BCC Minutes 10/24-25/2006 R
October 24-25, 2006
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, October 24-25, 2006
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board( s) of such
special district as has been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Frank Halas
Jim Coletta
Fred W. Coyle
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Derek J ohnssen, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
6""
"'~:::"
.. ~~~;
AGENDA
October 24, 2006
9:00 AM
Frank Halas, Chairman, District 2
Jim Coletta, Vice-Chairman, District 5
Donna Fiala, Commissioner, District 1
Tom Henning, Commissioner, District 3
Fred W. Coyle, Commissioner, District 4
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE 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 DA YSPRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
Page 1
October 24, 2006
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 IMPAIRED 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 Michael Harper, Naples Community Hospital
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.)
B. September 19,2006 - BCC/Panther Mitigation Workshop
C. September 20, 2006 - BCC/LDC Meeting
D. September 21, 2006 - BCC/Budget Hearings
E. September 21, 2006 - Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrate Meeting
F. September 26,2006 - BCC/Regular Meeting
G. September 27, 2006 - BCC/Economic Development Council Workshop
H. October 2, 2006 - BCC/Permitting Workshop
Page 2
October 24, 2006
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
A. 20 Year Attendees
1) Dale Waller, Wastewater
2) John Y onkosky, Utility Billing and Customer Service
3) Stan Litsinger, Jr, PUED
4) Jacinto Cervantes, Parks & Recreation
5) Connie Johnson, Community Development and Environmental
Services
B. 25 Year Attendees
1) Francisco Llorca, Road and Bridge Department
2) Dennis Mazzone, Code Enforcement
3) Mary Mehlmouer, Library
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation recognizing October 22 - 28, 2006 as Pastoral Care Week. To
be accepted by Reverend Michael Harper from Naples Community Hospital.
B. Proclamation recognizing October 23 - 31, 2006 as Red Ribbon Week. To
be accepted by Under Sheriff Kevin Rambosk.
C. Proclamation acknowledging The Day of The Red Walk in Collier County.
To be accepted by Craig Greusel, Nina Ribinski and Karey Stewart.
D. Proclamation recognizing Tom Mooney and Jeanette Showalter for their
extraordinary efforts in the clean up of their community lake. To be accepted
by Tom Mooney and Jeanette Showalter.
5. PRESENTATIONS
Page 3
October 24, 2006
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request by David Calandra to discuss inequitable treatment of
Collier County Youth in terms of usage of park facilities.
B. Public petition request by Bobbie Dusek to discuss escalating Insurance
rates for Collier County.
C. Public petition request by Gary Donaho to discuss new CAT bus terminal
near residential developments on Radio Road.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m., unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided bv
Commission members. Recommendation to consider adoption of an
Ordinance establishing the Falls of Portofino Community Development
District (CDD) pursuant to Section 190.005, Florida Statutes.
B. This item to be heard at 1 :30 p.m. This item was continued from the
June 20, 2006 BCC Meetine:, the September 12,2006 BCC Meetine: and
the September 26, 2006 BCC meetine:. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided bv
Commission members. PUDA-2005-AR-8832, Creekside West, Inc.,
represented by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, ofQ. Grady Minor & Associates,
P.A., and R. Bruce Anderson, Esquire, ofRoetzel & Andress, L.P.A.,
requesting a PUD Amendment to the Creekside Commerce Park PUD. This
amendment proposes to reduce the area of the Creekside PUD by
approximately 2.32 acres and rezone the area from Creekside Commerce
Park PUD to Naples Daily News Business Park PUD. The subject property,
consisting of 105 acres is located in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range
25 East, Collier County, Florida. (This application is being submitted
simultaneously with the Naples Daily News Business Park PUD and will be
considered a Fast-Track). (Petitioner's request.) (Companion Item to:
PUDZ-2005-AR-8833)
Page 4
October 24, 2006
C. This item to be heard at 1 :30 p.m. This item was continued from the
June 20, 2006 BCC meetine:, the September 12,2006 BCC meetinf! and
the September 26, 2006 BCC meetine:. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. PUDZ-2005-AR-8833, Collier Publishing
Company, Inc. d/b/ a Naples Daily News, represented by D. Wayne, Arnold,
AICP, ofQ. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., and R. Bruce Anderson,
Esquire, of Roetzel & Andress, L.P.A., requesting a Business Park Planned
Unit Development (BPUD) rezone from Rural Agricultural (A) and
Creekside Commerce Park PUD for project known as Naples Daily News
Business Park Planned Unit Development (BPPUD). The subject property is
located in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,
Florida. (This is being submitted simultaneously with the Creekside
Commerce Park PUD as a Fast Track). (Petitioner's request.) (Companion
Item to: PUDA-2005-AR-8832)
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Golden Gate Beautification Advisory
Committee.
B. Appointment of members to the Emergency Medical Services Advisory
Council.
C. Appointment of member to the Collier County Code Enforcement Board.
D. Appointment of members to the Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee.
E. Appointment of member to the Lake Trafford Restoration Task Force.
F. Appointment of member to the Isle of Capri Fire Control District Advisory
Board.
G. Appointment of member to the Collier County Airport Authority.
H. The Annual Performance Appraisal for the County Attorney.
I. F or the Board of County Commissioners to consider participating in the
mediation procedures with the Clerk of Courts to resolve the current case
nos. 04-941-CA, 05-953-CA & 05-1506-CA.
Page 5
October 24, 2006
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This item was continued from the September 26, 2006 BCC Meetinf!.
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)
B. Recommendation to award contract #06-4025, Collier County Sheriffs
Special Operations Building and to approve the necessary budget
amendment for the construction of the Sheriffs Special Operations Facility,
Project 52002, in the approximate amount of $10,650,000, the exact amount
to be presented at the meeting. (Ron Hovell, Principal Project Manager,
Facilities Management)
C. Recommendation to approve Exhibit E, Amendment #1 to Contract #06-
3914, Construction Management at Risk Services for the Collier County
Fleet Facilities with Wright Construction Corp. in the amount of $
$9,272,741.10 for the Fleet Facility, project 52009, Phase 2 which includes
the construction of the new Fleet Management Department facility and to
approve Change #15 to Contract #02-3422, Professional Architectural
Services for New County Fleet Facility, with Disney & Associates, P.A. to
update the rate schedule and include additional services necessary for
construction phase 2 in the amount of $60,885. (Ron Hovell, Principal
Project Manager, Facilities Management)
D. Recommendation to approve Change Order #3 to add $1,390,932.40 for
Inspection services to Johnson Engineering, Inc. under ITQ 04-3583 CEI
Services for Collier County Road Projects for Project No. 60018 Immokalee
Road Project from Collier Blvd. to 43rd Ave. N.E.
E. Report from the Collier County Health Department and Code Enforcement
Department regarding the initiatives taken to eliminate unsafe and unsound
housing in the Immokalee Community. (Michelle Arnold, Director, Code
Enforcement and Dr. Joan Colfer, Collier County Health Department)
F. This item was continued from the September 26 and the October 10,
2006 BCC meetine:s. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution repealing all
Page 6
October 24, 2006
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 November 1, 2006 and
superseding Resolution No. 2006-43 and all other Resolutions establishing
license and fee policy. (Marla Ramsey, Administrator, Public Services)
G. Presentation to the Board of County Commissioners by the Collier County
Transportation Engineering and Construction Management Department
regarding the cost and requirements associated with converting FPL
overhead electrical facilities to underground lines along county's roadways.
(Jay Ahmad, Director, Transportation/ Engineering and Construction
Management and Grover Whidden, Florida Power and Light)
H. Recommendation to approve selection ofKCCS, Inc. a Qualified Firm, and
award a Contract under ITN #06-3947 "CEI Services for Collier County
Road Projects" for Project No.6000 1 "Collier Boulevard (CR-951 ) from US
41 to Main Golden Gate Canal" in the amount of $3,626,570.00. (Norman
Feder, Administrator, Transportation Services and Jay Ahmad, Director,
Transportation/Engineering and Construction Management)
I. Recommendation to award Bid Number 06-4016 for the purchase of Carbon
Dioxide and Sodium Hypochlorite for use by the Water and Wastewater
Departments in the estimated annual amount of $1 ,000,000. (Jim DeLony,
Administrator, Public Utilities)
J. Recommendation to approve a request to operate Sun-N-Fun Lagoon from
November 1, 2006 to January 31, 2007 on select dates and revise the
schedule for February 3, 2007 through May 28,2007. (Marla Ramsey,
Administrator, Public Services)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners instruct staff to
present a proposed Ordinance for the Boards consideration at a future date
which would amend Ordinance No. 97-35, as amended, the Collier County
Code Enforcement Citation Ordinance, as codified in Chapter Two, Article
IX of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, in order to establish
an affirmative defense to certain alleged code violations.
Page 7
October 24, 2006
B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners review and
approve the FY 2006-2007 Action Plan for David C. Weigel, County
Attorney.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Ave Maria
Unit 7, Liberty Park, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
2) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Grey Oaks Unit Sixteen.
The roadway and drainage improvements will be privately
maintained.
3) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Mediterra
Phase Three East Unit One Replat of Lot 11, Block A.
4) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of DeLaSol Phase Two. The
roadway and drainage improvements will be privately maintained.
5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water utility
facili ty for V anderbil t Beach Resort.
Page 8
October 24, 2006
6) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for DeLaSol, Phase 3.
7) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Ave Maria
Unit 8, Emerson Park, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
8) Recommendation to approve an Interim Management Plan for the
Milano property under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition
Program.
9) Recommendation to approve the proposed amendment to the current
interlocal agreement between Collier County and the Economic
Development Council of Collier County.
10) Recommendation to approve Collier County and the City of Naples
Urban County Cooperation Agreement for the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) program and submit the agreement to HUD.
11) Recommendation to approve Collier County and the City of Marco
Island Urban County Cooperation Agreement for the U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) program and submit the
agreement to HUD.
12) Recommendation to approve a continuation of the Conservation
Collier Interim Management Plans for Railhead Scrub Preserve, Otter
Mound Preserve, Cocohatchee Creek Preserve and Malt property to
June 2007 to allow for optimal public participation in development of
the Final Management Plans for these Preserves and to coordinate a
management agreement with Rookery Bay National Estuarine
Research Reserve for the Malt property.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve award of Bid #06-4040, Traffic
Operations Signal Components to multiple vendors (item-by-item
basis).
Page 9
October 24, 2006
2) Recommendation to approve a change order in the amount of
$198,507.00 to CH2M Hill, Inc. amending contract #05-3774 Gordon
River Water Quality Park (project No. 51085) Engineering Design
Contract.
3) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$394 to recognize additional State Block Grant funds awarded
through Florida Department of Transportation.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
the County Manager or his designee to act on behalf of the county as
the authority in enforcing Section 337.403 of the Florida Statutes and
ratifying all prior notices issued by the Collier County Transportation
Department related to enforcement of that statute.
5) Recommendation that the Board accept a contribution from The
Halstatt Partnership for the additional plantings along Golden Gate
Parkway up to the amount of$10l,821.89.
6) Recommendation to approve the purchase of Pre-Cast Box Culvert
Sections from Hanson Pipe & Products for the Fish Branch Creek Box
Culvert Extension Project in the amount of$52,116.96, authorize
payment prior to delivery and approve an allocation of a $12,100
storage fee.
7) Recommendation to (1) award bid #06-4051 Sidewalks/Bike Paths
Various Locations for construction of sidewalks in various locations
within Collier County to Quality Enterprises USA, Inc. in the amount
of$69l,246.15 and 10% contingency in the amount of$69,124.62 for
a total of$760,370.77 and (2) approve a budget amendment to reflect
the amount of funds to be reimbursed by the Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT) to $367,500 (Project #690822)
8) Recommendation to award Bid #06-4034 Golden Gate MSTU
Sunshine Boulevard Landscape & Irrigation Installation Project" to
Hannula Landscaping, Inc. with a base amount of $289,460.64 and
10% contingency of $28,946.00 for a total of $318,406.64.
Page 1 0
October 24, 2006
9) Approve a FY07 Budget Amendment in the amount of $150,000
establishing current year appropriation for remittances to the
Southwest Florida Expressway Authority.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to approve a Donation Agreement and accept an
Access Easement from The Preserve at the Shores at Berkshire Lakes
Condominium Association, Inc. to provide legal access to Lift Station
#312 at a cost not to exceed $3,800.
2) Recommendation to convey a Utility Easement to the Water-Sewer
District for the construction and maintenance of a water transmission
main on property owned by Collier County at Goodland Park.
3) Recommendation to approve Work Order # UC-250 under Contract #
04-3535, Annual Contract for Underground Utilities Contracting
Services, to Kyle Construction, Inc. in the amount of$933,820.00 for
construction of fire and irrigation water system improvements at The
Strand in Pelican Bay, Project Number 74023.
4) Recommendation to award Bid Number 06-4017 for annual contract
for chlorinator equipment to Water Treatment Controls, Incorporated
for use by the Water and Wastewater Departments in the estimated
annual amount of $500,000.
5) Recommendation to approve an annual membership for County
Managers Agency in The Council of International Visitors in Collier
County in the amount of $300, serving a valid public purpose.
6) Recommendation to approve Work Order ICTSCADA-3916-MAC-
06-06 in the amount of$88,456 to McKim & Creed, P.A. under
Annual Contract 06-3916 for SCADA System Upgrades at the South
County Regional Water Treatment Plant, Project 71055.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve the submittal of a Florida Boating
Improvement Program Boating Education Grant to the Florida Fish
and Wildlife Conservation Commission for the initial phase of the
Page 11
October 24, 2006
Marine Resource Conservation Partnership of Collier County Boater
Education Program in the amount of $14,000.
2) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$5,000 to recognize donations from local community partners to fund
senior activities at the East Naples Community Center Annex.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1 ) Award of Bid #06-4048 Quick Copy Services (estimated annual cost
of $40,000).
2) Recommendation to award RFP#06-402l to Insurance and Risk
Management Services, Inc. for Property and Casualty Brokerage
Services. (Fiscal Impact $150,000)
3) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving a change in status of
a classification from exempt to nonexempt under the FLSA and to
receive approval from the Board for the execution of a settlement
agreement and release. (Fiscal Impact $7,533.89)
4) Recommendation to approve Change Order #8 to Contract Number
98-2867 with Schenkel Shultz Architecture to provide additional
services for the Naples Jail, Project Number 52008, in the amount of
$41,900.00 and to recognize a $164,937.60 rebate from FP&L.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Recommendation to approve a $100,000 budget amendment from
Fiscal Year 2006 to cover unexpected salaries/ overtime expense by
the Isles of Capri Fire/Rescue.
2) Recommendation to approve a grant application for the 2007 Polaris
Ranger All Terrain Utility Vehicle Grant Program.
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Collier EMS/Fire
Bargaining Unit, Southwest Florida Professional Firefighters Local
1826, International Association of Firefighters, Incorporated.
Page 12
October 24, 2006
4) Recommend Approval of Change Order # 2 for Contract # 03-3538
with Evans Klages, Inc. for visitor research services in the amount of
$12,000 and authorizing the County Manager or his designee to
execute Change Order # 2 after approval by the County Attorneys
Office.
5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves a
budget amendment transferring $302,800 from the Pelican Bay
Irrigation and Landscaping Capital Fund (322) to the Uninsured Asset
Restoration Fund (133).
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Halas requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a valid public purpose.
Attended the 18th Annual Southwest Florida Residential
Development Snapshot on Thursday, October 19,2006, at the Naples
Elks Lodge #2010 in Naples, Florida. $65.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Halas' travel budget.
2) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the Greater Naples Leadership Luncheon
Seminar on December 4, 2006 and is requesting reimbursement in the
amount of $15.00, to be paid from his travel budget.
3) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the Blue Chip Recognition Breakfast on
November 2,2006 and is requesting reimbursement in the amount of
$10.00, to be paid from his travel budget.
4) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the Collier Citizen of the Year 2006 Banquet
on November 10, 2006 and is requesting reimbursement in the amount
of $35.00, to be paid from his travel budget.
Page 13
October 24, 2006
5) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the American Specialty Contractors of
Florida monthly meeting where he was a speaker on October 12, 2006
and is requesting reimbursement in the amount of$35.00, to be paid
from his travel budget.
6) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the Naples Fishing Club Christmas Dinner
as a Keynote Speaker on December 19, 2006 and is requesting
reimbursement in the amount of $13.00, to be paid from his travel
budget.
7) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended the
Marco Island Historical Society Site Dedication Pig Roast on
Saturday, October 21 st, 2006 at the Marco Island Museum and
History Center, Marco Island, FL.; $15.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
8) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Will attend the
Southwest Florida Council for Environment Education Annual Dinner
and Auction featuring the 2006 Environment Education Award of
Excellence on Friday, November 17th, 2006, at the Hyatt Regency
Coconut Point, Bonita Springs; $80.00 to be paid from Commissioner
Fiala's travel budget.
9) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the One by One Luncheon on October 12,
2006 and is requesting reimbursement in the amount of $20.00, to be
paid from his travel budget.
10) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the Economic Development of Collier
County Industry and Opportunity Tour - Eastern Collier County on
Page 14
October 24, 2006
October 27, 2006, 2006 and is requesting reimbursement in the
amount of $20.00, to be paid from his travel budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to authorize the making of Offers of Judgment to
Respondent, Vision & Faith, Inc., for Parcels 719, 919, 840, 940, 742,
942, 943 and 843 in the amount of $63,581.00 in the lawsuit styled
Board of County Commissioners v. Vision & Faith, Inc., et al., Case
No. 05-1275-CA (South County Regional Water Treatment Wellfield
Project #70892). (Fiscal Impact: $51,091.03, if offers accepted).
2) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment for Parcel
Nos. 138 & 139 in the lawsuit styled CC v. Ronen Graziani, et al.,
Case No. 06-0548-CA (Santa Barbara Boulevard Project No. 62081).
(Fiscal Impact $40,300.00)
3) Recommendation that the Board Ratify and Authorize the County
Attorneys Retention of Norman W. Thabit, an Expert Witness for the
County in Dwight E. Brock, Clerk of Courts v. Collier County,
Florida, Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida,
as Ex-Officio Governing Board of The Ochopee Area Fire Control &
Emergency Medical Care Special Taxing District, A/KIA The
Ochopee Fire District; Linda T. Swisher and Paul W. Wilson. Case
No. 04-941-CA consolidated with Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida vs. Dwight E. Brock, Clerk of the Circuit
Court of Collier County, Florida Case Number 05-953-CA
consolidated with Case No. 05-1506-CA; Exempt the County
Attorney from the Purchasing Policy if and to the Extent the
Purchasing Policy is applicable and Authorize the County Attorney to
Sign any necessary Retention Documents.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
Page 15
October 24, 2006
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to
approve Petition A VESMT-2006-AR-9916-Imperial Wilderness Storage
Maintenance Parcel to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and the
Publics interest in that portion of a 65 foot wide drainage easement in the
West one-half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 51 South,
Range 26 East Collier County, Florida.
B. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to
approve Petition A VESMT-2006-AR-1 0083, The Rookery at Marco to
disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and the Publics interest in a
portion of a fifteen-foot wide Collier County utility easement as recorded in
O.R. Book 1664, Page 1963, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, and
more specifically described in Exhibit A.
C. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to
approve Petition A VROW-2006-AR-9674 Lucerne Road to disclaim,
renounce and vacate the County's and the Publics interest in a portion of
Lucerne Road adjacent to Block 115, Golden Gate Portion 4, according to a
map thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5, Pages 107, of the Public Records
Collier County, Florida.
D. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Petition SNR-2006-AR-
10350, Johnson Engineering, representing Treviso Bay Development, LLC,
requesting a street name change from Treviso Bay Boulevard to Corso Bello
Drive for the southern segment of Treviso Bay Boulevard, which is located
Page 16
October 24, 2006
in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, legally known as Tract R-
2, Treviso Bay Subdivision.
E. This item was continued from the October 10, 2006 BCC Meetine:.
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt 1) a
Resolution revising the Collier County Water-Sewer District Utilities
Standards Manual and 2) an Ordinance amending the Collier County
Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance, Project Number 70202.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
Page 17
October 24, 2006
October 24-25, 2006
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, County Manager
Jim Mudd.
And good morning, and welcome everyone to the Collier County
Board of County Commissioners. We are now in session.
At this time if you'd be so kind as to silence your cell phones and
pagers.
This morning we're going to have the invocation by Reverend
Michael Harvard of the Naples Community Church, or excuse me --
Naples Community Hospital, and that will be followed by the Pledge
of Allegiance.
If you'd all rise.
REVEREND HARPER: Let us pray. Spirit of the living God,
all pressure on this Collier County Commissioners' meeting, grant our
commissioners wisdom, compassion, direction and authority to govern
county business. Bless the people attending this meeting and the
people of our community. Help us to work together with our county
commissioners to make our community a desirable place to live, to
work, and to visit, amen.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Manager, are there any changes
to today's agendas?
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Agenda changes, Board of County
Page 2
October 24-25, 2006
Commissioners' meeting, October 24,2006.
Item 10E. The following is to be stated for the record: Funding
is being requested to cover the initial cost of contracted services for
removal of the structures. Property owners will then be billed for the
cost to the county for the work performed plus any administrative
fees.
If the property owner fails to pay as invoiced by the county, a
lien will be placed on the property for the specified amount of the bill.
This lien also accrues monthly interest, and that had to do with the
abandoned trailers, condemned trailers that are out in Immokalee, and
that needed to be on the record for clarification. There were several
questions by --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Manager, could I just stop you
for a second? Could you see if they could lower the temperature a
little bit? It seems warm up here.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Next item is item 16B 1. The following to be
stated for the record: The agenda item includes a backup document
that expressly specifies the recommended awardee, i.e., the lowest
qualified and responsive bidder for each line item.
Though the summary may not use the words lowest qualified and
responsive bidder, that is the intent here. That's at staffs request.
The next item is to move agenda item 16B4 to 10K. That's a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
the county manager or his designees to act on behalf of the county as
the authority in enforcing section 337.403 of the Florida Statutes and
ratifying all prior notices issued by the Collier County Transportation
Department related to enforcement of that statute. That item is being
moved at Commissioner Coyle's request.
Next item is item 17A. Request to be continued to November 14,
2006, BCC meeting. It's a recommendation to approve petition AE --
Page 3
October 24-25, 2006
excuse me. A VESMT-2006-AR-9916, Imperial Wilderness Storage
maintenance parcel to disclaim, renounce and vacate the county's and
the public's interest in the portion of a 65- foot wide drainage easement
in the west one-half of the southwest quarter of Section 12, Township
51 south, Range 26 east, Collier County, Florida. That item is asked
to be continued at staffs request. Reason, it was not advertised
properly.
The next item is item 17B. Again, to be continued to the
November 14,2006, BCC meeting. It's a recommendation to approve
petition A VESMT-2006-AR-10083, the Rookery at Marco, to
disclaim, renounce and vacate the county's and the public's interest in
a portion of a 15- foot wide Collier County utility easement as record
From OR Book 1664, page 1963, public records of Collier County,
Florida, and more specifically described in Exhibit A.
Again, this item is asked to be continued at staffs request.
Again, the item was not advertised correctly.
Next item is item 17C, continue to November 14,2006, BCC
meeting. It's a recommendation to approve petition
A VROW -2006-AR-9674, Lucerne Road, to disclaim, renounce and
vacate the county's and the public's interest in a portion of Lucerne
Road adjacent to Block 115, Golden Gate Portion 4 according to a
map thereof as recorded in Plat Book 5, page 107 of the public
records, Collier County, Florida. Again, that item is asked to be
continued at staffs request. Again, it was not advertised correctly.
Note: Item 8C. Please note that this item is being heard today
under reconsideration from the date of its original BCC hearing held
on September 12, 2006. At the original hearing, a correction to an
inaccurate citation of the Land Development Code regarding building
height was read into the record.
The staff has corrected the original staff report for this
reconsideration hearing; however, not all printed versions received the
corrected pages. As such, copies of the corrected pages are available
Page 4
October 24-25, 2006
in the County Manager's Office. The board and the county attorney
has the corrected version in their agenda packet. That notice is at
staff s request.
And Commissioners, you have a series of time certain items for
today. Item 8A to be heard at one p.m. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
commission members.
It's a recommendation to consider adoption of an ordinance
establishing the Falls of Portofino Community Development Direct,
CDD, pursuant to section 190.005 of the Florida Statutes.
The next time certain item -- there's two time certain items. It's
item 8B and 8C. Both relate to the PUD for the business park for the
Naples Daily News, and I won't read both of those, but I believe
everybody knows what 8B and 8C are. Again, those time certains for
those two companion items is at 1 :30 p.m.
The next item is item 10G, to be heard at 11 a.m., and it's a
presentation to the Board of County Commissioners by the Collier
County Transportation Engineering and Construction Management
Department regarding the cost and requirements associating with
converting FP &L overhead electrical facilities to underground lines
along county roadways, and Mr. Grover Whidden will be here from
FP &L to also discuss that particular item.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
County Attorney, do you have any additions or corrections to
today's agenda?
MR. WEIGEL: No, none. Thank you, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time I will ask each one of
the commissioners, starting with Commissioner Coyle, do you have
any changes to today's consent agenda or regular agenda or summary
-- well, the summary's already been pulled.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I have no further changes to
Page 5
October 24-25, 2006
the agenda, and I have no ex parte on the summary agenda, but I do
have a question concerning item 8B and C as indicated on the list of
changes read by the county manager.
It says, these items were continued from June the 20th,
September the 12th and September the 26th BCC meeting. I thought
this was a reconsideration.
Does that have any relevance to the legality of the announcement
of the change?
MR. MUDD: I would have to defer to the county attorney.
MR. WEIGEL: No. This is informational only. And what has
been done to this point has been according to the ordinance that exists,
both for land use and for reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: I appreciate your statement on the record,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you. That's all I have, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. I have no
changes to the agenda. And on the summary agenda, I believe that
item 17D is still on the agenda. I don't think that's been pulled, has it,
Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, 17B is being asked to be continued
till November 14th.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, fine, and that also. Then
there's no disclosures to make on the summary agenda. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Very good question. Thank you.
Myself, I have no other additions or corrections for today's
agenda. And, of course, the items on the summary agenda have
already been pulled, so there's no ex parte on that.
Commissioner Fiala?
Page 6
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have no ex parte and no
changes to the agenda.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nothing for me.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time I need -- like to have
a motion for the approval of today's regular, consent agenda, and any
amendments that were therefore stated.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor
for approval of today's agenda by Commissioner Coyle, seconded by
Commissioner Fiala.
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.
Page 7
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
October 24. 2006
Item 10E: The following to be stated for the record: Funding is being requested to cover the
initial costs for contracted services for the removal of the structures. Property owners will then
be billed for the cost to the County for the work performed plus any administrative fees. If the
property owner fails to pay as invoiced by the County, a lien will be placed on the property for the
specified amount of the bill. This lien also accrues monthly interests. (Staff's request.)
Item 16B1: The following to be stated for the record: The agenda item includes a backup
document that expressly specifies the recommended awardee (Le.; the lowest, qualified and
responsive bidder) for each line item. Though the summary may not use the words "lowest,
qualified and responsive bidder," that is the intent here. (Staff's request.)
Move Aaenda Item 16B4 to 10K: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
authorize the County Manager or his designee to act on behalf of the county as the authority in
enforcing Section 337.403 of the Florida Statutes and ratifying all prior notices issued by the
Collier County Transportation Department related to enforcement of that statute. (Commissioner
Coyle's request.)
Item 17A continued to the November 14. 2006 BCC meetina: Recommendation to approve
Petition AVESMT-2006-AR-9916 Imperial Wilderness Storage Maintenance Parcel to disclaim,
renounce and vacate the County's and Public's interest in that portion of a 65 foot wide drainage
easement in the west one-half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 51 South, Range
26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Staff's request. Item not advertised.)
Item 17B continued to the November 14. 2006 BCC meetina: Recommendation to approve
Petition AVESMT-2006-AR-10083, The Rookery at Marco to disclaim, renounce and vacate the
County's and the Public's interest in a portion of a fifteen-foot wide Collier County Utility
easement as recorded in O.R. Book 1664, Page 1963, Public Records of Collier County, Florida,
and more specifically described in Exhibit A. (Staff's request. Item not advertised.)
Item 17C continued to the November 14. 2006 BCC meetina: Recommendation to approve
Petition AVROW-2006-AR-9674 Lucerne Road to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and
the Public's interest in a portion of Lucerne Road adjacent to Block 115, Golden Gate Portion 4,
according t a map thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5, Pages 107, of the Public Records Collier
County, Florida. (Staff's request. Item not advertised.)
NOTE: Item 8C: Please note that this item is being heard today under reconsideration from the
date of its original BCC hearing held on September 12, 2006. At the original hearing, a correction
to an incorrect citation of the LDC regarding building height was read into the record. The staff
has corrected the original staff report for this reconsideration hearing; however, not all printed
versions received the corrected pages. As such, copies of the corrected pages are available in
the County Manager's office. The Board and the County Attorney has the corrected version in
their agenda packet. (Staffs request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 8A to be heard at 1 :00 p.m.: This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to consider adoption of an
Ordinance establishing the Falls of Portofino Community Development District (COD) pursuant to
Section 190.005, Florida Statutes.
Item 8B to be heard at 1 :30 p.m.: This item was continued from the June 20, 2006 BCC meeting,
the September 12, 2006 BCC meeting and the September 26, 2006 BCC meeting. This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. PUDA-2005-AR-8832, Creekside West, Inc., represented by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of
Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., and R. Bruce Anderson, Esquire, of Roetzel & Andress,
L.P .A., requesting a PUD Amendment to the Creekside Commerce Park PUD. This amendment
proposes to reduce the area of the Creekside PUD by approximately 2.32 acres and rezone the
area from Creekside Commerce Park PUD to Naples Daily News Business Park PUD. The subject
property, consisting of 105 acres is located in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East,
Collier County, Florida. (This application is being submitted simultaneously with the Naples Daily
News Business Park PUD and will be considered a Fast-Track). (Petitioner's request.)
(Companion item to PUDZ-2005-AR-8833.)
Item 8C to be heard at 1 :30 p.m.: This item was continued from the June 20, 2006 BCC meeting,
the September 12,2006 BCC meeting and the September 26,2006 BCC meeting. This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. PUDZ-2005-AR-8833, Collier Publishing Company, Inc. d/b/a Naples Daily News,
represented by D. Wayne, Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., and R. Bruce
Anderson, Esquire, of Roetzel & Andress, L.P.A., requesting a Business Park Planned Unit
Development (BPUD) rezone from Rural Agricultural (A) and Creekside Commerce Park PUD for
project known as Naples Daily News Business Park Planned Unit Development (BPPUD). The
subject property is located in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,
Florida. (This is being submitted simultaneously with the Creekside Commerce Park PUD as a
Fast Track). (Petitioner's request.) (Companion Item PUDA-2005-AR-8832).
Item 10G to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. Presentation to the Board of County Commissioners by the
Collier County Transportation Engineering and Construction Management Department regarding
the cost and requirements associated with converting FPL overhead electrical facilities to
underground lines along county roadways.
October 24-25, 2006
Item #2B, #2C, #2D, #2E, #2F, #2G and #2H
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 19,2006 BCC/PANTHER
MITIGATION WORKSHOP; SEPTEMBER 20, 2006 BCC/LDC
MEETING; SEPTEMBER 21,2006 BCC/BUDGET HEARINGS;
SEPTEMBER 21, 2006 VAB SPECIAL MAGISTRATE MEETING;
SEPTEMBER 26, 2006 BCC/REGULAR MEETING; SEPTEMBER
27, 2006 BCC/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
WORKSHOP AND THE OCTOBER 2, 2006 BCC/PERMITTING
WORKSHOP - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
Motion for September 19,2006, BCC, Panther Mitigation
Workshop; September 20, 2006, BCC/LDC Meeting; September 21,
2006, BCC Budget Hearings; September 21 2006, Value Adjustment
Board Special Magistrate Meeting; and September 26, 2006, BCC
Regular Meeting; September 27, 2006, BCC/Economic Development
Council Workshop; and last, October the 2nd, 2006, BCC Permitting
Workshop. We'll have a motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And do we --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle, seconded by Commissioner Fiala. No further
discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: 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?
Page 8
October 24-25, 2006
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Item #5A
PRESENTATION BY COLLIER COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR
GUY CARL TON AND THE TURN BACK OF FUNDS -
PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we have something that's
extraordinary that happens every year. The commission and this
boardroom is graced by the Honorable Guy Carlton, and he normally
comes not only with his wonderful persona and his great expertise as
our tax collector, but he always comes as the tax collector bearing
gifts.
Whenever he walks in with a check, I think it would be
extraordinary if we could take -- get him back to work, but take his
money and let him have a couple words at the dais.
But this is -- this is that time of year when he graces us with his
presence, and I'd like to do just a presentation. We'll annotate it, but
we'd like to do it now before we start the service awards.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Welcome, Santa Claus.
MR. CARLTON: Yeah. Good morning. For the record, I'm
Guy Carlton, your friendly tax collector. And this is the time of year,
if we have any unused fees, we turn them over to the county. I'm a fee
officer. I charge a fee for everything I do. Those fees are regulated in
Tallahassee, and those fees are designed to run the office.
Total turnback, total fees, unused, $9,521,499.10. The board's
portion of that is 8,554,229.05.
I would like to tell you that is a result of me being close to a
genius, but there's too much evidence of the other way. But what I
will tell you is I have one of the finest staffs in the State of Florida,
Page 9
October 24-25, 2006
and that's what this is about. Thank you. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's hear it for a million
dollars.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, Guy, do I have this right?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Where's the check, Guy?
MR. CARLTON: I'm going to give it to the clerk.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do I have this right, you actually
took more money from the taxpayers than you really needed?
MR. CARLTON: It does sound familiar.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It runs in the family.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MR. CARLTON: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I just -- I hope that shows that
Collier County is a very efficient form of government and what we
have -- where we end up turning back money, we've got some large
proj ects that are going to be before us, so thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, just to make sure that we do say it
on the record, we do have a great tax collector in Collier County. He
does a super job.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
(Applause.)
Item #3
SERVICE AWARDS: 20 AND 25 YEAR ATTENDEES -
PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to service awards for
employees, and the awards are down here. And if it's the board's
pleasure, we'll convene down in front of the dais.
Page 10
October 24-25, 2006
The 20-year awardees are close to the middle, and then the three
closer to me are the 25-year.
We have some very distinguished employees that have been here
a long time in Collier County providing us with their expertise and
their labors of love for this county.
We'll start with the 20-year -- 20-year employees. The first is
Dale Waller from wastewater.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Mr. Waller, come up.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hi, Dale.
MR. WALLER: Hi.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much for your dedicated
servIce.
MR. WALLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks so much for being here so
long.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In 14 years I get mine.
MR. WALLER: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
Can we get a picture?
MR. MUDD: Dale, can we get a picture? Get right in the
middle.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: The next 20-year employee is John Y onkowsky
from Utility Billing and Customer Service.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: John, what a wonderful job.
MR. YONKOWSKY: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I get to throw my arms around you,
Page 11
October 24-25, 2006
right? I've known you too long.
MR. YONKOWSKY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm going to shake your hand, John.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're definitely the smoothest
person we've got.
MR. YONKOWSKY: Thank you, sir. Thank you,
Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, John. Get in the middle here.
MR. YONKOWSKY: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: The next 20-year awardee is Jacinto Cervantes
from Parks and Recreation.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good morning, sir. Pleasure to meet you.
Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What do you do at parks and rec.?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much for the
first 20 years.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Which district?
MR. CERVANTES: Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh.
(Applause.)
MR. CERVANTES: Thank you. Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Our next 20-year awardee, and last but not least, is
Ms. Connie Johnson from Community Developments and
Environmental Services.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good morning, Connie. Give you this,
thank you so much for your work.
MS. JOHNSON: My pleasure.
Page 12
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. It's nice to meet you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations. Thank you very
much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You must have been six years
old when you started.
MS. JOHNSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to the 25-year
awardees, and the first 25-year awardee is Francisco Llorca from Road
and Bridge Department.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You're almost there, 25 years. Five
more.
MR. LLORCA: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you, Francisco.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. You realize that's
two and a half duck eggs?
MR. LLORCA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Next 25-year awardee is Dennis Mazzone from
Code Enforcement.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hi, Dennis, congratulations. Five more
to go. Thank you so much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wow, I'm so glad I got to meet you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations. Thank you very
much. Good job.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you so much for
everything you do for Collier County.
Page 13
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Very good. Get a picture.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Our next 25-year awardee is Mary Mehlmouer
from the library.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Mary, congratulations. Thank you very
much for your service.
MS. MEHLMOUER: Hi, there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hi, how are you? Wow, you are
wonderful. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
MS. MEHLMOUER: Wonderful years.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's great. That's good to
hear. Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that completes our awards today.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING OCTOBER 22-28, 2006 AS
PASTORAL CARE WEEK - ADOPTED
Commissioner, that brings us to paragraph 4, proclamations.
Our first proclamation today is a proclamation recognizing
October 22nd through the 28th, 2006, as Pastoral Care Week, to be
accepted by Reverend Michael Harper from the Naples Community
Hospital.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right up here, Michael.
REVEREND HARPER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Whereas, the Collier County
Board of County Commissioners is pleased to join the Pastoral Care
Page 14
October 24-25, 2006
Department ofNCH Healthcare Systems as it celebrates Pastoral Care
Week, October 22nd to the 28th, 2006; and,
Whereas, the Pastoral Care Department ofNCH Healthcare
Systems is staffed by professionals with caring hearts and giving
spirits who are united in their ministry to bring the spiritual care to all
men and women whether they are patients, families, caregivers,
volunteers or staff; and,
Whereas, Pastoral Care Week speaks to the deep spiritual
concerns of every person in the deeper meaning of life, relationship,
disease, healing and faith; and,
Whereas, by valuing each individual, pastoral caregivers give,
seek to hope with, to rejoice with, to suffer with, to believe and to love
each person with whom they work; and,
Whereas, the theme for this year's event, pastoral care, healing
humor, underscores the compassion, comfort and hopes inspired by a
loving smile and gentle laughter; and,
Whereas, we commend the members of the Pastoral Care
Department ofNCH Healthcare Systems for extending themselves to
the service of others at Naples Community Hospital and the North
Collier Hospital.
And, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that the week of October
22nd to the 28th, 2006, be designated as Pastoral Care Week.
Done and ordered this, the 24th day of October, 2006, Frank
Halas, Chairman.
And I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor
for approval of this proclamation by Commissioner Coletta and a
second by Commissioner Fiala.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 15
October 24-25,2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries unanimously.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for all that you give
to the community.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hi, Reverend. Nice to meet you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, Michael, you've been there for
a long time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thanks for your prayers.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Reverend, we'd like to get a
picture, if we may.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
REVEREND HARPER: Well, I want to thank the
commissioners for this honor and I said to them, I commend them for
their smiles, and truly I hope all of you this week will share a smile
and laughter with your friends and loved ones. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING OCTOBER 23-31, 2006 AS
RED RIBBON WEEK - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next proclamation is to
recognize October 23rd through the 31 st, 2006 as Red Ribbon Week,
to be accepted by Undersheriff Kevin Rambosk or his representative.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How many representatives do we
Page 16
October 24-25,2006
have?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Bring them all up here.
MR. MUDD: Come on all up here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Those of you sitting down, too,
come on up.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We welcome you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You have to come up here with us.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whereas, the Substance Abuse
Coalition of Collier County recognizes that alcohol, tobacco and drug
abuse in this nation has reached epidemic proportions; and,
Whereas, it is imperative that visible, unified prevention,
educational efforts by community leaders be launched to eliminate the
demand for drugs; and,
Whereas, the Substance Abuse Coalition is offering citizens the
opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to drug-free lifestyles,
no use of illegal drugs, no illegal drugs, no illegal use of legal drugs;
and,
Whereas, the National Red Ribbon Campaign will be celebrated
in every community in America during Red Ribbon Week, October
23rd through 31st, 2006; and,
Whereas, Governor and Mrs. Bush are the Florida Red Ribbon
honorary chairpersons; and,
Whereas, business, government, parents, law enforcement,
media, medical, religious institutions, schools, senior citizens, service
organizations and youth will demonstrate their commitment to healthy
drug-free lifestyles by wearing and displaying red ribbons during the
week-long campaign; and,
Whereas, the State of Florida further commits its resources to
ensure the success of the Red Ribbon Campaign.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that October 23rd to the
31 st, 2006, be designated as Red Ribbon Week in Collier County,
Page 1 7
October 24-25, 2006
Florida.
Done and ordered this 24th day of October, 2006, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank Halas,
Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I move acceptance of this proclamation.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I second it.
Okay. We have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Coyle to
accept this proclamation, and a second by Commissioner Halas.
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.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much for the fine
work that you do. Who's driving the car, by the way?
Don't dent the hood. My name is right on the front of that thing.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Drive that thing around town.
Would you all stand here to take a picture before we -- then you
could say a few words, if you'd like.
(Applause.)
MR. GUERETTE: Just a couple quick comments. I'd like to, on
behalf of Judge Brody and Sheriff Hunter and all the committee
partners with the coalition, Substance Abuse Coalition of Collier
County, we'd like to thank everybody in Collier County, and
obviously the commission, for allowing us to come and have a
proclamation.
Also we encourage everybody in Collier County, if we can this
Page 18
October 24-25, 2006
week, all the students, all the members of the county, citizens, to
symbolize the Red Ribbon Week with a symbol of a red ribbon,
whether it be tied on your antenna, or if you get a wristband, or
whatever you can do to show that we're all in one coordinated effort to
reduce drug activity and use in Collier County.
Again, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION ACKNOWLEDGING THE DAY OF THE RED
WALK IN COLLIER COUNTY - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next
proclamation, and it's a pretty similar proclamation to one that we just
-- previously just did, and this is a proclamation for acknowledging the
Day of the Red Walk in Collier County, to be accepted by Craig
Greusel, Nina Ribinski and Karey Stewart.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner, I'd like to say,
before I begin to read this, that Barry Williams, our own Barry
Williams, has been representing us on this committee and doing an
outstanding job.
In fact, Judge Brody came into my office the other day
exclaiming over all that he's done to help us. And I understand now
Marla Ramsey is going to be stepping in and taking your place as you
move on to some other duties.
And I just want to thank you for all the work that you've done.
When you took over there, you made a great difference. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Come on up.
Whereas, the Red Walk is an established provider of one-to-one
Page 19
October 24-25, 2006
youth involvement addressing the importance of drug awareness for
the past seven years; and,
Whereas, the Red Walk provides adult mentors to thousands of
children in Collier County's public and private school; and,
Whereas, the Red Walk was developed as part of the red ribbon
activities established by the Drug Awareness Coalition of Collier
County as well as the Collier County Public School System in
association with the National Drug Awareness Activities presented
between October 23rd and 31 st, 2006; and,
Whereas, national research has shown that the positive messages
supported by drug-free activities help form strong bonds between
youth and their communities leading to a direct, measurable and
lasting impact on children's lives, and that these children are more
likely to improve their grades and their relationships with their
families and peers while being less likely to skip school, use illegal
drugs or alcohol or become involved in criminal activity; and,
Whereas, locally the Red Walk has been bringing caring adults
and community organizations into the lives of children for seven years
and is the only drug awareness walking program in Southwest Florida;
and,
Whereas, supporting the Red Walk's message of total community
involvement is using the arts as a positive outlet for a healthy and
drug-free lifestyle in Florida's ongoing effort to recruit and match
caring adult members and mentors with children in our community as
an investment that will pay immediate dividends, as well as dividends
in the future; and,
Whereas, on Friday, October 27,2006, the Red Walk will host its
annual trek on the campus of Lely Elementary School from 8:30 a.m.
to 11 :30 a.m.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that October 27, 2006, be
designated as the Day of the Red Walk in Collier County.
Page 20
October 24-25, 2006
Done and ordered this 24th day of October, 2006, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank Halas,
Chairman.
And Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor
for the approval of this proclamation by Commissioner Fiala and a
second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further decision?
(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 unanimously.
Congratulations.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
Would you like to all turn around and take a picture.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nina, Let me give you one, too.
MRS. RIBINSKI: Oh, thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4 D
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING TOM MOONEY AND
Page 21
October 24-25,2006
JEANETTE SHOW ALTER FOR THEIR EXTRAORDINARY
EFFORTS IN THE CLEAN UP OF THEIR COMMUNITY LAKE -
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next
proclamation. This is a proclamation recognizing Tom Mooney and
Jeanette Showalter for their extraordinary efforts in the cleanup of
their community lakes.
To be accepted by Tom Mooney and Jeanette Showalter.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much. This is a great
opportunity for me to express my heartfelt thanks for these two people
who realized that in order to get something accomplished, they were
going to have to take the bull by the horns and get it done themselves.
So on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners, I just want
to say that I hope that other people follow your example of whereby
when you see a problem, you get in there and you -- you're not afraid
to do some work and get it done.
And it's a pleasure for me, as being commissioner in this district,
to read this proclamation.
Whereas, Tom Mooney and Jeanette Showalter started the quest
for cleanup of their community lake located between 107th and 108th
Street in North Naples over two years ago;
Whereas, through their diligence, persistence and hard work, they
were both instrumental in getting a municipal service benefit unit
through the Board of County Commissioners and organizing their
neighborhood for the support of their efforts for assistance in the
cleanup of this lake; and,
Whereas, Tom and Jeanette have both gone above and beyond
the call of duty in their effort to clean up the lake. They both have
contributed hundreds of hours of their own time to personally clean up
the lake and have both donated their personal funds to get this
accomplished.
Page 22
October 24-25, 2006
Together we are reason -- responsible -- together they are
responsible for removing over 25 tons of regrowth from the lake as
well as miscellaneous debris in their quest to restore the lake to its
original beauty; and,
Whereas, Tom and Jeanette have spearheaded the efforts to take
an eyesore and turn it into a remarkable lake for the enjoyment of their
community, never giving up on the project and following it through to
the end; and,
Whereas, their combined volunteer efforts have shown great
community service for the entire project.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Tom Mooney and
Jeanette Showalter be recognized for their ongoing service to the
community, and we thank them for their hard work and interest in this
project.
Done and ordered this 24th day of October, 2006. Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank Halas, Chair,
and I move that we approve this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those in favor, signify by
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you so much for the dedication to
both of you. Jeanette, thank you so much.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Goodjob. Thank you so much.
Good seeing you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do you have anything you want to say
Page 23
October 24-25, 2006
or you're welcome -- if you want to go to the mike.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, let's get a picture first.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We've got to get a picture, too.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, before you do that --let's
get the picture.
AUDIENCE: Get a picture. Make sure you smile.
(Applause.)
MS. SHOWALTER: Well, this is unexpected to be recognized.
Thank you so much. Thank the county, again, for everything that
they've done. And I also wanted to say that I've never worked with
anybody like Tom. Just -- it was an unbelievable experience.
He really triggered a weight loss program. He got me in the lake,
and suddenly things started to change.
Also, community service can be so much fun because we
developed cattail recipes, cattail jokes, cattail songs, and cattail
couture, so thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MR. MOONEY: Thanks, Jeanette.
Doing the amount of work that Jeanette and I did, you know, at
times we were beside ourselves when we looked at the task ahead of
us.
I guess my work ethics came from my dad, who's here today,
growing up as a kid in Massachusetts and teaching me what how to
work meant. And I want to thank my dad for that, thanks.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Dad, he's complimenting you. And I
imagine, as he was growing up, if he was any son, he probably gave
you some hard times in life, but look what he turned out to be.
Item #6A
Page 24
October 24-25, 2006
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY DAVID CALANDRA TO
DISCUSS INEQUITABLE TREATMENT OF COLLIER COUNTY
YOUTH IN TERMS OF USAGE OF PARK FACILITIES -
MOTION TO BRING BACK TO THE NOVEMBER 28, 2006 BCC
MEETING - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to public petitions,
and the first public petition is a request by David Calandra to discuss
inequitable treatment of Collier County youth in terms of usage of
park facilities.
Mr. Calandra, if you could come forward to the podium.
MR. ZINO: Morning, Commissioners. Thank you for giving us
this opportunity to speak with you today.
MR. MUDD: State your name for the record.
MR. ZINO: My name is Bart Zino. I'm on the board of directors
of North Naples Little League.
David's going to speak rather passionately today about the field
use in north -- overall with parks and rec. and the field use for Little
League baseball, youth sports.
To let you know that there are a lot of people that care about this
issue, I just would like the people from North Naples who came here
to see how this goes just to stand up just for a second.
(Applause.)
MR. ZINO: The youth of our county is an important thing, and I
think we need to get the emphasis where it belongs. And to that, I'll
turn it over to David, and bring this on.
MR. CALANDRA: Thank you. For the record, my name is
David Calandra. And once again, I want to thank you for giving us
time to state our position on this point.
A review of Collier County's fall recreation guide shows that
there's exactly one Little League field in Collier County. The sole
Little League field in the county is in Golden Gate Little League -- or
Page 25
October 24-25, 2006
Golden Gate Park.
The three major parks in North Naples, North Collier Regional,
Vineyards and Veterans have no Little League fields. What they do
have is indicated on the monitors that you're now looking at
throughout the room.
Little League baseball is the name of a non-profit organization in
the U.S. which organizes Little League throughout the USA. Outside
of playing the game and having fun, the league sets up to teach the
kids about teamwork, sportsmanship and loyalty.
The value of these goals -- I should say the marketable value of
these goals -- has not been overlooked by Collier County Parks and
Recreation.
As can be seen on the monitors around the room, Collier County
Parks and Recreation has thought enough of Little League to make a
Little League baseball player a focal point in its ad campaign, even
though there are no Little League fields at the new park nor are there
any Little League fields planned for the new park.
The photo is used in advertisement and brochure form and it's
part of a Chamber of Commerce package sent to prospective new
residents of Collier County.
This is not a North Naples Little League player. This piece of
fiction is used as a means of increasing interest in Collier County as a
place to live. With the current Little League scenario in Collier
County, some might see this as false advertising. Others might view
this as ironic that Collier County would use a child to entice families
to view Collier as child-friendly only to concentrate its efforts on
renting out the fields for adult softball.
To be objective, North Naples Little League does have usage of
Starcher-Pettay and shared usage of Oceola field. I say shared usage,
because when it comes to Oceola field, due to an overcrowded fall
schedule, at times Little League practices with two baseball fields --
baseball teams on the field at the same time or possibly a baseball
Page 26
October 24-25, 2006
team and a football team at the same time.
Now, just a quick question as far as liability goes, should a
baseball hit a football player in the head during practice, who is liable,
Little League, flag football, county parks and recreation, or Collier
County schools?
As I have alluded to, Starcher- Pettay and Osceola are both part of
school property. Typically the older children play at Starcher-Pettay
and the younger at Osceola.
The school property situation creates a host of problems that are
not found at Three Oaks Park, our neighbor and a model for what we
would like down here in Collier County. Three Oaks is the home of
San Carlos Little League. And needless to say, if San Carlos Little
League can afford to be playing at a park such as Three Oaks, I think
we can afford it down here in Naples also.
The problems that you have with school fields, to list a few,
include a lack of rest room facilities, inadequate parking, they're not
allowed for fundraising activities via a concession stand, as is
available at Three Oaks or even at our Veterans Park that we have
here in Naples. They do not permit parents who have more than one
child to enjoy the games and practices of both younger and older
children.
Additionally, there's a problem with maintenance and upkeep.
All that one would have to do is take a drive from Veterans -- the
five-minute drive from Veterans to Starcher- Pettay to see the
difference in how the fields are maintained.
And while advertising and marketing materials used may be
fiction, what is fact is that a family purchasing a 2,000 square foot
home in Collier County will pay impact fees of over $30,000. A little
over 10 percent of such monies are allocated toward regional and
community parks. If you look at the monitors, you'll see the reprint
which I found in the Naples Daily News.
After having paid these impact fees myself, I find it disturbing
Page 27
October 24-25,2006
that parks and recreation have done nothing but make a solid effort at
renting out these fields to adult leagues.
Additionally, some of these adult players are coming from
outside the county. In my own visits to Vineyards and Veterans Park,
I have observed such out-of-county license plates. I also note in a
Brent Batten column where Commissioner Coyle expressed an interest
in tallying the counts of such out-of-county participants.
I attempted to acquire this information from Mr. Williams,
director of county parks and recreation. I did receive a list indicating
that playing times on the field is dominated by adult soccer and adult
softball leagues.
It did not indicate county of residence nor what county the
participants were from, nor did it indicate whether or not these
participants were taxpayers -- property taxpayers in the county of
Collier County.
Ed Terrino, one of the gentlemen I spoke with from parks and
recreation, thought that most of the county participants probably were
from Bonita, as if that were okay.
I pointed out to Ed Terrino that Bonita residents, as close as they
may be, do not pay impact fees in Collier County, nor do they pay
property taxes in Collier County.
Mr. Williams did indicate to me that there would be a chance for
Little League baseball at Veterans during a recent conversation we
had while, once again, touring our model park, Three Oaks Park, up
there in Lee County.
To paraphrase, he said, Little League would get a field at
Veterans if adult softball opted to relinquish usage of their field at
Veterans Park since they were getting the five new fields. They still
might need the three at Veterans, but if they opted to relinquish those,
we would opt -- we would get the option of playing on them.
I find that kind of logic outrageous. I find that thought process
outrageous. I'm not sure what we're supposed to do. Perhaps we
Page 28
October 24-25, 2006
should just lock our kids in their closets until they're old enough to
play adult softball.
I propose the need for this Board of County Commissioners to
take the necessary steps required to turn over Veterans Community
Park and dedicate it to youth sports.
What we'd like to see over there is two lighted Little League
fields, one lighted girls softball field, and what they have over there
already of one lighted regulation baseball field.
As some of you may be aware, at one time Veterans Park was the
home of North Naples Little League field, and to move it back to that
status wouldn't be such a stretch. What we're really talking about is
the conversion of only two of the fields over there.
The result would be a true community park, a park where dads
and their sons could go gather for a pick-up game and do not have to
run home when somebody has to use a rest room, a park where parents
do not have to choose whose game or practice they go and watch
because with multiple fields they'll have an opportunity for a real
family experience, a park that would serve as a real symbol of youth
athletics similar to what we see at Three Oaks Park and other county
parks across the state.
And in the time as I listened to before about the awards for
drug- free awareness, at a time when we're -- we should be so vigilant
about drugs in the schools, what we really need are after school
athletic activities.
The more we can give the kids to do, particularly I -- I have a bit
more towards athletics, but the more we can give the kids to do as
opposed to giving them all that free time after school on their own, I
think that -- I think the better off we are. I think that's how we create a
solid foundation for them. And I think youth athletics is a -- goes a
long way in helping to promote a drug-free experience for our kids.
I believe the county is morally and ethically responsible to offer
the same type of facilities that you see in these four-plexes, such as a
Page 29
October 24-25, 2006
Veterans Park or a Three Oaks Park, similar to what you see across
the state now in other counties. A lot of -- in putting together this
information, a lot of the people in North Naples do plan on traveling
teams.
The all-star team's got a chance to play in fields across the park
(sic), up in Kissimmee, up in Englewood, North Port. And virtually
every park that -- every county or region we go to in this state, you see
this four-plex development where you have a couple Little League
fields, a field for the girls for playing softball, and then a field for
regulation baseball.
And for the record, when I say regulation baseball, really what
I'm talking about is a field that the kids are playing on when they're
above the age of 12 years old, the 13 and ups.
I believe that the adults need to share the parks with the kids.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sir, I'm guessing that a Little
League field is smaller than a softball field; am I correct?
MR. CALANDRA: Well, the real problem with -- in doing this
research, what I found is where -- a lot of times people in the parks
call them baseball/softball fields. A baseball (sic) field has grass in
the infield. A baseball field has a mound.
MR. ZINO: And yes, some of the dimensions are different.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Can you explain what
the difference is between a Little League field and a softball field.
MR. ZINO: Yeah. The biggest difference is the pitching
location.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sir, if you could get to the mike.
MR. ZINO: I'm sorry. The biggest differences are the pitching
locations. There are no comparable pitching locations between
softball and Little League baseball.
Page 30
October 24-25, 2006
Softball does not allow for a mound, a raised mound. Little
League baseball is mandated to have a raised mound. And the home
run fence issue is a moving target. Little League baseball has a
200- foot fence, and softball has no such thing.
One of the bigger differences though is the difference between a
skin field and a grass field. The softball fields -- particularly because
they're used by adults as well -- they try to slow the pray down a little
bit, so it's a softer sand, clay infield. So the ball hits, it doesn't really
move like it should.
And when the kids play on these skin fields, they hit a ground
ball, the thing dies halfway to wherever it's going to go, and then
when they go play on a travel team or play on a league that has grass,
they're completely unequipped to deal with a ball coming at them, and
that's not good.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How many leagues and what is
your season?
MR. ZINO: We've got two seasons. They run a fall ball season,
which we're in the middle of right now, runs for a couple months, right
up until Thanksgiving.
And then in the spring season, the season starts first week in
February, I believe, is when practices begin, and that runs just about
till the kids get out of school. And then from that point on, the
different all-star and special leagues continue on. I know my son
played till just about August this year.
MR. CALANDRA: It's basically a year-round proposition -- it's
basically a year-round proposition.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Spring and fall?
MR. ZINO: Well, in this fall weather--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, what I would
like to do it find out what the inventory of Little League fields are in
Collier County.
MR. CALANDRA: Sorry?
Page 3 1
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just giving some direction.
MR. CALANDRA: How many Little League fields are there?
There's one. If you pick up the fall --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What about the elementary
schools and the middle schools and high schools?
MR. ZINO: That's what we're looking to address at this point is
that the fields that we use primarily -- that we use in north -- in North
Naples are all interlocal agreement fields with the schools.
One of the fields, the Starcher-Pettay we talked about, that school
now at this point has gotten to a point where they lock the gates at
night. So the only parking we actually have for that field is in St. John
the Evangelist church. And if they get tired of having us, if we have a
foul ball hit one of their cars, that will be the next thing that we hear
about, and then we'll be out of there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But there might be some better
coordination with the county and the school board to provide facilities
for you.
MR. ZINO: Well, the dividing -- the division of farming out the
Little League fields to all the public schools, to having the schools be
park participants in this, is limiting to what we do in terms of
fundraising, as we said, and also in terms of quality control.
There's been a big issue with trying to get parks and rec. and the
school board to cooperate in a way that these fields can even be
maintained. Parks and rec. goes home at 3:30. The school doesn't let
parks and rec. on the field until 3:30 to actually maintain the field. So
every time -- it is a -- it's tough on parks and rec., and it's tough on the
end result.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do we have an upcoming
workshop with the school board?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm not sure if we have a scheduled
workshop with the school board at this time.
MR. MUDD: Not right now, but we're probably going to have to
Page 32
October 24-25, 2006
have one later in the spring in order to talk about the interlocal --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Interlocal agreements that--
MR. MUDD: -- agreements where we talk about concurrency.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- we have to have with them, Growth
Management Plan.
MR. ZINO: You know, we had Veterans Park for a long time,
and then it was kind of just -- one day it disappeared.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Solve his problem.
MR. ZINO: We'd just like one central park.
MR. CALANDRA: What would be the problem with getting
Veterans Park?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, can we have -- can we have Barry
come up here and give us guidance so that we can move on with this,
okay?
MR. WILLIAMS: For the record, Barry Williams, Parks and
Rec. Director.
We have talked with David and Bart about the possibilities at
Veterans Park. As both have indicated, the number of Little League
fields that we have, we have Little League fields that are involved
with interlocal agreements with the school board.
We have six Little League fields in Collier County in our
inventory currently. We also have 26 softball fields. And just to -- for
a little bit of information, most of our planning over the years has been
in creating the softball fields. Softball fields are multi-purpose fields.
They allow us to reconfigure the fields to Little League where we
need them.
And so we are looking at Veterans Park as a possibility. With
North Collier Regional Park opening, we see the ability -- some of the
softball play that's been happening at Veterans will go to North Collier
Regional. It will give us some opportunities at Veterans.
We talked -- and talked to David about the possibility of
converting one of the fields at Veterans to Little League play, so that's
Page 33
October 24-25, 2006
the discussions that we are now.
We haven't converted -- or rather, the league play that's occurring
at Veterans, we're beginning scheduling for the winter/spring in the
next couple months. Once that occurs, that's when we'll know what
our capacity and what our availability is at Veterans, so --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Don't go yet, Barry. I thank you for
being here. I just had somebody come into my office -- it must be
three weeks ago -- from East Naples Little League, and they were
saying the same thing. They've got eight teams, they have no place to
play really, and they said that the schools -- so they've been playing in
the schools, except the schools have raised the rates so high they can't
afford to go there any longer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know a park that we can make
a Little League field in.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good. And so I was wondering, can
you tell me what Little League parks there are?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. In East Naples we have a couple
that we use one -- for Little League play there. It's a park called Gulf
Coast -- Gulf Coast Little League boys play at Eagle Lakes, and Gulf
Coast Community Park. Eagle Lakes, of course, is our baseball fields.
That's the 13 to 14-year-olds. They play on the baseball field. And
then to Gulf Coast Community Park they also play.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's that one over on -- by Naples
Manor there?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. But the one at -- they
were telling me also that they had parks for 12 and up but they didn't
have anything for 12 and under, other than the one park; is that
correct?
MR. WILLIAMS: We actually have two Little League fields at
Page 34
October 24-25, 2006
Gulf Coast Community Park, two.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. I would like to emphasize
that the purposes of a public petition is to notify us of a problem and
ask us only one question, are you interested enough to bring it back
for a hearing or not?
It is not the time to discuss all the facts. There's so much stuffwe
do not know here. So rather than wasting time on collecting little bits
of information and telling antidotes -- or anecdotes, why don't we just
decide that this is an important issue and we want the staff to come
back with a proposed solution?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second your motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion--
Commissioner Coletta, do you have anything to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle just said
it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So we have a motion on the floor
by Commissioner Coy Ie and a second by Commissioner Fiala (sic) to
bring this back at a future date.
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: Okay. Opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
MR. ZINO: Thank you.
MR. CALANDRA: Thank you.
Page 35
October 24-25, 2006
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, let's shoot for November 28th on
that, if that would be okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, we'll bring that back to the
board on November 28th.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY BOBBIE DUSEK TO
DISCUSS ESCALATING INSURANCE RATES FOR COLLIER
COUNTY - BCC TO SET AS A PRIORITY AT THEIR
NOVEMBER LEGISLATIVE MEETING IN TALLAHASSEE-
CONSENSUS
Brings us to our next petition, which is 6B. It's a public petition
request by Bobbie Dusek to discuss escalating insurance rates for
Collier County.
MS. DUSEK: If I might approach the commissioners, I have a
booklet for each of you.
MS. FILSON: I can hand that out for you, ma'am.
MS. DUSEK: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ma'am, before you get started on this --
before you get started on this, we've discussed this at quite length. In
fact, we even basically sent a resolution to the governor in regards to
looking into the high insurance rates here not only in Collier County
but through the whole State of Florida.
So I'm not sure if you can give us some additional information,
but I'm just letting you know that the governor is also going to put
together a task force to address this.
It's out of our control as far as addressing insurance rates. We
don't have any control over that. So I'm not sure if what you're going
Page 36
October 24-25, 2006
to bring forth will be of any value as far as what we can do for you as
a citizen here in Collier County in addressing insurance rates.
