BCC Minutes 11/28/2006 R
November 28,2006
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, November 28, 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: Jim Coletta
Frank Halas (Absent)
Fred W. Coyle
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
Michael Pettit, Assistant County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
tI"'~
.~,
,-'
~""'''''''.., \,
. ~"
-....." ,..^~,.,,;,,
AGENDA
November 28, 2006
9:00 AM
Frank Halas, Chairman, District 2
Jim Coletta, Vice-Chairman, District 5
Donna Fiala, Commissioner, District 1
Tom Henning, Commissioner, District 3
Fred W. Coyle, Commissioner, District 4
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENT A TION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL
RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY
THE CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2004-05, AS AMENDED REQUIRES
THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING
ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO
THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
Page 1
November 28, 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. Swear-In Commissioner Fred Coyle by Judge Frederick Hardt
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. October 17, 2006 - Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrate
C. October 19,2006 - Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrate
D. October 24, 2006 - BCC/Regular Meeting
E. October 25, 2006 - BCC/Regular Meeting-Continuation of October 24, 2006
F. October 25,2006 - BCC/Land Development Code Meeting
G. October 30, 2006 - BCC/Land Development Code Meeting
H. November 1, 2006 - BCC/Emergency Meeting
Page 2
November 28, 2006
I. November 1,2006 - Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrate
J. November 2,2006 - Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrate
K. November 3,2006 - Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrate
L. November 8,2006 - BCC/Pre-Legislative Workshop
M. November 15, 2006 - Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrate
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
A. 20 Year Attendees
1) Linda Swisher, Ochopee Fire
B. 25 Year Attendees
1) Polly Currie, Human Services
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the Hungarian
Revolution. Proclamation to be accepted by Mr. Andy Evva.
B. Proclamation to recognize Sgt. Timothy Durham for his duty in the United
States Army and congratulating him for his accomplishments and
willingness to put himself in harm's way to protect our country. To be
accepted by S gt. Timothy Durham.
C. Proclamation designating December 1, 2006 World AIDS Day. To be
accepted by Scott Tims, M.S., HIV/AIDS Program Manager, Collier County
Health Department.
D. Proclamation designating November 28,2006 American Association of
University Women Day. To be accepted by (1) Harriet Lancaster, President;
(2) Jennifer Walker, Past President; (3)Robin Bimhak, Director of Public
Policy; (4) Rose Ford, Secretary; (5) Marilyn Von Seggem; (6) John
Goodlet, Historian; (7) Jeanne Bolds, Communications; (8) Lenice A.
DeLuca, Director of Finance.
Page 3
November 28, 2006
E. Proclamation to recognize Staff Sergeant John Plummer for his duty in the
United States Army and congratulating him for his accomplishments and
willingness to put himself in harm's way to protect our country. To be
accepted by Staff Sgt. John Plummer.
F. Proclamation to recognize Sergeant Travis Henderson for his duty in the
United States Army and congratulating him for his accomplishments and
willingness to put himself in harm's way to protect our country. To be
accepted by Sergeant Travis Henderson.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Sea Grant update by Mr. Bryan Fluech, Collier County Sea Grant Agent,
Rookery Bay NERR.
B. Presentation by John Carlo, Inc. on progress on Goodlette-Frank Road re-
laning from Golden Gate Parkway to south of Pine Ridge Road.
C. Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern De-designation Presentation by
Staff of Florida Department of Community Affairs.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request by Joseph DiMurro to discuss blasting level
requirements set by the State and subsequent house damage.
B. Public Petition request by Marvin Johns to discuss access road between
Amity Road and Johns Road.
C. Public Petition request by Jeannette Showalter to discuss citizen petition for
forming MSTU for Naples Park Lake.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 D.m.. unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Page 4
November 28, 2006
A. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
Fiscal Year 2005-06 Adopted Budget.
B. Recommendation that the Board review and approve an Ordinance Creating
the Rock Road Improvement Municipal Service Taxing Unit; providing the
authority; providing for the creation; providing a purpose and governing
body; providing funding and the levy of not to exceed three (3) mils of Ad
Valorem Taxes per year; providing for the collection of taxes; and providing
for an effective date; providing for duties of the County Manager or his
designee; providing for conflict and severability; providing for inclusion in
the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances; and providing for an
effective date.
C. Recommendation that the Board review and approve an Ordinance Creating
the Haldeman Creek Maintenance Dredging Municipal Service Taxing Unit;
providing the authority; providing for the creation; providing a purpose and
governing body; providing funding and the levy of not to exceed three (3)
mils of Ad Valorem Taxes per year; providing for the collection of taxes;
Providing for creation of the Haldeman Creek Maintenance Dredging
Advisory Committee, Appointment and composition; Providing for the
terms of office of the Advisory Committee; Providing for the officers of the
Advisory Committee, quorum and rules of the procedure; Providing for
functions, powers and duties of the Advisory Committee; Providing for the
duties of the County Manager or his designee; Providing for the review
process of the Advisory Committee; Providing for conflict and severability;
Providing for inclusion in the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances;
Providing for an effective date.
D. Request The Board Approve An Ordinance Of The Board Of County
Commissioners Of Collier County, Florida Amending The Code Of Laws
And Ordinances Of Collier County At Chapter 130, Traffic And Vehicles,
To Add A Section Allowing For The Use Of Golf Carts Upon Designated
County Roads In Goodland, Florida Subject To Specified Restrictions;
Providing For Inclusion In The Code Of Laws And Ordinances; Providing
For Conflict And Severability; And Providing For An Effective Date.
E. 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. PUDZ-A-2006-AR-9021 LASIP Conservation
Page 5
November 28, 2006
CFPUD Collier County Transportation Division, represented by Fred
Reischl, AICP, of Agnoli Barber & Brundage, requesting a PUD to PUD
Rezone (The Club Estates) to PUD (LASIP Conservation Area). The
CFPUD is currently part of The Club Estates PUD. That PUD is being
amended concurrently to remove the 99.3 acres that are the subject of the
petition. The LASIP Conservation Area CFPUD is owned by Collier
County. The site is currently governed by a conservation easement. The
proposed uses include restoration, protection and preservation of native
vegetative communities and wildlife habitat; a necessary use of passive
recreation is also described. The subject property is located along Collier
Boulevard, south of Club Estates Drive and north of Naples Lakes Country
Club, in Section 9, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida. (Companion to PUDA-2006-AR-9576).
F. This item to be heard followiDl!: Companion Item PUDZ-A-2006-AR-
9021. Item 8E. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and
ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission members. Petition:
PUDA-2006-AR-9576 The Club Estates II, LLC, represented by Michael
Fernandez, AICP, of Planning Development Incorporated, requesting a PUD
Amendment to change the Club Estates Planned Unit Development (PUD)
to Homes of Islandia Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD). The
proposed amendment seeks to remove 99 acres from the original PUD,
reduce the number of allowable dwelling units from 49 to 28, change the
name and remove a recreation tract and a common trash collection area as
requirements. The subject property is 155.3 acres, with a proposed density of
0.18 units per acre, and is located on the west side of Collier Boulevard
(C.R. 951), approximately 1 mile north of Rattlesnake-Hammock Road, in
Section 10, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
(Companion to PUDZ-A-2006-AR-9021).
G. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt an
ordinance that establishes a process and procedure providing for exceptional
benefits compensation for conveyance of an interest in Conservation Collier
Lands.
H. This item to be heard at 2:00 p.m. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided bv
Commission members. MUP-2006-AR-l 0052: VK Holdings Treviso Bay
Marina, LLC represented by C. Matt Joyner, P.A. Architect, requests a
Mixed Use Project in the Bayshore Drive District Overlay, proposing 2
Page 6
November 28, 2006
residential units and 19,607 square foot of commercial floor area to be
known as The Odyssey - Treviso Bay Marina. The subject property,
consisting of 1.59 acres, is located at 3470 Bayshore Drive on the west side
of Bayshore between Lakeview & Riverview Drive, in Section 14,
Township 50, Range 25, Collier County, Florida.
I. This item was continued from the November 14. 2006 BCC meetin2.
and is further requested to be continued indefinitelv. This item requires
that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. PUDEX-2006-AR-9610 G.L. Homes of Naples II
Corporation, represented by Robert Duane, of Hole Montes, is requesting
two 2-year PUD Extensions for the Terafina PUD (Ordinance 04-15) which
is scheduled to sunset on March 9,2007. The subject property consists of
636.8 acres and is located 1 mile north of Immokalee Road, north of the
Olde Cypress PUD and east of Quail Creek, in Section 16, Township 48
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the East of 951 Infrastructure and Services
Horizon Study Public Participation Master Plan Committee.
B. Appointment of member to the Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory
Committee.
C. Appointment of member to the Board of Building Adjustments and Appeals.
D. Appointment of member to the Immokalee Beautification MSTU Advisory
Committee.
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. Recommendation to approve a
Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, endorsing MDG Capital Corporations application to the State of
Florida for Community Workforce Housing Innovation Pilot (CWHIP)
Program funding. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community
Development)
Page 7
November 28, 2006
B. Recommendation to deny petition to convert fields at Veterans Community
Park to (2) lighted Little League, (1) lighted Girls Softball, and (1) lighted
baseball field.
C. Recommendation to approve a Resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, authorizing the borrowing of not
exceeding $32,900,000 from the Pooled Commercial Paper Loan Program of
the Florida Local Government Finance Commission pursuant to the terms of
the loan agreement between the Commission and the County in order to
refinance a portion of a loan previously made to finance the acquisition of
certain land within the County, including land used and referred to as
Caribbean Gardens; authorizing the execution of a loan note or notes to
evidence such borrowing; agreeing to secure such loan note or notes with a
covenant to budget and appropriate legally available non-ad valorem
revenues as provided in the loan agreement; authorizing the execution and
delivery of such other documents as may be necessary to effect such
borrowing; and providing an effective date. (Michael Smykowski, Director,
Office of Management and Budget)
D. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution authorizing the borrowing of an
amount not to exceed $1,200,000 from the Pooled Commercial Paper Loan
Program of the Florida Local Government Finance Commission pursuant to
the loan agreement between the Board of County Commissioners and the
Commission in order to finance the acquisition and equipping of four (4)
ambulances for the Collier County Emergency Medical Services (EMS)
Department; authorizing the execution of a loan note or notes to evidence
such borrowing; agreeing to secure such loan note or notes with a covenant
to budget and appropriate legally available non-ad valorem revenues as
provided in the loan agreement; authorizing the execution and delivery of
such other documents as may be necessary to effect such borrowing; and
providing an effective date. (Michael Smykowski, Director, Office of
Management and Budget)
E. Recommendation to approve the application by C- Tech Manufacturing
Florida, LLC for the Job Creation Investment Program and the Fee Payment
Assistance Program and to consider all four Economic Incentives as one
budget. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development)
F. Recommendation to approve the FY 07 contract between Collier County and
the State of Florida Department of Health for operation of the Collier
Page 8
November 28, 2006
County Health Department in the amount of $1 ,690,800. (Marla Ramsey,
Administrator, Public Services)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners accept (as
the said beneficiary) financial surety in the form of a letter of credit in
the amount of $40,000.00 on behalf of Florida Audubon Society.
Pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Environmental
Restoration and Maintenance (ERM) Transfer of Development Rights
(TDR) bonus credit requirements, the Collier County Land
Development Code requires financial surety in relation to all privately
implemented restoration and maintenance plans.
2) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Black Bear
Ridge Phase 3, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
staff to publish public notice of one public hearing regarding a staff
recommended Ordinance to amend Ordinance No. 2001-75, as
Page 9
November 28, 2006
amended, the Public Vehicle for Hire Ordinance, and to place the
recommended amending Ordinance on the Boards Summary Agenda
for possible enactment.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
an individual calculation of General Government Building Impact
Fees for the proposed City Furniture/Ashley Furniture store, resulting
in a rate of $194 per 1,000 square feet, in accordance with the
provisions of Section 74-202(1) of the Collier County Code of Laws
and Ordinances, which is the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Ordinance, and as reviewed and approved by Collier Countys impact
fee consultant.
5) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Mandalay
Place, approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve an amended funding agreement with the
South Florida Water Management District for an additional amount of
$100,000.00 for construction of the Gordon River Water Quality Park.
2) Recommendation to award Bid No. 07-4060 to Quality Enterprises
USA, Inc. for construction of the Fourteenth Street Outfall
Improvement Project, Project Number 510059 in the amount of
$482,895.18.
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
Florida Department of Transportation Local Agency Program (LAP)
Agreement for receipt of federal dollars for lighting at Bayshore Drive
Bridge and for a Resolution authorizing the Board's Chairman to
execute the LAP Agreement. ($200K)
4) Recommendation to authorize the expenditure of $54,860 from the
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) FY07 5307 grant for the
purchase ofa Ford Paratransit vehicle from the FY06 Florida Vehicle
Procurement Program and waive the competitive purchase process.
Page 10
November 28, 2006
5) Approve a Budget Amendment recognizing an additional $195.00 in
Transportation Disadvantaged (Fund 427) Trip and Equipment Grant
Funding for Fiscal Year 2007.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to approve the Satisfaction for a certain Water
and/or Sewer Impact Fee Payment Agreement. Fiscal impact is $10.00
to record the Satisfaction of Lien.
2) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfaction of
Lien for a Solid Waste residential account wherein the County has
received payment and said Lien is satisfied in full for the 1992 Solid
Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessment. Fiscal
impact is $20.00 to record the Satisfaction of Lien.
3) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfaction of
Lien for a Solid Waste residential account wherein the County has
received payment and said lien is satisfied in full for the 1993 Solid
Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessment. Fiscal
impact is $20.00 to record the Satisfaction of Lien.
4) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfactions of
Lien for Solid Waste residential accounts wherein the County has
received payment and said Liens are satisfied in full for the 1995
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments.
Fiscal impact is $30.00 to record the Satisfactions of Lien.
5) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfactions of
Lien for Solid Waste residential accounts wherein the County has
received payment and said Liens are satisfied in full for the 1996
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments.
Fiscal impact is $30.00 to record the Satisfactions of Lien.
6) Recommendation to authorize the sole-source purchase of Bioxide,
for use by the Wastewater Reclamation Department in the estimated
annual amount of $500,000 per year.
7) Recommendation to Authorize Sole Source Purchase of Replacement
Pumps, Specified Repair Parts and Materials for Approved
Page 11
November 28, 2006
Submersible Lift Stations in the estimated annual amount of
$700,000.
8) Recommendation to authorize the sole-source purchase of equipment
for the replacement of five (5) Drive Reducers in the amount not to
exceed of$123,864 for the North County Water Reclamation Facility
Rehabilitation, Project 725112.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
the Chairman to sign an agreement with the Agency for Health Care
Administration for $235,180 to participate in the Lower Income Pool
Program for Federally Qualified Health Centers for services provided
for the Countys most vulnerable citizens and generate $326,263 in
Federal matching funds for Collier Health Services, Inc.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to award Contract 06-4054, On Call Software
Development Services, to the following three professional services
firms for a term of two years: Idea Integration in Jacksonville, Florida;
Latitude Geographics in Victoria, British Columbia and Skill Storm in
Bradenton, Florida.
2) Recommendation to confirm and consent to the name change of
contractor on Contract No. 04-3588 titled Fixed Term Material
Testing Services from Professional Engineering & Inspection Co.,
Inc. (PEICO) d/b/a US Laboratories, Inc. to Bureau Veritas North
America, Inc.
3) Recommendation to approve budget amendments for the Courthouse
Annex Parking Garage, Project 52010, in the total amount of
$400,000.
4) Recommendation to approve the award of Bid No. 06-4055 Full
Service Auctioneer to Atkinson Realty & Auction, Inc. and Al
Assets.
Page 12
November 28, 2006
5) Recommendation to approve and execute the attached Second
Amendment to Lease Agreement with Roger Carvallo c/o Sun Real
Estate for the continued use within Court Plaza III for the Clerks
Finance Department at an annual rent of $80,347.44.
6) Recommendation to grant a Deed of Conservation Easement to the
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) for the
Emergency Services Complex (ESC) and South Regional Library at a
site located on Lely Cultural Parkway in Collier County, Florida and
at a cost not to exceed $61.00, Projects 52160 & 54003.
7) Recommendation to approve Southern Folger Detention Equipment
Company as the sole source provider for the repair and replacement of
the Naples Jail Emergency Gang Lock Release System, and authorize
the issuance of a Purchase Order in the amount of $495,536.00.
8) Recommendation to approve Change #3 to contract #05-3852, Design
and Related Services for the South Regional Library with Schenkel
Shultz Architecture, Inc. for additional design services related to
changes in exterior and interior design, in the amount of $64,420,
Project 54003.
9) Recommendation to design a Security Lobby for the W. Harmon
Turner Building to accommodate the general public and staff.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between The
Collier County Board of County Commissioners (CCBCC), through
its Emergency Management Department, and the Civil Air Patrol
(CAP) through its Florida Wing.
2) Approve Budget Amendments
3) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2005-06 Adopted Budget.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Page 13
November 28, 2006
1) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners authorize its Chairman to execute a Resolution
authorizing the Collier County Airport Authority to enter into,
modify, or terminate Master Joint Participation Agreement (MJPA)
2007-A with the Florida Department of Transportation to fund
projects at the Everglades Airpark, the Immokalee Regional Airport
and Marco Island Airport.
2) Approve Agreement for Sale and Purchase for the purchase of thirty-
six (36) acres of panther mitigation land, to satisfy the United States
Army Corps of Engineers permit requirements for development at the
Immokalee Regional Airport/Tradeport, at a cost not to exceed
$319,500.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Proclamation recognizing The Naples Press Club for 10 years of
commitment and contribution to the cultural and literary life of Collier
County. (Proclamation will be picked up by recipient Ms. Joan
Curley).
2) Proclamation designating Childhood Cancer Awareness Week
November 27,2006 through December 6, 2006. (Proclamation will be
mailed to Steven A. Firestein).
3) Commissioner Halas requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a valid public purpose.
Attending the Big Cypress Basin Holiday Luncheon on Thursday,
December 7,2006, at Big Cypress Basin in Naples, Florida. $10.00 to
be paid from Commissioner Halas' travel budget.
4) Commissioner Fiala request Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended the
Government Day Leadership Collier Class of 2007, on Thursday,
October 5th, 2006, at the Collier County Museum; $15.00 to be paid
from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
5) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended the
Page 14
November 28, 2006
Naples Chamber Farm City BBQ on Wednesday, November 22, 2006
at the Nobles Collier Packing Plant; $18.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
6) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attend the Marco
Island Chamber Citizen of the Year/Christmas Gala on Wednesday,
December 6th, 2006; $65.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's
travel budget.
7) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a valid public purpose.
Commissioner Henning attended the Blue Chip Community
Recognition Breakfast on November 2,2006, at the Hilton Naples &
Towers. $10.00 to be paid from Commissioner Henning's travel
budget.
8) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a valid public purpose.
Commissioner Henning attended the Golden Gate Citizen of the Year
Award Banquet on November 10,2006, at The Strand Country Club.
$70.00 to be paid from Commissioner Henning's travel budget.
9) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a valid public purpose.
Commissioner Henning attended the Collier Building Industry
Association, Inc. Installation of the 53rd Board of Directors and
Officers, and Builder and Associate of the Year Awards Event on
November 18,2006, at The Naples Grande Resort & Club. $125.00 to
be paid from Commissioner Henning's travel budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) To file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To request approval of an amendment to Contract #03-3497,
"Auditing Services for Collier County", with KPMG LLP, for $15,000
Page 15
November 28, 2006
in services related to the issuance of the Collier County Water and
Sewer District Bonds, Series 2006.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to Approve Two Agreed Orders for Payment of
Expert Fees in Connection with Parcels 105/705 and 111/711 in the
Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Raymond A. McCauley, et aI., Case
No. 05-0633-CA (County Road 951 (CR 951) Project #65061).
(Fiscal Impact: $19,068.00)
2) Recommendation to approve an Agreed Order Awarding Appraisal
Fees for Parcels 131 and 132 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v.
West Coast Development Corp., et aI., Case No. 06-0708-CA (Santa
Barbara Boulevard Project No. 62081). (Fiscal Impact $6,000.00)
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDA TION 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. The approved
Resolution No. 2006-188 has an INCORRECT date of February 10,2007 for
CUE-2006-AR-9424, American Dream Builders, Inc's Model Home and
Model Home Sales Centers Conditional Use Extension, the CORRECT date
has been changed to November 28,2007. The subject property is located at
4050 13th Avenue South West, at the corner of 13th Ave SW and Collier
Blvd (CR 951), in Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, Florida.
Page 16
November 28, 2006
B. This item was continued from the October 24 BCC meetin2 and is
further continued to the November 28 BCC meetin2. 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-99l6-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.
C. This item was continued from the October 24 BCC meetin2 and is
further continued to the November 28 BCC meetin2. 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-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.
D. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Collier County
Ordinance No. 72-1, as amended (The Collier County Lighting District) by
amending Section One, Area Established, by Deleting Edgewild
Subdivision, now known as Quail Woods Estates; providing for conflict and
severability; providing for inclusion in Code of Laws and Ordinances; and
providing for an effective date.
E. This item was continued from the October 24 BCC meetin2 and is
further continued to the November 28 BCC meetin2. 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 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.
F. 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-9951, Townhomes at Raffia Preserve,
disclaiming, renouncing and vacating the Countys and the Publics interest in
Page 17
November 28, 2006
two existing public right-of-way easements, one being the West 30 feet of
the South of the Northwest of the Northwest, together with West 30 feet of
the North of the Southwest of the Northwest of Section 34, Township 48,
Range 26; The other being the East 30 feet of the North of the South
Northeast of the Northwest, together with the East 30 feet of the South of
the South of the Northeast of the Northwest and the East 30 feet of the North
of the Southeast of the Northwest of Section 34, Township 48, Range 26,
Collier County, Florida.
G. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to
approve Petition A VPLAT-2006-AR-98l0, 1487 Bembury Drive,
disclaiming, renouncing and vacating the Countys and the Publics interest in
the Ten-Foot wide drainage easement encumbering the East Five-feet of Lot
12 and the West Five-feet of Lot 11, Storter Subdivision, as recorded in Plat
Book 5, Page 106, of the Public record of Collier County, Florida, and more
specifically described in Exhibit A and to accept a replacement drainage
easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit B in place of the vacated
easement.
H. Recommendation to approve an Amendment to Ordinance No. 80-80, as
Amended, to Extend the Reporting Requirements Timeframe of the
Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council.
I. This item has been continued to the December 12. 2006 BCC meetin2.
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-9477, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 95 to
disclaim, renounce and vacate the Countys and the Publics interest in a 60
foot wide right of way easement known as 7TH Avenue NW (Cherrywood
Drive) over portions of Tracts 15 & 16, Golden Gate Estates Unit 95,
according to the plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 9, Page 45, of the
Public Records of Collier County, Florida, and more specifically described
in Exhibit A, and to accept a 20 foot wide alternate drainage easement and
two 10 foot by 10 foot alternate drainage easements over portions of Tract
15, as more specifically described in the attached exhibits.
J. This item has been continued to the December 12.2006 BCC meetin2.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. Recommendation to approve Petition
Page 18
November 28,2006
A VESMT-2006-AR-9775, Hanson to disclaim, renounce and vacate the
Countys and the Publics interest in the south 30 feet of the South half of the
Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of
Section 24, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
Page 19
November 28, 2006
November 28, 2006
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Mudd.
Welcome to the Board of Collier County Commissioner's
November 28th meeting.
Before we proceed, I'd like everyone that has cell phones to
please turn them off or put them on vibrate. If you fail to do that, the
sheriffs deputy sitting at the end here will acted appropriately, I'm
sure, give you a dirty look or whatever it takes.
We will be breaking for lunch today from 12 to one. I will be
leaving this meeting at three o'clock today to go to a Florida
Association of Counties meeting, county meeting up in Northern
Florida, and at that point in time, Fred Coy Ie, Commissioner Coy Ie,
will be taking the chair position and assuming it from there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I will immediately adjourn the
meeting.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I knew I could count on you, Fred.
And with that, let's start off with the invocation. I'll ask everyone
to rise, and Reverend Craig Nelson, Dr. Reverend Craig Nelson, will
be giving the invocation.
REVEREND NELSON: Would you pray with me.
Dear God, we're coming off of the Thanksgiving weekend. And
while we don't grow potatoes and yams and corn here, we are -- have
agriculture as prominent in our county, and we thank you for the
abundance that we see from you.
We've eaten in abundance, we've had leftovers in abundance, and
leftovers are a sign of that abundance that we have from you, and we
also have leftover thanksgivings. We want to thank you for so many
different things, the beauty of our county, the beauty of just this day,
the abundance of everything that we have here.
Dear God, it's all good, and we want to just thank you for this
Page 2
November 28, 2006
time to gather together, and I ask that you would bless the thinking,
the speaking and ultimately the deeds that come out of this meeting.
We pray in your name, amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
Item #lA
SWEAR-IN COMMISSIONER FRED COYLE BY JUDGE
FREDERICK HARDT
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now, the next thing on the agenda is
a very happy thing. It's the swearing in of Commissioner Fred Coyle
by Judge Hardt, and that will take place at this point in time.
Judge, would you be so kind to come forward to the podium.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Judge Hardt, would you mind if I
invite my wife to come down with me?
JUDGE HARDT: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
Cheryl, I know you're back there. You can't hide.
JUDGE HARDT: Commissioner, please raise your right hand
and take the oath.
I, Fred Coy Ie.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I, Fred Coyle.
JUDGE HARDT: Do solemnly swear.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do solemnly swear.
JUDGE HARDT: That I will support, protect and defend.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That I will support, protect and
defend.
JUDGE HARDT: The Constitution and government of the
United States.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The Constitution and government
of the United States.
Page 3
November 28, 2006
JUDGE HARDT: And of the State of Florida.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Of the State of Florida.
JUDGE HARDT: That I am duly qualified.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That I am duly qualified.
JUDGE HARDT: To hold office.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: To hold office.
JUDGE HARDT: Under the Constitution of the state.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Under the Constitution of the state.
JUDGE HARDT: And that I will faithfully perform.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that I will faithfully perform.
JUDGE HARDT: The duties of the office.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The duties of the office.
JUDGE HARDT: Of county commissioner for Collier County.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Of county commissioner for
Collier County.
JUDGE HARDT: In which I'm now about to enter.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Which I am now about to enter.
JUDGE HARDT: So help me God.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So help me God.
JUDGE HARDT: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If you'd like to congratulate the
commissioner, please do. We're going to hold off the meeting for just
a few minutes.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you once more.
Congratulations.
Mr. Mudd?
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA-
Page 4
November 28,2006
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Commissioner, we have some agenda
changes for today for the November 28, 2006 meeting.
Item 8C, page 6, section 11, review process should read: This
advisory committee shall be reviewed every, rather than ever, four
years commencing 2006. That correction's at staffs request.
Next item is to continue item 8E to December 12, 2006, BCC
meeting, and to continue item 8F to the December 12, 2006, BCC
meeting. Both items are companions, and then I'll read.
These items require that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by commission members. It's
PUDZ-A-2006-AR-9021, LASIP Conservation, CFPUD Collier
County transportation division, represented by Fred Reischl, AICP, of
Agnoli, Barber and Brundage, requesting a PUD to PUD rezone, and
the PUD rezone is from the Club Estates, to PUD, LP AlP
Conservation Area.
The CFPUD is currently part of the Club Estates PUD. That
PUD is being amended concurrently to remove the 99.3 acres that are
the subject of the petition. The LASIP Conservation Area, CFPUD, is
owned by Collier County.
The site is currently governed by a conservation easement. The
proposed uses include restoration, protection and preservation of
native vegetative communities and wildlife habitat. A necessary use
of passive recreation is also described.
The subject property is located along Collier Boulevard, south of
Club Estates Drive and north of Naples Lakes Country Club in Section
9, Township 50 south, Range 26 east, Collier County, Florida.
Again, that is companion item to the next item, which is PUDZ-
-- PUDA-2006-AR-9576, The Club Estates II, LLC, represented by
Michael Fernandez, AICP, of Planning Development, Incorporated,
requesting a PUD amendment to change The Club Estates planned
Page 5
November 28, 2006
unit development to Homes of Islandia residential planned unit
development, RPUD.
The proposed amendment seeks to remove 99 acres from the
original PUD, reduce the number of allowable dwelling units from 49
to 28, change the name and remove a recreational tract and a common
trash collection area as a requirement.
Subject property is 155.3 acres with a proposed density of .18
unit per acre, and is located at the west side of Collier Boulevard,
County Road 951, approximately one mile north of Rattlesnake
Hammock Road in Section 10, Township 50 south, Range 26 east,
Collier County, Florida.
Both items are requesting by the petitioner to be continued until
December 12, 2006. And when that item comes up on your agenda,
I'd ask the board to vote in that particular regard to continue, because
these two items were advertised for today's meeting.
Next item is to move item 16A3 to 10J. It's a recommendation to
authorize staff to publish public notice of one public hearing regarding
a staff recommended ordinance to amend ordinance number 2001-75
as amended, the public vehicle for hire ordinance, and to place the
recommended amending ordinance on the board's summary agenda for
possible enactment. That item was asked to be moved to the regular
agenda by Commissioner Coyle.
The next item is to move item 16E3 to lOG. That's a
recommendation to approve a budget amendment for the courthouse
annex parking garage, project 52010, in a total amount of $400,000.
That item is asked to move to the regular agenda by Commissioner
Coletta.
Next item is to move item 16E4 to 10H. It's a recommendation
to approve the award of bid number 06-4055, full service auctioneer to
Atkins (sic) Realty and Auction, Inc., and Al Assets. That item was
asked to move to the regular agenda by Commissioner Coletta.
Next item is to move item 16E8 to 101. It's a recommendation to
Page 6
November 28, 2006
approve change number 3 to contract 05-3852, design and related
services for the south regional library with Schenkel Shultz Architects
(sic), Inc., for additional design services related to changes in exterior
and interior design in the amount -- in the amount of -- and it should
be -- there's a misprint -- $64,420, and it's got a 4 there instead of the
dollar sign. That's at Commissioner -- that item's being moved at
Commissioner Fiala's request.
Next item is item 16H8, that should read $35 rather than $70,
will be paid for Commissioner Henning's travel budget, and that's at
Commissioner Henning's request, that correction.
You have two time certain items for today. The first is item 8H to
be heard at two p.m. This item requires that all participants be sworn
in and ex parte disclosure be provided by commission members.
It's MUP-2006-AR-1 0052, VK Holdings, Treviso Bay Marina,
LLC, represented by C. Matt Joyner, P.A. architect, requests a
mixed-use project in the Bayshore Drive District Overlay, proposing
two residential units and 19,607 square feet of commercial floor area
to be known as the Odyssey, Treviso Marina.
The subject property consisting of 1.59 acres is located at 3470
Bayshore Drive on the west side of Bayshore between Lakeview and
Riverview Drive in Section 14, Township 50, Range 25, Collier
County, Florida.
And the last item is heard at 11 o'clock, and that's item lOA. It's
a recommendation to approve a resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, endorsing MDG Capital
Corporation's application to the State of Florida for community
workforce housing innovation pilot, which is CWHIP, better known as
the CWHIP program funding.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
Let's start off with Commissioner Coyle for the ex parte
disclosure on the summary agenda or any other changes to the regular
Page 7
November 28, 2006
agenda.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no further changes to the
agenda, Mr. Chairman, and I have no disclosures on the summary
agenda.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nothing for me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And also I have nothing new to add to
this.
And with that, the approval of today's regular consent and
summary agenda as so amended.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Henning and second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it unanimously.
Page 8
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
November 28. 2006
Item 8C: Page 6, Section Eleven. Review Process. Should read: "This Advisory Committee shall
be reviewed every (rather than 'ever') four (4) years commencing 2006 . . . . (Staff's request.)
Continue Item 8E to the December 12. 2006 BCC meetina: This item requires that all participants
be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUDZ-A-2006-AR-
9021 LASIP Conservation CFPUD Collier County Transportation Division, represented by Fred
Reischl, AICP, of Agnoli Barber & Brundage, requesting a PUD to PUD Rezone (The Club Estates)
to PUD (LPAIP Conservation Area). The CFPUD is currently part of the Club Estates PUD. That
PUD is being amended concurrently to remove the 99.3 acres that are the subject of the petition.
The LASIP Conservation Area CFPUD is owned by Collier County. The site is currently governed
by a conservation easement. The proposed uses include restoration, protection and preservation
of native vegetative communities and wildlife habitat; a necessary use of passive recreation is
also described. The subject property is located along Collier Boulevard, south of Club Estates
Drive and north of Naples Lakes Country Club, in Section 9, Township 50 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County, Florida. (Companion to PUDA-2006-AR-9576). (Petitioner's request.)
Continue Item 8F to the December 12. 2006 BCC meetina: This item requires that all participants
be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Petition: PUDA-2006-
AR-9576 The Club Estates II, LLC, represented by Michael Fernandez, AICP, of Planning
Development Incorporated, requesting a PUD Amendment to change the Club Estates Planned
Unit Development (PUD) to Homes of Islandia Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD). The
proposed amendment seeks to remove 99 acres from the original PUD, reduce the number of
allowable dwelling units from 49 to 28, change the name and remove a recreation tract and a
common trash collection area as requirements. The subject property is 155.3 acres, with a
proposed density of 0.18 units per acre, and is located on the west side of Collier Boulevard (C.R.
951), approximately 1 mile north of Rattlesnake-Hammock Road, in Section 10, Township 50
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to PUDZ-A-2006-AR-9021.)
(Petitioner's request.)
Move Item 16A3 to 10J: Recommendation to authorize staff to publish public notice of one public
hearing regarding a staff recommended Ordinance to amend Ordinance No. 2001-75, as amended,
the Public Vehicle for Hire Ordinance, and to place the recommended amending Ordinance on the
Boards Summary Agenda for possible enactment. (Commissioner Coyle's request.)
Move Item 16E3 to 10G: Recommendation to approve budget amendments for the Courthouse
Annex Parking Garage, Project 52010, in the total amount of $400,000. (Commissioner Coletta's
request.)
Move Item 16E4 to 10H: Recommendation to approve the award of Bid No. 06-4055 Full Service
Auctioneer to Atkinson Realty & Auction, Inc., and A1 Assets. (Commissioner Coletta's request.)
Move Item 16E8 to 101: Recommendation to approve Change #3 to contract #05-3852, Design and
Related Services for the South Regional Library with Schenkel Shultz Arthitecture, Inc. for
additional design services related to changes in exterior and interior design, in the amount of
464,420, Project 54003. (Commissioner Fiala's request.)
Item 16H8: Should read. . . "$35.00 (rather than $70.00) will be paid from Commissioner
Henning's travel budget". (Commissioner Henning's request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 8H to be heard at 2:00 p.m.: This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. MUP.2006.AR.10052: VK Holdings Treviso Bay
Marina, LLC represented by C. Matt Joyner, P.A. Architect, requests a Mixed Use Project in the
Bayshore Drive District Overlay, proposing 2 residential units and 19,6078 square foot of
commercial floor area to be known as The Odyssey - Treviso Bay Marina. The subject property,
consisting of 1.59 acres, is located at 3470 Bayshore Drive on the west side of Bayshore between
Lakeview & Riverview Drive, in Section 14, Township 50, Range 25, Collier County, Florida.
Item 1 OA to be heard at 11 :00 a.m.: Recommendation to approve a Resolution of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, endorsing MDG Capital Corporations
application to the State of Florida for Community Workforce Housing Innovation Pilot (CWHIP)
Program funding.
November 28, 2006
Items #2B, #2C, #2D, #2E, #2F, #2G, #2H, #21, #2J, #2K, #2L, #2M
MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 17,2006 VALUE ADJUSTMENT
BOARD SPECIAL MAGISTRATE MEETING, OCTOBER 19,2006
VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD SPECIAL MAGISTRATE
MEETING, OCTOBER 24-25 BCC/REGULAR MEETING,
OCTOBER 25, 2006 BCC/LDC MEETING, OCTOBER 30, 2006
BCC/LDC MEETING, NOVEMBER 1,2006 BCC/EMERGENCY
MEETING, NOVEMBER 1, 2006 VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SPECIAL MAGISTRATE MEETING, NOVEMBER 2, 2006
VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD SPECIAL MAGISTRATE
MEETING, NOVEMBER 3, 2006 VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SPECIAL MAGISTRATE MEETING, NOVEMBER 8, 2006
BCC/PRE-LEGISLATIVE WORKSHOP MEETING AND
NOVEMBER 15, 2006 VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD SPECIAL
MAGISTRATE MEETING - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
Mr. Mudd, would you go ahead and read down through the Value
Adjustment Board meetings, right down to letter M.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. 2B -- there needs to be a motion and a
second, and then a vote on each one, but we'll do it all in one for the
number of meetings that I'm about to describe.
2B, October 17, 2006, Value Adjustment Board Special
Magistrate; the October 19,2006, Value Adjustment Board Special
Magistrate meeting; October 24, 2006, BCC regular meeting; the
October 25, 2006, BCC regular meeting, continuation of October 24,
2006; October 25,2006, BCC Land Development Code meeting; the
October 30, 2006, BCC Land Development Code meeting; the
November 1, 2006, BCC emergency meeting; the November 1, 2006,
Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrate meeting; November 2,
2006, Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrate meeting; the
November 3, 2006, Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrate
Page 9
November 28, 2006
meeting; November 8, 2006, BCC pre-legislative workshop meeting;
the November 15,2006, Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrate
meeting.
I think I've got them all.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Coyle, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it unanimously.
Oh, also too, we have two items that we wish to continue. Would
this be the appropriate time, or are we supposed to wait till we actually
come to it?
MR. MUDD: We'll wait till they come on the thing, because
people know that they're supposed to be heard after one o'clock, and if
anybody comes in and they have a reason why they don't want it
continued, they can basically tell you at that time.
Item #3
PRESENTATION OF A 20 YEAR ATTENDEE SERVICE AWARD
TO LINDA SWISHER WITH THE OCHOPEE FIRE DISTRICT
AND 25 YEAR ATTENDEE POLLY CURRIE WITH HUMAN
SERVICES - PRESENTED
Page 10
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. At this point in time we're
going to the service awards. And I'll ask the commissioners to join me
in front of the --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we only have one, and in this
particular case, why don't we stay up there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: I'll bring -- get the award up to you.
Service awards, we have one 20-year attendee awardee, and that's
Linda Swisher from the Ochopee Fire District. And if Linda, Ms.
Swisher could come forward, please.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's take a minute and get a picture.
Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: We had another awardee today, and that was Polly
Currie from Human Services, but Ms. Currie's mom died last week, so
she couldn't be here today, and she's still mourning that event, so our
thoughts and prayers are with her today.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION COMMEMORATING THE 50TH
ANNIVERSARY OF THE HUNGARIAN REVOLUTION -
ADOPTED
And that brings us to our next agenda item, and that's
proclamations. And Commissioners, if you would be so kind, I'd like
to change the order a little bit. We'll get all the services folks together
and read their proclamations one after the other.
And so I'd ask to go to proclamation A, and then to C, and then
do B, D and E, if would be the chair's pleasure.
Commissioner Coletta, is that okay?
Page 11
November 28,2006
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine, sir. Please proceed.
MR. MUDD: Okay. Proclamation 4A. It's a proclamation
commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Huser Revolution. The
proclamation will be accepted by Mr. Andy Evva.
Mr. Evva, if you could come forward, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Whereas, on October 23, 1956, a
peaceful march through the streets of Budapest by university students
joined by workers and civilians numbering some of 100,000 protesting
against the Hungarian communist government was fired upon by the
Hungarian security police causing a death toll in the hundreds; and,
Whereas, this action turned into armed conflict that spread
throughout Hungary, was suppressed by a wide scale offensive, 16
Soviet armored divisions, and resulted in tens of thousands of
Hungarian citizens killed and wounded, many of them women and
children, tens of thousands imprisoned or deported to Russia and
hundreds executed;
Whereas, an estimated 200,000 Hungarians fled their country in
the aftermath of the Soviet suppression of the Hungarian uprising and
settled in various countries with the majority in the United States
where they continue to contribute to the culture and economic strength
of this nation, the State of Florida, and Collier County; and,
Whereas, some of these refugees who settled in Collier County
joined by Americans of Hungarian descent, their friends, relatives and
other patriots of freedom contributed a statue commemorating the 50th
anniversary of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution as the initial sculpture
to be placed at the government complex to commemorate those who
have fought to preserve their freedoms.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the heroism and
sacrifice for freedom of the Hungarian people in 1956 be fully
appreciated by all freedom-loving members of the community, and the
commemorative statue be recognized as a lasting tribute to that
Page 12
November 28, 2006
heroism and reminder of the possible cost of freedom.
Done and ordered this 28th day of November, 2006, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank Halas,
Chairman.
Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Henning.
All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If you'd like to say a couple words,
we'd love to -- if you want to address the commissioners, over at the
podium.
MR. EVV A: Well, I'd like to accept this on behalf of the
American Foundation for Hungarian Youth and Culture and board of
directors, as well as the Hungarian! American Club of Naples, and
hopefully on behalf of the brave 56. There's many of them who will
be coming to the dedication, and I invite everyone to come to the
dedication of the statue, which will be December 3rd, this coming
Sunday at 11 a.m.
And we have so far, I think, about 300 people coming. So come
early, and all of you are welcome to help celebrate freedom for all
people. Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Evva, could you please tell them where the
ceremony's going to be at?
MR. EVV A: Good idea. That ceremony will be right here,
Collier County government complex in front -- just about in front of
Page 13
November 28, 2006
the sub shop by the risk management -- risk management room, right
off the parking lot. Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING DECEMBER 1,2006 AS
WORLD AIDS DAY - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, the next proclamation is
designating December 1, 2006, as Wodd AIDS Day, to be accepted by
Scott Tims, M.S., HIV/AIDS program manager for the Collier County
Health Department.
Mr. Tims? And anybody else that's here with him.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
Whereas, the AIDS epidemic is a global emergency that affects
people in every country on earth; and,
Whereas, AIDS and HIV continues to be a health concern here in
Florida with over 35,000 HIV infections since 1997, and over 81,000
people living with HIV/AIDS; and,
Whereas, Collier County has over 290 HIV cases and over 950
AIDS cases; and,
Whereas, Collier County Wodd AIDS Day, 2006, is focusing on
youth and the impact of HIV on families; and,
Whereas, recognizing that the fight against HIV and AIDS
impact all -- impacts all communities across racial and ethnic lines and
can only be stopped through education and prevention and by ensuring
that the policies and programs existing protect the rights of all people
to be -- provide information and education about the risk of HIV.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Commissioners
of Collier County that December 1, 2006, be designated as Wodd
AIDS Day.
Page 14
November 28, 2006
Done in this order, 28th day of November, 2006. And Mr.
Chairman, I make a motion we approve this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Coy Ie.
All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it.
(Applause.)
MR. TIMS: I would like to thank you for recognizing this day
and just highlight the fact that this year we've worked with after-
school programs and different agencies that have youth and have done
an art project with kids from our community this year, and they've
created what are called peace tiles, and these are representations about
what HIV means to them, and we really focused on the stigma related
to the disease.
They've created some really amazing art work that will be on
display at River Park Community Center this weekend -- or I'm sorry,
Friday night at six p.m. It's an amazing array of talent from the youth
and what HIV means to them. So please attend. Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING SGT. TIMOTHY DURHAM
FOR HIS DUTY IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY AND
CONGRATULATING HIM FOR HIS ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND
WILLINGNESS TO PUT HIMSELF IN HARM'S WAY TO
Page 15
November 28, 2006
PROTECT OUR COUNTRY - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, our next proclamation is a
proclamation to recognize Sergeant Timothy Durham for his duties in
the United States Army and congratulating him for his
accomplishments and willingness to put himself in harm's way to
protect our country. To be accepted by Sergeant Timothy Durham.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And ladies and gentlemen, there
are going to be three proclamations read today honoring three
members of our armed forces who have just returned from either Iraq
or Afghanistan. The first will be presented to Timothy Durham.
Whereas, Timothy Durham grew up in Farmington, New Jersey,
where he attended and graduated from the public school system. After
graduating from high school, he served nearly seven years in the
active Army with the 11 th Armored Cavalry Regiment, 5th Infantry
Division, and 101st Airborne Division. Following active duty, he
joined the Army Reserves so he could advance his civilian education.
Timothy earned a bachelor's degree from Rutgers University in 1989
with High Honors; and,
Whereas, after graduating from Rutgers, Timothy obtained a juris
doctor from Florida State University College of Law in 1993, he went
on to become the department chairperson and an associate professor of
political science and criminal justice at Thomas University in
Thomasville, Georgia; and,
Whereas, after four years of teaching, he moved to Southwest
Florida and joined the Collier County Sheriffs Office at the drill
academy. The following year he came to work for the Board of
County Commissioners in the County Attorney's Office as a legal
assistant conducting research on a wide variety of issues important to
the county; and,
Whereas, in December 2004, Timothy joined the Supervisor of
Election's Office as Deputy Supervisor. He became a researcher and
Page 16
November 28, 2006
an advisor to the office and assumed responsibility for the absentee
balloting process. Less than a year later, his National Guard unit was
called to active duty in Iraq; and,
Whereas, while serving in Iraq, Sergeant Timothy Durham
distinguished himself by exceptional meritorious conduct in
performance of outstanding service to the United States as squad
leader in the Convoy Platoon, 651 st Military Police Company, Camp
Bucca, Iraq, from November 2005 to December 2006 in support of
Operation Iraqi Freedom. He was awarded the Bronze Star Medal for
merit by the secretary of the Army, Francis J. Harvey.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board Of, County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Sergeant Timothy
Durham be commended for duty in the United States Army and
congratulate him for his accomplishments and willingness to put
himself in harm's way to protect our country.
Done and ordered this 28th day of November, 2006, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank Halas,
Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to approve this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Motion by Commissioner
Coy Ie for approval and a second by Commissioner Henning.
All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it.
(Applause.)
SGT. DURHAM: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next proclamation is to--
Page 1 7
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Jim, could I interrupt you for a
minute?
We -- I was working over in the Supervisor of Elections Office
during the election process, and we kind of pried some stories out of
Tim. Man, oh, man, he had some horrendous experiences. The things
-- the tales he had to tell were goose-pimple tales, and I'm just so
proud to know you and to have you on our team. Thank you.
SGT. DURHAM: Thank you, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4E
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING STAFF SERGEANT JOHN
PLUMMER FOR HIS DUTY IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY
AND CONGRATULATING HIM FOR HIS ACCOMPLISHMENTS
AND WILLINGNESS TO PUT HIMSELF IN HARM'S WAY TO
PROTECT OUR COUNTRY - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: The next proclamation is a proclamation to
recognize Staff Sergeant John Plummer for his duty in the United
States Army and congratulating him for his accomplishments and
willingness to put himself in harm's way to protect our country. To be
accepted by Staff Sergeant John Plummer.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Welcome, Sergeant Plummer.
Welcome back.
Whereas, John A. Plummer, Jr., grew up in Londonderry, New
Hampshire, where he attended New Londonderry Elementary School,
Londonderry Junior High School and Londonderry High School; and,
Whereas, after graduating Londonderry High School on 8 June,
1987, John enlisted in the United States Army on 9 December, 1987;
and,
Page 18
November 28, 2006
Whereas, after graduating basic training, John attended the Field
Artillery School at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. After graduation, he was
stationed at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, where he began serving as a
Cannon Crew Member for Battery C, 5th Battalion/8th Field Artillery,
101st Airborne Division, (air assault). Shortly thereafter, he was
selected for and completed air assault training; and,
Whereas, on 24 February, 1990, Specialist John Plummer, Jr.,
joined the Florida Army National Guard and has been a member of
several units to include Fort Myers, Sarasota and Dade City, and has
completed several state active duty assignments to include Hurricanes
Andrew, George, Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne, plus statewide
land fires of 2000; and,
Whereas, an 11 February, 2005, Staff Sergeant John Plummer's
unit, Battery B, 2nd Battalion/l o 6th (sic) Field Artillery, Dade City,
Florida, was mobilized for active duty in support of Operation
Enduring Freedom as a security force for Task Force Phoenix in
Kabul, Afghanistan, leaving behind his loving wife Stephanie and his
three wonderful children, Amanda, Donovan, and Abigail; and,
Whereas, Staff Sergeant John Plummer has earned the Army
Commendation Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the
Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, the Armed Forces Reserve
Medal with 'M' Device, the Overseas Service Ribbon, the Army
Driver's Badge, the Afghanistan Campaign Medal, and the Silver
German Marksmanship Badge, and has continued to serve the Florida
Army National Guard in Winter Haven, Florida.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Staff Sergeant John
Plummer, United States Army, be commended for his duty as an
American soldier and congratulate him for accomplishments and
willingness to put himself in harm's way to protect our country.
Done and ordered this 28th day of November, 2006, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank Halas,
Page 19
November 28, 2006
Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we approve this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion from
Commissioner Coyle and a second from Commissioner Fiala.
All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it unanimously.
(Applause.)
SGT. PLUMMER: Commissioners, I greatly appreciate this
proclamation. I was very surprised that I had been asked to accept a
proclamation for my service on behalf of Florida Army National
Guard.
I have 19 years in soon. Next year, 20. I'll be retired. I made a
promise to my wife. That's all I can give them, 20 years.
So I'm very grateful for this, and as well as the support that I've
received from home, from the county, from McGregor Baptist Church,
Local 1826.
And I just want to recognize my kids, Amanda, Donovan and
Abigail, wonderful kids. And my biggest hero is my wife Stephanie.
And she stuck with me throughout this whole time, and she's still here,
and she's my hero. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is she here today?
SGT. PLUMMER: No, sir. She's making sure the kids get to
school.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Got to have those priorities
straight.
SGT. PLUMMER: They are my priority, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much for 20 years
Page 20
November 28, 2006
of service.
(Applause.)
Item #4F
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING SERGEANT TRAVIS
HENDERSON FOR HIS DUTY IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY
AND CONGRATULATING HIM FOR HIS ACCOMPLISHMENTS
AND WILLINGNESS TO PUT HIMSELF IN HARM'S WAY TO
PROTECT OUR COUNTRY - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, our next proclamation is to
recognize Sergeant Travis Henderson for his duty in the United States
Army and congratulating him for his accomplishments and willingness
to put himself in harm's way to protect our country. To be accepted
by Sergeant Travis Henderson.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think Sergeant Travis Henderson
has called in and said he was tied up in traffic and will probably not be
here on time. We'll go ahead and read this proclamation and present it
to him whenever he is able to arrive.
Whereas, Travis Henderson grew up in Immokalee, Florida,
where he attended and graduated from Immokalee High School in
1988. After graduating from high school, he served nearly two years
in the active Army; and,
Whereas, following active duty, Sergeant Henderson returned
home to his family, where he joined the Florida National guard in
1998; and,
Whereas, Sergeant Henderson joined the Collier County Sheriffs
Office in 2000, working in the jail for four years, and then moving on
to road patrol until November of 2005 when his guard unit was called
to active duty in Iraq; and,
Whereas, while serving in Iraq, Sergeant Henderson
Page 21
November 28, 2006
distinguished himself by exceptional meritorious service in support of
Operation Iraqi Freedom, serving as a team leader and shift leader for
the Liberty Special Housing Unit at Baghdad, Central Correction
Facility, Abu Ghraid.
Now, Therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Sergeant Travis
Henderson be commended for his duty in the United States Army and
congratulate him for his accomplishments and willingness to put
himself in harm's way to protect our country.
Done and ordered this 28th day of November, 2006, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank Halas,
Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we approve this
proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second that motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion from
Commissioner Coy Ie for approval and a second from Commissioner
Fiala.
All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I would ask that we give
Sergeant Travis Henderson a round of applause in his absence. We
will make sure he gets this proclamation.
I want to emphasize to you once again, you've heard it said many
times, freedom is not free. It is given to us and it is protected for us by
young men and women of the type you have seen here today.
Weare everlastingly thankful for their sacrifices and for their
protection.
Page 22
November 28, 2006
(Applause.)
Item #4D
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 28,2006 AS
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN DAY -
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: And Commissioner, our last proclamation today is
designating November 28, 2006, as American Association of
University Women Day. To be accepted by Harriet Lancaster,
president; Jennifer Walker, past president; Robin Birnhak, director of
public policy; Rose Ford, secretary; Marilyn Von Seggern; John
Goodlet, historian; Jeanne Bolds, communications; and Lenice A.
DeLuca, director of finance. We also have Susan Calkins, past
president; Sally Lam, past president; Carol (sic) Willis, past president;
Jeanne Brooker, past president; Jacqueline Urquhart, past president;
Mary Schell, vice president here to also accept.
If you could all come forward, please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's half the audience.
MS. DeLUCA: We're a force to be reckoned with.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Whereas, the American Association
of University Women is one of the oldest existing organizations
dedicated to the promotion -- promoting education and equality (sic)
for women and girls; and,
Whereas, the American Association of University Women
celebrated its 125th anniversary this year from its inception in
November 28, 1881; and,
Whereas, the AAUW, Greater Naples Branch, advances the
American Association of University's Women (sic), 125th-year legacy
of leadership on behalf of women and girls in Florida; and,
Whereas, the future of our nation's productivity and
Page 23
November 28, 2006
competitiveness is -- in the global workplace depends upon the
success of boys and girls, men and women; and,
Whereas, women have been discriminated against in education,
the workplace and society as a whole; and,
Whereas, the American Association of University Women opens
the door for women and girls and influences public debate on critical
social issues such as education, civil rights and workplace quality;
and,
Whereas, the American Association of University Women
promotes excellence in education for women through the
improvement of schools, communities and field of work for the
benefit of all.
And, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that November 28, 2006, be
designated as association -- American Association of University
Women Day and urge all citizens of Collier County to recognize the
value of education in an equitable society and the laudable work of the
American Association of University Women to that end.
Done and ordered this, the 28th day of November, 2006. Signed
by Frank Halas, the chairperson.
And I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion for approval by
Commissioner Coletta and seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it unanimously.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hold that up for the picture. We've
Page 24
November 28, 2006
got a copy for everyone. Thank you very much for being here today
and for what you're doing.
Thank you. Would you like to say a couple words?
MS. DeLUCA: I think our president, Harriet Lancaster --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine, okay.
MS. DeLUCA: -- is going to say a few words.
MS. LANCASTER: I just wanted to repeat very quickly our
mission statement. AA UW promotes equality for women and girls,
lifelong education and positive societal change.
Specifically in Collier County we have over 200 women and a
few good men, like John, who are very active in the community. We
have five "reading is fundamental" schools. We have many, many
volunteers in the schools. We have a wonderful math/science program
for fifth grade girls trying to promote math/science education through
junior high and senior high and then on to university . We have
volunteers that work in public policy. And we have our very own
Jean Brooker, who's the chair of the Collier County Coalition for
Human Rights ordinance, which we're hoping to see you guys pass
one day. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, before we go on to the
presentations, the rest of the agendas there will be times after the
agenda is presented by staff and the petitioner that it will be open for
public input.
In order to be able to participate, you must fill out a speaker
form, which is on the desk outside, and have it turned in to the county
attorney over here where Sue Filson is seated, to be able to speak on
that item prior to the beginning of that item.
And there will be a three-minute allowance for each person to be
able to state their particular issues on the agenda item.
Mr. Mudd?
Page 25
November 28, 2006
Item #5A
SEA GRANT UPDATE BY MR. BRYAN FLUECH, COLLIER
COUNTY SEA GRANT AGENT, ROOKERY BAY NERR-
PRESENTED AND THE BOARD DETERMINED A WORKSHOP
SHOULD BE HELD
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our first
presentation, and it's the Sea Grant update by Mr. Bryan Fluech of --
the Collier County Sea Grant Agent, Rookery Bay, NERR. And
Bryan asked to talk to you because he's been here for a year, and you
approved his position last budget, and he wanted to bring you an
update of what he's been doing for Collier County for the last year and
what he has planned for the future, and get your input. Bryan.
MR. FLUECH: Thank you. I appreciate you having me here
this morning. The name's actually -- it looks differently than the way
it's pronounced. It's Fluech, but it definitely looks like Fluech, so I get
that all the time.
But as Mr. Mudd said, as you're aware, the county approved
funding for my position last fall, and I was actually hired in January
and began in March of this year. So I've been here about eight and a
half, nine months.
I have a handout for you just to highlight some of the programs
I've been working on just so you can be informed about that. But as
part of my presentation, I'd like to introduce the assistant director of
Florida Sea Grant, Dr. Michael Spranger, as well as the Director of
Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, just to talk about
the position a little bit.
MR. SPRANGER: Thank you. Good morning. I'm Mike
Spranger, and it's really an honor and privilege to be here today to be
part of your proclamation in honor of recognition, and it's really
heartwarming to see that sort of thing.