MS. DUSEK: I'd like to try.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. DUSEK: My name is Bobbie Dusek. I'm a realtor with
John R. Wood Realtors.
Last month I went to the Florida Association of Realtors
convention, state convention. While I was there, because I knew
nothing about insurance except I've just continually heard over the --
at least one year, how the insurance rates have just hurt so many
people and have been cancelled, and so I thought, I want to go into
this session and find out what it's all about.
There was a lady there from Monroe County who stood up and
spoke about what they did in Monroe County, and I'd like to briefly
tell you what that was.
A group of 10 people got together and they decided that they
were going to do something about their insurance rates. A lot of
people laughed at them, said, you're crazy, you can't fight -- their
company is Citizens, and you can't fight government.
This little group decided they weren't going to listen to that, and
they got together. They now are over 3,500 people.
To make a long story short, they met with a lot of different
people. They went to Tallahassee on many occasions, had doors
closed in their face, but they finally got through to a few key people.
And with that the OIR, which is the Office of Insurance
Regulators, sent Citizens down to Monroe to find out why those rates
were so high because Monroe County has the highest building codes
in the State of Florida and very few claims.
Citizens, in their arrogance, went down there, came back and
raised the rates 25 percent. This little group of pit bulls decided, that's
not going to happen.
They went back to Tallahassee and they went to the OIR. Not
Page 37
October 24-25, 2006
only did they get Citizens to take away the 25 percent, but they got
their rates reduced by 35 percent which just took place in August.
And this group organized in February of this year.
This county is less than 79,000 of permanent residents. Collier
County is close to 320,000 permanent residents. They saved their
county homeowners $72 million.
Now, we all know that affordable housing is a serious problem
everywhere, and especially here in Collier County. The insurance
problem is tacking onto that.
When I saw at this meeting -- when I went to the state convention
-- on the charts that Collier County was -- had one of the highest rates
in the state.
Now, we have an image in Collier that we are a wealthy county.
Now, we know that not everybody here is wealthy. And I decided --
my daughter was sitting next to me and she said, oh, no, Mom, you're
not going to. And I said, yes, I'm going back and I'm going to work
for Collier County to find out why our rates are so high.
Now, I know there are groups all over the state working on this
issue, and I know that the political candidates are putting it at the top
of their agenda, but I want to find out why Collier rates are so high.
We haven't had a hurricane hit us directly for 45 years until last year,
and I have to compliment the county on the organization, the quick
cleanup. I mean, this is just a wonderful county, and I know we can
do wonderful things.
Weare losing some of our most viable people of the community,
and that's public service. We're losing health workers, teachers,
policemen and women, retirees, people on fixed incomes. First-time
homebuyers, when they're ready to purchase and they find out what
the insurance rate is, they turn away.
Second time -- second home buyers are looking for other
destinations because they can't afford to live here, or they choose not
to.
Page 38
October 24-25, 2006
The wealthy people in Collier County are doing self-insurance,
and then there are some people who can't afford to ensure themselves
at all, so they're not doing any insurance, and how scary is that? So
there is -- there is an imbalance here in Collier County, and I want to
work toward this.
A group of us October 5th got together, 14 people, and we
organized what is called FAIR For Collier, which stands for Fighting
Against Insurance Rates for Collier County. We have a blog site,
which is http:\\fairforcollier.wordpress.com.
Weare looking to the community, and especially to the county
commissioners, to support us in this effort. We would like to have
you develop -- which sounds like you already have -- a subcommittee
to work with us, because all these discussions that are taking place and
the resolutions that are being made, we want to put them to work for
Collier County. We're not going to be a group who will sit and
discuss. We're going to be a group of action.
And I would also ask that the county commissioners consider
helping to fund this. We're all volunteers. We are looking for
donations. And I think my timing is just right when I saw the tax
collector come in and hand you a check for $9 million.
So I really feel this is affecting the entire community. Businesses
are closing. A friend of mine who just started a -- built a small
building on Radio Road has an insurance of 80,000. He asked, what if
I took away the wind insurance, they said, well, then it would be
8,000.
So that shows you -- I hear people every day. Someone told me
they used to have a bill of a $1,000. It's now 5,000.
Citizens is our insurer of last resort, which all of you probably
know, and it has 1.2 million policyholders. Most of them are in South
Florida, the coastal regions. They have to be the highest in the state.
They have to be above the 20 top insurers in our state. So it's very
expensive to insure with Citizens. That's a group for the people.
Page 39
October 24-25, 2006
There are two private insurance companies who have decided
that they will take policyholders out of Citizens. When they do this,
they have certain requirements. One of them decided that they would
follow those requirements, and I want you to hear this.
Because they took these policyholders out and because they
would hold them, I think it's for three years, Citizens gave them a
bonus of $18 million to this one company.
There are no federal regulations on the insurance industry. The
State of Florida has set some regulations, but companies, before they
get their rate approvals approved by the OIR, can go ahead and raise
your rates and collect that money until they meet with the OIR. And
then ifit is not accepted by the OIR, then they refund the money. But
in the meantime, they've been using the people's money.
And Pasco County is another county who's doing exactly what
I've started, FAIR for Collier, and they have hired an insurance
attorney, which is what I'd like to see us do, an actuary who will give
us the actual facts of why the rates are so high in Collier County.
And as can you see from the forms that I've given you, it shows
you how our rates compare to the rest of the state.
And I guess that's about all I can say. If you have any questions,
I'd be happy to answer them.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you.
Wow, I'm impressed. Grass-roots movement. You never can top
that, and I want to support you any way I personally can, but I don't
think this is something the commission can get directly involved in. If
they did, they would have to select a committee, it would take months
to put it together. It would be under all the scrutiny that government
places on it, including sunshine. You wouldn't be able to talk with
your fellow committees unless it was in an advertised meeting.
But I don't think you're going to have any trouble raising the kind
of money you need. When it comes time to do the lobbying, I'm more
Page 40
October 24-25, 2006
than willing to join as a citizen to be able to help you any way I
possibly can.
This is a direction we need to go. I'm in that class of people that
is greatly impacted by the insurance rate. When my house is paid off
in the next couple of years, I intend to drop my wind insurance. I feel
that being self-insured at the rates they're charging me would be about
the best move I could make for the financial well-being of my family.
And I know that -- and I live quite a distance inland. And I know
there's a lot of other people that share that sentiment.
So I commend what you're doing. I'd like to help you any way I
possibly could.
MS. DUSEK: I appreciate that. I will just say that in Monroe
County, their commissioners did help them out financially and with a
subcommittee. But I understand if it's -- I don't want to waste any
time. I want to keep moving on this, so I do understand that it does
take time.
And we are a non- for-profit. It's all volunteers, and I hope that
those who are watching this meeting today who are out there in the
community, no matter what you do, I hope you will contact me or go
on our blog site. And we have a meeting this Thursday at five o'clock.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: County Manager, do you see
any problem with sending a staff member familiar with insurances?
MR. MUDD: No, I don't have a problem with that, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Because our insurance
has gone up dramatically.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if we could save that way
and also save with the ratepayers, maybe this is something that we
can, you know, get behind or take the lead after we have some more
information from a knowledgeable person on our staff. Does anybody
have a problem with that?
Page 41
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I like the idea of Citizens
grass-roots movement taking the lead and us following their lead,
maybe joining them individually. I've got a feeling if we start to take
the lead, with all the commitments we have out there in the world, we
could bog this thing down.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, just imagine -- I mean,
our -- what did we -- we doubled our insurance, what we set aside for
insurance coverage or insurance premiums?
MR. MUDD: Sir, I can't say doubled, but it has gone up.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Well, it's more than a
million dollars.
MR. MUDD: Oh, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. So maybe it's just
something to look at and get back to us. And if it's, you know, like
Monroe County -- and I did follow up on that, read some of that
information, what Monroe County did, if we could do similar things
for the citizens of Collier County, what a benefit.
MS. DUSEK: It certainly would be. If all counties in the state
would do a grass-roots group, it would be much more effective than
general sessions and groups meeting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I see everybody's -- most
everybody's head nod, so let's move forward.
MS. DUSEK: I also will tell you that I have talked to the EDC,
and I am meeting with the Chamber of Commerce tomorrow, and the
Board of Realtors is also behind this. I don't really want one group to
handle it. I want all groups to be involved.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There you go.
MS. DUSEK: So I'm not asking you to be the lead group, but I
would certainly look toward your support.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think if Monroe County was that
successful, then I hope when the governor assembles this group to
study the insurance rates, that they'll go down and look at Monroe
Page 42
October 24-25, 2006
County as possibly a pilot program, if they were that successful, and I
think that's very important.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I would make one brief
observation, and then a recommendation.
It's not just insurance rates, it's deductibles. The deductible
amounts have been raised to the point where nobody gets paid for
minor damage like the loss of a pool cage. So you have to take that
into account. In addition to the insurance rate, you have to look at the
deductible amounts which have been increased unilaterally by the
insurance companies to ridiculous amounts of money.
MS. DUSEK: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, to my recommendation.
There is something we can do. Each year we set a legislative -- set of
legislative priorities. We'll be meeting with our state legislators here, I
think, next month.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It is dangerous, very dangerous, to
leave this issue to politicians. They have been working on this for
decades, and what do we have to show for it? Absolutely nothing. It's
only going to get solved by citizens groups who understand the details
and who demand some specific solutions. It's not going to be solved
in some back room sitting with insurance agents and company
representatives.
MS. DUSEK: You've said it exactly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And so I would suggest what we do
as a commission is set this as one of our legislative priorities, task our
legislators with dealing with it in specific ways, and those ways you
have to tell us about.
Your grass-roots organization comes up with specific
recommendations about what you do about deductibles, what you do
about controlling rates and reviewing rates, how do you relate that to
Page 43
October 24-25, 2006
historical losses, and that sort of thing.
You give that information to us, and we can give very specific
guidance to our legislative delegation, and that will be working at the
problem from two different directions, and I think it could be very
useful to you.
And it certainly will be useful to us because we don't know what
the specific recommendations are, and it's the lack of specific
recommendations that has hampered the solution of this problem for
decades. And that -- I would suggest we do that, if there are three
nods.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yep.
MS. DUSEK: Well, that's why I'm asking for all sorts of help,
professional help as well, because we're a group who really are just
like the rest of us. We don't really know that much about it. We're
learning about the insurance.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: One of the things that is absolutely
unproductive is to say to people in Tallahassee, fix the problem.
That's not the way it works. They won't fix the problem, at least not
the way you think you want it fixed.
MS. DUSEK: That's right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We have to have a specific
program, a set of solutions to recommend to them before we'll ever get
what we want.
MS. DUSEK: Well, that's what we hope to do.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much for your time.
MS. DUSEK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Item #6C
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY GARY DONAHO TO
Page 44
October 24-25, 2006
DISCUSS NEW CAT BUS TERMINAL NEAR RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENTS ON RADIO ROAD - STAFF TO SET UP A
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATIONAL MEETING
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next public
petition, which is a public petition request by Barry Donaho to discuss
the new CAT bus terminal near residential developments on Radio
Road.
MR. DONAHO: Good morning. My name is Gary Donaho. I
am a resident of Collier County and a homeowner in Sanctuary at
Blue Heron, which is a development off of Radio Road.
I do have some media to present a little bit later on.
I'm here today to discuss the location of the proposed CAT
terminal, which I believe is -- would be the old Morande car
dealership off Radio Road, and it kind of junctions into Davis
Boulevard as well. I believe there's a north and south entrance to that
property .
The concern the residents have is, is that facility really going to
be placed in a proper location? What do I mean by that? We need to
look at the impact that that facility's going to have to the over seven
residential developments that are really only a tenth of a mile from
where that facility's going to be. Let's think about that for a minute, a
tenth of a mile. Not one mile, not two miles, not three miles. It's
literally going to be at our doorstep.
And the concerns that we have about this is all the noise from the
additional buses. The traffic all hours of the day and night. And I
have some history to share with you.
I'm a former resident of Broward County, Fort Lauderdale. And
we went through this process many years ago, and the residents did
not want this facility near the residential areas. And I'll show you why
in a minute.
But some of the bullets I have that came up again and again when
Page 45
October 24-25, 2006
Fort Lauderdale was discussing where to put their bus terminal was
the increased commercial traffic being too close to homes, increased
vehicle noise all hours of the day and night, as I mentioned before,
increased transient pedestrian traffic, pedestrian traffic near where
children live and play, undesirable aesthetics of a main bus terminal,
and finally, devalued residential property values. And that's probably
a low button item in Collier County right now.
City of Fort Lauderdale finally listened to its residents, and they
placed the bus terminal in downtown Fort Lauderdale away from most
of the residential areas. There's not any very close to that terminal,
and I have some pictures to show you that terminal in just a minute.
In fact, I can go ahead and do that right now.
Now, I took these pictures two weeks ago on a Saturday
afternoon, so you're not going to see a lot of buses there. If you go
there during the week in the daytime, you're going to see a lot of buses
around this facility. As a matter of fact, you can't see the facility with
all the buses that swarm around there during workdays and such.
I do have one more picture to show you. That's the back of the
facility. Again, this is located in a commercial only area, not near any
residential areas, and it looks like their decision was a good one.
Now, what we're asking, the seven developments -- actually my
president of my condo association, Donna -- I'm sorry, Dawn Bricco,
was going to be here today but she couldn't be here today, so I
volunteered as a resident to come and represent us.
But there are seven major developments as I mentioned,
Sherwood, Santuary Blue Heron, Madison Park, Sapphire Lakes, the
Shores, Sable Lakes and Plantation. Also, you know, Madison Park is
a very large community which will be located -- it's under
construction right now, but it's going to be located right behind where
this terminal's going to be, very close to it.
Sanctuary Blue Heron, tenth of a mile from this facility.
According to the newspaper on October 11 th, the Naples Daily News,
Page 46
October 24-25, 2006
the county wants this location for bus parking, fleet maintenance,
ticket sales and vehicle fueling. And it may start out a small facility,
but with the growing community and the need you're going to have for
additional buses, we can only see this as becoming a very business and
maybe even an unsafe area to be near our kids and children where
they play.
A lot of buses let children off on that street. If you've been out
on Radio Road, you know it's a two-lane road. I'm not sure when they
plan to widen that road. But even if they do widen the road there, it's
a very fast road. There's an awful lot of traffic. This situation's just
going to make it worse.
So what we're asking the commission to do is really take a look
at the impact that this will have to our -- to our neighbors, to the
neighbors that will be near this facility, all the residential areas. It's
very important to look at that.
I know this property's a good buy for the county from a business
sense. I would look at this myself. For the price you're going to pay
for this, it's probably a good deal. But I want you to ask yourself this
question, is this really a good deal for the residents that live along that
road?
So please consider this as you go through this process to look at
this property. Thank you.
If you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer them.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you sir.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sir, would you be open, before
the board makes a final decision, for us to come out to your
community and have a neighborhood information --
MR. DONAHO: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. DONAHO: Certainly we can do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's do that and address
Page 47
October 24-25, 2006
any concerns that you have.
MR. DONAHO: Okay. I'll--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Before we make any decision.
MR. DONAHO: Would you like to come to our next
condominium meeting?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's have our staff arrange
it --
MR. DONAHO: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- at an appropriate time. It
might be far in the future. But before we make any final decisions --
MR. DONAHO: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- I think that we owe that to
you.
MR. DONAHO: Okay, I appreciate that. And I thank the
commissioners and the county manager for allowing me to come
today and speak on this issue. I think you're going to have a better
balanced decision if you consider the residents in that neighborhood.
We appreciate your help on that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much for your time, sir.
MR. DONAHO: Thank you very much.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2006-279: RE-APPOINTING BARBARA SEGURA
AND RICHARD SIMS TO THE GOLDEN GATE
BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 9, paragraph 9,
Board of County Commissioners. And the first item is 9 A, and that is
to -- appointment of members to the Golden Gate Beautification
Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve the two
Page 48
October 24-25, 2006
applicants.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Fiala to
approve the two items -- the two persons that were approved by the
committee's recommendation.
Hearing no further discussion, all those in favor, signify by
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Passes unanimously.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2006-280: APPOINTING DR. DOUGLAS LEE (AT-
LARGE) AND JOHN C. VALENTI (COMMISSIONER DISTRICT
3); CONFIRMING DR. JEFF PANOZZO FROM PHYSICIANS
REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER AND COMMANDER BILL
RULE FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT TO THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
ADVISORY COUNCIL - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is 9B. It's appointment of members to the Emergency Medical
Services Advisory Council.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve the
committee's recommendations.
Page 49
October 24-25,2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That would also mean that the
confirmation from the --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- Physicians' Regional, and also the
confirmation from the sheriffs office.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You betcha.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, good.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And this is the two people that are
approved on this by the committee.
Not hearing any further discussion, all those in favor, signify by
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2006-281: APPOINTING CHARLES MARTIN TO
THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD -
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is 9C, appointment of members to the Collier County Code
Page 50
October 24-25, 2006
Enforcement Board.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve Charles
Martin.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Fiala to
approve Charles Martin.
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.)
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2006-282: RE-APPOINTING KAREN M.
ACQUARD (PHASE I) W/W AIVER OF TERM LIMITS AND RE-
APPOINTING STEPHEN B. GREENBERG (PHASE III)
W/WAIVER OF TERM LIMITS TO THE GOLDEN GATE
ESTATES LAND TRUST COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Brings us to our next item, which is 9D,
appointment of members to the Golden Gate Estates Land Trust
Committee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Move to approve both Karen
Acquard and Stephen Greenberg.
MS. FILSON: And that includes waiving section --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And waiving the necessary --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. That's included in the motion.
Page 51
October 24-25, 2006
Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coletta and second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any further discussion? Not hearing --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, was it Coyle, oh, okay, I'm
sorry. I didn't even hear Coyle. Excuse me.
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?
(No response.)
Item #9E
RESOLUTION 2006-283: APPOINTING PAUL M. ROSOFSKY
TO THE LAKE TRAFFORD RESTORATION TASK FORCE-
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this brings us to our next item,
which is 9E, appointment of a member to the Lake Trafford
Restoration Task Force.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Move to approve Paul
Rosofsky.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'll second that.
Any further discussion?
Page 52
October 24-25, 2006
Committee recommendation, there wasn't any, but this is
provided by Commissioner Coletta and seconded by Commissioner
Halas.
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 #9F
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE ISLE OF CAPRI FIRE
CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD - MOTION TO RE-
ADVERTISE - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Brings us to our next item, which is 9F,
appointment of a member to the Isles -- Isles of Capri Fire Control
District Advisory Board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'd like -- oh, I'm sorry. This is
your district, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, but you could have. They'd
asked us to readvertise for somebody residing at the other end of the
district of Main Sail Drive, or -- and/or Fiddler's Creek and -- because
apparently these people -- one guy lives on the same street as two
others. That would make three people living on the same street, and I
guess they wanted a more varied board.
So, Commissioners, would we ask our people to readvertise for
Page 53
October 24-25, 2006
this position?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I make a motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion on the floor by
Commissioner Fiala and seconded by Commissioner Coyle to
readvertise this -- this Isles of Capri Fire Commission Control District,
and hopefully we'll get some additional people to sign up for this
position, so --
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: 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 #9G
RESOLUTION 2006-284: APPOINTING HAROLD MAYS TO
THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this brings us to our next item,
which is item 9G, appointment of a member to the Collier County
Airport Authority.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I move to approve Harold Mays.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'll second that.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
Page 54
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: There's a motion on the floor for
approval of Harold Mays by Commissioner Coletta, seconded by
Commissioner Halas.
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: Okay. Motion carries, unanimous.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item --
well, I'll ask the question. Commissioner, do you want to take a -- you
normally go at 10:30. You want to take the 10-minute break now
before --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, we will.
MR. MUDD: -- we start this next item?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. We'll take a 12-minute break.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, County Manager.
At this time the Board of County Commissioners has reconvened
from recess, and I believe we're on item G?
MR. MUDD: Sir, we did G. We're at 9H.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: 9H.
Item #9H
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FOR THE COUNTY
Page 55
October 24-25, 2006
ATTORNEY -AWARD OF A LUMP SUM BONUS OF $15,121-
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: And that's the annual performance appraisal for
the County Attorney.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. County Attorney?
MR. WEIGEL: Pardon me. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and
Commissioners.
Well, this is really the board's agenda item. But as you know,
annually I, as the contract employee, as well as Jim Mudd, now Sue
Filson and Theresa Cook, the Airport Authority director, have
contracts for employment, and within our contract they provide for
Jim and me, as well as Ms. Filson, an evaluation, which is based upon
an action plan.
The action plan has been provided to all of the commissioners in
September. You all have reviewed it, some of you had the
opportunity and spoke with me in the meantime and provided that --
provided the figures and the evaluation scoring, which has come back
and been assimilated into the agenda item.
So from that standpoint, I've had an opportunity to review the
elements of evaluation that you've provided, both numerically and the
written comments that have come from some of the commissioners,
and that assists me greatly in knowing how I operate and how I
approach my office, my staff, as well as interacting with the client,
which is the board, the county manager, county manager's division
administrators, directors and staff.
And one point that I noted in the executive summary is that
although the contract provides for the annual evaluation, merit
increase to go to base salary, I, similar to Jim Mudd, have indicated
that any evaluation merit bonus that you may provide me this year
would be the lump sum bonus similar to what Jim has done this year
and previously.
Page 56
October 24-25, 2006
And I'm available for any questions, but ultimately it's your
agenda item to discuss and then come back to me upon, I think.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, County Attorney.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You can let Donna go first.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to say, although my
score isn't as high as I feel in my heart, I just wanted to explain a little
something.
It's painful for me to give any threes to anybody. I always -- they
have to really excel, which you did in many of these things, and I put
a three in there.
I'm going to say how it's an absolute joy working with you and
with your staff. Everybody's there immediately for anything we need
to discuss with them, and I can't tell you how much I appreciate that.
Many stick out, like, for instance, Scott Teach, I love working
with him. He's a great guy. He's been guiding us along.
I also -- Jeff Klatzkow, man. He's just so down to earth, and he
just tells you the answer even though you don't expect it because he's
just there. I just -- there's nothing even -- he comes right to the point
and says it, and I love working with him.
Well, actually -- and Michael. I could name everybody in there,
and Margie and so forth. But I just want to tell you that my score
looks a little bit low but it shouldn't be reflected that way, because in
my estimates you deserve high. I just don't score with threes very
often, sorry.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commission Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. I would like to also
state I am very pleased with your staff, and I think that we're getting
great value from the County Attorney's Office. The only problem I
had in the course of the year, even though I did give you a high score,
Page 57
October 24-25, 2006
was the inability to be able to get out the ordinance as far as the
affordable housing linkage fees or the inclusionary zoning in a more
timely fashion, but I understand that circumstances prevailed there,
and there's always reasons. Other than that, I had little to say that
would be negative and more to say that was positive.
With that, we had a score, an average of 2.44 out of a 3, and that
comes to an 81.3 percent approval rating, which is very good. I don't
think anyone could argue with that fact. That's definitely a passing
mark in any school that I've ever been in.
And if you'd use that and use it the same way that we applied the
percentages for the county manager's incentive that we gave him and
to the -- Sue Filson's, the office manager for the BCC, we did the same
thing, and we applied that across the board.
But what I'm doing is I'm making a motion that we grant you,
based upon that approval rating of 81.3 percent, $15,121.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, I come out with
an 87 percent myself using 3 points and figuring each point is worth
33 and a third percent. Is that how you --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Actually, the way I arrived at it
is I look the 2.44 and divided it by 3.0, and then I came up with the
.813. My math could be flawed, so if somebody else wants to do a
calculation real quick, I would appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Our mathematician just
confirmed your figures.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Who's our mathematician?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm satisfied with it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think I did it right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's close enough for a
mathematician.
Page 58
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coletta and a second by Commissioner Fiala for a pay
raise of -- well, this is a lump sum bonus of $15,100 to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: 121.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- 121, okay. Okay, 15,121 as a bonus.
And any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Not hearing any, I'll call the question.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
Aye.
Motion carries.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you very much, Commissioners. I
appreciate that and your very kind comments in regard to the attorneys
and support staff in our office. We look forward to providing even
better service.
Thank you so much.
Item #91
FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO
CONSIDER PARTICIPATING IN THE MEDIATION
PROCEDURE WITH THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RESOLVE
THE CURRENT CASE NOS. 04-941-CA, 05-953-CA & 05-1506-
CA. - MOTION TO SKIP MEDIATION AND CONTINUE TO
COURT HEARING ON NOVEMBER 27 WITH NO DELAYS -
Page 59
October 24-25, 2006
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to our next item,
which is 91, for the Board of County Commissioners to consider
participating in the mediation procedures with the Clerk of Courts to
resolve the current case numbers 04-941-CA and 05-953-CA and
05-1506-CA.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any discussion on this? I believe
Commissioner Henning prepared this, so --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, if I could start out, please.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- yeah, I was given the
information in the packet by -- during my deposition, and from our
county attorney's side, they're either going to settle or limit the case.
And the response, of course you can see, is from our Clerk of
Court, would like to mediate this with the Board of Commissioners,
which we usually don't do, but I think it's important from -- based
upon, you have a constitutional officer elected by the people, as we
are, and what a better way to settle this is, let's all get together and see
if we can come to common ground, put this thing to rest, instead of
having this bickering in the newspaper?
Does anybody disagree with that?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I disagree with the thought that -- I
believe this is a constitutional issue, and I believe that the only way to
solve this is, since it is a constitutional issue, you have to determine
what the grounds are of the jurisdiction of the Clerk of Courts, that I
feel that it needs to go through the court process in order to establish
exactly what the criteria of the Clerk of Courts is. That's my take on
it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But we can establish that if we
can come to an agreement, couldn't we?
Page 60
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't believe so. Neither -- none of us
here have the background to litigate as far as being a judge or an
attorney, and I believe that we need the auspices of those people to
take care of that.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, Coyle was first. I follow
him.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I would like to hear
from our legal counsel on this before we discuss it any further.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then I might have a comment,
but I'd like to understand the implications from the legal counsel.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Thank, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Coyle.
I'm going to have our assisting outside counsel, Mr. Ted Tripp of
the firm of Garvin & Tripp, provide some legal thought on this to you
in a few moments, but I will remind us all that the lawsuit that
initiated in 2004 was a lawsuit against the Ochopee Fire District, the
Board of County Commissioners sitting as ex-officio, the governing
body, and two individuals, employees of the fire district, the fire chief
and a secretary.
It became necessary upon the initiation of that lawsuit in which
these people and the county were the defendants to provide a defense,
and the counts included such things as restitution. It involved, in fact,
a $21,000 check that had been -- that had gone into an account, a
volunteer fire account of the Ochopee Fire District.
And upon the county manager being apprised of the fact that
there was money that the clerk believed should be subject within the
clerk's accounting, accountability, Mr. Mudd made every effort, in
fact, to turn that money over and provide the check to the clerk.
Notwithstanding that the money was, in fact, received by check and
Page 61
October 24-25, 2006
held by the clerk's office, the lawsuit was initiated prior to the board --
the Monday prior to the Tuesday board meeting where the board was
officially going to turn the money over to the clerk. That was the
initiation of that lawsuit.
The lawsuit by the clerk was initially dismissed by the court
through the judge. And was re- filed in broader terms. And since that
time it's gotten broader and broader and has, therefore, required not
merely the tremendous responsiveness of legal staff, but also the
county staff, county manager's people.
Additionally, we learned through the lawsuit that, in fact, there
was imprecision as to the knowledge of the clerk's rights and
responsibilities pursuant to the Constitution and the state statutes
which govern his powers and operation.
So from that standpoint, the county provided a clearer lawsuit to
the Court called a quo warranto lawsuit, specifically asking the Court
to please tell us, tell us both, the clerk and the county, what are those
legal rights, responsibilities, obligations and limitations.
And the case has gone forward, albeit slowly, although much
work has been required to date. And at this juncture then, the county
had asked -- had asked for mediation pursuant to the rules of civil
procedure with an intent for the agents of the clients, meaning the
attorneys, to attempt to work through and reduce issues, if possible,
and keep it straightforward to the extent possible for the Court to make
a determination.
And at this point, I'll turn it over to Mr. Ted Tripp to talk a little
bit further about the concept of mediation in the lawsuit, and I will be
prepared to speak further if necessary in regard to sunshine law
aspects if the board should attempt to become a part of the mediation.
Thank you. Mr. Tripp?
MR. TRIPP: Good morning. Commissioners, I need to
supplement the background a little bit.
This case was brought by the Clerk of the Court. It arose from a
Page 62
October 24-25, 2006
$21,000 donation for a fireboat. It was on the agenda for this body to
return to the custody of the clerk. Rather than await the next day's
delivery, he filed this lawsuit.
Important for you to understand that the lawsuit was begun by
the clerk in an effort to gain control of monies raised by volunteers in
support of the fire department. That case was thrown out by the judge.
That case, the judge said, was an effort by Mr. Brock to assert a
power which he did not have under the statutes and Constitution.
Mr. Brock then re- filed this case and now says, I don't know what
powers I have, Judge. I would like for you to tell me, as a matter of
law, what my legal authority is under the Constitution and under the
statutes.
In response, this body has filed an action asking the Court to limit
the clerk, to say to the clerk, these are your responsibilities under the
Constitution, these are your responsibilities under the statute, and they
do not include the right to interfere in the operation -- of setting a
policy by this board or the enforcement and carrying out of that policy
by the county government.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is a legal issue. It is a legal issue
which this board cannot alter by agreement and which the clerk cannot
expand by agreement. This is not a case that will be settled at
mediation. I want you to hear that.
The taxpayers of Collier County are entitled to a legal
determination of the powers and duties of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court and the authority and responsibility of this commission. And the
only place that legal issue can be answered is in the Circuit Court. We
have a trial date. We will begin trial the Monday following
Thanksgiving, assuming the clerk's motion to continue that trial
doesn't get granted, and we will be opposing that continuance.
This effort at mediation is not about resolving the case. It's about
doing what lawyers should do, which is to try and narrow the legal
issues presented to the judge so that we can make absolutely certain
Page 63
October 24-25, 2006
that when we do get an answer from the judge, we will get an answer
that will assist this board and the clerk in carrying out their roles and
responsibilities on a going forward basis. That's what this mediation is
about.
The reason we sought it is because we have two different views.
We believe that it is a narrow, legal issue. The clerk believes, based
on a $21,000 donation for a fireboat, that we're now going to require
three weeks of jury trial, we're going to be bringing in tens of
volunteer groups and subjecting them to the court process.
We have -- the clerk has already spent, if I'm understanding
correctly, over three quarters of a million of the taxpayers' dollars
pursuing this incredibly broad scope of the dispute. We don't believe
that's in the best interest of the taxpayers.
All we're trying to do in this mediation is to obtain the answer the
taxpayer needs in the most efficient way the taxpayer can get it, and
with the -- from the appropriate individual, who is the judge, and
ultimately the appellate court.
Please understand, mediation is a process that is created by
statute. The Florida legislature has decided that mediation is helpful
because it is confidential. It is not one that is conducted -- and not a
process conducted in the public forum.
This case began because the clerk did not follow the law. The
clerk, when he asks you to conduct this mediation in the sunshine, is
asking you to agree not to follow the law.
We oppose that. We believe that it is inconsistent with the
obligations that this commission has to the taxpayers. It is
inconsistent with the law of Florida, and it is inconsistent with our
opportunity to fairly present a narrow case seeking a legal
determination from the Court.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What is the recommendation of the
attorneys with respect to discussing this -- and by the way, this is very
Page 64
October 24-25, 2006
distracting at a time when we're having some very important
presentations going on here, to get all this stuff -- you know --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's a reason for it,
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- it's taking away from the ability
to concentrate on what's being said here, I'm afraid, but nevertheless.
Now, what would you recommend we do with this particular issue?
MR. TRIPP: I would recommend that if the party -- let me back
up. Mediation is a voluntary process. We sought mediation because
we believe it will save the taxpayers money. It will allow us to focus
the issue.
If the clerk is unwilling to participate in the mediation that the
legislature anticipates and authorizes, then we won't have mediation,
and that's fine. I recommend that we go to trial on the first Monday
following Thanksgiving.
If the clerk is willing to proceed with mediation under the statutes
of Florida and to have that occur within the confidentiality provided
by the mediation statutes, I think it is in our best interest to try and
narrow those issues.
But make no mistake, Commissioner, I do not recommend that
this case be settled, as you would normally expect from mediation. I
don't think this case can or should be settled. The taxpayers are
entitled to a legal answer, and you get legal answers not from
mediations, but from judges.
All we're trying to do is narrow the issues. If the clerk wishes to
participate, I think that's a good idea. Ifhe chooses to impose
conditions on that participation, then I recommend that we do not
participate in public debate, but that we proceed directly to trial.
After all, the clerk has had two years to come to this body in an
open meeting and express his concerns and seek your assistance. To
my knowledge, in the two years that this litigation has been ongoing
and in the two years it has taken to generate the files which you have
Page 65
October 24-25,2006
in front of you, I'm not aware of the clerk having made that effort.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What is the implication if we do
talk about this today? Is it going to hurt the case?
MR. TRIPP: The implication is that, to the extent that this board
is prepared to or encouraged to comment on legal issues that are
pending before the Court, any statement by this commissioner -- or by
this commission or individual members of this commission would
ultimately be, potentially, admissible in the trial of the case.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you're suggesting we not talk
about it at all?
MR. TRIPP: I'm suggesting that this council, or this commission
needs to either participate in the statutorily authorized mediation
process if the clerk is willing to do that, and if he is not, that we
proceed directly to trial without mediation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That would be my motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. And Commissioner Coyle,
I'd like to apologize. I really wanted them to wait till I was going to
speak to bring it in. I didn't mean to throw you off, but there's a
reason for these records being here.
You know, when we're talking about numbers and dollars and
everything, you don't get any visual aids exactly what's been done to
try to make things work.
You see before you what's been generated in work. Most of this
is what ended up with the clerk in response to a $21,000 request for
monies to be returned, which were returned in a timely fashion.
When we wanted to go through the process of reaching a
decision and getting a judgment as far as what is the legal parameters
the clerk can work in, we seem to be stymied every time. And the
clerk has made every attempt to be able to grow a case way past the
original request.
We're to the point where now we are having private organizations
Page 66
October 24-25, 2006
that are doing a purpose for the good of humanity out there being
questioned, being -- depositions performed upon their leadership, and
they're going into their books like there has been some mass
conspiracy taking place.
And, of course, the clerk keeps referring back to an instance that
happened before we came into office where we had a very bad
occurrence as far as three commissioners and the county manager that
did not perform appropriately.
And the reference are insulting because his claims lead back to
the point that the present commission is no better than what was there
before, and I can't accept that, and this is one of the reasons why I
wanted to go through this little measure to be able to show what we've
been dealing with.
Every effort has been made to expedite this and to bring the cost
down to something more realistic so we could come up with a final
decision. The truth of the matter is, very simply put, the clerk knows
he's on the losing end as far as this particular judgment's going to be,
and at the very end he'll lose on that, so what he wants to do is
mediate it so it never gets to trial.
And this is what costs us so much money. Do you realize the
amount of money that's been spent? Right now we're attacking our
non-profit organizations out there. Habitat for Humanity is being
picked apart over this issue. Barbara Cashone, the Empowerment
Allowance in Immokalee who has done an awful lot to put affordable
housing, is being questioned about their motives.
If we didn't have to go through this process, 10 habitat homes for
humanity could have been built with the money that's been spent so
far.
If the clerk wanted to do the right thing, he would step forward
and say, let's go forward and get a final determination and let's forget
all this end play stuff. He's trying to wear us down. He's trying to run
the expense up to the point that we'll say uncle.
Page 67
October 24-25, 2006
Well, we're not being completely -- he's not being completely
honest on this, and we need to have truth in government, and we need
to have that truth come through where we get to court, we get a final
determination, and then we can go on with life.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Very well put.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I just want to point out on
page 3, number 2, a letter signed by our assistant county attorney,
mediation may resolve the issues between the parties or narrow the
scope down.
So it is not absolutely true that the mediation was set to -- just to
narrow the scope down. That's what I read into it. But I think the
individual board members maybe have their eyes open to things that
are going on. And you probably -- and you probably will after the
hearing's over with.
So I just think it is appropriate to put it on the agenda. After all,
we are elected officials serving the people in Collier County, and I
didn't see anything wrong with the process. But obviously, I don't see
any support on the board, so let's move on to the next item.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'd like to make a motion that
we skip the mediation and just go right to court. I don't think that
we're in place to ever understand or guide this thing through a
mediation. I'm afraid it will just become a meeting of emotion, and I
think the court needs to address it.
So I make a motion that we skip the mediation and go -- and
continue with our November 27th court hearing, and I ask that it not
be continued.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I will second that. And I
want to emphasize that your intent is that staff will vigorously,
Page 68
October 24-25, 2006
vigorously oppose the clerk's effort to extend this process, to continue
this court date. It's scheduled now. We've had--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: November 27th.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Everybody has had plenty of time
to prepare. It should be held on November the 27th, and I'd hope we
vigorously, vigorously oppose any attempt by the clerk to extend that.
There will be a public hearing on this, and it's called a courtroom,
so nothing is being concealed from the public.
In my opinion, this idea of having a public mediation not only
violates the law under which mediation is to be -- to be accomplished,
but it is really a charade. And I think that at the time when the judge
is ready to make a ruling, then some things will result from that. We
might not all be pleased with the result, but the point is, it will be
solved, it will be over, and we will have a determination as to who is
responsible for doing what here, and that's something that has plagued
this county for a decade or more, and I think it's time to put an end to
it so we'll all know.
And so I will second your motion, and that's all I have to say
about it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning, and then
I believe we have two public speakers; is that correct?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me just point out is --
the motion is -- takes out ability to limit the case. You're saying, don't
go to mediation. And what the County Attorney's Office -- on our
behalf, since the lawsuit is between the elected officials in Collier
County -- you're saying that, on number two, Commissioner Fiala, is
-- what the county attorney's saying is to limit or narrow the issues
between the parties.
So that's out the window? Let's just go full bore, defend it,
whatever it takes?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. The reason I said that is--
Page 69
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- I'm just really concerned -- and
you kind of mentioned it before. We need to resolve the issue anyway.
I just don't like one side pitting against the other.
I hope that when we end up here, that we all walk out of the
courtroom hand in hand and say, okay, fine. You know, we need to
move on and we need to work together. And I felt if it comes to like a
public mediation where now sides will be for or against or start even
accusing, that isn't productive in my mind.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Would you call the public --
MS. FILSON: David Ackerman. He'll be followed by Anthony
Pires.
MR. ACKERMAN: Good morning. My name is David
Ackerman. I represent Mr. Brock in the two lawsuits that have been
brought by the county and by Mr. Wilson.
And I want to thank you for letting me speak here today. I've had
the pleasure of meeting four out of the five of you -- I haven't met Mr.
Coletta -- at your depositions, and I appreciate the opportunity to
come before you just to ever, ever so briefly, express Mr. Brock's
position on this because I do think it is important for the board to
understand that there is a completely different viewpoint of the case.
And you have heard -- and I don't believe you've ever heard -- I
know I've never stood here and taken the time to explain to you Mr.
Brock's viewpoint and how I believe that some of the assumptions
you're operating under -- and I know, having heard what Mr. Coletta
said -- are inaccurate, and there are two sides to the story. There are
two sides to the cases.
And I don't believe that everything that has been on our side,
every -- the aspects of the case that are important to us, have been
brought before you. Just as one example. This board has taken the
position that a variety of internal audits that have been performed over
the years by Mr. Brock's office, which we believe have been
Page 70
October 24-25, 2006
beneficial to the county -- and many of you have agreed that at your
depositions -- have served a function. Your outside auditor believes
it's crucial to the financial soundness of this county for Mr. Brock to
perform those audits.
Your position in the litigation is that they should -- they're not
authorized. They shouldn't be done anymore. They are post-audits
and they're impermissible and Mr. Brock should no longer perform
those audits. That's just an example, and there are more like that.
Mr. Brock believes in the mediation process. I believe in the
mediation process. I'm amazed -- I've been trying case for over 20
years, and I'm amazed how many disputes that people at this stage
never think can be resolved, that once they approach that process in
good faith and with an open mind, really are able to resolve it.
Mr. Brock also believes that in order for that process to work,
this board should be meaningfully involved. It's an important case, it's
an important dispute. And he has been meaningfully involved, and he
believes that, as do I, and as our law requires, that participants, people
with decision-making authority, be meaningfully involved.
And I believe that under the Court's supervision and with the use
of a good mediator, that there is flexibility. There is flexibility that we
can provide for. And I think that those are just some details that can
be worked out so that the mediation can be conducted meaningfully,
in good faith, and in compliance with all the applicable laws.
That's all I have to say. And again, I appreciate your time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much. Next --
MS. FILSON: You next speaker--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have a question, if you don't
mind.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can you tell me how many public
mediations you have participated in?
MR. ACKERMAN: I have not participated in many at all. It is a
Page 71
October 24-25, 2006
challenge. It is unique. There's no question about that. But I don't
think it's an insurmountable challenge.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And how do you rationalize that
when the law says that anything that you say in a public mediation
can, in fact, be used in a court of law, and that is not the case in a
private mediation?
MR. ACKERMAN: I don't believe that statements made in a
mediation are admissible in court.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Even in the public forum?
MR. ACKERMAN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think our lawyers probably
disagree.
MR. ACKERMAN: May very well disagree.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But you have not ever participated
in a public mediation before?
MR. ACKERMAN: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do you know any lawyer who has?
MR. ACKERMAN: Actually, I beg your pardon. I have. It is a
challenge. It is -- but I think it is something we can work out.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And would you agree that neither
you nor I have the authority to modify the rights granted to the clerk
or to the Board of County Commissioners under the Constitution of
the State of Florida?
MR. ACKERMAN: I agree we cannot change those, but I think
one of the aspects of the case -- again, we don't have the opportunity
to present our whole side, but one of the things we disagree on is -- we
agree on the principles of law. Your lawyers agree that the clerk has
the role of the accountant, the auditor, the custodian of county money
and serves this pre-audit function. We all agree on that.
The challenge is, how do you apply that in fact? And this is
another area Mr. Tripp and I disagree on. He believes it's purely a
question of law. I believe it's how you apply that law to the facts.
Page 72
October 24-25, 2006
And I don't believe your -- the county's position is, in any way,
workable and those are just areas from which we disagree.
So I do believe that there are areas that are worthy of discussion.
But if -- again, both sides have to want to do this. Mr. Brock does not
want to waste his time or your time. If you're not interested in
settling, then it would be a waste of time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, its my understanding that
Mr. Brock, or his attorneys, have refused to mediate in private and
have demanded that it be done in public.
So what is the objective here? Is it to try to mediate and reach a
conclusion or is it to try to have a public spectacle of some kind?
MR. ACKERMAN: No. Our specific position has been, we
believe in mediation. We also believe that both sides need to
meaningfully participate. And number three, we recognize that the
government in the sunshine law applies and that at least part of the
mediation process would need to be conducted in the open.
We would leave it to the mediator, not someone who's motivated
to settle the case, to exercise his or her discretion on when to privately
caucus. And let me just give you an example. Let's say we conducted
the mediation where Mr. Tripp gave you an opening statement, I gave
you an opening statement. You could hear both sides, then --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think this needs to go to a court of law,
okay?
MR. ACKERMAN: May I just finish my point? Then the
mediator can decide, gosh, Mr. Coyle, you -- let me meet with you
privately and discuss that with you. We can look into those issues. I
believe they can be resolved.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I just had a comment, and
that is, that all of this is stemming from lack of communication
actuall y.
And I've heard it said that -- a number of times that there are a lot
Page 73
October 24-25, 2006
of things we don't know. You know, I wish they would tell us. I
mean, if he would have come over and said anything to us about
whatever -- I don't even know because we haven't been told yet -- we'd
-- number one, we'd want to make sure it's solved immediately.
And number two, if he wanted an audit because of some facts
that he's learned, you know, we'd bring it right back to the board and
probably say okay, because I love that, you know. I want to make
sure that we have all the facts and that we understand completely what
the issue is and maybe ferret out any information that he knows of.
But nobody ever tells us.
We're the ones that are getting sued and we're the ones that are
being accused of hiding things or whatever, but we don't even know
what it is.
MR. ACKERMAN: I respectfully--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And that's sad.
MR. ACKERMAN: I respectfully disagree. The -- I can -- this
board has brought a lawsuit against Mr. Brock challenging his ability
to do his job. And as far as him interfering with county operations, I
don't believe there's been any proof of that.
And I think in almost every instance he provides --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I never said interfering with county
operations. I said, I wish he would tell us what concerns -- you know,
when he has something rise up to the top of the plate, then I would
want him to say, hey, you know what, we discovered this --
MR. ACKERMAN: I believe I can prove he does that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- and we need your support,
because we'll be there, you know. We don't want to see anything --
anything that would -- we've worked hard for these last six years to
improve the reputation of the county commission.
I have to say I'm speaking for all of us, we're honest, we have the
highest integrity, and we want to make sure that the government is run
in a fashion where we can stand up and be proud in front of an
Page 74
October 24-25, 2006
audience, so he needs to tell us these things. That's all.
MR. ACKERMAN: His practice is to provide notice of audits
ahead of time and to provide the results of them after.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But not through the newspaper.
MR. ACKERMAN: No, he provide -- I can show you
correspondence.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't think we're going to get much
taken care of.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's right.
MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much for your time.
MR. ACKERMAN: Mr. Pires has--
MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Tony Pires.
MR. PIRES: Just briefly, if I could. With regards to the process,
I know I've heard it said that the -- it's proposed to have an open
mediation session -- would be in conflict with state law.
While some may argue that Chapter 164 Florida Statutes, which
is an alternative dispute resolution process to local government
entities, may not apply in this instance, it provides a good guide. In
fact, I think you all have implemented that process for the South
Florida Water Management District, in fact, are examples of that
being utilized for governmental bodies. As an example, County of
Sarasota, the City of North Port, had an issue concerning ownership of
lots in that area, and they conducted a joint mediation session in the
open at the public chambers, publicized and broadcast on television,
no public participation, but the public could see what was going on.
They cross-noticed private attorney/client session as authorized
under the sunshine law so that if the individual boards needed to go
caucus separately to discuss the issues, and then come back separately,
that provides flexibility. That provides a good model of good guide.
And I think what we're saying is, that that opportunity is there.
You wouldn't be violating state law. We'd all agree that what's said in
Page 75
October 24-25, 2006
mediation could not be used in a court of law and provide for the
flexibilities with the parties to agree upon that opportunity to have that
initial open presentation and dialogue. And if there's a desire to
separately caucus, that could be achieved within the bounds of the
law, lawfully and legally, and we think it would help further this
litigation and this process. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I'd just like to make an
observation on Commissioner Fiala's remarks. There is a section in
our agenda for constitutional officers to appear before the commission
and communicate and describe things to us and tell us about problems
and ask for information.
We have a representative of the clerk's office sitting on the dais
here to listen to everything we say. And you know something? I
cannot remember the last time the clerk came in here to speak to this
commission about any issue other than the budget, but it's always
reserved in this packet for constitutional officers to come in and talk
with us.
Guy Carlton was here this morning. I cannot recall -- can
anybody recall -- the last time the clerk came in here to advise us, to
provide information or to request support from us on anything? I can't
recall a time. So I think maybe you need to get some additional
information.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta, and then we'll
wrap this up.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I thank you for the
opportunity to speak again. I think it's very important to point out. I
mean, this was designed to be an attempt to try to embarrass the
commISSIon.
And so at this point in time, you know, we have to come out with
everything as we see it and as the records show. As you can see
Page 76
October 24-25, 2006
before you the amount of records that the county's been working on
and the expense that we've been going from.
But there's more to it than meets the picture. This isn't something
that just happened today. This has been going on ever since I came
aboard in 2000. It was going on before that.
And when I seen the problem existing, I thought, well, possibly
it's just a lack of communications, and I championed the effort to try
to get the clerk to attend our meetings and sit over here on the dais to
our right, your left, some time ago, and it was a little bit of a
challenge. Oh, you don't want me up there, you know.
I was up there one time, and a previous commission asked me to
leave. But if you're there and you're part of the process, how can we
possibly go wrong? We'd love to have your feedback on a
moment-by-moment basis. Wherever the clerk has expertise, please,
come in and volunteer that information.
We also opened up the process so that anything that had to do
with contracts, that had to do with the budget end of the cycle where
the clerk comes in, the clerk was invited to attend, and he did attend,
and there was a lot of give and take going back and forth, and we were
working in a very positive way; however, that wasn't good enough.
There's always got to be something out there, some sensational
piece of information the clerk can seize upon, and then use the news
media to be able to play it up.
And I really resent the fact that he picks on the Collier County
Commission and tries to bully his way around as being the champion
of all rights of human dignity and that what's going to -- if it's gone
wrong in the past, is going to go wrong in the future, and that he's the
one that can -- the only one that can save you from the dangers of the
present commission or any future commission.
I mean, that's ridiculous. There's so many safeguards put into
place, they existed before, they exist today. And the clerk does playa
part in it, and that role is minor, but it has to be defined by the Courts.
Page 77
October 24-25, 2006
Thank you for the time again.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Fiala to continue this on to the court system, hopefully,
to convene on November 27th, and I have a second by Commissioner
Coyle on this.
No further discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. It wasn't hopefully continue to
the 27th. It was to continue to the 27th.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. It will be continued on the 27th.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And ask for no continuation.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Please correct that on the record. It will
be continued in court.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no, no, no.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no, no.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. It will be heard --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It will be heard in the--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- on November 27th --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Not to be continued.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- in the court system and --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It will not be continued.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- please not be continued.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. This--
MR. MUDD: David, let's clarify this a little bit.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Let's get this clarified. Okay. This will
be heard in the court of law starting on November the 27th.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No more delays.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No more delays.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, let me -- that's not what I heard the
motion --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You can't -- yeah, if I could just
elaborate on it. The thing is, it's scheduled right now for the 27th to be
heard in court. The clerk has asked that it be delayed. We don't want
Page 78
October 24-25, 2006
it to be delayed.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We want it to be decided. It's been
dragging on long enough. There's been enough attorney fees spent on
this issue. We do not want the clerk to drag this out any further. Let's
get it to the court and get the issue resolved. That's what we want to
do, but we have to convince the Court to do that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: This will proceed to the court system
starting November the 27th. How does that sound?
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. And additionally, Mr. Chairman and
Commissioners, Ms. Fiala had talked in terms of mediation or no
mediation. And what seems to be very clear is that there would be no
mediation with the Board of County Commissioners participating.
And in fact, she indicated no mediation at all.
Mr. Tripp, Ms. Hubbard or I can tell you that attorneys can
discuss issues and reduction of issues in -- within or without the
auspices of formal mediation with a mediator. I mean, these things
potentially can be communicated and potentially reduced. So there is
a possibility. I do not say a probability in that regard.
But to clarify Ms. Fiala, she had indicated that -- and Mr. Coyle
as well accentuated the fact that we are not looking to delay from the
November 27th date, that the attorney for the county shall resist delay
and be very communicative with the Court of our desire to go forward,
that the case has been around for a long time now, about two and a
half years or so, and so -- that the parties should be ready on these
fundamental issues to go to Court on the 27th.
And if there is to be -- if there is a mediation that can be had prior
to November 27th, so be it, with the agents for the clients
participating. And if there cannot be a mediation calendared and set
up or -- prior to the November 27th trial date, then there may be no
mediation, and that will be within the province of your attorneys,
Commissioners, your attorneys serving you, to determine whether at
Page 79
October 24-25,2006
this juncture mediation serves a purpose or not. I hope I've stated that
correctly.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is that in your motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I didn't make it elaborate. I
just said --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is that in your second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's in my second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- I said skip the mediation.
MR. WEIGEL: You just said skip, and it can be skipped. But
you know, attorneys can work to attempt to achieve some of the same
elements of a formal mediation in any event, and I'm not trying to
curtail the ability to reduce issues if it's possible, that's all.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Have we got good clarification on this,
or have we muddied the waters?
MR. WEIGEL: It's clear.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me try. We want the trial date
to stay on the 27th. We want to vigorously oppose any attempt by this
clerk to delay the trial date, and number three, we do not want to
participate in the public mediation as proposed by the clerk. Number
four, we have no objection if the attorneys wish to work together to
clarify some issues or to narrow the scope of the issues.
Is that fair enough, Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Does that hit all the points, County
Attorney?
MR. WEIGEL: I believe so.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And that's in your second also,
obviously?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you are leaving the door
open for mediation?
Page 80
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, for the attorneys to get
together and talk.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For the attorneys to mediate?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, if that's something that
they want to arrange amongst themselves. That wasn't in my motion,
but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I want to know what I'm
voting on. That's all I want to know. I'm hearing so many different
things. I understand your original motion. I made an argument. Now
I'm hearing a different motion. So just tell me what the motion is so I
can on vote on it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Then, now that the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'm not yelling at you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm looking for some clarification so that
we've got this totally cleared up.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think we're getting outside the box
here, so why don't we restate --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me ask the county attorney. If I
say, skip the mediation, does that prevent any -- say for instance their
attorney contacts your attorney and says, you know, we need to talk
about so and so. Does -- by saying skip the mediation, does that
prevent that from happening?
MR. WEIGEL: Not at all, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine.
MR. WEIGEL: So if your direction is to skip the mediation--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, go right to trial.
MR. WEIGEL: -- then the county will inform the Court that it's
no longer looking toward mediation as a facilitator.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do you agree with --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll buy that. I'll buy it.
Page 81
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. State it one more time. Skip
the mediation, go directly to court on November 27th to solve this
issue, and we ask -- we implore the Courts not to allow it to be
delayed any further.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Very good, very clear. And is that in
your second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's in my second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is that clear to you,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yep. I understand it. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Hearing no further discussion, I
will call the question.
All those in favor of the motion by Commissioner Fiala and a
second by Commissioner Coyle in regards to what was just discussed,
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
And I believe we have a time certain that we ran over.
Item #10G
PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT REGARDING THE COST AND
REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH CONVERTING FPL
Page 82
October 24-25, 2006
OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL FACILITIES TO UNDERGROUND
LINES ALONG COUNTY'S ROADWAYS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. We have a time certain. It's lOG. It's a
presentation to the Board of County Commissioners by the Collier
County Transportation Engineering and Construction Management
Department regarding the cost of requirements associated with
converting FP &L overhead electrical facilities underground lines
along county roadways.
Mr. Jay Ahmad and Gary Putaansuu --
MR. PUT AANSUU: Putaansuu.
MR. MUDD: Close.
MR. PUTAANSUU: Very close.
MR. MUDD: Close, I'm working on it. And I -- I don't know if
Grover's here. Is he here?
MR. AHMAD: Yes, sir he is.
MR. MUDD: -- and Mr. Grover Whidden will present.
MR. AHMAD: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, my name is Jay
Ahmad. I'm your Director of Transportation Engineering.
On April 11 of this year, 2006, Mr. Grover Whidden came to you
and presented the FPL grid hardening strategy before this commission,
and you asked us to coordinate and work with FPL on how to
accomplish this and what issues would be presented as a result. And
staff, Gary Putaansuu, has been meeting with FPL several times, and
he has a presentation before you. So if I allow Gary to --
MR. PUTAANSUU: For the record, my name's Gary Putaansuu.
It's P-U-T-A-A-N-S-U-U. See if I can pull up the presentation.
MR. MUDD: Gary, you got the slides?
MR. PUTAANSUU: I've got slides here. I have a PowerPoint.
MR. MUDD: I'll put them on overhead. You just tell me which
one to switch, okay.
MR. PUTAANSUU: Okay.
Page 83
October 24-25, 2006
MR. MUDD: Now we ready?
MR. PUTAANSUU: Now we've got it right.
MR. MUDD: Good.
MR. PUTAANSUU: The intent of my presentation is to show
the details out on the proj ects that might provide some clarification on
the spreadsheet and executive summary.
And so, you know, the -- we met three times at Grover Whidden's
working up the estimates. And go to the next slide here.
We chose six projects. The first of those projects is the one that
was under construction, which is Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Okay,
next slide.
One of the issues at that project is that we've already installed a
new overhead. So not only do we have to pay for the removal of it,
but the value, full value of that new system, and that's what increases
the price on that and makes it quite a bit more than others.
Another one of the realities out there, or one of the construction
challenges, is that in front of the Mandalay Development we're quite
restricted in right-of-way, and they have a wall and their landscape
buffer that is right tied to our right-of-way. We had them install the
storm sewer in front so that we wouldn't destroy it when we came in.
And if we were to go out there, we're going to have to -- we're
going to complete with gas line, water and sewer. It's a very tight
corridor, so these are some of the things that we'd have to deal with
out there. We wouldn't be able to transfer. We'd probably have to
directional lower through some of these areas.
Example two is a project in design, Collier Boulevard, 41 to
Davis. One of the other considerations is the design of the
underground takes up to 16 weeks, actually -- the time needed to
acquire easements and, like I say, allow for that design needs to be
considered.
And like the Rattlesnake Hammock Road, there are construction
challenges out there that are -- there's a wall, quite a lot of -- quite a
Page 84
October 24-25, 2006
few feet of wall that has yet to have the buffer put in, and there just
isn't a lot room. We've got to put the underground in before we can
take the overhead out, and so we're going to need easements along
there. And if that buffer's in, we're going to probably have to destroy
it or bore to minimize the destruction.
Example three is a proj ect 100 design, which is County Barn
Road. We'd have to delay the construction start on that while we
waited for an underground design. We'd also have to secure
additional right-of-way easements to provide room for it. It's a very
tight corridor for that project.
Example four is one that's less than 60 percent design, which is
Santa Barbara extension. And the difference in that project is, of
course, it's the new -- it's new alignment, so there isn't overhead out
there, except for the southern end of the project.
And it's hard to spot it in there, but there is a power line in behind
those trees. There's a little bit of that, that would need it.
But for the most part, right-of-way is available for the
underground. And they also -- because it's a new underground
installation, the charges to put it in are considerably less than it would
be on another project, and that's why on the summary it's a
considerably less costly project.
Example five is a project in the Estates, Golden Gate Boulevard
from Wilson to DeSoto. There's some cost savings there because this
is a situation where they would have to be moving the poles, or could
possibly, so we would save in eliminating that overhead relocation.
And in this case we've asked -- the estimate is based on no
additional right-of-way cost. In reality, there might be some in places
that we'd have to get, but the estimate doesn't reflect it.
And the Golden Gate Boulevard as well as all around Collier
County, we must be very aware of water conditions and make sure
that any of the switch boxes and things are brought up in elevations so
that water isn't an issue, because that's a bad situation for whatever's in
Page 85
October 24-25, 2006
that box and anybody that has to work on it.
Example six is a finished project, which is Pine Ridge Road,
Airport-Pulling Road to 1-75. There would be the cost to remove the
existing overhead, and the fact that we're into commercial property,
very restrictive right-of-way. It's kind of hard to see in that photo, but
there's an underground feed to the businesses there.
Very restricted that -- a great share of that's probably just going
to have to be bored because we would wipe out the landscape buffers.
We would take out parking lots trying to do a trench or whatever in
there. So that's why it -- one of the reasons why the cost on that
section is quite a bit more.
And this is the spreadsheet that summarizes what the costs are
per mile so you can compare them on a per-mile basis. The estimates
are ballpark -- for some reason that's a tough word for me -- and
they're provided by FPL.
There's a lot of, you know, project specific things that could
affect those numbers a little bit either way, but -- and the numbers are
on the spreadsheet.
Concluded from it, that going underground is very expensive. I
think the ratios we were figuring on are something like six to seven
times more costly than overhead. It would spend between
three-quarters and a million dollars a mile of limited transportation
dollars.
The grid hardening may most appropriately be an emergency
management issue with funding provided by FEMA. Even if grant
money were made available, grid hardening may still be cost
prohibitive in some locations due to right-of-way costs and conflicts.
I'm thinking of areas that we didn't look at, like coming up
Airport Road or if you're on 41 and, you know, you're right up tight to
sidewalk, and to do the work, you're going to destroy a lot more.
In FPL's literature, they say it can cost up to $4 million a mile.
So I would think if you really considered a grid in the highly
Page 86
October 24-25, 2006
urbanized area, that $4 million a mile probably isn't going to do it in
some areas.
Do you have -- are there any questions?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think this boils down to a
conclusion that says that it's too expensive to try to do this all at one
big gulp.
I have a suggestion. Why don't we provide guidance to the staff
to incorporate into the normal planning for any road widening or other
construction activity adjacent to roadways, whether it's drainage,
roadways, building sidewalks, whatever, to incorporate into that
construction design considering the possibility of undergrounding the
electrical at that point in time.
The logic being that if, in fact, the electrical has to be moved,
why don't we move it from aboveground to underground, and we'll get
-- we'll save some money that way, a substantial amount of money.
There are some cases when FP &L will find it important to put up
new poles, to harden some of their existing poles. Rather than
spending money doing that, have them contribute to putting it
underground, and we can save money doing that.
So if we approach this on a project-by-project basis as we're
going through all these construction projects, and as long as we keep
informed about what FP &L is planning to do with their lines,
hopefully we can get some credit to put them underground and
thereby reduce our cost.
So I would suggest that we accept the report. It's too expensive
for us to handle in one big lump sum, but let's incorporate this sort of
thing in our normal planning for all road or right-of-way acquisition
and construction activities.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, if I could, for clarification. I
Page 87
October 24-25, 2006
appreciate the acceptance of the report.
I would say that when we look at the projects, we want to make
sure we bring to you where we have the opportunity to go
underground, it makes sense because of availability of right-of-way
and the ability to get that additional right-of-way that's required and
overall cost. We will definitely bring that to your attention if that is
what I understand what the recommendation is.
The other thing I need to point out to you, on the cost you saw
here, don't -- already are including the concept of a 25 percent
reduction that is still not yet acted upon by the Public Service
Commission. Just so you're aware of that and others that see or have
heard this presentation. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, there are a lot of things that
go into that, and I'm not smart enough to think of all of them, but --
MR. FEDER: We need to look at it project by project.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, that's right.
MR. FEDER: That makes sense. I think the directions, were it
to make sense, we'd bring it to the board and figure out how we can
fund it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In some cases it will make sense,
FP &L hopefully reducing their cost.
MR. FEDER: I'll let them speak to that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In other cases, it might increase
their cost. But we need to take into consideration the difference
between the cost of moving it or strengthening, hardening it
aboveground versus the cost of putting it underground.
MR. FEDER: Understood.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Before you go, may I, sir? I
know you've got some comments you want to make.
Mr. Feder, we're talking about an expense -- I'll tell you, some of
my concerns is, one, this thing is still moving forward. We really
Page 88
October 24-25, 2006
don't have a firm commitment from Florida Power and Light at this
time. I mean, is there some negotiation, something taking place that's
going to finalize this down the road? That's my first question.
MR. MUDD: Twenty-five percent.
MR. FEDER: First of all, in their 25 percent, I'll let Grover,
who's probably dealt with it more than I -- but as I understand it, the
Public Service Commission has not taken that action at this time,
although it's still an issue out there that they may act on in the future.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. FEDER: Is that correct, Grover?
MR. WHIDDEN: That's certainly correct. And just to bring you
up on the status on that, actually that was supposed to go to hearing
this week, and the commission has delayed that action due to all the
various interveners that are involved. There's a lot of different
interests in that, and it's now been scheduled for mid December of this
year, so hopefully in December we'll have some idea of that.
Another factor that can influence these costs that we didn't even
take into account, part of our hardening plan that is included and is
going before the -- before the Public Service Commission, is to
strengthen our existing overhead lines, and that has not been approved
yet.
If that is approved, it will result in us having to upgrade many of
our existing overhead lines. And that -- you're absolutely correct,
Commissioner Coyle, that will definitely create some opportunities
because that will mean that we will, you know, have to spend
additional moneys on overhead lines, and it might be, in some cases,
there's an opportunity to underground some of those facilities.
So both of those things are really pretty much up in the air at this
point. And I think my view is that the action you're -- the motion you
have on the floor today I think is the prudent action at this point.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: My question -- back to Mr.
Feder again, so I can finish this up. Mr. Feder, I'll tell you what my
Page 89
October 24-25, 2006
concerns are on this. And maybe you might be able to alleviate those
concerns and maybe you can't.
My concern is this is just very expensive. It's an amenity that's
over and above what we've provided in the past. My concern is, what
will this do to the overall road program? I mean, we've got an
ambitious schedule for many years to come.
And if we suddenly include this particular element into the road
building process, what gives? What's going to have to move? Who
isn't going to get their road done at the time that it's scheduled? How
much longer will they have to wait so this amenity can go one place
and then -- before that road would take place?
We've been doing very well in holding with our road schedule,
and I don't know if I want to jeopardize it by introducing this to it as
another requirement unless we've got the funding for it.
Please comment on that.
MR. FEDER: First of all, Commissioners, I understood -- to
your issue, obviously we've had increased cost in our projects. That is
making things very, very tight to continue, but we're continuing to
deliver on the program.
And we're going to be coming to you, I'm sure, to look at how we
continue in an aggressive program that this board has pursued.
As far as what I understood the recommendation from the board
was, yes, it's expensive to go underground. We're not going back to
try and do a program of underground. But as we go forward with
projects, each one of them should be evaluated where it makes some
sense, where either because of FP&L's needs, where there are credits
to be gotten back, where there's availability of right-of-way so,
therefore, the right-of-way costs are not accessive to allow for
underground, that we should then -- obviously there will still be some
additional cost -- bring that to the board and decide at that time
whether or not those costs -- and then I could answer your question a
little more specifically if there's a definitive cost.
Page 90
October 24-25,2006
Where we don't find that it's viable, obviously we're not going to
pursue it because there will be expenses. But I think we're being
asked, where we have that opportunity, both in right-of-way and in
some credits and issues working with FP &L, that we should bring it
forward and we will do that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have a question, and this is for Grover
Whidden. Obviously some of these places that were -- when we're
putting in roads, widening roads, and there's overhead, there's
obviously -- where you as your business plan, you have a depreciation
on these lines.
MR. WHIDDEN: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So I would think that if you've had lines
up -- I don't know what your depreciation schedule is, but I would
think that it would behoove the county to take advantage of that if you
were, you know, a person that's concerned about the welfare and
well-being of the community.
So when you look at the overall project, I believe that we ought
to be -- you ought to be looking at the depreciation allowance that you
have over the period of time that you've had those overhead lines up,
that you've got to replace them.
MR. WHIDDEN: You're absolutely correct, and that is reflected
in these cost estimates and would be reflected in any -- in any cost that
would -- calculations that we would provide the county.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The figures that are here are also looking
at the depreciation allowance?
MR. WHIDDEN: Yes, sir. Basically what we're -- what we're
doing is we're -- when we -- when we remove an overhead line, if the
-- we're recognizing the -- only the value that is currently on the
books.
So all those -- all the value that has already been depreciated,
we're not -- we're not taking that into account in the calculation. So
Page 91
October 24-25,2006
what, for an example, an older line, there would be very little cost to
the county, and removing that over -- that older line, that's -- that is
definitely taken into account.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Because you're going to also depreciate
poles, too?
MR. WHIDDEN: Oh, yeah everything.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All the infrastructure.
MR. WHIDDEN: The wire to the poles, everything associated
with the line, yeah. Good point though.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala, did you --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. It really is challenging for me
to get my arms around the figures that are quoted here. I don't know if
you've involved all the labor it takes to put up the poles, replace the
poles, maintain the poles, the trees that fall on the wires, the burs, the
accidents that knock them down, replacing them, but I do know that
my electric bill had almost doubled because of the problems caused by
the hurricane all around the county and yet we continue to put them
overhead.
I liken it to Port Royal, for instance. Their lines are buried, have
been buried for quite some time. They've never had a problem with
their lines, their lights stay on no matter what the storm is, no
accidents cause any poles to come down. I would think that the FP &L
people would want to help pay to put us -- put these things in instead
of charging us an arm and leg and then some. That's my first
comment.
MR. WHIDDEN: Well, if I might just respond to that. That's
exactly what we're proposing to the Public Service Commission. And
by the way, we're the only electric utility that's proposed, you know,
crediting back those that -- counties that wish to put facilities
underground. We're the only utility that's come forth and proposed
this 25 percent contribution towards the cost of underground.
So yes. I mean, to answer your question, we have tried to take
Page 92
October 24-25,2006
into account all of the costs associated with these -- with these systems
in our calculations. And I agree with you, I wish the costs were a lot
lower, but unfortunately --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They seem to be a little hard to
believe, quite frankly, especially if, for instance, we're putting in a
new road, we've got everything dug up anyway, we've got all of these
pipes and everything going in, and we own the right-of-way, I don't
know where the cost is coming from.
You know, you don't even have to put poles back up, just put it in
there, and I would guess the holes are already there to put the lines in
to feed these wires through. I'm just trying to look at it, common
sense, and it doesn't -- I'm having a problem with it.
MR. WHIDDEN: Well, I understood.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And the second thing is, possibly on
our part, the county part, for instance, I'm thinking of one place in
particular, it's called Deauville, and it's right over there on County
Barn Road. People want their lines buried desperately, where the
proj ect has been delayed, so we have time to do that.
And if they would donate the land, the right-of-way, and before
the road's even dug up, would, you know -- so -- and I understand
that's supposed to be the biggest expense is the land -- how about if
along the way we bury lines on properties that have donated the
right-of-way to do that, and those that don't -- I saw a picture one time.
The one person that would not give any right-of-way, so you see the
things going up and down again right there by his house. And I
thought, that's a good picture to show people in case they are hesitant
about donating the property to bury the lines.
MR. WHIDDEN: Yeah. We have actually had quite a few
people donate. In fact, generally when we're putting in new systems,
people donate all their rights-of-way for our distribution facilities.
So certainly that's a savings if people will, you know -- they don't
even have to give the land to us free. I mean, all we need is a
Page 93
October 24-25, 2006
distribution easement on the property to locate the electric facility. So
that would be --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You have very little maintenance,
right?
MR. WHIDDEN: In those instances where -- in these cost
estimates where we're looking at, you know, acquisition of
right-of-way, if the right-of-way can be donated, that's certainly a
substantial savings, I think.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So I would love that to be part of
your motion is that we -- we vigorously support this, and the land that
we do not own, ask the owners if they will donate the right-of-way.
Heck, when they do it, it's covered back up. You can't see anything
anyway.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, no question I would do that,
but I would hope that that would be the first question our people ask
anyway. If you want your -- if you want your electric underground,
will you donate the right-of-way for it. As a matter of fact, we should
make that sort of a condition. If we're going to spend the money doing
it and they don't want to donate the land to do it, then we shouldn't
spend the money on them to do it. So I would think that would be a
very important point --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- of this evaluation.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The question I have, if we donate the
land, get the land donated, put the utilities underground, how much of
a savings is that going to be versus if we -- they give us the land and
put them on -- over the overhead wires? Overhead versus
underground?
MR. AHMAD: From the estimates that you, Commissioner, it's
about 10 percent. The right-of-way cost from the estimates we
received is approximately 10 percent.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, no. I'm talking about, if you have
Page 94
October 24-25, 2006
overhead and somebody gives you the land and then we want to put it
underground, are you still saying that -- what's the cost differential
between overhead and underground, with the land being free?
MR. AHMAD: It's 10 percent from the information we have.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what we have to believe.
MR. WHIDDEN: Well, I think you need to realize, typically the
overhead systems are such that they can be installed in the
right-of-way. They don't take up as much real estate, as do these large
pad-mounted switches and so forth.
So you've got a system basically that, you know, is being
installed today in a road right-of-way. And then when you go to the
underground system, in some instances, additional right-of-way, as
these jobs -- these estimates indicate -- some additional right-of-way is
included. And where you have additional right-of-way, that's about 10
percent of the cost -- of the total cost of the underground project of the
right-of-way.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's the question I'm trying to get at.
So you're telling me that we're only -- if you have to buy the
right-of-way, then all we're saving is 10 percent?
MR. WHIDDEN: That's what the--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. WHIDDEN: On these particular cases that we looked at,
that's what the numbers were.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Now -- so if somebody donates all the
right-of-way we need, all we're going to save is 10 percent?
MR. WHIDDEN: Yes, sir, that's correct.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is there a way that --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Wow.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- we could get these calculations so
we can study them? I mean, the calculations as to how you come up
with one lane mile of burying line versus putting in overhead poles
Page 95
October 24-25, 2006
and all the maintenance that's involved then and thereafter?
MR. WHIDDEN: Well. Let me clarify one thing, regard -- this
is not a life cycle cost of the entire system. I don't want to mislead
you. And that is not in any of these calculations.
In other words, when you start talking about maintenance and
operation costs, they are not included in these. This is the
construction cost for these systems.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How can we get a copy of how they
came to these figures?
MR. WHIDDEN: We can certainly provide you the formulas
that -- you know, the formulation. And the calculations are, I believe,
on the spreadsheet. But if you're looking for the, you know --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How they arrived at the figure.
MR. WHIDDEN: -- the formulation, we can certainly provide
that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. It's just -- for my simple
mind, it's just way too hard for me to understand one lane mile
$275,000, and that's when you have clear land, you know, and we're
digging up the property. It's hard for me to understand where
$257,000 goes for one lane mile. So I would love to see those
calculations, please.
MR. WHIDDEN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MR. WHIDDEN: We'll provide the formulas.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not the formulas, how you arrived,
you know, at what -- you know, what -- how much it costs to dig it,
how much it costs to install it, how much it costs for pipes?
MR. WHIDDEN: The actual cost estimates.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. WHIDDEN: Well, I tell you, basically what we're using for
these ballpark estimates is similar type jobs we've done in other
locations and we calculate them on like a per foot and a per device
Page 96
October 24-25,2006
basis. And these are very rough estimates I need to make you aware
of.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Certainly.
MR. WHIDDEN: We have not designed these systems, and we,
you know, haven't done the detailed costing on them. So these
ballpark estimates can vary quite a bit from what, you know, they will
actually be when we do the actual engineering. But, yeah, we can
show you the -- you know, the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Actual cost.
MR. WHIDDEN: -- unit cost that we've incurred in other
projects.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Those figures might be based on
putting varying lines along a major highway with no medians and no
right-of-way given to you, and certainly the cost would be a great deal
higher.
MR. WHIDDEN: Well, we've tried to select jobs that, you
know, we think are similar, but I appreciate your concern.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Does the total cost also include Sprint
and ComCast, or is this just strictly FP &L ?
MR. WHIDDEN: No, these are just FP&L costs.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So we have a motion on the floor
by Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Henning.
Is there any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I think it was amended just a
little bit to include the right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is that in your second also?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yep, let's get her done.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those in favor, signify by
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 97
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries. And it's 12:01, and we
will take an hour break. We'll be back at a little after one o'clock--
1:01,1:02.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, County Manager
Jim Mudd.
I can see that we have a large audience here. If you would be so
kind as to make sure that your cell phones are silenced or that your
pagers are silenced, we'd greatly appreciate it.
I believe at this time we're starting with a time certain.
Item #8A
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE FALLS OF PORTOFINO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (CDD) PURSUANT
TO SECTION 190.005, FLORIDA STATUTES - MOTION TO
ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION #2 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: 8A.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: 8A.
MR. MUDD: We have a one p.m. time certain on agenda item
8A. This item is to be heard at one p.m. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
Page 98
October 24-25,2006
commission members.
It's a recommendation to consider adoption of an ordinance
establishing the Falls of Portofino Community Development District,
CDD, pursuant to section 190.005 of the Florida Statutes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time if all those that are
going to be participating in any information on this item, would you
please stand to be sworn in.
Court reporter, would you swear them in.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time we'll start with any
disclosures.
Commissioner Henning, do you have any disclosures on this
item?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not on this one.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'm just checking, but I don't
believe I have any on this one. Just making sure. No, sir, I have no
disclosures.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, thank you. I, myself, do not have
any disclosures on this item.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. The only disclosure I have
is that I discussed this with staff.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I discussed this with staff, and I
have no other ex parte disclosure.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time, if you'd proceed.
MS. KENDALL: Okay. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, County
Commissioners.
F or the record, Marcia Kendall, Comprehensive Planning,
Community Development and Environmental Services.
On December 13th, Prime Homes at Porto fino Falls, L TD, a
Page 99
October 24-25, 2006
Florida limited partnership by and through their undersigned partner,
Larry Alboat, Vice-President of Prime Home Builders, Incorporated,
filed a submittal petition for the establishment of Falls of Portofino
Community Development District. The mandatory $15,000
application fee was submitted with the original petition.
While the entire petition submitted meets all the requirements as
set forth in Florida Statutes Chapter 190.0052, A through F for the
establishment of a community development district, there is an active
rezone position -- petition rather pending per 20 acres within the Wolf
Creek PUD and proposed CDD. That is zoned agricultural and is
currently going through the normal rezone process. Prime Home
Builders has decided to proceed with the petition.
The proposed district, including the ago zone to 20 acres, covers a
total of approximately 68.39 acres of land in a map showing a location
of the proposed CDD as shown in Exhibit 1 of the petition.
This petition is unlike any other prior petition. To establish a
CDD as a portion of the CDD is still being considered in the rezoning
process.
Of primary concern is that favorable action on the CDD petition
could be construed by affected stakeholders that the BCC will act
favorably on the rezoning petition and that the rezoning public hearing
would only be a formality.
Given these circumstances, action on this CDD petition would be
policy directive previously not provided to staff; however, alternatives
have been set forth in the executive summary.
If you have any questions, the County Attorney Office or myself
would be happy to answer them. Otherwise, I would turn the floor
over to the representatives or Prime Builders, and that would be
Gerald Knight and Linda Sokolo (phonetic).
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do we have any questions for the
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
Page 100
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning is first.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Twenty-acre CDD, would this
be the world-record smallest CDD created in the State of Florida?
MS. KENDALL: Well, the CDD itself would be 68.39 acres.
It's just a portion of that 20 acres that is pending a rezone. But yes, it
would be the smallest CDD.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. In the State of Florida?
MS. KENDALL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala, do you want
to have a question now or later?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I think I'll wait till later, but
thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I think I better wait till
after the petitioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Me, too, I'll wait till later.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. KENDALL: Okay. We'll turn the floor over then to Gerald
Knight.
MR. KNIGHT: Good Afternoon. My name is Gerry Knight, the
attorney for the applicant, Prime Homes. We are here today on our
petition to establish the Porto fino Falls or Falls at Portofino
Community Development District.
Let me say that although this would be the smallest CD D that
you have seen come through in Collier County, it is not the smallest
CD D in the State of Florida. There are other community development
districts that are smaller both in terms of acreage and in terms of
number of units.
Although this is 68 acres, the number of units for this CDD that
will be included in this CDD is 490 residential units. So there are a
number of other community development districts around the State of
Florida, including on the west coast of Lee County, particularly, that
Page 101
October 24-25, 2006
are smaller than this one.
Again, we are here today to request the county commission to
approve the petition to establish this community development district.
We have submitted a petition in accordance with the requirements of
Chapter 190 of the Florida Statutes. As staff indicates in their
presentation, the petition meets the criteria set forth in Chapter 190.
We have also provided pre-filed testimony, which would be in
your backup, supporting the petition and establishing the fact that the
criteria set forth in Chapter 109 for establishing a community
development district have been met.
We're here to basically answer questions that you might have
regarding our petition. With me today is Linda Sokolo from Prime
Homes. And with that, we'll be glad to try to answer any questions.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I had a couple questions,
please. First of all, where will you be holding your public meetings,
being that all the board members you have chosen live out of town?
MR. KNIGHT: The statute requires that the public hearings be
held in the county in which the CDD is located, so they will all be
held here in Collier County.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. But you don't have a facility.
So you'll make sure that public is aware of where they will be held?
MR. KNIGHT: Absolutely. We are required to publish notice of
all the hearings in the newspaper general circulation. Once there are
residents in the development, they will get a notice as well. But we
are required to hold the hearings here in Collier County. We will
locate a place where we will hold hearings and give public notice for
that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. My second thing is -- I'm
very adamant about this. With any CDD board that wants to be
established, I really demand that you have one person as soon as
Page 102
October 24-25, 2006
somebody moves into the development, I feel that the residents should
be represented on that board, and so one person at least should be a
representative of the community.
MR. KNIGHT: We're aware of that concern, and we agree to
that as a condition.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, the only thing I've got to
comment on is the balance that we're coming up with here as far as
what would be proper as far as allowing the -- this to go forward for
that small part of the land. I agree with staff as far as their
recommendations and their concerns. They're also my concerns.
When we come to it, I don't know if we're at that point now, but I
would like under recommendations for us to seriously consider
recommending number three, that the Board of Collier County
Commissioners adopt and enact the proposed ordinance establishing
the Falls of Portofino Community Development District with a caveat
that the 20 acres proposed for rezoning be removed from the petition
and considered for inclusion in the district at a substantial date if the
proposed rezone is approved.
This action will require the applicant to submit an application to
amend his CDD after the rezone is considered, assuming approved--
approval by the board. And that pretty -- pretty much clarifies where I
think would know the best condition to go with.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll make that a motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We've got a motion by
Commissioner Coletta and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I wouldn't have any trouble
supporting that motion. I, too, feel that staff has a good point.
We're taking this out of order. All of the rezoning hasn't even
Page 103
October 24-25,2006
been accomplished yet, yet we're trying to create a CDD, and the
CDD, essentially, as the staff has observed, lays the framework for the
rezoning, and it could very easily be used to circumvent the public
obj ections to the rezoning process itself.
So I don't believe we should be taking things out of sequence
here. I think we should do as Commissioner Coletta has already
motioned or we should just disapprove the CDD in its entirety and
wait until the necessary rezoning is accomplished and then consider
the CDD. So I would be willing to go with either one of them.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Myself, I like recommendation
number two, and that is to recommend the Board of County
Commissioners continue this item to the meeting where the proposed
rezoning will be considered by the board.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then I could make that as an
amendment to the motion, in which case we would vote on my
amendment first, or I could ask that --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think Coletta made the motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- the motion maker -- yeah, but the
amendment will have to be voted on first before the motion itself --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- can be voted on, or the motion
maker can amend the motion, either way.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I very well might do that. I'd
like to hear what Commissioner Henning has to say.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The CDD has the established
preserves and in the lakes; is that correct?
MR. KNIGHT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, is that to buy the
preserves, or is that to keep them maintained?
MR. KNIGHT: The CDD will fund the infrastructure for the
project, water/sewer, water management, including the lakes,
Page 104
October 24-25, 2006
excavation. Also, the CDD will acquire and maintain the preserve
areas.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I see.
MR. KNIGHT: But that for the preserve -- that acquisition will
not be passed along to the homeowners. It will be paid off prior to the
conveyance of any units to the homeowners. So the acquisition costs
will be paid off. The maintenance will be an ongoing obligation of the
community development district.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, how would the
public, the general public, gain access to the lakes or the preserves?
MR. KNIGHT: The -- they're not -- they would not unless
there's some public access to them. The CDD is allowed to, under --
provide for the infrastructure, to fund the cost of the infrastructure for
the project, including the water management system, which would
include the lakes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I have a question for our
attorney behind you, Mr. Klatzkow, because I need clarification on
Chapter 190.
Mr. Klatzkow, it's my understanding that under Chapter 190, to
create a CDD is for the public benefit, correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So not having access by the
general public to the lakes or the preserves, would that be a benefit to
the public?
MR. KLA TZKOW: Well, that's for you to determine whether
there's a benefit to the public or not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I don't see a benefit there.
No access by the public, don't see anything proposed on the map, don't
see any parking. I couldn't get in there if I wanted to fish in the lake
or swim in the lake or -- I can't support either motion.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'd just like to note for the board as well,
because of the zoning issue, that one of the criteria is that the property
Page 105
October 24-25, 2006
be sufficiently contiguous to be developable. I mean, if you've got a
20-acre piece that's still out there, I think you do have a significant
issue on the contiguousness that you might want to consider.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I've got one clarification. Hold
on just before we -- Commissioner Coyle added an amendment, unless
the motion maker wants to amend his motion, so we either have to
have a second on the amendment here --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, before you do that, I
might very well amend it. I'd like to ask Mr. Klatzkow one question,
if I may.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure, please.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Based upon what you just said,
would the best alternative be two or three? Sounds like two.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Under recommendations.
MR. KLATZKOW: I think both work, Commissioner. Again, if
you're sufficiently concerned about the zoning or the contiguous issue,
then number two would probably fall within that category.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then I amend my motion to
read number two rather than number three.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Would you like to state that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just did.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, okay. Make sure we got it--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I stated it for the record.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is that in your second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do we have any speakers on this?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
MR. KNIGHT: Mr. Chair, can I clarify what number two is?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Number two is, recommend that the
Board of County Commissioners continue this item to the meeting
Page 106
October 24-25, 2006
where the proposed rezoning will be considered by the board.
MS. SOKOLO: Linda Sokolo, Prime Home Builders. We've
had this petition in with the county for approximately about a year.
We've gone back and forth. We actually were going to do what your
motion three was, which was have the CDD, and then bring in the
additional 20 acres after the -- after that piece had been rezoned.
It was determined that it would be better to do it this way after
debating this back and forth with staff for several months, and now it
seems like we're back where we started a year ago.
But if it -- I would rather have the CDD approved as it is with
bringing in the 20 acres after that piece has been rezoned.
It was our conclusion that the piece is considered sufficiently
contiguous because it's going to be all part of one development and
one community. Whether or not the 20 acres does get rezoned, we
will still be developing that additional piece, that is the 12-acre piece
behind the 20 acres, and that will all be part of Falls of Portofino. So
it will be part of one community whether or not that piece gets
rezoned.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I think that was part of the
discussion that we had with -- amongst the Board of County
Commissioners in regards to the information that was provided to us
in the agenda package.
And I think the conclusion is, because we want to make sure that
we're protecting it all -- all areas of this, that we feel that if you decide
to go this way, this way it's going to make you make a determination
in what direction you want to go and how rapidly you want to get this
done.
And we feel that is probably the better way of handling this.
MR. KNIGHT: Mr. Chairman, may I suggest another alternative
possibly is to defer this or table it for two weeks till your next meeting
while we can have some discussions with staff about which way to
proceed and the consequences of all of that?
Page 107
October 24-25,2006
So -- and then we'll come back. And if it -- if it is the consensus
of -- and obviously it is of the commission at this point, that we go
ahead and continue it to the rezoning hearing. Then we'll do that at
that time. If we decide we'd rather do something different like
withdraw and re-file or whatever, then we'd have that opportunity, if
that would be acceptable to the commission.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
MR. KNIGHT: If not, then alternative two would be -- you
know, we'd have -- we'd go -- you know, we'd obviously have to go
along with that because that's the commission's consensus at this point,
it looks like.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There are some administrative
complications concerning that for one reason or another. The full
commission will not be available for the next two meetings.
And furthermore, merely continuing it when -- for another
meeting when there is no likelihood that it can be resolved at that
meeting is really a waste of time, I think, on everybody's part.
The key issue here is that we must, I believe, accomplish the
rezoning decision first and then deal with the CDD decision.
And every time we take these things out of sequence, we tend to
get ourselves in a little difficulty. And it's my personal preference that
we resolve the rezoning issue, get that done, and if we have resolved it
in a way which permits it to be included in the CDD, then we take up
the CDD question. And if you then decide that you want to go to the
CDD without that property in it, then we'll consider that, whichever --
whichever is appropriate for your needs.
But I don't -- just don't like doing things out of sequence. I don't
like creating CDDs on a contingency basis. It's just not good business.
MR. KNIGHT: I hear -- I understand what you're saying,
Commissioner, and I will obviously follow the commission's
direction.
I'd like the opportunity though, that if we decide to do something
Page 108
October 24-25, 2006
different than what we're talking about now, that we have the
opportunity to bring it back even before the rezoning. For instance, if
we want to just create a CDD for the portion of the project or
whatever, or portion of the project, that we be allowed to bring that
back, but in the interim. You know, because I don't know when the
rezoning's going to occur.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure.
MR. KNIGHT: It may occur next year sometime.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just speaking personally, since
you've addressed the question to me, I would be willing -- I would be
willing to consider that, but I wouldn't want you to do it twice. In
other words, I wouldn't want you to come back for a CDD without the
20 acres, and then when the 20 acres gets rezoned, come back in and
have another CDD hearing for the additional 20 acres.
MR. KNIGHT: That was another option we considered, believe
it or not, and then merge the two once the other -- once they -- the rest
of it was rezoned. This was the option we selected as being the best
under the circumstances that we could move forward with.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would prefer not doing it twice,
but I'll have to leave that up to you.
MR. KNIGHT: Okay. Just for the record though, let me just say
one more thing. We do not -- and we'll state this for the record,
provide it in whatever form you want. We do not consider the
approval of a community development district as vesting any rights to
get rezoned or get any other development permits.
This is strictly the creation of a community development district,
not -- and it doesn't give us any argument that because you did this,
we're entitled to rezoning or anything like that, that was mentioned
earlier. We'll state that for the record. In fact, Chapter 190 says that
in so many words, that by approving this community development
district, you don't grant any other development approvals or give us a
right to get any other development approvals.
Page 109
October 24-25, 2006
And as to the lake system, there is a public benefit to the lakes
even though there's no public access, and that's why, in almost every
community development district ever created, there is, where the --
there is a water management district component to what the CDD's
going to finance because it's viewed as a public benefit.
And with that, we'll be glad to answer any more questions you
have.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me just say that we
have communities here in Collier County that have built roads with
CDDs that can't stop the public from entering.
You just told me that the general public's not welcome to use
those CDD benefits. I mean, that's -- that's a law, is any CDD is
supposed to be for the public benefit, and you clearly demonstrated,
there ain't going to be no benefit.
It's a requirement under your development order to have
stormwater storage. It's a requirement to have a certain percentage of
preserves within your community. That's a requirement. It's not a
requirement for the government to grant a CD D for bonding for those
residents to pay for, but it does say under 190 there has to be a public
benefit.
MR. KNIGHT: I agree with you, and I think that the water
management system and the water and sewer system that the CDD
will be funding will be a public benefit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I cannot enjoy it as a
member of Collier County.
MR. KNIGHT: Not all the members of the public have access to
it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. If there's no further discussion, at
this time I'll call the question.
All those in favor -- the motion made -- was made by
Page 110
October 24-25, 2006
Commissioner Coyle and seconded by Commissioner Coletta.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion to -- those opposing?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion carries 4-1.
MR. KNIGHT: Thank you.
MS. SOKOLO: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Just for clarification that was the second one and
that was to continue?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's correct. Recommend that the
Board of County Commissioners continue this item to the meeting
where the proposed rezone will be considered by the board, that's
correct, number two on the recommendations.
Item #10A
RESOLUTION 2006-285: AUTHORIZING THE FEE SIMPLE
AND EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY BY
CONDEMNATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING
STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENTS TO ALLEVIATE FLOODING
IN THE EAST NAPLES AREA KNOWN AS PHASE ONE OF
THE LEL Y AREA STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(LASIP) - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, we have a 1:30 time certain, as
you know, but I believe we can get one in, which is basically just a
scrivener's error, and that's lOA, before that 1 :30 time certain.
And this item was continued from the September 26, 2006 BCC
Page 111
October 24-25, 2006
meeting. It was the recommendation to adopt 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 called
LASIP.
Fiscal impact $1,838,000. It's project 511012. Mr. Gene Calvert,
your Director of Transportation, Stormwater Management, will
present.
MR. CALVERT: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the
board, I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you this
afternoon. I'll be very brief about it.
This is a condemnation resolution for consideration of
construction of two projects within the LASIP project, Lely Area
Stormwater Improvement Project. These projects are the Lely main
canal from U.S. 41 to Rattlesnake and Traviso Bay east from Lely
Manor.
It is important that the record of these proceedings reflect the
following facts: The sketches that accompany the legal descriptions
for parcels 101, 719 and 720, while they accurately depict the parcels
being described, they do lack the line bearing distance required under
the minimum technical standards for sketches according to the Florida
Administrative Code governing surveys. So the description in there is
accurate, however, the accompanying sketch does not have a bearing
and a distance on one of the lines.
Therefore, before the original resolution is provided to the board
for signature by the chairman, these sketches will be replaced with
sketches that show all the bearing distances as required by code.
Further, let the record reflect that the board's adoption of the
subject resolution is an acknowledgement and approval of the
alternate routes and location study and approval of the study of
comparative costs and project alternatives, and approval of the study
Page 112
October 24-25, 2006
of various impacts upon the environment, and an approval of the
project with respect to long-range planning and public safety
considerations.
I would be glad to answer any specific questions you may have.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor
and a second.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Just a question on the
financing of this. It's one-third county, one-third Big Cypress Basin
and one-third MSTU?
MR. CALVERT: I don't have the -- no. It's not a one-third
breakdown. I don't have the specific numbers for this project. It's
primarily funded though through Big Cypress Basin, Southwest
Florida Water Management District, and the counties.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, are you asking for the phase or are
you talking about the entire LASIP program?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm talking about the entire
program.
MR. MUDD: The entire LASIP program, based on the ordinance
that the board approved, it's one-third -- it's one-third county, one-third
Big Cypress Basin, and one-third MSTBU.
MR. CALVERT: That is correct. For these particular projects --
thank you, Manager Mudd. For these two particular projects, they are
canals, major canals for us, and particular ones, other than if you count
the value of the right-of-way, it's primarily county funds and Big
Cypress.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just want to verify that the
scrivener's errors that are being corrected here will have no impact on
Page 113
October 24-25, 2006
the cost or the schedule of the project.
MR. CALVERT: That is absolutely correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Fiala for approval and a second by Commissioner
Henning.
Hearing no further discussion, I'll call for the question.
MR. MUDD: Any speakers, Ms. Filson?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The public -- the public speakers
are closed at this time.
Okay. Call the motion. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
MR. CALVERT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2006-50: PUDA-2005-AR-8832, CREEKSIDE
WEST, INC., REPRESENTED BY D. WAYNE ARNOLD, AICP,
OF Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A., AND R. BRUCE
ANDERSON, ESQUIRE, OF ROETZEL & ANDRESS, L.P.A.,
REQUESTING A PUD AMENDMENT TO THE CREEKSIDE
COMMERCE PARK PUD. THIS AMENDMENT PROPOSES TO
REDUCE THE AREA OF THE CREEKSIDE PUD BY
Page 114
October 24-25, 2006
APPROXIMATELY 2.32 ACRES AND REZONE THE AREA
FROM CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PUD TO NAPLES
DAILY NEWS BUSINESS PARK PUD; MOTION TO ACCEPT
EXPERT WITNESSES - APPROVED; MOTION TO ACCEPT
EVIDENCE - APPROVED: ORDINANCE 2006-50 - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our 1:30 time
certains, and I'm going to read both 8B and 8C. Petitioner has asked
that they be --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Before we start, I hope all the speaker
slips are in because we're going to have to cut it off. How many do
we have at this present time?
MS. FILSON: Forty-one.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have 41 speakers, so this--
we're going to start this so at the beginning -- as we start into this,
that's the end of the speaker slips, okay?
MR. MUDD: Item 8B. This item to be heard at 1 :30 p.m. This
item continued from June 20, 2006, BCC meeting, the September 12,
2006, BCC meeting, and the September 26, 2006 BCC meeting.
And this discussion with the county attorney about just providing
that information was talked about as we -- as the board approved the
agenda this morning.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by commission members.
PUDA-2005-AR-8832, Creekside West, Inc., represented D. Wayne
Arnold, AICP ofQ. Grady Minor & Associates P.A., and R. Bruce
Anderson, Esquire, of Roetzel & Andress, LP A, requesting a PUD
amendment to the Creekside Commerce Park PUD.
This amendment proposes to reduce the area of the Creekside
PUD by approximately 2.32 acres and rezone the area from the
Creekside Commerce Park PUD to the Naples Daily News Business
Park PUD.
Page 115
October 24-25, 2006
The subject property consisting of 105 acres is located in Section
27, Township 48 south, Range 25 east, Collier County, Florida. This
application is being submitted simultaneously with the Naples Daily
News Business Park PUD and will be considered a fast track.
This is companion item to PUDZ-2005-AR-8833, which I'm
about ready to read. That's 8C. This item, again, to be heard at 1 :30
p.m. The item was continued from the June 20, 2006, BCC meeting,
the September 12, 2006, BCC meeting and the September 26, 2006
BCC meeting.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by commission members.
Item #8C
ORDINANCE 2006-49: PUDZ-2005-AR-8833, COLLIER
PUBLISHING COMPANY, INC. D/B/ A NAPLES DAILY NEWS,
REPRESENTED BY D. WAYNE, ARNOLD, AICP, OF Q.
GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A., AND R. BRUCE
ANDERSON, ESQUIRE, OF ROETZEL & ANDRESS, L.P.A.,
REQUESTING A BUSINESS PARK PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (BPUD) REZONE FROM RURAL
AGRICUL TURAL (A) AND CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK
PUD FOR PROJECT KNOWN AS NAPLES DAILY NEWS
BUSINESS PARK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (BPPUD) -
ADOPTED W/STIPULATIONS
Again, it's PUDZ-2005-AR-8833, Collier Publishing Company
Inc., d/b/a, Naples Daily News represented by D. Wayne Arnold,
AICP, ofQ. Grady Minor & Associates P.A., and R. Bruce Anderson,
Esquire, Roetzel & Andress LP A, requesting a business park planned
unit development, which is a BPUD.
Rezone from rural agricultural A in Creekside Commerce Park
Page 116
October 24-25, 2006
PUD for a proj ect known as the Naples Daily News Business Park
planned unit development.
The subject property is located in Section 27, Township 48 south,
Range 25 east, Collier County, Florida.
Again, this is being submitted simultaneously with Creekside
Commerce Park PUD as a fast track.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time if all those that are
going to give public testimony in regards to this would all rise, and
this would include staff, applicants and public speakers on this item.
Court reporter, would you please administer the oath.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time we'll start with the
disclosures by the county commissioners, starting with Commissioner
Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I met with the petitioner and the
petitioner's representatives; I met with two gentlemen from Collier's
Reserves; and I received some email, some written correspondence,
and telephone calls, and they're all here for anybody wishing to
inspect.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've met with many residents
in my office, for instance, from Collier's Reserve and from Pelican
Marsh. I've also received telephone calls. I've received a lot of mail.
I've gone over to Collier's Reserve because I wanted to see the
property myself and investigate not only how it lays out, but how the
surrounding properties layout to see what kind of access and road
conditions we have, and I believe that's it. They're all here on file for
anybody to see.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I also -- I also
visited the site on several occasions and the surrounding areas.
Page 11 7
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I, myself, have visited the area. I
met with the petitioner at a late date, along with his representatives;
I've received numerous email since our last meeting and numerous
phone calls; and I've met with staff, and I believe that's it, and citizens
in the general area of this project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner, I forgot to mention
that I also met with staff on this, I also met with the petitioner, and I've
made a few calls myself just to check out further information.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And I've also made telephone
calls on this issue with other parties involved in this. And I believe
that I covered pretty much the whole gamut. All of my emails, phone
calls and et cetera are located in this file up here.
So at that, I'll turn this over now to Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I have driven through the
area, too, to observe where this is contemplated for. I have had the
opportunity to meet with Mr. Anderson, Mr. Arnold and Tony Pires,
representing the petitioner, on two different occasions.
Also, yesterday I met with -- or excuse me. Last -- yeah,
yesterday I met with an Allan Rosoff and a Jim Johnson from Collier's
Reserve and I talked to them at great lengths about it. Probably had a
record amount of emails from both sides of the issue, received phone
calls, and even made one phone call myself to Mr. Wolf from Scripps
Publication to ask him some questions.
And other than that, I talked to staff.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have talked with the petitioner
and the petitioner's agents concerning the petition. I have talked with
members of the public who are opposed to this petition. I have talked
with members of the public who are in favor of the petition.
I have discussed all of the issues that have been raised with both
Page 118
October 24-25, 2006
sides, traffic compatibility, building heights, noise, all of those kinds
of things.
I have inspected not only the proposed site, but I have closely
examined the existing site of the Naples Daily News operation. I have
inquired as to the type of nuisance that it provides at its present
location, and I have talked with staff about this.
I have received telephone calls and emails about all the items that
I just discussed, and that pretty much covers it, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time the item that we're
going to be discussing, just so that everybody has a clear indication of
where we're going, this is the PUDA-2005-AR-8832, and this is in
regards to a piece of property that is going to be annexed into the
piece of property that we're going to be talking about later.
So just so everybody realizes, it's 2.3 acres from Creekside into
. the proposed Naples Daily News. So I'm not sure how the speakers
signed up in regards to speaking. This one is -- this is just to talk
about annexing 2.3 acres into the Naples Daily (sic) PUD.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, can't we take
them both so there's no confusion from the public?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, what's the--
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I believe -- and Mr. Schmitt, if
you're around here you can help me a little bit, or the petitioner can
help me. I believe that the business park request is contingent upon
the 2.32 acres being brought over from the Creekside PUD into that.
If that -- if the business park is not approved, therefore the 2.32
acres does not get moved over from the Creekside PUD. And that's
the way it is specified in the particular documents; is that right, Ms.
Student?
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: Thank you. Marjorie
Student-Stirling, Assistant County Attorney, for the record. Not quite,
because Creekside was approved last time, and that was, you know,
sent off to the Secretary of State. The Naples Daily News portion was
Page 119
October 24-25, 2006
not.
So we prepared another ordinance in case anything were changed
in Creekside to take care of that in that ordinance. So what we have to
do to put -- if Naples Daily News were not approved, we'd have to
come back with an ordinance to put it back like it was, because the last
time the Creekside was approved 4-1.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But I believe the petitioner asked to have
that brought back, okay?
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: Right.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: They asked to bring it back.
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: That's correct, but that ordinance is
still in effect. And so what we'd have to do is, depending what
happened -- it is -- Naples Daily News is contingent. But if Creekside
passes again and the Naples Daily News didn't we'd have that situation
where the three whatever acres would be, you know, out of the
Creekside but not in anything else.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So do we discuss this item first?
MS. STUDENT -STIRLING: What -- Mr. Weigel and I
discussed this and thought it might be more prudent this time to take
one motion with two parts, with the Creekside part in it as well as the
Naples Daily News, and that way we would avoid any problem like
we had last time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's try to simplify this for me,
will you? Let's talk about item 8B and item 8C. Which one are we
going to take first, or are they both going to come together?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Both.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Both of them are going to
come together, 8B and 8C we'll hear at one time. The speakers will be
heard one time?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. But that's why -- I think there's
some people here that are strictly for 8C and there may be some here
Page 120
October 24-25, 2006
for 8B, so I really think that we ought to address this -- you've got
some that may be here for 8B, and then the majority's going to be for
8C.
MS. FILSON: The speaker slips all say 8B and C.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I'm just looking for a way to
keep from hearing speakers twice.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Right now we have how many speakers?
MS. FILSON: Right now we have 41 and another pile over here
that I didn't accept.
MR. MUDD: And that pile over there came in after -- after you
had said, get your slips in before this starts. At the time it started there
was 41, and there has been slips that have been pouring in to Ms.
Marjorie Student's side of the desk.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I think--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But the other 41 were all sworn in,
right?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The question here is, Commissioners, do
we want to hear the speakers twice on this particular item or --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- do we hear them --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't want to hear them twice.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I suggest something?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If we're going to vote on it one
time as two separate parts of the same motion, then we'd only have to
hear the speakers one time because you're combining the two elements
into one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: Mr. Chairman, can I --
Page 121
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm just thinking that this is going to be
very convoluted if we try to put it all together because you've got a
motion for putting land in, and then you're going to talk about the
PUD itself. So I have some concerns. Maybe you can assist us here.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I will tell you the petitioner's
request for reconsideration was for both items taken simultaneously.
This board, when it acted to reconsider, reconsidered that petition by
the petitioner and approved that it would come back to this meeting,
so that's what the reconsideration is is to take both items
simultaneously.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
MR. SCHMITT: Companion items.
MR. ANDERSON: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, fellow
commissioners. For the record my name is Bruce Anderson from the
law firm of Roetzel & Andress, and I represent the landowners and the
contract purchaser, Collier Publishing Company, Inc., which publishes
the Naples Daily News and the Collier Citizen among other
publications.
I will address the reconsideration of both petitions together. I'm
quite comfortable with the procedure outlined by the County
Attorney's Office as to how the voting would occur.
I'll try to be brief, but thorough.
The -- let me address Creekside initially. The only changes to the
Creekside PUD are to amend the legal description and the master plan
to remove a smaIl2.3-acre parcel at the northwest corner of the
intersection of Creekside Way and Immokalee Road and to rezone it
into the new PUD.
Secondly, we would amend the Creekside master plan to show
that Creekside Way would be extended to connect with Creekside
Boulevard as requested by the county transportation department, and
to amend the master plan to show that Creekside Boulevard now
extends west beyond the boundaries of the Creekside PUD. Those are
Page 122
October 24-25, 2006
the only changes to the Creekside PUD document.
The Naples Daily News PUD document would include the
2.3-acre parcel from Creekside, which consists of a water management
lake and a portion of Creekside Way, and those 2.3 acres would be
added to approximately 33 acres that are presently zoned agriculture,
which all together, would become a part of the new Naples Daily
News Business Park PUD.
The Naples Daily News PUD would have two development
parcels, parcel A and parcel B. Parcel A is limited to newspaper
operations, and parcel B would allow uses, some of the same light
industrial uses, that are already permitted in the existing Creekside
Commerce Park PUD.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Would you point those out?
MR. ANDERSON: A and B.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And the two -- the land that is going to
be annexed.
MR. ANDERSON: From Creekside?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This parcel here.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
MR. ANDERSON: I'd like to do some introductions of people
you might hear from this afternoon. First of all I'd like to introduce
John Fish, CEO and Publisher of the Collier Publishing Company and
the Naples Daily News; Paul Marinelli, CEO and President of the
Barron Collier Companies; George Varnadoe, my Co-counsel from
Cheffy, Passidomo, Wilson & Johnson; Wayne Arnold, AICP. He's a
Principal with Q. Grady Minor & Associates. He's the project's Land
Planner; Reed Jarvi, PE, a Principal with Vanasse, Daylor &
Associates, the project's Transportation Engineer; Rick Barber, PE,
Principal of Agnoli, Barber & Brundage; Chris Hagan, PE, of Johnson
Engineering, the project's Civil Engineering Consultants.
I also have Robert LilKindey of Siebein & Associates of
Page 123
October 24-25, 2006
Gainesville, an Acoustical Architectural Firm; David Borden, the
Vice-President of Barron Collier Companies, and Tom Sewell, the
Director of Operations for the Naples Daily News.
I've got some procedural things that I need to get out of the way
so we can get into the substance of the issues before us.
First of all, I would ask one of you commissioners to make a
motion and for you to vote on accepting Mr. Arnold, Mr. Jarvi, Mr.
Barber, Mr. Hagan, Mr. LilKindey as expert witnesses in the
professional fields and occupations that I identified.
And I would also ask that Mr. Fish and Mr. Sewell be accepted
as expert witnesses in newspaper and related multi-media publication
production and operations. If one of you would be so kind as to move
that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Include the following --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to include the following
expert witnesses.
MR. ANDERSON: And recognize them as expert witnesses,
yes, please.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And do we have a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. A motion on the floor by
Commissioner Fiala and a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, call the question. All
those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 124
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you. Next--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I would like if you -- could just interrupt.
How many more speaker slips do we got there so we can make a
determination here?
MS. FILSON: Well, there are some who took theirs with them
when --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: -- we declined to accept them.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: What's the --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I could answer that question for
you, I think I know where you're going, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yep.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It says that speakers must register
with the county manager prior to the presentation of the agenda item
to be addressed, and I think you gave proper notice with respect to
that, and they were not.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we have the option to be
able to waive that. I would like to see us waive it. I -- and then have a
cutoff as of now, because we did have some people that came --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The problem is, if we still continue to
have people come in. So I agree with you that this is the direction.
What's the -- what's your concern? Would you like to -- the ones that
are there presently, to have them included?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have to think about that for a
minute. I know what the directions say, and none of them are sworn
in, that was my concern.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. County Attorney?
MR. WEIGEL: Yeah. Well, as indicated, it's you as the board
Page 125
October 24-25, 2006
members to determine whether to deviate from policy or not.
As Ms. Filson indicated, some have been left off here after the
start of the agenda item. Some of the persons attempting to leave
them off after the start of the agenda item have returned to their seats.
They're not necessarily not arrived yet, but they may have a few. So
that was why her response to your question about how many was a
little bit indeterminate, because some of the people kept their slip and
went to their seats. We were not attempting to receive them, but some
were laid down on the table as well.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: But you can do it if you wish to.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, thank you. The public has
taken their time to give their input on this issue, and I think it's
important that we listen to the public because they might come up
with something different that we're not aware of.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All right. All those people that
signed speaker slips and hasn't been -- have not been sworn in, would
you please rise or stand and raise your right hand so that we can get
you sworn in, and -- okay.
Clerk, would you -- court reporter, would you administer the
oath.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And the cutoff is as of right now. Does
everybody agree with that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I agree.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So that we don't have this going
on all afternoon, all right?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we have an opportunity to
change our mind though.
MR. ANDERSON: Anybody who has speaker slips, turn them
in now or forever hold your peace.
Page 126
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, wait a minute, some of these
people did not stand up to be sworn in.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: If they didn't get -- they did not get
sworn in. Okay. We have to close the -- we have to close the hearing
on this so that we can proceed or we'll be here all afternoon, okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, my goodness. There's another
five.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Were they sworn in?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We want everybody to speak on this, but
we also have to close the doors. So as of right now, the doors are
closed. Any of those that did not take the oath, please stand and raise
your right hand, or if you're standing, raise your right hand so we can
administer the oath the last and final time, then we can proceed.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They just handed all of their things
In --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Court reporter?
MR. MUDD: If are you going to speak in front of this Board of
County Commissioners --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You have to be sworn.
MR. MUDD: -- at that podium, you have to be sworn in because
everything you're going to say is going to be the truth and nothing but
the truth. And if you don't get sworn in, then you're in violation. So if
you haven't been sworn in and -- could you please stand up and raise
your right hand so you can be sworn in. We have one person in the
back.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We have one, two, three.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Raise your right hands, okay.
Court Reporter, for the final time.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: We now have 51 speakers.
Page 127
October 24-25,2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Pardon?
MS. FILSON: Fifty-one.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Fifty-one speakers.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's three hours.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We'll pare that down.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Three hours.
MR. MUDD: Keep going.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time, petitioner, would
you proceed at combat speed?
MR. ANDERSON: I accept your challenge, Mr. Chairman.
I'd like -- I want to introduce into evidence the following public
records: All written and printed material in today's county
commissioners' agenda documents for items 8A, pages 1 through 156,
and 8C, pages 1 through 273. Also, I have to introduce into evidence
certified copies of the transcript of minutes from the Planning
Commission hearing held on June 15,2006, and from the county
commission hearing held on September 12, 2006, on these rezone
petitions that are the subject of today's hearings.
And those transcripts include two letters of support or no
objection from the Bay Colony Property Owners' Association and the
Collier's Reserve association, which were accepted into evidence at
those hearings.
Also, certified copies of the reconsideration request letter to the
county manager from me dated September 15,2006, and certified
copies of the September 26th county commission agenda documents
and transcript of minutes for the county commission motion and
approval of the reconsideration of the rezone applications that are the
subject of to day's hearing.
If I could please have a motion to accept those documents into
evidence, I will bring them to the court reporter.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Page 128
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Fiala and a second by Commissioner Coletta.
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.
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you. There's been a lot of
misinformation put out about this project, and I'd like to respond.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We all will have time to speak on this, so
if we can just try to be organized as best as possible.
MR. ANDERSON: I think I struck a nerve.
And I would like to respond to that misinformation by
summarizing the factual and expert witness evidence that was
provided to the commission at the September 12, 2006, hearing on
these petitions, and also how my clients have addressed concerns by
residents in the area.
Your planning staff has previously advised you that this proj ect is
consistent with the Growth Management Plan which encourages
business parks in the urban area to be submitted in the form of a
planned unit development or PUD.
And your staff has testified that the project complies with the
Land Development Code, which states that PUDs may depart from the
strict application of setback, height, and minimum lot requirements of
Page 129
October 24-25, 2006
conventional zoning districts.
The only deviations requested from the Land Development Code
relate to requiring a wall or berm within the 25- foot landscape buffers
on the -- on the sides of the property and existing landscape buffers
and signs allowed within existing recorded utility easements,
otherwise there are no deviations requested.
The height of the press portion of the building will be, flat out, 75
feet measured from the minimum flood elevation. There will be no
antennas, no signage, no lighting, no nothing on the outside of that
portion of the building.
You have also heard evidence that the tract 22 PUD in which
Collier's Reserve is located, allows 80- foot high buildings itself.
Now, at the prior hearing it was stipulated that the affordable
housing contribution in section 6.8 of the PUD would be reworded so
that it would only say that it was credited against future adopted
affordable housing fees rather than fully satisfy those fees, and I want
to reaffirm that commitment to revise the language in the PUD.
You also received evidence from your staff and from the proj ect
planner, Wayne Arnold, that the project is compatible with
surrounding industrial, retail and residential uses.
I'll ask Mr. Arnold to come up in a moment and elaborate on his
prior testimony with regard to the compatibility of this project with
surrounding uses and building heights.
My clients have met on at least three different occasions in the
last month with the property owners in Collier's Reserve, and before
that my clients had previously met with them months ago, which
resulted in their original letter of no objection.
We have addressed their concerns whenever they have been
made known to us, just as my clients did with the property owners'
association for the closest residential neighborhood, Bay Colony. Bay
Colony Property Owners' Association letter of support for this project
remains in support.
Page 130
October 24-25, 2006
Let me explain how my clients have addressed the principal
concerns raised to us by the year-round and part-time residents of
Collier's Reserve.
Transportation. By way of background, Collier's Reserve
consists of approximately 225 homes with access to two stop lights on
Immokalee Road. One from their gated access opposite Creekside
Way, and a second gated access through the Collier Health Park that
leads to the intersection of Immokalee and Goodlette Roads, so they
have a choice as to how they access Immokalee Road, though they
apparently have concerns about sharing the stop light at Creekside
Way with other members of the public.
Now, in response to numerous emails to the county from Collier's
Reserve concerning transportation concerns, the county's
transportation administrator, Norman Feder, attended a meeting at
Collier's Reserve within the last month.
And at that meeting, he informed them that the Naples Daily
News operations would have less peak hour trips generated than most
any other land use that could be located at this site, and that the county
wanted Creekside Way to be extended to connect with Creekside
Boulevard to improve traffic circulation regardless of the Naples Daily
News PUD.
My clients have made the following commitments on
transportation: Between seven a.m. and 10 p.m. Naples Daily News
will instruct its general delivery vehicles to utilize Creekside
Boulevard rather than Immokalee Road to Creekside Way for access
to the Naples Daily News headquarters.
As Mr. Fish can tell you, the Naples Daily News experience is
that 15 semis per day make deliveries in the height of the tourist
season, and those occur during the daylight hours.
Now, between 10 p.m. and seven a.m., all newspaper distribution
trucks for ultimate delivery to homes and businesses, and any other
delivery vehicles, would be restricted to utilize a gated access on the
Page 131
October 24-25, 2006
west side of the Naples Daily News headquarters along the back side
delivery area of the Granada Shops commercial PUD immediately to
the west. From there, they would access Immokalee Road.
As Mr. Fish can tell you, they currently have six such newspaper
distribution trucks the size of a U-Haul truck, which make a total of 30
distribution round trips from the Naples Daily News headquarters.
Other than between 10 p.m. and seven a.m., that gated access would
be locked.
Additionally, the PUD requires my clients to pay above and
beyond road impact fees for the installation of computerized
coordinated traffic signals to improve traffic flow along Immokalee
Road at its intersections with U.S. 41, Creekside Way and Goodlette
Road.
As to noise. There has been a question about the potential for
noise from the Naples Daily News headquarters, so my client engaged
the service of an acoustical architectural firm. Their findings, which
were previously provided to Collier's Reserve, state that because of the
distance of homes in Collier's Reserve from the Naples Daily News
headquarters and the existing vegetation and the existing commercial
buildings within the same PUD as Collier's Reserve, that those would
all block the sounds, and that all sounds are less than the sound level
limits in the county's noise ordinance.
I do have a copy of that noise report, which I would ask that it be
accepted into evidence. It's an October 4, 2006, letter from Siebein &
Associates that deals specifically with Collier's Reserve.
If there would be a motion to accept that into evidence, please.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Could I have a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I first want to ask, you only
addressed Collier's Reserve regarding noise. What about Bay
Colony?
MR. ANDERSON: Oh. Bay Colony, that is addressed in the
initial -- from our prior hearing in the transcript, but we have also --
Page 132
October 24-25, 2006
we reoriented the delivery area, moved it from the south end of the
project over to the west side to face the back side of Granada Shops in
order to address what we thought might be a noise problem.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Now, the -- on noise issue -- on the noise
Issue --
MR. ANDERSON: Excuse me, I can't hear you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah. On the noise issue, next door on
Creekside, it specifies that daytime dBA levels there will be at 65, and
I believe the nighttime level's at 60 dBA.
So are we saying that the same noise criteria -- and that's
emanating from the property line, measured at the property line of the
premises of the building. Is that going to be the same for the PUD for
Naples Daily News?
MR. ANDERSON: They will comply with the same county
noise ordinance requirements as Creekside.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And what assurance is the public
going to have if there is a violation that takes place? What is the
recourse that we can address later on when we decide one way or the
other, when we make the motion?
MR. ANDERSON: Code enforcement. You have, as I--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I would like some other assurances.
What -- if we do have a noise problem, what is going to -- what is
your client going to do in regards to addressing that so that we don't
have a continuing noise abatement, noise problem?
MR. ANDERSON: Well, they'll have to do whatever they have
to do to come into compliance with the ordinance. I mean, they can't
-- they can't stay in violation. You all could probably close them
down in addition to fining them.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So you're telling me that the--
what we can put in there, if there's a certain amount of violations, that
then we could put that into the motion, if it exceeds more than four or
five times, that there has to be something that's immediately taken in
Page 133
October 24-25,2006
the steps of abating that noise?
MR. ANDERSON: We would object to anything that
discriminatorily singles out our operations from any other business in
Collier County.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, it wouldn't do that. It -- what it
would be is the noise ordinance, and that's in the Creekside PUD that
states 65 dBA at daylight hours and 60 dBA at nighttime hours.
MR. ANDERSON: Let me think about that and make sure we
understand what you're talking about.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We got all afternoon.
MR. ANDERSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question before I make
a motion to accept that into evidence.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Anderson, are you saying
that the noise study was done taking into consideration of the delivery
area to the west and how it sits with the neighboring community of
Collier's Reserve?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I'll make a motion to
accept that into evidence.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just a comment.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just a procedural item, if I may.
It's a little different. I can't recall previously times that we've had
issues come before us that we had to vote to take a particular item into
evidence. It was generally just presented to our reporter and it was
accepted --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That was accepted as evidence.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'm just curious to why
Page 134
October 24-25, 2006
we're doing it this particular way at this time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Attorney, can you give us some
guidance?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They're going to sue you if you
don't give them the right decision.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I mean, if we continually do this, we're
going to be having motions all afternoon, so --
MR. ANDERSON: I don't have any more, that I know of.
MR. WEIGEL: Yeah. You mean to add things to the record?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah.
MR. WEIGEL: I would suggest that if you take a motion, that
it's, you don't object to it going into the record. It's not necessarily
that you're approving it as the record in that nature. And in the
meantime, I'm cogitating a little bit on the noise ordinance aspect as
well.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good.
MR. WEIGEL: Creekside's an old PUD. Ifit provides for 65
dBA daytime --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sixty at night.
MR. WEIGEL: -- and 60 at night, I want to do a quick review. I
would ask Joe Schmitt and his staff to assist me because our current
noise ordinance generally is 60, as I recall, and I want to make sure
that we don't have a conflict of an old --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It's 60 at night, I believe. We'll get
clarification.
MR. WEIGEL: Yeah. I want to just be sure on that, too.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All right. So do we need to
accept this motion or can we --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we've got to vote on it.
I'm not going to remove it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We might as well. Everything we do
is a matter of public record anyway.
Page 135
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if I may, to accept it in
without objection -- the way the county attorney's suggested the
wording of it, because what we're doing is we're accepting this in as
fact. We don't know that -- we haven't had a chance to read this from
end to end. That's the part I -- I don't have any problem with receiving
the information.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. I don't want to slow
down the process, so I'll remove my motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I agree that -- to accept that
into evidence, as one member.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's two members.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Three members.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Four members.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I guess this is the same as
making the motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Just continue on.
MR. ANDERSON: Let it never be said that the lawyers are the
ones who complicate things.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You set a good example for us.
MR. ANDERSON: Yeah. Now, lastly on the noise matter, I
would point out to you that the western boundary of Collier's Reserve
abuts the back delivery area of the River Chase Shopping Center,
which includes a grocery store with nighttime and early morning
deliveries.
Now, with respect to lighting and signage and landscaping. As
previously stated, there will be no lighting or signage placed on the
75-foot portion of the Naples Daily News building. All building and
parking lot lighting will be, quote, cutoff, unquote, type fixtures or
shields which will be used to direct the lighting downward onto the
parking lot, and no lighting fixtures illuminating the parking area shall
Page 136
October 24-25, 2006
be located on poles more than 20 feet in height.
Ground signage shall be restricted to monument type signs
similar in sty Ie and size to that installed at Creekside Commerce Park.
No pole signs shall be permitted within the Naples Daily News
Business Park PUD.
The developer shall provide an additional 30 percent to the
minimum required trees along the north perimeter buffer next to
Immokalee Road. Additional vegetative material will be installed near
the intersection of Immokalee and Creekside Way in substantial
compliance with the landscape plan to reduce intersection sight lines,
and Mr. Arnold will show that graphic to you as part of his
presentation, and it would become an exhibit to the PUD.
Now I would like to ask Mr. Arnold to come up and speak to you
on compatibility issues, and he will be followed by Mr. John Fish
from the Naples Daily News. Thank you.
MR. ARNOLD: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Wayne
Arnold with Q. Grady Minor & Associates. I'm a certified land
planner, and been practicing for approximately 20 years in the field.
I wanted to build on what Bruce had talked to you about. I know
we have a lot of information in the record, so I don't want to belabor
the points. But I did want to discuss the proj ect and compatibility
with the Growth Management Plan because that's the foundation of
the decisions that we're making.
To qualify for a business park throughout the urban area by
virtue of a business park subdistrict that you have in your Growth
Management Plan, has several criteria that you must meet, and we've
identified in your staff report that we've met each and all of those
criteria, including things such as acreage, location on an arterial
roadway, which is Immokalee Road.
We have issues such as types of uses. It permits the gamut of
retail through industrial. We've asked for uses that are restricted to
very light industrial in nature and no retail activity.
Page 137
October 24-25,2006
We also have discussed in our presentation of materials the idea
that we are parklike in nature, and that was the subj ect of quite a bit of
discussion at your last hearing as well as the Planning Commission.
And we made a commitment to you then through staff and CCPC
recommendation that we would add increased landscaping within
buffer requirements.
We would also add an additional 30 percent of landscaping on
the north side of the property, and, as you heard Mr. Anderson say, we
were going to make the commitment to add additional landscaping at
the intersection of Creekside Way and the proposed business park to
help alleviate any concerns that there might be that this is an issue of
sight line from the intersection of Collier's Reserve. So we've gone to
a great effort in that respect.
We also had an idea called parklets if you remember, and I won't
belabor that by putting up an exhibit. But we made a commitment to
provide three miniparks inside the project area, as well as creation of a
linear park along our frontage on Immokalee Road.
And I think with those four things that we've done in addition to
your normal code requirements, I think it's pretty clear that our intent
is to make this a parklike setting, low structural coverage. We're
within each and every one of the criteria that your compo plan
estab lishes.
So in that respect, we concur with the findings of staff that we are
consistent with your Growth Management Plan for a business park.
I also wanted to build on what Mr. Anderson said which largely
comes down to the issue of compatibility that we've all discussed.
You know, whether it's in the context of what type of use this is, how
tall the use is, where it's located, it also comes down to some of those
compatibility criteria that -- you have a definition in your LDC that
tells us what compatibility factors may be.
But I think it's typically expressed in the idea of things like
building heights, location, aesthetics, landscaping, noise and odor
Page 138
October 24-25, 2006
issues and things of that nature. And it seems the one lightning rod
issue that we had was the fact that we had a proposed portion of a
building that's 75 feet tall. We heard from residences early on that this
was too tall, out of character for a residential neighborhood.
So with that, we had done a lot of our own research, and you've
heard testimony before about the surrounding zoning. But we know in
this particular case we have an activity center designation immediately
across the street from us that's part of the Collier's Reserve project.
That was approved as the tract 22 PUD. It's known as Collier's
Reserve, River Chase Shopping Center, but that is a shopping center
largely that's located in an activity center. That's where you focus the
majority of your new commercial and most intense commercial
acti vi ty .
To the west we have Granada Shops. That's also located in a
mixed-use activity center, and then to our east we have the Creekside
Commercial Park, which is a light industrial park.
So in the context of where we are and what we have, we have
projects that allow heavy retail and light industrial uses. To our south
we have a golf course tract that's part of the Pelican Marsh PUD.
Having looked at that location issue, we looked at heights. The
Collier's Reserve commercial component allows heights of, zoned
height, of 80 feet. We know the Collier Health Center immediately
east of Collier's Reserve allows 100- foot tall zoned height buildings.
We know the Granada Shops to our west allows 60- feet high retail and
office buildings with architectural embellishments that can reach 75
feet in height.
So the 75 feet that we're seeking on this particular property
doesn't seem out of character or incompatible with what's there. And I
think that Mr. Anderson mentioned it. We have an issue that came up
of zoned height, actual height, things of that nature. And let me show
you an example, if I can.
And I apologize for that not being completely legible to you, but
Page 139
October 24-25,2006
that is the architectural rendering that was accepted as the Site
Development Plan approval for the new expansion of the Collier --
north Collier hospital. It starts with a benchmark elevation of 100. It
could have just as easily been zero, but what that represents is --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Isn't -- wouldn't a hospital be considered
an essential services building and, therefore, it may have extenuating
circumstances to where it could be higher because it's an essential
building?
MR. ARNOLD: I'm not aware of any provision in our code that
would grant a special provision for height to a hospital.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Essential operations?
MR. ARNOLD: No, sir. The point of this exhibit is that that is
an 80-foot tall building, six stories. And if you look closely, the six
stories are included in the 80 feet. The top of that building is 103 feet.
The difference meaning that above their 80 feet height
requirement, they are permitted to put mechanical rooms and other
appurtenances above the roof line that makes an 80- foot tall building
103 feet under your code. It was approved. It's been constructed.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Attorney, is there anything in
our codes that say that there's essential services buildings in regards to
heights?