Page 26
November 28, 2006
I'm here basically to thank you for your support for this position.
It took some time to get funded. But it's a partnership between Collier
County government, between the Florida Sea Grant Program based in
Gainesville, Florida, with funding from the federal government, from
the NOAA, National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration,
University of Florida IF AS extension, and the Rookery Bay National
Estuary Reserve -- Research Reserve.
In its unique program, you may not know, there's only one
position like this in the entire United States that have all those partners
involved, including the NERRs.
Our mission is science serving Florida's coasts. And basically
with the position and some of the things that Bryan will be telling you
is showing how we will -- we are serving your residents in the marine
and coastal resource area.
When I appeared last time I said we would come back and
provide you a report on the return of what your public investment is. I
mean we're putting money in, you're putting money in, and we feel
very strongly about the accountability of those funds, and I think we're
off to a very good start, particularly with the hiring of Bryan.
He's developing new partnerships with the county, state and some
national groups, bringing some new resources in, leveraging the funds
that you provide and that we provide, and, again, meeting your needs
through a citizen advisory committee to make sure that we're
complementing and not duplicating efforts in the county.
So that's all I have to say. I'm here to answer any administrative
type questions you might have. Again, I thank you all for your
support.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may, sir. Clam farming, that's
been an issue that's been before this commission a number of times,
and we've been supportive of it.
MR. SPRANGER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Can you tell me -- I haven't heard
Page 27
November 28, 2006
anything about the program's success or where they are in the program
for about six months now.
MR. SPRANGER: I think Bryan can provide that to you, but I
know we have a shell fish specialist, Leslie Stermer (phonetic), who is
coming down here.
One of the research activities that we're doing is we're doing
some, call it genetic manipulation, the riploid oyster, that basically the
oyster and clams will not produce. So in the summertime, instead of
spending their energy for producing seed, they're actually using that
energy to keep growing, and that's a particular issue here since we
have warm climate and warm waters, and that sort of thing. So on the
research side, we're doing that, and then Bryan and others are coming
down working with some of your farmers. But he can probably
provide more information on that to you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Possibly sometime in the
future somebody could give me an update of where the program is.
MR. SPRANGER: We certainly can, we certainly can.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I believe we have a speaker.
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman. We have one speaker, Al
Stier, S- T -I-E-R.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we're not done with the
presentation yet, I don't believe, okay . You just got -- three parts to
this presentation. You just heard --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize that.
Please continue with the presentation, then we'll call the speaker at the
end.
MR. LYTTON: Mr. Chairman, members of the board, good
morning. My name is Gary Lytton, I'm the Director for the Rookery
Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, work for the State of
Florida. I've been with Rookery Bay for 20 years.
As Mike mentioned earlier, we came to you a year ago asking for
your support for the Sea Grant extension agency, and we're back to
Page 28
November 28, 2006
tell you that it's working. I'm really thrilled to be part of the
partnership with the county and Sea Grant and the Rookery Bay
Reserve.
One of the things I'm particularly excited about is that Bryan has
helped us bridge the gap reaching out to boating, fishing and marine
industry interests in Collier County. When you think about what that
means for us in Collier County, boating and tourism generate about a
billion dollars a year in Collier County. So as we encourage good
stewardship of the coast, it's also good business as well.
I also want to remind you that the Rookery Bay Reserve, 110,000
acres, and it represents about 40 percent of the county's coastline. As
I've discussed with each of you individually, we are very interested in
working in partnership with the county to look for opportunities to
enhance boaters' access to some of these coastal areas, and at the same
time, protect the national resources.
So Bryan has been a catalyst for reaching out to these boat
interests and helping us get engaged in a dialogue that I'm very
enthusiastic about. I think it's going to be very good for us in the
.
comIng years.
I look forward to continuing the partnership. Commissioner
Coletta, I'd be glad to talk to you a little bit more about not only the
clam farming -- which I'll tell you from my observations this past
year, it's been tough for clam farming because of red tide, because of
hurricanes. It's not an easy thing to do.
But I will tell you that we're working with Florida Gulf Coast
University, and I think Sea Grant's going to be a huge help, to look at
new technologies that might enhance the success of clam fisheries, but
we're also interested in sponsoring some research into fish farming
that might prove not only environmentally friendly, but also very
sustainable in the long run, so I'll be glad to brief you in more detail
about that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Page 29
November 28, 2006
MR. LYTTON: But we're thrilled that Bryan's onboard and very
supportive of the partnership.
MR. FLUECH: Commissioner Coletta, to just clarify that.
Actually on my advisory committee, which I'll talk about here in a
second, I have Dr. Matt Finn, who actually is a clam farmer. And
throughout these eight and a half months I have actually helped to
provide him with information about just some of the agriculture
techniques.
I know a concern from the farmers, that Wilma definitely set
them back, and that has been an ongoing issue. I have spoken with
our state agricultural specialist to, hopefully in the future, kind of
serve as a liaison between her and the farmers here to help them try to
get back on their feet. So I know that's an ongoing process.
But like I said, I do have Matt on my advisory committee, and
hopefully we'll continue to provide him with some input on that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. FLUECH: I just wanted to -- like I said, over the last eight
and a half -- just kind of give you an overview of what I've been
doing. One of the first things when I got here was obviously just to
learn the physical layout of the county, and I'm still doing that. It's a
very large place.
But essentially my role as an extension agent is to serve as a
bridge between the research and management community and our
stakeholders for our environment here.
So something that was very important to me was developing
partnership within -- not only within the county, but at a regional
level, too. And it was also important to realize that, coming in here,
not to duplicate efforts that are already being done. It's a waste of
money, and resources for that matter.
So through my interactions with the different agencies, one of the
first things that I realized that was absent from the county was a
functioning monofilament recycling and recovery program. And if
Page 30
November 28,2006
this is something you're not familiar with, this is a statewide program
that's been implemented for several years and has been very
successful.
As popular as fishing is here in the community, discarding
monofilament line can actually have an impact on marine life and also
boaters as well.
So working with different agencies, ranging from county parks
and recreation, Everglades National Park, Everglades City School,
Keep Collier Beautiful, I've been able to get funds and materials to
install monofilament recycling bins, which on the front of the sheet
there's actually a picture of one of these bins. They're PVC, kind of
look like one of these periscopes, and we've actually installed them in
several spots around the county.
I've also managed to recruit volunteers to help me monitor these
bins, so we actually collect data to see how much line is being
collected. Unfortunately sometimes people choose to put other things
in there, which we're slowly working on that.
But I've also created the brochure to inform people where exactly
the bins are located, and I'm always up for suggestions where new bins
might be needed as well.
Also at the North Collier Regional I've established a permanent
display as well on this topic.
A couple other things I want to bring attention to you -- another
important part, as I said, was to kind of bridge that gap between
research and management community and our citizens.
Earlier in the fall I helped coordinate with the Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council to host a fishermen's forum here at
Rookery Bay, and this is an opportunity for anglers to discuss and
voice their concerns about issues in our region.
Of the forums that they have actually in the state -- I think there
are three. Ours was definitely the most attended, and it seemed like
grouper was a big issue on that.
Page 31
November 28, 2006
So it's something I'm continuing to try to do is bring agencies into
the community so they can understand what exactly are some of the
.
Issues.
Something else that's been addressed to me is red fish hatchery. I
was able to actually organize a tour up at the state hatchery and
brought some local anglers with me for them to come and see the
facility, to talk with the outreach staff there. And the plan, hopefully,
is to actually bring some of their staff down here in the spring to talk
to some of the anglers about the dos and the don'ts about the
hatcheries here in the state.
Environmental education is a very important part of my job. I
mean, essentially I was hired to design and evaluate comprehensive
marine and natural resource education programs focusing on
everything from commercial and recreation fisheries, boating industry,
water quality.
This summer, with the help of our 4-H outreach coordinator, we
planned and implemented a family marine science outreach program
with the cooperation of Delnor- Wiggins State Park, and we actually
had over 150 participants for this six-session program, and all the
evaluations that we received really indicated a strong need for this,
and it was an effort to make them more aware of why our beaches are
important and the marine life that lives in them.
Currently, I am actually serving as a project coordinator for a
newly-formed marine resource conservation partnership boating
group, and this is actually what started off as a grass-roots effort
between several agencies in our county. It is now serving as a pilot
project for the state, an effort at hopefully improving boating
stewardship behaviors in our waterways.
And this is made up of Sea Grant and the county, City of Naples,
City of Marco Island, Marine Industries Association, Cedar Bay Yacht
Club, Rookery Bay FWC and DEP. And I'm very pleased to say, I
just found out that I was awarded a grant from FWC that I applied for
Page 32
November 28, 2006
for $14,000 to help us begin implementing the program.
So we're still in our infancy, we're still working it out, but as I
said, this is something that we think will be a multi-year --
multi-phased program.
And as I said, an important part of my job is to get feedback from
the community to see where exactly can education needs be most
utilized. And to help me with that is an advisory committee.
And through my interactions over the eight and a half months,
I've been able to interact with diverse audiences, and that was
something that was very important. I didn't want just to have
everybody from the recreational fishing sector. I wanted to make sure
that I had a diverse group.
And in the end of October, we actually had our first meeting.
The group agreed that we'll meet quarterly. It is my intentions to
actually rotate out the advisory committee just to get fresh
perspectives.
But I just wanted to give you an update of who's on that
committee. Dr. Greg Tollery, who is a professor at Florida Gulf Coast
University. He's actually the Sea Grant campus coordinator there; Sara
Jewell, who's the executive director of the Marine Industries
Association of Collier County.
Scott Hopkins is the general manager of the Cedar Bay Yacht
Club; Will Geraghty is a fishing guide for Grand Slam Charters;
Louise Taylor is a science teacher at the Everglades City School;
Tabitha Stadler is the coastal training program coordinator at Rookery
Bay; Dr. Matt Finn, who's a commercial blue crabber, clam farmer,
and also a mangrove consultant; and finally Larry Block, who is the
president of the Naples Fishing Club.
And actually at their request, they suggested that I find somebody
from the tourism industry to help with future education efforts
dealings since we do have so many visitors coming to our county.
With that being said, there are definitely other things on there,
Page 33
November 28, 2006
but -- matter of time, if you guys have any questions, feel free to
please ask me.
I've also provided a fax sheet about Florida Sea Grant if you have
some questions about that, and I gave you an example of the brochure
that I've created for the monofilament program.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir. There's no questions
at this time from the commission, but we do have one speaker.
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Al Stier.
MR. STIER: Thank you very much for giving me a heads-up,
Mr. Coletta, that this was going to take place. And I'd like to say that
I have met Bryan shortly after he got into town, and he was my guest
on the TV show. And when he came up the first -- he's been my guest
a couple times, two or three times on the show.
And I had spread the word around. I've got some ideas about
what really should be done in our fishery here in Collier County,
which I'll try to cover in the short time I've got here.
But anyway, it was kind of cute because when Bryan walked in
when we met, he said, I understand you're really going to sic the dogs
on me. And I said, no, not really . We're going to treat you really nice,
but we have a little bit of difference of opinion on what your job
description should have been.
Mainly what I said was that -- when someone I think from
Rookery Bay emailed me and asked me my opinion on the county
supplementing some income towards this gentleman's salary -- and my
comment was, you asked me my opinion, and so I em ailed it to all of
you. You might remember it.
And what I actually said was, if you're going to hire someone that
will put something back in the resource and not just study things that
have been studied over and over again, I'd support it.
And I said, well, but if you're going to hire somebody that's just
going to, you know, study things and put people together and hold
hands and things like that, I really thought it would be a waste of
Page 34
November 28, 2006
money.
I have to tell you that I think you've got one really great guy here
for what he does and what he's been doing, and I would recommend
that you keep him and help him out all you can.
But I can tell you one thing that -- I've been here since 1949, and
if I'm not mistaken, someone said on my program the other day that
the number of recreational anglers has doubled in the last five years in
our area. And with the amount of growth that we're having and going
to have for time -- God knows how long. Till they build it all out, I
guess. They're just going to have an increased number of anglers.
And what we really need to do is put some fish back in our
fishery by starting a program for fish hatcheries.
And Bryan's going to give me a dirty look there probably. But
Bryan told me that really -- that that wasn't quite his gig yet when I
first started talking to him on the TV show. And I respect that. I think
he's a great guy and you ought to keep him.
And I think that Mr. Lytton does a great job. Again, we don't
agree on a few things, but he's a great guy and does a good job also.
But we do need some fish hatcheries in Southwest Florida. And
how do we fund them? I'm not really sure yet, but I have a few ideas
I'd like to talk about later on.
There's probably some money laying out there. There's a
movement going on right now to change the fishing license thing
where we gather round more people and collect more money because
there's a federal sales tax on fishing licenses, and we get a little bit of
that back every year, but it's based on the number of fishing licenses
that each state issues, so --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Stier?
MR. STIER: I know my time's up. I'm going to bail out right
now. I'm hyperventilating anyway, so I've got to go anyway. I've had
two heart surgeries, and the last one left me a little bit short winded.
But anyway, I wish them well, but I wish that you would just
Page 35
November 28, 2006
bring -- take this home with you tonight, these thoughts home, that
what we really need in this -- Southwest Florida, not just in Collier
County, but Lee and Charlotte County, we need some fish hatcheries.
The science is there.
Texas releases millions of them a year. You have a fish hatchery
in Port Manatee that works fairly successful. And I think with a little
bit of effort and maybe a little shove from some of you people higher
up, we'll get the ball rolling and maybe even drag Bryan in on it,
okay?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Mr. Stier?
MR. STIER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: When is your -- right up here. When
is your show on, just in case the public out there -- you represent
several kinds.
MR. STIER: Thanks for the plug, thanks for the plug. It's on
Saturday morning at eight o'clock, Channel 8, Comcast. They replay
the show several times during the week. One night is Monday night at
6:30 on Channel 35 and 80, it's simultaneously.
The technology on the replay shows, if you don't find it, just go
to the next day that it's scheduled for. Sometimes it gets kicked off.
But we've been doing this -- I've been doing this gig since I was in
grade school -- I mean high school. So we'll keep pushing it, if I live
long enough, and keep hammering everybody, but we'll get our fish
hatcheries here with your help. But we really need these fish
hatcheries in Southwest Florida.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Stier.
MR. STIER: Thank you very much. Have a great day. I've got
to go.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have one question from
Commissioner Henning, actually two.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know -- and I hate to
say this, but up north you see a lot of programs of hatcheries in
Page 36
November 28, 2006
freshwater streams and -- the trout or whatever. In the State of Florida
it seems like we tend to regulate because of overfished (sic) instead of
recreate, and I think we got it backward.
Mr. Stier has it right. I don't know what we can do to maybe put
pressures on the State of Florida to at least create one here in Collier
County. It seems like we've got a lot of state agencies in Collier
County doing duplicate things, and a hatchery, I think, would really
benefit not only the fishermen, but the estuaries.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You know, you're right,
Commissioner Henning. I think what we ought to do is look into the
possibilities of adding this to one of our workshops in the coming
year.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me work with -- maybe Mr.
Stier has some ideas that --
MR. STIER: I'll email you some information, and we'll stay --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR. STIER: We'll stay in touch.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR. STIER: We'll get rolling.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me know what the fishing
report is. It's been a while.
MR. STIER: Okay. There's been a lot of them, and where
they're catching them, they're getting them right here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, great.
MR. STIER: Thank you, folks. Have a great day.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And if anybody needs any fresh fish,
contact Commissioner Henning. He's very good at it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's been a while.
MR. FLUECH: If I could say one thing. If that is -- if you'd
please include me on that, because like I said, I'd be more than happy
to help you guys with bringing in some resources to talk about that
issue. Okay? So I mean, that is one of my jobs is to bring in the best
Page 37
November 28, 2006
available science for that, so make sure -- I would be more than happy
to help you with that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we just convince you
to do it?
MR. FLUECH: Convince me. That's what's needed.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's what the workshops for.
Mr. Mudd?
Item #5B
PRESENTATION BY JOHN CARLO, INC. ON PROGRESS ON
GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD RE-LANING FROM GOLDEN
GA TE P ARKW A Y TO SOUTH OF PINE RIDGE ROAD -
PRESENTED AND DISCUSSED WITH TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next
presentation, which is by John Carlo, Inc., on progress of the
Goodlette-Frank Road re-laning from Golden Gate Parkway to south
of Pine Ridge Road.
Commissioners asked about two months ago to get presentations
from our particular contractors as they build facilities and
infrastructure for Collier County, and this is the first of many to come.
MR. MUNTZ: Good morning. My name Steve Muntz
(phonetic). I'm the regional manager for John Carlo. We've currently
got three projects with you, and I'm here this morning to talk about
Goodlette- Frank.
Maybe I'll talk a little bit about the time, the schedule. The
original duration was 44 days. We've gotten time extensions approved
by the county for 77 days. That puts our completion on January 17th,
coming up. We think we're going to be able do that.
We are currently engaged in some additional work that was given
Page 38
November 28, 2006
to us by the City of Naples, some utility work, and we are engaged in
dealing with some storm sewer underground conflicts throughout the
project, two or three locations.
By Christmas we think we will be sodding. We will have the
electric subcontractor working on traffic signals. The road work -- the
road work will be largely done within the next couple weeks. We will
be putting the final coats of paving on the first week in January.
We have some current issues. As I indicated, there's a -- the
utility conflict for the proposed storm sewer. We've worked our way
through them. We know what we need to do now and we're preparing
to do so.
We have a single traffic signal pole location, which I believe we
just got the go-ahead on or the design change just recently.
In summary, I mean, I'm not exactly sure how much detail you
want here. I'm certainly here to answer any questions, but --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sure. Let's do that. Commissioner
Fiala would like to ask a question, and then Commissioner Coyle will
follow, ifhe can ever get his button to work here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I didn't have a question
actually. I just wanted to tell you that I've been so impressed with all
of the work that you guys have been doing and the bumps along the
way. Every time -- and I use Goodlette Road a lot, and it's always
open and it's always free-flowing traffic. And I'm really amazed that
you can do that and still keep the things going. So I just wanted to --
you know, so many times people are there to criticize, and I don't have
any criticism.
MR. MUNTZ: I appreciate that. A lot of that is the cooperation
we've been getting from the construction manager and the public
works department. I mean, that's been tremendous, and it's greatly
appreciated, believe me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Munson (sic), tell me a little
Page 39
November 28, 2006
bit more about the additional tasks you said were required as a result
of the City of Naples.
MR. MUNTZ: There's -- a force main needs to be relo--
relocated at the Ohio intersection. It's a 24-inch diameter pipe, and
that's what we're engage -- where we're at right now, Commissioner
Coyle, is we're waiting for the material to come on site, and it's taking
a little longer than we thought. It will be here December 6. We
anticipated we'd be able to order the material, come off the shelf. And
this material is just not available, unfortunately.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, is this something that was
requested by the City of Naples, or is it merely a City of Naples force
main that we're obligated to relocate for this project?
MR. MUNTZ: It was an additional-- it's additional work
requested by the City of Naples.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. How does -- how is that
funded, County Manager? Can you -- can you help me with this, or
Norm Feder?
MR. MUDD: Jay's here. But, Commissioner, when we get into
that business, if there's something that's unforeseen that they're
basically asking to do, they pay for it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right.
Now, how do we handle things when we're dealing with a late
contract?
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, for the record, Norman Feder,
Transportation Administrator.
Right now we are not dealing with a late contract, as was noted,
because of unforeseen conditions, redesign and some weather days. If
they come in in January and complete within that time frame, they
will not be late on this project.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But this is a -- this is an
additional requirement. The force main itself is an additional
requirement. The material is coming in late. Is that going to delay in
Page 40
November 28, 2006
any way the completion of the overall contract?
MR. FEDER: I will defer to the contractor, but we're hoping not.
And right now we haven't established any days for that delay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUNTZ: Yeah. Actually what we're anticipating is
December 6, the material comes in, we can do the work in two weeks.
Open Ohio Drive by Christmas is our object and our target. We think
that's doable, barring unforeseen conflicts that we don't know about as
of right now, but that's what we're hoping.
MR. FEDER: And for the record, Commissioner, I don't want
this to -- it is a city pipe, but it's one that we have to relocate as part of
our project. It's one that was anticipated. When we didn't move some
of the reclaimed water issues, we had to move this pipe and restructure
it. There is a certain type of pipe that's desired because it's under the
travel way, and that's what's taking extra time in ordering, but this is
not a new item that was placed upon us by the city, so I don't want to
leave that impression with this board.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So it's something that we
anticipated from the very beginning?
MR. FEDER: We anticipated putting this pipe in. We did not
anticipate the conflict we found in its placement, and then the desire
for -- or the need for a specialized type of pipe because it's under the
travel way, and it's inability to get that off the shelf as anticipated has
created some slowdown, but hopefully no delay to the schedule that
you were given just a few minutes ago.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, I recall that the
original schedule provided for a completion in December.
MR. FEDER: That is correct. We will be --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So there has been a slippage in the
schedule for whatever reasons.
MR. FEDER: It was actually in November, sir. The 77 days will
bring us into the middle of January, later January. Yes, because of
Page 41
November 28, 2006
what we found in issues underground that weren't noted on the plans
and provided for. We've also had some conflicts with FP&L, the one
noted about the one signal installation. The design was bringing it too
close to the FP&L lines.
And so we've had some of these issues to deal with. We did
have, limited, but some weather days or hurricane days, but that's the
77 that's been identified.
And as we go through a project, we have a set contract period. I
hope he'll tell you that, while they request days, we don't always grant
them, but we have granted 77 as of this date. And so if they complete
within that contract date plus 77, which brings us to mid to late
January, then they would not be facing liquidated damages on the
overall project itself.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, I would echo
Commissioner Fiala's praise for the way the project has been handled.
I've seen people out there working almost every day, with some
exceptions.
And I'm not going to make a big issue of this, but I'd just like to
tell you about perception. When we -- from the public's standpoint,
we are actually late in this project. They don't always understand the
kind of problems we encounter doing the construction projects, and
this is no reflection on the contractor.
But it would be helpful if we use every working day that we
possibly can to get this project completed so there won't be any further
days. And I've noticed, at least Friday after Thanksgiving nobody
worked. Most of the stores in town were operational, and everybody
else was working.
MR. MUNTZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But nobody was working on that
road. So I would encourage that we use every available day if we can.
Then finally, my primary purpose in asking for these kinds of
briefings is to determine if there is anything that you can suggest that
Page 42
November 28, 2006
we might be able to do to help things move along better or faster. Are
you running into any problems that you're having difficulty getting
resolved? Is there something that should be brought to our attention
that might help you?
MR. MUNTZ: That process is working very well right now. We
identify a problem, and the construction manager, PBS&J and the
public works department are very, very quick on responding to us, and
it's going very well.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good.
MR. MUNTZ: It wasn't so good at the beginning, but it's just
been going excellent since I'd say August or so.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good, good.
MR. MUNTZ: As for the time, I agree with you 100 percent,
that, you know, we need to be out there working every single day, and
that's part of what I wanted to say, that since August, we've worked
six days a week, sometimes seven. We have to request work on a
Sunday, and some days it's approved, sometimes -- sometimes it's
approved, sometimes not. I don't believe on this job it's ever not been
approved, frankly, but that's the process, the way it goes.
It was my conscious decision, because they have -- the fellows,
the crews had been working pretty aggressively since August to take
the four days of Thanksgiving, and it was just more or less a
management decision.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I can understand that.
MR. MUNTZ: It was certainly not any indication -- don't take it
as any indication that we're dropping the ball on it. We are 100
percent committed to getting this job done on time and we'll be there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. We just would like to
encourage a sense of urgency for all involved. And if there's anything
we can do to help out, if there's conflict with third parties, Florida
Power & Light or other people that we might be able to influence that,
please let us know.
Page 43
November 28, 2006
MR. MUNTZ: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that holds true on other
projects where you are contracted to do the work. So this process is
intended to be constructive and not to be critical.
So I think you've answered all my questions. Thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
MR. MUNTZ: Thank you.
Item #5C
BIG CYPRESS AREA OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN DE-
DESIGNATION PRESENTATION BY STAFF OF THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS - PRESENTED AND
APPROVED DRAFT RESOLUTION W/CHANGES OPPOSING
ANY DE-DESIGNATION BY THE STATE; PROPOSED
RESOLUTION W/CHANGES (STIPULATIONS) TO BE
BROUGHT BACK FOR REVIEW AT THE DECEMBER 12, 2006
BCC MEETING
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next presentation is the Big
Cypress area of critical state concern, de-designating presentation by
the State of Florida of Community Affairs, and that presentation will
be made by Clark Turner, AICP, who's the administrator of the areas
of critical state concern.
Mr. Turner? I've talk to him on the phone, but I've never seen
him before.
MR. TURNER: Mr. Manager, glad to meet you.
MR. MUDD: Good to finally meet you.
MR. TURNER: Commissioners. My name is Clark Turner. I
am an Administrator of the Areas of Critical State Concern Program
for the Department of Community Affairs, State of Florida.
Page 44
November 28,2006
Let me give you a little bit of background as to why we're here
talking about this right now.
The Big Cypress area of critical state concern was designated by
the State of Florida in 1973. It was the first of the, what are now
called, areas of critical state concern to be designated. In fact, the
legislation that designated it coined the term, so that term belongs first
to the Collier County Big Cypress area.
Basically the designation was a land use regulation or a set of
regulations over the area that we now know as the Big Cypress. That
was done by administrative rule 28-25.
Subsequently -- that was long before there were state growth
management regulations, comprehensive planning requirements. It
was every local government for itself in the field of planning and
zoning and regulation.
So the state regulation was a pioneering effort and an
unprecedented effort by the state to designate land use development
requirements for an area that is perceived to be of critical concern to
the state and an environmentally sensitive area.
Subsequently in the 1970s, again in the 1980s, the state
legislature adopted regulations and processes that would govern local
government comprehensive planning and land use regulations. And
we know those now as the growth management legislation or the
comprehensive planning legislation.
The Big Cypress and other areas of critical state concern
provided very valuable input in the drafting of those regulations
because the kinds of problems that were being dealt with under the
state's designation became the foundation of what kinds of regulations
it would be desirable to have all communities adopt in their own local
plans.
But fundamentally, the growth management legislation has
required every local government in Florida counties and
municipalities, to adopt and enforce and implement and update a
Page 45
November 28, 2006
comprehensive plan and to adopt land use regulations that are
supportive of that plan.
So subsequent to the designation of the area of critical state
concern, all of the substance of that regulation that was contained in
that designation has been adopted into the Collier County
comprehensive plan and its Land Development Code. Not only has it
been adopted into it, but it's been expanded and augmented with
regulations and procedures that the county has added that go beyond,
well beyond, what the state designation in its very primitive form
accomplished.
The Department of Community Affairs does an annual review of
each of the areas of critical state concern. Incidentally I mention them
as plural. The others are Apalachicola, Green Swamp, Florida Keys
and Key West. Key West is its own area of designation with the
Florida Keys. But as I said, Big Cypress was the first.
The DCA does an annual review of the area of critical state
concerns. And in the 2006, the current year review, it concluded that
the Big Cypress ACSC has met the requirements for de-designation,
and the report recommended -- and here are the key -- this is the key
phrase.
The report recommended that the Administration Commission,
which is the governor and cabinet -- the Administration Commission
initiate rule making to remove the designation.
Now, as we stand now, the Administration Commission has not
agendaed the item, never mind initiated a rule making.
It was thought that the item would be on the Administration
Commission's December 5th agenda. But at the staff level, the
governor's office, it was determined that there were some additional
non-substantive but important items that needed to be addressed in the
Collier County Comprehensive Plan to make sure that its references to
the area of critical state concern, which are scattered throughout the
comprehensive plan, to make sure that those references were properly
Page 46
November 28, 2006
anchored in your comprehensive plan so that there would be no
question that that was the authority, whether or not the state's
designation continued to exist.
Now, I have to say in all candor, that this was called to our
attention by our own legal staff and by people who heard that there
was a potential de-designation coming and who called our office,
many of them with histories that go back to the very beginnings of the
Big Cypress designation, and reminded us that these things needed to
be addressed.
And for those citizens and interest groups and government
officials, we're grateful that they called it to our attention because we
need to know what the local issues are and how they are perceived by
the local officials and other interested parties in the area.