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: For the record, not that I'm aware
of. We have an essential services section, but I'm not aware of height
exemption or anything in that section.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
MR. WEIGEL: That's true.
MR. ARNOLD: This is a photograph from Collier's Reserve
looking at the new hospital complex. And you can see that in line
with the exhibit I showed you, the building has an 80- foot component.
It also stairsteps to over 100 feet in this case.
We tried to look for another way to demonstrate that our height
that we're seeking is consistent and compatible with surrounding
Page 140
October 24-25, 2006
development. On this exhibit, we've put in bar graph form the zoned
height maximums for the surrounding proj ects and the proposed actual
height in certain cases because not all those buildings are built to their
maximum height, and then we've reflected on the far right of that
exhibit the hospital building which has been constructed to its, what
we believe, maximum actual height.
But you can see from this exhibit that what I've taken is really a
west to east south of Immokalee Road, and compared it to west to east
north of Immokalee Road with the Naples Daily News project being
the second one from the left. And you can see that our 75- feet
proposed structure is both the actual and zoned height of 75 feet.
There's no encroachment above 75 feet above flood elevation, as Mr.
Anderson stated.
If you extend to the right on this exhibit, you see that the zoned
heights north of Immokalee Road exceed those proposed for our
proj ect and that the proposed actual heights further exceed that zoned
height. And I used a factor of 20 percent above the zoned height to
approve the actual height.
Now, that's a standard I used based on a comparison of what was
approved at Granada Shops between zoned height and their maximum
height, and then looking at what the hospital achieved. In both of
those examples they were above 25 percent higher than the zoned
height, comparison to actual height. I wanted to be conservative, so I
used 20 percent. I thought it was a fair comparison. And just so you
know, your definition of actual height looks at the total maximum
height from the center line of the adjacent road to the top of all the
structures, and it allows height exceptions for up to 33 percent of the
roof structure to have these exceptions.
So I think from this example it's clear that we've asked for a
height that's not inconsistent or incompatible what what's around us.
Going back to the issue of location. It's been stated by some of
the residents that we've met with at Collier's Reserve that this is a
Page 141
October 24-25, 2006
residential neighborhood. We've prepared a graphic that shows, that's
crosshatched in red, all of the properties along the Immokalee Road
corridor essentially between the intersections of U.S. 41 and
Goodlette-Frank Road that are commercially zoned, including a
separate crosshatching for the proposed Naples Daily News Business
Park.
And if I look at that exhibit, except for the Collier's Reserve
project that lies north and northeast of its own commercial component
this corridor is not residential in character and, in fact, the entire south
side of this road is certainly not residential.
Having said that, I put some additional information on heights in
there as well. It's a little redundant to the other, but I wanted to let you
all know that we have taken a hard look at the height in this area. And
in my professional opinion, I do not believe that height or location are
out of character for what we're proposing.
You heard Mr. Anderson state all the various conditions that
we've placed on ourselves for the planned unit development process
that deal with the operational components of this proj ect, their setback,
their design standards in there. And keep in mind that the 75-foot tall
component of this proposed facility is limited in its scale.
This is a plan view of the model that was created that -- you all
have seen these images before. But that the area that you see that -- in
the center of that building is the 75-foot tall press area for the Naples
Daily News facility. You can see that it's surrounded by other
components of the building which are largely less than 50 feet in
height. So the proj ection above the balance of the building is
relatively small. And, again, that total overall height is not out of
character with the neighborhood.
The other aspect that Mr. Anderson touched on was aesthetics
and landscaping, and he told you that we're designing the building to
be in compliance with your architectural standards. We have a
building that presents its office component out front on Immokalee
Page 142
October 24-25, 2006
Road, its front door, and it is out arterial access to the site. We also
told you about the additional landscape enhancements. And I wanted
to show you that elevation exhibit that we prepared in response to
some of Collier's Reserve comments.
There was a perception that the view from the exiting movement
from Collier's Reserve would present an unfinished industrial building
to the neighbors in Collier's Reserve. And even though we have
architectural standards we're adhering to, we exceeded the county's
minimum landscape code by at least 30 percent in creating the linear
park on Immokalee Road, we wanted to demonstrate that we're willing
to put supplemental vegetation at that intersection to help shield the
view of the 70-foot, 75-foot tall component of that building.
This represents the at-grade view that you could see with the
supplemental vegetation. And as Mr. Anderson said, we're willing to
stipulate that that become a part of our PUD.
I think that as you look through the various components of
compatibility, the thing that hasn't been said here is that we are on a
soon to be six-lane arterial road. We're separated from our nearest
neighbor across the six-lane Immokalee Road by a road that would, in
most other areas -- and in many other areas of Collier County a
six -lane arterial road is a clear divider between higher and lower
intensity uses.
And I think what I've shown you through these series of exhibits,
not only are we separated by a six-lane arterial road, we've presented a
project to you, that is compatible and complementary to what is across
the street, and I think we've been very sensitive to those areas of
concern, and I think we've addressed each and every one that have
come before us.
Bruce also mentioned transportation and the fact that we're
participating with transportation department with some additional cost
sharing for improvements in the area. We've agreed to restrict our
nighttime deliveries, we've agreed to other operational characteristics
Page 143
October 24-25, 2006
for normal daytime deliveries. We've addressed traffic appropriately,
and it's not a compatibility issue in this case.
So when I go back down through the considerations for
compatibility and I'm trying to find one that we haven't met -- and in
this particular case we're taking a farm field that's located adjacent to a
power center and an activity center, across from a power center and an
activity center and adjacent to a light industrial park and converting
that to other light industrial and very low-intense high-technology
uses.
And, again, as Mr. Anderson said, parcel A, which is designed to
house the Naples Daily News facility, is further reduced in its
intensity because that's the only type of use that it permits.
So with that, I would submit to you that in my professional
opinion you have a compatible project with the surrounding
properties, you also have one that's consistent with your Growth
Management Plan.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Are you finished with your presentation?
MR. ARNOLD: I am, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Because of the amount of people
that are here today, we'll take a 15-minute break. We have rest rooms
on the bottom floor. Each of the floors have rest rooms. So please,
we'll take 15 minutes, because obviously it's going to take some time
to get back -- back and forth up the elevator or the stairs, and we'll be
back here at 2:48.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your
seats so we can proceed. We've got a long way to go here this
afternoon. Thank you very, very much.
MR. ANDERSON: Mr. Chairman, for the record, my name is
Bruce Anderson, again, on behalf of the petitioners.
Page 144
October 24-25, 2006
Our last witness that we will call on direct would be Mr. John
Fish, the CEO and publisher of the Naples Daily News.
And I would specifically reserve rebuttal time, the right to
cross-examine witnesses and to introduce into evidence anything else
that might come up that is relevant.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, we might be here all night long if
we're going to cross-examine because the other side's going to say, I
want to cross-examine, too.
MR. ANDERSON: I will exercise it sparingly, if at all.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We are going to have a presentation by
staff, aren't we, a brief one?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We already did.
CHAIRMAN HALAS : We are going -- okay? Because I have
some questions for staff. Okay, thank you.
MR. FISH: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. For
the record, my name's John Fish, 1075 Central Avenue.
As the president and publisher of the Naples Daily News, I
represent today over 400 employees of the Collier Publishing
Company who are asking for your support for a new facility we would
like to build on Immokalee Road.
Since 1969, the Naples Daily News has been located at its current
home on Central Avenue in the heart of Old Naples. It's been a
wonderful location for us, but we've outgrown our facility and we
need to position ourselves for our anticipated growth in the future.
I believe we have proven ourselves to be outstanding neighbors
and excellent corporate citizens. I think if you examine our history
with the City of Naples , you will find not one claim ever filed against
us for any issue related to pollution, noise, odor or traffic.
The plans for our new facility would allow us to continue that
excellent track record of the past 37 years. The press hall will be
Page 145
October 24-25, 2006
constructed of concrete, eliminating any noise outside of the building,
and our new press, which will be a state-of-the-art piece of machinery,
will be operated by four to five people who stand at computers.
As has been the case in the past, we will continue to comply with
all laws related to pollution, and no odors will emerge in the future.
We consider ourselves a very environmentally friendly company.
We recycle all of our newsprint through a company in Georgia, and
we use our soy based ink that generates only about six 55-gallon
drums of waste a year, and that's handled by a certified environmental
agency.
As our business continues to grow in the future into a more
high-tech industry, our new building, our technology and our job
growth will move more and more toward a greater emphasis on the
Internet and other digital media.
Our work at the new plant will be very clean, it will be very
modem, and it will be very efficient. Our new building will look
extremely nice with a strong emphasis on beautiful landscaping. The
design of the building will be compatible with the area that we hope to
be located in.
From a traffic and transportation standpoint, the Naples Daily
News owns six U -Haul type trucks, and these trucks take papers to our
three distribution centers each night around the county, which is where
the majority of our newspaper carriers pick up their papers.
The opening of these new distribution centers in the past two
years has limited substantially the amount of traffic that we have at
our main facility. Up until a couple years ago, about 220 carriers each
night picked their papers up downtown. Today that number is about
12.
The semi trucks that deliver our rolls of newsprint and
advertising inserts make their stops at our facility Monday through
Friday between the hours of eight a.m. and 5 p.m. We receive about
15 of these trucks a day during season and about 10 out of season.
Page 146
October 24-25, 2006
We believe that these facts, combined with the limited traffic that
we receive during the day, greatly minimize any negative impact that
our building may have on the traffic situation on Immokalee Road.
And finally, why did we chose this property for our potential new
site? First, we wanted to keep our business centrally located in the
core of our market so we can better serve our readers, our advertisers,
and our staff.
Second, our goal is to keep our entire operation, both the business
offices and the production facilities, together because it makes the
coordination and communication of our jobs every day much easier.
This property gives us enough space to do that.
And last, our options in Collier County, given those first two
desires, were very limited, and after examining those options, we
made this our first choice.
Thank you for your time this afternoon. We hope that you will
support the proj ect.
On behalf of the Collier Publishing Company, I want to promise
you that our goal is to build a facility that will be a lasting monument
to a community that we take a great pride in serving.
For all of you and really the entire community, this project will
be something that I think all of us will be very proud of for many
hears to come.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, Mr. Fish, before you leave, I have
some questions I'd like to ask you, if I could.
MR. FISH: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sir, at your present facility, your daily--
what's your daily production at your present facility?
MR. FISH: It fluctuates, Commissioner Halas. In season, our
circulation increases daily to as high as 85-, 90,000. Sunday
circulation is as high as almost 110,000.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And what is the speed of your
Page 147
October 24-25, 2006
presses at the present time? How many newspapers can you put out
per hour at your present location?
MR. FISH: On nights when it's working?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, sir. Let's say the height of the -- the
nights it's working? Doesn't it work all the time?
MR. FISH: I don't know. I'll let some of these people answer
that. No, we can produce, Tom, what, about 15- to 20,000 an hour
when everything's running well.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Fifteen to 20,000 papers an hour?
MR. FISH: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: This is a complete newspaper?
MR. FISH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. How many different newspapers
do you presently print at your location?
MR. FISH: Let's see. We print the Naples Daily News, the
Bonita Daily News, the Marco Eagle, the Marco Islander, the Collier
Citizen. We are printing several papers, new acquisitions that we have
just made, including the Naples Sun Times and several others in Lee
County, and then our sister papers over on the east coast in Stuart are
printing now, I think, five or six -- five papers for us.
So in total, Commissioner, we are printing someplace,
somewhere, 13, but I think about five of those are at our current plant.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thirteen papers at the present time at this
location?
MR. FISH: No, sir, no, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh.
MR. FISH: Five at the current location. That's one reason why
we are in need of a new facility because we just can't handle already
the growth in which we have -- we have enjoyed recently.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And how many rolls of newsprint do you
use a week at the locations that you're at at the present time?
MR. FISH: We're estimating 200 during high season.
Page 148
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Two hundred a week or daily?
MR. FISH: Did you ask a week?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, daily, what do you use for
newsprint?
MR. FISH: I'd say it's always higher -- little higher on Sunday,
so I would -- during peak season we're probably looking at 25 to 30
rolls.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Twenty-five to 30 rolls a day?
MR. FISH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And that -- you say around 200 a week;
is that correct?
MR. FISH: That's during peak season.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And how many gallons of ink do you use
in that period of time in the location you're at now, would you guess?
MR. FISH: About 500 gallons a month.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Five hundred gallons a month, okay.
And how many hours a day do these presses run to produce these
newspapers?
MR. FISH: This past season -- and again, we -- we have
circulation, sir, that probably fluctuates more than any newspaper in
the country.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. FISH: So you're really talking about two very different
types of operation with hours worked. And I'll give you an example.
That question actually allows, I think, to provide a good example of
that. This past year during season from Wednesday morning to
Sunday afternoon, our press ran non-stop.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And that was just on newspapers, local --
the Naples Daily News or associated papers, or was that --
MR. FISH: And products, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And products. And by products we're
talking --
Page 149
October 24-25, 2006
MR. FISH: For example, the Collier Citizen, the Marco
products, so --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. FISH: -- it's a fairly wide variety.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So you're saying that when the
presses are running, they're running 24 hours a day just to take care of
the newspapers here locally; is that correct?
MR. FISH: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No?
MR. FISH: That's just one time during the year. They don't --
that schedule I just gave you was for about three months out of the
year. The other nine months the press does not run like that, thank
goodness, because it wouldn't last long if it did. The press we have
currently is about -- well, I think it's about 30, 35 years old, so.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do you have any other non-newspaper
contracts that you -- that you run at the present location?
MR. FISH: No, sir. We do publish several magazines. We can't
print those. The only thing that we can print in-house are
newspaper-type products.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At your new proposed facility,
you're looking at 400,000 square feet.
MR. FISH: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Isn't it 400,000?
MR. FISH: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The total square feet -- footage of that?
MR. FISH: Right now we're looking at about 180,000.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: At the location?
MR. FISH: At the new --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Location?
MR. FISH: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I need to be corrected on that
because I thought it was 400,000.
Page 150
October 24-25, 2006
MR. FISH: Four hundred is what we would be allowed, but the
facility we're planning to build only has 180.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: A hundred and eighty?
MR. FISH: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Okay. Now, if you could give
me some idea of, what are the changes in your business plan that
requires you to increase the floor capacity and the space to this extent?
What's your square footage at your present plant?
MR. FISH: About 70,000.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: About 70,000, okay. And you're going
to increase this to 80,000 --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hundred and eighty thousand.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hundred and eighty thousand, excuse
me, okay. Do you anticipate this probably to even increase larger?
MR. FISH: Boy, I don't know. But I hope 10 years down the
road we'd have a need to increase it. If our business grows the way
that we would like to see it grow, there may be a need, but that's just a
hope.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Some of the research that I have done in
regards to printing plants, most of the new ones are somewheres in the
category of 45 feet, the presses. Can you tell me why we have a press
here that's 75 feet that you need to have a building to encompass it?
MR. FISH: Yes, sir. That is the total amount of footage that we
could ever need in order to build a new printing tower. We have not
picked out a new press yet, but we know in terms of flexibility, we
need that 75 feet. But I think it's important that, I guess, everyone
understood that, you know, the shorter we make that the better off we
are because it saves us a lot of money.
We're not looking just to build a 75-foot tower because we like to
see high buildings. I mean, that's what we need, possibly, in terms of
what our new press looks like.
But I will just add to your statement about other presses, because
Page 151
October 24-25, 2006
our company has built two other plants in the last five, six years. One
was in Knoxville, Tennessee. The height of that printing plant is 80
feet. And, again, our sister paper's over in Stuart, Florida. They got a
new printing production facility two years ago, and the height of their
building's 70 feet. So there is some variation there. But we know 75
is the highest we would possibly need.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Now, this -- so this -- you're
talking one press. This isn't presses as in pleural, right? This is just
one press that you're looking at the present time?
MR. FISH: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. What do you anticipate its speed
to run at?
MR. FISH: I think our hope would be, what, 70- and 90,000 an
hour.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Seventy to 90,000 an hour. So at that
current rate, obviously you're going to have a lot of extra space that
you could contract out; is that correct?
MR. FISH: We don't -- I seriously doubt it. We don't believe that
that will be the case, because as I mentioned earlier, we're currently
having eight newspapers that we are producing, including four that we
have acquired in the last month, are being printed outside our facility.
We would bring all those back in-house.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. FISH: And once we did that, that would fill up a lot of that
press time pretty quickly.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So you don't anticipate that your
business plan would be such that you would incorporate outside
contracts to where you might take on publications that could be
Newsweek magazine or something of this nature, a weekly magazine
MR. FISH: We have --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- to fill your press time since -- you're
Page 152
October 24-25, 2006
going to have press people there 24 hours a day; is that correct?
MR. FISH: No, sir, not necessarily.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Not necessarily.
MR. FISH: I mean, because it all depends on what the print
schedule is. I mean, that's a question that's impossible for me to
answer because, again, it depends on what products we're printing and
how many more products we have -- we're talking about, again, a
press that would not be operational for probably at a minimum, you
know, somewhere two, three years, so there's a good chance we will
continue to grow our business between now and then.
I have no idea -- in answer to your question, I have no idea if we
would attempt to print anything else, but I can tell you, we have had
absolutely no discussion about the possibility of doing that. It's all we
can do right now to figure out how we get our own things printed.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: In your other plant locations that you
have throughout the country, do they take on contracts to do additional
printing other than the local newspapers?
MR. FISH: Some do -- some do, some don't. It all depends -- a
lot depends on the equipment that you have. For example, our sister
papers in the Treasure Coast are built to be able to manager
commercial print jobs. We're not planning on doing that. We're not
planning on taking on commercial print jobs.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You're not planning at this point, but you
have that flexibility; is that correct?
MR. FISH: We won't if we don't purchase the equipment. It
takes special equipment to do that. Right now we're not planning on
purchasing that equipment.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The reason I'm asking these
questions is because when I read through the PUD, it says the Collier
Publishing Company, and so that kind of opens up a whole big arena
in regards to -- are you just going to publish the local papers -- or local
papers for the area or does this take on a whole big -- bigger spectrum
Page 153
October 24-25, 2006
to where it could be -- you're going to contract time? Because if you
had this running 24 hours a day, obviously there would be some open
time on the press that you could contract this out, and so, therefore, it
opens up a whole nother arena.
MR. FISH: I just believe that Collier Publishing Company has
been the name of the company forever. I don't think that has any
special significance in terms of what it represents, in terms of the
business.
I think -- Commissioner, I think our folks at our facility would
tell you that if there's any open time, I'm going to look for a way for us
to fill it with our own products.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The other concern that I have,
and that is, there was some information that was put out that said that
there would only be two-axle vehicles that would be going to and fro
this facility, and obviously what was brought out early on is that there
are going to be semi trucks involved in this, and I believe it's
something like 15 semi trucks a day, if --
MR. FISH: During the height of the season.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And that -- those trucks will be
bringing in the raw material, which would be newsprint and ink and
so on. And would there be also some trucks that would be leaving this
facility, semi trucks, ladened down with the finish product which
would be printed up?
MR. FISH: No, sir. The eight -- those I8-wheelers that deliver
the products do not leave with any of our --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Finished product?
MR. FISH: Not that I'm aware of.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Would they?
MR. FISH: No, sir, they never have. I don't envision that
happening in the future.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So in -- the other question that I'd
like to know is that the size of this press that we're going to have here,
Page 154
October 24-25, 2006
in the information that was given to us on your agenda, it basically
listed that this would be a light industrial use. That's listed in section
3.3, page 102 of273.
It says, I know that the printed uses in the mixed use include
printing and publishing, but how would a 24/7 manufacturing plant
and distribution center qualify as light use?
When I looked up SIC code, it was listed as 271 or 2711. This
plant will basically bring in raw materials, some are toxic, into the --
that will be put into the finished product, and the work will be done by
heavy machinery and a minimum of laborers. How would this
constitute as a light assembly or light industry?
MR. FISH: I guess it depends on what you define as heavy
industry .
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, if you're -- if the majority -- if you
-- if the product that you're putting out is with the least amount of
manpower and you're feeding this with a large amount of raw
materials and the end product is you're producing so- to 90,000 papers
or 120,000 papers an hour, how would this be considered light
industry? Wouldn't it be considered heavy industry? Most areas of the
country consider it heavy industry, I thought.
MR. ANDERSON: Let me interject here a moment. For the
record, Bruce Anderson. I think you need to take a look at your
Growth Management Plan. It specifically lists publishing as an
authorized use in the business park uses that the comprehensive plan
encourages. So whether you want to characterize it or someone else
does as light or heavy, that might be an interesting distinction, but it's
not one that the comprehensive plan makes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, there's a whole gamut of
publishing. You've got someone that makes business cards, you've got
someone else that may get into the printing business where he's got
fliers for neighborhood stores or whatever, and then, of course, you've
got an all-out newspaper printing publishing company, and so that's
Page 155
October 24-25, 2006
why I'm looking for that distinction, and it could be -- the gentleman
who is putting out the business cards, that be considered probably light
industrial. But when you've got a large printing plant, then it could be
something of larger magnitude than just light industrial, okay?
The other concerns I have is what we brought up earlier, Mr.
Fish, and that is, what -- what can you offer the citizens that do live
around the proximity of this proposed plant in regards to noise or if
there are any odors or anything that might be put off from this plant?
What do you have to offer them as far as making sure that their
concerns are met?
MR. FISH: I think the best thing that we have to offer is a
30-year, or 37-year, history of no problems.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. FISH: And Commissioner, we would not -- we would not
build the type of facility that we're hoping to build with the kind of
financial investment that Scripps as a company is willing to make
without making sure that that trend continues.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And obviously, there's a whole
gamut of EP A regulations --
MR. FISH: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- that go along with a printing plant --
MR. FISH: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- of this magnitude.
MR. FISH: Weare monitored very closely, and we have never
had any type of violation of that type.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And the place that you're located within
the City of Naples, would that be classified as an industrial park?
MR. FISH: I don't know the City of Naples that well. I don't
know what it's classified as.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: In other words, you were at this location
and then there was encroachment of buildings or encroachment of
residents at a later date, but the general area is considered an industrial
Page 156
October 24-25, 2006
park area; wouldn't you say?
MR. FISH: Sir, I don't know. I really don't know.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. How about the attorney that
represents you; Bruce, wouldn't that be classified as an industrial park
area?
MR. ANDERSON: No. I'm not aware that it is.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Because when you look at the
surrounding community around there, it's basically all commercial
except where the encroachment of residents was at a later date than
where the printing plant is today.
MR. ANDERSON: I'm not sure which use was there first. The
bottom line is, they peacefully coexist.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I understand that, but what we
have is a case where if the printing plant -- it's like the airport. If the
airport's there first, then the residents really don't have any means of --
they shouldn't be complaining to the full extent in regards to the
printing press because they moved there, okay, and this printing -- the
printing operations that presently exist in downtown Naples, okay,
whereby now you have two established communities, and now we're
moving in this particular PUD that involves printing operations.
And my classification of -- obviously differs from what -- Mr.
Fish's, and that is I don't consider it to be light industrial. To me, I feel
this is heavy industrial. And I think maybe we can establish that later
on as we work through the process here.
MR. ANDERSON: Well, may I read from the comprehensive
plan. Business park subdistrict. When a business park is located in the
urban commercial district or urban mixed-use district, the industrial
uses shall be limited to light industry, such as lighted manufacturing,
processing and packaging in fully enclosed buildings, research design,
and product development, printing, lithography and publishing and
similar light industrial uses.
So the legislative determination has already been made by this
Page 157
October 24-25,2006
county commission that publishing is considered a light industrial use.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I believe that would just be in the
interpretation of it, okay? When I look at what staff says about, if this
is in compliance with the GMP, staff has concerns that this project did
not provide for multiple buildings as intended in the GMP and did not
provide for parklike settings. The majority of the open space would
be restricted from the access to employees and the patrons of the
business parks.
Access to the business park was not directly off an arterial road
or collector road, and the maximum building height of 75 feet
exceeded the maximum height of the business park of 35 feet and 50
feet from the industrial districts.
Comprehensive plan department has indicated the proposed
Naples Daily News BPPUD is consistent with all applicable elements
of the Future Land Use Element, FLUE, of the Growth Management
Plan, GMP, subject to revisions to the GMP document.
And I just want to know where the revisions to the PUD
document are listed. I haven't found that in this reading, and I'm
hoping that staff can give me some guidance in that direction.
MR. ANDERSON: Well, I would be most reluctant to put any
words in staffs mouth, so I'll let them speak for themselves.
But, nonetheless, revisions have been made to the PUD
document. And that is, in fact, why the staff has found that the
application meets the requirements of the Growth Management Plan
and the Land Development Code and why they are recommending
approval.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Can you tell me where the
revisions are in -- for this PUD? Maybe you can --
MR. DeRUNTZ: For the record, Mike DeRuntz, Principal
Planner with the Department of Zoning and Land Development
Review in the Community Development/Environmental Services
Division.
Page 158
October 24-25, 2006
The staff, comprehensive planning staff, has identified that the
Board of County Commissioners does need to make a determination
of the compliance to the direct access point. Transportation does not
have a problem with the proposed plan of them going out on
Creekside Way because that would be part of their property itself.
The -- they've also felt that the other comments were addressed
though in a later review that the proposed plan was in compliance with
the Growth Management Plan.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So the portion of the legal considerations
that were given to us in this agenda package then are wrong, when it
says the "cons" section of the ideas of -- that this may not fit in
accordance with our Growth Management Plan?
MR. DeRUNTZ: Comprehensive planning changed their opinion
that it was in compliance with the area and the parklike setting and
other issues that they had brought up previously.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So this is in compliance with the Future
Land Use Element, FLUE?
MR. DeRUNTZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's interesting.
MR. DeRUNTZ: With the exception --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Why would staff give us this information
and say that there's some questions here?
MR. DeRUNTZ: They did state that the board does need to
make a determination about the access. One of the criteria is that
business parks would have to have direct access onto an arterial road.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. What about the portion about the
possibility of creating an isolated district unrelated to the adjacent or
nearby districts because of the assemblage of five different parcels of
property to facilitate the minimum area required by the business park
created by a gerrymandering of parcels of the property that is not
accessible by those using the subject property and encroaches into an
area developed as upper-end single-family residents in a private golf
Page 159
October 24-25,2006
course? Does this follow the criteria?
MR. DeRUNTZ: It is under the same ownership. And even
though they assembled the five parcels to get the 35 acres, that is the
test for qualifying for a business park PUD, having that 35 acres.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But a business park also basically
stipulates that the 35 acres should be open spots and it should be with
park atmosphere and that it should have access by all patrons or
employees that are working in that area; is that correct?
MR. DeRUNTZ: It -- it did provide the parklike setting with the
open space that was provided. They provided additional buffering as
was mentioned at the September 12th meeting.
That one area, the appendage that has an existing easement over
it for a use by the Bay Colony golf course and also the water
management area of the lake exists presently, and -- but was included
in the 35 acres for the total site.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But my question is, for the 35 acres, this
is supposed to be an open area, by what I read as a Land Development
Code for business parks, that the area should be open and it should be
a parklike atmosphere and it should have accessibility; is that correct?
MR. DeRUNTZ: You're correct that it is supposed as to be 35
acres, and it is supposed to have a parklike setting, and they are -- the
appendage does not allow access for the business park owners -- or
tenants and people that are employed there to have access to that
because it is a private golf course and the lake area that is cut off from
the -- from the rest of the area. But they do have access, the persons
that would be employed there, would have access --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: To what?
MR. DeRUNTZ: -- to the green space, the park areas that they're
proposing to show on site, and that's available to the other users.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But not to the appendages that--
MR. DeRUNTZ: No, that area would be restricted.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. That's the question. It's going to
Page 160
October 24-25, 2006
be restricted, okay.
One of the other things that you brought up into the agenda was
whether the proposed change would adversely influence living
conditions in the neighborhood. And I believe one of the findings by
staffwas, staff is of the opinion that the proposed Naples Daily News
BPPUD is not compatible with adjacent residential and commercial
land uses due to the related noise, odor, building massing related to the
proposed newspaper press operation to be adjoining Pelican Marsh
DR! and Collier Tract 22 PUD unless the recommended mitigation is
adopted.
Can you tell me what -- the mitigation that was adopted?
MR. DeRUNTZ: They additionally proposed, if I can -- well,
that the -- there would be deviations to the buffering, along the side
property lines and front property line, and to the rear.
They have amended their plan, and -- which was one of the 37
conditions that the Planning Commission and staff had put together
and addressed to withdraw those deviations for the lessening of the
buffering in the front and on the sides for the proposed site plan.
They also have included in with the conditions to add additional
vegetation along the front, also on the south side of the building they
were going to add additional vegetation. They had met with Bay
Colony Homeowners' Association and worked out an agreement for
maintenance of the southern buffer area and to add additional
buffering in that area where there had been previous storm damage.
So they are making attempts to mitigate these site, noise and odor
problems that may occur at this printing operation.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. If that's the case, then why did we
change the path of the vehicles from Creekside onto Immokalee Road
at night which would then affect the neighbors to the north, which is
Collier's Reserve? I think that the semi trucks bringing --
MR. DeRUNTZ: One of the concerns that the Planning
Commission talked about when they heard this petition was the issue
Page 161
October 24-25, 2006
of noise, and the applicant prepared a noise study and provided that,
and that was a part of the documentation that you had for this petition
today.
And in that, they recommended that traffic be deviated or
changed from exclusively using the Creekside Boulevard access to the
site to having the trucks use the northern access onto Immokalee
Road.
And as the applicant has mentioned today, they are proposing to
modify that traffic circulation plan to limit it to, during the evening,
having that traffic go out through the Granada access area.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think there was some discussion also
that as the traffic egressed onto Immokalee Road, if they wanted to go
west, they were going to have to make a U-turn at Creekside to head
back in a westerly direction to get out on U.S. 41. Is that your
interpretation, your understanding also?
MR. DeRUNTZ: I read that also, but I would refer defer to the
traffic engineer to explain that because I wasn't sure what they were
actually talking about, a U-turn on Immokalee Road.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I would think that if we had large
apparatuses, that it might be difficult to make that, even though we
were going to widen that to six-lane.
MR. DeRUNTZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Norm, could you enlighten me a little bit
in regards to the traffic that's going to flow onto Immokalee Road at
later hours and how that was going to be addressed where they may
have to make aU-turn at Creekside?
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, for the record, Norman Feder,
Transportation Administrator.
I will defer to the application and how they're proceeding on that.
I know when I went out to speak to the folks at Collier's Reserve that
that issue came up. The concern was essentially for that traffic
leaving at night that would go out into the Granada Shops, cut out
Page 162
October 24-25, 2006
onto Immokalee if it wanted to go up 41, they would come back to the
Collier's Reserve, the Creekside Way signal, and then make a U-turn
to go back to 41.
My understanding is they've come up with some alternate. At the
meeting they were discussing going through the shops. Now I
understand they can't. I think now they're talking about possibly
going down to Goodlette-Frank to make the U-turn or going over to
Livingston, but I'll defer to them, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much,
Commissioner.
I want to talk with Mike some more, just a few things.
MR. ANDERSON: Commissioner, I think there's some
confusion. At nighttime the only vehicles that will be using that
access along the back of Granada Shops are the U - Haul type
newspaper distribution trucks, not the semis. Mr. Fish told you that
the semis deliver during the day. They will use Creekside Boulevard.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So we will have assurances that
there won't be any semi-trucks making deliveries or taking loads of
finished product out at a later date?
AUDIENCE: Yes.
MR. ANDERSON: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I appreciate that. That's great.
Mike, just to finish up, I have one more question.
MR. DeRUNTZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I really want to thank my fellow
commissioners for enduring this. I want to make sure that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, that's fine.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I want to make sure that I was getting a
lot of my questions answered that I didn't do last time.
When we look at this -- this picture that was given to me
yesterday, it talks about the Collier Tract 22 where -- that we could
have 80- foot buildings at that location. Have you been there lately?
Page 163
October 24-25, 2006
MR. DeRUNTZ: Yes, sir, I have, and those buildings in all of
those areas around there, none of these properties have been built to
the maximum height that they were approved to.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And they're pretty much all built
out at this point in time?
MR. DeRUNTZ: Right, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So it is basically a low profile
area?
MR. DeRUNTZ: At this time it is.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Would you say that the Granada
Shops is somewhat of a low profile area for --
MR. DeRUNTZ: It is. But as was mentioned earlier, they were
approved to go up to 75 foot for architectural features.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. But they haven't used that option
as of yet?
MR. DeRUNTZ: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The other thing about -- that I
found interesting, I requested that the -- when -- I looked at the
Creekside Commercial Park, and in there it says, commercial industry
35 feet, business 50 feet.
It's my understanding that the only area in this park that you can
build 50-foot buildings is the drainage canal that is part -- is the east
side of the drainage canal, which is part of the Pine Ridge drain. So
anything east of that canal, I believe, has the height available to them
of 50 feet; is that correct?
MR. DeRUNTZ: That is correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And anything west of that canal
is a maximum of 35 feet; is that correct?
MR. DeRUNTZ: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And that's including silos, chimneys,
antennas, et cetera; is that right?
MR. DeRUNTZ: No. The antennas -- appurtenances can be
Page 164
October 24-25, 2006
higher than that, as an antenna.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, what I read was silos and antennas
were only 35 feet. Maybe I stand to be corrected and you can look at
that PUD.
MR. DeRUNTZ: I can check real quick and get back to you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, please do, and that's the Creekside
PUD.
Okay. I'm through with questioning. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Halas, you were
referring to the consistency of the pros and cons statements provided
by our staff?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, I was.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So you were reading
from the con side of it?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But there is a pro side of it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: There is a pro side, but I was --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me -- I don't think -- you
know, my colleague's questions was not answered completely, and I
think he deserves the answers to the questions, and I don't think it's up
to our staff to answer those questions.
The perception could be that you're supporting the petition, and
we have come in an era of letting the petitioner defend his petition.
MR. DeRUNTZ: You're correct. That's not the impression.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So, you know, I've written down
some questions that I feel that Commissioner Halas's questions were
not answered. So Mr. Anderson, Mr. Fish?
First of all, Mr. Fish, you stated that you're asking for 75 feet, but
you may not need 75 feet; you may come in less in your site
Page 165
October 24-25, 2006
development plan.
MR. FISH: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that correct?
MR. FISH: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Would that be just like the
Granada Shops, they are at whatever feet they are; they're definitely
not at SO feet. And they came in their site plan with much less than
what their zoned height is, just like Collier's Reserves?
MR. FISH: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you don't need it --
MR. FISH: Ifwe don't need it, Commissioner, we won't build it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And I think that's very
important to understand.
And it was explained about your delivery vehicles.
Now, Mr. Anderson, the park -- the parklike settings, I don't feel
like that was addressed properly by our staff. Is that what you call
parklets within --
MR. ANDERSON: That is only one component.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. ANDERSON: The additional landscaping that has been
pledged along Immokalee Road is intended to help address that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, okay.
MR. ANDERSON: And no, we're not surviving on parklets
alone.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now another question
that Commissioner Halas asked was about the buildings, and the
Growth Management Plan -- and I did look up, and you're absolutely
right what it says about printing and presses and that. That's what it
does state in our Growth Management Plan, but it also does state, like
Commissioner Halas said, it was multiple buildings.
Is there only going to be one building proposed on this site?
MR. ANDERSON: One building on Parcel A and one on parcel
Page 166
October 24-25, 2006
B.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So there's going to be
more than one building?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The arterial versus -- Creekside
would be considered a collector? I would imagine Mr. Feder is the
determination of that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He's trying to sneak out.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: He's trying to run.
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, either a major local or minor
collector.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That's Creekside. And
this site is located and it has access to an arterial road?
MR. FEDER: Yes, to Immokalee Road directly off of Creekside
Way.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In your opinion, as far as the
traffic circulation, would it be better that all that traffic uses the
arterial roadway? What is being proposed is the bigger trucks, the
delivery trucks to the site, be using Creekside Way . Would you rather
see them use Immokalee Road?
MR. FEDER: Basically what we're trying to do by extension --
and I'm a little bit roundabout, but I'm trying to answer your question.
By extension of Creekside Way from Immokalee down to
Creekside Boulevard, we're trying to create more of a grid pattern and
the opportunity for access from multiple directions.
I would tell you, depending upon where the traffic's coming
from, I would seek for it to travel the least distance on the system in a
safe manner, and obviously Immokalee is an arterial, and that's why
the provision for a facility to be off of an arterial is the preference.
But then, again, there are trucks on Creekside Way today, I'm sure,
with the other developments that are along that, on Creekside
Boulevard, excuse me.
Page 167
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. In your opinion, as far as
the U -Haul trucks, if you lived there, would you rather see them use
Creekside Way or Immokalee Road?
MR. FEDER: Depending on time of day that they're using it and
volume, I think they can use either, as I've answered, but obviously
Immokalee Road is more geared to higher volumes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'm not sure if that
answered all of Commissioner Halas's concerns, but I was concerned
that you didn't have all your questions answered fully. Do you feel
satisfied?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: To some extent. I just want to make
some clarification. I did pull up ordinance 97-51, and the maximum
height of 35 feet includes silos, storage tanks, elevator towers, satellite
dishes, antennas, et cetera.
MR. DeRUNTZ: Exactly. I was just going to correct the record
on that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ah, okay.
MR. DeRUNTZ: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala? I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. No, that's all right. Thank
you. When I -- I guess this would be for the petitioner or for Bruce. I
had a few questions myself, and that is when I went over to the -- to
Collier's Reserve the other day, they mentioned a few things that they
were concerned about, and I would like to see those questions
answered. One of them was, they were very concerned that the trees
along their property would be ripped out as we widened Immokalee
Road. And I think Norm stepped out of the room. 1'11--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: He's running.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you happen to know? See, he
keeps trying to get away.
MR. FEDER: My apologies, Commissioner. I will make sure I
stay right here. What can I do to help?
Page 168
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I was wondering -- I was
concerned with the trees being ripped out of the area when you widen
Immokalee Road, and that's been a very important thing to the people
in Collier's Reserve.
MR. FEDER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Will that be done?
MR. FEDER: Yes, the widening on Immokalee Road -- and I
have some figures here if you want me to show you in graphic, but
there are trees that were planted along the median on Immokalee Road
that will be removed since most of that construction to six-Ianing will
be to the center of the roadway trying to minimize right-of-way takes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But not on the property like in front
of --
MR. FEDER: No. Let me get a -- if you could indulge me for a
second, I'm sorry. Let me get a graphic, and I think I can answer your
question better.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. While you're getting the
graphic, I have another question for Bruce. Will you be -- the trees
that are on the property now that kind of shield the look of the
property, will they be removed? And if they're going to be removed,
will you put something in as dense to, again, soften the look of a
manufacturing plant? Or not a manufacturing plant, a printing plant.
Is doesn't manufacture anything. Sorry about that.
MR. ARNOLD: Hi, Commissioner Fiala. It's Wayne Arnold. I
thought I'd better respond to that. Our firm prepared the graphic that
we had prepared in response to the Collier's Reserve's comments on
the sight line. And if you drive by the site today, there are some
banyan type trees that are there. Some are groomed to be more of a
hedge and some have been left wild to be, as I understand, more of a
windbreaker for the farm field that's there.
It's my understanding that those banyan trees will come out, and
we'll be planting our linear park, the additional vegetation and the
Page 169
October 24-25, 2006
supplemental vegetation that's represented there on the visualizer, to
replace the vegetation at that intersection. Where we can leave some
of the vegetation that extends south along Creekside Way, we
certainly would do so. But in essence, a manicured landscape that
looks well planned, I think, is more in more keeping with the area.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, this looks beautiful. Will it --
when you plant it, will it be this dense?
MR. ARNOLD: When we plant it -- we show a planting plan
immediately below. And I know it's hard to see for the record, but
that's within our commitment. The only thing we've offered for the
record is that we need some flexibility in the types of vegetation that
get planted there just in accordance with availability and the other
architectural style and the plants that will go in for the rest of the
buffer.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. It looks good the way it is.
Also, Norm, would -- will you -- do you plan -- at any point in
time to remove the median in the entryway into Collier's Reserve?
MR. FEDER: We have no plans to do so. As a matter of fact,
we do have plans to modify the way the two lanes that exit that area
are structured today. And I mention to you -- first of all, in answer to
your question, I'll show you the next section. But the six -laning of
Immokalee Road will be removing vegetation that's in the median
today.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just in the median though?
MR. FEDER: In the median, that's correct.
In answer to your other question, this is the intersection. And
today what you have coming out of Collier's Reserve and the shopping
area which will -- once we directional this median opening a little
further to the west, which is a quarter mile from U.S. 41, it's open
today across from the shopping center, causes a lot of problems and
issues, so that will be directionalized. That will bring some more
traffic from the shopping center down and over to this signal.
Page 170
October 24-25, 2006
Right now the way it's structured today, you have basically a
through and left turn and then a right turn setup. That setup is very
problematic even today without the extension of Creekside Way and
any of the issues we're discussing because when people on the
opposite side, they don't know whether someone's going to be taking a
left turn or coming through. Also you don't have the phasing on the
signal that really is accommodating some of these movements.
What we've already committed to is we're going to restructure
this to a left-turn lane and a through-right, same here, and set up
what's called a protective permissive, which means for a short cycle,
you're going to have the left turns be protected and clear out as much
as they can, and then it will be permissive, but they'll know which lane
people are coming from, through, and the left turns can wait for that.
So that should help a lot at this intersection.
We're also modifying the intersection down at U.S. 41 with dual
rights. We had looked at extension of that right-turn lane originally.
We're looking now at setting up a dual with a permissive right from
the curb lane, and the other would have to wait for the signal.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see. So in other words, when
you're describing this exit at the light from Collier's Reserve and the
new modifications that you're going to be implementing --
MR. FEDER: That would not hit the -- it would not hit the
median that is actually owned by Collier's Reserve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And it will be kind of like
the one at Lakewood Boulevard and Davis Boulevard?
MR. FEDER: That's correct, where you have the--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Just so I can get a visual.
Okay. Now, we've already talked about, there are only going to
be 18-wheelers, and they're only going to be during the day.
Somebody else had mentioned something about U-turns, and I'd heard
that again from the people there, and they are very concerned about
U-turns and directional traffic. Can you tell me about that, Norm?
Page 171
October 24-25,2006
You think you're going to get out the door, poor guy.
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, on U-turns, as I said from the
previous discussion, that was presented when I was out at Collier's
Reserve and listening to the rest of the other conversation as well.
At first they were planning on coming out of the shopping center
off of a gated area at night and then having to make a U-turn right
there at the Collier's Reserve/Creekside Way signal that we just saw.
My understanding now is they are planning some alternates to
that because that was of concern to the folks in Collier's Reserve, and I
will defer to them to commit to you exactly what they plan on doing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll let them talk to me in just a
minute, if you don't mind. But I want to ask one more question of
you.
Interconnectivity. Right now when I try to go through, you
cannot go through all the way easily to Golden Gate -- I mean, I'm
sorry, Goodlette-Frank Road. And is that going to be changed?
MR. FEDER: Yes. And that was one of the key issues that we
placed on them, which is to take what is called Creekside Way, across
from the Collier's Reserve entrance that now goes in and goes
basically to the post office, keep that going straight south so that
interconnects with Creekside Boulevard creating about mid block
between 41 and Goodlette- Frank, a connection for the two parallel
roadways, Creekside Boulevard and Immokalee Road.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Last question. Now, with all
of the other truck traffic that comes in and out of that shopping center,
whether it be to service bookstores or restaurants or grocery stores or
whatever, that's a lot of other traffic. How does that come in and out?
MR. FEDER: It goes various directions depending upon -- a lot
of it's off of Goodlette-Frank, let's say, to some of the development
that's down there, whether it be Arthur X or others, the shopping
center probably predominantly, I would assume, is off of U.S. 41.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I think that's all. You can
Page 1 72
October 24-25, 2006
leave -- if you get out that door real quickly, I won't catch you
anymore.
MR. FEDER: I will not leave, and I will be at your call. Thank
you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you. Oh--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Now, Bruce, just that other question
I wanted to ask you, and that was, has the building on the site that --
the way you have it drawn now -- I've heard that you've changed the
footprint of that building or the location of it on the property. Could
you tell me about that?
MR. ANDERSON: The only -- excuse me. The only change
that I am aware of since I've been involved in the proj ect, which is
from early on, is that the delivery area was shifted from the southern
side of the building to the western side so that our delivery area faced
the delivery area for Granada Shops, and we just, you know, thought
that would work better. And that is the only change in the building
arrangement that I know of.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you. I think I've
gotten all my questions answered. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have one question. How many loading
docks do you anticipate at this location on the west side? Tough
question.
MR. ANDERSON: Right now they are looking at eight.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Eight?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I don't think this
meeting's quite as interesting as it sounds to us.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It is now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I knew that would wake you up.
Page 173
October 24-25, 2006
I tell you what I'm concerned about is the fact that our audience is
starting to drift off without having their opportunity to speak.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, I think we're getting close to it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. What I was going to say
is, let's put our priorities first. I'd rather hear what their concerns are
and then deal with them rather than what my own personal concerns
are. And let's get them up here, let's let them speak so they can go
home to the comfort of their homes and watch the rest of the meeting.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think -- but I think it's important that
we lay the groundwork, and I think if you don't have any other
questions --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I don't. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- I'll turn it over to Commissioner
Coyle. He's been waiting, and I know -- Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no. I'm really in agreement
with Commissioner Coletta. I'd like to get to the audience and let's
hear about the specific concerns.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time we'll open this up for
public comment, and I believe you said we had 51.
MS. FILSON: We have 50 now.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Somebody left us.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't blame them.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They probably died.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And if -- do we have staffhere? I
believe there's probably going to be some PowerPoints. So do we
have somebody here that -- from staff that can assist in the
PowerPoints if they need to?
MR. DeRUNTZ: To load it in? Yes, I can do that.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Sean Mahoney. He'll be
followed by Willie Anthony.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Page 174
October 24-25, 2006
MR. MAHONEY: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Sean Mahoney. I'm the President of the American Specialty
Contractors of Florida. We're a trade organization consisting of over
150 business owners. By unanimous vote taken at our October
meeting, we all agreed to support the location being requested by the
Naples Daily News. We feel it's imperative to contribute to the
community in which the newspaper serves. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, sir.
MS. FILSON: Willie Anthony. He'll be followed by Penny
Taylor.
MR. ANTHONY: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, I'm sure
you're somewhat surprised with me standing here. Normally I don't
speak. I come out and listen.
The only reason I'm speaking -- I was only going to talk about
noise. I am a neighbor of the current Daily News, and I wanted to
discuss that, but after listening to what you all have said, there are
probably two other things I'd like to address.
My experience with the Daily News is that I was living in
proximity before Daily News came. Before Daily News, there was a
sawmill there before this, and the remnants of that. It's been dawn to
dusk for as long as I'm aware of. But after that, finally the Daily
News came in.
I live right now about three blocks from the Daily News as the
bird flies. But the Daily News, I've never had any noise problems. I
really didn't even know it emanated any odor.
You know, you get the feeling that -- I get the feeling, that
Collier County has very little industry. Construction is its main bread
and butter. It seems to me something like this would be what
everybody was climbing for.
I normally don't support business because, you know, they do --
they are aggressive and they do kind of crowd you, but I think you got
to have some if you're going to sustain the life of a community.
Page 175
October 24-25, 2006
So I -- I don't -- I went by that site. And I've been from Collier
County since 1953, so I know how the complaining and stuff goes
here, and I do a lot of that myself. You know, we good at it.
But in viewing my perception of the site -- I came in from
Goodlette- Frank, I came around that way. I don't -- I'm assuming
they're going to put that connector in in terms of coming out the
Creek, but I can almost assure you that the people in -- the residents
surrounding that is not going to hear whatever is going on at Daily
News, because I've never heard anything, but that doesn't mean I don't
know what they're putting in. If it's similar to what they've got, it don't
create noise.
You know, there are people that live a good 50 to 100 feet from
the Daily News now. I've never heard any of them complain about
noise. You know, and maybe we don't hear too good, but I haven't
heard anybody complain about it.
But, you know, I think that -- I think the Daily News is extremely
-- should be extremely important to the residents of Naples. I look out
in the audience, and most of the people are like me. You know, they
don't really need a job. They're probably retired. They're getting old.
So am I. But there are some young people left, and we need them to
support us in terms of job and someplace to work. And I just hope
that people give it some consideration. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Penny Taylor. She'll be
followed by Edward Morton.
MS. TAYLOR: That's a tough act to follow, I'll tell you. Penny
Taylor. I am not representing the Naples City Council, but I am here
because I've been a resident in this community for almost 30 years.
When I initially came to this community, I worked for the Naples
Daily News. That was when McDonald's quarters backed up onto it.
And you've heard testimony that there never has been a complaint
Page 176
October 24-25, 2006
about noise or anything with the Naples Daily News.
What I have here -- and I'm going to put it in the public record --
is a research that I asked our city manager to do regarding the Naples
Daily News and code violations, and I'm going to read it into the
record, if I may.
This goes back 11 years, and I think this is significant. I hate to
say this, but I think we've thrown away the records prior to that;
however, the sergeant that created this and who's been employed by
the city for 17 years said he never, ever remembers any problems with
the Naples Daily News in -- regarding noise, traffic, problems,
neighbors or anything. Now that's what he says, and I'm going to read
what we have in our records.
There are two, two recorded code enforcement cases involving
the Naples Daily News. One in 1998 and one in 2006. The 1998 case
was involved in -- involved an inoperative vehicle, and needless to
stay, the status is closed.
The 2006 case involved a Naples Daily News generated concern
about litter on the vacant Naples Daily News lot behind the main
facility.
There have never been any code enforcement cases involving any
of their adjunct facilities on 12th Street North.
I think this is significant because the expansion and the
development of the Naples Daily News has taken place, perhaps, in
the last three years.
If there are 15 or 25 semis delivering papers to the Naples Daily
News on a daily basis in the season, it's news to the Naples -- it's news
to Naples and it's news to me.
I travel that road -- 10th Street. It borders 10th and Central. I
travel that maybe three or four times a day. The traffic is smooth.
There's never any problem. And I'm talking about 10th Street as a
two-way street. If it comes up Goodlette and Central, I don't see it.
So I think it's extremely important to understand what a good
Page 1 77
October 24-25, 2006
neighbor the Naples Daily News has been to the City of Naples. How
-- as Willie said, if there's any odor -- and I've never smelled it and the
neighbors have never smelled it.
There's a residential property right now called Jasmine Kay that's
probably as far as away from the Naples Daily News back yard as a
little bit more than this building. There's never been complaints.
So I think you're going to be -- have a good neighbor stay in
Collier County, and I hope that you support their petition for rezone.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Edward Morton. He'll be
followed by Michael Reagan.
MR. MORTON: Good afternoon. For the record, my name is
Edward Morton. I am a past member of the Collier County Board of
Economic Advisors; member of the Collier County Board of Health
Advisors that I served on with Commissioner Coletta; member of the
City of Naples Redevelopment Advisory Board that I served on with,
many years, with Mr. Coyle.
I've had the privilege of working with, I think, the majority, ifnot
everybody, on the Collier County Commission.
I have just recently retired at the end of September after 35 years
CEO of the NCH Healthcare System. I'm obviously very much aware
of the height impact, the good citizens at Collier Reserve.
I would also add, I'm board member ofNDIC. NDIC is the
Naples Diagnostic Imaging Center. We are the neighbor, the
immediate neighbor, of the Naples Daily News.
We see thousands of patients every year. Never once in the 19
years that we have operated has there been a single complaint as the
immediate neighbor of the Naples Daily News about noise, odor, or
anything that I can remotely consider to be offensive in any way, and
that's -- we're right -- our property abuts one another.
I'm also vitally involved with the neighborhood health clinic, and
Page 178
October 24-25, 2006
the same goes, to the best of my knowledge, for them.
My remarks today are going to be very brief. I'll try not repeat or
go over anything that's been said.
I think we're presented with an opportunity here today to
embrace the continued redevelopment and reconfiguration of a good
corporate citizen, a corporate citizen with a 37-year exemplary record
of practicing as a good neighbor to all of us.
The academic literature indicates that SO percent of all good jobs
are created by businesses that are already located within a community.
We stand here today at the tipping point. A tipping point is really
the message that we will send and the message that will echo
throughout this community for a very -- for many years to come.
We will either embrace and welcome to this community the
redevelopment and expansion of an existing business, a business, I
might add, that has made extraordinary concessions in a good-faith
effort to remain in Collier County, or we will invite business to look
elsewhere, someplace else outside of Collier County.
If we turn this petition down, we invite other communities to
welcome into their midst hundreds of needed and well-paying jobs.
We deny our residents the opportunity to apply for these jobs and the
dignity that these jobs afford them.
We deny this community the opportunity to work with good
corporate citizens. We send a message loud and clear that we are,
albeit reasonable concerns on the part of the provincial few, that it
overwhelms the good of the many.
I ask you today to improve -- approve the petitioner's request, to
approve these hundreds of new jobs that will be preserved, and send a
message throughout the community and Southwest Florida that good
corporate citizens are not just tolerated in Collier County, but
welcome.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
Page 179
October 24-25, 2006
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Michael Reagan. He'll be
followed by Jim Albert.
MR. REAGAN: For the record, my name is Michael Reagan.
I'm the president of the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce. I
came before you about a month ago when this matter came before you
for the first time, and I asked you and urged you, please, to vote in a
positive fashion, and I think my comment at that time, trying to be
brief, was that it was the right thing to do. I'm here again today to tell
you, or ask you to do the same sort of thing.
I've spent a great deal of time on this matter. I regret very much
that there's anxiety and upsetment and concerns by the good citizens
who are represented here, a number of whom are close personal
friends. The reality is, I believe that the two corporations involved in
the petition have done everything that they can and are willing to be
very good neighbors, and the reality also is that we need a balanced
economy here, we need a balanced community, and I think these good
men and women want to work with everybody to make it happen.
So ladies and gentlemen on the commission, I would urge your
positive vote on this matter.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Jim Albert. He'll be followed
by Jim Johannsen.
MR. ALBERT: Hello. I'm Jim Albert. I am a resident of North
Naples. I've lived up there for 15 years. I understand the complaints
that are being made by some of the people. I don't see how this one
project and especially with traffic -- and that's what I'm going to be
referring to -- could possibly affect it.
I have five children. I've travel on Immokalee Road countless
times over the last 15 years, and I don't see how the limited amount of
15 trucks a day at the peak of season will make any difference at all.
On top of that, from a business standpoint in the county, I would like
to see it approved.
Page 180
October 24-25, 2006
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Jim Johannsen. He'll be followed by M.B.
Adelson.
MR. JOHANNSEN: For the record, Jim Johannsen. I live at
Collier's Reserve. I have a question relative to time. I signed up for
three minutes, but maybe other people can give me time or how -- you
know.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: How much time would you like to have,
Jim?
MR. JOHANNSEN: I would like probably 12 to 15 minutes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Can--
MR. JOHANNSEN: We will limit number of speakers from
Collier's Reserve to their -- I would speak for --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Twelve minutes, okay.
MR. JOHANNSEN: And then our attorney would like some
time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And how much time does he want?
MR. ADELSON: I need a few minutes, Commissioners,
depending on your questions, 10 or 15.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Fifteen minutes, okay.
Do we have 12 people -- that would be 12 times three -- do we
have 12 people that would relinquish their time for the two spots?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There's two, three, four.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any more?
MR. JOHANNSEN: Dave, raise your hand. I mean, anybody
from Collier's Reserve that signed. Well, I mean, we sort of chuckle,
but here it is, we've been two and a half hours.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's four.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I need a couple more. Okay. Do we
have a consensus here so that I can give you some time? Obviously
you've got some points that you want to bring out. Why don't you go
Page 181
October 24-25, 2006
ahead.
MR. JOHANNSEN: Okay. I'm Jim Johannsen. My wife and
teenage son and I live in Collier's Reserve. I am pro business and I'm
pro community. I'm a full-time businessman who was recruited to
move here four years ago to manage an office.
In March of this year I started with a new employee-owned firm
that opened in March, and so far we've hired and created eight new
jobs in Collier County. Seven of those jobs pay more than the average
Naples Daily News compensation.
Is this about a building? I don't think so. The people at Collier's
Reserve absolutely supported NCH and its development and the
growth of the hospital. As a matter of fact, I personally was involved
in helping to raise more than a quarter of a million dollars from
Collier's Reserve people for the hospital.
Why? Because it's essential. That part of the county needs it.
There wasn't a question about whether it belongs there. It was there
before we moved there, and that part of the county needs it. I'm also
on the board of the Naples Botanical Garden.
We are for business and we are for jobs. Nearly everybody that
lives in Collier's Reserve worked in a business or still works in a
business, including a number of us who are full-time business people
in Collier County.
But let me let get my anger out of the way early. Jobs are not
tied to this location. And to insinuate that, I think, is -- or it's
blackmail to threaten it. There are other locations in the county; there
are other alternatives. Scripps, as well as other publishing companies,
co-locate. It may not be the right business model, but it's possible.
With the growth of this county that's gone on that's been reported
by the Naples Daily News for all these years, to say, whoops, we've
run out of time, we've run out of space, and this is it, and this is only
it, is just -- we've got a hard time with that.
We are for business. But we want a win-win proposition, not a
Page 182
October 24-25, 2006
win-lose. We want the Daily News to expand. We read it. We buy
advertising space in it.
We want to be good citizens as well, but we want the printing
and the distribution plant to be in a compatible space and not where it
will hurt the quality of life of the many neighborhoods that are in the
immediate area.
What makes this incompatible? I don't know which drop of
water makes this overflow, but there are several factors that make it
wrong to put a 24/7 industrial plant within a thousand feet of an
existing quiet residential neighborhood and near many neighborhood
communities.
Number one, it's a 24/7 business that obviously is going to
operate at a much higher capacity in its new location than in the old
location just based on the numbers we've been given today. If they
can do 70- to 90,000 papers an hours versus 15 to 20,000 papers an
hour now, if there's going to be more -- if the production that's being
done right now -- Stuart is going to be moved here.
You know, the 15 semis we talk about -- it won't be 15, it will be
more, and I'll talk about that in a minute. But it's a 24/7 business
which we don't think is compatible with a residential neighborhood.
The height and mass. I'm not sure, but I think that the 75-foot
portion is approximately 40,000 feet. We've never seen the blueprints
on this thing, so I may be -- but I stand to be corrected there. But if
it's 40,000 feet, as a stand-alone building, that's equivalent of about
three million cubic feet of building. I don't think that's a small part as
some have contended. The 75 foot is on top of FEMA.
Importantly, I want you to know that despite what has been most
recently put in the newspaper, I will look directly at that building from
my living room and I will look directly at that building from my
bedroom.
And I have other neighbors here, Roger Williams, Jerry Moore
are just some of the neighbors that will look directly at that building.
Page 183
October 24-25, 2006
Everybody who also exits onto Immokalee Road from -- going east
from River Chase, the Publix and Blockbuster and ABC Liquor and
every -- all the stores and offices in River Chase will also see it when
they -- when they come out onto Immokalee Road at Collier's Reserve
Drive, and that's obviously thousands more people than the people at
Collier's Reserve.
Traffic? The staff report indicates there will be about 5,000 more
additional trips daily because of this PUD. But here's an important
one, quote, several intersections will not function at acceptable levels
of service. Even with the widening of Immokalee Road to six lanes,
with the development along Immokalee from Ave Maria to the 25,000
person Collier Enterprise Zone -- Collier Enterprise Development,
excuse me, to the enterprise zone, the expansion of Twin Eagles, to
the quarry, which is being built, to Mirasol, which is under
development -- or perhaps Mirasol, I should say.
According to the News-Press October 11, 2006, article,
Immokalee Road between 1-75 and 41 will only be brought up to a D
rating and will inevitably be a failed road. What editorials will be
written then?
These 18-wheelers that we talk about, maybe it's only 15 right
now, but during the day, that really amounts -- you know, if it's 15 a
day, it's 15 in, 15 out. It's really 30 trips. You divide that by eight, it's
about four. So it's roughly one every, about 15 minutes.
Question -- now it may not sound much (sic), but with no
assurities that these trucks will absolutely use Creekside -- if they used
the intersection coming out of Collier's Reserve and the new
Creekside extension right there, then that ends up being, right now,
one about -- well, I don't know how often that light turns, but let's say
it turns every three minutes.
The question that I have is, okay, when they pull in the product
that's now being done in Stuart and there's growth -- we want the
newspaper to grow -- then the question is, are you going to have one
Page 184
October 24-25, 2006
of those semis every 10 minutes, eight minutes? What's it going to be,
five, 10 years from now?
It's just like Mr. Fish said, they want this to be a monument for a
long time. This county's going to grow. You know, what's this going
to do to that area of town relative to traffic after all of these other
developments have been built?
Another thing actually -- we don't know the answer to this, but I
raised it as a question -- what's that going to be like if the construction
of the facility is being done at the same time as the expansion of
Immokalee Road, which our understanding is, the expansion of
Immokalee Road is going to start sort of at the end of this season, but
now we're talking about the expansion of Immokalee Road between --
I think it's between Airport and 41, but it's that last part. I don't know
if Norm's still here or not, but I want to make sure that I'm accurate as
it relates to that.
So we could have, it appears in discussions, you know, four, five,
six, seven months of overlap which could be a -- a real issue. I don't
have an answer, but I want to raise the issue.
Noise. We're told there's not a noise problem. But wait, you
know, when the noise study was done, that's when the nighttime truck
-- nighttime truck routes were changed.
I've given each commissioner a copy of the July 31 st letter
addressed to me personally from Tom Sewell, copy to John Fish, and
a Collier's Reserve board representative committing that nighttime
delivery trucks would be to the south of the building and not the north.
Unfortunately, the Daily News reneged on its commitment with
no notice to me, no notice to Collier's Reserve. We found out about
this very, very significant event after the September 12th hearing.
What does that mean to my neighbors and my family? Well, the
nighttime delivery trucks -- and we want to define what a U - Haul is
because there are lots of different kinds -- sizes of U - Hauls, but the
nighttime delivery trucks that make 30 trips out also make 30 trips
Page 185
October 24-25, 2006
back, and they're going to pass on that intersection at Collier's Reserve
Drive and Immokalee Road, which is about 600,650 feet from my
house.
I have not seen a copy of the study -- noise study that's been done
as it relates to that particular location.
The noise study that I have seen is where the trucks come out of
the loading docks and enter on Immokalee Road down by the Granada
Shops where the noise is going to be an issue for me and Jerry Moore,
Janet Hamilton, Roger Williams and the rest of us, are the ones, I
mean -- that are 600 feet or less than 600 feet or 700 feet from
Immokalee Road.
So it may pass the county decibel test or whatever it is, but is
there anybody that thinks that I'm not going to hear those trucks every
night? And if it's 60 now, what's it going to be in five or 10 years with
the growth of the county? Is there anybody that thinks that I'm ever
going to be able to open the windows and enjoy a quiet night's sleep
again?
There's also a lake in our back yard. So in addition to being only
600 feet, the sound is going to come across the lake.
So when the Naples Daily News unilaterally, and without so
much as a phone call or letter, changed the nighttime delivery truck
route and its commitment to us, unfortunately, any good neighbor
policy was absolutely violated.
We feel like we were thrown under the bus, or maybe I should
say delivery trucks.