Based on the review by our own legal counsel and based on the
comments that we received from this area, the staff at the governor's
office decided not to press forward on this as an agenda item for
December 5th but to defer it indefinitely pending more input from the
local government and a review of the exact issues in the
comprehensive plan that might need to be addressed to make sure that
the ACCSC designation was well anchored in the plan, that it was, in
effect, unimpeachably anchored from a legal standpoint, so there
couldn't be any question about the plan's authority in the absence of a
designation.
We also heard from some interest groups that while the area of
critical state concern designation is essentially duplicative and
redundant now, there is nothing in the area of critical state concern
requirements that we now at the state use as a regulatory tool.
All of our regulatory tools are exercised through you, the local
government, your comprehensive plan and your land development
code. If any question comes up with regard to development issues in
the Big Cypress, if it reaches the state level, we immediately return to
your process of local government comprehensive plan and land
Page 47
November 28, 2006
development regulations.
So from our standpoint, the designation serves no useful purpose
any longer. Again, recognizing that there may be some things in your
plan that need to be tweaked in order to ensure that if a designation
goes away, those things have anchored it.
But we were reminded by some people, especially people who
are in the environmental and wildlife realms, the national parks and
preserves realms, that the very name, area of critical state concern,
carries a kind of weight with it that may have nothing whatsoever to
do with whatever regulatory power it once had but has to do with the
way it sounds.
And I was told by one employee of the federal government, who
is located here, that when it comes to funding from the federal
government for certain things having to do with the Big Cypress, it's
very useful to invoke the term area of critical state concern, sort of
like saying that a property is on the national register if it's historic
interest. Doesn't really matter whether it is or not, but it really sounds
good.
And often the conversation just gets a nod and moves right along
because we all understand that it's an area of critical state concern.
And, frankly, as the administrator of that program, the new
administrator -- I've only been with the state for three months. I was --
spent the entire -- my entire career with local government in
Miami-Dade County in the City of Miami, so I'm new on the state side
of this fence.
Quite frankly, I think it's gratifying, having been on the side of
the fence that's so often chafed against state control or state regulation
of local government, I'm very gratified that in this case there actually
seems to be very strong support for the state maintaining a role in this,
and that's heartening. I hope that it is a precursor of a great deal of
cooperation and partnership that we can have as we move along.
But it is something that I think is a -- certainly a perfectly viable
Page 48
November 28, 2006
option would be to see if there is a way that the name, area of critical
state concern, with its historic significance to this area and other
environmentally sensitive areas of Florida could be retained.
It doesn't have to be a regulatory tool, but it can be a designation,
and that's an idea that has not yet been presented at any level higher
than my staff level. But it certainly is something that we could
consider as we go along.
So in summary then, I'd like to -- I hope that I've cleared the air
with respect to where we stand. It's not on the Administration
Commission's agenda. It will not be on the Administration
Commission's agenda until it is determined by the department that it's
ready to move forward, and then it will go through the rule making --
if it does, it will go through the rule making process, which means that
the Administration Commission will decide whether or not to take it
up, and if they decide to take it up, they will decide whether or not to
accept a department recommendation, to reject the recommendation or
to accept it with modifications.
So there's quite a trail ahead if the designation is to proceed, the
de-designation; however, at this moment it is not being pursued, will
not be pursued until we, the department, are convinced that this local
government and the people it responds to are comfortable with having
it proceed ahead.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, good, thank you for
allowing us to respond to the state's actions or possible actions in the
future and -- so we get our books corrected to recognize what needs to
be protected in Collier County.
But let me ask you something. As we know, that we're going to
have a new governor and cabinet, we don't know who he's going to--
as far as his administrators in the different departments, who's going to
be a carryover and who's not. So is it your understanding that the new
governor coming onboard is -- this is part of -- going to be a part of his
Page 49
November 28,2006
consideration in the future, or you know, is this going to drop off,
something that we don't have to be concerned about changing?
MR. TURNER: At this point, of course, I personally have no
way of knowing what the new governor is going to want to do with
respect to this, if anything. We're in the uncomfortable period of time
now that we call transition, which is a period of time between the
election and the end of the current administration's term at the end of
December.
During that transition time, the transition team that is appointed
by the incoming governor meets with all of the departments, the
department heads, the secretaries, and with the existing staff of the
governor, of the present governor, to find out what the status is of any
issues of present concern.
In fact, I think they're meeting today at our department. I guess
maybe I could consider myself fortunate to be on travel today.
An old city manager once told me, Clark, if you aren't there, they
can't ask you any questions, can they?
So the transition team is going to make the recommendations to
the governor as to what things need attention and what things can be
set aside for the moment, because the first 100 days are going to be
pretty tough ones. And I say, I don't have any way of reading the
mind.
Obviously there's the possibility we'll have a new secretary. That
is fairly common when administrations change, and we will have our
own process of vetting the secretary on what's up.
But I think this issue is one that can safely be held --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In advance?
MR. TURNER: Yes. There is no -- there's no need to get into a
dispute with local government over something that doesn't at this point
have any enforcement effect at all.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, thank you. You answered
that question.
Page 50
November 28, 2006
The next question is, state statutes refer to state area of critical
concern in Collier County. Is -- part of that process is to correct that
language in the state statutes?
MR. TURNER: You mean, if it were to proceed with a
de-designation?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, sir.
MR. TURNER: If there were a de-designation, typically -- there
has never been a de-designation of a whole area in the state. Part of
the Apalachicola Bay was de-designated some years ago.
What the Administration Commission does is to adopt a rule that
repeals the existing rule.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you'd have to clear up state
statutes then? Because you've got -- it refers to it in F AC, Florida's
Administration Code, but it also --
MR. TURNER: It also -- yes. It's in the state statutes. I'm not
fully familiar with the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. TURNER: -- legal steps that would be taken, but what
happens is the rule is repealed and then I believe there is an
appropriate adjustment in the state statutes to remove the references to
that area since it would no longer exist.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Great.
MR. TURNER: But I -- please, I'm not an attorney, and
attorneys have a way of finding out things that I didn't think out, so --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine, and again, I'm glad
the state is pulling back and letting us work on issues here in Collier
County to make sure that we're protecting what needs to be protected.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would like to echo that
sentiment. It is refreshing to know that the state is willing to defer to
local government from time to time, but my experience has been that
they give with one hand and take away with the other, so I'm always a
Page 51
November 28, 2006
little suspicious.
The -- we have, I think, a really good Growth Management Plan,
much better than we had six or eight years ago, and -- but it still needs
improvement.
We're working now on habitat protection areas for threatened and
protected species, and we're also working on watershed protection
plans. So we need some time to get in place the appropriate
protections in our Growth Management Plan to deal with these
environmental issues on a more cohesive countywide basis.
And I would -- would discourage the state from taking action on
something like this in Collier County until such time as we have those
protections completed here, and for that reason, you might have seen
our packet. We have a resolution that says we support it and we have
a resolution that says we don't support it.
So I probably would like to suggest that we meet halfway there
and say, we don't mind having control of something like this returned
exclusively to Collier County, particularly since there's no state
enforcement associated with this terminology any longer, as long as
we do have the proper protection measures in place.
And I would -- I personally would like to see any action deferred
at the state level until such time as we have those changes made to our
Growth Management Plan, but otherwise, I have no concern about
being able to apply the appropriate protection measures to an area that
is of state concern.
So with that --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I think you're summing up the
way Commissioner Henning feels.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I agree, yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Myself. I haven't heard from
Commissioner Fiala yet, but I think we're getting a consensus from
this board that, you know, if something weren't broke -- it it's not
broken, why try to fix it? There's always a time to come back later if
Page 52
November 28, 2006
we need to to readdress this situation.
And with that, we do have five speakers. I want to remind these
speakers that while this commission seems to be going in the direction
of status quo, that if you talk long enough, you might be able to talk us
out of it.
With that in mind, call the first speaker.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Bonnie Michaels. She'll be
followed by Nancy Payton.
MS. MICHAELS: Good morning. I'm Bonnie Michaels with the
League of Women Voters, and I'm representing Chris Stratton who
could not be here today, so I'm reading a letter from her.
Dear Commissioners, the League of Women Voters of Collier
County is pleased that the Department of Community Affairs, DCA, is
taking this opportunity to brief the Board of Commissioners about
DCA's proposal to de-designate the Big Cypress area of critical state
concern.
We're also pleased that you have this opportunity to provide your
comments before the governor and cabinet, sitting as the
Administration Commission, make any decision about DCA's
recommendation; however, we are very concerned about the lack of
public input into any kind of DCA decision-making process.
Due to the magnitude and significance of this proposed change
and the fact that the public and stakeholders have not been privy to the
discussion about this matter, we ask that you do everything that you
can to provide adequate opportunities for public hearings and public
involvement in any decision to change the designation of the Big
Cypress area of critical state concern.
Thank you. Sincerely, Chris Stratton.
And I have copies of the letter.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Ms. Payton.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Nancy Payton. She'll be
followed by Margaret Emblidge.
Page 53
November 28, 2006
MS. PAYTON: Good morning. Nancy Payton, representing the
Florida Wildlife Federation that has a very long history with the
establishment of the Big Cypress area of critical state concern and also
ensuring that it fulfills its mandate.
Our board member, Franklin Adamas, worked on the 1973
designation, and he knows it well. And we've wrestled with Collier
County over regulations about agriculture out there and NRP As, but
now we're all on the same wavelength that there are -- we do have a
program that is designed to protect what remains in private hands of
the Big Cypress area of critical state concern.
But we do urge you today to pass the resolution opposing the
de-designation, and for many of the reasons that you've heard today.
It's not really broken, so we don't really need to fix it, but we do need
to explore how we could have more local control or devolve to the
Collier County Growth Plan.
And if that's done, we do need to address how that's to be done.
Is it going to be done administratively? Do we have to do some
actions through the legislature? We didn't get clear answers today,
and we need to know that as we move forward.
We need to know the implications to our growth plan, the entire
implications and how we address those; the rural land stewardship
area for one. There are references to the administrative code in our
comprehensive plan. Those references need to be cleaned up.
And also their implications to the long-term not-yet-reached
goals protect and restore lands in the Big Cypress area of critical state
concern, primarily the Okaloacoochee Slough.
There's a lot of conservation work yet to be done, and that needs
to be done before we talk about de-designation. And, again, I want to
stress, if it's explored, we have to have all stakeholders at the table and
there has to be a lot of free interchange of ideas and concerns as this
moves forward.
And thank you very much. And, again, I urge you to pass the
Page 54
November 28,2006
resolution opposing the de-designation. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Margaret Emblidge, followed by
Jennifer Hecker.
MS. EMBLIDGE: Good morning, Commissioners. Margaret
Emblidge with Collier Enterprises, representing one of the property
owners with that designation.
I will keep this brief based on Commissioner Coletta's comments.
We agree with the recommendations that we've heard. I think
Nancy said it more succinctly than I could. We're glad to hear that
this action or this proposal will not be pursued and, but if it does come
back to us, we would like to have the opportunity to participate in any
of the assessments of the proposal. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Jennifer Hecker. She'll be
followed by Brad Cornell.
MS. HECKER: Good morning. Jennifer Hecker, representing
the Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
I'm here on behalf of our over 6,000 members in Southwest
Florida today to ask for your support to maintain the Big Cypress area
of critical state concern.
When this designation was created in 1973, its intent was to
recognize the exceptional natural resource value of the Big Cypress
area and to provide specific state resources for oversight of
development proposals in the area to ensure that they be appropriate to
this environmentally sensitive area.
Their resources are evidenced even by, today, having dedicated
staff in DCA that are dedicated specifically to oversight and
involvement with areas of critical state concern, so those are resources
that would be lost with de-designation.
The Big Cypress area remains just as valuable as when it was
designated. The necessity for specific oversight and dedicated
resources has never been more greatly needed than it is now when
development pressures are at their greatest in this area, and the
Page 55
November 28, 2006
original goals of strategic land acquisition, restoration and water
quality, are not yet fully realized nor have they been accomplished.
The de-designation would also be detrimental to the
implementation of the new rural land stewardship plan. The
designation is used in the scoring of the national resource value of the
stewardship lands, and removing the designation would change the
scoring process as well as remove essential incentives provided to
private landowners in the region for preserving the strategically
important environmentally sensitive lands.
Collier County would also have to amend its comprehensive plan
and its LDCs as well.
In conclusion, the designation is justified. It is a very sensitive
area that's worthy of that designation of area of critical state concern.
It provides -- the designation provides additional resources. It's
intertwined with Collier County's Growth Management Plan and the
rural land stewardship program. It provides additional funding to
preserves and for the preservation of these lands in Eastern Collier,
and it would not be in the best interest of the community to have this
designation removed.
We have other issues about the legality of DCA's action. We did
have an attorney look at the issue you rose. We do believe that the
statute would have to be repealed or amended in this case as the Big
Cypress area of critical state concern is not worded as other areas of
critical state concern throughout the state have been, so it would
require a different process, which would require repeal or amendment
of the actual statute itself.
We have also concerns about the process and stakeholder
involvement. We've put all these concerns in greater detail in a letter
that we've provided to you that we had sent up to DCA and to
members of the administration last week.
So in conclusion, therefore, we just ask that you pass a resolution
in support of maintaining the designation of the Big Cypress as an
Page 56
November 28, 2006
area of critical state concern to express your sentiment on this issue.
Even though action is not being taken at DCA at this time, we do ask
that you go ahead and pass a resolution in support. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, did you have
a question, or did you want to wait?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I'll wait till the speakers are
done.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Brad Cornell.
MR. CORNELL: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Brad
Cornell, and I'm here on behalf of Collier County Audubon Society
and Audubon of Florida. Just, you know, everybody's really said what
the succinct points are, the relevant points are in this.
I think Clark Turner from DCA really hit on something that's
really important, which is that the Big Cypress area of critical state
concern is still a state -- of state and national significance whether you
name it that or not. So taking that designation away or having it in
place does not change the importance of habitats and the environments
in this incredibly unique place. So for that reason alone, we should be
retaining that designation.
It was our understanding that the state and the department of
community affairs, as reflected in Senate Bill 360 in the 2005
legislative session was putting an emphasis on prioritizing issues and
policies of state significance. That was how they were going to focus
their work across the state. And an area of critical state concern by
definition is such an area. So removing that seems antithetical to that
whole prioritization of state issues being most important to their
efforts.
I think that it would be very appropriate if you -- even though
this is not pending -- does not have any pending action right at this
time, it would be very appropriate and we would recommend that you
pass the resolution in opposition of de-designation to retain the status
Page 57
November 28,2006
quo and keep the designation for this area. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great. I'm not sure if the -- if
the resolution on our agenda is appropriate to pass. I think it needs to
be tweaked. Don't disagree with the speakers. I think we ought to
recognize it as a national treasure.
But if the state is not going to -- if they're referring back down to
us as far as regulation, still, things need to be cleaned up. We don't
know if this is going to be in a priority for the governor next year or
years after that.
So why don't we put this in abeyance right now, find out through
the DCA if this is going to come back, if this is going to be one of the
governor's issues, and let's have a clean document, not only at the state
level, but here in our Growth Management Plan. But I'm fully in
support of recognizing the -- trying to get some kind of recognition for
this area.
MR. TURNER: Mr. Commissioner, Mr. Chairman, if I could
respond to that. The -- a course of action that you might wish to
consider would be to direct the appropriate staff to work with the
Department of Community Affairs staff to identify those areas of law
and regulations that would be affected if the designation were to be
removed.
Specifically I believe in the rural land stewardship area, there's a
-- there are some provisions that might need to be augmented, et
cetera, et cetera. But if you were to direct your staff to meet with
department staff on that issue and any interested groups in a workshop
or series of workshops to identify those issues, at least that part of the
concern could be alleviated.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We don't have staff sitting
around waiting for work to be done. Let us know what you're going to
do so we can respond with our staffs participation, give us guidance,
Page 58
November 28, 2006
give the community guidance. I mean, why should we put our staff to
work when we don't know what the governor is going to do?
MR. TURNER: Well, I was -- I was suggesting that only as a
means to try to keep as much local control of the process as possible.
If you wish, we can schedule workshops here, a workshop or
workshops here, with your staff and with other interested groups to
explore these issues in more detail, find out exactly what the
designation means to what kinds of groups and how it might be recast
to try to satisfy the interests that are there.
We'd be happy to do that, but we prefer at this point to defer to
local control as much as possible and to provide our input as requested
and invited. But if you'd like us to spearhead that effort, we'd be
perfectly happy to do so.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just want to say that I agree
with everything everybody's said, especially you when it says -- you
said, if it's not broken, don't fix it. I think that's a great idea.
And we've heard resoundingly throughout that no one even knew
this was going to be happening, so we know that a better form of
communication needs to be created, and I would think that if it's even
being talked about again, now that you're directly involved and you
know us and we know you, and you see all parts of our community in
favor of keeping the designation as is, if there's any talk of changing
that, I would -- I would -- all of us would appreciate that you get hold
of the stakeholders and staff involved so that we can participate in
whatever conversations are taking place.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And myself, if I may jump in front of
you, is I -- the fact it isn't broken -- I don't know why we want to get
this so involved to the point where going to have staff, whether it's the
state staff or county staff, involved in a process where we agree that
we don't want to change it at this point in time.
I mean, if it comes back, it should come back from the state level.
Page 59
November 28, 2006
They should do the vetting out there to be able to run it through the
public and be able to get a consensus of opinion. And then when they
have that, then bring it back to the county for the direction that, if
we're involved, where we would play into it.
But I don't think that it should become -- Commissioner Henning
made a very good point. We don't have staff standing around waiting
for something to do. And I don't want to see extra work put upon
them. When it gets to that point in time when we need to address it,
I'd be more than willing to do it.
For now, I'm for keeping the status quo where it is.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm going to disagree with
Commissioner Henning and you slightly on this. It's very dangerous
for us to sit back and not express an opinion as to such time when the
governor or DCA takes a position, because if we wait until that point
in time, we're now challenged with trying to get somebody to change
their mind.
I would much rather be in a position where we're providing them
input before they've made up their mind. And if we express an
opinion at the present time, and it doesn't have to be critical, of the
state's intent, but at least express our opposition to this measure until
such time as adequate protections are developed for -- and approved
for our Growth Management Plan.
And that puts Governor Crist on notice that we don't want it
changed. Before he ever starts making any decisions about what we
would like to see, he at least knows that the Collier County
Commissioners don't want it changed right now.
That's going to make our task a lot easier than if we -- if we take
no action now, let DCA and the Administration Commission and the
governor's office think about this for a while and then come up with
what they want to do, then we're fighting an uphill battle. It would be
almost un-winnable at that point in time.
Page 60
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead and put that in the form of a
motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think you're closer to what I was
saying than not.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then I would make a
motion that we approve the resolution that opposes the de-designation
but with some changes, and I think those changes should take
recognition of the fact that we have habitat protection plans to develop
for the entire county, we have watershed protection plans to develop,
we have to bring together in our Growth Management Plan all of the
measures that are necessary for protection in a single play so they can
be easily understood and interpreted and used, and do that in a way
which provides the document that is essential for local control and
management of an area of critical concern.
Now, once that is done, I think most of us would probably agree,
and I think environmentalists would probably agree, that the state's
involvement isn't all that essential as far as the enforcement of an area
of critical state concern.
So that would be my motion, is that we say that we oppose any
change to the designation of critical -- an area of critical state concern
until such time as Collier County has received approvals for all
Growth Management Plan revisions necessary to assure the protection
of this very critical area.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And would you like to include in
your motion to keep the lines of communication open with the
departments involved?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, absolutely. I would encourage
that DCA communicate with us, involve us in the discussions of
whatever plans you intend to take. I presume you'll continue to do
whatever you think you need to do whether we pass a resolution or
not. But at least I believe it's important that you and the governor
Page 61
November 28, 2006
understand that we don't want to do this right now, and we've got
some work to do before we're capable of administering this thing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Then I'll second your motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I think there's a -- the
way to put it on a positive basis and form of a resolution is, we enjoy
the state designation of it, but we're willing to take local control over
how we manage those lands within the critical area, and please allow
us enough time to do so.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think that's a good
suggestion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we're all saying the same
thing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And with that, we do have a
motion by Commissioner Coy Ie and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Is there any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none. All those --
MR. PETTIT: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner?
MR. PETTIT: Commissioner Coletta, I also, just -- Mike Pettit,
for the record -- just suggest we might want to delete a couple whereas
clauses and refer to it as vote, because I understand it's now not going
to take place next week. But I think that will capture what
Commissioner Coy Ie is saying.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Just clean up the resolution
based upon our discussion and bring it back to us, and we'll be okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Bring it back to us or just pass it
as is?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: As is.
Page 62
November 28,2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a reso.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: See, I don't know exactly what it's
going to say yet, and I think we'd be safer if it just came to us maybe
at the next meeting and we looked at it briefly and said, okay, this is it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Have it on the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Will that fall in the proper timing?
MR. PETTIT: As I understand it, the action by the state has been
deferred, so it shouldn't be an issue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It should be addressed to the
governor and the -- the new governor and the new cabinet.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: May I suggest that you put it on the
consent agenda, and if a commissioner has a problem with it, we could
pull it from the consent agenda?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's the way to do it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. With that, is there any other
input?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The motion maker and the second
both agree?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And with that, no more discussion.
All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it.
We're going to take a 10-minute break. We'll be back here at 11
Page 63
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not 12 or 13 or anything?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, 11 :53 (sic.) Enjoy.
(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 COLETTA: Correction, I didn't mean 11:53. I
meant 11 :03. Let's get going.
Item #10A
RESOLUTION 2006-312: A RESOLUTION ENDORSING MDG
CAPITAL CORPORATIONS APPLICATION TO THE STATE OF
FLORIDA FOR COMMUNITY WORKFORCE HOUSING
INNOVATION PILOT (CWHIP) PROGRAM FUNDING -
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we have a time certain item at 11
a.m. This is item lOA. This item to be heard, again, at 11 a.m.
It's a recommendation to approve a resolution of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, endorsing MGD
Capital Corporation -- Corporation's applications to the State of
Florida for the Community Workforce Housing Innovation Pilot
program funding, and we call that program, CWHIP.
Mr. Cormac Giblin, your Project Manager for Housing, will
present.
MR. GIBLIN: Good morning, Commissioners. Again, my
name's Cormac Giblin, your Housing Development Manager.
We're here to present a CWHIP proposal to you. Let me give
you a little bit of background. Representative Mike Davis from Naples
drafted a bill known as House Bill 1363 in this last legislative session.
Page 64
November 28, 2006
It was passed and signed into law earlier this year.
It's become known as the state's new affordable housing law.
The law contains several provisions, one of which is a new
state- funded program called the Community Workforce Housing
Innovation Pilot program, or CWHIP as it's known for short.
One of the innovative concepts --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Excuse me just one second.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I can wait till you make
your presentation. How long are you going to take, Cormac?
MR. GIBLIN: I only have maybe 30, 40 seconds.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good. I'll do it -- I'll speak
right after you do.
MR. GIBLIN: Okay. One of the innovative concepts in the
CWHIP program is that it, for the first time ever, is a state-funded
program that addresses higher than low income housing. It addresses
housing up to 140 percent of median income.
Part of this program is a requirement that the project be a
public/private partnership, and to that end, a public/private partnership
has formed in Collier County consisting of the school board, the
sheriffs office, the two hospitals and the City of Naples. They have
come together with a private developer to propose a project for
funding from the state.
Part of the application process is that any application from a
county be endorsed by that county's commission as part of the review
process.
The program is $50 million statewide, which will be split into 10
$5 million allocations. Again, no more than one from each county, and
they're prioritized in high-growth and high-cost counties, of which
Collier County ranks in the top four of each of those categories.
What you have before you today is a resolution of support for the
CWHIP project being proposed by this ESP partnership group in
Page 65
November 28, 2006
conjunction with MGD Capital.
And within the resolution is a section that specifies that this
development does need to go through final development approvals
through the county system and that approval of this resolution shall in
no way prejudice or imply that the board will automatically approve
any of those further approvals.
Again, that is an underlying reason why it is conspicuously not
part of the partnership at this time, the Collier County Board of
County Commissioners or county manager's agency, as to avoid any
appearance of even a conflict of interest in it as this development
moves forward.
That's the end of my presentation. The partnership may want to
say a few words or you may want to.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, Cormac, as you correctly
pointed out, this is merely an endorsement of a request for funding for
a private/partner -- public/private partnership, which I think is a
wonderful concept. We've been looking forward to this for some time,
and it now has taken root, and I think it will do wonderful things for
us.
And with your indulgence, Mr. Chairman, can I ask a question?
Is there anybody here who is opposed to the approval of this grant
request?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then in that case, I would like to
recommend that we approve this item.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second, okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Second,oh. We've got three seconds.
COMMISSIONER COYLE; I think I know how this vote's
going to go now.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right. So I guess where we are with
it now -- and we have 20 public speakers who probably if they get up
Page 66
November 28, 2006
there are going to convince us maybe it was a bad idea.
I'm not saying anything. I would love to hear every one of you
go on forever. In fact, I could grant you additional time if I --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wouldn't.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, okay, I won't.
With that, is there any questions?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I just wanted to say I had
the privilege of talking to Bill Klohn, and it's really, really nice to see
the partnership and what the partners are doing to make this happen.
And just also to point out, this $5 million is not ad valorem dollars or
property tax money. It's not sales tax money, and it's truly what it's
meant to do, and that's the Sudowsky (phonetic) funds. And, you
know, I think we owe the gratitude to Representative Mike Davis for
putting together such a great bill to give Collier County citizens and
businesses an opportunity to provide for what's needed in the
community .
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's do that right now.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Very well put, Commissioner
Henning.
With that, I'd like to be able to go to the speakers and be able to
move this issue along before we forget where our support is.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You might even let them know that
they could waive if they agree with it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's true. There's this thing called a
waive, and it's very simple. Put up your hands, let's practice a little.
There we go.
Ms. Filson, would you be so kind as to call for the waive -- I
mean the speakers.
MS. FILSON: Brian Settle?
MR. SETTLE: Waive.
Page 67
November 28, 2006
MS. FILSON: Tammie Nemecek?
MS. NEMECEK: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Gary Kluckhuhn?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: He waived.
MR. KLUCKHUHN: I would like to speak on it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sure. You may.
MS. FILSON: He'll be followed by Bob Krasowski.
MR. KLUCKHUHN: Either side?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That would be fine right there, sir.
State your name for the record.
MR. KLUCKHUHN: Commissioners, good morning. Gary
Kluckhuhn. I represent primarily myself, although I work with
several grass-roots groups and organizations and have met with some
of the people involved with this initiative and I applaud it and all, of
where we are going.
I wanted just to speak briefly on the subject of the community
land trust, which I know you're -- Mr. Mudd was telling me that you're
going to have a report in February on the funding mechanisms for it.
But the reason that I mention that is, community land trusts are
very much misunderstood, and I would like to encourage the board to
look at any of these projects to encourage or provide incentive. I've
looked at ways whereby you do things and mandate things, and it
doesn't seem to get done. But using the community land trust as a
vehicle to provide incentives for developers and property owners to
add density -- and I know that the density and the height issue is one
that we come up against in a negative way. We do let developers or
people of privilege build along the beach and Hammock Bay --
beautiful buildings down there.
But the 20 story-buildings, if we were to allow for this group to
develop in the heir rights of some of the land in the community, we
could create a sustainable community land trust, letting market force
prevail.
Page 68
November 28, 2006
And the firefighters had asked for a building tall enough to
practice defending it, so I would suggest that we start thinking outside
of the triangle -- and I met with the Gateway Triangle committee, and
they're doing some wonderful things, but limiting it to the triangle --
that we think outside of the community land trust and heir rights as a
viable solution. And by the same token, down the road I would like us
to look at not allowing that type of density on any properties unless it
was in a community land trust, thereby creating wealth for the
community instead of wealth that is taken out of the community.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bob Krasowski. Bill Klohn.
He'll be followed by Ed Morton.
MR. KLOHN: Good morning, Chairman and members of the
commission. I'd just like to be very brief and say, thank you very
much for your support.
Affordable housing is not new to MGD Capital Corporation.
We're so excited that the largest employers of the community have
come together and selected MDG to take this very important role to
bring this proj ect forward.
And I'd like to thank all of the CEOs and the sheriff for their time
in coming, even though some or most may waive. So thank you very
much for your support of this project.
MS. FILSON: Ed Morton. He'll be followed by Sheriff Hunter.
MR. MORTON: I was once told that, once you have made the
sale, shut up because it can only go in one direction. I understand that.
What I wanted to say was, I would love to encourage the county
as well, to the extent you can, to get involved in our project -- in this
project as well for, I think, all of the good and appropriate reasons that
we've discussed previous.