So I ask you -- and it has been asked here -- if there is a problem,
I hope they're a great neighbor. We want great neighbors, and we
want business. But if there is a problem, who do we turn to? Will you
help us? And if you can't help us, who will?
Is it practical? Weare told that neighbors of the existing site
don't have problems. When I got told that I went down and knocked
on two doors. Ask Ariel Fernandez at 153 Jasmine Circle. He told me
Page 186
October 24-25, 2006
the beep, beep, beep sounds of trucks backing up and honking of horns
wakes him up every morning at four o'clock. It's not a big deal
because he has ajob where he said that's when he's supposed to get up
anyway, but he never has to set an alarm clock.
His next-door neighbor, Eddie Peer (phonetic) made the
comment, quote, that's the way it is in these apartments. The loading
docks are loud, unquote.
Now, my guess is, the people who live there moved there after
the building was built with full awareness that loading docks are going
to create noise issues. I still maintain, that's dramatically different
than authorizing a 24/7 industrial plant to be located within a thousand
feet of an existing quiet residential neighborhood.
We moved here for quality of life. Don't take it away.
When my wife and son and I moved here four years ago, we
chose to buy our home in Collier's Reserve due to the unique
preservation of nature, as the world's first Audubon cooperative
sanctuary community golf course. We still have fox, bobcats and bald
eagles feed daily on our course.
Before we bought our home, we checked the zoning on the
tomato farm, and we checked the zoning on the business park. We
knew there was going to be growth. We want growth. I'm not going
to say it's going to be a tomato farm forever, and we found out that the
business park over there was 35 feet.
Well, shame on us. I guess everybody needs a legal opinion
before you buy property. Citizens should be able to rely on codes
comfortably.
In my life, how would a citizen or businessman who moved here
ever expect a 24/7 industrial printing and distribution facility with
constant nighttime and daytime traffic to be allowed to locate within a
thousand feet of a residential neighborhood and to be over twice the
height and have to look at it?
If a PUD has no practical limits, then is any neighborhood safe?
Page 187
October 24-25, 2006
Should all of the people who buy a home be given a PUD warning? I
don't mean to be facetious about that, but how do you think I really
feel?
I don't know which drop of water makes this glass overflow in
terms of incompatibility, but it all adds up to the printing and
distribution plant being incompatible and inappropriate.
Weare for business. We're for it in the right location. But by
site, by noise, by traffic, by 24 hours a day operation, it will absolutely
negatively impact the quality of my life, my family's life.
I'm just about done.
It will negatively impact the quality of my life, my family's life,
the lives of people in Collier's Reserve, and many surrounding
communities.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I've got to cut you off, John.
MR. JOHANNSEN: Okay. We just would say, we'd like a
win-win solution, not a win-lose. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker -- the next speaker is M.B.
Adelson, followed by Lyn Hunerberg.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sir, if you can limit your time as much
as possible, I'd appreciate it very much, okay?
MR. ADELSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Because we've got a lot of
speakers we've got to get through here.
MR. ADELSON: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission.
My name is initial M, initial B, Adelson, A-D-E-L-S-O-N. I'm with
the Sachs Sax Klein law firm and under a Tallahassee office.
I've appeared before many county commissions. And as soon as
I say I'm from Tallahassee, I understand how that reaction plays.
I'm here today hopefully to assist the process. It's a fresh pair of
eyes. And I would like my clients comments to be taken in that vein.
Page 188
October 24-25, 2006
I've looked at many, many projects over the course of my career,
and one of the things that pops out at me right away when I start
seeing projects coming in with a list of exceedences and variances, is
that project maybe doesn't fit in its intended spot. Might be a great
project, but it might be in the wrong location.
And my first impression of this one was, there's existing
regulatory structures, there's existing limits on things, and this one
tries to exceed all of them. So I ask myself, why?
You opened the meeting this afternoon reminding everyone that
we had item SB and SC on the agenda. And one of the things that
initially occurred to me is, why is this project not being incorporated
into the existing Creekside PUD instead of a few acres being snatched
out of the existing Creekside PUD to try to cobble together 35 acres to
make something new and different?
The something new and different is the disturbing issue to my
clients, the Collier's Reserve folks. And here's where it gets iffy,
here's where it gets strange. I actually drove around the neighborhood,
I actually drove around the Creekside area, the business park,
Immokalee Road, U.S. 41. I have many friends in Naples. I'm down
here frequently. I love this community. I'm not a resident of it, but I
certainly respect it and admire it.
And I went out to get refreshed on that particular area so I could
make a presentation to you today having also seen it, like you have,
recently.
The buildings that exist in the business park now are 35 feet or
less. This proposed building, even though the applicant says, oh, we
really don't intend to build it, we really don't need it, but we want it
anyway, Commissioners, it's going to dominate the existing parcel.
It's going to dominate the existing use. It's going to be a monument all
right, but what kind of monument should this county commission
approve and place in the center -- and I'm calling it the center of
today's focus -- in the center of existing uses, existing very nice
Page 189
October 24-25, 2006
residential neighbors, existing very nice shopping areas, and what
looks to be a traffic pattern that's going to get some needed
improvements to six lanes and those kinds of things that staff does so
well.
The Collier's Reserve community is located in the very near
vicinity of the proposed project. Because they're my clients, my
remarks are from their perspective. But the community at large also
can share that perspective.
I would suggest to you that if the large buildings compared to the
buildings that exist and if the limited number of buildings -- there's
one in a parcel instead of some small buildings in a business parklike
setting. These kinds of differences and these kinds of changes in the
character of that community and that local area are going to
substantially and adversely change it. They're going to be dramatic
adverse impacts.
And I'd like to address, since I'm a lawyer, a legal perspective on
that for just a moment. I'm concerned about the fast track process. I'm
concerned that some of this has occurred when a lot of the people who
actually live here are away for the season.
And my concern is, there really hasn't been, up until very
recently at least, the kind of scrutiny that this project deserves.
Your questions, particularly yours, Mr. Chairman, today, were
cogent and right on the mark, and I'm surprised that this has been
before you several times without those questions having been
answered.
But the answers I heard today confirm my opinion that I want to
suggest to all of you that this is too big, it's too large, it's too much on
this spot. Great project, it's just in the wrong place.
There's also some labeling things that are going on that concern
me very much. One of the roadways is supposed to be extended. One
of your definitions say that it's okay to cobble together properties as
long as things are contiguous. And contiguous says, if you're going to
Page 190
October 24-25, 2006
put a roadway between a piece and another piece, it has to be at least a
five-acre piece to match your definition.
On investigation of that one, the answer I was given was, well,
that's not really a roadway. It's just an easement, but that easement's
going to carry all this industrial traffic that you've been hearing about.
And that extension is going to connect and change the traffic flows.
So whether you call it an easement or roadway, it is a roadway.
It's going to function as a roadway. And functionally when you look
at your definitions about cobbling together 35 acres to make the
required parcel to make the changes, if you look at this from
functional definitions, there is a problem.
Circuit judges kind of look at those things, too. And I'm not here
to convey any kind of saber rattling, I'm just saying that without
aspersions to any of the planning and the hard work that's gone on
anywhere personally, the integrity of the process depends on the
integrity of -- and consistency of its definitions.
And some of these inconsistencies are troubling me. They
trouble my clients as well, because they think that the size of the
building is going to allow the size of the use and more shifts and more
traffic, and it's too much where it's trying to be placed.
Also, for these variances and deviations -- and I can put a fine
point on the labels again. Policies, rules, regulations, statutes,
requirements. Yes, these all are terms of art and they all have specific
legal meanings, but the common person with a common sense rule of
statutory construction view, the ordinary understanding of these things
says, if you're going to grant a variance or change from the
requirements announced, it should apply to everybody.
The law requires that there's some sort of involuntary hardship
that has to be demonstrated. A self-inflicted wound to a self-inflicted
problem does not count. It does not support, on this record or any
record, the granting of these kinds of variances and deviations.
If the applicant wants to build something that's taller than what's
Page 191
October 24-25, 2006
allowed for the area, they need to make that decision that to build
here, you're limited by height. You can't come in and say, well, I
really want to do this and it's great for the community, but you've got
to let me do what I want in spite of what the rules and regulations are
that apply to everybody else.
That's really what's being urged on you today, and I would urge
you to carefully consider that one and make a decision that says, if
you all want to locate here, you've got to meet what the neighbors are
doing, not go to the maximums that you propose to change everything
that the neighbors couldn't do, didn't do, won't do because they're
already built out.
The record does not explain -- and I've had a chance to review it.
It does not explain why they have to have a 75- foot tall building.
Their choice of presses, their choice of activities, their choice of
business that they're going to conduct needs to be limited by the limits
that apply to the site development parameters.
If they build that size building, there's all sorts of related
problems that now are engendered. It's a tomato farm now. That's a
very pervious percolating plot of land. There's going to be a lot of
impervious surface now with this size building. Where's the
stormwater going to go?
Where are the things going to go when the stormwater goes with
it? I read in the plan that, well, to take care of some of the pollution
for stormwater runoff, there's going to need to be regular sweeping of
the parking lot. These things are really hard to enforce. They're really
difficult to maintain for the business activity on site. They're going to
run a business.
The spinoffs here, the law of unintended consequences now
raises a very ugly specter when you start making this dramatic
magnitude of change to that site.
The parcel must be used as it's proposed or the landowner suffers
an imposition of involuntary undue hardship. The landowner is
Page 192
October 24-25, 2006
somehow being regulatory prevented from -- no, none of that really
applies when you look at the variances that are needed for this site to
have this program that they want on it. It's just the opposite.
They come in and say, I have to have something this large and I
want to put it here, but they haven't told why you need to approve that.
The applicant wants to avail itself of the latest and best
technology. That's fine. I don't understand why it needs to be
vertical, why it needs to exceed the other industrial neighbors that are
already operating their businesses out there.
The existing character of the entire and mostly built-out
neighborhood is built at a maximum of 35 feet height. There's been
nothing in this record that says why that has to change.
There are also other unanswered and unexplained departures
from regulatory compliance. I was able to read your criteria for PUD
rezones, which is on your excellent website, and those criteria are
listed in your document 04-BCC-OII99/434, and the questions that
were asked by the commission -- there was a lot of avoidance of those
direct answers (sic) rather than those direct answers given to date,
according to that criteria.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Can you wrap it up, sir.
MR. ADELSON: Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Commissioner, the rest of the
Collier's Reserve speakers will relinquish their time so that our lawyer
can finish his.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How many signed up?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: How many signed up, yeah?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: How many signed up?
MR. ADELSON: A large number, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's see. One, two, three, four
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Go for it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Twelve and 12, 10.
Page 193
October 24-25, 2006
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you.
MR. ADELSON: Even today, as I came to the meeting this
afternoon, there's a couple of pages -- page 4 of 273 is at the top, page
2 of 13 is at the bottom. These are some replacement pages in the
executive summary.
Even today on the first page of the handout that you've provided
everyone, there's some just clear misstatements, and I think this comes
not from someone's efforts to mislead, I think it comes from the fact
that because there's so many exceedences and because there's so many
variances and because this has gotten so complicated in trying to
weave this tangled let's-do-it-anyway sort of argument, I need to
correct a couple of these things, because they're critically important.
On the first page it says, the county staff has received
confirmation from Bay Colony Property Owners' Association, Exhibit
1, and Collier's Reserve Association, Exhibit 2, that they're supportive
of the rezoning request.
For the record, ladies and gentlemen, Collier's Reserve is not
supportive of the rezoning request before you, and there are letters
from them that withdrew their earlier approval explaining why that
was withdrawn.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: How much more time do you need, sir?
MR. ADELSON: Maybe two or three minutes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Please wrap it up.
MR. ADELSON: I'm rolling it up.
Also back on the final page of this handout, legal considerations
show that there are still some uncorrected, unaddressed, unexplained
variances and requirements that are being varied and deviated from
without explanation and without the necessary support.
Staff says that you can do this if listed conditions are addressed,
but they have not been addressed anywhere in the record that I can
find.
Also, this possible creation of an isolated district and the
Page 194
October 24-25, 2006
assemblage of the parcels. Again, I want to call the commission's
attention in a very practical way. There was a graphic that showed
what everyone has referred to today as the appendage. It's a long strip
of land that extends south of the project.
It was part of the golf course. It still is part of the golf course.
It's going to remain part of the golf course. But if we label it as
somehow providing some greenspace and something to get necessary
acreage so this project can exist, what are we doing?
Again, I address the integrity of the process, the integrity of the
planning requirements and how they're being met or not met by this
proposal.
The people that are going to live and work and use the area
where this new business is going to go, they're being promised a linear
park along a road that's about to be six-Ianed. Hardly a parklike
setting. The parklets look nice, but functionally, what do they actually
do?
There are this myriad of problems. I want to name the five of
them that staff has identified, and with that I will conclude.
I've already mentioned that there's a separation of a small parcel
out of an existing PUD that's supposed to be transferred contingently
into this parcel. It's separated by a road. It does not meet your
definition of a contiguous parcel.
Number two, the plan fails to maintain the parklike setting
because of the size of the building, only two buildings instead of a
small number of buildings. It changes the entire character of that
business park as described in your regulations and as built around this
site.
Number three, the appendage portion is cobbled together to try to
make this required acreage, but it just doesn't function. The deed says,
and the letters that have been presented to you say, and I quote, access
by employees and customers of the proposed business park will be
restricted.
Page 195
October 24-25, 2006
So functionally it's not really part of the park. It's just on the map
so that somehow form over function is elevated to meet the
requirement of the rule.
As everyone has mentioned, the incapability of the proposed use
with the maximum building height restriction is still unexplained and
unjustified, and that is a serious concern.
Number five, the plan lacks identified stormwater compliance
and mitigation, it lacks identified planning for reasonable
commendations to the impacts to adjacent properties, it lacks
identified adjacent and nearby adversely affected properties, concerns
expressed by Collier's Reserve and some of the other residents.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sir, please wrap it up.
MR. ADELSON: Yes, sir.
On behalf of my clients, the project should be denied in your vote
today, but if that's too severe, if that's too harsh, at least continue it for
another round of staff investigation to address these unexplained and
unanswered deviations and variations departures from your published
rules.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MR. ADELSON: I will be here to answer questions if there are
any.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have some questions.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, I appreciate
your addressing the height issue, and that's what I got stuck on the last
time this came before us, until I found out -- and it was addressed
today in our Land Development Code 2.03.06.
MR. ADELSON: Yes. And your question, sir?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm just recognizing that I had
similar problems, but I mean, are we in violation of this section of the
code if we pass this?
MR. ADELSON: What you're in violation of is a different
Page 196
October 24-25, 2006
section, Commissioner, the other sections that talk about maintaining
cohesiveness of existing communities.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What section is that?
MR. ADELSON: I can't cite you the numbers, but I can certainly
follow up with a letter to you and give you those sections.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm making a decision
today, so I need some help.
MR. ADELSON: Well, I can help you with the language, I just
don't know the number of the section. The language says that the
commission tries to maintain existing community cohesiveness.
The language says that -- your compo plan is designed to make
orderly improvements and orderly advancements and development in
the community. This thing will dominate and overpower the existing
built-out areas and the existing and preexisting uses that surround it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're talking about the
compatibility?
MR. ADELSON : Yes, sir, compatibility.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Part of our Growth Management
Plan on how we determine whether it's compatible or not?
MR. ADELSON: But also those related impacts on stormwater,
public services, traffic.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wait a minute. I really want to
get this, okay. So -- but that's a compatibility thing?
MR. ADELSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's one of them. And now
you're saying stormwater?
MR. ADELSON: Well, that's part of compatibility.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, that's determined in the Site
Development Plan.
MR. ADELSON: I believe the commission was advised when
the question was asked at a previous meeting, how is that going to be
handled, and the answer was, we'll have to lay a lot of pipe. That's
Page 197
October 24-25, 2006
hardly an answer that's worthy of --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well-- and you know, Mr.
Schmitt, that was part of the questions that I had for our staff during
the reconsideration process. And you are going to make sure this
conforms to the stormwater retention?
MR. SCHMITT: For the record, Joe Schmitt, your Administrator
of Community Development/Environmental Services. Yes,
absolutely. That is part of the site plan review process, and that will
be reviewed as part of the submittal when they come in for the SDP.
We'll determine even -- this project may even have to go to the district
for district approval as well.
MR. ADELSON: Commissioner, to answer your question from a
fresh set of eyes, the existing capacities to handle stormwater out there
now -- the development, the buildings, the streets, the gutters --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But we don't determine that at
the rezone process.
MR. ADELSON: I don't know where they're going to put new
water flows.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We don't determine that during
this process.
MR. ADELSON: It should indicate to that you though that the
process is really stretching the underlying basis for having a set of
rules and regulations to say it ought to be this big and not this big
because then the area is being strained beyond its capacity to
reasonable handle these impacts.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He's not going to approve it. He
just said he can't -- he's not going to approve it unless it meets the
code.
What about the consistency issue?
MR. ADELSON: My lantern in the tower to you, sir, is that's
something that requires careful consideration because it's likely not
permittable. The capacities are already being used out there by the
Page 198
October 24-25, 2006
other authorized developments.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you a land use lawyer?
MR. ADELSON: Yes, sir, I am.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Have you looked at our
Land Development Code?
MR. ADELSON: Of course, I have, but not--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, it's a simple question
because -- I mean, I looked at it and -- after I was given the answer.
And you're absolutely right, I mean, it's during the process of the Site
Development Plan that they have to meet those capacity things.
MR. ADELSON: I follow this line of logic, Commissioner.
When someone wants a dock at a single-family home, you have to
clear that with the corps of engineers and you have to clear that with
the state submerged land people before you can come to the local
building department to say it ought to be okay.
So I'm looking at the capacities already used out there for
stormwater handling and for traffic impacts. I'm seeing in the staff
reports that the level of service on your roads are being exceeded, that
intersections have become non-functional, that the stormwater
capacities, no one has actually calculated it, and I'm very concerned
about what this PUD proposal before you does not say, as well as
what it does say,
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What do you know about our
fast track process? You brought that up.
MR. ADELSON: Very little.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What do you consider
fast to get a permit, vertical permit?
MR. ADELSON : Your question is a great question, sir, because
that depends on what it is you're asking --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's your opinion?
MR. ADELSON : Well, for a building permit, fast would be six
months. For something like this, two years.
Page 199
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can guarantee you it won't --
I'll put a dollar on it, it won't get a vertical permit within that fast track
two-year period.
MR. ADELSON: My purpose today is to urge you to put careful
scrutiny on this proposal and see if it passes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'm trying to figure out
where we have deviated from our laws. Where are we wrong in our
laws?
MR. ADELSON: The existing conditions say 35 feet, but you're
about to approve something that says, oh, well, why not go 75 feet.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And here, I'm looking at
it here, and it says a PUD does not have to -- I'm sorry -- encourages
innovated imaging planning design development or redevelopment
related to large tracts under the landownership or control. A PUD
process complies with the terms and provisions of this LDC and GMP
may depart from the strict application of the height.
MR. ADELSON: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. ADELSON: If this tomato field--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In setbacks.
MR. ADELSON: If this tomato field was incorporated into the
existing Creekside PUD, it would observe the 35-foot limitation that
all those buildings out there have already built out to.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I think you pretty much
answered all my questions and all my concerns.
MR. ADELSON: I hope I've done it adequately.
Any other questions?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't believe so. Thank you.
MR. ADELSON: Thank you very much for your time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, did you want me to pull the other
speakers out from Collier's Reserve?
Page 200
October 24-25,2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The ones that raised their hands, they
need to turn their slips in, okay, if they would, please.
MS. FILSON: So do you want me just to call all their names and
they can waive?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're going to have to wait until
she -- she's ready to go. Her hands are waving.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Why don't we take another
IO-minute break for our court reporter. Make it 15 minutes because,
again, the bathrooms are limited here. So we'll be back here.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, County Manager
Mudd.
At this time our court reporter has requested that anyone sitting in
the front row, if you would limit your conversations. She's having a
hard time with talking.
So if you need to talk, maybe you can switch seats with someone
else during the proceedings here, but -- and also we had --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That includes reporters in the
front row and lawyers.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We had some people that relinquished
their time for the attorney and for the person that was representing
some people here. If they would be so kind as to when, if their name is
called, okay, I'm asking you to waive because you gave up your time.
There is other people in Collier's Reserve that did not raise their hand,
so those people will be allowed to speak. So just make sure we've got
the ground rules.
And the other thing is, if it's -- if someone gets up and speaks and
your subj ect is the same thing that that particular person spoke about,
Page 201
October 24-25, 2006
if you have nothing to offer additional, please waive so we can get
through the process.
Thank you very, very much for your cooperation.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Lyn, and I think it's
Hunerberg.
MS. HUNERBERG: Yes, I waive.
MS. FILSON: Bill Ebben?
MR. EBBEN: I'll waive.
MS. FILSON: Monika--
MS. DeBENEDICTIS: DeBenedictis. I waive.
MS. FILSON: Thank you. Robert Ochs?
MR. OCHS: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Fred Roth?
MR. ROTH: Waive.
MS. FILSON: John Bouckley?
MR. BOUCKLEY: Waive.
MS. FILSON: John Beringer?
MR. BERINGER: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Dianne Shanley.
MS. SHANLEY: Waive.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is John Beringer.
MR. BERINGER: I waive.
MS. FILSON: Alan Rosoff.
MR. ROSOFF: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Jane Rosoff?
MS. ROSOFF: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Roger Williams.
MR. WILLIAMS: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Ted Nearing.
MR. NEARING: I'm going to waive two and a half minutes and
just say a little tiny bit. I got a letter in the mail dated October 9 from
Conservation Collier, and I want to share with you the first sentence.
Page 202
October 24-25,2006
They're trying to get support from the public and donations.
The first sentence of that letter says there's no more urgent local
issue than preserving our community's character and quality of life,
and I would just suggest that sentence has relevance to this because it's
more than just preserves that are for gopher tortoises. It's for
everyplace in Collier County, and that's it.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: Ted Nering.
MR. NERING: That was me.
MS. FILSON: Oh, sorry. Brenda Talbert?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Brenda?
MS. FILSON: Brenda Talbert?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Where's he from?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: CBIA.
MS. FILSON: Donald Spanier? Be followed by Scott Price.
MR. SPANIER: Good evening, Commissioners. I'm actually
going to waive about 90 percent of what I have to say so I can fit what
I do have to say. That will all novel into a couple of minutes.
I'm a resident, full-time, year-round resident property owner,
voter, in Pelican Bay, which may strike you as somewhat unusual
since we are some distance, as you know, from the site in question.
I'm also the vice-chair of our Pelican Bay service division, a
member of the District 2 Advisory Council, and my particular focus
and interest at this stage of my career and life is on the actions and
changes authorized in good faith by our government that may have
unintended or intended consequences far beyond the location in
question.
I believe the matter before you this afternoon, this evening, is
such an issue, that a decision to grant a variance that in effect pierces
the protective shield of zoning around our residential communities
will have a ripple effect throughout the district, it will reach Pelican
Page 203
October 24-25, 2006
Bay, it will, in fact, I think, affect property values as well as the
character and general climate of living, perhaps, throughout Collier
County .
And I say that from the perspective of a member of a community
surrounded by such existing commercial usages that have been
reasonably well controlled in terms of height, noise, and truces, et
cetera, and those that now are beginning to press the envelope of
protections that make them good neighbors to residential
communities.
For example -- and then this will make my point, and I'll sit
down. I look at the issue in question across from Collier Reserve on
Immokalee Road, and I see instead the Pavilion shopping center
across Vanderbilt Beach Road from Pelican Bay, a rag of an old
rundown shopping center that I'm sure will soon be purchased,
redeveloped and apply for a variance to give it the highest best use of
its land, citing the precedent, if you set one, of having pierced the
protection that the zoning regulations and the land management plan
have kept in place around our exemplary neighborhoods throughout
the district of the county. I urge you to reject this petition.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Please hold it down.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Scott Price. He'll be followed
by Fred Thomas.
MR. PRICE: Good afternoon. Again, Scott Price. I am
Vice-President of Arthur X, Inc., and we are a medical device
company located caddy-comer to the proposed Naples Daily News
site.
We have about 140,000 square feet there. We have office,
warehouse, manufacturing. We run about three shifts of
manufacturing a day into the night with about 400 employees.
And I don't know this for sure, but I would say, we haven't heard
any complaints from the Bay Colony residents who are immediately
Page 204
October 24-25, 2006
adjacent to us about noise, odor or anything else. Our manufacturing
is light, but it's nonetheless truly manufacturing.
I'm here today to express our company's support of the Naples
Daily News petition, number one. Number two, also to express a
concern. We think they'll be great neighbors, but our concern is more
about the business community.
As you all are probably aware, it's wonderful to do business in
Naples, but there are challenges, so -- primarily dealing with attracting
and retaining employees, costs of housing and so forth.
And so we struggle every day to overcome that challenge. And
it's hard at times, but we make it work. But the business community is
watching this. We were, frankly, shocked in our management of the
negative outcome the last time.
And the business community that is really important that's
watching this are those people who are considering coming to Collier
County.
I think that if you approve this petition, it will be a strong
message to that community because, frankly, it makes common sense
that the Naples Daily News is located in Collier County.
But, however, if you disapprove it, I think it will be a very
negative message, and I think it will have a long lasting impact that
you all will never see because the people that might consider coming
here will never even consider it, and you'll never see the loss of
opportunity to the people, for the employees, to the young people that
this community will experience. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Fred Thomas. He'll be
followed by Bob Mulhere.
MR. THOMAS: For the record my name is Fred N. Thomas, Jr.
I'm a 67-year-old retiree who completed in 2002, 37 years of public
service in public housing and urban renewal. I served on your
Planning Commission for 11 years.
I presently serve on the Master Planning Visioning Committee,
Page 205
October 24-25, 2006
one of your committees, to help make sure we accommodate growth,
because unless you have figured out a way to keep their cousins,
aunts, relatives and daughters from coming here, we've got to find a
way to make it possible for them to be here and live here in a nice
way.
We've got to continue to find a way to make it possible for our
schoolteachers to bump into the parents of the teachers they -- the
children they teach at the supermarket, at church on Sunday morning.
We've got to make sure that our police officers can walk the streets
and know who's who on that particular street and our firemen know
how many kids are up in the attic in your particular house. They can't
do it if they're not familiar with the neighborhood because you have
not made allowances for them to be in this community.
Finally, I don't know how in world you cannot consider the
official organ disseminating information about your government, your
government services, to the public, your official organ that brings
information back and forth to people so they understand the issues,
should not be located here in Collier County as a good neighbor. That
sends a terrible message to any other kind of business that wants to
come to your community.
All these people complaining about taxes. For every dollar of ad
valorem taxes you collect in residential, there's a demand of $1.25 in
services. Industrial, only 177 cents back in services, and ago only 137
cents back in services.
It seems to me that you want an industrial heart, you want
industry, good, clean industry to come here, so that they can get what
they want without their taxes going up so doggone high. Stop letting
them be selfish. You do the leadership thing. Teach these teenagers
how to live in the right kind of community. Thank you.
(Applause)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bob Mulhere. He'll be
followed by Tom Quinn.
Page 206
October 24-25, 2006
MR. MULHERE: Good afternoon. For the record, Bob
Mulhere, here this afternoon on my own behalf representing myself.
Always hard to followed Fred Thomas, I'll tell you that.
As you know, I earn a profession as a community planner, I'm a
certified planner, and I've been doing that kind of work for more than
18 years. I also am active in this community, serve on a number of
boards and -- for example, the EDC, the United Way of Collier
County, and a number of other boards. And I raise that issue only
because I want to say that all of those boards and the folks that they
serve and represent are all affected by the economic viability of this
community.
I think really you've heard a lot and you're going to hear a lot
more for the -- you have to make a decision on this issue. I think it's
important to state for the record that with my experience and -- you
know, in our local codes, you've heard about variances and exceptions
and deviations, and none of these apply in this case. There may be a
few deviations, but deviations are not variances by your own
definitions.
A PUD allows, Commissioner Henning, allows for an applicant
to request higher buildings, different setbacks, all of those types of
things. You are charged with making the final decision, but an
applicant has the right to ask for those things. And what would be the
basis of your decision? Well, is it consistent with the comprehensive
plan? Is it compatible with the neighborhood? You've raised these
issues. You're asking the right questions.
I would like to highlight that the staff recommendation is for
approval, that the Collier County Planning Commission recommended
approval. And I know that this board has stated on many occasions
that they take very highly the counsel and recommendations of the
Planning Commission.
It's critically important for the Naples Daily News to remain in
Collier County. A lot of time and effort, I'm sure, went into planning
Page 207
October 24-25, 2006
this. It doesn't happen overnight. It takes years of work and planning.
It's not so simple as to go out and look for other sites. You plan, you
work, you find the best site, you hire the best consultants, you go
forward with the process, and you end up here.
And so, the decision is not based on emotion. It's not based on
hearsay. It needs to be based on the criteria for approval that you have
within your code, and I think it's been demonstrated, and if you look at
the recommendation of staff and the CCPC, it's been demonstrated
that the definition meets that criteria.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Tom Quinn.
MR. QUINN: Pass.
MS. FILSON: C.J. Houston.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He had to leave.
MS. FILSON: Buddy Brunker.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Had to leave, pass.
MS. FILSON: Jerry Thirion?
(N 0 response.)
MS. FILSON: Dave Weston.
MR. MUDD: No, Mr. Thirion is here, he's just trying to get
there.
MS. FILSON: He'll be followed -- Mr. Weston passes?
MR. WESTON: Correct, okay.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Colleen Kvetko.
MR. THIRION: Good afternoon. My name is Jerry Thirion, and
I come to you today as the general manager of Bay Colony Golf Club.
I'm also here representing Don Gunther, who is the president of the
Board of Directors of Bay Colony Golf Club and the president of the
Board of the Bay Colony Community Association.
Lastly, I'm representing Ron McGinty who is the president of the
Property Owners' -- excuse me -- Association of the Estates at Bay
Page 208
October 24-25, 2006
Colony.
First of all, we strongly support the passage of this project. We
have signs early on. Our letter of intent is on file, and we wish it to
remain there.
We started this project -- we started talking with these people
about a year ago. They were kind enough to come to us and introduce
the proj ect to us, and, of course, we had some concerns at that time as
well. Issues like safety, security, lighting, buffers, et cetera, but they
were all quickly erased, and we feel very comfortable with this
project.
We continue to support it and we urge you to do so in the same
way. Quite frankly, we can't think of a better neighbor that we'd
rather have. It's a good industry, and we want to be a part of it.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, sir.
MS. FILSON: Colleen Kvetko. Did -- is Dave Weston here?
MS. KVETKO: No.
MS. FILSON: Okay. I thought I heard somebody say he left.
Then you'll be followed by Jerry Adams.
MR. KVETKO: Good evening, Commissioners, Colleen
K vetko, Fifth Third Bank, past EDC chair, past chairman member of
the board, and currently on the Productivity Committee, to give a
background.
A lot has been said this evening, and I would like to echo, to save
time, what Ed Morton and Mike Reagan said, however, I have just a
couple brief comments.
Although we have five districts here, I believe each of you
represent Collier County as a whole. This is a Collier County issue.
As a member of the business community, I support, very heavily
support, the Naples Daily News move to Creekside. They have
certainly been a good corporate citizen, contributing to the
community, to the economy, and most importantly, pay taxes in
Page 209
October 24-25, 2006
Collier County.
Why would we as a community force them to move out of
Collier County? Do the right thing. I ask that you support this move
to Creekside.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Jerry Adams. He'll be followed
by Dolly Roberts.
MR. ADAMS: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and
Commissioners. My name is Jerry Adams. I'm the president and
CEO of Liberty Bank, Liberty Bank, Naples. We're one of your
newest investors in Collier County. We're a Florida based bank
holding company . We have, shall we say, affectionately in our
boardroom, we have skin in the game. We just opened our newest
office on Vanderbilt Beach Road.
I'm here to talk from a completely different perspective, not only
being a new business partner in Collier County, but my wife and I and
our young family are residents here.
Our history began in April of 2006 when both the company and
myself took residency here in Naples. As a result, we have interest in
this decision today. I have limited knowledge of Naples Daily News.
I took it from a completely different perspective. I took it from
economic development. Coming from the Midwest, there was two
issues that I supported in various roles throughout my banking career
over the last 25 years.
Most recently I served as a trustee of a community college, and I
think it's important to understand today, at least back in the Midwest,
our role was to stimulate, retain and attract our business partners in
our community.
Again, as I look at Naples Daily News, it honestly doesn't mean a
great deal to me, but what I did pay attention to were the numbers.
Employment, tax revenues. The numbers I've seen -- and I will not
Page 210
October 24-25, 2006
repeat the numbers that I believe you have been presented in part of
their business plan -- is astronomical of what they're going to invest in
the future in Collier County.
My wife and I, with our two small children, elementary age,
came down here in October of 2005 and talked about an opportunity
and a dream. A dream to lead a financial institution. From zero to a
billion dollars, phase one, throughout Collier County.
The first question we asked ourselves, what's the opportunity of
employment for each -- excuse me -- for my wife? What's the
educational opportunities for my wife? We took it probably to the
highest level of decision making. What's the education in Collier
County for our children?
Then we took it one step further, post college. Can they remain
residents, productive residents in the community that they grew up in,
Collier County?
Diversity. I think the matter at hand today really speaks very
loud for the subj ect matter that my wife and I deliberated some 12
months ago. The answer is yes. The vision that the commission, the
city leaders of Collier and of Naples have presented over the last
decade clearly define an opportunity for my wife and I.
We're extremely pleased to be here. We've written the check.
We moved here. Our company has written their check. We are
interested for -- in future development of our partners, our neighbors,
and future interested businesses and industry.
I would ask you very kindly to give favorable consideration to
the petitioners at this time, and I thank you for your patience.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Dolly Roberts. She'll be followed by Reg
Buxton.
MS. ROBERTS: Thank you. My name is Dolly Roberts, and
I've been asked to read into the record a letter from Scott Cameron, a
local commercial real estate broker, and a letter from the property
Page 211
October 24-25, 2006
owners' association of North Collier County all in the absence of the
people who have signed these letters.
So let me start with Scott's letter, and it's signed R. Scott
Cameron, CCIM: I have been a resident of Naples for over 30 years
and have had the honor of serving as chairman of the Economic
Development Council of Collier County.
As a commercial realtor, I know the importance of being a good
neighbor as a business enterprise. NDN has proven itself to be a good
neighbor for more than the three decades I have known them.
I am not a party to this transaction and am not being paid to be
here.
Approximately two years ago, I undertook the job of trying to
locate a new location for the Naples Daily News. We reviewed
several options and, one by one, determined that for various reasons,
none of them were suitable.
When the Creekside property became available, it became
obvious that this is the one. My professional opinion as a commercial
real estate expert is that there are currently no other viable alternatives
available in Collier County; therefore, I support the petition before
you, and do so in the interest of economic development and the
economic interests of the county.
Secondly, from the Property Owners Association Of North --
Associations of Northern -- of North Collier County, signed by
Richard E. Lydon, president, Art Jacob, past president, and Sally
Barker, past president.
Lady and gentlemen, several recent letters to the editor have
indicated some reservations as to the advisability of locating the new
plant of the newspaper on the south side of Immokalee Road.
Our organization has been following this proposal and have had
the opportunity to carefully review the location, building and impact
on the community.
Since the first plans, I saw a number of changes have been made
Page 212
October 24-25, 2006
at the suggestion of residents residing adjacent to and near the
property, and it is my understanding that their concerns have been
addressed, with the possible exception of Collier's Reserve.
It is difficult to understand how anyone can be opposed to this
proj ect if the economics are considered.
You have authorized the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of
dollars by the Economic Development Council to bring new
companies to the area. Allowing an employer of this magnitude to
leave the county seems to be in direct conflict with past actions on
your part.
Please look carefully at the chronological facts. May 10th,
advertised public information meeting in accordance with county
regulations. Both newspaper and lighted street signs were used to
advertise this meeting. There were only three public attendees. One
couple from Bay Colony area within Pelican Marsh, and the writer
attended.
Concerns relative to the 75- foot height were raised, and it was
pointed out that zoning for residential -- for surrounding
neighborhoods is consistent with the 75 foot in Granada Shops and the
SO feet in Collier's Reserve.
Traffic concerns were discussed with the satisfactory breakdown
advising that the majority of use is between 10 p.m. and seven a.m.
when the papers are delivered to the distribution ports.
Management and staff traffic will be insignificant since staggered
hours are the norm for employees of a newspaper.
If I may finish, it's about two more paragraphs.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. ROBERTS: Thank you. June 15th, Collier County
Planning Commission moved the project forward by a vote of 4-2 with
two abstentions. Public speakers did not voice objections to the project
but stated that they would have preferred that the meeting had been
during season.
Page 213
October 24-25, 2006
September 12th. Board of County Commissioners rejected the
project by a vote of 3-2. A review of the public comments do not
indicate any great objections.
Commissioner Henning later requested that the project again be
placed on an upcoming agenda.
That brings us to today.
It is my sincere hope that each of you will see fit to approve this
project for the following reasons: The Naples Daily News has been a
good neighbor for many years even though some of us have felt the
sting by being on the other side of their position;
The county needs the impact fees and the tax revenues that this
plant will produce. The present tax value on Central Avenue is about
$13 million. Best conservative estimates indicate that that will
increase five or sixfold;
We need to keep the existing 300 plus jobs in the county as well
as welcome the new jobs that will be created;
And finding another employer of this magnitude will be a costly,
time consuming and, perhaps, impossible task. Thank you for your
favorable consideration.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ma'am, I just want to bring -- put on the
record that I believe the North Naples Property Association has been
defunct for the last two years. I don't believe they had a board --
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay?
MS. ROBERTS: You might want to take that up with Mr.
Lydon. I believe he represents them.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, if--
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Reg Buxton.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He left.
MS. FILSON: Richard Botthof. He'll be followed Tammie
Nemecek.
MR. BOTTHOF: Good afternoon, my name is Dick Botthof.
Page 214
October 24-25, 2006
I'm a native Floridian, currently executive director of the Regional
Business Glance (sic). I'll explain that later. I'm also a resident of
Pelican Marsh, which is not defunct, Mr. Halas.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I didn't say that Pelican Marsh was
defunct, sir.
MR. BOTTHOF: Well, I'm just -- I want to clarify it so you
won't have any issues on that, okay?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't have any issues.
MR. BOTTHOF: I'm a member of the Peli -- a member of my
homeowners' association within that community. I attended the
hearing of the board, the Pelican Marsh foundation, that thoughtfully
and thoroughly heard all of the issues relative to the project at hand,
and they supported it and saw no reason to object.
I am a native Floridian, 40-year retired banker in this community,
have been also a two-time former chairman of the Economic
Development Council, one of the founding members of the Downtown
Redevelopment Task Force. I've been involved in this community a
long time.
It's very interesting to hear the comments that were made earlier,
and each one of those comments said, yes, we support business, but
not in our back yard. Where have you heard that before?
We have become a very divisive community. Everybody's for
something as long as it impacts somebody else. Nobody's for -- we
have got to start being for something. We have got to diversify our
tax base.
Fred Thomas's comments were right on target in terms of our ad
valorem tax revenue. Almost 90 percent of our ad valorem tax
revenue comes out of the residential sector. We have got to change
that. That compares to the state average of about 76, and the nation of
about 68. If we don't do it, two things are going to happen; taxes are
going to go up, service is going to go down.
This is a clean industry. It's in the right place. It's at the right
Page 215
October 24-25, 2006
time. I mean, I'm just -- you know, listening to all these objections
today, you know, I'm really convinced, now I know where the
weapons of mass destruction are going to be put. Thank you, people, I
appreciate that.
I would ask that you -- I would ask that you support this
endeavor. And there is absolutely --
Now, we gave you guys plenty of time. We gave you--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Order. Gees.
MR. BOTTOF: Well, be that as it may, I'm -- I think this project,
Naples Daily News, the Barron Collier Company has done everything.
They followed the letter of the law. It complies with everything. It is
a leading industry in this community, and I would urge your support
for it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Tammie Nemecek. She'll be
followed by Kevin Fitzgerald.
MR. NEMECEK: Good evening, Commissioners, Mr.
Chairman. It's a difficult afternoon for us all. I wanted to tell you that
I have the utmost respect for everybody in this room and that's -- my
voice is going, so pardon me.
And we do have a difficult decision here for everybody, and we
all have a point that we want to make.
And my statements are based on what we believe is good for this
community. I'm a 33-year resident. I was very young when we came
here. And I do want to say that you have the ability to make this
happen. I understand that we have some people that are not in favor
of it, and that happens a lot with issues.
I am Tammie Nemecek, President of the Economic Development
Council of Collier County. I'm here today as a result of the
public/private partnership between the Collier County Board of
Commissioners and the Economic Development Council of Collier
County .
Page 216
October 24-25, 2006
Through this partnership, the EDC is charged with the retention
and creation of high-wage jobs in Collier County. It is our
responsibility to ensure that we retain our high-wage employers in
Collier County and ensure that they have every chance to grow in our
community.
Our partnership does not allow companies to go around the
regulatory process, but prioritize these projects as important
contributors to the economic diversity of our community and the
future sustainability of our quality of life.
The Naples Daily News has been a long-standing corporate
citizen in our community since the 1920s. Evolving since then, the
current Naples Daily News has grown to be a leader in the industry for
not only news content, but innovation in the high-technology arena.
As an example, in February of this year, the Newspaper
Association of America recognized the Naples Daily News with their
digital edge award for the electric version of their newspaper. This is
exactly the type of company we want in Collier County.
The governor and the State of Florida promote our state as the
innovation hub of the Americas. I would say that the Naples Daily
News' wide use of technology and innovation within their
organization has transformed this company into a leading-edge
technology company and is one of the main reasons why Collier
County could easily promote itself as an innovation hub of Southwest
Florida.
Within the innovative use of technology at the Naples Daily
News comes also a demand for more technical staff and high-wage job
earners. This new location is a result of that demand.
With the 256 people who will be employed -- who are employed
at the current location, the company is also adding an additional 50
jobs. Countywide there are over 400 employees of the Naples Daily
News.
These are jobs that pay an average wage of 51,000. This is well
Page 217
October 24-25, 2006
over the county's average wage of $34,000.
May I have additional time, please? Thank you.
We have been working with the Naples Daily News for over two
years to find an appropriate site in Collier County.
In fact, the difficulty we encountered in finding a suitable
location for this company prompted the EDC to do a land use analysis
which we presented to you, the Board of County Commissioners, in
March of this year. That analysis was prompted not only by the
Naples Daily News, but also by other companies of similar size that
were looking to locate in our area.
Unfortunately the other companies chose locations outside
Collier County, but the Naples Daily News continued to search, as
they were and are committed to remaining in our community.
The location under consideration here today is located on
Immokalee Road between a retail center and an existing business park.
Weare fortunate that this site was still available and has compatible
uses to the east and west.
Furthermore, as you've heard today, every effort has been made
to mitigate the impacts of this company to other surrounding
neighbors.
We'd like to thank the outpouring of support for this project from
the business community and residents of the community. Your
extraordinary efforts underscore the need for a positive outcome in
this matter.
The direct economic impact, in just the first year alone of this
project is over $100 million. This includes the capital investment of
the company as well as the first year wages of over 300 high-wage
employees.
We respectfully request the approval for Naples Daily News to
ensure that this investment in our community and the high-wage jobs
that are associated with it all remain in Collier County.
A positive outcome today helps to ensure the economic viability
Page 218
October 24-25, 2006
of Collier County by not only preserving the businesses in our
community, but also by sending a message to both the existing
business here as well as companies that look to locate to our area, that
Collier County wants economic diversification.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Are you close to the end?
MS. NEMECEK: That we support businesses, and when a
company complies with the rules and regulations set forth, as we
believe the Naples Daily News has, that they have the certainty that
our community will support them.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. NEMECEK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I've got a --
MS. FILSON: The next--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have a question, Tammie. Was there
any consideration of locating this project in the White Lake Industrial
Park?
MS. NEMECEK: We provided all those sites. We had a very
limited number of sites. And it's a business decision according to the
company. We let the company decide where it's most suitable for
them to locate.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, we have about another 145,000
acres of land within Collier County . Wouldn't there be a place that we
could locate the printing operation and keep the corporate
headquarters at this location that we're talking about today --
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- and the printing operations within
Collier County so that don't lose any jobs? Do we have that --
MS. NEMECEK: That is a business decision for the company,
as it is for every company that we deal with.
When we look at companies trying to come to the community,
we offer them a wide variety of locations if they are available, and the
company will decide where they want to go. And this is the location
Page 219
October 24-25, 2006
that was decided on based on the compatible uses to the area.
And again, we have companies that come to us and don't find
suitable locations, and they go and locate in Lee County or elsewhere
in Southwest Florida.
So it's a business decision for the company.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I realize that, but when you look at
the compatibility issue I think that everyone here in the audience
would welcome the corporate headquarters to be located at this
location whether it falls within the guidelines --
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- whether it falls within the guidelines
of the zoning area.
I think the real concern is the -- excuse the terminology -- the
Trojan horse that is attached with the -- with the process of this being
a manufacturing, okay, and a heavy manufacturing.
And I think if we could locate -- and I would work diligently to
try to find a location that wouldn't be that far away -- I know you and I
discussed where I thought even just moving this location down the
road to the comer of Immokalee Road and Goodlette- Frank, which is
in the southeast comer, I felt that it would be less intrusive to the
surrounding communities and -- because it would back up against our
reclamation water plant, and then there was some -- there was some
commercial to the -- to the east of it, and then, of course, it would be
fronted there by two major highways, being Goodlette-Frank and
Immokalee Road.
And I really felt that that might be the reallocation, but
obviously when I was talking with you, again, there was no way of
making a compromise on this location.
MS. NEMECEK: And unfortunately it's very difficult to dictate
to businesses to site in a specific location. You just can't do that.
They're going to have to look at their business model and what makes
sense for that company.
Page 220
October 24-25, 2006
So to split up the operations from the corporate headquarters or,
you know, from the press operations, you know, they're going to have
to make that decision from a corporate standpoint, and I think we can
all recognize that that's good business practice to do that.
And if it works for them financially and feasibly for their
employees that come to that site, they'll make that decision. They're
not about making decisions that are not going to be benefiting to their
company.
So the site was chosen based on the criteria set forth by the
company and the needs of the company, and this is the location that
worked the best with what limited locations we had available in order
to offer them, so --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But I'm saying that the options were--
you could -- the location that we're talking about today, we could have
the corporate office there and segregate the printing operations
someplace else within Collier County.
The other option that I brought out to you was to move both the
printing operation and the corporate headquarters that I just described,
and that was at Immokalee Road and Goodlette- Frank. And there was
no -- didn't seem to be any movement in that area, and I thought that
would be a great compromise because it would move it away from the
two neighborhoods that it might impose the biggest problem on.
MS. NEMECEK: All of the sites were provided to the company.
They chose the one that suited their needs from that standpoint. And I
can't really speak for, you know, John Fish, but I will tell you that
sites were looked at. This is the one that was most appropriate for
what their needs are, and that's how businesses decide.
We have many times where we can't meet the needs of
businesses because we don't have an appropriate site for them, and
that's when they look elsewhere in the community. So it's very
difficult to dictate that to a company.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The thing is that you two -- they've got
Page 221
October 24-25, 2006
two arterial roads at that location, so -- I understand. Thank you very
much.
MS. NEMECEK: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Kevin Fitzgerald.
(N 0 response.)
MS. FILSON: Kurt Lutgert.
(N 0 response.)
MS. FILSON: Gary Eidson.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Kurt's right here.
MS. FILSON: He'll be followed by Gary Edison or Eidson,
E-I-D-S-O-N.
MR. EIDSON : You did it right the first time.
MR. LUTGERT: Hello. I'm Kurt Lutgert, wanted to speak as a
Naples native and a resident of North Naples and the Vanderbilt
Beach area, and I feel this project is compatible with all the
surrounding use and that any other use for this site could actually
generate more traffic, so I support the petition for the Naples Daily
News. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Gary Eidson. He'll be followed by
Dwight Richardson.
MR. EIDSON: Hi. My name's Gary Eidson. I'm a full-time
seven-year North Naples resident and a Director with the North Bay
Civic Association. I was asked by my fellow directors to speak today.
A month ago I stood before you the lone dissenter to the
industrialization of a zoned office park, and it's become clear that I'm
not alone.
Why is the district united? Well, you know, the compatibility
issue has been raised, and we're concerned that there are residences
that abut and are adjacent to this facility. It doesn't make sense to do
that.
The Naples Daily News is in a growth mode. We're very
Page 222
October 24-25, 2006
concerned about the intensity of the traffic. And I know this has been
said, but I live up north, and that's bother me all the way up there, as it
is my neighbors.
The other thing is -- and I think Commissioner Halas just brought
it up. We live in a county that's just 400 square miles smaller than
Delaware, and we can't find another location. That baffles me. The
size of Delaware, and this is it, that plot of land.
And I just would love to see that little piece separated where you
take the plant and move it and keep the other where it's supposed to
be. The offices fit where the offices go.
Here's what I've seen happen. Colliers have land available.
That's what I've heard. It's just not quite the right land. They don't
want to move the press because -- I don't understand that. Is it because
they want Jeff Lytle to be able to run out and say, stop the presses,
like they did in the '30s movie? I mean, I don't see that happening
anymore. We've got the technology today.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Please don't make it -- let's not make it
personal.
MR. LUTGERT: Well, no, I am serious. I think we can move an
industrial -- we don't have to have it next door. We can have it
separated.
And I also think that it just -- just because it doesn't fit their
model, I don't think that it doesn't fit my model. I don't see the model
of -- the Land Development Code is designed to protect me as a -- and
so is the Growth Management Plan.
And Don Spanier said it very well. I buy a house here, as do
other people, and we buy the house here because we know what we
got. I don't want to wake up living on Glen Eden Road and finding
out that tomorrow afternoon in that vacant lot beside me that's
supposed to be a golf course, I wind up with Naples Daily News
sitting there, and that could happen, and you're going to set the
precedent today if you vote, and I don't want you to vote that way.
Page 223
October 24-25, 2006
I think a vo note (sic) today means that you're not going to --
you're not going to gerrymander a PUD and allow parklets that could
become precursors to flower boxes and beach umbrellas as a substitute
to real parks.
And a no vote means that we don't have to worry about this
precedent being set, and that's what I'm concerned about, and I thank
you for your time.
I want these offices here. I want the Naples Daily News to stay
here. I think they're great people, but I don't want their plant to be
where it's not supposed to be. Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Dwight Richardson. He'll be
followed by Bruce Burkhard.
MR. RICHARDSON: Mr. Chairman, I just have a few point I
want to make, and I thought the visuals might help out. Take a
maximum of three to four minutes.
I'm Dwight Richardson. I live in Naples Park, which peculiarly,
the applicant says, is not a residential area that's near this place, but it's
actually one of the larger residential areas and it is adjacent to this, but
we're just being overlooked in Naples Park.
What I want to focus my remarks on are what I consider to be the
environmental considerations, which have not been discussed very
deeply today.
How do I do this? Hit play.
What I want to talk about is really the -- if you will, a bifurcation
of this project, which has been talked about a lot, where you have the
operations for the people to sit and think and write versus the
production, plant production facilities.
And what this will show if it ever comes up, but I'll cover it
anyway, is that in this printing process -- it's a lithography process,
and they have a lot of things that go into it. We've talked about the
paper that's delivered, all of the ink and the platemaking, the imaging,
Page 224
October 24-25, 2006
cleaning solutions, chemical storage containers. There's a whole rash
of things, which they're much more competent to talk about, though
they haven't mentioned much about it but -- in order to produce the
proj ects that they talk about.
They have five papers that -- five publications that they're
dealing with now. There are eight more that are at a distant location
that they say they're going to try to pull into this production facility.
So from an input standpoint, we know we have all of the
lithography kind of things, and if you went ahead to the output, which
we may never get to -- thanks.
Well, let me just cover it. On the output side, you know, you end
up with used stuff that's left over. You've got used and out-of-date
films, scrap paper, volatile compounds, spent developer and mixer,
used rinse water, solvents, soap rags, empty containers, platemaking,
used plates, used rinse water, spent developer. You can see where I'm
headed here.
You've got solutions with volatile organic compounds, toxic air
emissions, oil based ink -- give me a break -- wastepaper, solvents, ink
and solvent, finishing paper. You know, these are byproducts that are
just inherent in this kind of an operation.
Now, if you -- we've looked at some that were by the Rochester
Institute of Technology, and they talk about toxic release inventory.
They've gone -- they've looked at 215 printing firms and they realize
that there's millions and millions of pounds of toxic chemicals in the
air, million of pounds of toxic chemical waste and all of the volatile
organic compounds.
Well, what's this all mean? That means that what you're doing
with this applicant's proposition is that you're introducing into a
business park environment with the residents around, you're
introducing a potentially toxic situation which really should be in an
industrial complex, not as part of a business research facility.
I was happy to hear Mr. Fish say that in 37 years they've never
Page 225
October 24-25, 2006
had an EP A investigation or complaint. I find that kind of surprising
based on the kind of operation that this is, which is so potentially
damaging to the environment. Perhaps one of his investigative
reporters could verify the accuracy of that, but I'll accept your --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Are you close to wrapping it up?
MR. RICHARDSON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. RICHARDSON: Let me offer a solution here. We have, I
think, the basis for a win-win situation. What we have -- what the
applicant really is asking for is two functions, one where one of the
pundits that was published in the paper today said, we need a place for
the people to think, sit and write, and then he also wants to have a
place to do the production where they can, you know, print and have
the inherent pollution problems.
Now, what I think we should do, what I think you should do, is
approve this project for the business park application, that is for the
portion that sets up in the environment where they can sit and think
and write and do all the things that they do so well, and then take the
production portion of this thing that is so potentially polluting and find
an appropriate industrial area to put it in.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. RICHARDSON: So I think that's within your jurisdiction to
do. So that's what I recommend.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bruce Burkhard. He'll be
followed by Doug Fee.
MR. BURKHARD: Good afternoon. My name is Bruce
Burkhard. I'm a Director of the Vanderbilt Beach Residents
Association.
It seems to me that a common principle in community planning
101 would be that you don't mix an industrial factory with all of its
Page 226
October 24-25, 2006
negatives into a residential and office park community. Saying that
this is a PUD and a PUD isn't governed by the same rules as the
surrounding neighborhood is seriously flawed planning.
The whole concept of PUDs, as I understand them, is that they're
supposed to be placed in an appropriate location and they're supposed
to be in the public interest.
A PUD should create a more desirable environment, providing
for consistency and visual harmony, more than would be possible
through the strict application of the minimum requirements of the
LDC.
The neighborhood believes that this project is exactly the
opposite. Common sense tells me that a PUD should offer an
improvement over a conventional zoning district. A PUD should not
be used to get around criteria such as height restrictions in the adjacent
properties.
What we're faced with is another example of the wrong project in
the wrong place. These are industrial-- there are industrial sites and
industrial zones within this county that would be an appropriate
setting for the printing plant. There's no reason or need to locate
outside the county.
Just as the CEO was able to locate a more appropriate site, so,
too, should this proj ect. Certainly no one obj ects to the general office
being located on the site. That would be perfectly -- a perfectly suited
development and would not be troubling.
Please listen to the voices of the affected citizens opposing this
project. Deny it for the good of our community. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning, you had a
question?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I do. Mr. Burkhard, since
every one of the --
Page 227
October 24-25,2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Please come back up to the mike.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- adjacent properties are PUDs,
you think it would be appropriate to take the average height and apply
it to this one?
MR. BURKHARD: No. As I said, I think what you should do is
look at what the surrounding community is. The adjacent PUDs that
you're talking about are all one-story buildings.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, the height, their zoned
height.
MR. BURKHARD: Well, it doesn't matter what the zoned
height is. What we're talking about is what's the impact on the
community. What's it look like?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm just trying to --
MR. BURKHARD: We're talking about is what you -- what is
proposed --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm just trying to be fair and
looking at the other PUDs --
MR. BURKHARD: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and what they're zoned for,
what they could build at.
MR. BURKHARD: But they didn't.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, they didn't.
MR. BURKHARD: Well--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'm saying, and Mr. Fish
said, they might not build it at 75 feet.
MR. BURKHARD: Well, that's not exactly -- he said they might
not. Maybe they'll build it at -- he said they wouldn't build it maybe at
75 feet. Maybe they'll go to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Granada Shops are SO feet.
What are they at?
MR. BURKHARD: What's that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The Granada Shops are SO feet.
Page 228
October 24-25, 2006
What are they at?
MR. BURKHARD: They're one story, Commissioner, one story.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So they did not build to
their zoned height.
MR. BURKHARD: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Collier Reserves, 75, SO feet?
MR. BURKHARD: No way, none of them do. What we're
saying is this --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, that is their zoning. I
looked at it yesterday. That is their zoning, so --
MR. BURKHARD: Well-- but that's not what exists, and that's
what we're complaining about. That's what we're saying. We're
changing -- what this proj ect is trying to do is --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's good for one is not the
other.
MR. BURKHARD: -- change the whole character of the
neighborhood. It's going to change the look. It's going to turn it into
-- are you familiar with the Fifth Third Bank down at the comer of
Vanderbilt and 4I? That is an ugly building, and that's what we're
talking about putting right --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sir, you know what, you really
answered my question.
MR. BURKHARD: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not in my back yard.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Doug Fee. He'll be followed
by Carol Reuss.
MR. FEE: Commissioners, good afternoon. For the record, my
name is Doug Fee, and I'd like to request a -- I had signed up and was
sworn in, however, I'm losing my voice, and we've prepared a small
short PowerPoint. If I could have Gina Downs fill in for me, I would
greatly appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Does she need to be sworn in then?
Page 229
October 24-25, 2006
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: Yes, she should.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Court Reporter?
(The speaker was duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hopefully you'll have better success than
the last person.
MS. DOWNS: This is my first PowerPoint. I taught economics
at my local college for three or four years, but the reason Doug's
interested in me is I worked at my local newspaper for seven or eight
years, so I can feel qualified to speak to the industrial part of that
process.
As you can see on the overhead, this is one example of a press.
There are only about a dozen manufacturers worldwide of presses.
This particular one is about 55 feet high, 365 feet long. There are
some -- some larger, some smaller, but it is a massive piece of
specialized equipment. Requires a huge outlay of capital.
The top photo shows you -- this is a typical basement of a
pressroom or a first floor. The top photo or the legs, if you will, of the
press. This particular one is SO feet deep. They have to be built
substantial, not only to support the weight of the press, but to try to
avoid having any vibration in the press when it's running.
The second photo, as you can see, it's not a tow motor. It's called
a clamp truck, removing one of the bails of paper. This particular one
is interesting because it's unloading a railroad -- from a railroad train,
and a lot of the newer production facilities have rail spurs right up into
their production facility.
The third photo is just an example of the size of the rolls of
paper. That particular one is 50 inches by 50 inches. Some of them
are smaller, some of your presses will run a 47- to 4S-inch wide paper
roll.
This particular one weighs 3,000 pounds. The variation is
between 2,700 pounds and 3,000 pounds per roll. A typical tractor
trailer can hold 23 to 30 rolls, depending on the weight of the
Page 230
October 24-25, 2006
individual rolls.
When I got involved in this project, I immediately called the
newspaper I used to work for. I got in touch with about two dozen
other newspapers across the country. Mostly I was looking for newer
facilities.
What I did find, I got a lot of aerial photos -- a lot of aerial photos
and a lot of ground photos of new plants. They are next to major
highways for the most part. They often, as you saw, have rail spurs
right into the building, but they are never in a residential area or in an
office park.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Could you leaf through these quickly.
MS. DOWNS: I have two more, two more slides.
Of the papers I contacted, I tried to find one that was the closest
comparison to the size of this paper. The Baton Rouge Advocate,
which just opened up two weeks ago, there's your comparison. Their
service area is 412,000 people; Naples Daily is 307.
Baton Rouge's plant, which is brand new, is 120,000 square feet.
Naples Daily is proposing 180.
There you see the circulation and the amount of projects that
come in. Their circulation is about double what this is. So they use
100 gallons a day. I would anticipate Naples Daily would use 50
gallons a day of ink.
Five hundred rolls of newsprint are used a week. Naples Daily,
assuming they use half of that, is 250. And typically a newspaper will
store a month's worth of newspaper in their facility, so Naples Daily, I
would assume, is going to have about 1,000 rolls that they'll go
through monthly that has to be stored somewhere on the property,
brought in by tractor trailer, and I remind you, the tractor trailer can
hold about 30 loads of paper.
In summary, I don't see how anyone, by any stretch of the
imagination, would call this light industry. Their footprint will
occupy about 400,000 square feet, as I understand it. It is a capital
Page 23 1
October 24-25, 2006
intensive business. They have large amounts of raw material that are
used daily, weekly, monthly in the production of the newspaper.
I could go on and on about the hazardous byproducts produced --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Please wrap it up.
MR. DOWNS: Okay. As you all know, they have a large
finished product that gets trucked out daily.
I think it's a perfectly fine business for an industrial area, but I
don't see how it could possibly fit into a business park or near a
residential.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Carol Reuss. She'll be
followed by Michael Lissack.
MS. REUSS: My name is Carol Reuss. I'm a resident of
Stonebridge Country Club, a community of 799 homes just down the
road from where this anticipated project is to go.
I would like to read this on behalf of the Stonebridge Country
Club Community Association president.
Dear Collier County Commissioners, on behalf of the Board of
Directors of Stonebridge Country Club Community Association, I
write to express our opposition to the application which would allow
the Daily News printing plant and distribution center to be built on
Immokalee Road.
Zoning regulations provide a certain level of trust and assurance
when someone makes an investment in their home. One of the
fundamental principals of zoning is to ensure that incompatible
properties do not exist side by side. This aids in a successfully planned
urban development and increases the value and enjoyment of homes
and businesses alike.
There are numerous differences between businesses which exist
in commercial and industrial zones. If you were to purchase a home
Page 232
October 24-25, 2006
next to an industrially zoned area, you might lessen the strength of
your argument against any nuisance therefrom. Such is not the case
with Stonebridge residents.
When the PUD for Stonebridge Country Club, formerly South
Hampton, was filed, this area was filled with residential and
commercially zoned properties. Much at the time was undeveloped
and yet the neighborhood feel was paramount in many people's
decisions to invest in our community.
Our community has been actively involved in the continued
growth of northern Collier County and has been active in supporting
the quality of life enhancements brought to this part of the county.
This proposal, however, neither enhances, nor is it supported by our
community .
In short, the proposed industrial manufacturing distribution plant
is clearly incompatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. We have
sincere concerns about increased traffic and noise along Immokalee
Road. Weare still experiencing the pangs of road widening, including
the condemnation of our northern border which brings Immokalee
Road and associated noise even closer to our residents' homes.
Adding traffic, especially during the times necessitated by
newspaper distribution, will greatly affect our owners' quiet
enjoyment of their homes.
Immokalee Road is already taxed with traffic. Why would you,
the regulatory agency, look at granting a variance which would allow
additional industrial traffic on this part of Immokalee Road?
Placing a 75- foot tall building with no direct societal benefit,
such as a hospital, at this location is a visual intrusion upon the
surrounding residents. The noise associated with operations will
affect all those who live in this area.
As we read the very paper that requests this change, they
continue to purchase competitor papers and will grow as the county's
population grows, thus all of the above-named concerns will increase
Page 233
October 24-25,2006
in the future.
Weare not against the editorial and executive offices being
located on this property. Those are in keeping with the current zoning.