All of us getting together, I think, could make a powerful
statement to the entire community. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Sheriff Hunter.
Page 69
November 28, 2006
SHERIFF HUNTER: I'm going to waive with my thanks to the
board.
MS. FILSON: He'll be followed by Bob Murray. He'll be
followed by Michelle LaBrute (sic).
MR. MURRAY: Good morning, Commissioners. I might have
waived except that I think it's important for you to know that as well
as the business community, the citizens represented through the civic
organizations are very much in support of all that can be done to bring
us affordable housing.
I recall being struck, oh, four or five years ago by what I saw at a
football game with so many young families, and over time I
speculated then as to where they could live, and over time I've seen
there's less and less and less. And so this is a first good step, finally,
where we've brought together a number of people who are willing to
help, and we pledge our support to this organization to try and make
something happen.
To the extent that we can do anything we will, thank you.
MS. FILSON: Michelle LaBute?
MS. LaBUTE: Michelle LaBute waives and extends a thanks to
the school system.
MS. FILSON: Mayor Bill Barnett.
MAYOR BARNETT: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Fielding Epstein.
MR. EPSTEIN: I'll waive.
MS. FILSON: Dr. Mike Reagen?
DR. REAGEN: Waive with thanks.
MS. FILSON: Jack Ullrich?
MR. ULLRICH: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Thomas Eastman.
MR. EASTMAN: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Maureen Mino?
MS. MINO: I waive with thanks again, please.
Page 70
November 28, 2006
MS. FILSON: Brenda Talbert?
MS. TALBERT: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Dr. Jeff Sharkey?
DR. SHARKEY: Waive my time.
MS. FILSON: Lou Vlasho?
MR. VLASHO: Waive, and good morning.
MS. FILSON: Kathy Patterson?
MS. PATTERSON: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Dave Weston?
MR. WESTON: Waive with gratitude.
MS. FILSON: And that was your final speaker.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. And any -- oh, I'm sorry.
Commissioner Henning, your light's on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You just didn't turn it off.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh. I'll turn it off right now. That
was really -- with that, we have a motion by Commissioner Coy Ie, we
have a second -- three seconds actually. I'm going to recognize
Commissioner Henning for the second.
Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Failing to hear any, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 4-0, thank you very
much.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we've got the mike back on again
Page 71
November 28, 2006
as the people have left the meeting room.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY JOSEPH DIMURRO -
DISCUSSED BLASTING LEVEL REQUIREMENTS SET BY THE
STATE AND SUBSEQUENT HOUSE DAMAGE AND WILL BE
BROUGHT BACK FOR REVIEW NO LATER THAN JANUARY
23.2007
This brings us to public petitions. We're on item 6A. It's a public
petition request by Joseph DiMurro to discuss blasting level
requirements set by the house and subsequent house damage.
Mr. DiMurro, if you could please come forward.
MR. DiMURRO: First I'd like to thank you for your time. And
the reason I'm here is under great concern.
I live 500 feet from Jones Mining. And I come to you for help
today because on June 20th at a vote of 5-0 you gave Jones Mining
permission to blast.
Since that time -- and you put some safety measures in, which I
really appreciate. One of them was a preblast inspection of homes,
that if anybody wanted, you would send this Geosonics over to the
house, take pictures before the blasting started, and that would get
things going.
We participated in that. And here's my concern. After about a
month of blasting, I noticed damage to my house, damage in the form
of cracked tiles, lose tiles, drywall cracks, stucco cracks outside the
house.
What I did was, I sat and I waited for my preblast inspection
report to come in. It came in -- because I had called them a few times
-- six weeks after the blasting started.
So what I did was, I got the pictures that they gave me, I went out
Page 72
November 28, 2006
around my house, I compared their pictures to the -- to what actually
is in front of -- the damage to my house.
It's staggering the way these cracks have grown. It threw up red
flags to a point where I called up the mine, I asked them to please
bring Geosonics back over to my house, do another inspection,
because there are damages.
And I don't know what to do. Do I fix these damages? This is
going to go on for eight years. They blast twice a week. That's 96
times a year they'll shake my house. By the time they're done,
somewhere around 800 times.
I am very concerned. The reason is, this is my primary
investment. I have nowhere else to go. I tried to sell this house to no
avail. No one will even come to look, and I'm not blaming that on
anything but maybe a bad market, I don't know. But you're stuck with
me. We're stuck with each other, and I need help.
All these blasts are in the state requirements. And I'm told that I
am going up against 50 years of data collected all over the country and
that I'm on an uphill battle.
Well, I've been walking uphill my whole life. It doesn't scare me,
and I'm not going to walk away. These people are damaging my
home.
Now, I don't want to put them out of business. I'm not looking to
shut them down. What I am looking for -- and I'm not concerned about
this 50 years of data, because what would really impress me more is
50 years of data done in Florida on homes that are built on sand,
because I really believe that if that's the kind of data we were dealing
with here, these levels would be lower, because at a 126 dcB, which
meant nothing to me before, but now I understand what it is, it's
aboveground waves coming from these blasts.
They're knocking things off my shelves. They're breaking
windows, they're cracking tiles. This is not my imagination, and I
don't expect you to believe me.
Page 73
November 28, 2006
What I am waiting for is the second pre-inspection to come to me
so that I can bring these pictures to you and show you the damage.
Cracks that have been -- that were two inches when they came and
took pictures, that are over two feet long now. And I really -- I
brought two pictures, and I really don't know if you want to see them,
but this is just a small example because I know I only have 10 minutes
of time. And--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. DiMurro, you have -- I'm sorry,
right up here, sir.
MR. DiMURRO: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. You're here at my invitation
because we didn't seem to be getting anyplace within the system with
staff and with the mine.
MR. DiMURRO: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And to be honest with you, I've heard
nothing but excuses of why we haven't got there. You have -- when
we originally passed this thing and they agreed, the Jones Mining
Company, that they would do a pre-inspection, it was -- my thoughts
were that they would get that to you in a timely fashion. That hasn't
happened.
MR. DiMURRO: No.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And how much time has elapsed
since then?
MR. DiMURRO: Well, it was six weeks after the blasting
started that I got the information from them. Now I don't even have
the second blast report yet, and I don't know when I'm going to get it,
that's why I don't really have solid proof for you that they're damaging
my house.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand. But the reason I asked
you to come today is so we could start some sort of action to be able
to see what we can do to remedy this.
MR. DiMURRO: Thank you.
Page 74
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We cannot make a decision today as
far as directing our staff or the Jones Mining Company what to do.
MR. DiMURRO: I understand.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: This is only a preliminary to be able
to do it.
MR. DiMURRO: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I, for one, would like to make a
motion to bring this back when we can hear all the evidence, when
Mr. DiMurro receives that pre-inspection, we can have a presentation
at that time not only of our own staff, but of Jones Mining to see
where they may have failed or not failed in this particular endeavor.
Commissioner Henning and then Commissioner Coy Ie, then
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Commissioner, I agree, if
you would amend your motion to state to have -- invite Jones Mining
here and don't rely on our staff. They haven't done anything or are not
part of this process. But let's see what the mining company's going to
do to rectify this situation.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I agree with you,
Commissioner Henning. Only thing is is our staff was the one that
was here when we put the rules and regulations together, and they'll
have to be -- make -- they're knowledgeable of the subject matter, and
so to not have them present would probably do a disservice to this
. .
commISSIon.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think they're going to be
here, but actually have them prepare a presentation -- if Jones Mining
doesn't respond to the resident, then I think we need to take further
action.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we have the representative from
Jones Mining here, and that's attorney Bruce Anderson. Possibly
they're ready to commit to this procedure, and we'll able to know that.
The meeting we hold will be two-sided to be able to get to the point
Page 75
November 28, 2006
that we're at.
Mr. Anderson, would it be out of my reach as a chairman to ask
you to come forward and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You've got long arms.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You could have left your briefcase
with them. I'm sure they could be trusted. That was a joke, Bruce.
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes. The question is, is we're trying
to find away, a mechanism that we can bring this back as an agenda
item to be able to address the concerns of Mr. DiMurro.
MR. ANDERSON: For the record, Bruce Anderson,
representing Jones Mining. And I would just -- you might want to call
on your own staff because they have investigated this man's
complaints any number of times, and you may be better off hearing
straight from them.
My client will continue to try to work with Mr. DiMurro. But
there is a procedure set forth. If he believes that my client has
damaged his home, there -- it's a hundred dollar filing fee, and --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. I don't mean to interrupt
you. But what you're talking about is the state process.
MR. ANDERSON: And it is the exclusive process for
compensation.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, yeah. But also, too, we have a
PUD in place that had certain agreements in it, and that's where I'm
coming from.
MR. ANDERSON: Ask your staff if we've violated any of them.
It's --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we will, but not now. We're
going to do that in the process. My only concern is, Mr. Henning
wanted to know -- I believe what he was alluding to is, would Jones
Mining participate in this item when we brought it back? Would you
be here along with Jones Mining to answer questions?
Page 76
November 28,2006
MR. ANDERSON: Certainly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. ANDERSON: And we're here for that purpose today.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, I believe --I'm sorry.
Commissioner Coyle -- I'm sorry. Were you finished, Commissioner
Henning? I didn't mean to interrupt you.
Go ahead, please.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I'm fine.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I think Mr. Anderson is
correct, there is a process for resolving grievances here. But the
problem I have is, reading the background information, it appears to
have taken an inordinate amount of time to get the initial survey
results from the company that was responsible for providing them.
And now apparently there is a second inspection that no results
are available for that either. Is that where you are?
MR. ANDERSON: It's my understanding that the second
inspection was done a week ago today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. ANDERSON: And has been being reviewed since that time
to see if Jones Mining is responsible and if there have been any
changes.
MR. DiMURRO: May I interrupt? I asked for that second
inspection about five weeks ago, so there's another month just to get to
my house. Now, if it's going to take another six weeks to get me the
information back, I don't think that's acceptable. And I'm not going to
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I don't mean to interrupt you,
but this is one of the reasons why I wanted to bring it back as an
agenda item so that we can put it out there for public viewing and to
make sure that everything's being done that should be done.
Continue, Commissioner Coyle.
Page 77
"---~~"""'___"""___' .~._~..~w...._
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'm just going to give you an
initial reaction. Whatever actions have been taken by both sides, if the
man's house has been damaged and he has damage now that is more
severe than he had before the blasting occurred, I don't care what steps
were taken, he deserves to be compensated for that and he deserves
that it be fixed.
So, you know, this is just one homeowner. The mining company
shouldn't have a big pressure dealing with one homeowner and getting
these issues resolved.
And I personally would expect that kind of responsibility from
the mining company. And I -- I'm not going to draw any conclusions
at the present time. But based upon what I have read about the
inspections by the county staff and the response from Jones Mining, it
has not been particularly impressive.
And so I would -- I would certainly hope that somebody would
get to work on resolving this issue before we bring it back to us
before, or I'm going to be probably inclined to vote for cessation of all
blasting until we get it resolved.
MR. DiMURRO: Mr. Coyle, may I say something?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You have to talk with the
chairperson.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. Please make it brief.
MR. DiMURRO: Okay. My only point is, I don't want to put
them out of business, but there's got to be a way to lower these levels
-- I mean, to lower their levels. They're blasting 400 holes -- they're
drilling 400 holes a week. They're blasting -- this is how they do it.
It's two blasts. It's one right after another. They're doing 140 holes
and then 70. It's a boom, it shakes your house, and then a boom, then
a small one.
My point is, is that maybe you're restricting them to two days
blasting a week, and that's what's causing this. Because if they can
drill -- if they can just blast maybe 80 holes in one day, maybe my
Page 78
November 28, 2006
house won't shake so violently compared to 200 holes in one day.
Maybe if you stretched it out and made it less intense. I'm just trying
to find ways to solve this.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're being very realistic, and I
appreciate that. But what we need to do is we need to be able to force
the issue by getting it on a future agenda.
MR. DiMURRO: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I assure you that they'll be at your
door talking to you about all the possibilities in the world between
now and then.
MR. DiMURRO: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Meanwhile, if we reach some -- you
reach some sort of agreement with them that's favorable and it doesn't
look like it's got some hidden agenda to it, then we just won't continue
it. It will be the end of it.
MR. DiMURRO: Well, their answer is, they'll fix my house, but
my problem is is that this is an eight-year process. Do they fix my
house, and then what, come back in another year and start fixing it
again?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, that's part of the discussion that
will either take place --
MR. DiMURRO: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- either before we meet or at the
meeting itself.
MR. DiMURRO: Thank you, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, just a couple things also. In
reading all of the backup material, Stan had said that the air blast is at
the high end. Maybe when we're coming back, they can also report to
us on what that actually means and if that can be reduced, if that is
another cause.
And also I read in the letters between you and some of the staff
Page 79
November 28, 2006
members, on three different occasions, three weeks in a row they were
working on Sunday. Not blasting, but they were working on Sunday
crushing things with a lot of noise starting at 7: 15 in the morning, and
I don't believe they're even supposed to be working on Sunday.
MR. DiMURRO: Well, they haven't been lately since I filed that
complaint with the code enforcement, because they -- thanks to code
enforcement, they've kept up on it. They've talked to Mr. Jones.
He's expressed concern that he will not let these trucks line up,
honk their horns at five in the morning, you know, get things going
earlier, and they won't be working on Sunday any more. And to their
thanks, it's been quiet on Sunday, except for the pump that runs 24
hours a day non-stop. And when the wind blows out of the north, it
sounds like there's a tractor trailer idling in my back yard all the time,
all the time. And I've put up with that, but I will not put up with them
damaging my home.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MR. DiMURRO: That's where I have to draw the line. I'm
sorry .
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I remember right, the petition,
that pump was supposed to be housed. It was supposed to be housed in
a shed.
MR. DiMURRO: It's not. I was there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You mean the pump --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Maybe we can get a report on
that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, the pump, I believe you went
down and checked it out. They did put the insulation box around it,
didn't they?
MR. DiMURRO: It doesn't help. But another fact is, I thought
my berm was going to be raised to 15 feet and it never was. It's still
Page 80
-'~-^_. . ....'.;lIIl"'''''..'~.,.,,,'',,.,,.~-.
November 28, 2006
the same berm eight feet high that it was before. It was raised 15 feet
right where they're blasting for the people on the east side of the mine,
not for the people on the north side of the mine.
Maybe that has something to do with it, I don't know. I'm
looking for answers like you are.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we'll--
MR. DiMURRO: And I'm desperate.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm going to make a motion that we
bring this back with all the concerns mentioned at a time that staff
working with you determines that it's the right time to do it so there's
plenty of time --
MR. DiMURRO: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- for Jones Mines (sic) to meet with
you to try to resolve the issues. That's my motion.
MR. DiMURRO: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 4-1 (sic).
Question, Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I'd suggest that you put a no later
than date on when it needs to come back so that people don't
dilly-dally, and let's make -- and if it would be okay, sir, if we put a no
later than the second meeting in January to come back here so that
Page 81
><".,.""~"".._--..,.-,,,,.;~....,.. ." -'...-....,. ..
November 28,2006
they get some work done and make some progress in this
conversation, okay?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I agree. I add it to the motion, and we
have to take a new vote, if I'm not mistaken.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't know.
MR. MUDD: No. All you have to say is, if you all agree, I see
three nods to that. No later than the 23rd of January, I think we're
fine.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're hopefully on the way to--
MR. DiMURRO: Thank you for your help. I appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, that's what we're here for.
Sorry it takes so long to get there sometimes.
MR. DiMURRO: It's okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY MARVIN JOHNS TO
DISCUSS ACCESS ROAD BETWEEN AMITY ROAD AND
JOHNS ROAD - DISCUSSED AND TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT TO EXPLORE OPTIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next public petition is 6B, and
that's a public petition request by Marvin Johns to discuss access road
-- the access road between Amity Road and Johns Road.
MR. JOHNS: Good morning. My name is Marvin Johns, and I
was the owner of a home at 6909 Johns Road in East Naples. My
home was built by my maternal grandparents in 1966.
On October 20, 2006, my daughter and I left for Georgia for a
weekend camping trip with other members of our family. Sometime
Saturday morning our house caught on fire.
We were told that the East Naples Fire Department arrived at
Page 82
November 28, 2006
approximately 5: 15 a.m. Many of my neighbors who witnessed the
scene unfold said that the Collier County Sheriffs Office arrived on
scene a little after 5:00, and the fire department shortly thereafter.
Our home and all of our personal belongings were destroyed
because the emergency vehicles could not make access to our home
safely.
Since the time of this fire, Gail, who is a resident of Johns Road,
needed ambulatory services, as she had a heart attack and was forced
to get in her car and have her husband, Wes, drive her across the
bridge to the waiting ambulance, as the ambulance could not make
access to her home.
Also Wendy Ison, another resident of Johns Road, suffered a
stroke and was forced to be driven to the hospital by her son for the
same reason.
During the previous expansion of Collier Boulevard, no turning
lanes or proper access were installed to the Johns Road community,
and my home burned completely to the ground, as emergency
personnel could not safely access my home.
My father, the late Allen Perry Johns, Jr., fought the battle over
the access to our community for many years. Over 50 years ago, my
entire family purchased property in the East Naples area.
Some years later, the county installed the drainage canals and
wooden bridges along the Collier Boulevard corridor all the way down
to Turner River, which accessed private properties.
The county maintained these bridges and even purchased the
wood for these bridges from my family's sawmill, the Johns Sawmill.
The county, several years ago, abandoned the maintenance
program of these bridges and it became the responsibility of the
private landowners.
Since the initial expansion of County Road 951, which is now
Collier Boulevard, the Johns Road bridge access has been cut off and
barely passable to normal vehicular traffic, much less emergency
Page 83
November 28, 2006
vehicles.
The guardrails were installed directly up against the edges of the
bridge, which has caused many accidents in this area throughout the
past few years. Noone ever asked us, as the citizens of Johns Road, if
we wanted the 951 road expansion or to close off the access to our
bridge.
I feel the problems with access to our community were the cause
when the county expanded the 951 corridor and installed guardrails up
against the bridge and by not installing proper turn lanes.
We have been told for over a year now that an access road would
be installed from Amity Road to Johns Road by Tad Pluc with Collier
County. This would provide a safe access for the residences of Johns
Road, but yet, no action. We wonder, does someone in our
community have to die for action to be taken?
I am a single father with a 12-year-old daughter, and because of
the fire department not having access to my home because of our
bridge being closed off by Collier County, we have lost everything we
own. Our home was completely destroyed. We need an access road
installed immediately to prevent other tragedies like this from
.
occurrIng.
I feel that Collier County is responsible for the damage to my
home and hope you can help us find an immediate solution to this
condition, as people's lives are at risk every day. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you know where this is even?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, I do. It's -- Commissioner Fiala
was just inquiring as to where it was located. It's located off of 951 by
-- what's that campground close by?
MR. JOHNS: Country Camping.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, right down in that area. It's
actually East Naples. And Donna identifies quite strongly with East
Naples.
With that, I would like to take a moment, with the permission of
Page 84
November 28, 2006
this commission, to bring up Norm Feder's (sic) and staff to give us a
play-by-play and some maps, an idea of what we're really looking at
here, what may be able to be done.
MR. FEDER: Commissioners, for the record, Norman Feder,
Transportation Administrator. And I've got also here John Vliet, who
is your Road and Bridge Superintendent.
What you have here is off of 951, as was noted, you have two
private access points. One is Amity Road, which does have a box
culvert, concrete box culvert, over the canal, and is assigned as a
private access road and is very passable and is utilized by the
neighborhood.
You also have here at Johns Road a wooden bridge structure that
is in very poor condition and is not terribly passable. I'll show you a
picture of that and I'll go back to the other map in a minute.
That structure, as I said, is a wooden structure, not in very good
shape to the point where we are in the design of this six-laning, as
you're quite aware, of getting ready to let that hopefully later this year,
first of next year.
And the professional designers looking at it were very concerned
about leaving this opening as an access point because of the liability
of encouraging anyone to try and cross this structure, let alone
walking, in a vehicle.
And so the emphasis was, okay, what do we do about that
access? And we took a look -- and I'll go back to the graphic here for
a second -- at what is happening out there, because it didn't appear that
many people were probably going across that wooden bridge.
And, in fact, you do have off of Amity Road, as you can see by
the graphic, a set of private dirt roads that are providing access in that
area.
Those dirt roads do come in, do go around even to Mr. Johns'
house in two points there, and we did look at it -- and I'll let John talk
about sort of the distance and the pictures here of nature of that access
Page 85
November 28, 2006
and how vehicles can go through.
But before he does that, I also wanted to attach to the other issues
noted that Tad Pluc said that there's an access road being built and
why hasn't that been built?
In reality what we're talking about is a 10-foot multi-use pathway
that's going to be built in the Big Cypress Basin's easement, of the
canal easement itself. It will be on their easement on the east side of
the canal, but it is there for pedestrians, bicyclists and the like. It is
not being established for vehicular movements, which is what I think
is intended or desired.
It would be available, if you will, for emergency vehicles, should
that be required in the area because it is going to be utilized by Big
Cypress Basin for periodic maintenance of their canal, which is one of
the reasons they authorized us putting in that 10- foot pathway within
their easement.
So I'll be happy to answer any other questions after John's given
you a little bit of an idea of the access in through that area.
MR. VLIET: John Vliet, Road Maintenance Superintendent.
Coming off Collier Boulevard on Amity Way (sic), if you travel
approximately 1,350 feet back, there's an FP&L easement. Its obvious
access has been used going that route and through the FP &L easement
over to Johns Road, which is approximately 500 feet to the north of
where you would turn there, and that would put you -- you would turn
right here, okay?
You'd go 500 feet, it'd put you over to Johns Road, and then
another 1,200 and some feet back towards Collier Boulevard to Mr.
Johns' residence.
There's also, on the South Florida Water Management easement,
immediately east of the canal there on Collier Boulevard, there is
another dirt road that leads over to Mr. Johns' home, and that's
immediately east of the canal.
We traveled those distances. To go around from Amity Way to
Page 86
November 28, 2006
the FP &L easement, back down Johns Road back to the west, takes
approximately six minutes because the road's not a maintained road.
It's a rough dirt road.
Traveling the easement next to the canal on the South Florida
Water Management easement, that dirt path takes approximately one
and a half minutes.
There's also an access road that cuts through properties about
midway down from Amity over to Johns' Way (sic), which travels
through private properties. And I did not access through there since it
was pretty obvious it did; however, that also leads back towards Mr.
Johns' properties. That would probably take about half the time of
going all the way around.
Any questions?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, if I may. A couple of things.
One, the la-foot pathway that possibly could be used for emergency
vehicles because it's going to be built to a standard to be able to take
care of Southwest Florida Water Management's equipment, when was
this -- when would this be done?
MR. FEDER: It would be done as part of the 951 project. As I
said, we're looking to try and let that sometime the first of next year.
But as far as done, probably it's two years plus out.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So we're at least two years away on
that. Is the Big Cypress Basin and Southwest Florida Water
Management, would they be okay for emergency vehicles to drive on
't?
I .
MR. FEDER: I don't think there'd be any problem there, and
there's nothing that's going to stop the emergency vehicle from
accessing where they need to.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Could this pathway that's being built
-- I mean, we do need pathways to be able to serve the public's need.
Is there some way that could be also built in such a way with
permission from Florida Water Management to serve as an access road
Page 87
_._0...."''''',,''''''_.._.._ .Ibl"""_ .. .. ____
November 28, 2006
also?
MR. FEDER: First of all, I don't know who would construct that.
We're utilizing their easement for a specific purpose. Again, I'm
dealing with a set of private roads in this area. As I mentioned, the
access even to Amity is signed and specifically noted as private.
Again, I need to point out that the Johns Road access is not
closed and hasn't been closed, although there's great concerns about it.
And the issue came up as part of our study for the expansion of six
lanes about whether or not that should remain open given the
condition of the wooden timber bridge.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, let me ask you that, concerning
the timber bridge that's there. And I realize that there's a danger that
presents itself. If somebody inadvertently uses that and they go
through, is the county liable?
MR. FEDER: It depends upon their attorney. Probably all of us
are one way or another, yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there any--
MR. FEDER: Especially after this discussion, we've recognized
it as a non-desirable situation.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. The road itself, the six-minute
trip that it takes to go from Amy, is it, or Ammy?
MR. VLIET: Amity.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Amity -- to be able to go around to
the beginning of John (sic) Road, which I guess is pretty close to
where this bridge is, it's six minutes. Now, in time -- relation to time,
that's not realistic.
But I think the problem that we're looking at -- and I realize it's a
private road, but I'm still going to ask the question. Is that road
sufficiently open to allow emergency vehicles to be able to take that
roundabout trip to be able to get to Mr. Johns' residence or other
residents who are at the end of Johns Road? Is it open enough?
MR. VLIET: I believe it's open enough to do that. It would be
November 28, 2006
bumpy, there's no question about that, because, again, it's poorly
maintained, but it is passable.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why was the response time so long
for the fire department to get down there, and did they make it right to
the residence or did they have to stop short. And I realize that the
county's liability on this falls a little bit short on some of these things,
but still these are questions that need to be asked.
MR. VLIET: I cannot answer what took them the time it did to
get there. I don't know.
MR. TEACH: Commissioners, Scott Teach with the County
Attorney's Office. The state fire investigator is still going through the
process of the cause of the fire and whatnot, and there is a report
available at East Naples Fire Department, which I will get. But we
don't have an answer why it may have taken longer that time. They
did get there. They were able to access the roads.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Tell me about Johns Road. Johns
Road is private?
MR. FEDER: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And the bridge leading from
Collier Boulevard is private?
MR. FEDER: It appears so. What -- we have gone through a
great record search. It appears, at least according to George
Archibald, who, as you know, is one of my predecessors and is now
with the City of Naples, he said that in the '60s actually the county
built that bridge as they did some others on 29, State Road 29.
And then in the '70s there's a resolution that came to the board
noting that based on funding, no longer could they maintain those, and
they were back, sent over as private, and they have not been
maintained since then, for over 30 years, by the county.
The roadways themselves are private. But I will also tell you, we
were unsuccessful in trying to find any of those in the records in either
Page 89
November 28, 2006
way to show what the issue was with the bridge, exactly how it got
built, but that's what I've been told.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And how do we deal with widening
or improving private roads in other parts of the county?
MR. FEDER: We do not, sir. Unless we're directed, by the
board. Usually for public health, safety, to provide some interim relief
and assistance like we did Rock Road not too long ago. But essentially
we do not seek to make improvements to private roads with public
funding.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there a possibility, going back to
the pathway that's going to be built in two years' time, that there might
be some initial clearing to lay the pathway down to a point that
emergency vehicles could get across that to --
MR. FEDER: I will defer to folks from the emergency vehicle
board, you know, from fire and EMS. But my understanding is that
pathway, as was presented to you exists today, to a degree is being
utilized by folks in that area even though it's on the easement of Big
Cypress Basin. So that pathway is being utilized some today.
And so until we go ahead and build, as I said, the 10- foot
pathway on that easement, that would be accessible obviously to
emergency now, and then when we build, it would be even more
accessible --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. I need you to repeat that.
There is a pathway there now?
MR. FEDER: There's a pathway that's been established by
movements across it on the easement today that does get over between
Amity and Johns Road. It is on the Big Cypress Basin easement. It is
being utilized, as you see some other pathways on the map. It's a little
bit more covered by a tree you view on the aerial, but exists today and,
therefore, what I'm saying is, if you get off on Amity, you still -- an
emergency vehicle still could take that path, and then later when we
Page 90
November 28, 2006
put in the 10- foot pathway for bikes and pedestrians, they would have
even better access to it. Is that the one that's --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What's this we're looking at?
MR. VLIET: This actually follows from Johns Way looking
south at the South Florida Water Management easement.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's the water management
easement right there?
MR. JOHNS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And that looks like it -- like a
limerock road that would be adequate for a fire engine to get down.
I'm lost.
MR. JOHNS: In actuality, that is south -- looking south from
Johns Road, going across the front of my father's property. That
portion of the road has been maintained, but there's no access to it
because of the guardrails being installed to the Johns Road bridge
from 951.
That looks great from this side, but if you go to Amity Road and
look north, there's no way possible. In the last two weeks, two
ambulances could not make it into Johns Road because the road is
impassable.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: This is the road that comes off of
Amy (sic) Road?
MR. JOHNS: Yes. That would be the extension of the pathway
from Amity to Johns Road. That's the north end of it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand. But why are guardrails
on a private road?