May I just finish? I have two more paragraphs.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. REUSS: The land mass of Collier County provides many
locations and zoned industrial in which the Naples Daily News could
locate its printing and distribution facility. If in their judgment,
however, it is necessary to locate all of these aspects at one location, it
must be somewhere else.
Zoning is government's recognition that there exists entities
which are incompatible. Today you are faced with just such an
example. A rezoning or variance threatens residents' ability to rely on
promises made by government and should only be done when there
are unique circumstances which are unable to be fulfilled elsewhere
and where the public will benefit from the deviation to the original
plan or zone.
This simply is not the case. This proposed rezone will affect all
of the communities located along Immokalee Road, as well as in the
surrounding area. The Naples Daily News is asking you to pierce the
protective shield provided us all when we purchased our homes.
Ifpierced, we are even more fearful as to our ability to enjoy our
homes while worrying about decreasing property values. Properties
located near industrial zones are not as valuable --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Are you close to being done?
MS. REUSS: Yes -- as those located within the residential
commercial areas.
I thank you for your courtesy and would ask that you do not grant
this request, and I particularly appreciate your understanding as
commissioners, that some of us have never spoken before before this
board and were not quite familiar with how to sign up, and you were
very courteous to all of us.
Page 234
October 24-25, 2006
Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Michael Lissack. He'll be
followed by Scott Cameron.
MR. LISSACK: Commissioners, I'm here as a private citizen
and not as a candidate. And what I'm about to tell you is something
that is, I believe, very different from what you've heard from the rest
of the speakers.
I'm going to ask you to look at the process that you're going
through. This decision is a decision that has been tainted by the fact
that the Naples Daily News has chosen to give you an either/or
ultimatum. Take our whole plant or we are threatening to move out of
the county.
There's another word for this. It's known as extortion, and you
should not be making decisions based on the fact that someone is
trying to extort you. The citizens of this county deserve better.
Recently you have made a series of decisions that basically
indicate that if someone comes to you with a threat, be it a threat of a
lawsuit, be it the threat of take it or leave it, be it the threat of we're
going to move out of the county, that instead of looking at what is the
good of the county, that the decision that you have made has been to
roll over.
Well, the business community has come here today and told you
that if you don't do this, business will not come to Collier County. I'm
here to tell you that if you to do do this, what business will have
learned from this is, threaten Collier County with a lawsuit, threaten
Collier County with extortion, and we will get our way.
This is not a government that is of the law. It is a government that
is instead going to be decided by who can throw the most weight
around.
The Naples Daily News has done this with an extreme amount of
hubris. They could separate their plant; they choose not to. They
Page 235
October 24-25, 2006
could look at other locations; they choose not to. They could have
looked at the location that Commissioner Halas suggested; they chose
not to. They chose, and they're making the community and you suffer
from it. It's extortion. Don't give in to it. Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Scott Cameron.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He already spoke.
MS. FILSON: John Hickey? He'll be followed by Steven
Hiway. I can't read that one.
MR. HICKEY: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, I am John
Hickey, representing 356 owners in Beachwalk Residents Association
in North Naples. We are adamantly opposed to the location of the
industrial printing plant and distribution center by the Daily News off
Immokalee Road.
Like the previous speakers opposing this rezone request, we
deplore the size, the noise, the height, and the water problems of this
plant.
Approval of this request sets a dangerous precedent for all
neighborhoods in Collier County as Don Spanier mentioned. The
large increase and all sizes of vehicles to supply and distribute product
from this proposed plant mostly onto a near-failing Immokalee Road
is creating a traffic disaster.
Please consider a short distance east of the plant's site on
Immokalee Road as the main entrance to the North Naples Hospital.
By approving this rezone, Commissioners, you will be spewing this
huge traffic increase onto Immokalee Road thereby making it much
more difficult for ambulances and other emergency vehicles to get to
the emergency room and the hospital. This easily could create
life-threatening situations.
On behalf of all Beachwalk residents, we strongly request you
vote no on this rezone request. Thank you.
(applause.)
Page 236
October 24-25, 2006
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Steven J. -- and I'm don't--
can't read the last time. It's from Architects Unlimited.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He's gone.
MS. FILSON: B.J. Savard-Boyer. She'll be followed by Carlos
Diaz.
MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Good evening, Commissioners. My
name is B.J. Savard-Boyer. I live in the Vanderbilt Beach area, and I
am here representing myself. I'm also here to support the wishes of
our neighbors and ask you to reconsider the request of the Naples
Daily News to build their facility in North Naples.
You've heard all the reasons, and I'm not going to repeat them,
but one thing that I thought of right from the beginning, they have
played down the fact that the trucks in the evening are going to be
dual axle, I think, small trucks, dual axle. They're going to back up to
the loading dock. When they back up, there's going to be a no shabell
(phonetic). When they let down their loading whatever, it's going to
bang.
And if they're going to have a number of trucks that are going to
be taking the newspapers around town, they're going to be listening to
these bells all night. Fortunately in the cooler weather, we all have
our windows open, and we can cut down on our FPL bill because we
don't have to run our air-conditioners.
So they're going to hear this. It's been played down. Only one
person mentioned it, and that was Jim Johannsen, and he's right.
You're going to hear it. They're going to hear it.
The other thing is the water discharge. We've spoken on the
environmental, but you know what, this is going to be in all of our
waterways eventually. And we're over by the Gulf. We get enough
pollution over there from drainage. We don't need any more.
So as good neighbors, we join together to maintain a peaceful
quality-of-life community. This project so close to a residential area is
inappropriate. We're not asking the Naples Daily News to leave
Page 237
October 24-25,2006
Collier County. We're asking them to reconsider part of their plant or
another area. As Commissioner Halas said, there's a lot of land
around.
So thank you, and please deny this petition. Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: Carlos Diaz.
MR. DIAZ: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Well, I guess
when I was sworn in I was asked -- one of the commissioners said that
maybe someone from the audience or the public had a new input and
could bring some issues up to the table.
Before you today I'm going to talk to you for three reasons. One,
I am a member of the EDC board and executive vice-president; two, I
am a citizen of this community for over 34 years; and three, I have
two children who live here in Collier County. Brian, eight and Alice,
12.
I've got to say that I'm going to disagree with my president for
the first time ever in saying that today your decision is not a hard one;
it's a very easy one. And the right decision will come out of this.
I'm going to speak from personal experience. Four years ago I
was in this room in front of the board for a very similar reason. I was
relocating our business next to a community, and we had the same
issues. Interestingly enough, exactly like what happened here today.
So hopefully in my conversation I'm going to try to let you know
what happens after you vote of yes today, because this cannot prolong.
This should be handled. This is something that this community
needs.
As your logo says, Collier County, we are representing Collier
County here today and not Collier's Reserve. And the entire
community deserves for this pillar of businesses in our community of
-- business in our community to stay and remain in Collier County and
provide the very jobs that we so seek.
Our economy has been driven by three economic engines which
Page 238
October 24-25, 2006
today are all hurting. The construction, the industrial, the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Agriculture?
MR. DIAZ: Agriculture and --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Tourists.
MR. DIAZ: -- and the tourism, and the tourism. Oh, I'm sorry.
And the three of them, seem to be on a very difficult path.
We cannot bypass the opportunity that a pillar of this community
that -- has made the intent to remain here whose salary range, by the
way is way over the average salary of Collier County.
I owe it to my children, we all owe it to the other citizens of
Collier County, to vote yes -- to have you vote yes on this project.
I'm going to say that -- what happens after your vote of yes? I
happen to have that picture. Three years ago neighboring residents
said that their property values would deplete. Well, guess what, my
friends? Over the last three years, their values are twice what they
were when we moved into the area.
They said that there would be noise. Today we're a fixture in the
neighborhood. In fact, we have received many, many messages from
the neighbors saying how happy they are that we moved to the facility
and that today is a non-issue. Four years later, life can go on and
everything is fine.
All we have been discussing all day is 40 feet of airspace, the
height of the building. Ladies and gentlemen, there's a lot more to it
and more hard impacts to this community, and we must make that
decision soon. I will say that --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sir, could you wrap it up soon.
MR. DIAZ: Yeah. Well, I want to just thank you very much for
voting yes. You'll do the right thing.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time -- at this time we're
going to close the public hearing, and I'd like to make a motion for
Page 239
October 24-25, 2006
denial of this PUDZ-2000-AR-8333 (sic), which is the Naples Daily
News Business Park PUD, and I got to base it on some statistics, okay.
So bear with me. I've got a prepared statement here that I've studied
over the weekend, and I was up till all hours of the night last night.
The Naples Daily News Business Park PUD is not consistent
with the Growth Management Plan Future Land Use Element 5.4.
New developments shall be compatible with and complementary to
the surrounding land uses.
The Naples Daily News is a 24-hour, seven-day-a-week
operation. This would not meet any standards of compatibility with
the residential neighborhoods to the north and to the south of the
project.
It is also not consistent with the GMP Future Land Use Element
for the business park subdistrict, including but not limited to, the
business parks are intended to be designed as parklike environment,
three little parklets, and some sort of linear configuration on a six-lane
Immokalee Road hardly qualifies for a parklike atmosphere.
Business parks are intended to be constructed with a low
structural density. More than doubling the height allowed in the
business park is not conforming to low constructural density. Open
space is supposed to be for the benefit of both the patrons and
employees, but it is not so in this business park. Most of it is totally
restricted from the project behind the berm on Bay Colony Golf
Course.
This business park is located in an urban mixed-use district, and
uses -- uses shall be limited to light industry. A major industrial
newspaper printing and distribution plant operation should not qualify
as light industry.
There are a series of questions as to how this project meets 35
contiguous acre requirements. The Land Development Code, in
2.03.06A and 2.03.06B, one through four, describes the purpose of the
intent of a planned unit development, and I denied -- and I deny based
Page 240
October 24-25, 2006
on the following:
The PU (sic) provisions provide for a departure from the strict
applications of height. That suggests a reasonable departure, not a
complete disregard for the standard.
The Naples Daily News project has a gerrymander of several
pieces of property, some already counted in other PUDs in order to
meet the requirement of 35 contiguous acres.
More than doubling the height standard does not create a more
desirable environment providing for consistency and visual harmony.
This product will add to infrastructure stresses by intensifying uses in
a zoning district.
Additionally, water management requirements have not been
adequately addressed as I could see today.
This particular PUD was seriously -- will seriously impact the
present and projected population. A newspaper printing plant is too
intense to be used in the -- adjacent to the residential areas.
And in closing I want to say that I'm a great supporter, a fan of
the Naples Daily News. I welcome their corporate headquarters at this
location, but I find that the part that bothers me the most is the intense
operational use of a printing plant. And we heard the possibilities --
how many papers they can provide.
And at that, thank you very much.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't believe there was a second to that
motion, was there?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I want to have discussion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you have any copies of that?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, I don't. Just the copy that I made.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Because I couldn't write
as fast. Let me ask you. The -- you don't feel this should be a
business park there?
Page 241
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I believe it should be a business park, but
it should conform to what the business park as outlined in our Land
Development Code and the Growth Management Plan.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But in our Land Development
Code it calls for printing and printing presses.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But it also says that you -- where -- the
way that we've got piecing together all of the particular pieces of land.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's why I want to cover
where you're coming from. And that's -- and it has to have 35
contiguous acres?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Then why are these not
contiguous?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Because you're taking existing
lands from a PUD that presently -- that you presently have to borrow
from.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. But they're together
though.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: They're already part of a PUD.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I -- you know, I really believe
that we should -- everybody should conform to our laws, especially
our land use laws. But my study of it, Commissioner, I hate to say,
they do fit our land use laws.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I understand, and I respect your -- I
respect your feelings and what you feel is part of the -- what it meets
the desire --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Tell me where I'm wrong.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I'm just saying that when I went
through, I basically wrote the interpretations, and I think that that's all
I need to say at this point.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I ask the petitioner a
question?
Page 242
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Anderson -- I guess we're
working from the land -- same Growth Management Plan. That's what
I read is, printing is allowed in business parks.
MR. ANDERSON : Yes, sir. It's quite clear. I mean, in both of
the Growth Management Plan and in the Land Development Code for
a general business park, conventional zoning district, printing and
publishing are both specifically --
AUDIENCE: Time's up.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Time's up.
MR. ANDERSON: -- permitted uses.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The section that Commissioner
Halas pointed out, I think it's 3 point -- or is it 2 point --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: 2.03.06A.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 03 -- A.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Of the Land Development Code, and
2.03.06B, one through four.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 2.03.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: One through four.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: One through four. Now, I know
it said that PUDs can deviate from the strictness of the height and
setbacks. Is -- 2.03.06, correct? That's the --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And did you see in the--
and I don't know if you have that, but did you see in the second to the
last sentence where it says, PUD process -- I'm sorry -- produces a
compliance with the terms in the provisions of the Land Development
Code and Growth Management Plan, may depart from the strict
application of setbacks and height.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's correct, but it also should add to
the surrounding community as far as--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Compatibility.
Page 243
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- compatibility, that's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, and I agree with that, it
should be compatible. But that's where I got hung up in the last
meeting, and I apologize to the Collier Reserve folks for bringing this
up. But -- and I should have been aware of this provision. But the
surrounding land uses as far as the, what, the height, Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, it's the intent that the land is going to
be used for. I was trying to get a definite answer in regards to, is this
considered light industrial use, or is it considered heavy industrial use?
And I believe that some of the video that was presented here
showed the -- basically the type of intent that a large printing plant
that's going to be on this property, I believe it showed the intensity in
the size, the magnitude of the press. So I felt that that would no longer
lead into being light industry. That would be classified as heavy
industry .
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, I'd support you to
amend our Growth Management Plan to remove that out of the
business park district, if that's what you want to do.
But, you know, the way I see it, they're asking for a business park
designation under a planned unit development, and under business
park it provides for use of printing presses.
But if you don't think it's appropriate in business parks, I'll
support your amendment to the Growth Management Plan.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The other thing that bothered me quite
immensely was the fact that in a business park, that they're supposed
to be a business park and it was supposed to give you the effect that all
the open space would be available not only to the people that work in
that business park, but also the people that would be using that park.
And, of course, you had a section of the land that is in the --
another PUD, or a DRI in this case, that would not be available to
those people, and that is supposed to be part of the 35 acres.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And that's why they
Page 244
October 24-25, 2006
amended it to put those park settings in there, if I remember, in the last
meeting.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I believe it was called parklets.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Parklets.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Parklets.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I don't know what to say.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, obviously -- and I'm not sure if
there was a -- that was a second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coyle's light is
on.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So is mine.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala, I believe.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I wanted to ask a question
about stormwater management, excuse me. And one of the things that
the Conservancy brought up to me was, they wanted to make sure that
the stormwater management was, indeed, going to cleanse the water.
That was the big concern to them.
And I just wanted to make a suggestion. This might be way too
late or whatever, but I was thinking, as long as you're going to be
moving that stormwater into one area, and then after cleansing it you
were going to send it into the Cocohatchee, could that ever be
somehow rerouted so that we can use it as reclaimed water
somewhere, you know, in the golf courses around there or something?
I mean, it's not a requirement or anything. And you can just think
about this later on, but I really think that that might be a good idea for
the use of the water rather than putting it into the Caloosa --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Cocohatchee.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- or Cocohatchee River. And--
anyway, but I wanted to be assured that the water will be cleansed
properly.
MR. ANDERSON: I'll let someone competent address that.
MR. BARBER: Semi-competent. Good afternoon,
Page 245
October 24-25,2006
Commissioners. For the record, Rick Barber, Agnoli Barber &
Brundage.
The criteria that they'll have to design to -- and of course, the site
is not designed because it's still in the zoning phase, but these are the
criteria that they'll have to meet to get the South Florida Water
Management district permit and also get through your land
development code.
They'll have to provide wet detention to treat the first inch or two
and a half times -- two and a half inches times the percent impervious
on the area. So if the site has a lot of impervious area, it will have to
increase the amount of volume that it holds. That can be provided in
wet detention or dry retention.
There has to be an additional 50 percent of the standard volume
that you would find at any site for protection of impaired water. Since
the Cocohatchee is an impaired water, they have to increase the water
retention volume by 50 percent to meet what the Conservancy -- the
Conservancy was concerned about. So this is part of the criteria they
have to meet.
They also have to provide an analysis beyond just the water
quality volume that proves that there can be no degradation of the
impaired waters.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So that will be done?
MR. BARBER: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's mandatory, correct?
MR. BARBER: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: In order to get their permit.
MR. BARBER: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I just needed to know that. I
wanted to make sure of that.
Another question that was asked by somebody that came up here,
and I didn't hear the answer to it -- it doesn't involve you, Rick.
Bruce?
Page 246
October 24-25, 2006
MR. BARBER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Somebody asked, will the road be
widened at the same time the building will be built.
MR. ANDERSON: I'm going to see if transportation will come
up here and give us the time frame for when the widening is expected
to be completed.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Beginning of'08, I believe.
MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, Transportation
Administrator. And Mr. Chairman, you're correct. About June or July
of next year we'll be in the last section of the three, which will be from
Airport over to 41. That will be completed in the spring of '08. So
you're about from June or July to about February or March of '08.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And while you're here Norm,
I just wanted to reiterate one more time that -- now, how many exits
will this -- will the traffic be able to disperse, especially the truck
traffic? How many actual places? I mean, is it all going to go in one
way? Is it going to be dispersed amongst other areas?
MR. FEDER: Well, they've created some stipulations as I've
heard in the discussions today. But essentially as far as what they're
doing is they are adding the connection of the current Creekside Way,
which essentially stops about at the post office, continue that down to
Creekside Boulevard. That will open up for other flows in the area.
They're going to concentrate their flows, though, to the arterial, which
is Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Will that be done immediately, that
connectivity?
MR. FEDER: My understanding, as part of their construction,
they're going to establish that. And whether or not you want to make
that a first requirement on them, I don't know.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. FEDER: But it does give other alternate flow routes, which
is why we required that of them.
Page 247
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. That seems to also answer--
Mr. Johannsen had said something about, he wants this to be a
win-win, and that's what I'm looking for is a win-win. A win-win
means everybody has to give up a little something to come out so that
everybody wins, you know.
And so I'm trying to meet all of their objections and -- as well as
meet all of the criteria for the Naples Daily News so we can all come
out a winner.
And so one of the objections was, of course, the traffic. But then
if it's dispersed into what, three exits or four exits?
MR. FEDER: You've got more flow opportunities than you now
have out there today with the adding of that for overall flow in the
area.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So they can go out Goodlette --
MR. FEDER: Again, but their concentrations will be on
Immokalee Road.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- at Immokalee, and they can also
go out on U.S. 41?
MR. FEDER: Yes. If an individual is going through the area,
can go out on 41 through Creekside Boulevard. I believe they've
restricted some of their truck traffic on Creekside Boulevard, as I've
heard. But it opens up overall flow in the area, yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And another thing that
sounded pretty dangerous to me, and that was, when they were talking
about big semis making U-turns, what can be done to avoid that?
MR. FED ER: My understanding is that they're talking about
modifying where they're doing U-turns. I would not necessarily
encourage it. We will have a six-lane roadway that theoretically could
address it, and I'll defer to the applicant in what they may want to say
on that issue.
MR. ANDERSON: With regard to that issue, again, I would
stress that that was nighttime delivery distribution vehicles that we
Page 248
October 24-25,2006
were talking about that there was a concern about them making
V -turns in the middle of the night to head back north.
And I've spoken with Mr. Fish, and the Daily News is willing to
require its distribution trucks that are headed north to continue north
on Immokalee Road up to Livingston Road to head north rather than
make a V-turn in the middle of the night.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Did you say north, or heading east to
Livingston Road and then head north, is that what you're saying?
MR. ANDERSON: Heading north on Immokalee Road.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, no, east.
MR. ANDERSON: I mean east on Immokalee Road if they're
wanting to go --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: North.
MR. ANDERSON: -- wind up going north, yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And they'll go to Livingston Road.
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And the good thing is, it's their
trucks and so they can direct their employees. It's not like we have
trucks coming --
MR. ANDERSON: And again, that only becomes a concern
between the hours of 10 p.m. and seven a.m., so -- otherwise they'd
use Creekside Boulevard.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And we've answered the
concern with noise control and also accountability for the noise
control; is that correct?
MR. ANDERSON: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And also eliminating odor problems.
We haven't heard of any that were even emanating from the first
place. And from what I've understood from what you've said, as well
as the soy-based ink and so forth, it seems that these odors will be
contained and -- but certainly if we hear of any or you hear of any,
Page 249
October 24-25, 2006
you will address that problem immediately; is that correct?
MR. ANDERSON: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And then -- and I had also heard that
they had changed the location of the building. We understand, instead
it said changing of the location of the delivery docks so that the noise
will -- anything pulling up to those things will revert back into the
shopping center rather than drift over into the residential units; is that
correct?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, I think that right there
you've given, the people of Collier's Reserve has given, so
everybody's -- everybody is a win-win, and I would say I make a
motion to approve.
MR. WEIGEL: Just a minute. There's a motion on the floor.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have just a couple of questions for
staff and, perhaps, the petitioner.
First of all, I would like to have a question concerning
compatibility answered. Although there are both tall and smaller
buildings in the area when you're talking about compatibility, what
does the law provide? Is it compatibility to existing zoning or is it
compatibility with what happens to be built there?
MR. DeRUNTZ: Well, we would -- Mike DeRuntz, principal
planner, for the record. It's compatibility with the zoning and the --
what was approved in those PUDs for this location, those heights that
were approved. So it's for the zoning, compatibility with the zoning.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So if something is zoned for a
maximum height of 80 feet, it would be compatible then with
something that is zoned for a maximum height of 75 feet?
MR. DeRUNTZ: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that's what the law says?
MR. DeRUNTZ: Yes, sir.
Page 250
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd like to pursue one of the issues
that Commissioner Fiala raised. In the executive summary it clearly
states under legal considerations that we have to take into
consideration in making a decision here that the timing or sequence of
development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy and available
improvements in facilities, both public and private, shall be provided.
Now, we've talked about the general timing, but we haven't -- I
haven't heard any assurance of a phasing schedule that would make
sure that, if approved, the construction would not begin until the
adequate public facilities are available. Is that something that has
been determined?
MR. DeRUNTZ: Phasing has not been brought up in the
petition. I would like to ask the petitioner to address that comment.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's on the executive summary of
8B under legal considerations. It is the fourth point. I would have
expected somebody to have addressed that, and I haven't heard
anybody say a thing about that.
MR. DeRUNTZ: The -- when staff reviewed the application,
engineering services did review the availability of water and sewers
and the issue of stormwater management.
Transportation looked at the transportation network, and they had
no objection to what was proposed so that they felt that it was
compliance and consistent with the Growth Management Plan so that
they did not raise an objection.
They did -- one of the conditions, as was mentioned earlier, with
Creekside, that they were going to provide the continuation of
Creekside Way.
MR. SCHMITT: Let me answer that question. Commissioner, in
our reviews after transportation reviewed it, it was deemed consistent
with our Growth Management Plan under 5.1 and 5.2 of our GMP.
As you well know, the concurrency is at submittal of plat or plan.
Talking to the petitioner, we still have no idea when they're going to
Page 251
October 24-25, 2006
submit for that plan. That's something the petitioner would have to
ask. I don't even know if they're prepared today to even address when
they're going to submit for the Site Development Plan.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Give me the general time frames
from point of rezone to submittal of Site Development Plans under
normal circumstances,
MR. SCHMITT: Normal circumstances, that could be six
months to a year. They -- normally a client does not spend the kind of
money designing a site plan until they have the zoning, unless they're
really fast tracking, then they take a risk.
But I would assume a project of this size is going to take at least
six months before they come back and even submit, and statistically
it's going to be at least two reviews. So we're probably talking a year
from now before they have approval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: For the site development plan?
MR. SCHMITT: For the site plan, the Site Development Plan.
Now, this will be an EDC fast track. An EDC fast track, they can
submit for a building permit upon completion of the -- or upon
submittal of the second submittal of the site plan. So they can also
have a simultaneous review of the building permit at that time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now let's -- as long as we
understand that concurrency issues can be resolved at site plan
submittal --
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- let's move on to the other legal
consideration, which is that the proposed change will not create or
excessively increase traffic congestion. And we might get Norm
Feder up here.
MR. SCHMITT: I've got to defer to Norm on that one.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, Norm, part of this property is
agricultural.
MR. FEDER: Yes.
Page 252
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It is going to be rezoned, if not
now, at some point in the future. So we're going to have something
other than agricultural there.
MR. FEDER: Acknowledged.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Probably will be commercial or
industrial, since that's --
MR. FEDER: That's the prevailing zoning in the area.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. What is the difference in
impact from a traffic standpoint of commercial as opposed to this
particular use?
MR. FEDER: Commercial would actually generate more trips
during the peak hour on the network. It would probably generate a
little bit less in truck traffic, but the heaviest truck traffic we would be
experiencing would be in off-peak hours, based on this proposal I've
heard so far.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, from the standpoint of
burden on the transportation system?
MR. FEDER: Would be greater on a commercial application of
this site than on the proposal that's before you today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. It appears to me, based
upon what I've heard today, that what has so many people upset is that
they bought a home and made a fairly substantial investment under the
assumption that certain things would not happen and that if we were to
rezone this, that bad things or things they never predicted are going to
happen, and that's always a very difficult issue to deal with.
But I guess in order to get to the bottom line, I want to take my
colleagues back a bit and perhaps forward. There are two other
communities, the Estuary and Bear's Paw, both gated communities,
who were severely impacted by a proposed overpass adjacent to their
neighborhoods, which not only elevated the traffic so it could be seen
and people could look into their homes, but they would have
additional sound problems and traffic problems, and, of course, the
Page 253
October 24-25, 2006
height of that overpass was objectionable.
The majority of the commission made the decision to do it
anyway, and the reason for that was that the majority of the
commission believed that it was in the best interest of the entire
county .
We have proposed the extension of Vanderbilt Beach Road. We
are destroying people's peaceful enjoyment of their property. It is a
terrible thing to do, but we're doing it because it's in the best overall
interest of our county.
We have just authorized the purchase of a defunct car dealership
so that we can use it for a Collier Area Transit station. There are
people who do not like that. It disrupts their life. It is adjacent to their
homes.
Bottom line, what I'm saying here is, that there is very little that
we as a county commission can do with respect to approving anything
anywhere that isn't going to make somebody angry. So it's a difficult,
difficult problem, but bottom line for me is that this zoning will have a
significantly smaller impact than any future commercial zoning will
have, and it will be rezoned. There is no question about it, it will be
rezoned.
Number two, printing and publishing is clearly a permitted use.
There's no way around that. It says printing and publishing. The
building height is compatible with the zoning of the adjacent areas.
So I would have to second Commissioner Fiala's motion for
approval, but I believe that it would be a really good idea if we did
something that would help mitigate these problems of sound and sight
lines.
And by the way, do you have a sight line study? I'm sure you
must. I haven't seen it. You know, what is it really going to look like
from Collier's Reserve? And what can we do to mitigate that problem
for these residents?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think that's a very good question,
Page 254
October 24-25, 2006
because we're looking at a 75- foot building. You're looking at a
seven-and-a-half story building.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, these were in your report. I
know they're hard to see because they weren't in color. That picture,
Mike, I believe, is from Collier's Reserve side and --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you see, that really isn't--
isn't an accurate portrayal.
MR. SCHMITT: That is the entire building envelope, which is
not -- a portrayal of just that one area of the building, of course. But
these were submitted by the applicant.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. That shows the building
higher than it really is at that particular corner. The raised portion of
the building is actually set back considerably so that if I can believe
this sight line, it would not even be visible from that particular
location.
Now, I did see -- someone showed me a photograph taken from
that area that I would like to see again. Okay. Now, that's a
photograph that shows what?
MR. ARNOLD: If I might, Wayne Arnold, for the record. This
is a photograph from near Mr. Johannsen's house looking back to the
west. What you see in the foreground --
AUDIENCE: South.
MR. ARNOLD: I'm sorry, south. What you see in the
foreground is the bank building that's been constructed in the River
Chase Shopping Center tract that's approximately 50 feet high.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So the building that I see on the
right center of this thing is already in existence here?
MR. ARNOLD: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now there's something else.
MR. ARNOLD: Yes. When you look just to the left of that
image, you will see that -- you cannot very visibly see it, but that
represents the approximate location and view of the Naples Daily
Page 255
October 24-25, 2006
News facilities that we're proposing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, what can we do to make that
invisible?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, one of the things that that doesn't really
represent -- well, I think one of the questions I have is, I mean, I
understand the question of invisibility. I don't know that that's a true
test considering that this property that's the subject of the photograph
is near its own commercial tract that allows 80 feet tall as its height.
Having said that --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I understand that, but what
can we do to try to soften the blow here a little bit?
MR. ARNOLD: What we've offered was the conceptual
landscape exhibit that we believe will help soften that view. I can't
specifically say with clarity that that's going to obscure every view
that, for instance, Mr. Johannsen may have, but certainly for the
majority of the residents who live in Collier's Reserve, their view
coming out of their site, we hope to look like that.
I mean, as you heard Mr. Fish say, this is going to be designed as
a building that's going to be something that meets your architectural
standard. It's going to be a monument. It's their business
headquarters, and it's going to cost millions and millions of dollars to
construct. So the landscaping enhancements we've proposed, I
believe, adequately addresses that.
And I think as Mr. Anderson mentioned, that that would be an
exhibit to the PUD that we're willing to have inserted as one of the
other exhibits.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Would you be willing to add some
additional landscaping to try to make it a little more invisible? It
couldn't be particularly expensive, would it?
MR. ARNOLD: I think certainly within reason we'd be more
than happy to work with the residents to do that. I don't know that I
can stand here and tell you exactly what tree placement. We can
Page 256
October 24-25, 2006
certainly work with the residents to work on tree placement and help
obscure the -- I think the couple of homes that have and share a similar
view of Mr. Johannsen.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning? Then I
have some questions.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. The motion is to approve
8C as the Planning Commission's recommendations and findings?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I, you know, interesting
this weekend, I was at the North Regional Hospital all weekend
visiting, and I noticed something that is very obvious is the helicopters
flying over, not only during the day, but the night, and I recognize that
living next to -- near the Cleveland Clinic. But the two gentlemen
from Collier's Reserve were very supportive of the hospital over there.
And all these things that get approved is a -- is a community
benefit. Just like Mr. Diaz has decided to stay here in Collier County.
Although that isn't one of the considerations that we -- that I think as
far as land use, but he has demonstrated that he has been a good
neighbor, and there was a lot of neighbor concerns. And it is a
beautiful facility.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I wish they'd keep up their
landscaping.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right off Coconut community.
And I'll talk to him on your behalf.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I'm not sure if a building
height would fit the industrial section of our straight zoning of our
Land Development Code.
Mr. Anderson?
MR. ANDERSON: No, sir. Correct me if I'm wrong, Mr.
Arnold, but the industrial district's building height limitation is 50 feet.
Page 257
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So if we want to provide
for the community, we need to provide for -- in amendments, like I
was suggesting to Commissioner Halas, if it's inappropriate to have a
printing press in a business park, then we should remove it, but we
also must provide it in other zoning districts.
Is there anything that you want to get on the record before we
need to close the public hearing? And one thing --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It's been closed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: One thing that's really, really
obvious to me, many people talked about a variance. This is not a
variance. And I don't believe that Naples Daily News would come to
the Board of Commissioners for a variance. I think that would put
their editorial page in jeopardy since they have criticized the variance
in the past, so there is no variance.
And, again, the economic impacts of our decisions is not based
upon land uses law, though I appreciate the people's input on that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Question I have -- are you
finished?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: A question that I have is, in zoning, it's
not only in building heights, but it's -- I would believe in what I read
in here, zoning also is compatibility of what is going to be placed on
that piece of property.
And my concern is when I read the SIC codes -- and the SIC
code is 2711, okay -- and the -- it depends upon the intensity of what
that SIC code relates to, and that is printing applications. And, of
course, a SIC code of 2711, I believe is -- refers to newspapers, is that
correct?
MR. DeRUNTZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And in normal areas of the country
where there's a SIC code of2711, aren't these located basically in an
industrial park or an industrial complex?
Page 258
October 24-25, 2006
MR. DeRUNTZ: The -- our --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Not in a business park. They're in a park,
I mean --
MR. DeRUNTZ: Our Land Development Code identifies this as
a permitted use in a business park with that SIC code classification.
And the Growth Management Plan also identifies printing as an
allowable use and a desirable use in that --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But it --
MR. DeRUNTZ: -- area.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But when I looked at and I read the Land
Development Code in the Growth Management Plan, I couldn't see
where this meshed in to be compatible with the surrounding
community, okay.
This is a -- in other words, if you're telling me that that's possible,
then there's a possibility that we could come up with some code
whereby we could have a steel rolling mill next to a residential
property, because to me this is precedent setting.
MR. DeRUNTZ: Well, in any rezoning for a planned unit
development, you -- the elements that you cited before in the section
2.08 and -- A and B, those -- each of those -- every time you need to
look at those and to weight those out to see if they are compatible with
-- that use is compatible with the surrounding uses that are permitted
in existence. And if they are not, then you would look for ways of
mitigating the impacts.
And the concerns that was addressed today, we were look at
transportation impacts, we were looking at noise impacts, we were
looking at site impacts and stormwater impacts. And the -- you know,
the petitioner and the staff has worked closely to try to address those
issues because the staff had those concerns as well, and so did the
Planning Commission, and they identify 37 conditions that they
wanted the petitioner to meet, and they did that and adjusted their
PUD document to address each of those concerns.
Page 259
October 24-25, 2006
So the idea of incorporating mitigation to make this use
compatible with the surrounding uses was thought of quite seriously,
and the Planning Commission felt it was met, and they passed the
recommendation of approval to the board.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Wouldn't it raise a red flag if you had to
go through 30 some different variations, that maybe there's something
wrong, that it doesn't quite fit?
I mean, when you look at, you know, a list of 34 variations, all of
a sudden, it's like, why do we need all these variations? Something's
not right here.
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows, I'm the Zoning
Manager.
The review that staff does is one of consistency with the codes
and the comprehensive plan. Everything that we do has to be
consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Now, many petitions that come in before us, they have a grand
scheme that may not be completely consistent and it takes several
reviews to bring it into consistency.
We have -- this Naples Daily News project went through many
reviews, many meetings with the applicant, came up with a list of
stipulations where we felt it would mitigate the project and is now
incorporated in your executive summary. I think there's -- Mike?
MR. DeRUNTZ: Thirty-seven.
MR. BELLOWS: Thirty-seven. Those 37 stipulations, it's, in
staffs opinion, would make this consistent.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Thank you. Well, let's
see where we are right now. So far we've had a motion for denial, and
that motion failed because of a second.
And we're starting to discuss the same issues over and over again
and we're all just rephrasing some of the questions and we're getting
the same answers, and it's consistent.
Page 260
October 24-25, 2006
Since we have had a motion for denial and it hasn't got a second,
that leaves one option open, and that's motion for approval, and I'd
like to make a motion.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners Fiala already did that, and it was
seconded by Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I figured the length of time we
were going that it never went anyplace or something. I just wanted to
make sure. Okay, go ahead. Sorry to jump the gun on that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's all right. You didn't jump the
gun.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It happened so long ago, I forgot
about it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Who made the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I did. Coyle seconded.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Manager?
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman -- and I haven't said anything except
SInce --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You don't have to either.
MR. MUDD: Yes, I think we do, sir. I want to make sure that
what we're talking about -- the motion's talked about the Planning
Commission recommendations, and that was 34. The zoning
department's was 37 stipulations, and I want to make sure that it's clear
on the record that we're talking about those 37 stipulations.
And then I also want to make sure on the record your motion
includes those seven mitigating steps that Mr. Anderson espoused
earlier from the podium that they would do, the Naples Daily News
would do, to try to minimize the traffic impact upon Collier Reserve,
and I want to make sure that those particular steps are included in your
motion so that we can include those into the PUD document.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that your recommendation?
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I just want to make sure that's what your --
Page 261
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I sure did, including, by the
way, the interconnectivity that we spoke of here, and I didn't see that
written on there. So yes, I want to include all 37, plus the seven steps,
and interconnectivity, please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, that's it. I'd just like to see the
motion get called so we can vote on it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those in favor of the motion
that was made by Commissioner Fiala and seconded by Commissioner
Coyle for approval of this project, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
Aye.
Motion carries.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman, this is --
pardon me.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2006-50: PUDA-2005-AR-8832, CREEKSIDE
WEST, INC., REPRESENTED BY D. WAYNE ARNOLD, AICP,
OF Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A., AND R. BRUCE
ANDERSON, ESQUIRE, OF ROETZEL & ANDRESS, L.P.A.,
REQUESTING A PUD AMENDMENT TO THE CREEKSIDE
COMMERCE PARK PUD. THIS AMENDMENT PROPOSES TO
Page 262
October 24-25, 2006
REDUCE THE AREA OF THE CREEKSIDE PUD BY
APPROXIMATELY 2.32 ACRES AND REZONE THE AREA
FROM CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PUD TO NAPLES
DAILY NEWS BUSINESS PARK PUD. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF 105 ACRES IS LOCATED IN
SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. (THIS APPLICATION IS BEING
SUBMITTED SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE NAPLES DAILY
NEWS BUSINESS PARK PUD AND WILL BE CONSIDERED A
FAST-TRACK) - ADOPTED
MOTION TO ACCEPT EXPERT WITNESSES - APPROVED 5/0
MOTION TO ACCEPT EVIDENCE - APPROVED 5/0
MR. WEIGEL: County Attorney here. This was in -- there are
two agenda items, 8B and 8C, and this essentially referenced 8C. So
as part of the protocol to finish the item would be to discuss briefly
8B, the Creekside element.
At that prior meeting, which there's reconsideration today,
Creekside element --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: David?
MR. WEIGEL: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How about if we let the room clear
out and let our stenographer --
MR. WEIGEL: That's fine with me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- take a little break here, too.
MR. WEIGEL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve 8B.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor
for approval of 8B by Commissioner Henning and a second by
Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
Page 263
October 24-25, 2006
(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.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
Aye.
And at that, I think we're going to conclude today's activities, and
we -- Board of County Commissioners will reconvene at nine a.m.
tomorrow morning to finish up the rest of our agenda.
Thank you very much, and we are adjourned for the evening.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
*****
(The Board of County Commissioners adjourned until October 25,
2006, at 9:00 a.m.)
Page 264
October 24-25, 2006
CONTINUATION OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
October 25, 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 districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in
EXTENDED REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the
Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following
members present:
CHAIRMAN: Frank Halas
Fred Coyle (Absent)
Jim Coletta
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
Leo Ochs, Deputy County Manager
Mike Pettit, Assistant County Attorney
Page 265
October 24-25, 2006
MR. MUDD: Ladies and Gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Thank you very much, County Manager Jim Mudd.
I'd just like to say we're reconvening the Board of County
Commissioners from yesterday. And at this time I believe we're
starting off with 10(B).
Item #10B
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD CONTRACT #06-4025,
COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFFS SPECIAL OPERATIONS
BUILDING AND TO APPROVE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SHERIFFS
SPECIAL OPERATIONS FACILITY, PROJECT 52002, IN THE
APPROXIMATE AMOUNT OF $10,650,000, THE EXACT
AMOUNT TO BE PRESENTED AT THE MEETING-
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And that's a recommendation to award
Contract No. 06-4025, Collier County Sheriffs Special Operations
Building, and to approve the necessary budget amendment for the
construction of the Sheriffs special operations facility, Project 52002,
in the approximate amount of $10,650,000, the exact amount to be
presented at this meeting.
And Mr. Ron Hovell, the Principal Project Manager for Facilities
Management, will present and will give you the exact dollar amount.
MR. HOVELL: Good morning, Commissioners. Ron Hovell,
Principal Project Manager, Facilities Management Department. And I
will give that exact amount.
I have a short presentation, and then we'll be available to answer
Page 266
October 24-25, 2006
any of your questions.
Just a little bit of background on this proj ect. It was requested
probably over 10 years ago. The lease arrangement with the Naples
Airport was approved by the board in May of 2004. The design
contract was approved by the board in September of 2004. And we
got to the point of the city and the Naples Airport Authority approving
the site development plan in March of 2006, and we're now to the
phase where the building permit application is ready for pickup in the
City of Naples.
We started the bid advertisement process in July. We had eight
firms, general contractor firms pick up the plans. But unfortunately on
September 7th when we received bid, we only had one bid, from
Vanderbilt Bay Construction.
There were other bidders present at the bid opening. One of the
issues that were raised were potentially, the metal building pricing
Issue.
We felt -- when we did a bid review, we felt that the metal
building issue related to the fact that this is slightly above the normal
code and therefore it's not a standard off-the-shelf package that a metal
building manufacturer provides.
But there was overall general contractor interest. We went
through and looked at issues like construction materials, pricing and
the timing of a potential rebid if we were to say that one bid wasn't
enough. And also looked at subcontractor availability, and felt that
given the timing, that we're nearing the end of the calendar year, if we
were to start the process to go out to rebid, we would be indicating to
the contractors that they wouldn't be starting the work until next
calendar year when the next round of price increases is due, on
January 1st.
We specifically obtained copies of all the subcontract quotes.
We don't normally do this on a low-bid process, but we did from
Vanderbilt Bay Construction obtain all the subcontractor costs, along
Page 267
October 24-25, 2006
with their direct costs. Much like we would do for a guaranteed
maximum price, if we had a CM at-risk type of contract.
There was competition at the subcontractor level. We reviewed
the cost for the metal building and felt that it was reasonable. We
discussed cost-savings alternatives. We did a little bit of value
engineering, saved a little over $100,000 in that regard. Because we
were able to negotiate this contract instead of just accepting the bid
directly, we also negotiated up front that the way we would lay it out,
that we would take a lot of the direct material purchases out of the
contract up front and therefore we would get that 140,000 plus dollars
in tax avoidance. We'd take that savings right up front and, therefore,
we wouldn't have to have them pay -- them, the general contractor --
pay for their performance and payment bond on all those items that we
pulled out. So that was about another $50,000 that we were able to
knock out of the total proj ect cost.
That brings the total project estimate at this point to $18,637,400.
Today we have an approved budget of$15,729,000, leaving a shortfall
of $2,908,400.
Therefore, our bottom line recommendation is to approve the
contract as negotiated with Vanderbilt Bay for $10,250,269, along
with $2,342,432 in direct material purchases.
Additionally, there's a $2.6 million subcontract with Johnson
Controls that we have a direct contract with Johnson Controls anyway
that we had planned to bring back to the board at a future date, once
we work out the final details with them, to see if we can save any
additional monies in that area.
The second piece of the recommendation would be to authorize
the issuance of a commercial paper loan in the amount of
$17,272,700. There was always a commercial paper loan envisioned
for this proj ect. We just had to increase the amount somewhat because
of the increased overall project estimate.
And the last piece would be to approve a budget amendment in
Page 268
October 24-25, 2006
the amount of $2,908,400.
Unless there's any specific questions, that concludes my portions
of --
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, if you -- just another piece of
information. If you remember correctly, not at this last budget but the
year prior budget and for 2006, the Sheriff and his budget put $1.7
million away every year for this particular facility.
In order to do the commercial paper loan and to pay it back, we'll
need about 2.6 million a year to pay it back. And that -- around
$900,000 will come out of that one-third mill in the capital budget part
that we've got.
So just to kind of let you know how -- if you remember back,
there was 1.7. The special operations facility was an issue of
discussion in the '06 budget preparation. So just kind of let you know
where those monies are coming from and what's there.
MR. HOVELL: And I'm sorry, ifhe didn't specifically say so,
the source of funds for repaying the debt service is law enforcement
impact fees.
MR. MUDD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I know that this is supposed to
be a special ops hangar, including an aircraft hangar. But I don't
really know what all is going into this for the 18 million. What are we
actually getting for 18 million?
MR. HOVELL: I can review both the size of the building and
the site plan, if you'd like.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I just wanted to know. Like
what does special ops mean? I can envision what I think it means, but
I want you to just tell me.
MR. HOVELL: All right. Might I defer to Lieutenant Mark
Churney (phonetic) from the Sheriffs Office to --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: See if the Lieutenant can help us out
Page 269
October 24-25, 2006
here.
LIEUTENANT CHURNEY: Good morning. Lieutenant Mike
Churney, Collier County Sheriffs Office.
Special operations entails aviation, marine patrol, agricultural,
canine. There are also some other specialty units that I'd rather not
reveal in a public forum. If you'd like to contact me, I'd be more than
happy to share those with you one-on-one that will be going in there.
We just don't want that out public, those other units that will be in
there. But there will be a multitude.
But primarily it's all the units outside of road patrol that you may
see in uniform that have specialized functions within the Sheriffs
Office.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So will it house their vehicles, for
instance, or --
LIEUTENANT CHURNEY: It will house many specialty
vehicles, but it will be office space for those people as well, training
areas, conference rooms, squad rooms for those units to have their
daily and weekly briefings in as they go -- storage for certain things,
such as canine has dog sleeves and training equipment. And so there
would be a storage area for them.
And I'll use canine as an example. There would be a canine
sergeant's office in the building. There will also be a squad room so
when they come together in their daily briefings, they'll come into that
squad room. They'll have individual work stations within that squad
room that those deputies assigned to canine conduct their reports and
so forth before shift or coming off a shift.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Will this also be a hardened
building? Is that what we're doing here?
LIEUTENANT CHURNEY: It's -- yes, it's somewhat hardened,
the first floor. And I'll let Mr. Hovell discuss that directly. But the
first floor is hardened and the whole compound is fenced.
MR. HOVELL: I'll elaborate a little.
Page 270
October 24-25, 2006
On the hardening, at least from my aspect, the metal building is
above code minimum for storm reasons, so I think instead of the -- I
think it's something like 140-mile-an-hour three-second gust is the
standard code for a metal building. These specifications were for
160-mile-per-hour six-second gusts, so it's higher.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to make sure when
we're building, we're building it right all the way down the line.
Okay, thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We don't approve the
architectural features or the allocation of space within this building or
other buildings; is that right?
MR. HOVELL: I don't believe, other than the original design
contract and then the construction contract that's before you now that
we come back for those types of items, no, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
I noticed about some of the things being taken out for Johnson
Control, including wiring, telephone, stuff like that. Do you have any
concerns of that being problematic during the construction phase?
MR. HOVELL: Well, we're not suggesting that we're going to
eliminate the work, we're just suggesting that we're going have
Vanderbilt Bay still coordinate them as a subcontractor, but that we
will pay them directly through our contract with them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So that won't be problematic
between the contractor --
MR. HOVELL: No, we don't believe so.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
I'll make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just wanted to see, do you have
any green features in this building to try to save on energy costs, do be
Page 271
October 24-25, 2006
able to utilize whatever natural energy we can?
MR. CAMP: We have what's called the vertical standards. And
we are just now going into sustainability and green buildings. We
don't have a full program yet. Probably it will take us the next four to
six months to roll it out. In fact, this Friday we met with our
colleagues in Sarasota, who have a pretty extensive plan, so as not to
reinvent the wheel.
But we do have a number of items that are sustainable items or
green building items. For instance, a waterless urinal. There's a
number of those things. The fact that we have ice here. So we have a
number of them. We've just never formally applied for the L.E.E.D.
status, which is the sustainability or green building. But we plan to in
the next six to -- four to six months.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we've got the thought
process going there.
MR. CAMP: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any further discussion?
MR. MUDD: One other piece.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure.
MR. MUDD: A lot of folks that are going in this particular
facility are coming out of L.E.E.D. space, so it's going to save us
money as far as leases are concerned, too.
So we thought about different units that are going to be in there,
but Commissioner Henning, we don't tell the sheriff what he's going to
put in that building. We just ask him what he's going to put into it, to
make sure where it's coming from so that we can kill leases and things
like that that made good sense.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I mean, I just heard
concerns from some of my colleagues that we really don't approve
facilities. We approve, like it was stated, the contracts for design and
construction. But the uses and the allocation of uses we don't approve.
Page 272
October 24-25, 2006
And I think that was a concern from some of my colleagues that,
you know, maybe we should take over that duty.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, in this case I -- you know, I
just wanted to know. It didn't real state anything in here, and I just
wanted to know. Certainly I don't want to get into anything in detail,
because I understand this is a special ops building, and it should stay
that way. I just wanted to know what was in there.
MR. CAMP: In this particular case -- again, for the record, Skip
Camp -- it was designed that way. And we will be happy to meet with
you on a one-on-one to show you the occupants. Again--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great, I'd love that, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, I call the question. We
have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Henning, a second by
Commissioner Fiala.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed by like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries. Thank you.
Item #10C
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE EXHIBIT E,
AMENDMENT #1 TO CONTRACT #06-3914, CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT AT RISK SERVICES FOR THE COLLIER
COUNTY FLEET FACILITIES WITH WRIGHT
CONSTRUCTION CORP. IN THE AMOUNT OF $ $9,272,741.10
Page 273
October 24-25, 2006
FOR THE FLEET FACILITY, PROJECT 52009, PHASE 2 WHICH
INCLUDES THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW FLEET
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT FACILITY AND TO APPROVE
CHANGE #15 TO CONTRACT #02-3422, PROFESSIONAL
ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR NEW COUNTY FLEET
FACILITY, WITH DISNEY & ASSOCIATES, P.A. TO UPDATE
THE RATE SCHEDULE AND INCLUDE ADDITIONAL
SERVICES NECESSARY FOR CONSTRUCTION PHASE 2 IN
THE AMOUNT OF $60,885 - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE
NOVEMBER 141 2006 BCC MEETING - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is No. 10(C). This is
a recommendation to approve Exhibit E, amendment number one to
Contract 06-3914, Construction Management at Risk Services for the
Collier County Fleet facilities with Wright Construction Corp. in the
amount of $9,272,741. 10 for the Fleet Facility, Project 52009, Phase
2, which includes the construction of the new Fleet Management
Department facility to approve change number 15 to Contract
02-3422, professional architectural services for the new county fleet
facility, with Disney & Associates, P .A. to update the rate schedule
and include additional services necessary for construction of Phase 2
in the amount of $60,885.
Again, Mr. Ron Hovell, your Principal Project Manager and
Facility Management will present.
MR. HOVELL: Okay, on this one the history, again, project
requested over 10 years ago. The design contract was awarded in
February of 2003.
Along the way, you may recall, we came to you for some
changes to the design contract to study the potential for adding the
CAT operations facility, and perhaps acquiring some of the properties,
either north and/or south. In the end I don't think those really worked
out.
Page 274
October 24-25, 2006
We did get the site development plan approved in February of
this year. You awarded the construction manager at risk contract in
March of this year. The building permits are now ready for all the
phases that are currently approved. And then we're also looking at
adding the fueling facility, which we brought to you back in July.
You did approve that addition to the project scope.
So the design contract specifically, we're now up to change
number 15. A lot of these changes had to do with looking at different
options along the way. Many of them related to CAT. But the
contract is so old that the contract does contemplate that if you go
beyond I think it's two years, they are authorized under the contract to
ask for an update to their rate schedule. So that's one of the things that
this took care of.
Another item. Apparently back when this contract was originally
negotiated, they were negotiating to put together a budget, and so they
deleted a lot of items related to the construction phase to stay within
that budget. Rather than award them and say that they would fund
them later, they actually removed them from the contract.
So now as we're approaching the construction phase, we realized
we had to negotiate those back in in order to get the services we need.
And then ultimately we're going to have to do another change to
address the construction related to the next phase which would be the
sheriffs fleet facility portion.
But at this phase we didn't want to belabor our negotiations with
that piece of it, so that will be a forthcoming item to you.
As far as the guaranteed maximum price review, again, we
obtained all the copies of the subcontract bids, along with the Wright
Construction's direct costs. We ensured that there's competition at the
subcontractor level.
The project estimate now, and this is for the total project,
including the sheriffs facility, the total project is now envisioned to be
$22,909,000. Current approved budget is $14,270,000, leaving
Page 275
October 24-25, 2006
roughly an $8.6 million shortfall.
But when you look at it from a phasing point of view, the fleet
facility portion is about 12.8 million and our approved budget is 14.2.
So right now today we don't have a shortfall that we have to
address, but we do recognize that from a total project review, our
suggestion will be that we address that shortfall in the FY 2008
budget.
Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Don't we have some bond issues that
may be paid off at that point in time? Would we be able to use that?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. You have in the one-third mil. capital
budget program there will be about $3.2 million that will get freed up
for the '08 budget. My plan is to use that $3.2 million that's on a
reoccurring status in order to bond this particular shortfall and any
shortfall that I have from the EOC or from the two libraries that we're
going to build until those impact fees are in such a state they can pay it
back.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So what you're telling us is that the
rubber band is pretty well stretched.
MR. MUDD: It will be stretched in the '08 budget, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We will be able to meet the
commitments, though?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. That's the biggest thing, is being
able to meet our commitments. Okay.
Any further questions?
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, first I had a lot of questions
and some concerns about this. And I spoke with Jim Mudd in my
office and asked him a lot of questions. And he answered them for
me; he cleared up a lot of things.
Then I spoke with Crystal Kinzel from the clerk's office also, just
Page 276
October 24-25, 2006
to see if the clerk had any concerns. They did not either. So I feel
very comfortable with this, so I make a motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'll second that.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Exhibit E for $9 million, over
$9 million? That's not actual construction, is it?
MR. HOVELL: Yes, sir, that's the construction contract in
essence with Wright Construction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Exhibit E is from RW A
Consulting?
MR. HOVELL: Oh, no, sir, I'm sorry. That may have been
confusing. There's two pieces in there. There's the design change with
Disney & Associates, and some of their backup paperwork may have
referred to an Exhibit E. But the Exhibit E we're talking about is with
Wright Construction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Where's that at?
MR. HOVELL: I'd have to pull up the executive summary, but
I'm not sure that the Exhibit E was part of the executive summary
package.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, how can we approve it if
it's not in there for us to read? We do have an Exhibit E in here that is
-- refers to a change order, but it has to do with fees.
MR. HOVELL: Yes, sir, I just doubled checked the executive
summary package. You're right, the Exhibit E, as far as the
amendment with Wright Construction, was not part of the package.
My understanding -- and I don't think anybody from purchasing is
here -- but my understanding is that that is a common practice for a
guaranteed maximum price amendments is to just present the dollar
amount to the board and not necessarily have it in the executive
summary package.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Well, the original
contract -- that's what I'm trying to figure out -- for this company
Page 277
October 24-25, 2006
Wright was for a half a million dollars.
MR. HOVELL: Oh, no, sir, the original contract was for only for
about $40,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Forty thousand?
MR. HOVELL: It was just for them to go through the bidding
process to bring a guaranteed maximum price back to the board.
The contract that you approved, I think it was in March -- let's
see, the history here. Whoops, I'm in the wrong one, that's why I'm
not finding it.
Right, back in March when the board approved the guaranteed
maximum price con -- or the CM at-risk contract with Wright
Construction. The actual dollar amount at the time was only I think
$40,000. That was just enough to cover their efforts to do some
amount of design review and to process -- you know, go through the
bidding process to bring back a guaranteed maximum price proposal
to the county.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just have a problem asking to
approve something that's not here.
MR. MUDD: We can move this item to the next meeting, if
that's the board's pleasure.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I feel comfortable with it. I've asked a lot
of questions with the county manager; I went through all the math on
this weekend, and I feel comfortable with it at this point in time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The Exhibit E in here has
nothing to do with what we're supposed to approve. It's a $9 million
change order, and I don't know what it says.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you know what? I'm
comfortable waiting till the next meeting to do that in order to satisfy
Commissioner Henning's concerns. And quite frankly, that will be
interesting for all of us, so I withdraw my motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion to continue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
Page 278
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those in favor of continuing the
motion till the next meeting, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed?
Aye.
Continue on.
MR. HOVELL: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #10D
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #3 TO
ADD $1,390,932.40 FOR INSPECTION SERVICES TO JOHNSON
ENGINEERING, INC. UNDER ITQ 04-3583 CEI SERVICES FOR
COLLIER COUNTY ROAD PROJECTS FOR PROJECT NO.
60018, IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT, FROM COLLIER BLVD.
TO 43RD AVE. N.E. - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: The next item is 10(D). It's a recommendation to
approve change order number three to add $1,390,932.40 for the
inspection services to Johnson Engineering, Inc. under ITQ 04-3583,
CEI Services for Collier County road projects for project number No.
60018, Immokalee Road project from Collier Boulevard to 43rd
Avenue Northeast.
And Mr. Jay Ahmad, your Director of Engineering for
Transportation Services, will present.
MR. AHMAD: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, good morning.
F or the record, Jay Ahmad. I'm your Director of Transportation
Engineering.
Page 279
October 24-25, 2006
This is to finalize a contract with Johnson Engineering for a
change order as a third installment to that contract. Back when this
contract was brought to you, it was brought to you with the
understanding that due to the duration of this contract, there'll be -- it
will come back to you after certain segments are completed. And time
and money was not decided at the time of the contract for the CEI.
So this brings to you that third installment for that contract.
Essentially to extend the time to the end of the project and also to add
money to -- for the services to the end of the project for CEI services,
surveying and management services and their field office. I'll answer
any questions, if you have any.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This money that we're asking
for, will this be the final one?
MR. AHMAD: Yes, indeed. It will be the final one.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can you--
MR. AHMAD: Commissioner, this is not a change order due to
delay in the project or the schedule, it is a bookkeeping item that when
this project was approved, it was decided that it would be brought
back in this fashion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can you tell us what Johnson
Engineering is actually doing for this money?
MR. AHMAD: Correct. Johnson Engineering provides
management services, they do all the inspections, they make sure that
the proj ect is built, is being built in accordance with the plans and
specification, they do the testings through their sub-consultants, and
they also provide day-to-day management services for this project.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And how does the rate that
they're asking for here compare to the rate they previously got? Is it
about the same?
MR. AHMAD: It's approximately the same. This contract was
negotiated, staff completed the negotiation, and this is a negotiated
Page 280
October 24-25, 2006
amount for the services, based on what they've been providing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
Motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any further discussion?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those in favor of the motion that's on
the floor by Commissioner Coletta and seconded by Commissioner
Fiala, all those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
Opposed by like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Item #10E
REPORT FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY HEALTH
DEPARTMENT AND CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT
REGARDING THE INITIATIVES TAKEN TO ELIMINATE
UNSAFE AND UNSOUND HOUSING IN THE IMMOKALEE
COMMUNITY - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 10(E). This is a
report from the Collier County Health Department and Code
Enforcement Department regarding the initiatives taken to eliminate
unsafe and unsound housing in the Immokalee community.
And Ms. Michelle Arnold and --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nancy Frees.
MR. MUDD: -- Nancy Frees from the health department will
Page 281
October 24-25,2006
present this morning.
If you'll remember, yesterday I read something in the change
sheet about this particular item under 10(E) that basically said that if
any service was provided to take down a dilapidated trailer, if the
board approves, the $100,000 requested to move those trailers, we
would treat it as a lien against the property. I read that in yesterday
just so -- to complete the executive summary.
Ms. Arnold?
MS. ARNOLD: Good morning. For the record, Michelle
Arnold, Code Enforcement Director.
Myself and Nancy Frees are here to give you the good news
about all we've done out in Immokalee since June. But I'd like to start
by giving you just some information.
The executive summary identifies some of those items that were
recommended as an outcome of the April 13th workshop out in
Immokalee. I won't go through all those, but we had another meeting
with the board on May 23rd, 2006. At that time the board gave us
direction, the Code Enforcement Department, as well as Nancy's -- the
health department, to take an aggressive approach of addressing
substandard housing out in Immokalee.
On the part of the Code Enforcement Department, we
reorganized and put six staff out there. Currently we have three
investigators out there. Along with those three investigators that are
assigned to do normal investigative work in Immokalee, we took two
of our property maintenance specialists and another general
investigator to refocus and identify those substandard housing in
Immokalee.
As a part of an initial survey that was conducted, we identified
103 homes that looked as if they needed to be removed or
substantially upgraded.
After that initial survey, we have since asked the building
department to help us to conduct more intensive evaluation of those
Page 282
October 24-25, 2006
structures, and they've done that for 20 structures and sent out notices
to property owners.
In addition to the building department's efforts, we got voluntary
compliance from 20 property owners, and they have removed the
structures that we've identified as substandard.
Some of the photographs are identified in the executive summary
for you. I have some more, if you want to look at them. But we are
pretty proud of the efforts being taken out in Immokalee right now.
There's an additional 10 that would be repaired and/or
demolished. And we estimate at this point about 25 units that will
need to be removed or some action taken by the county, because we
haven't gotten any responses from the property owner.
As the county manager indicated, if you all were to allocate the
funds that are being requested today, those dollars would be
reimbursed or a lien would be placed on the property and then
reimbursed once the lien notice is sent to the property owner.
We have, also working with the purchasing department, put an
RFQ, a request for qualifications, to solicit demolition contractors so
that they can help us with that process.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: This amount of money that you're
requesting, how quick can we get these dilapidated shacks out of
there? Can we get it done before the new season starts, the
agricultural season?
MS. ARNOLD: That's what we're hoping. We have already
gone through the RFQ process. That's going to be coming before you
to get approval. And so we have some qualified contractors at this
point to do the work.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So they can get the job done before the
season starts before these people return and have to live in this type of
squaller.
MS. ARNOLD: And they occupy them, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The other thing I ask is obviously you've
Page 283
October 24-25, 2006
taken a lot of resources from other areas to address this issue. How
soon will you be reassigning the people that were pulled from other
areas to be reassigned back to the areas that they were pulled from?
MS. ARNOLD: Well, what we're trying to do is after we've
addressed these 103 units, I think that it's an ongoing effort that we're
going to be doing with the health department. We'll try to focus our
three Immokalee people on that full time, and then the other
investigators probably at the end of the year will be reassigned back
into their areas.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Because I think now what we're doing is
we're -- we've depleted the resources in other areas that need to get
back and get readdressed, so that's my concern, when we're going to
start, when we'll be able to reassign those people. So you don't think it
will be any sooner than the end of the year?
MS. ARNOLD: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And then --
MR. MUDD: Point of clarification. Is that calendar year or
fiscal year?
MS. ARNOLD: Calendar year.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Calendar year. December 31 st.
MS. ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Because I know there's areas that
need to be addressed in other areas of the county, so I just want to
make sure I understand the immediate that we -- the immediate
emergency that we had out there. But we also have to address the
concerns in the other county, too.
MS. ARNOLD: Yes, we--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. And I want to
thank my commissioners for supporting this effort in allowing these
inspectors to go out to Immokalee and put the big push on. It's made a
big difference.
Page 284
October 24-25, 2006
And the Immokalee Civic Association, who's been very
supportive about this all along the way. But also, too, I'd like to give
kudos to the Health Department on hiring the inspectors from the
Immokalee community. What a difference that made, to be able to
have people that were actually working in the fields at one time in
their lives, have been living in the community all their lives, to be able
to be the ones that went out there to be able to address the situation on
a local basis. I can't tell you how much that's appreciated by myself
and the Immokalee community.
And also, for Code Enforcement for putting so much effort into
this. I know Immokalee is a little bit out of the way for a lot of these
code inspectors. And I don't know how we can show our appreciation
enough.
We're on the right direction. I can't tell you how much I
appreciate the fact that we're getting there. And with that, I'd like to
make a motion for approval.
MS. ARNOLD: Well, we have another part of the presentation.