MR. JOHNS: No, no, no. I'm talking about on Collier
Boulevard, to the Johns Road bridge.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. The Johns Road bridge is out of
the equations. I mean, that's not safe. We don't want anybody going
across it. I'm talking about getting from Amy (sic) to John (sic) along
the pathway. This isn't the pathway leading from Amy to John?
Page 91
November 28,2006
MR. JOHNS: Yes, it is. That's the north end of it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And this goes all the way through?
MR. JOHNS: That's right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why didn't the fire department use
this to get to your house?
MR. JOHNS: Because on the south end of it, it's impassable. It's
very rough and the trees are very close.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And that's still on water
management property?
MR. JOHNS: Yes, it is.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there some way we can petition
water management to finish that particular pathway for safety reasons
with the idea that whatever resources they use in it is going to be used
for the pathway later?
MR. FEDER: First of all, Commissioner, we will ask them, if
that's the direction from the board. I'm not sure that this is their
roadway or they've done anything to maintain this. But assuming that
it is and that they have and that they wouldn't have a problem with it,
of course we'd encourage them to do such.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I can't see many solutions left
to this unless my fellow commissioners have some ideas.
MR. FEDER: What is being referred to -- I'm just showing you
this picture. This here is, as I said, Johns Road.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah.
MR. FEDER: When you hear the issue of the guardrail, it does
come up on both sides of that wooden structure. While it is something
that still allows it to be passable, that's something that we're looking at
.
In our concerns.
An emergency vehicle could still navigate that, assuming they
could get across that wooden bridge, which I wouldn't recommend.
So that's really not part of what we've been presenting.
The issue is more using Amity, which is posted as private, is a
Page 92
November 28, 2006
box culvert, is a better crossing. And then as you said, they've got the
middle, they've got the back, but they also have today, it appears, most
of -- and I will defer to the gentleman, obviously that lives there and
knows it more acutely, in the front.
But that access in the front I need to again tell you, even if I can
get water management district to assist on the south end, and the south
end being right at Amity, I assume you're saying?
MR. JOHNS: Right.
MR. FEDER: Okay, right up by Amity Road itself, we are, in
the future, putting in a 10- foot pathway there, and that is not going to
be between Amity --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand.
MR. FEDER: -- and Johns Road.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But still, an emergency vehicle could
use it?
MR. FEDER: Emergency vehicles can definitely use it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I'm sure if some resident there
had an absolute emergency and the road wasn't passable, they would
find reason to use it, too, under -- for just cause. I mean I wouldn't --
we can't --
MR. FEDER: Definition of emergency if problematic, so what
I'm telling you is, I would like to not --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Act now and ask questions later.
MR. FEDER: -- put ball asters in it to keep cars off of it because
then that would be defeating its ability to be there for emergency --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
MR. FEDER: -- vehicle access.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's see if we can get off these
District 5 issues and help you out here.
Why don't we ask the district if we can borrow their trees? And
we need a -- we have some dirt, we need to fill in a hole, for
emergency vehicles to use that frontage future pathway.
Page 93
November 28, 2006
MR. FEDER: And that's what I think is being asked, and we will
get with Big Cypress and see that southern end, if there's some
improvements that can be made to make it more available in the
interim until our project comes forward.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I'll second that. You want to
make that in the form of a motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I just think we need to give
direction. Bottom line is, we need to make sure that we have the
means to provide health, safety and welfare to our residents even
though this is private property. At least we're making some
improvements where we're going to be making improvements in the
future. I don't want to keep on improving private roads.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, we can't. I mean--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But this isn't a private road that we're
talking about.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, this is a public easement.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right. That's what was a little bit
different. That's what I was trying to get to.
MR. FEDER: Point of clarification, make sure that I understand
the board's direction.
At first I thought my direction was to go to Big Cypress Basin,
see if they're ready to make the improvements on the south end
needed. What I think I'm hearing is, ask for permission from them and
us make the improvements?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think you had it right the
first time.
MR. FEDER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And then if not, do the second
thing?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right. That would be item number
two. In other words, if --
Page 94
November 28, 2006
MR. FEDER: I think I know the answer to my request number
one then.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, nothing ventured, nothing
gained.
Do we have enough direction -- I don't -- without going to a
formal vote? It's more of an exploratory type?
MR. MUDD: I think Norman's going to get with the South
Florida Water Management District, see if they can maintain the south
part and get rid of some trees so that the folks can get in it, and then
barring that conversation, I believe Norm Feder's going to let me
know ifhe gets told to go pound sand, so to speak. And if that's the
case, then we'll try to figure out what the estimate's going to be, and if
the estimate is more than what I can do by your delegation, we'll come
back to this board and get some money.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pound some limerock, okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Thank you very much.
MR. JOHNS: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if we could do the last petition.
Ms. Showalter has been waiting here --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes.
Item #6C
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY JEANNETTE SHOW ALTER
TO DISCUSS CITIZEN PETITION FOR FORMING MSTU FOR
NAPLES PARK LAKE - DISCUSSED AND TO BE HEARD AT
THE DECEMBER 12~ 2006 BCC MEETING
MR. MUDD: -- and I don't believe hers is much, and then break
for lunch.
Six -- excuse me, 6C. It's a public petition request by Jeannette
Showalter to discuss a citizen petition for forming an MSTU for the
Page 95
November 28, 2006
Naples Park Lake.
MS. SHOWALTER: Thank you very much, County Manager
Mudd. My name is Jeannette Showalter, and I do want to thank the
Transportation Department, Diane Flagg and Pam Lulich, and then the
attorney's office, Scott Teach, and also Commissioner Halas who's
been meeting with me in the intervening couple of weeks.
In mid December, the commissioners will have before it a
proposal to form an MSTU for Naples Park Lake, and it was signed by
17 of the 31 parcel owners.
I will not be able to attend that meeting, and I will probably not
be before the commissioners again. I'm -- it's not a disaffection for the
project, but I'm going back to my profession on a full-time basis, so
this was an opportunity for me to talk to you about it and for me to
answer any questions you would have.
About 18 months ago, we had formed an MSBU. The
commissioners, and then especially Commissioner Fiala, had
challenged me to come back with an ongoing or permanent
maintenance plan for the lake, the two-acre lake.
And during this summer, the attorney's office, transportation and
Tom Mooney worked on language and scope for forming an MSTU.
The language is broad. It references planted growth, trash,
beautification, lake level maintenance of the lake so that we wouldn't
be coming back to you in the future every time there was another little
tweaking of the project or we wanted to do something a little bit
differently.
It was signed by 17 of 31 parcel owners. Commissioner Halas in
the past had asked me many questions about, when we had the MSBU
before, why we didn't get more votes. I want you to know that it was
extremely difficult even to get the 17.
We have, of the 31 parcels, about six properties for sale. Six to
eight are kept in really, I think, deplorable condition, and they don't
spend a dime on their own property. And then we've had three people
Page 96
November 28,2006
who -- in the past who have signed it who didn't sign specifically
because they're so upset about the repeat of trash going back into the
lake again.
When I spoke to you before, I told you about carpets, shopping
carts, just incredible amounts of trash, some dan -- I mean, knives and
broken bottles just pitched in there.
And specifically two people are leaving the lake now because
they do not feel it will be -- the people are willing to maintain it. And
I had even one owner who wasn't angry at me but came out screaming
at me because he's so upset that since the lake is being cleaned up, he
had to take out a full container of trash from his end of the lake.
So I think it's really important that the lake be maintained going
forward. So I -- I have offered my lot for continued access for the lake
for this coming -- hopefully it will be shorter than a year, but it would
be an opportunity also for them to lay electrical lines on my property
if they want to in order for an aeration system to be installed. And I
would ask that you would unanimously approve the MSTU when it
comes before you in December.
And do you have any questions?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That was from before.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We thank you very much for--
MS. SHOWALTER: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- taking the time to come today.
MS. SHOWALTER: Thank you and the county.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With that, we'll break for lunch and
be back --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if I could get some clarification,
just -- and I know we're -- is the county manager with staff going to
draft this MSTU to get it to you for approval on the 12th of
December? Because if you're going to do that, it needs to be done by
1 January, and I just want to make sure we're all lined up to do that.
Page 97
November 28, 2006
MR. TEACH: Mr. Mudd, I believe it's been loaded in Novus, or
will be, with revisions later today.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Great. That's what we needed to
know.
With that, we'll break for lunch. And I'm sorry, Commissioner
Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just one word of caution. In the
past when we have created improvement districts for communities and
we thought we had the majority of the community on board, we found
out we didn't.
We need to make very sure that we have an indication of what
the majority wants to do. And I agree with Jeannette, you know,
something needs to be done. But let's not put ourselves in the position
of mandating something and then find out the majority of the
community didn't have any intention in supporting it.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, you're not -- this is a volunteer
MSTU based on 50 plus one vote.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: And that will be verified by the County Attorney's
Office before you get it. This is not -- this board is not mandating an
MSTU.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand that. But every time
we send out questionnaires about seeking people's approval to do
something, there is always conflict about whether or not we asked the
right question, whether the people actually replied, whether or not we
got a majority. I haven't been -- I haven't seen one of these yet that
didn't get involved in that kind of controversy, so we've got to be very
careful about how we do that.
MR. TEACH: I understand, Commissioner. I have reviewed the
signed petitions that came back, and it has been advertised for the
December 12th meeting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good.
Page 98
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. We're adjourned till
1: 15, seven extra minutes.
(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 COYLE: Okay. County Manager, which is the
next item we're going to, 8A?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I need -- we have a one o'clock
time certain, but we have a request from the petitioner to continue 8E
and 8F. I need a board vote to continue that particular item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is there a motion to approve a
continuance for 8E and 8F?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
MR. MUDD: Any speakers on that one, Sue?
MS. FILSON: 8E and 8F, no, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: They're companion items. So we will
take them, however, in sequence. This will be for 8E.
Any further discussion, commission members?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Hearing none, then all in favor, please
signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
(Commissioner Coletta entered the hearing room.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And so 8E is continued.
Now, do I hear a motion to continue 8F?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
Page 99
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Fiala to continue item 8F.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And no speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then it passes, 3-0.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, that's four.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: 4-0. And now I will turn the gavel back
over to Commissioner Coletta.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Item #8A
RESOLUTION 2006-BAR-02: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND
SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2005-06
ADOPTED BUDGET - ADOPTED W/STIPULA TIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Coletta, that brings us to our next
item, which is 8A. It's a recommendation to adopt a resolution
approving amendments appropriating carry forward transfers and
supplemental revenue to the fiscal year 2005/2006 adopted budget.
Mr. Michael Smykowski, your director of office management
Page 100
November 28, 2006
and budget, will present.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Michael Smykowski, O&B Director.
As Mr. Mudd indicated, this is a public hearing to amend the
budget in accordance with section 129.06 of the Florida Statutes.
Budget amendments that increase a fund, total appropriations of a
fund, over the adopted annual budget may be approved by resolution
of the board following an advertised public hearing.
It is important to note that each of the respective budget
amendments in question today has been reviewed and approved by
this board during the course of fiscal year '06 via a separate executive
summary, again, during the course of the year. This is the summation
of those activities. The statutes do require an advertised public hearing
recognizing -- recognizing the changes to the budget.
But again, as I indicated, each of these respective budget
amendments has been approved by this board via a separate executive
summary during the course of the year, and the action required today
is the board adopting the attached resolution regarding same.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: These are -- these are saying, it's
the present budget that we are working on now that we approved,
these items?
MR. SMYKOWSKI: No, sir. These are for fiscal year
2005/2006. You may amend the prior year budget up to 60 days after
the close of the fiscal year, and that would have captured activity
through September where the board made changes that would have
recognized additional revenue or carry forward. So it's designed to be
all inclusive through that period. Rather than breaking it up into two
advertising periods, we did it in one fell swoop.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- just to refresh my
memory, I did talk to Mr. Feder on one item. Now, the other one is
out of 310, community development capital improvement; purpose to
Page 101
November 28,2006
recognize capital development transfer for building renovations. Is
that the renovations of --
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Of development services building, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's the $2 million one on the
entryway?
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now, does this take a
simple majority or a supermajority?
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Simple majority.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is just a resolution.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Simple majority.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Any other comments from
staff?
MR. SMYKOWSKI: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have one public speaker?
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman, one public speaker. Al
Zichella.
MR. ZICHELLA: Thank you, Commissioners. For the record,
Al Zichella. I'm here today on behalf of CBIA.
I just noticed that item on the agenda and wanted to speak to it.
We know that that money's been already put aside for that. And while
we have no problem with increasing -- anything that increases the
level of service down at CDES, we would like to say, we'd like to
have a voice in how our money gets spent.
This is an enterprise fund. That money is collected from impact
(sic) fees. I had a brief conversation with Joe Schmitt. He assured me
that that will be the case. I'm here to go on the record with a formal
request to you all that we be part of that.
Of course, we prefer human resources to capital improvements,
but we also need, I think, over the long run, to look at these fees.
There is an excessive, I would say, surplus in that fund, and that's
Page 102
November 28, 2006
usually a strong indicator that we're charging some people too much
money. And while -- we don't mind paying for a high level of service.
We did participate recently in a workshop to that effect.
We're happy things are starting to move in the right direction.
We're concerned that it can't be sustained, so we would like you to
look at the human resources there first; capital improvements second.
And, again, we would support anything that helps improve that
level of service. I'm not here to be critical. I just want to be on the
record. So thank you very much for the opportunity to speak today.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Zichella, you meant fees for
permits and not impact fees?
MR. ZICHELLA: Excuse me. Did I say impact? I meant permit
fees.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. ZICHELLA: Thank you for that. That's correct. These are
permit fees. It's in the enterprise fund. Impact fees are not part of the
enterprise fund.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Well, I mean, I didn't
support this before and I can't support it now, I just think that $2
million to improve an entryway is just way too excessive. And that's
fine. That's your opinion.
MR. ZICHELLA: Well, Commissioner, we don't necessarily
disagree with you. We would just like to see the plans first. My
understanding is, there are no plans yet. My understanding -- and
that's why we're here to go on the record to ask for reassurance, if you
will, from this board that we'll be part of that process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine. Once you set it at
two million, that's what the plans are going to show is two million, so
MR. ZICHELLA: Well, hopefully we'd have a strong enough
voice that we would have -- be able to comment on the level that it
Page 103
November 28, 2006
would be, and that's what I'm here to ask for, quite honestly. And I
really thank you for the opportunity -- that's a very astute observation.
You know, we did set aside $2.25 million for this. We think that
sounds excessive too. We'd like to see the plans. I would rather see
work stations filled with human beings than the lobby. I think the
lobby's quite attractive as it is.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think it works.
MR. ZICHELLA: But, again, I'm not here to be adversarial.
Want to be -- we're always looking for a better level of service,
Commissioner. I mean, it's been notoriously poor for a while. It
seems to be moving in the right direction. We're very hopeful they
can sustain that. We're doubtful about that right now, but we're
hopeful. So we would just like to be more actively participating in
how those dollars get spent, particularly the enterprise fund.
Any other questions?
(N 0 response.)
MR. ZICHELLA: Have I made myself clear?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much, Mr. Zichella.
Any other comments from staff?
MR. SMYKOWSKI: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commission wish--
somebody wish to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll make a motion to approve with
the exception of budget amendment number 06-436, which is fund
number 310, community development capital of $2.285 million.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Would you tell us, please,
what the ramifications of that would be if we approve that particular
motion?
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Well, at this point, the board had
previously approved that item. We set up the budget for the building
Page 104
November 28, 2006
renovation. Mr. Schmitt will still have the opportunity come back to
the board with -- as Mr. Zichella noted, they'd be interested in the
drawings and the like.
There is no construction contract awarded at this point. This
established the budget. It set up funding from the community
development fund into a capital projects fund just setting up a budget.
The board will have another bite at the apple, so to speak, and
Mr. Zichella will have ample opportunity to comment because at the
point at which a construction contract were to be brought back to the
board for their consideration, obviously the board at that point could
say yes or no certainly, and obviously we think staff would be
working with the CBIA or the Development Services Advisory
Committee before they'd be bringing forth the construction contract to
the board for their consideration.
So at this point, you simply have a budget but not a construction
contract.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: That would probably be the appropriate
time for the board to say yes or no.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's why we don't have anything to
see at this point in time?
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: In order to be able to go to the next
step, we have to be able to have the budget set aside for it?
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I can understand. For that reason, the
way the motion's presently worded, I wouldn't be able to support it.
Is there any other comments?
Mr. Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: One thing the board doesn't
Page 105
November 28, 2006
approve is designs, whether it be a road or a building or anything else.
You know, a construction contract we do approve. But I think if we
come back with possibly a design engineered to design it would be
more appropriate than allocating such a large amount for this
expenditure, and I think it's -- the motion is very appropriate.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My motion stands.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. That's fine. And then is there
any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Hearing none, the motion was
made by Commissioner Coy Ie, second by Commissioner Henning.
Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
Nay.
3-1. Thank you.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2006-56: AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE ROCK
ROAD IMPROVEMENT MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT;
PROVIDING THE AUTHORITY; PROVIDING FOR THE
CREATION; PROVIDING A PURPOSE AND GOVERNING
BODY; PROVIDING FUNDING AND THE LEVY OF NOT TO
Page 106
November 28, 2006
EXCEED THREE (3) MILS OF AD VALOREM TAXES PER
YEAR; PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF TAXES; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; PROVIDING FOR
DUTIES OF THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY
CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is a recommendation of the board to review and approve an
ordinance creating the Rock Road improvement municipal services
taxing unit; providing the authority; providing the creation; providing
a purpose and governing body; providing funding and the levy of not
to exceed three million -- yeah, excuse me -- to exceed three mills of
ad valorem taxes per year; providing for the collection of taxes; and
providing for an effective date; providing for duties of the county
manager or his designees; providing for conflict and severability;
providing for inclusion in the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances; and providing for effective date.
And Ms. Diane Flagg, your Director of Alternative
Transportation Modes, will present.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ms. Flagg, before we start with the
presentation, I think the commissioners are pretty much understanding
what an MSTU is. I don't think we need to go through all that.
You might just want to touch on the meetings that took place
with Rock Road and the community input to get us to the point we're
at.
MS. FLAGG: The -- due to the health, safety and welfare of the
condition of Rock Road and some adverse weather which created
flooding, the county did some emergency repair to Rock Road just at
the level to provide access to people's homes.
Page 107
November 28, 2006
We subsequently met with the residents in that area, exchanged
emails, answered questions, and we are at this point now where we are
creating, with the board approval, an ordinance for the continued
maintenance of Rock Road to be paid by the property owners that
reside within the MSTU boundary.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And meetings were held with the
residents, and those meetings were very favorably in support of this.
It's been a process that's been going on for five years.
Is there any speakers? Five speakers. If they're without -- if the
board has any other questions, I'm going to call the speakers forward.
Please proceed.
MS. FILSON: First speaker is Dan Wing. He'll be followed by
Virgil Ross.
MR. WING: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
My name is Dan Wing. I am on the Board of Directors of the Rock
Road Property Owners' Association, newly incorporated.
We -- since your great generosity to help us out, we have banded
together and raised over $6,000 in private donations from the residents
to bring in quite a few loads of gravel to cover the rock that you put on
the road for us, and it's now time to get onto the next step, and that is
that MSTU so that all the people that enjoy the lifestyle out there can
pay for the way.
So we have had quite a few meetings, as Diane has said. We are
in quite a bit of agreement. But we also would really like to still
control, in some way, working with the county, of course, and the
roads department, what would happen as far as budgeting millage --
the percentage of millage.
You know, if we -- if we use $6,500 wisely, we're in the process
that where at one and a half mills, we could raise over $30,000 in a
year, and that, I think, for a start, would be a great way to start a
proj ect.
As you well know Rock Road, that's a big step up for all of us,
Page 108
November 28, 2006
and we would appoint a representative to work hand-in-hand with the
county and the roads department and show you where we want our
community to go.
And I thank you for your time.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Virgil Ross. He'll be
followed by David Woodworth.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is either gentleman here at this time?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. Next person?
MS. FILSON: George Webster?
MR. WOODWORTH: I put the wrong number on it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh.
MR. WOODWORTH: I'm on for the next one.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Could you please remark that
for the next issue.
MS. FILSON: Who is that?
MR. WOODWORTH: I already put one in.
MS. FILSON: George Webster?
MR. WEBSTER: I'm in the same predicament. Thought I was
talking about the district for improvement of the Haldeman Creek.
MS. FILSON: Okay. I have it. David (sic) Baird.
MR. BAIRD: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name, for
the record, is Douglas Baird. I reside at 2360 Rock Road. I'm the first
house as you come off of Immokalee Road.
And I've been there since 1983, and there's been a lot of change,
but nothing's happened on Rock Road, and I think it's time.
I agree with my predecessor speaker. I encourage you to adopt
this ordinance for the MS TU.
I have one concern that I'd like to voice in the process of crafting
the ordinance. The levy of -- on -- excuse me -- on property values is
somewhat appropriate unless there are mixed use. And currently,
besides the residential component on Rock Road, there are several
Page 109
November 28, 2006
enterprises operating down the road that generate a little bit more than
the standard traffic.
And, you know, it's my understanding that they are assessed with
an agricultural exemption, and I think that should be taken into
account during the process.
Other than that, I support the MS TU and would encourage you to
pass it.
Any questions?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Not really so much of you. But Ms.
Flagg, is the agriculture exemption exempted from paying a tax on an
MSTU?
MS. FLAGG: Those are all determined by the tax collector and
the tax appraiser. That's not something that we could address through
the MSTU process.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I can barely hear you. Would you
make sure the sound is on over here?
I'm going to -- I'm sorry. I'm going to have to ask you to repeat
that in just a second. Try to now.
MS. FLAGG: Those items are determined through the property
appraiser and the tax collector. There are exemptions for certain types
of property, and that's not something that can be addressed through the
MSTU process.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But the numbers that have been put
together and sent out that we've seen, that represented the actual
people that we could collect taxes from; is that correct?
MS. FLAGG: Correct, correct. What you see in the executive
summary that at -- at three mills, that would generate approximately
$67,000, and that's based upon using the values of the property out
there irrespective of whether they're agriculture or single-family.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And not -- I don't want to
misrepresent anything, but we're talking about Florida state statutes.
We don't have --
Page 110
November 28,2006
MS. FLAGG: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- the ability to be able to amend them
at this point.
MR. BAIRD: I understand.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What we see is what we've got, but I
do think that we do exact taxes from them also. I can't picture where
the agriculture exemption--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's just a lower rate.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's possible it would be a lower rate.
But still, it's funds coming in. It's a way to get to it.
MR. BAIRD: Understood.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is it an equitable way of doing it?
No. But it's the only way to do it. We tried the collection business of
donations, and that failed miserably. So I think this is about the best
way we can go. I'm glad you brought that up.
MR. BAIRD: Thank you for your consideration.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thanks.
MR. BAIRD: Thank you.
MS. FLAGG: And commissioners, I would just add that this is a
maintenance MS TU, so this -- the expectation is not to pave the road
out there. It's just to maintain the road.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Until we change our opinion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right. Any other speakers?
MR. PETTIT: Commissioners, I -- Ms. Ross -- and I suspect it
was her husband also was called out -- had to leave for a doctor's
appointment. They gave me a short letter. What's your pleasure?
Would you like me to read it?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please do. If it's a short letter, by all
means.
MR. PETTIT: It's from Virgil and Ursula Ross from 1255 Shady
Lane.
Page III
^ d>~...._.,_""",. -<I' ...."""'.__..."..
November 28, 2006
Collier County Tax Collector is to whom the letter is addressed.
Dear sir or madam: A letter of complaint. I am writing this letter
of complaint because of the amount of tax you have taxed us. It is
unfair. You are making us sell. You should not be allowed to do this
to people.
Please rethink how you tax us, as we sure did not pay what you
say our land is worth. We really don't want to go. My husband's
social security is 14,000; mine is 12,000. We cannot pay 8,000 in
taxes. This tax is very unfair.
We would like to take you to court with a jury about this. This is
not an appropriate way to handle taxes and make people move. There
must be a tax cap.
Then there's a phone number for her to be -- for her and her
husband to be contacted.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. It's a little bit -- it might be
indirectly related to the subject at hand, but it's a little bit off in outer
space, but we do appreciate the comments. Thank you very much for
reading them.
With that, I'd like to make a -- close the public hearing and make
a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion from
Commissioner Coletta for approval, a second from Commissioner
Coyle.
Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 112
November 28,2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 4-0.
Thank you so much, Ms. Flagg.
Item #8C
AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE HALDEMAN CREEK
MAINTENANCE DREDGING MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING
UNIT; PROVIDING THE AUTHORITY; PROVIDING FOR THE
CREATION; PROVIDING A PURPOSE AND GOVERNING
BODY; PROVIDING FUNDING AND THE LEVY OF NOT TO
EXCEED THREE (3) MILS OF AD VALOREM TAXES PER
YEAR; PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF TAXES;
PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF THE HALDEMAN CREEK
MAINTENANCE DREDGING ADVISORY COMMITTEE,
APPOINTMENT AND COMPOSITION; PROVIDING FOR THE
TERMS OF OFFICE OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE;
PROVIDING FOR THE OFFICERS OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE, QUORUM AND RULES OF THE PROCEDURE;
PROVIDING FOR FUNCTIONS, POWERS AND DUTIES OF
THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR THE DUTIES
OF THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE; PROVIDING
FOR THE REVIEW PROCESS OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES;
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE - MOTION TO
CONTINUE TO THE DECEMBER 12, 2006 BCC MEETING-
APPROVED
Page 113
November 28, 2006
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is 8C. It's a recommendation that the board review and approve
the ordinance creating the Haldeman Creek maintenance dredging
municipal taxing -- municipal service taxing unit, providing the
authority; providing for the creation; providing a purpose and a
governing body, providing funding and the levy of not to exceed three
mills of ad valorem taxes per year; providing for the collection of
taxes; providing for the creation of the Haldeman Creek Maintenance
Dredging Advisory Committee; appointment and composition;
providing for the terms of office of the advisory committee; providing
for the officers of the advisory committee, quorum and rules of
procedure; providing for functions, powers and duties of the advisory
committee, providing for the duties of the county manager and his
designees; providing for the review process of the advisory
committee; providing for conflict and severability; providing for
inclusion in the Collier County code of laws and ordinances;
providing for an effective date.
And, again, Ms. Diane Flagg, your Director of Alternative
Transportation.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before you proceed, Ms. Flagg,
Commissioner Coyle has a comment or question.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Perhaps you can -- you can
include maybe an answer in your presentation. But before the people
in that area begin to consider taking on a special taxing district for the
maintenance of the dredging of the Haldeman Creek and the canals, I
believe that they should have reasonable assurances that the current
dredging project is being properly completed. They shouldn't be left
with problems at the present time with this dredging process.
Now, there have been some photos and complaints submitted
through the County Manager's Office for review. Have you had a
chance to take a look at those and provide us an opinion as to what the
corrective action's going to be?
Page 114
November 28, 2006
MS. FLAGG: I'm going to defer to the Stormwater Department,
as this is their project.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MS. BISHOP: Margaret Bishop of the Stormwater Management
Department.
As you said, the project is not complete, and we have run into
areas, especially on the east side of Bayshore Drive, we've run into
cap rock and some other issues.
So our current completion date will be April 1 st. So we are in the
process of having those areas resurveyed because the project is not
complete, and we haven't certified any of the work as completed yet.
So we are still in the process.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So you're going to
re-examine that part of the project east of the bridge --
MS. BISHOP: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- of Bayshore?
MS. BISHOP: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Because if you -- have you seen the
photos?
MS. BISHOP: Oh, yeah. No, I've been out there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So you know that there
appear to be a number of ridges and piles of spoil that really have
nothing to do with the cap rock, but -- so that's going to be taken care
of?
MS. BISHOP: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right. Then that answers
my question.
When this dredging project is completed, the residents will not be
left with those kinds of problems; is that a fair assessment?
MS. BISHOP: Correct. And again, we've had other complaints.
We can only work within the scope of services that we've hired the
contractor to do. Our canals are going to be -- to have a 20- foot
Page 115
November 28, 2006
bottom width. I know some of the property owners want that to be
extended. But our permits and our scope only entails a certain
footprint.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand that. But within --
within the footprint of the project approval, it's going to be done --
MS. BISHOP: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- properly?
MS. BISHOP: Yes, and it will not be accepted until everything
is complete.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MS. FLAGG: Commissioners, this item is to create an ordinance
to provide for maintenance dredging. It also established an advisory
committee of people within the MSTU boundary. The parcels that
have been identified for inclusion in the MSTU boundary are those
that front the waterfront so have a direct benefit to the water.
And it's important to remember that, let's say the project for some
reason goes beyond what the expectation is, there's actually no tax
incurred until there's a budget created. So the budget would be created
April/May of 2007, but the project, if it's still underway or is expected
to continue underway, then, again, there's no tax assessed until there's
an actual budget created and presented, which would be done so by
the advisory committee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ms. Flagg, do you believe this
dredge is going to -- or this maintenance is going to have to be on an
annual basis?
MS. FLAGG: Again, I'll defer to stormwater on that.
MS. BISHOP: Typically in waterfront property like this,
maintenance usually occurs, depending on the siltation, but typically
between 10 and 15 years. This project hasn't been dredged since
Page 116
November 28, 2006
1960s.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I have a question for Ms.
Flagg then. Ten to 15 years, that's -- what is that? Ten years would
be $2.7 million, based upon what we know today.
MS. FLAGG: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the dredge that took place
today is $2 million, approximately. Are you figuring there's going to
be an escalating cost?
MS. FLAGG: What the -- when the -- what the ordinance does is
it establishes a millage rate of not to exceed. We have set budgets for
a half a mill, a tenth of a mill, and then that's all they're assessed for.
So, again, the advisory committee takes a look at the -- the
advisory committee that would be appointed as a result of the creation
of this MSTU would take a look at the completion of project, maybe
do some project calculations in conjunction with county staff,
determine how much money they would need, and then we'd back into
what the millage rate would be at that point.
But, again, it's not -- we have one MSTU for instance, this year
we didn't create a budget for because they didn't need any additional
money. So the ordinance is in place, the mechanism to assess the
millage is there, but they just didn't -- they chose not to use that
mechanism this year.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Are there any speakers?
MS. FILSON: Eight.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Once again, the speakers are
limited to three minutes. If you have -- a speaker preceding you has
raised all the issues that you wish to raise, it would be appreciated if
you waive. If you have something new to add, we'd love to hear it
from you.
Please call the first speaker. Oh, Commissioner Henning, I'm
sorry. Did you have something else to add or is that your light from
Page 11 7
November 28, 2006
before?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's from before, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you.
Please call the first speaker.
MS. FILSON: First speaker is Sharon King. She'll be followed
by John Hall.
MS. KING: Good afternoon. Sharon King. I reside on Captains
Cove, 3307.
Listening to the presentation by the county employees this
morning, I'd like to address two points. First of all, Commissioner
Coyle, thank you for bringing up the problems that we're currently
having with our dredging program.
I have also submitted pictures to Margaret Bishop, and I am
concerned, very concerned, with the current conditions, that they're
not acceptable. I also take issue with the 20- foot swath that they've
made down the middle of a 75-foot canal. It's pretty much not going
to work.
And my other point with that was the drainage. I'm going to
address the other point -- and I just lost my train of thought was -- I've
heard that they have the MSTU boundaries in place, which include the
frontage property on the river and the canals.
What I'm concerned with is I live right there on the point where
Wal-Mart, Lakewood, Glades, the county courthouse complex, Towne
Centre, Courthouse Shadows, all those other developments have
drainage tubes, pipes, that run into the Haldeman right there at the
mouth of the Haldeman.
And in an MSTU, shouldn't those properties also be responsible
for paying into the MS TU that would create -- that would -- the
maintenance that would alleviate the problem in the river?
I think if you're going to create an MSTU, it should include
everyone that's currently using that river for a dumping ground and the
cleaning. And I've got pictures that support when it rains, you can --
Page 118
November 28, 2006
the river itself is clear. The bottom is mucky. But you can actually
see the clouds of sediment and trash coming down these drain pipes
that include all these developments. So I think an effective MSTU
should include all those benefiting from the drainage on the
Haldeman, and I don't know that that's true at this point.
Also with regard to the dredging, I've heard the term cap rock
used, that they dredged the cap rock. That's not true. I know other
presenters are going to show that we've still got two foot of sludge on
top that have cap rock. Cap rock has not been obtained on the
dredging.
Then again, I'm going to -- I brought in a copy -- I'm sorry I
didn't get this copied for everyone -- but a copy of my abstract. In my
abstract that concerns -- I live on a canal and a river, and on the part of
the river where my property gave drainage easement to the State of
Florida when 41 was constructed in 1953.
And the part that I'd like to bring to your attention is the fact that
it's a 75-foot canal on each side of a drainage ditch center. And then it
says that, together with immunity into ( sic) the second party, which is
its successors or its assigns, from all claims for damages arising from
or going out of such construction and/or maintenance to the land.
So that was -- with regard to the river property, the state was
responsible for maintaining that. In 53 years, it has not been dredged,
since this easement was in effect.
And if I'm going to go on quickly, there was a canal left out of
the MSTU. The canal that resides east of Captains Cove and west of
Cherokee, all the finger canals off the Haldeman were included in the
dredging program except that canal.
I've been told that that canal is supposed to be kept up by the
county. It has not happened. I've spent a fortune of money just trying
to clean up my section of the canal so that it drains.
All the stormwater work that they've done further south -- or
further south on Bayshore where they cleaned up that lake to try and
Page 119
November 28, 2006
present, that all comes down that canal, and that canal was left out. I
don't know why. It doesn't make any sense to me.
People along there have had docks there for 50 years. It's in
terrible shape now. It should be included. And I think the MSTU
boundaries need to be rethought and readdressed to include all those
who benefit from the river and all property owners.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is John Hall. He'll be followed
by David Jackson.
MR. HALL: Commissioners, public. Fred, you sort of stole my
thunder, so I guess I can sit down. There is a correctioh, though, that I
believe I'm right on, and that was that the Corps of Engineers dredged
this river in 1949, and they straightened it out because they were going
to -- had an idea that they were going to make a canal between the east
coast and the west coast.
So when I went to my property there, I had to get Corps of
Engineers permits in order to do my riprap wall. Now, that was 57
years ago, and I've never seen a dredge in that canal. And, of course, I
have now, and I think it's the same dredge.
So I loved your idea about having this project off the books,
everybody signing off on it, all those permits, all the entities, you
know, the Corps of Engineers, everybody approving this thing, and
then, and only then, can we worry about the maintenance of what we
got. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: David Jackson. He'll be followed by Robert
Smith.
MR. JACKSON: Good afternoon. David Jackson,
Bayshore/Gateway Redevelopment Agency.
I'm here to speak to let you know that the advisory board is very
supportive of the MSTU, but also as a staff, and in working mostly
with the people in the area of the Bayshore CRA area, which
Page 120
November 28, 2006
encompasses almost all of Haldeman Creek and most all the finger
canals, there's been a lot of interest by the people that something be
for done for the future.
One of the things that I am concerned about and what I have been
hearing about is that though the staff has done a good job of doing
what they were told to do, I think that the ordinance needs to be
focused a little wider, a little bit more scope. And the reason I think
so is because what you are doing is you are treating the symptom and
you're not curing the cause.
You're going to wait 10 years for all of this silt to re-gather and
then go back and redo the process we're just doing at a greater cost
and a lot more teeth gnashing by the people that are here.
The MSTU should have an ordinance written, and I feel -- this is
just my personal opinion -- that it should target the sources that create
the silt, and each year they budget enough money to fix those sources
that create the silt. And if they do that every year a little at a time,
you'll end up pushing the dredge requirement at 10 to 15 years, further
back into the future.
Things like stormwater conveyances that are in the right-of-way
system, spillways, collector pipes, drains, flow ditches all within the
area, a lot of people will talk about outside the CRA. Within that,
there are some sources also that are from failing seawalls, residential
property and commercial property.
Unprotected shoreline with seawalls and those people that don't
have riprap. They're contributing to silt. So why don't we fix what is
ailing us. Instead of waiting for it, let's be proactive.
Write the ordinance such that the advisory group can advise you
as a Board of County Commissioners how to spend the money in any
way that you see feasible to fix the problems, and every year go after a
project, go after a spillway, go after a ditch, so after failing seawalls,
go after those things that are contributing to it, and you'll push us out.
Maybe you won't ever have to dredge. Maybe it will be a
Page 121
November 28, 2006
25-year project from now, and maybe it will be at less cost because
there will be less to do. I'm just asking for them to consider that, to
think about that.
I also think that if you're going to do the ordinance -- and I've
talked with staff. They feel that there's an enforcement issue in here.
Well, the creek and the canals didn't get like they were unless the
enforcement issues weren't being enforced.
To consider looking at it that, you know, an ounce of prevention
will be a pound of cure, and instead creating the ordinance and passing
it today, there's no rush. Take a little bit of time to go back and reflect
and look at it, reconsider, rethink it, talk with some of people in the
community, those people that would be paying the tax and see where
they sit, and reconsider that part of it there and see if there's maybe
something else that can be done. And instead of writing the ordinance
and then going back and rewriting it and amending it, write it correctly
the first time. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Robert Smith. He'll be
followed by Roy Wilson.
MR. SMITH: Good afternoon, Commissioner Coletta and --
Chairman Coletta and Commissioners. My name is Robert Smith, and
I reside at 3312 Collee Court, which is inside the boundaries of the
proposed MS TU. I'm a little nervous, so I'll do my best.
I'll start by saying that we live in a -- I'll start with a comment
and then ask a question.
We live in a fast-paced time, and everything seems to move
quickly. The streets are clogged with people rushing to go get
someplace and the stores are packed with people who are doing their
last-minute shopping, which is 30 days from now, and even sometimes
the government can move at a rapid pace.
I have in my hand the notice of this public hearing from the Clerk
of Circuit Courts, Dwight Brock, that is dated November 13th, was the
day it was prepared. I also have the envelope which it was mailed in
Page 122
November 28, 2006
postmarked the 14th of November, and my date of receipt as the 16th
of November.
But in his notice to me it states, and I quote, persons wishing to
have written or graphic materials included in the board's agenda
packet must submit said materials a minimum of three weeks prior to
the respective public hearing.
In effect, the time period for submitting information to you folks
had elapsed before the notice to us was prepared. And so I question if
you are able, because of -- some people were concerned that they
couldn't submit information.
I'm wondering if you have the information that is necessary to act
on this matter today. And that is the question I ask is, is there a
technical point that would cause this hearing to be delayed until the
people can respond?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can I address it?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, first of all, there is
no deadline for you to be able to communicate with the county
commissioners or with staff. That deadline specifically said that if
you wanted it included in the --
MR. SMITH: Packet.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- packet.
MR. SMITH: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We get many things that are never
ever included in the packet. We're constantly getting telephone calls,
emails. I have letters from a number of the people out there.
Photographs of the problems.
MR. SMITH: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have seen the problems myself.
And the answer to your question is, I think those of us who are
involved in making this decision are well aware of --
MR. SMITH: Okay.
Page 123
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- of the issue.
MR. SMITH: Yes, I just want--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we've been talking about this
for probably five or six or seven years, we've been working on this
dredging process, and it's finally gotten started, many years too late.
MR. SMITH: I can appreciate your response.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we're very familiar with the
process.
MR. SMITH: Okay. Then I wish to state my position as to
opposing the establishment of this MSTU until such time as the
problems are resolved with this dredging project.
And I think -- my reasons are as follows: This is a mandated
MSTU and not a voluntary MSTU, and based on that, it -- the
dredging project has not been completed; the project manager has
halted work on the project in our area; the County Attorney's Office is
engaged in an analysis of the problems that we're experiencing at that
point; and more dredging may be required.
So based on those things -- I would ask that my time be extended.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Another minute, sir. And I'm afraid
that we'll make this one exception, but please be brief.
MR. SMITH: I ask that you defer action on the MSTU today,
not that you throw it out, but delay action.
And the project in our area east of the Bayshore bridge
encompassed building -- or dredging a 20- foot channel in this
right-of-way of the canal, which was approximately 100 foot wide in
our area. And several hours a day now the water is funneled down
this ditch, and our area has wound up dry before we had a sheet flow
of water across the full width of the canal.
The third point I'd like to make is that I believe a speaker before
me mentioned that the boundaries of the MS TU should be expanded
because the Haldeman Creek watershed area covers several square
miles from Rattlesnake Hammock Road to Davis Boulevard to
Page 124
November 28, 2006
Thomasson Drive to the bay, and only those in that general area of the
creek are being asked to pay that three mills -- up to three mills in this
proj ect.
And I think areas such as Trail Acres, Sabal Shores, Riveria
Colony, Lakewood, Kings Lake, are bene -- would all benefit from
this project.
And the third point is, no remedial action has been taken in this
project to correct the drainage problems that exist in that area.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. SMITH: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Roy Wilson.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would just like to clarify
something so that there's no misunderstanding. The creation of the
MSTU does not create a taxing obligation on the residents. So that you
don't understand (sic), any decision we make today, even if we
approved the MSTU, does not require that you pay any increased
taxes.
That is only determined after people who represent you are
selected to participate on a board that then makes recommendations
that we would then consider with respect to taxation. We're only
saying that we'll create the mechanism. If you want to take advantage
of it sometime in the future, then you can do that. But if you don't
have the mechanism to do this, then you can't take advantage of it, you
can't create an MSTU, you can't tax to improve conditions that affect
your own property.
So this really is a proposal to give you a tool which you may
choose to use or not. It does not obligate you to clean up any failures
of the current dredging contract. In fact, I would agitate to make sure
that we clearly state that, that this is going to be -- this contract is
going to be done properly and completely before we ever start
Page 125
November 28, 2006
approving a taxing rate for the people in the MSTU.
But don't interpret this as something that we're trying to impose
upon you, because we're not. We're not going to decide what the
taxing rate is going to be. You're going to decide that through your
advisory board. And if you choose to take advantage of it, it's there
for you to do that.
And with those explanatory remarks, I'm sorry to delay you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. I just want to add, just to make it
even in simpler terms, you're doing nothing but creating the shell that
you have to fill the details in later. If you miss the date, the end of the
last meeting in December, you have another whole year before you
become eligible to even be considered for it. So this just marks the
place in time where we can go forward with it.
Please continue.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Roy Wilson. He'll be
followed by David Woodworth.
MR. WILSON: Roy Wilson, 336 Pier C.
First of all, I'd comment that I do believe there's a need to provide
for ongoing maintenance. I think the taxing unit's the right way to go.
I think the real question that I would bring towards the board, and I
think several speakers have spoken on it, is the timing right to pass it
today with serious questions about the definition of the unit as far as
who's included in it. I won't repeat all that stuff, but 99 percent of
what was said, I would have said.
There doesn't seem to be an urgency. I mean, based on the
testimony or comments today, it appears that money needs to be raised
for a project that's going to be done eight to 10 years from now. So
doing it right, I don't think, will cause a big problem on a deadline.
There's a lot of increased development along Haldeman Creek, as
well as the outlying areas that are funneling stormwater in, both
commercial and residential, bringing more use to it.
The -- there's been so much said, and I'm trying to honor your
Page 126
November 28, 2006
comment about not repeating, but I don't want to do it in such a way
that I don't bring importance to it, so just take that as it is.
As far as today's project -- and I brought this up at a meeting
earlier, actually in the spring -- as related to the Haldeman Creek area,
there, not in the project, is signage, speed limit signage, as well as
channel signage that I think needs to be taken care of, as well as
sheriff patrol.
We hardly ever see a sheriff boat up that creek unless it's going
for maintenance. I don't have the exact details, but over a holiday
weekend where you'd think everybody would be on duty, there was a
report about an incident on the creek, and it was over three hours
before a boat did arrive, and it was well past the situation.
This has been brought up in emails for me to the sheriff last year,
and I don't see anything improving on that.
But with that, I'd say ongoing maintenance, the formation of a
taxing unit needs to be done. I think it's timing, and I'd rather see us
get the definitions right before we pass the ordinance. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is David Woodworth. He'll be
followed by George Webster.
MR. WOODWORTH: Good day. My name is David
Woodworth. I live at 2735 Lakeview Drive. I'm against this whole
thing.
I've lived on Lakeview Drive for 25 years. I -- you know, before I
got there, I saw what I had. I didn't complain, I just did what -- you
know, I bought boats that could go in and out without too much
trouble.
You know, if something has to be done in the future, I think it
should not be ad valorem because the ad valorem situation is way out
of line. You know, it's -- well, like the marina that you're going to be
talking about, it was sold for $5 million. It's on the tax rolls right now
at 1.5.
The property, the lot assessment, the ground, not the
Page 127
November 28,2006
improvements, are on the tax rolls for $1.3 million. There are eight
lots there, and I figure that that would be -- the value of each lot is
only 173-. Everyone else, their lot is valued at close to $400,000 a lot
in where I am. There's something wrong.
If you assess -- and the marina has 150 boats, and they will have
150 boats from now on. The improvements on that particular property
are on the tax rolls for $211,000. Most of the houses in my
neighborhood are on the tax rolls for $211,000. Something's wrong.
The only fair way would be to go -- have not ad valorem tax but
something based on footage along the waterway or the use, like the
marina, something that puts in 150 boats every month. You know,
that's the way to go. And I'm waiting --I'm willing to wait another 25
years before it gets dredged again, okay?
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is George Webster.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me -- let me also add a point of
clarification.
That is not the way to go. It's -- if you want to argue about the
valuations and tax rates, you need to talk with the tax -- property
appraiser and the tax collector. We don't have anything to do about
that.
But what's going to happen if you do it on frontage with the
marina, they don't have a lot of frontage. So when it gets appraised at
eight or nine million dollars when it's completed, you're not going to
get any money from them.
MR. WOODWORTH: You're not getting any anyway because
they're taxed --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, the tax will increase.
MR. WOODWORTH: They paid $5 million --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
MR. WOODWORTH: -- and it's on the tax rolls -- the whole
thing is 1. 5.
Page 128
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, and they're reassessed every
year.
MR. WOODWORTH: This is the year. 2005 was the year that
the tax appraiser's set it, his appraisal.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Look, if the marina is approved and
it is built --
MR. WOODWORTH: Why is -- why is -- all the lots around me
are $400,000 and the ones down at the marina are only 170?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The tax assessor will be happy to
explain that to you, but your concept --
MR. WOODWORTH: I don't think he can explain it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I bet he can, because he has to do it
in accordance with state law. This is not a hit and miss situation.
MR. WOODWORTH: Well, there's something wrong.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, talk with the tax appraiser.
He'll explain it to you.
But it is dead wrong to suggest that you try to do it on the basis
of frontage because you get really burned when you do that.
Okay. I'm sorry, sir, go ahead.
MR. WEBSTER: I, too, am against the idea of establishing a tax
district. I think it's basically premature. We -- the community has
waited for what, 30 years for the dredging to happen. The dredging is
ongoing now, and already somebody wants to make a tax district to
maintain what they've just spent money on.
My question would be, how much does three mills raise based on
the assessed value within the district? It would probably astound you
for the amount of money that would be available if you went to the
extreme of three mills, so --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why don't you get that answer. Just
take one second, sir.
Ms. Flagg?
MS. FLAGG: $272,704.
Page 129
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 272,000?
MS. FLAGG: $704.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And what does that buy by today's
dollars for what we're looking for?
MS. FLAGG: Well, I think the gist of this whole situation is that
to -- in order to accomplish maintenance out into the future, is if you
do a minimal millage tax now and let it accumulate over the years. By
the time it is to dredge, you'll have the funding necessary rather than
taking a significant hit in one or two years.
MR. WEBSTER: Well, my little house on Lakeview Drive is
assessed at over $500,000. It doubled -- my taxes are now $8,000 as
opposed to 3,000 a year ago.
My payment into this taxing district at three mills would be
something like 100 and -- $1,500 a year. And if the total is only
$100,000, the inequity of my 150 -- or $1,500 tax is -- ought to be
plainly apparent.
If the total three mills of that taxing district only raises $100,000
and I'm paying $1,500 of it, I'm 1 percent of the obligation -- of a tax
obligation into this taxing district.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: She didn't say $100,000.
MR. WEBSTER: What did she say?
MS. FLAGG: $272,704.
MR. WEBSTER: Oh, all right. Well, that makes me five -- half
a percent.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Less than that.
MR. WEBSTER: Yeah. It still seems extreme when you
imagine all the users of that whole creek.
I also question the way of applying the tax liability where you
apply it -- ad valorem to the tax assessment of a private home, for
instance, and then ignore the fact that there are several marinas in this
tax district who are going to impose hundreds of users from their boat
clients.
Page 130
November 28, 2006
Another point I'd like to make -- and the idea of having a tax
district to specifically raise money for maintaining this canal, this is
more like a county road. There are roads in the county that I will
never drive on, that you may never drive on unless you're on county
business and yet it's all lumped into one maintenance as far as
supplying the annual cost of maintaining the road.
My point is that the Haldeman Creek district really has a lot more
to do with the total county usage scope than is being imagined just
because we've got some dredging done.
So I guess that -- suffice it to say, I'm against establishing the tax
district now. Having -- anticipating that it may be needed in the future,
why not wait until the future when the use -- when the need is more
readily apparent?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
MR. WEBSTER: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Next speaker?
MS. FILSON: This gentleman would like to speak on this issue
as well.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we do have a policy which is--
I'll be honest with you. I feel a little uncomfortable with the time. If
you came all the way out to speak --
MR. SULLIVAN: It will only take me two seconds. No. I came
here to talk about this and Treviso Bay, but I was waiting for the
elevator and it was a long one.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand, sir. I'll tell you what, go
ahead. We appreciate you being here.
MR. SULLIVAN: And I may be repeating someone. My name
is Richard Sullivan. I live on Riverview Drive, and I'm thrilled that
you've dredged and that we've worked on that.
And I've spoken to some people in the county about this. The
silting that has happened in this neighborhood doesn't come from this
neighborhood all by itself. It came from Davis Boulevard and
Page 131
November 28, 2006
Lakewood and then from Winter Park and all of the areas that have
been built which tend to drain into the basin at Haldeman Creek.
Granted, most of that silting took place when those areas were
being built prior to the grass being grown, but all of those water --
well, the ponds and all the other drainage area is draining underneath
Wal-Mart and going into the basin.
Now, it would only seem sensible that since that is -- Haldeman
Creek has become a drainage area for those neighborhoods, that they
are benefiting from Haldeman Creek, and if they are to benefit, then
they should pay for the upkeep of the dredging that they're causing to
be -- you know, because of their silting.
So, perhaps there's a formula where half a mill, a quarter mill
from those neighborhood districts could be applied to those people
who are connected to this drainage ditch, because that's what it has
become.
A smaller assessment to them would unburden the homeowners
in this neighborhood who do benefit from having waterfront property,
but they're also being burdened with the cleanup from somebody else's
mess.
And I'm also afraid what we've done is we've pacified this
neighborhood by dredging and saying we're paying for it, but actually
what we're doing is starting to pay it back by putting an ad valorem
tax on it.
I know that's not exactly what it is, but you know, we've just paid
for it, now you want your money back for the future.
I would like to see some discussion about, or facts about how
much and who drains their drainage which takes their silt into that
basin, because it's a significant number of people who benefit. So if
they're benefiting, perhaps someone could say, let's subtract some of
the financial burden in the future from these homeowners, apply it to
the people who also benefit somehow, some sort of formula so that it
spreads it out so that everyone can benefit and afford it. Thank you.
Page 132
November 28,2006
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Start off with Commissioner
Fiala, then Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I have a couple things.
Probably the first one to Margaret, and that is, as it was stated in one
of the presentations here, the state, when this was dug, originally in --
they said in the '50s or something, as stated, said that they would --
they would be required to then maintain it, the state would be required
to then maintain it. And apparently they have never done that. Are
they contributing to now the removal of all this silt?
MS. BISHOP: I think you're referring to a drainage easement
that was granted.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I think they were referring to
keeping canals clean; is that correct? Is that what your paper says?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what I thought. Yes, I think
I've seen that before. Actually it was brought up a number of years
ago when they first started talking about this, and one of the people at
that particular meeting produced a paper that said it very clearly that
the state -- nothing to do with the county at all -- the state would
maintain that canal from here on in.
And so if they haven't, then maybe there's a way that we could go
and get some of this money because we shouldn't be paying for
something the state was supposed to be doing and never has. That was
my first question, and I'd love to have you look into it.
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, for the record, Norman Feder,
Transportation Administrator.
I need to pull you back to when we did a stormwater policy, this
board established policy on stormwater issues. We identified -- and I
may not be correct on this -- but it was about seven tidal influenced
areas that we had heard from people repeatedly that they couldn't get
Page 133
November 28, 2006
anyone to respond.
Basically we had information on some where the state should
have been responsible yet was not doing and was not being
responsive. Others felt that Big Cypress Basin, because of the nature
of the area, should be doing it. And Big Cypress Basin said, well, I
think, county, some of your development has put silt in, and basically
nobody was getting anything done on these areas.
What this board decided was on those seven tidal areas which
aren't part of, specifically, the county storm water system, but
nonetheless, are an outfall, that we would go in one time. We'd
encourage Big Cypress Basin to assist us as they could and would, but
that we'd go in one time, clean everything up as best we can -- and I
need to go back to that statement because we had a scope and we're
working on that scope. But I mean, there's always the ability to add,
and before I know it, I'm going to be doing a whole system all the way
up right to the county line.
But nonetheless, we had a scope to go in, do that, and then it was
up to the abutting property owners to maintain, and that's why the
MSTU is before you today.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I know what went on there.
What I'm saying is, I think that there are some extra dollars that should
be obtained to help in this process instead of just us paying for it. If
there are dollars there that should have been dedicated toward this,
never have been, I would say that you should go out and see if you
can't get those dollars. That was my first point.
MR. FEDER: We'll pursue that or any grants, yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. I mean, why should -- why
should we not if they should be available or might be available, okay?
The second thing is, did we -- and this one is to Diane. Diane,
did we talk with any of the communities before putting these ideas
together, you know, the parameters for the MSTU and so forth?
MS. FLAGG: Stormwater met with various folks. I'll defer to
Page 134
November 28, 2006
them again.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Can you tell me who, just
approximately, who you met with as you're putting this together?
Because they brought up many, many good points. For instance,
maybe there should be more people included in this because there are
more people contributing to the problem.
MS. BISHOP: In May of2006, the Haldeman Creek dredging
was approved by the board, and in the executive summary it was
agreed that we would form a mandatory MSTU at that board meeting
so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So have you talked with anybody in
the neighborhoods?
MS. BISHOP: I didn't have a public meeting with the people
about forming an MSTU. My conversations have been with the
dredging project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So I would like to make a
suggestion. First of all, I don't think we're ready to form this MSTU
quite yet, because I think we ought to be talking to them, and maybe
we ought to include more people.
I think David had a -- David Jackson had a really good
suggestion that maybe we ought to be attacking some of the reasons
it's silting over in the first place as we get some of this money in and
repair those things so maybe it will last longer, and we won't have to
dredge as regularly. But I think all these things ought to be -- ought to
be discussed, and who all should actually be in this thing.
Let's see. Okay. I think that's everything other than, they had
also mentioned about the 20- foot dredge in the middle with the
75-foot side. I don't know anything about dredging and I don't know
anything about middles and sides, but that might -- as well as missing
completely one of the finger canals, maybe that would be something
you should be talking to the community about as well, and then come
back to us.
Page 135
November 28, 2006
MS. BISHOP: Well, we have had several meetings, like you
said. This project has been ongoing for years, and there were several
public meetings about this. And again --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I mean, I'm talking about forming an
MSTU.
MS. BISHOP: Right. And the foot line -- or the footprint of the
project was based on water quality also. It wasn't strictly a navigation
project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Have you talked to the community
about forming an MSTU?
MS. BISHOP: Well, that's what --
MR. MUDD: No, ma'am. I don't think we have.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I didn't think so either. I know
you've had plenty of meetings, because I've attended them.
MR. MUDD: I think the stormwater -- I think the stormwater
ordinance -- when you put up the utility, one of the things was -- this
Haldeman Creek issue has been going on for 10 years. First thing that
I learned about when I was in public utilities and I became the deputy
was a series of emails from boaters in Haldeman Creek that could no
longer get out because the channel had been silted in, and especially at
low tide.
There is no program that we have in Collier County, okay,
whereby we dredge canals for boaters. Doesn't happen. That's -- if
you boat, you work your own canal in order to get out to where you
want to get out to go fish or cruise around or whatever you want to do.
There is no -- there is no special fund that does that. The -- over
a series of years, we heard from the boaters that it was a silting issue,
that it's silted in because of stormwater from upstream when things
were being developed.