I know Nancy wants to tell about her great efforts out there as well.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have one other question. I hope that
after we clean this up that the town there, with all this pride that they
have there, will make sure that this stuff doesn't reoccur again.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I second your motion, just so
that we have that on the table.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the reason this item is on
the agenda is Commissioner Coy Ie requested a status report from the
health department. I thought it was supposed to be prior to the final
adoption of the budget.
So I'm interested in finding out what they have done since April.
MS. FREES: That's why I'm here.
Let's see if I can do this right. Different equipment than I'm used
to.
Page 285
October 24-25, 2006
And I am Nancy Frees. I'm here to represent Dr. Kolfer, who
sends her apologies to the board since she was not able to attend
today.
I am the division director for the Health Department of the
Immokalee office. I went to work originally in Immokalee in 1981
and have watched a lot of changes over the years.
When our initiative started this summer -- first of all, after our
meeting in the end of May, we created positions, hired and trained
staff. We had the Department of Health chief legal counsel come in
and train staff for a full day to make sure that as we approached this,
we were doing everything appropriately.
We did some rearranging over the summer to get offices
established, and reviewed our data that we had collected after
Hurricane Wilma, to make sure that those were the first units that we
began addressing.
We began to investigate then. It was about the first of July that
we began to investigate and document the violations. What's shown in
this picture is the side of a trailer. What has happened to many of
these trailers, the metal coating on the outside is loose. If you pick it
up, you can see that -- the mold and the deterioration that's occurring
underneath.
What's happening, if an inspector is not out and identifies this, a
piece of metal is taken and that's covered up. But the damage
underneath has never been addressed.
We have gotten documentation. We photograph extensively.
We make copies then of all of our actions with the accompanying
photographs that we send on to code enforcement. We send the other
copy to our legal counsel and a packet, with a notification letter, and is
then sent to the property owner.
We have sent many on to code enforcement that actually has then
provided information for them to continue their work.
This is an example of cooperation and the importance of our
Page 286
October 24-25,2006
relationship working with code enforcement. This property, as you
can see, it was August 23rd that we took this picture. This is not
migrant housing, but a woman from the community came to me and
she said, I'm renting property off of Lake Trafford Road. There's no
water, there's no sewer, there's no electric, and we've been there since
after the hurricane.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Somebody was living in this?
MS. FREES: Someone was living in this, sir. And this was
August. It was not a farm worker. But she said, I hear you're fixing
housing. And I said, sure we are, what do you need?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Did she ever say what the rent was?
MS. FREES: No.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It would be interesting to find out what
she was paying a month.
MS. FREES: Yes.
So I sent my inspectors out originally. They went out from -- the
interesting part was from the front of this house it really didn't look
like there was -- it just looked like a house. You walked to the back,
and basically the back half of it was almost gone.
We were able to cite the owner for sewage and health risks.
Then what we did the same day was take this material, the pictures, all
of the information, copies of the citation, and take it to Michelle's staff
in Immokalee and said, you've got to take it from here.
The woman was relocated within a couple of days and had other
housing.
So I think that's what's so important with the working relationship
that we've got now going with code enforcement.
And the other is the community's endorsement. Obviously
everyone in the community isn't real happy with us. There's a few that
are not. But many of them are very happy with the efforts we've been
making.
The closures reduced capacity in the budget. We have reduced
Page 287
October 24-25, 2006
and eliminated 486 beds from 238 units. Primarily salaries, supplies,
travel and equipment. A great deal of what we do is documenting this,
because we have folks that we need to take the pictures, that's what we
share with code enforcement and that's what we send on to our
attorney.
The positive outcomes is some our other efforts in conjunction
with this. We have now started posting in every unit the capacity. It's
almost like when you go into a hotel room, you can have so many
people. We have signs that we have gotten, gotten them laminated.
We're putting them in every unit so that it will begin, I hope over the
long run, to address the overcrowding issue.
Weare increasing efforts for hygiene and sanitation efforts and
education. Part of it is a lack of education on people's parts on pretty
much just some basic issues.
We have reduced or eliminated many potential health risks in the
community. And a real positive outcome I believe has been the
community's support and cooperation.
What we feel is needed to do is to continue identification and
enforcement, monitor closures to avoid reoccupancy. Because it's
very easy to move someone out of somewhere or to say -- not to move
them out but to say you can't put someone in here because it's not up
to a health standard. But it's also very easy for someone to move back
in and start collecting rent again. So that's where that ongoing piece
continues.
We need to continue to locate unlicensed facilities and bring
them to compliance or to closure, because there are more unlicensed
facilities there.
I think our continued cooperation with code enforcement is
required, because they then take the next step in removing the
deteriorated units. We can say you can't be in them, but I can't say
move that trailer.
Y .?
es, SIr.
Page 288
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is $100,000 going to do the job?
MS. FREES: That one I'll leave to Michelle.
Is $100,000 going to do the job?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: This can't continue on, and I hope that
the people there in this community, once we close all this up, never
allow this to happen again.
MS. ARNOLD: I just wanted to address, the 100,000 is just
based on the 25 units that we're estimating three to 5,000 for removal.
So if there's additional funding that would be required, we'd have to
come back to you all for that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And do you feel that there's additional
units out there that they're going to have to be closed in this because of
this -- what we're seeing here?
MS. ARNOLD: I believe so. And I think the Health
Department's going to help us identify some. Because as I showed you
-- or as I mentioned, we just did a wind chill survey initially to
identify those units that were obvious from the front. But the one that
was shown to you was something that they referred to us that we
obviously missed. Because from the front it looked fine. And, you
know, when you enter onto property and look into it more, you'll find
these things.
MS. FREES: I think that's where again that cooperation works so
well. Because my inspectors know the community very well and are
really in the back yards, around the neighborhoods, all over the place.
And when we find the issues that we can't handle, even things
like vehicles that are unlicensed that have been sitting abandoned, I
can't do anything with that. But I can list the property, the
information, and refer that to Carol and Michelle -- or Michelle's staff,
Carol and the other folks in Immokalee, who then are able to go and
see that that abandoned vehicle or whatever it is is removed.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: If you need some help for driving a
tractor, let me know.
Page 289
October 24-25, 2006
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just wanted to ask, how long
from the time of a property such as this is identified until you can
actually haul it off the property? Is it rather a quick process, I hope?
MS. ARNOLD: Well, it's -- the quickest it can be is a 30-day
period, because we've got to give them 30 days notice. But it will
probably take a little bit more than that with, you know, getting the
contractor to go out and do it and schedule it. So it will probably be a
two-month period.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, great. But I think that's pretty
good. I'm glad to hear it doesn't take like a year or anything --
MS. ARNOLD: No, no, no.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- to get rid of that stuff.
Okay. And somebody else mentioned, and I just wanted to say
how much I appreciate you still working in the area over here as well.
I mean, you guys have really helped us with cleaning up some of the
problems that we've had with the homeless here. And I can't tell you
how much I appreciate your staff continuing on as the problems
continue to mount.
And also, with some of the flophouses that you and the Sheriffs
Office have been working on and some of the other really deplorable
conditions that we have here, I appreciate with all the stuff you're
doing in Immokalee, and I applaud you for that. And I feel you ought
to dedicate everybody. Still you haven't forgotten some of these other
things.
MS. ARNOLD: Yeah, we've got some efforts underway in the
Estates as well.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the comment was that we
heard just a minute ago is there is not total support of the community.
All I've got to tell you is the vast majority of people in the community
support it.o
Page 290
October 24-25, 2006
We have one community that says we should wait till after the
master plan before we do anything. Of course the master plan's
probably two years away from being implemented. And then at that
point in time it's something that would take forever to get there. And
we delayed for 40 years --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think the slum lords don't like it
either, huh?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Can't make any money.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, probably two different
ways. They'd like to have a little more money probably to send home.
But I bet you two to one living in those conditions they have to live in
now, they probably appreciate the fact that they've got running water
and they're not quite as cramped.
The other complaint I received from another member of the
community, who took me a little bit by surprise on it, this complaint
about a person that was rented a unit in one of these substandard
places for 600 a month and now no longer can get a unit for 600 and
he's going to have to pay 800 and that's not fair. So be it, you know.
It's going to be what the market is. But the thing is, is we can't
subsidize quality.
But the other thing I know everybody is concerned about, getting
enough money out there to try to correct the problem. And believe
me, I'm for that, too. I'd rather they keep coming back and giving us a
play-by-play so this is in front of us on a continuous basis than to give
them enough money to be able to operate for a full year. So they get
the continuing encouragement from us to keep going forward and we
get reports as we go into it.
And I think what they're asking for is adequate at this point in
time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is there any plan with the
entitlement group to -- not entitlement, Barbara Cacchione's place?
Are they ever thinking of building some kind of apartments for some
Page 291
October 24-25, 2006
of these families so that they have group housing, but, you know, not
like the ones that they had for the farm workers where they have just
guys in there but families?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, Barbara Cacchione and
Kuck, who work together on it, they've been mainly concentrating on
houses, not apartments.
I'll be honest with you, apartments can be handled by the private
sector without any problem. You know, we've just got to be able to
make it a little more user friendly, the master plan's got to come
together. They're out there waiting to do it. I really think that we can
get there in an expedient manner.
Do you have some comments on that?
MS. FREES: Well, only that I have had probably five owners
who've come to me to ask information about what they can do then if
they take out, remove, whatever it is. And I have referred them on to
the county. There are the planning and the zoning folks that need to
help them do that.
There are places -- there are at least three places that are looking
at totally clearing their existing property, rebuilding whatever they're
able to rebuild based on the county's guidance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I had one other question also if I
may, and that is about the rents. We heard that $600 to rent for
conditions that no human being should live in. Isn't there something
that -- don't we have some kind of control over them -- no, none, huh?
MS. ARNOLD: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was figuring out when we went on
our tour that day that some of these guys make $50,000 a month on --
well, anyway.
MS. FREES: That's why it's been a flourishing business.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the reason the Health
Department is involved is because they control farm worker housing,
Page 292
October 24-25, 2006
and we can't as a county.
I haven't heard -- that was the whole point of Commissioner
Coyle's update of the progress was what the Health Department has
done for the housing for migrants in Immokalee.
MS. FREES: We have--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, I seen a lot of things to
do with what code enforcement does.
MS. FREES: We have eliminated -- no, we have eliminated 486
beds from licensed migrant housing in Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So that was -- gives an
update of what the request was during the workshop in Immokalee and
your targeted goal. That's why we're here, I think. Why you're here
today is to give us an update on that.
MS. FREES: Well, and that's what we did. We eliminated from
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You identified how many at the
workshop.
MR. MUDD: You identified at the -- in May when -- on agenda
item 10(E) -- excuse me, May 23rd, agenda item 10(C) when they
came back, Dr. Kolfer was talking about -- and this was one of the
slides that she used and gave to the board and said, okay, there's 1,440
migrant housing units out there, there's 720 that are in good quality,
there's 360 that need improvement and there's 360 that are just
completely bad.
And I believe what you saw, the elimination of 438 units --
excuse me, beds -- were in 238 units.
MS. FREES: Units.
MR. MUDD: So I would think that that 360 are the units that
you're talking about.
MS. FREES: Yes.
MR. MUDD: So you've got 238 of the 360 that are beyond
.
repaIr.
Page 293
October 24-25, 2006
And what Michelle and the Health Department's basically asking
for now is -- and that was on a voluntary basis. I mean, you've applied
the pressure and they acquiesced to the pressure. They've applied
pressure to 100 and some odd others that have given stiff resolve to
say no we're not going to do this on their own.
And what I had put on the slide before is, for instance, here's the
house that -- or a shack or -- I don't know, someplace you put your
lawn equipment. But I believe somebody was living there.
This is a before picture of the pressure, and on their voluntary
basis, here's the after picture. Okay, it's gone.
Goes another picture that's like this. This is the thing after
Wilma with no roof because the roof came off. And now this is what
the lot looks like, because the property owner did the right thing and
cleared it.
You remember this one. This is one of our stops that we took out
in Immokalee. This was a wonderful place. Again, way out of code
and everything else.
And with pressure, this is what the property owner did to clear
the lot.
This is a picture of the same building, but at different sides, you
know. But we saw people when we were on our trip out there actually
coming out to their veranda wanting to know what we were doing in
the neighborhood.
And this is another picture, the same building, when you look at
the back side of it.
And through pressure, this is what the property owner did. You
can see the church library or whatever is behind it's a pretty
good-looking building, okay? And having that nasty thing looking
next door.
On the good news item, here's a trailer that's sitting there, needs
some work. And you can notice at the bottom, you can see
underneath where the wood's starting to rot, you can see a broken
Page 294
October 24-25, 2006
window up here by the tree.
And through the pressure of the Health Department and code
enforcement, this is what it looks like now . You've got the lattice
work underneath, they've fixed the boards that were rotted out, they
fixed the windows, they got new windows in, they fixed the entryway
to get into it. So there are some positive things that are transpiring.
So Commissioners, about 112 of that original 360 that still need
to be cleaned up out there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, can you put that back up?
MR. MUDD: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you've got 112 to hit the
target. Before your target, would you say that's a reasonable
assumption?
MR. MUDD: There wasn't a year on it that I remember
correctly.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it was identified as so
many units. It looks like 1,440 --
MS. FREES: That's the total--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- migrant workers.
MS. FREES: -- migrant units in Collier County.
MR. MUDD: Half of them were good, so they didn't need to
have any work to them. So they were in good shape.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. MUDD: It's the 720 that still needed to be either repaired or
removed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It said 720 up there, good
quality, 50 percent. So that means that you don't have to do anything
with those, County Manager.
MR. MUDD: You just monitor them, sir, and make sure that
they don't get themselves in a dilapidated state.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I still have some more
questions.
Page 295
October 24-25, 2006
So we hit 440. What other work --
MR. MUDD: We hit 238.
Could you go back to that slide where you said you eliminated
empty beds and 238 units.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're halfway to the goal?
That's what I'm trying to figure out.
MR. MUDD: I'd say that they're 66 percent of the way to -- keep
going back. There it is.
MS. FREES: We eliminated the 486 beds from 238 units.
MR. MUDD: Okay. And they said of the ones that need to be
eliminated, there were 360 of them. So you're about 66 percent of the
way of eliminating the bad units, those 360. I can't tell you where you
are with the 360 that need improvement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So if we're halfway there, and
this is supposed to be a four-year program, we might reach the target
this coming year.
MR. MUDD: You could get it done possibly earlier than four
years, yes, sir. And it could be this year. As they keep diligently
looking at it and getting rid of those particular vehicles and things like
that.
And if the board so chooses to allocate that $100,000 to get at the
unwilling landowners that don't want to clear the dilapidated buildings
and trailers off their property, I would recommend that staff give you a
blow-by-blow, okay, in a memo that basically said here's the one that
we removed, this is how much it cost, this is how much money we've
put on the lien, and it's gaining interest at such and such an amount.
So that you know the trailer, you know the lot, you know the owner of
the lot. So that we've got each one, and we can itemize that for you,
okay.
And if we run out of money, okay, then we can come back and
show you this is how it was spent, this is the liens that basically would
cover that, and if anybody finally decides to payoff their lien because
Page 296
October 24-25, 2006
they figure the interest rate's going to kill them over the long term, and
it will, and they paid off early, we'll show that as a positive revenue
source so that we can continue to move the effort.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I include that in the motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But you could, if the Health
Department reaches their goal in half the time with the allocations,
quarter of a million dollars each year, you could take those monies and
allocate it for --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- you know, cleaning up those
properties.
MR. MUDD: No, sir, we'd have to come back to you and say
okay, the effort is done, and they don't need to have those staff
members in '08 or whatever it is, or in the middle of the year, and then
have you -- come to you to ask you to reallocate those dollars to them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Does that sounds good,
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, it sounds fine. I like what
Jim Mudd proposed about the -- coming back to the commission and
give us a blow-by-blow as we go into it. And I'd like to include that in
my motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You made a statement early on that you
eliminated 430 beds. And I thought you said that these were licensed?
MS. FREES: Well, some of them had been in licensed facilities.
And some were not, that we found that were illegal.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: How could they be licensed?
MS. FREES: Some of them were because the condition they
were in after Wilma was much different than the condition they were
in before.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But some of this stuff -- I don't know if
that one picture that you showed, was that licensed?
MS. FREES: No, that was not.
Page 297
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I just wanted to get some
clarification --
MS. FREES: No, that was not licensed. There's much that we
find, and that's why when we do the investigations, depending on the
condition that they're in, perhaps with some improvement they can be
licensed. If not, then our goal is to see that they're closed.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The next question is, what means
are you going to take to make sure that we do this on a yearly basis, to
make sure preventively that this isn't going to happen again?
MS. FREES: What we have to do is our staff go out in the
evenings, they go out on weekends. We have developed, with the
attorney investigation forum -- because in the past what would happen
if someone has over four migrants, five or more, we would go in, we'd
investigate, talk to them.
We'd go then to the attorney or to the landlord -- to the attorney
and then to the landlord and they'd say no, no, those were not really
migrants, they work --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Visiting.
MS. FREES: -- something else. So we do things much
differently now. We take pictures, we copy pay stubs to show that
they have picked tomatoes. Sometimes we take a license plate, if it
shows their car is from North Carolina and they're living here in
Immokalee.
We do documentation which we then take to our attorney, who
develops an administrative action. We then send that to the landlord.
And again, based on the facility and the conditions that it's in, it's
either licensed or it's closed.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So what you're telling me, this is very
labor-intensive it to follow-up on --
MS. FREES: It takes a lot of work, yes.
And we have to have people that are willing to go out there at
8:00 at night. Because at noon, they're not going to be there. So they
Page 298
October 24-25, 2006
go out in the evening, two or three, sometimes together. I have done
many of these myself over the years, which is actually very
interesting. And we go into a -- sometimes we've gone in with even
eight or 10 people, depending on the large area. Because some of it's
pretty interesting. Once you get there, many times the first thing you
know, the landlord drives in. I don't know quite how that works. But
we have done that in the past. Actually, very interesting process.
But it has to be documented and documented very well or it can
be certainly argued in court that it is not -- they were not really
migrants living there and it was not a violation.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, we have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coletta and a second by Commissioner Fiala. Any
further discussion on this?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, I'll call the question. All
those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Thank you very much for the presentation.
MS. FREES: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: And just for clarification, just on that issue, that
$250,000 that the board allocated, they only allocated it for one year.
Because the original recommendation was for three years, but the
board only authorized it for '07.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry, did we include what
Jim Mudd suggested? I can't remember if I --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, you did in your
Page 299
October 24-25, 2006
amendment to the motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You said that was in my motion.
Include that in.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I certainly have it in my
second.
MR. MUDD: We're going to do that, Commissioner. We're
going to do that. We need --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I like that coming back to us
play-by-play.
MR. MUDD: I want to make sure that -- and Commissioner
Henning had a very good point. We've got to keep our eye on the goal
and make sure that those 360 that we initially identified would get
cleaned up. And I'm talking about the bad ones and the 360 that we
fixed up. So we owe you a running total of how well we're doing
against that original.
And if anything gets observed that we didn't see in the initial
shock when that was originally presented, we need to be able to let
you know what those are and show you the pictures of those, and
basically lay that out and make sure that we've got those liens on
property .
I will be very interested to see how, once the liens are set, how
fast those folks come forward and pay the money back.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to know who the owners of
these places are.
MR. MUDD: That will be --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That will be included, right?
MR. MUDD: That will be --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It should be made a matter of public
record.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
And there was something that came across my e-mail, and
somebody had sent it to Commissioner Coletta, and I was copied on it
Page 300
October 24-25, 2006
that talked about cheap trailers from FEMA. And the price that they
were looking for coming in from the southeast someplace and their
storage area seemed to be too good to be true.
So what I've asked Mr. Summers to do is to please check on that
to make sure that they are indeed the full house trailers and not those
little Arrow things on four wheels, okay, because those aren't going to
make it. And so we'll take a look at those, just to make sure that
somebody's not passing trash and they're actually passing us trailers
that are livable and in good condition.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We have to be very careful on
this, too. I don't want to end up as a gift to a landowner out there
who's going to make exorbitant rents on them. I can see them for
homeownership, but I hope to God it's not going to be something
where all of a sudden 50 are going to end up on a certain named
property --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I have nothing to do with the
purchase --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I know that, I --
MR. MUDD: -- I just want to make sure I'm not getting 150
Arrow vans, okay, that are silver in color, okay, that don't have any
plumbing in them that are worse than what we're trying to clear out
already. That could be the worst thing that could possibly happen out
there.
So I just noticed it, it came forward, and I said could you please
check on this, it seems to be too good to be true, a $40,000 trailer for
$500.
Item #10F
RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION
REPEALING ALL PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS ESTABLISHING
AND AMENDING PARTS OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PARKS
Page 301
October 24-25, 2006
AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT FACILITIES AND
OUTDOOR AREAS LICENSE AND FEE POLICY AND
ESTABLISHING THE POLICY EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 1,2006
AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 2006-43 AND ALL
OTHER RESOLUTIONS ESTABLISHING LICENSE AND FEE
POLICY - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE NOVEMBER 14,
2006 BCC MEETING - APPROVED
Commissioners, that brings us to our next item, which is 10(F).
And this item was continued from the September 26th and October
10th, 2006 BCC meetings. 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 policy effective date of November 1, 2006 and
superseding Resolution No. 2006-43 and all other resolutions
establishing license and fee policy.
And Mr. Barry Williams, your Director of Parks and Recs, will
present.
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Commissioners. Good morning.
For the record, Barry Williams, Parks and Rec director.
Just wanted to start out by saying thank you for the opportunity
to further adjust the fee policy. And from our conversations from the
last Board of County Commissioners meeting and the suggestions that
were made, I just wanted to briefly go over those, what we have done
with this latest version of the fee policy.
First of all, I just need to offer a correction, and just to talk about
the annual pass related to all of our aquatics facilities.
The suggestion was made that we not have a fee beyond a family
of four. And in the resolution that you have, that is the case. In my
example to you, if you buy a family pass for Sun-N-Fun, it's one price
that would pay for as many family members as you have. And that's
Page 302
October 24-25, 2006
true of the Immokalee Sports Complex, as well as Golden Gate
aquatics facilities, so I just wanted to clarify that.
The other things that you asked for us to consider with the fee
policy, just to briefly go over there those, one was increasing fines for
a variety of offenses: Littering, glass containers on the beach,
defacing! de- figuring (sic) county property, removal of live natural
objects, you asked that those items be increased. And we've done that
in terms of the fines associated with that.
Also another good suggestion was clarifying in our fee policy a
condition that said if somebody was defacing county property, the
expectation that they would be expected to pay, and so we've also
included that.
We've also added indecent exposure, as well as nudity in our
fines that we could consider.
And some of the other items, just to mention, we did continue to
keep prices related to Immokalee Airport and Sugden Park. And part
of the explanation for that is those are the only two parks that we offer
for rentals for community events to outside organizations. The other
parks that we have, we do not do that at this point.
We've also taken the suggestion of adjusting our league pricing.
For example, adults we were charging $30, youth $30 to pay for
T-shirts, trophies, recognition for the teams, that type of thing. We've
adjusted the pricing to increase for adults to $40 and decrease for
children to 20. So we're hopeful that we're giving kids that want that
opportunity to participate in sports that $20 -- that $10 less will help
them in that.
Also wanted to point that we've included in our fee policy an
explanation that offers -- that we do offer a sliding fee scale for people
with low income. So we do have a mechanism in place to help those
folks that their income levels might be a limitation to their
participation. So we have that available for those folks.
The other good suggestion was regarding Sun- N - Fun, and just to
Page 303
October 24-25, 2006
mention that. We didn't change anything specific in the Sun-N-Fun as
far as the fee policy for our group sales, but the recommendation that
was made was for us to manage our group sales in such a way that it
doesn't cut into public access. And that's certainly what we intend to
do.
We have a group salesperson and manage that resource, and our
expectation is that group sales for any particular day won't exceed 10
percent of the facilities' capacity. For example, Sun-N-Fun, if we can
get 2,500 -- if there were 2,000 people in the park, our group sales
wouldn't exceed that 10 percent number.
So we just -- our intent is to manage that very carefully and not to
cut into public access in that way.
Y .?
es, SIr.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Have you addressed the fact that maybe
we should have an additional tax on people who are not from Collier
County? Such as maybe residents from Lee County or people coming
over from the east coast, that they should have a pay increase in the
fair of, let's say, our Sun-N-Fun Park?
MR. WILLIAMS: We are looking at that. And, you know, we
are looking at some of the organizations, other water parks in South
Florida. That's not uncommon for that to occur, where you have a
non-resident charge. We're not offering that in this current version of
the fee policy, but we'll look at that. We'll bring this fee policy back
to you next year and can certainly look at that very carefully.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, I think that's a good thing to look
at in the future. Because I feel that as the popularity of this
Sun-N-Fun park gains notoriety that we're going to have more and
more people from outside the area of Collier County that are probably
going to want to use this park. And I believe that the park up in Cape
Coral charges a fee, additional fee for out of Cape Coral area or out of
Lee County. So I want to make sure that our residents are taken care
of first.
Page 304
October 24-25, 2006
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, Barry, I commend you for
looking at this business of group sales, tickets. What a way to be table
able to maximize the revenues coming in. You can accommodate
what did you say, 1,200, 1,400?
MR. WILLIAMS: Our capacity is actually 2,500. We try to keep
the park, though, right at 2,000 for the guests comfort.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I mean, we have days now -- of
course we're adjusting our time schedule to allow for it -- where we
have less than 100 people showing up.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, that's true.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Possibly those group sales, you
might want to -- I mean, because whatever we can do to bring in
revenue, we can hold the cost down for our residents.
Maybe that group sales should be a floating number rather than
10 percent of the total. Whereby if you know you're only going to
have two or 300 people there, you know, you leave a cushion of
maybe 10 percent in there. And then you could have group sales for
the rest of them.
The same with the facility to use in the evening. I see nothing
wrong with private parties, the Ritz-Carlton, whatever, doing this if it's
done in such a way that it brings the cost down for our residents. In
other words, they paid for all the expenses, and we make enough
money off it that that enables us to be able to hold our fees lower for
the people that we represent.
MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioner, I agree. I think that, you
know, one of the things that we're trying to do is to manage the group
sales so it doesn't affect public use, but I think your suggestions are
very good for us.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I thought Commissioner Henning had a
problem with that.
Page 305
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could be. I don't know.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: He's not right here to -- I knew that there
was a question that came up before in the discussion.
MR. MUDD: I believe his concern was if the park is closed --
closed, I mean on that day -- and it's completely not open for some
strange reason, and then all of a sudden there's some outside firm that
comes in and says they want to rent the park and then all of a sudden
the park is open during an hour of operation that it would typically be
open for the public, that he had issues with that. Or if it closed down
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I agree. I agree with that.
MR. MUDD: And that was--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm talking the evening when
we're normally closed.
MR. MUDD: That was never the intent when you would
actually close it down, because you wouldn't go through your normal
salary. These people would have to pay all the overtime and
everything else for that particular event and have to be scheduled way
in advance in order to get that done in order to make things work for --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But once again, whenever we
can get a revenue source to come in to hold the cost down for our
residents, I'd like to do that.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you. I had four
questions.
The first one is, you still haven't answered, about fundraisers. I
think particularly I've been working with a soccer league, and these
guys are just terrific guys who have to raise funds because most of
their kids are, you know, underfunded or have no funds. And they
want to keep these kids playing with the adults and give them a
wholesome background. So they raise funds to buy the kids uniforms
Page 306
October 24-25, 2006
and to help, so forth, just by having the concession stands. And there
are others along the way that do equal fundraising to help the kids out
and really, to keep them off the streets and playing in a healthy sport.
And I still don't feel that they should be charged extra. I don't
know how you can differentiate between a not- for-profit who has a lot
of money and a charitable not- for-profit who's doing things to give
back to the community. But I think that should be done. I don't think
they should be penalized for having fundraisers to then put back into
the community. I hope everybody agrees with me.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, we make -- I'm
sorry, I'm speaking out of turn. May I?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Go ahead, please.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But you're saying that the
non-profits are treated differently than --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, they're--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- like little league or
something?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- charged extra.
MR. WILLIAMS: Well, we charge -- we have a fundraising fee
assigned to our rentals that is used to pay for things like electricity,
utilities, that --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But then you charge for lights
anyway.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know what would be a
good idea, Commissioner Fiala? Is to make a motion to include that
in that we start to tailor this so that they don't have to bring it back in.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, that would be great. But I
would like that addressed.
Secondly, with the youth, again, it's nice that you drop the youth
Page 307
October 24-25, 2006
down $10 for the rest of the county. But I think with Golden Gate,
East Naples, our rates should be equal to that of Immokalee. We have
a lot of kids in both of those areas that are free lunch kids, and I think
that they should be equal to Immokalee. If they all get $10 fees so
that it's equal across the board, or $5.00, however you want like to do
it, but I'd like to see that reduced.
Also, the Immokalee leagues don't have to be charged for light
fees, and yet Golden Gate and East Naples do. And I think it should
be equal across the board. I just think that that's only right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I do see a difference
between it, but then again, I think there's a way around this.
In Immokalee, I mean, the average income is like $27,000 as
compared -- you know, quite a difference when you get farther in.
But you also have something in place where these people
individually can get special waivers on fees that are the low, low
income?
MR. WILLIAMS: Well, we have a scholarship program that has
a sliding fee scale, depending on income.
As far as waiving the fees themselves, we -- and this was brought
up in the last meeting, we talked about how sometimes we co-sponsor
events for organizations. For example, the United Way did an annual
walk at North Collier Regional Park --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but we're talking about fees
now for just recreation leagues, right?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, and that's different than a
fundraiser for a not for profit. And we're off that subject.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am, I was just --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is the fundraiser just a one-time event, or
is this a fundraiser every week?
Page 308
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, just a one-time event, yeah. I'm
talking about things like soccer teams and Kawanis clubs and so forth
that raise money for --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And they have like a one-time event?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Most of the time, I would think.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Once a year?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Maybe with the soccer teams,
because they have the concession stands and that's how they make
their money, that would be maybe once a week.
But again, you know, they're not a profit center. They're just
trying to help get the equipment for the teams and the outfits and the
shoes and stuff like that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But I think that's what we use with some
of the money, don't we?
MR. WILLIAMS: We do. The--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Trophies and shirts and--
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but what I'm saying is, they're
charged extra. So if they have a concession stand and some kind of
fundraising, they're charged extra and they're also charged for the
lights.
MR. WILLIAMS: Well, you're talking about two separate
things. And just to clarify, one is with the league play and the charges
that are associated with that, the dollar amounts that we talked about,
the 40/20, go right back into the program for the trophies, the T-shirts,
et cetera.
A lot of times the leagues, as Commissioner Fiala describes, will
run a concession, or wish to run a concession. And so when they're
doing that we'll charge them these fees that she's talking about for the
electricity, utilities that they use.
They're using the concession to raise funds for their organization
often is the case, and so I believe Commissioner Fiala is suggesting
Page 309
October 24-25, 2006
that perhaps that not be -- that we not charge those guys.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, because the other teams that
play there who aren't part of this -- a fundraiser, you know, they're just
a regular team, they're not charged it. It's only charged on fundraisers.
That's what I'm saying. Isn't that right?
MR. WILLIAMS: We have two different types of operations in
our park where funds are raised. The nonprofit piece -- and we've
reduced the fees from the $20.00 fundraising fee to 10. And then we
have folks that, for example, Sun- N - Fun this summer we had a
concessionaire come in, because our concession wasn't ready, that was
making a profit. And we were charging him $20 an hour as a
fundraising fee. Which, you know, the fundraising I know -- the term
fundraising, it sounds like charitable giving. It's not always. It's
sometimes a commercial enterprise, like what this gentleman was
involved in.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So these are things that I think we
still need to address. We don't have to get back here, if you would
prefer not to, but I really think--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I think maybe we ought to have it
come back again and make sure it's all taken care of.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, thank you.
That's all. I just wanted to make sure that we can keep the kids in
a healthy program.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And help the adults raise money to
keep those kids in a healthy program.
MR. MUDD: So let me make sure that I understand it so we can
at least couch it so that we know what we're coming back with.
Because the last meeting we made some changes, and I'm not too sure
it really got at the issues that were discussed. I'm not trying to avoid
anything, and I want to make sure if we back with this thing again that
we've got it nailed.
Page 310
October 24-25, 2006
And so I want to make sure that we come back and --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Manager, maybe I can suggest
that Barry just work with Commissioner Fiala, since she seems to have
the greatest concerns, and work through the process, and then bring
back whatever comes -- that we feel -- I feel comfortable with what
we've got, but obviously she's got some concerns.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know what? I think just a little
wording, different wording.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But the other thing that I have is some
concerns making sure that this is a viable operation, parks and rec.,
and that we're not hauling funds out of ad valorem taxes to run this.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, as soon as you start playing with
the fees, you're going to have an equal and opposite effect on ad
valorem taxes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I understand that, so we've got to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And with the fundraisers, I think
that you have something in mind, and so do I, but I bet there's a way to
get to it where we both are -- maybe just a little bit of different
wording. I'd love to sit down and just chat with you on that.
MR. MUDD: Well, ma'am, I think you can -- you can do that.
You basically say if it's a fundraiser for the kids, okay, for their league
to get them -- and we're talking about -- you're talking about kids.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: You're not talking about a fundraiser for the
adults.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
MR. MUDD: You're talking about a fundraiser for that league --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Wait a minute.
MR. MUDD: -- to help the kids get equipment, things like that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But the kids, are they going to run the
fundraiser or is the adults going to run the fundraiser?
MR. MUDD: The adults will. But they're going to have to show
Page 3 11
October 24-25, 2006
us the bills and stuff that basically say that they've used the monies
and the proceeds in order to get it done, or then they'll fall in the other
category and they'll have to pay their $20 or whatever it is on that
particular issue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And that's what happened to this
soccer league that came into my office. We were charging them
something else, and all they had to do was produce their records and
show that the money has gone just totally for the kids. And they buy
their own trophies and everything. And then it was fine.
So I just want to make sure that we continue on and encourage
leagues like this where fathers and sons play together.
Last question I had for you was? When are they going to build
that soccer field over in East Naples Community Park?
MR. WILLIAMS: I appreciate you asking.
It's in permitting. We hope that you'll see it come on line 2007.
That's --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, that's so -- we've been waiting a
long time for that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I just got one question. We're talking
about fundraisers for soccer. So we could have a fundraiser for flag
football, we could have fundraisers for baseball, softball, so that we
understand the implications here, especially if you're not going to
charge electricity and so on. So this becomes pretty large.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You pretty well stated it when you
said for kids.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, so, I mean, when we start looking
at this, we've got not only girls softball, men's -- or girls softball,
you've got boys softball and baseball and soccer. So you've got --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Little league.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, you've got a little -- you've got a
whole gamut here. And so we have to make sure that we have to look
at all the implications here when we start looking at this and openingn
Page 312
October 24-25, 2006
up this envelope, okay?
MR. WILLIAMS : Well, if I may just share, 30 percent of our
budget is based on user fees, and so, you know, the question of if you
change the fee structure then we either have a reduction in-service or a
request for additional funds for ad valorem, so --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have to add the funds someplace
else, get the funds from someplace else, yeah.
MR. MUDD: I think all those things are doable. I just want to
make sure that -- Commissioner Fiala had an initial thing and it's on
Page 11 of 19 of your packet under 10(F), okay? And I think it's
important that we get this part resolved so that we can get this piece
done. I think it's important and I think, you know, making sure the
kids' concessions and things are covered and how they have to prove
that we can add all of those things.
And this has to do, under H -1, where adults have been increased
from 30 to 40, the kids have been decreased from 30 to 20, and the
Immokalee kids are five. And Commissioner Fiala basically said she
wanted to add the East Naples kids and the Golden Gate City kids to
the category of five --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Or 10.
MR. MUDD: -- at the bottom.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: Or 10. The board needs to make the
determination. You know, five or 10, what would you like? And
we'll put it in there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's talk about this just for a
moment. You know, I want to make sure we keep everything solvent,
I want to make it fair across the board.
I have an unusual situation in Immokalee. It's not repeated in
other parts of the county. I mean, the income level hopefully is going
to get up there where it's comparable to East Naples or Golden Gate
City, but it's not there yet.
Page 313
October 24-25, 2006
However, we do have that in the program there, that ability to be
able to have rates reduced through the scholarship program. Maybe
what we have to do is look at this a little differently, where the
scholarship program kicks in to be able to pick up everybody that
would fall into that. Because there's some very well-to-do families in
Golden Gate and in East Naples, and there's a --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we also have farm workers --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- couple in Immokalee, too.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, I mean -- but we're
kind of across the whole board on this issue. And if it was user
friendly enough where the income was proven where it's just a simple
little statement that's made up and it goes in, and then that particular
family would be exempt maybe even from fees. Whatever we now
allow for scholarships. And then keep the rate up there in a more
reasonable rate that will help to cover costs. I mean, everybody would
like to get the service for free, there's no doubt about it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. I'm just mainly concerned
about we have a lot of farm workers, as you well know --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You do, you do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- in our part of the county as well.
We have those two big farms over there, plus some small ones and the
tomatoes and so forth. Plus we have about 700 Habitat homes. I don't
think that those people can afford to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They probably can't. And that's
why the scholarship program would work very well, if we tried to
amend it and tweek (sic) it in such a way.
So right now if we charge everyone, including Immokalee,
$10.00, and then we came back with the scholarship program and
hopefully it's user friendly enough, and I never got into details with
how it works. But possibly knowing more than just a pay slip or a --
make it extremely easy to be able to prove what kind of income is
Page 314
October 24-25, 2006
coming in to that family. And set it at a level that is meaningful, you
know, to be able to make a difference to be able to help.
I'm not one to make that decision or judgment.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But I think it sounds like --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But it would be universal
throughout the county. Hey, what about in North Naples, you got
some families I'm sure that are economically depressed, too. And, you
know, they might -- if the scholarship program was made a little more
available for that particular income group. Something like they have
for the lunches in school for kids. If you're a certain economical
group, then you get those lunches free and everybody else pays.
And this -- you know, the only way I can think we can get there
to a point that would be absolutely fair across the board without
disturbing the revenue stream to the point where we have to make it
someplace else or maybe cut services --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I liked your idea of$10.00
across the board. That would --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And then the scholarship
program on top of it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: What income level does the scholarship
fund kick in?
MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioner, I'm sorry, I don't have that
information with me. And I'm trying to recall from memory. It is -- I
just can't tell you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, you're being honest about it.
Okay.
So I think the discussion that we're holding here is saying that it
will take the youth, whether it's Immokalee or East Naples or Golden
Gate or North Naples, it's going to be $10.
Is there any discussion from the commissioners?
MR. MUDD: So we're talking about across-the-board $10.00 for
the kids. And if they show -- I'm not too sure any parent's going to
Page 315
October 24-25, 2006
want to come show their proof of earnings to get down so that they
don't have to pay 10 bucks --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They do it at the schools. So it's
not something that's new. I'm sure that they're taking advantage of the
breakfasts and the lunches that they offer at the schools. So it's not
something that's new. And it can be done in such a way that it's not
something where you stand up in front of a crowd and you say, well,
here's my voucher. It can be done in a very humane type of way.
MR. MUDD: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Recognizing the fact that we
have some special needs --
MR. MUDD: We're going to talk about waiving the fee then if
somebody can show you that they're in the scholarship program?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Waiving it or reducing it
considerably. Maybe a couple of tiers in it.
MR. WILLIAMS: It's reduced. We have two levels of
reduction, 25 percent and a 50 percent reduction, based on income.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Now, will this take care of the
other issue that Commissioner Fiala has in regards to fundraisers?
MR. MUDD: We'll put that language in there. But this is the first
part she had about the fee. And the fee for youth now is $10.00 across
the board in the county. And we'll put a thing in there that basically
talks about there can be additional reductions based on the scholarship
program. And we'll have a section in there that talks about it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning, do you feel
comfortable with this?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I want to know what --
Commissioner Coletta's interpretation of well-to-do in Golden Gate.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, let me put it this way:
Probably someone earning over $30,000 a year, family of four. You
know, even that is stretching it quite a bit. But I don't know. I mean,
we have our human service agency I bet you that can come up with
Page 316
October 24-25, 2006
those kind of numbers.
I'm not even going to begin to guess at it. But I'd rather than
geographically saying this area is depressed and giving that area a
special discount, even though in Immokalee you're probably hitting it
95 percent of the time, come across the board with something that's
uniform throughout the county. Be fair for everyone.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think it's fair. That's the only fair way
of doing it. And then when they can show that they need assistance,
we can provide that for them. Okay?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's really great. And same with
-- now, it says Immokalee leagues will not be charged light fees for
practices. And I notice that sometimes like ours at Eagle Lakes
Community Park, I'll drive by there at 10:00 and the lights are blazing
-- actually, 10:30 the other night -- lights are blazing, nobody's in the
park.
So, I mean, maybe we could do something about turning the
lights off as the last person leaves or something and --
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- not charging the leagues that are
there for practices.
MR. WILLIAMS : Well, the lights that were on the other night,
my apologies, we certainly make every effort after the league play is
over to make sure those lights are off. And some of them are on
timers. And Eagle Lakes, if that was the case, we'll certainly look
after that and make sure that that's done, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. By the way, are you going to
be holding practices over at the Regional Park? Soccer practices?
MR. WILLIAMS: Appreciate you asking that.
The North Collier Regional Park is available -- we're making it
available. It should be ready within the next week or two for
tournament and game play. We don't intend to use it for practice at
this point.
Page 31 7
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Ever?
MR. WILLIAMS: No, ma'am, I won't say ever. Just initially
what we're trying to do is to program all of our game play and
tournament play hopefully at this point.
And mainly to preserve the fields. You know, the field use has
been an issue for us throughout the county. Us being able to not limit
but to program a certain number of hours on the fields is important for
us to keep the fields in good shape, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, maybe you could dedicate a
couple of those fields, because one of the things they've said
repeatedly is how much in dire need they are for soccer fields, and yet
they're not going to let anybody practice on them.
MR. WILLIAMS: We believe, though, that the community
parks will allow for practice. So a lot of the play, the game play that's
being done on community fields will come to North Collier Regional,
thus making those fields that folks were playing on available for
practice.
We're beginning to schedule North Collier Regional Park now.
We'd like a good six months to 12 months to see how that will change
the way folks are using the fields in general. We think it is going to
offer some relief to our overuse fields and some of our community
parks.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. WILLIAMS: But we still want to make sure that they're
available for folks to practice.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we've been waiting for years
for the soccer field or fields. I hope you get two fields over there at
East Naples Community, Park. And that would help, too.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But without the fields, you know,
we're kind of stuck, too.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am.
Page 318
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, so I think you've answered all
my concerns. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You're welcome.
Barry, I don't mean to put you on the spot, and if you don't know
the answer, you can e-mail it to me. Do you know what it cost -- and I
know each field is lighted differently. What does it cost per hour to
run those lights?
MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioner, I'm going to have to get that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Like I said, I wasn't trying to put
you on the spot. I just want to know what our costs are. Because I'm
sure, with the amount of floodlights on there, we have to find out what
the cost is for each of the fields. Or not each of the fields, just say
ballpark figure of what it cost the county per hour to light fields.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Especially when number one there's
nobody there, and number two, they're shining in the windows of
those of Lely Resort and over across the street at Hitching Post. And
until the lights go off, they don't have a quiet, dark house.
MR. WILLIAMS: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I'm sure the county is paying a
premium for those power lights, just as we're paying a premium for
our electric bill and it's gone up substantially.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Twice.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So I just wanted to get some idea.
So I think that will give us a little bit bigger envelope to work in
when we look at fees. Because when we have to look at the fees as far
as how they're associated with lighting the fields. Okay? Thank you.
So we need a motion to continue this to the next meeting?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to continue.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
And yeah, I think -- did we come to some sort of decision as far
Page 319
October 24-25, 2006
as the lights? I'm not too sure on that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I think that--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's an operational issue.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Well, I'll tell you where
I'm going. Forgive me. On one hand I'm trying to bring the quality
throughout the whole county. On the other hand I've got to try to
preserve something for Immokalee until they get a little bit more
stable. I hope that we can keep the light costs to zero for Immokalee,
at least for another year. I'm afraid that too many hits going to 'em,
you know, going back at this, $10.00, then you've got to prove it --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't want to change that, I just
want to be equal.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I know.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Same with Golden Gate, by the
way.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Well, no, and I'd like to
see it come across the whole county --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- so that we got it so the
poorest --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, that's part of the operational costs
of running the park. I mean, that's part of the equation.
MR. MUDD: But what I heard from Commissioner Fiala was
she wanted to have East Naples and she wanted to have Golden Gate
City to have the same policy as Immokalee does for lights. That's
what I heard.
Commissioner Fiala, is that --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: -- what you said?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm not asking for more, but I'd like
the same.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can go for that. I'm just now
Page 320
,,,... ~.. a"
October 24-25, 2006
concerned with how we're going with the rest of the county. But for
now I'll go for that. You know, it's just that we got North Naples now
that may say -- you know, we solved one problem pretty much, so
now we've still got another one that's a little bit of an open wound.
Let's go into it. I mean, we're never going to make it perfect first try.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but maybe we can --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, let me tell you, I think we're opening
up a can of worms here, so I'm not sure how we're going to address
this. If we end up doing something in one area and not doing it to
another, it's not going to be fair, and yet we're going to end up putting
an additional burden on the Parks and Recs service.
So when you take away or give up something to some other
place, there's a vacuum that's going to be formed. And something is
going to fill that vacuum, okay? In this case it's going to be ad
valorem taxes. We're trying to make sure that the Parks and Rec, 30
percent of their budget is user fees.
So if we keep playing with this thing, we're going to end up to
where they don't have 30 percent of user fees, okay? Or somebody
else is going to have to pick up the slack. So we have to be realistic
about this whole thing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Suggestion?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Maybe Barry could bring back
to us the next time what the ramifications are, what we're proposing,
you know, several different ways. How much it was for Immokalee,
how much it would be to include Golden Gate and East Naples, and
how much it would be to include the whole county.
And maybe there might be some suggestions that staff can come
up with that would make this whole thing sound more realistic.
Commissioner Halas brings up a good point.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I guess, you know, what we
have to think of, too, you've fighting hard for Immokalee because you
Page 321
October 24-25, 2006
want the kids to be in a wholesome sports-like atmosphere and playing
with their families. Same with me, same with Golden Gate.
The most important thing about the parks are it provides children
a wholesome outlet, rather than roaming the streets.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And of course I am concerned
about the whole county, I'll be honest with you. Wherever a child
may be in this county . We all feel the same way, you know, we have a
concern.
MR. WILLIAMS: I guess could I just for my own --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think you need some clarification,
okay, exactly.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Don't do anything.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, I think the clarification is find out
what the cost is for lighting the fields at two geographical locations --
or actually three geographical locations that were in discussion: Being
East Naples, Golden Gate and Immokalee, and then North Naples.
MR. WILLIAMS: And when you're saying lighting the fields,
just the implications that we were to waive the fees? Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah. We've got to find out a dollar
amount. I think that might -- I think we might find some -- we might
find out that either we can afford it or that there is going to have to be
a lighting fee, okay, because we have to stay within your budgets.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And maybe also by putting some
different timers on it so that we're not wasting the light might help in
that figure -- in those figures.
MR. WILLIAMS: We'll get after that right away.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And I believe the other direction,
other thing that we gave you direction on was that we're going to look
at youth leagues in Immokalee -- all through the county, instead of
$5.00, it would be $10.00.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And put the scholarship program on top.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And with the scholarship program.
Page 322
October 24-25, 2006
And maybe next meeting you can give us some idea of where the
scholarship program kicks in, okay?
MR. WILLIAMS: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And is there any other thing that we need
to address? So we got everything -- because I'm sure staff has been
working diligently --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Fiala talked about the little league
concessions, okay, that are basically funding the equipment for the
little league teams. And we'll put that in there, and verbiage.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And then if you can then also
give us an idea of what the shortfall might be, if there is a shortfall. I
think that's important, okay? Ifwe have a shortfall, find out what the
shortfall is.
And then from there, I think then that's going to be left up to us
as commissioners, to sit here and try to figure out, making sure that we
maintain within the guidelines of your budget and then we have all the
information here and then we can make a decision from that point.
Okay?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We could even have a fundraiser to
cover those costs.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good. You can have it. You can be the
chair.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One suggestion. Possibly Barry
might be able to meet with any commissioner that has the time, so that
when we come forward with this the next time, we'll be ready to go
and we won't be moving it forward to another meeting.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I thought that's what Barry did this time,
you know.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I got to meet with him.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I did.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I did, too.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Page 323
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But I still have those concerns.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning, do you feel
comfortable with the direction that we're going here?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure. I'm ready to vote. Let's
go. Let's get her done.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, let's get her done.
Any further discussion?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, we have a motion on the
floor by Commissioner Fiala and a second by Commissioner Coletta.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And we're going to take a 10-minute
break, okay?
(Recess. )
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mic.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much. We'll continue
on.
I believe County Manager -
Item #10H
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE SELECTION OF KCCS,
INC. A QUALIFIED FIRM, AND AWARD A CONTRACT
UNDER ITN #06-3947 "CEI SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY
Page 324
October 24-25, 2006
ROAD PROJECTS" FOR PROJECT NO.60001 "COLLIER
BOULEVARD (CR-951) FROM US 41 TO MAIN GOLDEN GATE
CANAL" IN THE AMOUNT OF $316261570.00. - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Brings us to 10(H), sir. You did (G) yesterday.
(H) is a recommendation to approve selection of KCCS, Inc., a
qualified firm, and award a contract under INT (sic) No. 06-3947, CEI
Services of Collier County road projects for Project No. 60001,
Collier Boulevard, County Road 951, from U.S. 41 to the main
Golden Gate canal in the amount of $3,626,570.
Mr. Jay Ahmad, your Director of Engineering for Transportation
Services, will present. And I believe -- and Norm Feder is standing
over there, ready to go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, we have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Thank you very much. Great presentation.
Item #101
Page 325
October 24-25, 2006
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD BID NUMBER 06-4016 FOR
THE PURCHASE OF CARBON DIOXIDE AND SODIUM
HYPOCHLORITE FOR USE BY THE WATER AND
WASTEWATER DEPARTMENTS IN THE ESTIMATED
ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $110001000 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is number 10(1), and
it's a recommendation to award bid No. 06-4016 for the purchase of
carbon dioxide and sodium hypochlorite for use by the water and
wastewater departments in the estimated annual amount of
$1,000,000. And Mr. Paul Mattausch --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
MR. MUDD: -- the director water will present.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, we have a motion on the floor.
Any further discussion?
Yes, go ahead, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You've got -- their bid was less
than 700,000? Am I wrong?
MR. MATTAUSCH: No, the total estimated annual amount is
one million dollars.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Annual?
MR. MATTAUSCH: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, thank you.
MR. MUDD: I was basically going to say, it meets the one
million dollar threshold.
And this has to do with supplies that are needed in order to do
your water treatment.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, we have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Halas and a second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
Page 326
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Carries.
Item #10J
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A REQUEST TO
OPERATE SUN-N-FUN LAGOON FROM NOVEMBER 1,2006
TO JANUARY 31,2007 ON SELECT DATES AND REVISE THE
SCHEDULE FOR FEBRUARY 3, 2007 THROUGH MAY 28, 2007
- APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is No. 10(J). It's a
recommendation to approve a request to operate Sun-N-Fun Lagoon
from November 1, 2006 to January 31, 2007 on selected dates and
revise the schedule for February 3rd, 2007 through May 28th, 2007.
And Mr. Barry Williams, your director of Parks and Rec, will
present.
Commissioners, if you remember -- I can't remember if it's last
meeting or the meeting prior to that, I had mentioned that I had staff
taking a look at the hours of operation on Sun- N - Fun Lagoon as far as
how much does it cost to heat the particular pools, which pools are
heated, what's the difficulty with lifeguards, come up with the cost
benefit analysis in a particular issue.
In your agenda package, okay, I have real issues with how they
came up with their sunk costs. I'm still scratching my head about that.
Page 327
October 24-25,2006
I will tell you, those costs are pretty much -- are there because
you've paid those costs to maintain the facility if there's nobody there
or not.
So what we focused on were the incremental costs above that as
far as opening or staying closed. And so that's what's presented in the
executive summary.
Mr. Smykowski and I spent a lot of time going over their staff
report. Both of us scratched our head on sunk costs. Once I got done
with the sunk costs through December, you know, the October,
November, December part, and they got into February and March, the
days they were open or closed, I think they got confused in their sunk
costs. So I would ask you to stay away from the sunk costs, because I
don't believe that's a full accounting of what those are. But the
incremental costs they did a good job trying to capture those.
Mr. Williams?
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you. Commissioners, for the record,
Barry Williams, Parks and Rec. Director.
Just as Mr. Mudd describes, we did attempt to put a proposal
together that showed what costs would be associated with Sun-N-Fun
Lagoon from November 1st through January 31st. We had originally
planned for the facility to be closed during that period.
And just to make mention, from September -- from Labor Day to
the present what we've experienced at Sun-N-Fun, we've had a
relatively strong weekend attendance. However, during the week
we've not had as good attendance, and we're making recommendation
to alter our scheduling for the time period of February 1st through
May 28th.
And so the question of being open November 1st through January
31 st is the one primarily that we wanted to bring to your attention.
We have had a number of constituents of yours that have asked about
the possibility of being open. In particular, folks have asked about
whether or not in the Christmas break, for example, people having
Page 328
October 24-25, 2006
grandchildren down and such, they are telling us that they would use
the pool.
I can tell you from the recent cold snap, going swimming
yesterday, I'm not sure I would go swimming in weather like this, but
we are hearing people that have friends from the north that say that,
you know, an 80 degree water temperature might be a very pleasant
thing for them. So we wanted to bring this forward and get your
thoughts on us continuing opening.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: My question is, I know what my pool
runs in the wintertime, and it's pretty close to these temperatures that
are the average temperatures without heating the pool. So what's the
cost of heating the facilities? What do you think the proj ected costs
would be? I see that we're looking at $347,000 in the hole here.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And that's on Page 8 of 12 on the
bottom. To me it doesn't look like it's that cost effective. Maybe
would be effective during the holiday season before -- during
Christmas and New Year's, but I can't see where it's going to be
beneficial to keep this place open.
MR. WILLIAMS: We think during the period of November 1st
through January 31 st, our heat bill for the pool heaters would be
approximately $121,000.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You heat them with propane or electric?
MR. WILLIAMS: Electric.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: $121,000?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the purpose of Parks and
Rec. is to provide recreation for residents in Collier County. And my
opinion, if you're going to demand from a resident to stay open on the
weekends longer during the year, I don't have a problem with that. I
think that's good -- a good decision on your part to make that
Page 329
October 24-25, 2006
recommendation. You know, if it doesn't work, we can also tweak it. I
fully support your recommendations.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, let me see if I understand.
How many months is that $121,000 expended over?
MR. WILLIAMS: That's for a three-month period of --
MR. MUDD: November, December, January.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
MR. MUDD: And that's to basically keep her open on the
weekends and have the pool open for two weeks during the Christmas
break, starting on the 26th of December, going through the 7th of
January.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, Barry, if I understand
correctly, you can't just turn the heat off to the pool and then expect
that at some point in time like on a Friday to turn it on and it will be
warm for Saturday or Sunday . You probably have to keep it on to
some degree during the week and maybe fluctuate it back up maybe as
far back as Wednesday. That's a large volume of water to be heating.
MR. WILLIAMS: It is. We can ratchet it back a little, but we
need to keep those water temperatures close to where the level would
be when the public is using it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And that would be what, the level?
MR. WILLIAMS: 82 degrees is not a bad temperature. Folks
that live in Florida would want 84. People that come from the north,
82 would feel good.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that's true. Once again,
Commissioner Henning is on the track there. This is a wonderful
amenity for not only our residents but our visitors, too. And we need
to be able to have it go forward.
Now, $121,000 is a big cost. What, it comes to about a little bit
over $40,000 a month.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, when you look at the bottom line,
Page 330
October 24-25, 2006
revenue proj ections from November 1 st, 2006 through January 31 th,
2007, we've got a net loss of roughly about $347,000.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay? That's operational costs.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But once again, you've got the
facility itself that's going to be sitting idle and it's going to require a
certain amount of maintenance and whatever. And I don't know how
much the difference would be if you had it closed the whole period.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, let me try to go to -- I'm on Page 8
of 12 in your executive summary, and it says five at the bottom. And
this is the one that talks about the climate, the rainfall, the Gulf water
temperature, and it says revenue projection.
And you remember I stated earlier that I said I'm not real sure on
their sunk costs. So Commissioner, that $336,000 right there is sunk.
You're going to pay that open or not, okay?
So the delta between revenues that you gain and additional costs
because of lifeguards and heating, you're in the hole $11,668. And
that's on the third line, net loss or gain.
If you then go to Page 12 of 12 of your packet, and you take a
look -- and that's where we tried to combine both, I believe, Barry -- is
you're talking about a net gain on that line, gross loss gain of $184,000
to the positive.
So the 184,000 minus the 11 that you're in the hole from
November, December, January, you're in a plus column of around
$173,000. And I believe that's exactly what the executive summary
says. Your sunk costs are sunk.
Your operational -- you know, you've got to keep your pools
chlorinated, chemicals, things like that. You've got to keep your pool
filters on or you get yourself an algae scum problem that you'll have to
drain pools, chemically treat them. We won't go that way. So you
have sunk costs that are already locked in for maintenance.
So if you follow the staffs recommendation, and this is our best
Page 331
October 24-25, 2006
estimate of what we think attendance will be, based on what people --
what our staff has heard and what we've seen in the past, now, we've
been open since July. We believe that if you follow the
recommendation will be to the positive around $176,000 as far as the
incremental cost. The sunk costs are still going to be sunk. And if you
look at what staff believes it's going to be, that sunk cost is going to be
over a half a million dollars. That would be gone, and that's part of his
annual budget anyway.
So incremental, to open, based on what staff has recommended,
about $173,000 to the good, if our attendance is where we think it's
going to be.
And Commissioner Henning did mention that if it's not, we can
come back and have you adjust it. I mean, this is our first year. We
don't know.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, the schedule for being
open, weekends and holidays when the kids are off school?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. We tried to look at the days kids
were going to be out of school in Collier County and mirrored the
schedule accordingly. So on the weekends we think that's where we're
going to get our attendance. So we just basically picked the
weekends. And no weekday opening, except unless the kids are out of
school.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's all.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do I have a motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Fiala in
regards to the costs and operation of the Sun- N -Fun Park. Any further
Page 332
October 24-25, 2006
discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Not hearing any, call the question. All
those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed. Aye.
And motion carries.
Item #10K
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER OR
HIS DESIGNEE TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY AS
THE AUTHORITY IN ENFORCING SECTION 337.403 OF THE
FLORIDA STATUTES AND RATIFYING ALL PRIOR NOTICES
ISSUED BY THE COLLIER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT RELATED TO ENFORCEMENT OF THAT
STATUTE - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 10(K). And
10(K) is a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
authorize the County Manager or his designee to act on behalf of the
county as the authority in enforcing Section 337.403 of the Florida
Statutes in ratifying all prior notices issued by the Collier County
Transportation Department related to enforcement of that statute.
This item was asked to be moved to the regular agenda by
Commissioner Coyle. And Commissioner Coyle has relayed his
concerns to me. If you would be so kind, I will relay them to you.
He said wouldn't it be better if the board approved this particular
notice and! or had the chairman sign the notice instead of the county
Page 333
October 24-25, 2006
manager or somebody from transportation? Would it add more weight
to get the utility companies -- because that's what this is all about, the
utility company is not moving their utilities out of the right-of-way in
a timely manner, and it is causing our road construction contracts to
go up by 220 days we have on one particular item.
Wouldn't it add more weight if the chairman was the person that
would sign the particular notice and!or have the item come back to the
board and approve it to have the chairman sign it? That's what his
concern is. He's trying to add additional weight to the process to get
the utility companies to move faster.
MR. FEDER: Thank you, County Manager.
For the record, Norman Feder, Transportation Administrator.
Commissioners, what we have in this item is basically trying to
clarify and enhance a tool in our tool box. And I'll speak to in just a
minute to Commissioner Coyle's ideas on that.
Essentially what you have is utilities are allowed to use the
county's rights-of-way as a right. In doing so, when we have to
expand, they're required then to respond to move the utilities during
our design. We coordinate with them.
In the past we generally had pretty good success. Although
every utility doesn't make a profit on this. So they have very few
crews typically and it's not a profit center item for them. So generally
there's always been an issue. But in coordination and efforts, we've
had fairly good response.
With the advent of the recent hurricanes around the country in
the last couple of years, a lot of the utility crews have found that those
resources, along with just the difficulty that all contractors and
consultants are finding keeping their resources in this aggressive time
are not as available. And with that, we've had a lot more difficulty in
getting the utilities moved.
As I said, this is basically an item that's provided for. It is one
that we are already exercising. The department has been making it
Page 334
October 24-25, 2006
clear to the utilities, working in every way we can come up with, have
brought them before this board on prior occasions to try and
emphasize the need for that effort for them to move so we can keep
everything on schedule and progressing.
So that's basically what this item is, and that's why it was on
consent was rather to clarify the efforts already underway and to
provide a clarification what's meant by authority relative to the Florida
statutes.
To Commissioner Coyle's request, we're open to any
recommendation of this board. Obviously having the emphasis of the
board or the chairman's signature, if that provides us any further
emphasis on the issue, we would welcome. And I'll defer over to legal
some, but yes, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do you really think that a signature from
the Chair would have any greater effect than all the efforts that you've
gone through and your staffs gone through? Especially when we have
a weather event and all those crews leave the area.
MR. FEDER: From a practical sense we understand the nature of
some of the delays. And yet at the same time we have to push very
hard, because it does create a problem for our contractors. And we
have done that. And therefore, I would welcome any further efforts.
And in answer to your question, I'm not sure it can hurt, but let
me defer it over to your legal.
MR. PETTIT: I think Commissioner Coyle's suggestion's a good
one. I mean, the only issue is timing. Because we'll simply have to be
alert if something like this arises. Staff will have to get the matter on
the agenda so the board can --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I mean, if it's going to work, if it's got
some horsepower behind it, that's fine. But if we're just signing a letter
and we're just spinning our wheels and not getting any action out of it
-- because we had that case on Immokalee Road where it was over 200
days, and in fact it got to the point where the contractor just went and
Page 335
October 24-25, 2006
blacktopped around all the utility poles.
MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, if I could, let me defer for one
second to the county manager, since Commissioner Coyle isn't here.
My impression was the request was when we went after one of
these, while hopefully the recommendation of the county manager or
designee, his designee as the authority, that we would then seek to get
the chairman's signature on one of these letters when we go to send it,
and that that would be pre-approved by this board and then we would
come back and advise the full board of the fact that we had exercised
that, rather than trying to get on an agenda item waiting those weeks
and getting a letter out. Because we want to continue to be
responSIve.
Is that consistent with Commissioner Coyle's --
MR. MUDD: He basically said either/or. To do something like
that, and!or come back as an agenda item, have the board approve it
and have the Chair to sign.
He didn't really much care, as long as he got a signature of the
chairman of the Board of County Commissioners to give it additional
weight in order to get the utility moving.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do I hear a motion? And which
direction do we want to go on this? Why don't we just set it up so that
the Board of County Commissioners have the ability to tell -- instruct
the chairman to write the letter, have the letter written and signed and
get it out.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to make a motion to
approve the item, with the added that the -- have the chairman of the
board of commissioners sign a form to use by transportation to apply
in this case.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Does that mean before it has to
come back to us and go through a long --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It won't have to come back to us
in that case.
Page 336
October 24-25, 2006
MR. MUDD: You're basically not designating the county
manager as his designee, you're basically designating your --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Putting that power into --
MR. MUDD: -- chairman to be authority in order to sign the
notice.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So we're going -- the motion on
the floor is that the Chair will sign the necessary documents that are
provided by the transportation in regards to moving along, hopefully
getting right-of-way clear in a project. Okay.
And we have a motion by Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's also clarify, we're
approving the item, too.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And we're -- motion on the floor
by Commissioner Henning, and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any other discussion?
MR. PETTIT: Chairman Halas, if I may, Commissioner
Henning, could we add to your motion that you are ratifying the prior
notices sent out by the transportation division?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ratifying--
MR. PETTIT: The prior notices sent to utilities.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, sure. Was that a part of the
executive summary?
MR. FEDER: Yes, it was.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. That's of course in my
second. But if it's part of the executive summary, then--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So are we clear on everything, County
Attorney?
MR. PETTIT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion on this?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, I'll call the question. All
Page 337
October 24-25, 2006
those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries. Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, brings us to public comments on
general topics.
Ms. Filson?
MS. FILSON: I have no speakers, sir.
Item #12A
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS INSTRUCT STAFF TO PRESENT A
PROPOSED ORDINANCE FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION AT
A FUTURE DATE WHICH WOULD AMEND ORDINANCE NO.
97-35, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE
ENFORCEMENT CITATION ORDINANCE, AS CODIFIED IN
CHAPTER TWO, ARTICLE IX OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, IN ORDER TO
ESTABLISH AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO CERTAIN
ALLEGED CODE VIOLATIONS - MOTION FOR COUNTY
ATTORNEY TO CREATE A DRAFT ORDINANCE WITH BCC
RECOMMENDATIONS AND TO BRING BACK FOR REVIEW -
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Brings us to the County Attorney's report. 12(A).
It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
instruct staff to present a proposed ordinance for the board's
Page 338
October 24-25, 2006
consideration at a future date which would amend Ordinance No.
97-35 as amended, the Collier County Code Enforcement citation
ordinance, as codified in Chapter 2, Article 9 of the Collier County
Code of Laws and Ordinances, in order to establish an affirmative
defense to certain alleged code violations.
And Mr. Jeff Klatzkow will present.
MR. KLATZKOW: Good morning.
MR. MUDD: You want me to read this in?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, I think just put that on the visualizer,
Jim.
MR. MUDD: Yes, absolutely.
MR. KLATZKOW: This is an item that is really board directed.
We've had discussions in the past where citizens have had code
complaints filed against them for work that was supposed to have been
done 20 years ago, 30 years ago.
And one of the issues they raised, and I think it's a fair issue they
raised is, you know, how can I prove that a permit wasn't granted? I
mean, that may have been two or three owners ago that this happened.
There's been some discussion that maybe the county record isn't
perfect. And I think we'd all agree, as time goes on, everybody's
records starts getting less and less perfect.
And so there was some discussion how could we perhaps
improve this and give the citizen a defense to this sort of code
complaint.
Michelle and I went to the Code Enforcement Board during a
workshop and we discussed the issue. And what came out of that
workshop was this particular concept. And it's just a proposal. I'm not
here to present an ordinance for you, I'm just looking for feedback.
And the idea is really this: There comes a point in time where we
really can't prove that a permit was in fact issued or not issued. I
mean, it's like proving a negative. And so the idea is if the work that
was done was done properly, at that point in time why should we care.
Page 339
October 24-25, 2006
I mean, compliance is really what we're looking for anyway.
And so if a homeowner could say look, I understand that maybe
your records doesn't have a permit, but this work was done properly
and here's an engineer's certificate or whatever proof it is to verify that
this was done properly, at that point in time the county can just issue
the permit, issue the CO and clear the records, and the homeowner can
move on and be done with it, and the county can move on. That's just
the general concept.
The year we picked was the year that we migrated to the present
system, CDPlus. It was thought that maybe some of the records didn't
make the transition from the older system to the new system. But that
date can be any date. And that was the date that the Code
Enforcement Board thought that it would be most appropriate. Five
years, 10 years, 15 years, any date this board would choose would also
be an appropriate date.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I like Code Enforcement
Board's recommendations.
How would this work?
MR. KLATZKOW: It would work that it's an affirmative
defense. So the code enforcement -- generally the way this works is
code enforcement gets a complaint, usually from a neighbor. They
follow up with the complaint. The owner would then say, listen, I
can't prove this one way or the other, it's too many years ago. But
here's proof that the work was done properly. So that the work would
amend the then current codes.
So if the work was done in 1980, for example, it would have
made the 1980 code. And as long as they can demonstrate that, CDS
will issue the permit, issue a certificate of occupancy, and close it out
so that this would be a problem for future homeowners for that
particular residence.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's give an example.
Page 340
October 24-25, 2006
Let's sayan addition was done in 1994. The owner can prove it.
That's a concept. The owner can prove that that was done in 1994 and
verify it by the county. Would all fees associated with that
improvement be applied?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, now we've raised the issue of impact
fees. And if you were to supposed to bring in a permit back in 1990 or
1985 or whatever date it was and you didn't do that, then we probably
should charge you then current impact rates at that time, just to be fair
and everything.
So we're sort of like truing up the system here. We're saying
maybe your contractor for example took your money for the permit
but didn't file. And that happens, all right? Or maybe somebody did
the work on their own, and that happens. But what we saying is, okay,
we'll true up the system. We'll give you the permit, we give you the
CO, you're okay, but we're going to true it up because now you've got
to pay the impact fees that would have been done.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's great. I kind of like that
concept.
How would you provide that the addition in this case, the 1994,
met that current code?
MR. KLATZKOW: Homeowner's going to have to prove that,
SIr.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Would it be acceptable
to put into the language that the homeowner will hire a general
contractor, in the case of a residential home, to verify that the
improvements were done properly to then code?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'll defer that to Mr. Hammond and Joe as to
what they'd be comfortable with.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, I do have some
other questions.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioners, there's some difficult issues
here to address. It's not that we oppose what's being proposed. In
Page 341
October 24-25,2006
fact, Jeff and I have talked about this. And Bill's here from a building
director's standpoint.
The difficulty is going to be, number one, we issue a permit. But
that permit has to be based upon a professional, a design professional
signed and sealed, would have to attest to the fact that what was built
met code.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A design professional.
MR. SCHMITT: A design professional.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's a design professional?
MR. HAMMOND: For the record, Bill Hammond, the Director
of the Building Review and Permitting Department and the Building
Official for Collier County.
The State of Florida identifies a design professional as a Florida
registered architect or professional engineer. And the Florida Building
Code greatly limits anybody else's responsibility to design, review,
approve or inspect buildings constructed under the Florida Building
Code.
So a contractor would have a very, very narrow range of things
he'd be able to approve. Most of those things are given to either
Florida licensed inspectors, which is still at a pretty narrow range, or
the preponderance is certainly given to architects and engineers
registered in the State of Florida.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me ask you something:
My home, if I was to put an addition on there, couldn't I submit
drawings myself?
MR. HAMMOND: You can submit them. They'd still-- but
you're not a registered design professional, so they --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I know I'm not.
MR. HAMMOND: Yes. So they would have to be approved by
someone who can attest that they meet the standards of the Florida
Building Code.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That was my question.
Page 342
October 24-25, 2006
And then it would have to be an architect or an engineer.
MR. HAMMOND: Registered in Florida, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, does the building
department have people to inspect to see if it meets then code?
MR. HAMMOND: The responsibility of the building
department to inspect occurs when a permit has been applied for and a
permit has issued. That's the -- that's my charter. I inspect buildings,
you know, under the scope of work identified within a permit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you don't have people to do
inspections to see if it meets the code?
MR. HAMMOND: Not to provide as a public service like that. I
do it under, you know, the auspices of a permitted issued from the
department. A fee is paid for that and then we make those inspections
in accordance with the permit that we've reviewed and approved.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If somebody pays a fee to the
inspectors that certifies that it does meet the minimum code --
MR. HAMMOND: That's a private provider action, sir, which is
beyond the building department's charter under 468.
MR. SCHMITT: And what you're asking is -- when our
inspectors go out there, they're technicians. They're licensed
technicians for specific disciplines: Electrical, mechanical, structural.
But they cannot -- they're not design professionals, they're not licensed
as design professionals, and they cannot attest from a stamping and
sealing -- like a registered architect or an engineer, they cannot attest
to the fact that what it is being built meets structural -- the structural
standards and structural codes. That is a licensed professional.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: Our guys are only going out to ensure
compliance with the code.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So I guess we'd want to put
something in there to say that attested by a design --
MR. HAMMOND: Yes, sir. We have very good guidance and
Page 343
October 24-25,2006
verbiage we can borrow from the Florida Statute in that regard that we
can capture it very clearly what the requirements would be for that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, to meet then code.
MR. HAMMOND: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And I think that's
important, to make sure that we're not allowing health, safety issues to
slide by without them being addressed.
Now, this doesn't -- this is not addressing any setbacks or
anything?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, sir, this is just straight -- this is the work
that's been complained of. For example, somebody who took their
porch and enclosed it or somebody who put up a fence without a
permit. It has nothing to do with setback. That's a continuing
violation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you don't need -- well,
that's further clarification. You don't need an architect or an engineer
to certify that a fence --
MR. SCHMITT: No, but we need a licensed land surveyor.
They would have to do a spot survey. And that is a licensed
professional again to do a spot survey.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I drew up on our old
survey where I was putting on a fence, and I got a permit for it.
MR. SCHMITT: And you demonstrated basically that it was on
your property. That is not an issue. We will issue a permit for that if
you're a private resident putting a fence up on your property line. We
do not inspect that. That is -- but if it's a commercial property or
you're worried about some kind of encroachment, if there's an
encroachment violation, that has to be a licensed professional, a land
surveyor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: As long as we're getting --
MR. SCHMITT: And understand, this is not probably as easy as
it sounds when you read this, because to find a design professional to
Page 344
October 24-25, 2006
go in and attest that whatever was built meets code, first of all, you're
going to have -- it's going to be difficult finding someone. Second of
all, much of that is in the terminology of forensic engineering. You
may have to -- there's certain things that are behind walls that they're
going to have to attest meets code. And to have someone stamp and
seal that, it's going to be difficult to find someone to do that.
But this process is allowed today. You can come in today, if you
have a structure that was not built -- or was built without a permit and
now you want to permit it, this is really not anything new from a
standpoint of the Florida Building Code. You can do this today.
What this ordinance does, from a standpoint of the board, no
longer would demand a Notice of Violation. Basically it's kind of a
get out of jail card, so to speak. But it's still not cheap. Somebody is
going to have to pay for a design professional and review the project
and attest that it meets code. We'll come in, we'll issue the building
permit.
I think the question we're going to have to address ourselves as
well is what impact fees do we assign? Because there may be some
issues legally. And we're still not to that point. I mean, we're still
trying to discuss is it today's impact fees or are we post-dated, and if
we post-date it, is that legal? We're still debating those issues.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just want to tell you that I've
received at least two correspondence where your staff has said it has
to come up to current code on things like additions or guest homes.
And therefore, it would have to come up to the FEMA code. So
you're saying -- you just said something different.
MR. SCHMITT: That's a different issue. FEMA code --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I know it is.
MR. SCHMITT: -- is not the building code. That's your flood
ordinance. If they want to deviate from that, that requires a board
action. You have to approve a variance to the base flood elevation.
That is a board action.
Page 345
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Previously attested
improvements that was done years ago, your staff is saying you have
to come up to FEMA code?
MR. SCHMITT: That is correct. Unless the board issues a
variance to its flood ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But today if I do an
improvement, let's say 25 percent improvement on my house, I don't
have to do that.
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct, you do not.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Anything over 50 percent.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But the person that code
enforcement or the neighbor turns in that had 25 percent improvement
does have to come up to FEMA.
MR. SCHMITT: It depends on if we're talking about a
conversion of a garage or whatever that may be below the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What about an addition?
MR. SCHMITT: An addition?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A 1 DO-foot addition on an 1,800
square foot house.
MR. HAMMOND: That probably would not meet the definition
of substantial improvement. And it would not --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Over 15 percent. But your staff
is telling the residents they have to. I'm just telling you that.
MR. HAMMOND: Well, I think the message is is that the
violation may reveal that some current code requirements may be
there. But as a whole sale, it's certainly going to be a situation on a
case-by-case, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think you know what I mean.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, I understand. We'll make sure--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There's not consistency in the
message to the residents in community development.
The other thing, I have noticed that there are several ordinances
Page 346
October 24-25, 2006
dealing with code enforcement. And I think it's prudent that we take
those ordinances -- there's one for the special master, there's one for
code enforcement. And I mean, there's several of them. And then one
for the Minimum Housing Code and so on and so forth.
Would it be a good idea to take those whatever ordinances, put
them together in one document so everybody knows what their duties
are? Such as code enforcement, special master and the code
enforcement officers.
MR. KLATZKOW: We can certainly have a unified code
ordinance, yes, just like we have a unified impact fee ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I think that would help us
out the code enforcement officers to run this thing.
MR. SCHMITT: We did that last year with the minimum
housing standards. We took four ordinances and combined them into
one. W e'lllook at that, see what we can --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Whatever you recommend as far
as -- so we don't have so many papers out there and everybody can try
to follow as best as possible.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, just a question. You were
talking about impact fees now. Say for instance the house was built in
1974 and they didn't have any impact fees, and the additions were
there and they didn't have any impact fees.
Then now, you know, come up to today and they're going to add
an addition onto this older place. What do you do when there weren't
any impact fees in the first place? You say to pay impact fees at that
present date, but there weren't any.
MR. SCHMITT: Okay, I'm going to answer your question.
If they're going to add an addition today and you come in for a
permit today, you only pay the incremental difference in impact fees
on the square footage of that addition if it puts you into the next
category. So that's today.
Page 347
October 24-25, 2006
If you came in today -- you're already given credit for the impact
fees for that home. It's deemed that those impact fees have been paid
through ad valorem or whatever. If you're going to add an addition, I
charge you for the incremental difference, again, if you bump up into
the next area.
If it's going back and saying this was built in 1980 and I now
want it post-date or at least get a building permit for that, we're going
to have to address -- I know Jeff said that we could look at post-dating
the impact fees. I think we're going to probably have to determine
whether that can be legal or not.
We'll have to address that when we come back to you with an
ordinance as to what date the impact fees would be at least allocated
for a permit that is issued based on a claim that it was built, say,
addition in 1980.
The gentleman that was here two weeks ago who added the 210
feet --
MR. MUDD: Mr. Swayzee.
MR. SCHMITT: Mr. Swayzee.
And saying that was added before he bought the house.
Certainly he can come in now and try and get a permit for what exists.
He would have to attest that that meets the code. What impact fees
would we assess we need to address that.
MR. KLATZKOW: Ifwe could have board direction on that, we
can clear this up. What's your pleasure, really? I mean, do you want
to charge them as of today or as of when it was built?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, my opinion is if they can
prove that they built it at a previous time, that's when the impact truly
exists. It's not when government discovers that they didn't have a
permit, or allegedly didn't have a permit. I mean, that's my feeling on
it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I look at it also is if he did it with
the idea that he was trying to circumvent the law and got caught, then
Page 348
October 24-25, 2006
he's going to pay whatever today's impact fees are.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And this is not going to apply in
this case. If they're trying to circumvent the law, then I mean, yeah,
you can -- code enforcement will prove that. Let's say 1994
somebody tried to circumvent the law by not paying fees or something
like that --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Or didn't even get a permit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Built it on it on their own.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pardon me?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Went out and built it on their own and
didn't -- and circumvented the system that's in place, and then they get
caught. Then I feel that they have to pay the impact fees that are the
going rate for --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I agree with that. But I
think that most people are innocent until proven otherwise.
But I also say, Commissioner, you can make an addition to your
house today. You could be an owner/builder and do it today. You
don't need a contractor to do that, as long as you live in it, right?
That's right.
MR. HAMMOND: The law allows you -- if you're the fee
simple owner of a single-family resident, the law allows you to act as
your own contractor, but you have to hire licensed contractors to
perform the work. Or they have to be in your employ, yes, sir, that's
correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or you have to employ --
MR. HAMMOND: That's right. In your employ, which means
you pay Workmen's Comp for them, you do withholding, they have to
be employees of yours. Or you have to hire licensed contractors. If
you're going to act at your own contractor, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But say, for instance, you're the
third owner in this. How would you know if somebody actually did
Page 349
October 24-25, 2006
this to circumvent the law or built it with a permit because it's been so
old?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, that's another thing that we need to
address sometime in our ordinances, that when someone wants to sell
a house, that it has to -- and I talked with Joe about this and also the
code enforcement people. And they're going to try to come up with
some kind of verbiage whereby when you go to sell a house, the house
has got to make sure that it's been cleared by the owner that wants to
sell that house that it's up to par so that it's not buyer beware, that
when the buyer buys the house that most of the concerns are
addressed. One way or another. If there's something that needs a
variance, then the seller needs to make sure that it's -- the variance is
taken care of so that the next person doesn't get involved and say I
didn't know, nobody told me that there was -- that this was an
outstanding violation. And now I'm stuck with it. So there's a lot of
things that need to be addressed here.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'm kind of glad you got
ahead of me on that one there. Because I agree with you, there's some
things that we're missing the point on. The reason there's a problem
that exists is one, people are trying to cut corners. They figure they're
saving a couple of dollars on a permit. When the truth of the matter is
that permit is there to be able to protect them from all sorts of
problems. From unscrupulous contractors, from shoddy work. And
from some future time when it may come up where they're going to
have the problem.
I think that we should be protecting the unsuspecting homeowner
that purchases the property.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, if a person owns a
property for 50 years and 30 years ago they did some illegal work, I
don't think there should be any kind of time allowance for them to be
Page 350
October 24-25, 2006
able to come forward and say, well, I got away with it for 30 years,
now I'm exempted. No way.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: By God, if they did it, then
they're guilty, they pay the thing. They have to go through all the
rigmarole that you have to go through. That's what code's about.
But the unsuspecting homeowner that comes up that walks into
this thing, unknowing that this took place, now where's the failing
here? Where does do you diligence come in and where does the
responsibility of government lie to be able to warn this person? I
mean, it's a fine line.
Due diligence means, of course, the person does their own
research. They find out if everything is right. Maybe they have the
title search, goes to the point where they make sure everything is up
the way it is. But I think Halas's suggestion that maybe an inspection
that takes place at a time that a person wants to sell their house --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sell their house, exactly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No one is ever going to cheat on
a permit again unless they're planning to die in the place and leave it
with their kids with the problem. It does solve an awful lot.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And eventually you'll get all this cleared
up so that we'll have less burden on code enforcement.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But here we go again, too.
Some way there should be a mechanism in there until we get to that
point we could something that warns people purchasing homes that it
is their responsibility to exercise due diligence and to be able to go
back and look at it.
I don't know how you come up with the wording for it, but, I
mean, at some point in time we've got to stop paying for those people
that aren't going to do due diligence and just remind them. Like we
remind them when to put out the trash. The Federal government sends
them reminders if they forget to pay their taxes, you know.
Page 351
October 24-25, 2006
But I don't want to get to the point we just automatically start
forgiving people because they got past the certain point in time and
because of that statute of limitations they now are scot-free from the
responsibilities of whatever the laws were at that point in time.
MR. SCHMITT: I need to correct the record, though,
Commissioner Henning. You asked about if you do the work yourself
in your home and not hire a contractor, then you can do the work. If
you want to do something in your home as a homeowner -- go ahead,
Bill. Just to clarify.
MR. HAMMOND: I apologize if I misunderstood,
Commissioner.
Yeah, if you yourself want to build that wall or hang that light in
your home, yes, sir, you can perform that yourself.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're going to make sure I do
it right, right?
MR. HAMMOND: Absolutely, sir.
MR. SCHMITT: For those permitted activities. But you can do it
yourself. If you act as the general contractor, then you have to -- then
you would be hiring a certified professional.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, I think you're
talking about something else. But this ordinance I think will solve a
lot of problems out there in the community. And it won't hinder the
health, safety and welfare issue.
Do you disagree with me Amy?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Suggestion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- but I think Commissioner
Halas is working on something that might work out bringing it back.
But this is the way to -- the county manager, through a series of
e-mails on a lot that was cleared in Golden Gate Estates go back to
then -- it was in 1992. Go back to then code and that's what they do
Page 352
October 24-25, 2006
already. We just want to put it in writing, and still address some of
those concerns such as health, safety and welfare.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could I make a suggestion? I
could vote for this, I wouldn't have any problem. But here's the
problem, is I think Commissioner Halas has got a good idea coming
up. I don't know if we've got enough to make it go forward. We've
only got three commissioners here and it would have to be unanimous
to happen.
Possibly you might want to consider continuing this so that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, no, this is just --
MR. MUDD: This is just a draft --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- direction.
MR. MUDD: This is just direction to us to go draft an ordinance
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Just a draft.
MR. MUDD: -- to come on back to the board.
MR. SCHMITT: We have two actions here: One is this, and this
is just a draft. And frankly, we're in agreement with this, because --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Fine, no problem.
MR. SCHMITT: -- the process is for you to approve. But it also
puts the onus on the homeowner to validate.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So all you need is just a nod to
move things forward?
MR. SCHMITT: What we can do, though, talking about the
other issue that Commissioner Halas talked about, we're going to do
some research to find out what programs are available to do now what
you've talked about. Not this issue but another issue, some kind of
inspection or at least due diligence to assist a homeowner who
purchased a piece of property to say hey, there's work that was done
that was not permitted or there are existing encroachments or some
other type of activity.
We'll have to come back to you and report to you on how we can
Page 353
October 24-25, 2006
do that. Frankly, how much it would cost, what kind of fees would
have to be charged for that, what kind of staff would need to be
required to support it. And look at other counties and look at the
resources it would take and whether you want to move forward with
that type of program. But that's a different action.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And if would be serviced -- it would be a
fee attached to it and the seller of the house has to --
MR. SCHMITT: There would have to be some sort of fee,
because that's how I pay for staff.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Exactly right.
MR. SCHMITT: The issue here also was with the county
attorney determining is there any type of -- what's the word I'm
looking for.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Obligation by the county.
MR. SCHMITT: If I do an inspection, is there -- are we --
liability, thank you. Lost the word.
What kind of liability do we assume and how in-depth of an
inspection would we do? We can certainly go through the records, we
can look at the property card. And we'll have to vet this with
N.A.B.O.R. and through the real estate industry as well, so they know
and understand that this is something we're working on, and get their
input.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But on this --
MR. SCHMITT: But this one --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We need a motion, right?
MR. SCHMITT: Just a nod. We're going to have to bring this
one back.
MR. MUDD: Hang on, Joe. This one's 12(A). I would like to
have a motion to tell the staff, the county attorney to come back with
an ordinance on this particular item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's do some clarification on
Page 354
October 24-25, 2006
this. And I'm going to second the motion to create a more of a unified
ordinance for, you know, special master, code enforcement, code
enforcement officers in the duties. Create the draft ordinance,
including the consideration of the SIB and the comments of the board
of commissioners.
And I also would like to have defined definitions within the
ordinance, similar to what we have in our present ordinances. That's
most important.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah.
You have enough direction?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry, repeat that last part
about --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Definitions. Definitions of, you
know, what is the Code Enforcement Board. What is code
enforcement officers. What does it mean by the action we're taking
today? What does it mean by design professional. What is a design
professional? Those types of --
MR. HAMMOND: Substantial improvements.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Those types of meetings. We
have it throughout our other ordinances what the definition is.
MR. SCHMITT: That will be clarified and noted in this --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you agree with that?
MR. SCHMITT: Yes. It's right out of the Florida Building
Code.
If I could just add, though, that this is not a -- this is a problem
that is happening a lot. There are a lot of people doing conversions. In
fact, what I heard this morning, one inspector told me what people are
doing now is leaving the garage door up to make it still look like a
garage but going actually inside and rebuilding --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I got one down my street --
MR. SCHMITT: -- from the inside.
Page 355
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- the guy just did that. He's got the
garage and he opens the door up and the garage is only this big now.
MR. SCHMITT: Yeah, it's a wall. They build the interior out.
And it's all being doing --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I went by the other day and I go, what
the heck?
MR. SCHMITT: You know, they do it, but they're putting
themselves at great risk for fire insurance, all the other type of issues.
So -- I had an inspector tell me this morning they're leaving the garage
door up now just to conceal it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me just say, in that
case most likely you're not going to find a permit.
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Most likely that the property
appraiser's not going to catch it.
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So doesn't it go back to hey, you
know, where's your proof that this was done a long time ago?
MR. SCHMITT: This ordinance, once we are notified of this, we
would go back to the homeowner and say, okay, now the onus is on
you to validate that what you built is in accordance with code.
What this ordinance does is we don't get into the whole Notice of
Violation, code enforcement board issue. We give them an
opportunity to make it wrong or right and make it legal. And that's all
we really want to do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, is to come in compliance
with the law.
MR. SCHMITT: Come into compliance. Make sure what they
built is on the property code and is built to code, to the Florida
Building Code.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But don't you agree in that case
where they have a phony garage door that they didn't get a permit.
Page 356
October 24-25, 2006
MR. SCHMITT: Most likely they did not, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, wouldn't -- I mean,
you're going to come down on them, right?
MR. SCHMITT: This ordinance will allow them to come back to
us to properly permit.
MR. MUDD: The answer to the Commissioner's question is, if
that garage door's open and we see the phony wall there, we'll cite
them.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
MR. MUDD: Okay? And then they will have to come in and get
it resolved basically with use of this ordinance or pay the fines and
come in and get an after-the-fact permit or whatever they --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But again, if the owner's done
that, he's trying to circumvent the law.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's exactly right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if an owner buys that house
with that garage door like that, wouldn't you question it? Wouldn't
any owner trying to buy it question it, just common sense?
MR. MUDD: When you do your title insurance and when you
take a look at the building designs, you have a company that you
normally hire, you pay a fee to pull all those documents from the
county records in order to look at them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm not trying to protect
those types of people, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, but what happens is, a title
company, they're just going to go out and look at the perimeter.
They're not going to go in and look at every one of the rooms and see
if there's been additional rooms put in.
MR. KLATZKOW: And again, this ordinance does put a date of
April 1 st, 1997. So anybody doing this now is not going to fall under
the protection of this proposed ordinance.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion?
Page 357
October 24-25, 2006
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, I'll call the question. We
have a motion on the by Commissioner Coletta and a second by
Commissioner Henning.
All those in favor, significant by saying any.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
Okay, commissioner.
Item #12B
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS REVIEW AND APPROVE THE FY 2006-2007
ACTION PLAN FOR DAVID C. WEIGEL, COUNTY ATTORNEY
- APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 12(B), and that's a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners review and
approve the FY 2006/2007 action plan for David C Weigel, the county
attorney and I believe Mr. Pettit's got this item.
MR. PETTIT: Commissioners, Mr. Weigel is in a post-surgery
medical meeting today and sends his apologies.
In action plan is very similar to the action plan you just recently
reviewed as part of his evaluation. I think it's been streamlined. I
won't spend time on those segments, but I would call your attention to
the Page 4 of four in your package on the exhibit.
And Mr. Weigel did want me to note that these are specific goals
he's identified to include in the action plan for the fiscal year 2007.
Briefly I'll go through those.
To continue to work on our presentations at meetings, not only
Mr. Weigel and me or Mr. Klatzkow, but anybody from our office to
Page 358
October 24-25, 2006
make them short and sweet and to the point and not complicate it by
legalese, as best we can, understanding our affirmities as lawyers.
To try to add to the tools of the BCC's tool box, especially on
land use items, but also on other matters, similar to what Mr. Feder
just brought forward today concerning Chapter 337, utilities
relocation. Another way for us to accomplish objectives in the county.
Specifically Mr. Weigel wanted to call you attention to a home
rule. We're going to continue to take a hard look at that. And more so
in the upcoming year.
Home rule simply stated says that in a non-chartered county, if it
is not prohibited by or in direct conflict with the state statute or
general laws, as is referred to, typically you can do it. And we're going
to try to look at those issues where you may be able to achieve county
objectives that otherwise we haven't been getting to possibly.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I was surprised that we haven't been in
that arena already.
MR. PETTIT: I think, Commissioner, that there have been times
that there have been discussion of home rule here, but we want to
make a special emphasis for the upcoming year.
So as issues arise that you identify as a board or as individual
commissioners, we can look and see how home rule might get you
where you want to go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, we have a motion on the floor for
approval by Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner
Coyle.
Hearing no further discussion, call the question. All those in
favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 359
October 24-25, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to staff and
commissioner general correspondence.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do you have anything to bring forward,
County Manager?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
A couple meetings ago the board asked us to come and set up a
schedule so that we could have contractors come forward with the
project manager's staff, come with a unified presentation to brief the
board; one contract a meeting in order to do that under presentation.
We've gotten that ball rolling. You're first presentation will be
the second meeting in November, and it will be by the road contractor
that is doing Goodlette-Frank Road from Golden Gate Parkway to
Pine Ridge. Your meeting in December will be the overpass, the
flyover. That contractor will brief you on his progress, where he is in
that contract, along with staff.
And there's a series that we're laying on so that every meeting
you will have a contractor give you a briefing during presentation and
that. So that part is rolling.
We're also modifying our contracts so that when we cut a new
contract, we'll require that contractor to perform up to two
presentations in front of the Board of County Commissioners on their
contract while they're doing it. So those things are transpiring.
The next thing that you told us a little while ago to do was to
come up with signs on our projects. And I had staff take a look at the
Page 360
October 24-25, 2006
signs. And we've gone from -- I told them to go with this particular
design. And this is basically an example of north county government
center, who the architect is, the general contractor. That is a project,
yes, your tax dollars are at work. Who the point of contact is for the
county so they can make a phone call in order to do that.
And that would be on a four-by-eight sign. And if it's a road, it
will be at the beginning, you know, as you face the proj ect coming
into it going north, south, east or west. And if you're coming in the
other direction, you'll have another sign that will tell you that
particular item in order to do it.
Staff also toyed with the idea of going and -- this is more than
what the board told us to do, okay? What the board told us to do at
the meeting was to do this. But we thought that would be a little stark
and we didn't think that would really get what you wanted to get to tell
them that the project is there. And there's so much stuff there in a
small place, I'm not too sure somebody would see it in order to get it.
So we, as a staff, as they got together and we had purchasing and
all our proj ect managers sit down and representatives thereof in order
to come up with that, and that's what they kind of thought.
I'm looking for at least we're in the ballpark and this is what
you'd like to see. Because I'm going to tell you --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think this is good. We got our names
on it so they can call us up and hot job us.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And I'm number five on
the list so I'll probably get the least amount of calls.
MR. MUDD: What I also -- and we'll start --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Fiala will get all of them.
MR. MUDD: We'll start putting these signs on projects starting
on 1 December.
Next item, I received a meeting with the Florida National Guard,
and they came down and in particular Brigadier General Michael
Fleming came in with his staff to talk to Dan Summers and myself
Page 361
October 24-25, 2006
about the possibility of coming to Collier County with an armory, a
State National Guard Armory.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Can I ask you a question?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We don't have a quorum. Is there
anything we're going to have to make any votes on?
MR. PETTIT: I think that you are precluded from taking action
at this point. We can certainly continue the information.
Information-sharing's fine.
MR. MUDD: All I'm basically doing is providing information.
They came for the visit. We listened. The armory would consist
of around 160 folks. They have about 80 trucks, 13 trailers. It would
be a service support company. It has what we call in my Army days
an S&S company. Basically a quarter master. They set up distribution
pods. They do distributions of supplies. They're experts at it.
What a wonderful asset to Collier County, especially in an
emergency . You already have 160 living and breathing soldiers that
know how to do that in order to pass supplies and help the county in
those particular cases.
What's the string? Normally what you get an armory in a county
or a city, the National Guard looks for the donation of the land, okay,
and they use state and federal funds in order to build the facility.
In this particular case, they need around 30 acres. I'm letting you
know about that. I told them I would keep my eyes open and I would
also inform the Board of County Commissioners upon this particular
Issue.
They also asked if there was any rental properties in the county,
if I would keep my eyes open for that. I know that the Kraft
Construction company is moving out of their headquarters out of
Horseshoe and they're moving into a new building that they're
building, and we all know about that. So they are going to free up that.
And those facilities, those two buildings would be empty.
Page 362
October 24-25, 2006
I've also relayed that information to the Florida National Guard
and I've also given them the points of contact in order to call and see if
they were interested. So I'm keeping that option open.
When do they think that they would be ready to start to build on
any particular project? Around 2008,2009, and I would go for 2009.
Because they have to go get the funds in order to do it. They're not
going to get the funds unless they have the land.
So I would ask the board members to keep their eyes open for 30
acres and look for some wonderful donations from someone. And we
can talk about this some other time, but I just wanted you to know
they came down to visit and they are very interested in adding an
armory to this county.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Now, in donations, would this be--
would the implications be that they could write this off on their taxes?
MR. MUDD: The who, sir?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The people that's going to donate the
land. Would they have a tax write-off?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, they would have to talk to you
about that, talk to the Federal Government about that, but I believe all
things are possible.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm talking about income tax write-off.
MR. MUDD: I think all things are possible, sir, in this particular
case.
And I've also talked with representatives from both sides of the
Collier family in this regard. Just to let you know that I said I've had
some interest. It's been giving to me and what do you think.
Next thing, I received a letter yesterday from the city manager.
This is in response to the board's resolution about entering into
negotiations, as stipulated in Florida Statute Chapter 1 71 part 2 that
was just part of the recent legislation that was passed in June in
Tallahassee. And Mr. Lee is stating that the City Council is due to
talk and discuss this particular item on the 30th of October. And they
Page 363
October 24-25, 2006
will be forthcoming. They have 60 days. You -- the certified copy
was received by them on the 20th of September. That gives them till
the 19th of November to satisfy the 60 days.
I will tell you that this item was discussed at City Council
preceding prior to today's meeting. I guess it was last week. And it
seems that some of their council seems to believe that this is not a
mandatory item in order to negotiate. The agreement is -- in our
opinion the agreement is not mandatory and both sides can consider to
disagree at some future time. But the negotiation process is
mandatory, based on the Florida statute. So this will be interesting. I
am going to relay back to Mr. Lee these particular concerns.
I will also let you know that during their presentation of this
particular item, they had a briefing -- they, the City Council had a
briefing about annexation policy, and they are going to determine their
annexation policy at a future workshop.
What I also want to discuss with you is one slide. And I know
it's a poor quality, but I also want to make sure that you see the
number numbers that are aligned next to the City of Naples in a
particular issue. And areas that adjoin the city are areas that they are
talking about setting a policy up. And the areas in white are the City
of Naples boundary as it stands today. The hash marked boundary
that runs up here is their water boundary, the water district in that
particular area.
Some things that talk to me, you've got an area that's down there
in your CRA already. The particular area that I'm talking about that --
of this particular conversation has to do Commerce Park and is this
number three area. And you'll notice that that -- where my pen is right
now, that is the zoo property that we just acquired.
You'll also know that if three goes into the city, now they've
really necked down this particular area so that it's almost an enclave.
They're precluded from doing enclaves by the Florida Statutes. And I
will also mention that in my particular letter.
Page 364
October 24-25, 2006
The area of Horseshoe, concerns that we have in that particular
area, and I want to make sure -- and I'm going to blow up that
particular area for you so that you have a better idea.
Okay. The area in blue on your slide is the area that the City of
Naples has been -- that they've had the client so to speak come to see
them about annexing this particular property into the City of Naples.
As it stands right -- that area in blue and the white areas, which is
Coconut Estates -- is that right, Leo? Coconut Estates, River Reach
and the zoo property right now are in the county. By taking that
particular piece out, you really sliver down that area. And that's what
I was talking about making an enclave.
I will also tell you that in that blue area, okay, of concerns for us,
here's the sheriffs admin. building that we own. Here is community
development, which is a county facility which we own, and their
garage is behind it. And this is Norman Feder's operation, okay,
transportation, which the county own owns.
The Kraft facility that I was talking about sits down in this
particular area for the National Guard in this area that I was talking
about renting.
So we have some issues. This area is a mixed city water/county
sewer area. So, you know, how does that all pair out at the end? The
good news on the county's side -- first of all, the good news on the
county's side is we don't pay taxes now, nor will we pay taxes when
the city puts it on our facility, so they have no tax gain on that
particular item. We will no longer pay a water surcharge on our
facilities when we're in the city, because that 25 percent will go away.
The one thing that does disturb us, though, is our electric bills
will all go up by about 10 percent, because they have a utility tax on
electricity. So if there's one bad thing about that, it's electricity, our
electricity bill. The one good thing is our water bill will go down.
But we still have to figure out how that service is going to be done, if
we're going to trade service areas so that this would be a water/sewer
Page 365
October 24-25, 2006
city process and the county would go out in what other areas that they
would like to talk about to trade on those particular issues.
So I believe we have some items that we want to discuss.
I will also tell you, in my conversations with the chief of the East
Naples Fire Department, he does not want to give up that as a service
area. So they're also party to this part two, 171 particular discussion
that your resolution has initiated. So I look forward to their response.
I am going to respond back to Mr. Lee's letter with the particular
items that I have just discussed with this board.
If there's any other things that you would like me to include in
there, I would be glad to do that. You can see me after this meeting or
sometime after that. And at this particular moment that's all I have,
sir. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Attorney?
MR. PETTIT: Nothing, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, Mr. Coletta, you and I are the only
two here, so do you have anything to bring forward?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I want to thank everybody in the
audience that showed up today, and I'm glad for your participation.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I just want to say that -- I want to
thank my commissioners. Yesterday was a trying day, and I think that
we did well. So other than that, I don't have anything further to say,
and we are 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
THE FINAL PLAT OF AVE MARIA UNIT 7, LIBERTY PARK,
Page 366
October 24-25, 2006
APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY -
W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A2
RESOLUTION 2006-270: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF GREY OAKS UNIT SIXTEEN. THE
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE
PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED - W /RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A3
THE FINAL PLAT OF MEDITERRA PHASE THREE EAST UNIT
ONE REPLAT OF LOT 11~ BLOCK A - W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A4
RESOLUTION 2006-271: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF DELASOL PHASE TWO. THE
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE
PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED - W /RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A5
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR VANDERBILT BEACH RESORT - W/RELEASE OF THE
Page 367
October 24-25, 2006
UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Item #16A6
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR DELASOL, PHASE 3 - W/RELEASE OF THE
UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Item #16A 7
THE FINAL PLAT OF AVE MARIA UNIT 8, EMERSON PARK,
APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY -
W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A8
APPROVAL OF AN INTERIM MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE
MILANO PROPERTY UNDER THE CONSERVATION COLLIER
LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM - TO IDENTIFY THE KEY
MANAGEMENT PRIORITIES AND ISSUES WITHIN THE SITE
AND GIVE DIRECTION FOR MANAGEMENT FOR THE NEXT
TWO YEARS
Item #16A9
APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE
CURRENT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
OF COLLIER COUNTY - TO INCREASE ANNUAL FUNDING
BY $160,000 TO A TOTAL OF $560,000 FOR THE CURRENT
Page 368
October 24-25, 2006
FISCAL YEAR
Item #16A10
RESOLUTION 2006-272: APPROVAL OF COLLIER COUNTY
AND THE CITY OF NAPLES URBAN COUNTY COOPERATION
AGREEMENT FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM AND
SUBMIT THE AGREEMENT TO HUD - COMMUNITIES ARE
REQUIRED TO RE-EVALUATE THEIR URBAN COUNTY
COOPERATION AGREEMENTS EVERY THREE YEARS
Item #16A11
RESOLUTION 2006-273: APPROVAL OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY AND THE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND URBAN
COUNTY COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR THE U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
(HUD) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) PROGRAM AND SUBMIT THE AGREEMENT TO HUD
- COMMUNITIES ARE REQUIRED TO RE-EVALUATE THEIR
URBAN COUNTY COOPERATION AGREEMENTS EVERY
THREE YEARS
Item #16A12
A CONTINUATION OF THE CONSERVATION COLLIER
INTERIM MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR RAILHEAD SCRUB
PRESERVE, OTTER MOUND PRESERVE, COCOHATCHEE
CREEK PRESERVE AND MALT PROPERTY TO JUNE 2007 TO
ALLOW FOR OPTIMAL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN
Page 369
October 24-25, 2006
DEVELOPMENT OF THE FINAL MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR
THESE PRESERVES AND TO COORDINATE A
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ROOKERY BAY
NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE FOR THE
MAL T PROPERTY - CONTINUING THE PLAN UNTIL JUNE
2007 WILL GIVE STAFF THE ENTIRE 'SEASON' TO
CONDUCT PUBLIC MEETINGS AND REFINE THE PLANS TO
BEST REFLECT PUBLIC INPUT
Item #16Bl
AWARD OF BID #06-4040, TRAFFIC OPERATIONS SIGNAL
COMPONENTS TO MULTIPLE VENDORS (ITEM-BY-ITEM
BASIS) - AWARDED TO 6 VENDORS TO PROPERLY
MAINTAIN AND REPAIR COLLIER COUNTY'S TRAFFIC
SIGNAL HARDWARE
Item #16B2
A CHANGE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $198,507.00 TO
CH2M HILL, INC. AMENDING CONTRACT #05-3774 GORDON
RIVER WATER QUALITY PARK (PROJECT NO. 51085)
ENGINEERING DESIGN CONTRACT - TO INCLUDE
ADDITIONAL DESIGN SERVICES AND THE ADDITION OF
THE FREEDOM MEMORIAL TO THE PROJECT SITE
Item #16B3
A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $394 TO
RECOGNIZE ADDITIONAL STATE BLOCK GRANT FUNDS
AWARDED THROUGH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION - A REIMBURSEMENT GRANT THAT
Page 370
October 24-25, 2006
THE COUNTY WILL INVOICE AS THE EXPENSES ARE
INCURRED
Item #16B4 - Moved to Item #10K
Item #16B5
RESOLUTION 2006-274: ACCEPTANCE OF A CONTRIBUTION
FROM THE HALSTATT PARTNERSHIP FOR THE
ADDITIONAL PLANTINGS ALONG GOLDEN GATE
PARKWAY UP TO THE AMOUNT OF $101,821.89 - FOR
IMPROVEMENTS ON GOLDEN GATE P ARKW A Y ADJACENT
TO GREY OAKS
Item #16B6
THE PURCHASE OF PRE-CAST BOX CULVERT SECTIONS
FROM HANSON PIPE & PRODUCTS FOR THE FISH BRANCH
CREEK BOX CULVERT EXTENSION PROJECT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $52,116.96, AUTHORIZE PAYMENT PRIOR TO
DELIVERY AND APPROVE AN ALLOCATION OF A $12,100
STORAGE FEE - WITHIN LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD RIGHT-
OF-WAY
Item #16B7
RECOMMENDATION TO (1) AWARD BID #06-4051
SIDEWALKS/BIKE PATHS VARIOUS LOCATIONS FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS
WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES
USA, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $691,246.15 AND 10%
CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $69,124.62 FOR A
Page 371
October 24-25, 2006
TOTAL OF $760,370.77 AND (2) APPROVE A BUDGET
AMENDMENT TO REFLECT THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS TO BE
REIMBURSED BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) TO $367,500 (PROJECT #690822)-
AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16B8
AWARD BID #06-4034 GOLDEN GATE MSTU SUNSHINE
BOULEVARD LANDSCAPE & IRRIGATION INSTALLATION
PROJECT" TO HANNULA LANDSCAPING, INC. WITH A BASE
AMOUNT OF $289,460.64 AND 10% CONTINGENCY OF
$28.946.00 FOR A TOTAL OF $318~406.64
Item #16B9
APPROVE A FY07 BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT
OF $150,000 ESTABLISHING CURRENT YEAR
APPROPRIATION FOR REMITTANCES TO THE SOUTHWEST
FLORIDA EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY - FOR THE HIRING OF
A CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT TO ESTABLISH AND
REGULARY ADMINISTER AUTHORITY FINANCES
Item #16C1
A DONATION AGREEMENT AND ACCEPT AN ACCESS
EASEMENT FROM THE PRESERVE AT THE SHORES AT
BERKSHIRE LAKES CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. TO
PROVIDE LEGAL ACCESS TO LIFT STATION #312 AT A COST
NOT TO EXCEED $3,800 - DUE TO THE BLOCKED ACCESS,
THE WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN REQUIRED
TO UTILIZE AN AL TERNA TIVE ROUTE FOR MAINTENANCE
Page 372
October 24-25, 2006
AND OPERATION OF THE LIFT STATION
Item # 16C2
RECOMMENDATION TO CONVEY A UTILITY EASEMENT TO
THE WATER-SEWER DISTRICT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE OF A WATER TRANSMISSION MAIN
ON PROPERTY OWNED BY COLLIER COUNTY AT
GOODLAND PARK - THE EXPANSION IS TO PROVIDE
SERVICE TO THE RESIDENCES LOCATED ON PALM POINT
DRIVE
Item #16C3
WORK ORDER # UC-250 UNDER CONTRACT # 04-3535,
ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
CONTRACTING SERVICES, TO KYLE CONSTRUCTION, INC.
IN THE AMOUNT OF $933,820.00 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
FIRE AND IRRIGATION WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
AT THE STRAND IN PELICAN BAY, PROJECT NUMBER 74023
- TO ENSURE LONG-TERM RELIABILITY OF THE PELICAN
BAY FIRE PROTECTION WATER SYSTEM
Item #16C4
AWARD BID NUMBER 06-4017 FOR ANNUAL CONTRACT
FOR CHLORINATOR EQUIPMENT TO WATER TREATMENT
CONTROLS, INCORPORATED FOR USE BY THE WATER AND
W ASTEW A TER DEPARTMENTS IN THE ESTIMATED
ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $500,000 - TO COMPLETE ANNUAL
INSPECTIONS AND ALL REQUIRED MAINTENANCE ON
CHLORINATOR EQUIPMENT LOCATED AT WATER AND
Page 373
October 24-25, 2006
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES AND RE-PUMPING
STATIONS
Item #16C5
AN ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP FOR COUNTY MANAGERS
AGENCY IN THE COUNCIL OF INTERNATIONAL VISITORS
IN COLLIER COUNTY IN THE AMOUNT OF $300, SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE - PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY
TO SHARE THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE WITH PEOPLE
FROM OTHER LANDS AND PROMOTING A DEEPER
UNDERSTANDING FOR THE SOCIETIES AND CULTURES OF
OTHER PEOPLE
Item #16C6
WORK ORDER ICTSCADA-3916-MAC-06-06 IN THE AMOUNT
OF $88,456 TO MCKIM & CREED, P.A. UNDER ANNUAL
CONTRACT 06-3916 FOR SCADA SYSTEM UPGRADES AT
THE SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT
PLANT, PROJECT 71055 - TO OPTIMIZE AND ENHANCE THE
WATER TREATMENT PROCESSES AT THE FACILITY BY
THE UTILIZATION OF ADVANCED HISTORICAL DATA
COLLECTION~ ANALYSIS. STORAGE~ AND REPORTING
Item #16D1
RESOLUTION 2006-275: APPROVAL OF THE SUBMITTAL OF
A FLORIDA BOATING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BOATING
EDUCATION GRANT TO THE FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION COMMISSION FOR THE INITIAL PHASE OF
THE MARINE RESOURCE CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP
Page 374
October 24-25, 2006
OF COLLIER COUNTY BOATER EDUCATION PROGRAM IN
THE AMOUNT OF $14,000 -AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D2
A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,000 TO
RECOGNIZE DONATIONS FROM LOCAL COMMUNITY
PARTNERS TO FUND SENIOR ACTIVITIES AT THE EAST
NAPLES COMMUNITY CENTER ANNEX - FOR PROVIDING
REFRESHMENTS, PURCHASING SUPPLIES AND RENTING
EQUIPMENT
Item #16E1
AWARD OF BID #06-4048 QUICK COPY SERVICES
(ESTIMATED ANNUAL COST OF $40,000) - TO CECIL'S COPY
EXPRESS AND RAY LEP AR PRINTING
Item # 16E2
AWARD RFP#06-4021 TO INSURANCE AND RISK
MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. FOR PROPERTY AND
CASUALTY BROKERAGE SERVICES (FISCAL IMPACT
$150,000) - THE EXISTING AGREEMENT EXPIRES ON
JANUARY 1~ 2007
Item # 16E3
RESOLUTION 2006-276: A RESOLUTION APPROVING A
CHANGE IN STATUS OF A CLASSIFICATION FROM EXEMPT
TO NONEXEMPT UNDER THE FLSA AND TO RECEIVE
Page 375
October 24-25, 2006
APPROVAL FROM THE BOARD FOR THE EXECUTION OF A
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE (FISCAL IMP ACT
$7~533.89) - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16E4
CHANGE ORDER #8 TO CONTRACT NUMBER 98-2867 WITH
SCHENKEL SHULTZ ARCHITECTURE TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL SERVICES FOR THE NAPLES JAIL, PROJECT
NUMBER 52008, IN THE AMOUNT OF $41,900.00 AND TO
RECOGNIZE A $164,937.60 REBATE FROM FP&L - FOR
ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION/PERMIT DOCUMENTS AND
ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
SERVICES DUE TO PROBLEMS WITH THE EXISTING FIRE
ALARM SYSTEM AND ELECTRICAL SWITCH GEAR
Item #16F1
APPROVAL OF A $100,000 BUDGET AMENDMENT FROM
FISCAL YEAR 2006 TO COVER UNEXPECTED SALARIES/
OVERTIME EXPENSE BY THE ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE/RESCUE
- DUE TO HURRICANE WILMA AND SEVERAL UNRELATED
BRUSH FIRES
Item #16F2
APPROVAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE 2007
POLARIS RANGER ALL TERRAIN UTILITY VEHICLE GRANT
PROGRAM - TO RESPOND IN AN EFFICIENT AND
EFFECTIVE WAY TO A VARIETY OF EMERGENCY AND
CRISIS SITUATIONS
Page 376
October 24-25, 2006
Item #16F3
APPROVAL OF THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENT WITH THE COLLIER EMS/FIRE BARGAINING
UNIT, SOUTHWEST FLORIDA PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 1826, INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS, INCORPORATED - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16F4
CHANGE ORDER # 2 FOR CONTRACT # 03-3538 WITH EVANS
KLAGES, INC. FOR VISITOR RESEARCH SERVICES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $12,000 AND AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY
MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE CHANGE
ORDER # 2 AFTER APPROVAL BY THE COUNTY
ATTORNEYS OFFICE - TO BETTER DEFINE THE BUYING
HABITS AND CREATIVE PREFERENCES OF THEIR
CUSTOMERS
Item #16F5
A BUDGET AMENDMENT TRANSFERRING $302,800 FROM
THE PELICAN BAY IRRIGATION AND LANDSCAPING
CAPITAL FUND (322) TO THE UNINSURED ASSET
RESTORATION FUND (133)
Item #16H1
COMMISSIONER HALAS REQUESTS BOARD APPROVAL FOR
REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A
FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE.
Page 377
October 24-25, 2006
ATTENDED THE 18TH ANNUAL SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SNAPSHOT ON THURSDAY,
OCTOBER 19,2006, AT THE NAPLES ELKS LODGE #2010 IN
NAPLES, FLORIDA. $65.00 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER HALAS' TRAVEL BUDGET - TO REVIEW
TRENDS, INFLUENCES, AND FUTURE CHALLENGES OF
LOCAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Item #16H2
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUESTS APPROVAL FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER PAID IN
ADVANCE TO ATTEND THE GREATER NAPLES
LEADERSHIP LUNCHEON SEMINAR ON DECEMBER 4, 2006
AND IS REQUESTING REIMBURSEMENT IN THE AMOUNT
OF $15.00, TO BE PAID FROM HIS TRAVEL BUDGET - TO
SPEAK REGARDING IMMOKALEE AND ITS DEVELOPMENT
Item #16H3
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUESTS APPROVAL FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER PAID IN
ADVANCE TO ATTEND THE BLUE CHIP RECOGNITION
BREAKFAST ON NOVEMBER 2,2006 AND IS REQUESTING
REIMBURSEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $10.00, TO BE PAID
FROM HIS TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD AT THE HILTON
NAPLES & TOWERS
Item #16H4
Page 378
October 24-25, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUESTS APPROVAL FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER PAID IN
ADVANCE TO ATTEND THE COLLIER CITIZEN OF THE
YEAR 2006 BANQUET ON NOVEMBER 10,2006 AND IS
REQUESTING REIMBURSEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$35.00, TO BE PAID FROM HIS TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD AT
THE CLUB AT THE STRAND
Item #16H5
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUESTS APPROVAL FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER PAID IN
ADVANCE TO ATTEND THE AMERICAN SPECIALTY
CONTRACTORS OF FLORIDA MONTHLY MEETING WHERE
HE WAS A SPEAKER ON OCTOBER 12, 2006 AND IS
REQUESTING REIMBURSEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$35.00, TO BE PAID FROM HIS TRAVEL BUDGET - TO SPEAK
REGARDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Item #16H6
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUESTS APPROVAL FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER PAID IN
ADVANCE TO ATTEND THE NAPLES FISHING CLUB
CHRISTMAS DINNER AS A KEYNOTE SPEAKER ON
DECEMBER 19, 2006 AND IS REQUESTING
REIMBURSEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $13.00, TO BE PAID
FROM HIS TRAVEL BUDGET
Page 379
October 24-25, 2006
Item #16H7
COMMISSIONER FIALA REQUESTS BOARD APPROVAL FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE MARCO
ISLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY SITE DEDICATION PIG
ROAST ON SATURDAY, OCTOBER 21ST, 2006 AT THE
MARCO ISLAND MUSEUM AND HISTORY CENTER, MARCO
ISLAND, FL.; $15.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Item #16H8
COMMISSIONER FIALA REQUESTS BOARD APPROVAL FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. WILL ATTEND THE
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA COUNCIL FOR ENVIRONMENT
EDUCATION ANNUAL DINNER AND AUCTION FEATURING
THE 2006 ENVIRONMENT EDUCATION AWARD OF
EXCELLENCE ON FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 17TH, 2006, AT THE
HYATT REGENCY COCONUT POINT, BONITA SPRINGS;
$80.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET
Item #16H9
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUESTS APPROVAL FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER PAID IN
ADVANCE TO ATTEND THE ONE BY ONE LUNCHEON ON
OCTOBER 12, 2006 AND IS REQUESTING REIMBURSEMENT
IN THE AMOUNT OF $20.00, TO BE PAID FROM HIS TRAVEL
Page 380
October 24-25, 2006
BUDGET - HELD AT THE VINEYARDS COUNTRY CLUB
Item #16H10
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUESTS APPROVAL FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER PAID IN
ADVANCE TO ATTEND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF
COLLIER COUNTY INDUSTRY AND OPPORTUNITY TOUR-
EASTERN COLLIER COUNTY ON OCTOBER 27, 2006, AND IS
REQUESTING REIMBURSEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$20.00, TO BE PAID FROM HIS TRAVEL BUDGET - TO
SUPPORT GROWTH THROUGH THE EDC IN DISTRICT 5
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 381
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
October 24, 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) September 23, 2006 through September 29, 2006.
(2) September 30, 2006 through October 6, 2006
B. Districts:
(1) East Naples Fire Control and Rescue District: Final 2006-2007
General Fund Budget; Registered Office and Agent Letter;
Schedule of Regular Meetings and Workshops, FY 2006-2007;
District Map; Five Year Plan for 2006-2007; Audited Financial
Statements for FY ending September 2005.
(2) Immokalee Fire Control District: Monthly Meeting Schedule;
District Map.
(3) Heritaae Greens Community Development District: Meeting
schedule FY 2007.
(4) Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District: FY 2006-2007
Budget; Description of Outstanding Bonds Letter; FY 2006-
2007 meeting schedule; District Map; Registered Office and
Agent Letter.
C. Minutes:
(1 ) Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee: Minutes of July
24, 2006; Agenda of July 24, 2006; Agenda of September 25,
2006.
H:\DATA\FRONT DESK - 2006\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\102406 mise corr.doc
- -
(2) Collier County Public Vehicle Advisory Committee: Agenda of
October 2, 2006; Minutes of September 11, 2006.
(3) Collier County Planning Commission: Agenda of October 5,
2006.
(4) Golden Gate Community Center Advisory Committee: Agenda
of September 6, 2006; Minutes of September 6, 2006.
(5) Environmental Advisory Council: Agenda of October 4,2006;
Minutes of September 6, 2006.
(6) Collier County Citizens Corps Advisory Committee: Minutes of
September 20, 2006; Agenda of September 20, 2006.
(7) Pelican Bay Services Division: Agenda of October 4, 2006;
Agenda of September 6, 2006; Minutes of September 6, 2006;
Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for Period Ending
September 27, 2006.
(a) Budget Committee: Agenda and Minutes of September 6,
2006.
(8) Biq Cypress Basin Board of the South Florida Water
Manaaement District: Minutes of Workshop of August 3, 2006;
Minutes of June 30, 2006.
(9) Golden Gate M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee: Minutes of
September 12, 2006; Agenda of October 10, 2006; Budget of
October 2005 through September 2006; Project Status Report.
(10) Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage M.S.T.U. Advisory
Committee: Agenda of October 11, 2006; Minutes of
September 13, 2006; Budget of October 2005 through
September 2006; Project Status Report.
(11) Collier County Library Advisory Board: Agenda of September
27, 2006; Minutes of June 28, 2006.
(12) Vanderbilt Beach M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee: Minutes of
September 14,2006; Agenda of October 5,2006; Tax Analysis
H:\DATA\FRONT DESK - 2006\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\102406 mise corr.doc
- -
of 2005 versus 2004; Annual Tax Analysis Report; Project
Status Report; Budget of October 2005 through September
2006.
(13) Lely Golf Estates M.S.T.U. Beautification Advisory Committee:
Agenda of October 19, 2006; Minutes of August 17, 2006;
Project Status Report; Budget of October 2005 through
September 2006.
(14) Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee:
Minutes of September 19, 2006; Agenda of October 17, 2006;
Project Status Report; Budget of October 2005 through
September 2006.
(15) Immokalee Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee:
Agenda of October 18, 2006; Minutes of September 20, 2006;
Budget of October 2005 through September 2006; Project
Status Report.
(16) EmerQency Medical Services Advisory Council: Minutes of
September 27,2006.
(17) Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee:
Agenda of October 9, 2006; Minutes of September 11, 2006;
Minutes of June 12, 2006; Minutes of July 10, 2006.
(18) Productivity Committee: Agenda and Minutes of July 19, 2006;
Agenda and Minutes of August 16, 2006.
D. Other:
(1) Collier County Tax Collector: Summary of Tax Certificates of
1995 through 2004 as of September 29, 2006.
H:\DATA\FRONT DESK - 2006\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\102406_misc_corr.doc
October 24-25, 2006
Item #16K1
AUTHORIZE THE MAKING OF OFFERS OF JUDGMENT TO
RESPONDENT, VISION & FAITH, INC., FOR PARCELS 719,
919,840,940,742,942,943 AND 843 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$63,581.00 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS V. VISION & FAITH, INC., ET AL., CASE
NO. 05-1275-CA (SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER
TREATMENT WELLFIELD PROJECT #70892) (FISCAL
IMPACT: $51,091.03, IF OFFERS ACCEPTED) - LOCATED
EAST OF CR 951 AND NORTH OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK
ROAD
Item #16K2
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT FOR PARCEL NOS. 138 &
139 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED CC V. RONEN GRAZIANI, ET
AL., CASE NO. 06-0548-CA (SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD
PROJECT NO. 62081) (FISCAL IMPACT $40,300.00) -
LOCATED NORTH OF GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY AT THE
FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF GOLDEN GATE~ INC.
Item #16K3
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD RATIFY AND
AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS RETENTION OF
NORMAN W. THABIT, AN EXPERT WITNESS FOR THE
COUNTY IN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF COURTS V.
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS EX-
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD OF THE OCHOPEE AREA FIRE
CONTROL & EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE SPECIAL
Page 382
October 24-25, 2006
TAXING DISTRICT, A/K/A THE OCHOPEE FIRE DISTRICT;
LINDA T. SWISHER AND PAUL W. WILSON. CASE NO. 04-
941-CA CONSOLIDATED WITH BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA VS.
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NUMBER 05-953-CA
CONSOLIDATED WITH CASE NO. 05-1506-CA; EXEMPT THE
COUNTY ATTORNEY FROM THE PURCHASING POLICY IF
AND TO THE EXTENT THE PURCHASING POLICY IS
APPLICABLE AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY
TO SIGN ANY NECESSARY RETENTION DOCUMENTS - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #17 A - Continued to the November 14, 2006 BCC Meeting
PETITION A VESMT-2006-AR-9916-IMPERIAL WILDERNESS
STORAGE MAINTENANCE PARCEL TO DISCLAIM,
RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTYS AND THE
PUBLICS INTEREST IN THAT PORTION OF A 65 FOOT WIDE
DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51
SOUTH~ RANGE 26 EAST COLLIER COUNTY~ FLORIDA
Item #17B - Continued to the November 14,2006 BCC Meeting
PETITION AVESMT-2006-AR-10083, THE ROOKERY AT
MARCO TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE
COUNTYS AND THE PUBLICS INTEREST IN A PORTION OF
A FIFTEEN-FOOT WIDE COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY
EASEMENT AS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 1664, PAGE 1963,
PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND
MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A
Page 383
October 24-25, 2006
Item #17C - Continued to the November 14, 2006 BCC Meeting
PETITION A VROW-2006-AR-9674 LUCERNE ROAD TO
DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTYS AND
THE PUBLICS INTEREST IN A PORTION OF LUCERNE ROAD
ADJACENT TO BLOCK 115, GOLDEN GATE PORTION 4,
ACCORDING TO A MAP THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK 5, PAGES 107, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS COLLIER
COUNTY~ FLORIDA
Item #17D
RESOLUTION 2006-277: PETITION SNR-2006-AR-10350,
JOHNSON ENGINEERING, REPRESENTING TREVISO BAY
DEVELOPMENT, LLC, REQUESTING A STREET NAME
CHANGE FROM TREVISO BAY BOULEVARD TO CORSO
BELLO DRIVE FOR THE SOUTHERN SEGMENT OF TREVISO
BAY BOULEVARD, WHICH IS LOCATED IN SECTION 32,
TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, LEGALLY KNOWN
AS TRACT R-2~ TREVISO BAY SUBDIVISION
Item #17E
ORDINANCE 2006-48 AND RESOLUTION 2006-278:
A RESOLUTION REVISING THE COLLIER COUNTY W A TER-
SEWER DISTRICT UTILITIES STANDARDS MANUAL AND 2)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COLLIER COUNTY
UTILITIES STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES ORDINANCE,
PROJECT NUMBER 70202
Page 384
October 24-25, 2006
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:03 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
5:="~~~
FRANK HALAS, Chairman
A TT~BTS?i!'(FD ;p
DwrqFf! E~.B~OCK, CLERK
.
, . ~< -.;:
~[l ~~~d2 ~c
'.\tUlt Q to Qu; h'7411l ~
i 19Mt... 0tI] r
,...., ""'C\
These minutes approved by the Board on ( [I 'l-ce) ('Ll.'O<O , as
presented ~ or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY
COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. BY CHERIE'
NOTTINGHAM.
Page 385