So what we basically did is, we worked with the South Florida
Water Management District in order to work a 50/50 on this particular
project. They've contributed about a million dollars. We've contributed
Page 136
November 28, 2006
about a million dollars. The City of Naples has contributed $80,000.
Mr. Antaramian has contributed his property, put the dredge
material on, plus another $40,000 to dredge the navigational side
down by the City of Naples side of the house to make up for that 120
in order to get there. That's where those dollars came from, and the
board -- I relayed that information to you at a prior meeting.
Once that no man's land, so to speak, i.e., Haldeman Creek or
Henderson Creek or the Cocohatchee issue, once those get dredged,
the agreement with the Board of County Commissioners with South
Florida would be, there would be a mandatory MSTU that was formed
for those boaters that wanted to use that particular canal or whatever in
order to access the Gulf.
Because I will tell you from a stormwater side of the house,
Hender -- or Haldeman Creek was not an issue as far as getting
stormwater out. Now, there's some areas outside of that immediate
basin that have problems, i.e., the Triangle and things like that and
some --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Let me back you up just a
minute. For those boaters that use the canal, that's what you just said,
right?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I own a little house over
there on Shore View. It has two docks. We don't have any boats.
They're just docks. But I'm part of that. I'm right on the canal. I don't
have any boaters, but I think I should be paying my part.
Not only that, but I live in Lakewood, and a few of the people
mentioned that. And if we are a contributor to that, maybe by
spreading it out really thin and every household pay $5 a year or -- I
mean, when you get a few thousand households in there or, you know,
10,000 or something, but I think it should be discussed a little bit
more.
Maybe I'm dead wrong, but I think that you're absolutely right.
Page 137
November 28, 2006
We voted on this. We knew it was a thing that needed to be done. We
voted on then establishing an MSTU. I just think that people should
be involved in establishing the MSTU and see what the parameters
should be.
I'm just -- but that's just my opinion. I'm not even the
commissioner there. It's Mr. Coyle. And so I would bow to his
expertise, but I'm just laying my two cents.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning is next. I'm
sorry. I didn't mean to cut you short.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's all right. I probably said
more than--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I was afraid this was going to
happen. I think, you know, we had this discussion about creating the
MSTU first before we do the dredge. Here we are today. We're using
general fund monies to do this.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we ought to get state money.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, right, okay. And here we
are.
I will not, I will not, vote for another improvement project based
upon a forced MSTU, never again, because it just doesn't make sense
to sit up here and fight it after the fact.
But let's talk about upstream. And I need to know a little bit
about something that I don't have a background in, and that's water
quality .
MS. BISHOP: Okay. Can I interject here for one moment?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure.
MS. BISHOP: Since the area hasn't been dredged since the '60s,
the majority of the silt buildup, or actually a lot of the silt buildup, has
occurred or has already occurred. That happened when the areas to
the north had been developed, and that's when the silt gets into the
water. So this would really be a maintenance from that development.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, because we're using
Page 138
November 28, 2006
general fund money to do so.
MS. BISHOP: Exactly. So from this point on, we shouldn't have
the huge burden and the siltation that you have today.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What -- tell me about upstream
and what kind of controls that we have for water.
MS. BISHOP: Well, what everybody's referring to is the weir
control structure right there near Wal-Mart.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MS. BISHOP: So that's really the major contributor there. But
that isn't a lot of silt that goes over due to construction. That's really a
water quality flow control structure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Do you know the design
of that? And if you don't I'm not going to ask you any further
questions about that.
MS. BISHOP: Okay. I don't have the exact elevations.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And that's my concern.
If Commissioner Fiala wants to pay for it and her neighbors pay for it,
that's fine, but I think there are things in place to take care of that. I
mean, I don't know when that structure was put in.
Does anybody know? It's been there for quite a while.
MS. BISHOP: It is, yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Way before Wal-Mart.
MS. BISHOP: Right.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERS: Late '50s, '59.
MS. BISHOP: I would say that's correct, '50s.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fifty-nine, in the '50s? Okay.
Well, here we are.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I wasn't against an MSTU, in
case I sounded like I was. I sure wasn't.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, what I heard was, you
have a lot of concerns about we should have involved the people at the
time.
Page 139
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I agree with that, and I
brought that up, okay? It didn't happen, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I know. I just think it should.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it should have been voiced
at that time, and it was voiced, but --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think you had agreement on all
parts there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we didn't do it,
Commissioner, we went ahead and did the dredge without the input.
Now there's concerns.
I did look at one of -- the assessed valuation of one of the
speakers. I should be so blessed to have that, and maybe we're a little
bit confused between assessed values and what the market value is, I
don't know, because people move and come up to a market value rate
versus people that live there for long periods of times. I wish I had
your tax bill. I went ahead and expanded my family and moved so --
and I'm not on the water.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, let's--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I can't be blamed for any of
the water qualities out there either.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, let's go to Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me -- let me go back and
review some of the issues for the benefit of the audience and some of
the commissioners.
It's not really true to say that we didn't ask the people. The
people have been asked several times over the years. As a matter of
fact, in the beginning the only way this dredging was ever going to get
done was if you agreed to pay for it out of property taxes.
And there was a questionnaire circulated to the residents, and at
one time there was a majority of the residents who said, yes, we'll be
willing to pay into that to get all the canals dredged.
Page 140
November 28,2006
Then we got up until about somewhere around 2002, and we
were trying to resurrect this project because it had laid around for a
number of years and nothing had happened to it.
And the engineering analysis indicated that, look, this is a
stormwater drainage problem that has been exacerbated by years of
construction and silting that shouldn't be placed on the backs of a
small group of residents.
So the county manager and the staff went to the South Florida
Water Management District and said, look, this is a stormwater
drainage problem. We need to drain this entire area more effectively
to eliminate flooding around the Kelly Lakes area and even in the
Triangle area.
And the staff was able to get significant funding so that we didn't
have to go to the residents to solve this problem that had been forced
upon you over years of construction and silting, silting in.
But let's make one thing absolutely clear. This project would
never have been done if it were not for the fact that the staff and the
county manager were able to get funding for a stormwater project. It's
not a navigational project, never has been a navigational project. We
don't spend money doing navigational projects.
In my neighborhood, I'm going to have to pay 10 to 12,000
dollars because of canal dredging. Okay. Nobody else is helping me
share that. The other neighbors are, but no other part of the city.
There is no precedent for having navigational dredging done by
the government, to my knowledge, in all of Collier County.
So it gets done only one or two ways. You pay for it out of your
property taxes or you get other people to help you fund it through
grants as a stormwater drainage exercise, and that's what this one was,
so that you didn't have to pay for it.
So this is the last time that this dredging will ever be done at
government expense. Is it the last time you will ever be required to do
some dredging to improve your property values? No. It will happen
Page 141
November 28, 2006
again one of these days, and where's the money coming from? Are we
going to sit around and debate it like this for days and years and delay
it and delay it and delay it, or do we give you the tools to solve the
problem?
We think it's better to give you the tools. We're not forcing you to
pay taxes. You can create this MSTU, we can create it, and it can just
lie there. It can die or you can take advantage of it. It's up to you.
But if we don't do it now before the end of this year, it won't be
effective until -- and even if we did it next year, it wouldn't be
effective till 2008. Maybe there's something you want to do to
improve things at that point in time. So how are you going to get it --
make it work if it's not there? It's something that's available to you.
It's nothing that is being forced upon you.
MSTUs are not unusual things. They're approved all the time.
People -- communities say, I want better landscaping in front of our
house. We want better landscaped medians going by our community.
How do they get it? They create an MSTU, they pay more taxes, they
get what they want.
So it is a very proven process. It makes sense. There are clear
guidelines about how it's administered. I don't know of anybody
who's objected to an MSTU that we currently have. There are lots of
beautification MSTUs in Collier County. How many, 30, 40?
MS. FLAGG: There's seven with advisory committees, and then
we have additional MSTUs that do like road improvements without
committees.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So there's quite a number of
them. So this is not an unusual concept. It's -- you know, you can
take it or leave it, or we can just ignore it, and then you'll be faced
with this problem again sometime in the future and maybe there will
be people sitting here who don't understand the problem, who are not
sympathetic to the issue and just leave it up to you to solve.
So it's pretty much up to you. I have -- I feel no need to create an
Page 142
November 28, 2006
MS TU if you're going to be angry about it. But I'm telling you that
you're going to be back one day and you're going to be looking for a
solution and the solution might not be here at that time. So I just
encourage you to think about that. And that's all I have to say about
this.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think it's appropriate to
table this motion for one more meeting and put it in the residents'
hands. I can tell you one thing, the community of Golden Gate paid
for their community center through an MSTU to where other
communities got theirs through general fund tax dollars or impact
fees, and it's the feeling of some that that MSTU has served a useful
purpose but the residents don't want to give it up. They want to keep
it there.
Because I did ask them, what is your purpose, and they did dig
deep and take a look at that. There is a purpose. So Commissioner
Coyle is exactly right. It's a vehicle. It's your choice whether to use
that vehicle or not, and I'm going to make a motion to table it to the
next meeting.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Table it or continue?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Continue to the next meeting.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll second that, and I'd like to also
note the fact that earlier today we had residents of Rock Road before
us. For five long years they tried to put an MSTU in place to get their
road repaired, and just now they were successful, and they're very,
very appreciative of the fact.
There's no magic dollars out there. Don't think you're going to
come back to this commission sometime in the future and they're
going to come up with the monies to dredge this. It won't happen.
If you don't have an MSTU in place and you do it later, there's
going to be what's called catch up. You'll probably have to do it with
the maximum millage, and you'll do it to yourself when that time does
Page 143
November 28, 2006
come to be able to get your canals cleared because the value of your
property is in direct relation to the ability to be able to access those
canals.
You're going to have it now for a short while, but where is it
going to go? At 274,000 or so, you're talking about a year. That's
almost a negligible amount when you talk about the cost of
maintaining canals such as you have, and to be able to have that
money set aside and ready to go would be an absolute God-send when
that point comes that you need it and it's there.
You don't have to get into a long discussion with the commission.
You just come in through your neighborhood group, and you say,
now's the time to do this maintenance work, draw into that fund and
take it.
And if you reach the point where that fund will exceed what's
needed, then the funds stop. You don't put any more money into it.
But like Commission Henning said, a motion's being made to continue
this item for one meeting, give everybody time to go back and think it
over, and then we'll take it up at a future meeting, and hopefully
whatever decision is made, it will be something that everybody can
live with now and in the future.
Any other comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, the motion's by
Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Coletta to continue
this item for one meeting.
All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So it's 3-1. The motion
Page 144
November 28, 2006
passed.
Thank you very much for being here.
And what we're going to do is take a very short 10-minute break,
and then we'll continue our time certain item that was for two o'clock.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
Item #8H
PETITION MUP-2006-AR-I0052: VK HOLDINGS TREVISO BAY
MARINA, LLC REPRESENTED BY C. MATT JOYNER, P.A.
ARCHITECT, REQUESTS A MIXED USE PROJECT IN THE
BA YSHORE DRIVE DISTRICT OVERLAY, PROPOSING 2
RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 19,607 SQUARE FOOT OF
COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA TO BE KNOWN AS THE
ODYSSEY - TREVISO BAY MARINA. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF 1.59 ACRES, IS LOCATED AT
3470 BA YSHORE DRIVE ON THE WEST SIDE OF BA YSHORE
BETWEEN LAKEVIEW & RIVERVIEW DRIVE, IN SECTION
14, TOWNSHIP 50, RANGE 25, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA-
MOTION TO CONTINUE - APPROVED
Commissioner, the next item -- the next item is 8H. It's got a two
p.m. time certain. We're 51 minutes late.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by commission members.
It's MUP-2006-AR-l 0052, VK Holdings Treviso Bay Marina,
LLC, represented by C. Matt Joyner, P .A., Architect, requests a
mixed-use project in the Bayshore Drive District Overlay proposing
two residential units and 19,607 square feet of commercial floor area
Page 145
November 28, 2006
to be known as the Odyssey - Treviso Bay Marina.
Subject property consisting of 1.59 acres is located at 3470
Bayshore Drive on the west side of Bayshore between Lakeview and
Riverview Drive in Section 14, Township 50, Range 25, Collier
County, Florida.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: One question before you begin, if I
may, to the county attorney.
Hello? Yes. This requires three or four?
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: This requires -- if there were five
present, three, and if there were three present, it would be two out of
the three because it's not a rezone.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Because I have to leave at
three o'clock and I wouldn't want to handicap this commission. So if I
leave, then it will only require two out of the three for approval.
Thank you.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My
name is Sanjay Kuttemperoor. Before Matt gets started with his
formal presentation, I'd just like to make a few comments.
My family is the owner of the Treviso Bay Marina, and we also
happen to be the owner/developer of Treviso Bay, which is the master
plan community in East Naples. If any of you have driven by that
area, you'll see that we've made a tremendous amount of progress in
our construction. We're very pleased.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, if I could wait just a minute. I
believe the people that are to speak on this particular item need to be
sworn in, and I don't believe everybody's been sworn in yet. Ifwe
could get the clerk's reporter to do so before we continue.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please, if you wish to speak on this
item, please rise now and raise your right hand.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And does -- this requires disclosure
on the part of commissioners?
Page '146
November 28, 2006
We'll start with Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. I've had some -- one em ail
and some information from the petitioner. That's it, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've had a number of emails,
and I've met with Deborah Russell who lives on Lakeview. I've met
with the owner and the architect and project manager. I've gone to see
the place. And I think I've even had some calls on this. Yes, I have.
I've even had some calls on this, and I've called other people as well.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I have had
correspondence and emails concerning people who are in favor of and
people who are opposed to this development, and the nature of those
discussions have generally centered around the height of buildings and
whether or not this is a true mixed-use development.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I, myself, have received
correspondence and emails, and in just a few minutes, you're going to
have to excuse me. I'm going to have to leave.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a petition that I received
from residents in the area. It wasn't additional information from the
applicant. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Please proceed.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Sorry. I hope I didn't start
prematurely.
As I was saying, we are the owners -- our family is the owner of
the Treviso Bay Marina, and we're also the owner/developer of
Treviso Bay.
And we're well on our way with respect to Treviso Bay to
developing this very high-end community in East Naples. We think it
would be a great addition to the community . We're very excited about
our construction progress, and the community also contained a new
Page 147
November 28, 2006
TPC at Treviso Bay Golf Course, which you may have been reading
about in the monthly section, in the Naples Daily News sports section.
Our family's philosophy in undertaking any project has always
been to meet with all the interested parties, with the government
officials, with the residents, and with anyone that basically wants to
talk to us about our project and try to address all of their concerns up
front.
We've had a great experience working with Collier County staff.
They've been responsive, and it's been a -- it's been a good
experience, and I believe that's why we are where we are today with
respect to this petition.
With respect to Treviso Bay, we continue to work with the
neighbors, even as construction has started, even though permits are in
hand and even though our rezoning was completed many years ago, I
personally respond to residents whenever they have any concerns or
questions about our construction.
And it's that same process that we undertook--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Excuse me a minute. There's a
conversation going on here that's a little disruptive. If you're going to
talk about this, please go outside. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's quite all right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not the chairman yet.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, that's okay. When you've got a
hearing loss, you need help from people.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sorry, go ahead.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: What I was saying is we basically
went through the same process with respect to the Treviso Bay Marina
petition. We had a neighborhood meeting, which we thought was very
productive. We had a number of very positive comments. A lot of
people were in attendance at the meetings.
I offered to meet with and speak with any of the residents that
had any concerns or questions. And in fact, we did meet with one
Page 148
November 28, 2006
individual in particular, met with that person twice, and believe that,
you know, at the end of the second meeting, had reached a
compromise with that individual, so we've been very pleased with the
interaction we've had with some of the residents and the staff.
(Chairman Coletta left the hearing room.)
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: I understand that there is some
opposition with respect to the project as it relates specifically to a
private deed restriction.
Now, without going into too many details on the restriction, first
off, the deed restriction has nothing to do with the LDC or the Growth
Management Plan. We did look at the restriction, our team, our
counsel looked at the restriction even before acquiring the marina and
determined that it was not an issue, and that was actually a very
important part of our analysis before we purchased it.
So we don't -- we don't believe that the restriction is really even
applicable to the development of our facility.
So finally, I just want to point out that with our petition, we're
basically asking to continue with an existing use. We're taking an
existing facility, continuing with the existing use, and basically for
lack of a better expression, we're just making it look a whole lot better.
And, you know, Treviso Bay, we think, will be another great
addition to East Naples and to Bayshore, and we're excited to move
forward with it. And with that, I'm just going to turn it over to Matt,
and he can begin with a formal presentation, and I'll be available for
questions.
MR. PETTIT: Commissioners, I'm sorry to interrupt. Mr.
Joyner is not registered as a lobbyist and needs to do that. I've never
dealt with this situation before. I don't know how long it's going to
take him to run upstairs and do that registration process.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We could postpone this for 30
minutes and go on to another item.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, would it be -- Mr.
Page 149
November 28, 2006
Chairman, how about if we hear from the -- how many speakers do
you have?
MS. FILSON: Twelve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Twelve, so that's 20 minutes
right there. If you want to do that, stay on the topic. That's just a
suggestion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can you get up -- does Mr. Joyner know
where he's supposed to go and what he's supposed to do?
MR. PETTIT: Yes. And I'm sorry we got too loud over here.
That's what I was asking Ms. Kinzel. He can go upstairs, and they've
got a form there that he can fill out, I think relatively quickly.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then why don't we begin with
the public input.
MS. FILSON: Okay. The first speaker is Chuck Holland. He'll
be followed by David Jackson.
MR. HOLLAND: Good afternoon. My name is Chuck Holland.
I live at 3178 Lakeview Drive, been there for 28 years, been in Naples
since 1957, so I saw Naples happen.
So I'm not against business. I am a businessman. I've been a
developer, a realtor, and a businessman for -- since 1972, I guess.
What we -- we're not against business. What we are against is giving
up our property rights.
And we feel like this is what is taking place here with this
rezoning hearing. And I provided the commissioners a package.
Do each one of you have a package of what I provided? And I'm
going to go over this quite rapidly. I know time is of the essence. On
the package that I provided on the -- if you'll notice on page 3, this is a
letter that was sent in September to some of the property owners.
Now, I did not receive this letter, and many other property owners did
not receive this letter that was sent out.
But going to page 4, I'll read this to you. This is -- this letter is
very misleading. And it says, the property owners is petitioning
Page 150
November 28, 2006
Collier County to rezone the property from commercial C-4 to a
mixed-use MUP. This the incorrect. It is residential property. It was
not commercial property that was being asked to be rezoned for use.
So many people was confused about this and did not appear at
some of the meetings because they weren't concerned of the change of
this use of commercial. But what we're talking about here is using this
residential property, which is -- does have a deed restriction on it and
using it for a commercial property.
Presently the marina is using residential lots which somehow got
paved and used as parking, but instead of being used just as parking,
it's being used as a commercial use as boat storage. So that is another
issue that was -- has been brought up by some of the people that we --
have brought this up when we had the meeting.
Going to page 5, I'd like to call your attention to the deed
restrictions. And in about the middle ways of the page on A it says,
this land shall be used for residential purposes only, no more than one
resident, et cetera.
Then following it on down to about two-thirds of the page, it
says, no building should be located near to the front lines of 25 feet
nor to the side lines of six feet.
My understanding is, this marina that's being put in, this building,
it's going to be within 13 feet of Lakeview Drive. Lakeview Drive is
where I reside and where -- many other people that are opposed to this
.
rezonIng.
Going over to page 6 down to the bottom, I've highlighted these,
which is on -- on Riverview Drive we have Lots 25 and 26 of Block 4.
That is where the proposed clubhouse and the condo is going in.
Presently -- those lots are being used as commercial presently, which
we feel like is against the zoning code.
And on Lakeview Drive in Block 3 and 4 is where the proposed
-- I call it the barn. It's going to be a 56-foot building, which is going
to be like a six-story building, six-story high-rise. And --
Page 151
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sir, could you wrap it up? Your time has
expired.
MR. HOLLAND: Since I'm representing many people, could I
ask for a little extra time?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You had three minutes.
MR. WEBSTER: Can I give him my time?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. What's your name?
MR. WEBSTER: George Webster.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Can you take Mr. Webster off.
MS. FILSON: I sure will.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. HOLLAND: I'll talk fast. I'm a fast talker, if I can just get
this put in.
On page 7, the terms and enforcement of these deed restrictions, I
would like to read it quite rapidly. It says, these covenants are to run
with the land and shall be binding on all parties and all persons
claiming under this for a period of 20 years from the date of these
covenants that are recorded after that, which time covenants shall be
automatically extended for excessive periods of 20 years on and on.
In other words, we're talking about, unless an instrument's signed
by the majority of the then property owner lots -- owners of the lots,
are recorded, it grants such change.
Property owners in this area have never agreed to any change in
this zoning. We are -- we feel like we are bound and the government
is bound by these deed restrictions that were put on by the developer.
We're not asking you people for anything. We're asking you,
don't take away what we already have. We have deed restrictions that
protects our property that we have earned and paid for throughout the
years. We ask you to give consideration to us that we might continue
to have our safety and health and welfare in our community, to protect
our properties, that it not be rezoned overlapping the deed restrictions
that was placed on there by the developer. I thank you.
Page 152
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Dave Jackson. He'll be
followed by Bob Murray.
MR. JACKSON: Good afternoon. David Jackson, Bayshore
Gateway Redevelopment Agency.
I'd like to cover a couple succinct points in the three minutes I'm
allotted. Up on the visualizer, the Growth Management Plan that
established the Bayshore Gateway redevelopment overlay. I've taken
the opportunity to copy that for you.
The point that I want to point to is the underlined part. That is
my underline. It's not in the Growth Management Plan. Parking
facilities encouraged to be located to the rear of the building and the
building's oriented close to the major roadway, traditional urban plan.
And that is what we've done.
The second portion of the same -- in the same section of the
Growth Management Plan, it talks about residential uses are allowed
naturally, and nonresidential and noncommercial uses, I underlined
there, that has dependent, water-dependent and water-related uses.
A factor that's going to come up in the conversation today by
some of the residents, in this portion of Growth Management Plan, I
think it was alluded to by the first speaker is, paragraph 6 there talks
about non-commercially zoned properties within the Bayshore Drive
mixed-use zoning overlay district may be eligible for infill, low
intensity commercial development, provided they meet the criteria
below, and they do meet the criteria A and B below, and then they'll
be presented to you by the staff and that will also be shown to you by
the presenter.
In my last minute and 30 seconds, the advisory committee totally
supports this and wants that recommendation forwarded to you as the
Board of County Commissioners.
I've listed nine things that are benefits to the community or things
that were repaired by this project. There's less traffic. The number of
Page 153
November 28, 2006
trips have been reduced by the TIS's own study. On-street parking
impact is reduced at Lakeview Drive. At any time if you go down
there, they've got trailers parked in the right-of-way and delivery
trucks. That will be reduced because there's not that kind of activity.
Less noise is created from the surrounding neighborhood. The
lady that lives immediately in back of the property on Lakeview, she
was concerned about motor noise, about engines running and all those
type of maintenance facilities.
Safety. Setback -- the building is set back further at the corners.
People have trouble exiting Riverview and Lakeview because they
have sight line problems with the landscaping. Here the building is set
back, and you'll see that from the presenter.
Safety. Remove Bayshore Drive on-street parking where people
are backing out into 35 mile an hour traffic. Okay. That has been
removed. And aesthetically they're installing Bayshore Drive type of
landscape and replacing that, and they're going to put that all at their
cost.
Other aesthetics is that it's a Florida style building.
Environmental; they are going to capture and do a better job of
capturing the runoff from the building and the boats and the grease
and the oils and make sure that that is environmentally safe, which has
a lot to do with protecting the canal, the creek, and, of course, Naples
Bay.
Another one is environmentally -- though it's minor, they've
reduced the impervious surface. There's more green space. And
lastly, as my time runs out, the developer has met with the residents
and expressed -- heard their express concerns, and items two, three,
four, five, seven and eight listed above is what was brought up in our
advisory board meetings and in the neighborhood meetings, and they
have addressed those.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Page 154
November 28, 2006
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bob Murray. He'll be
followed by Kevin Killilea.
MR. MURRAY: Good afternoon, Commissioners. On behalf of
the East Naples Civic Association and certainly myself, and -- I would
say to you that in spite of the fact that some people will be impacted,
in their perception, negatively, looking at the facilities that exist right
now and seeing the rendering and knowing of the people who are
doing the Treviso Bay development and their sincerity and their
honesty that I've come to understand and know, in spite of the
frustration that exists with some of the folks who don't want to see
change, looking at it as I did, it hopefully can be appreciated as an
objective, it's a marina that is what you might find at the end of a
waterway. It's not fancy. It's not pretty, what exists there today.
When it's completed, it will be a lovely facade based on the
rendering. The interior will provide boat storage adequately and take
some of the boats away from where they're currently extending closer
to the residences.
And I would just say to you that I would hope that the people
would trust these folks. I think that they will do everything in their
power to make it a good thing. And I recognize trust is a difficult
thing. I recognize that when you're living next to something, you
don't want change because you know what you have, and you're not
sure what it is that's coming.
But I have worked with these folks in other matters, and they will
and do accommodate, and I'm sure that if the opportunity arises and
they need to, they'll accommodate again.
So all I can say is, we support that as a development, a good
positive change for the CRA and Bayshore. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Kevin Killilea. He'll be
followed by Rod Robinson.
MR. KILLILEA: Good afternoon. My name is Kevin Killilea.
I've been a resident of Collier County for the past 25 years. I'm an
Page 155
November 28, 2006
avid boater. I've used the current facility over the past few years.
And in the interest of time, because I know you have a long list
of speakers, the previous points, the 10 points that were made
regarding the benefits to the community is exactly what I was going to
point out, so if you refer back to that, we can save a little time on my
end.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Rob -- Rod Robinson. He'll
be followed by David Woodworth. Steve Main? He'll be followed by
Ken Main.
MR. WOODWORTH: Hello. My name is David Woodworth. I
live on 2735 Lakeview Drive. The developer talked about the meeting
that he had. Well, I asked, well, why -- you only have two units that
aren't going to be rented, that are not going to be sold, that could be
used for anything, storing his boats or whatever, life preservers or
whatever. That's not a mixed use.
In my mind, a mixed use would be like downtown Naples. You
have like one floor. One-third of a building is residential, maybe
one-third is office, one-third is a store.
This -- this -- one of the requirements of David Jackson's
mixed-use plan requires that they provide services to the
neighborhood. Services -- and they're not providing one -- zero
services. So it's not a mixed use, you know, following their criteria.
David Jackson -- the last time I was in a meeting, the advisory
board was sitting there. They gave $5,000 to be a sponsor for an art
show. I might want to go to it, but you know what? I don't like my
public money going to sponsor an art show.
And I was here earlier about a municipal taxing district for
drainage. It really is a stormwater development, you know. Not a
navigational one. And if that board would do the same thing, they
could get $5,000. That would be 10,000 for the art show.
You know, this is -- you know, it just -- the other thing is the
Page 156
November 28, 2006
parking. I appeared earlier for that Windstar thing they're talking
about at the end of the street. We have so much traffic. We have a
convenience store; we have Naples 701 across the way. They have
177 apartments. They're trying to sell them, but I don't think very
many are sold because the traffic is down.
But this -- this development's going to make more of a traffic
hazard than what's there now because we have no on-street parking.
They'll have on-street parking on Lakeview and Riverview. They'll be
backing out. People will be coming around the corner. We'll have
accident after accident after accident.
What should be done is that -- a true mixed use would be may be
build eight apartments for sale with parking underneath with parking
for the marina. That would be a true mixed-use area with enough
parking on site that they're not over -- going over to the streets.
You know, Lakeview Drive is overused as it is with nothing
added to it for whatever reason. I mention it again, you count the
number of cars going into the convenience store, even if they're
coming from the north, they don't go by Lakeview Drive. They turn
into Lakeview Drive and then into the convenience store even though
there's an exit on Bayshore Drive. I'm against this development as it is
presented today.
And you're seeing a rendering, aren't you? We're not. And they
don't show the back, do they? They haven't even shown the -- the
planning -- planning board. No one has seen what it looks like on the
back. And I can imagine what it looks like, because I live right down
the street. I go down on my dock, I'll be seeing something wonderful
if you approve this project.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Steve Main. He'll be followed
by Ken Main.
MR. MAIN: Good afternoon. I'm Steve Main. I'm one of the
former co-owners of the marina that Treviso Bay is developing into
Page 157
November 28, 2006
the Odyssey. I'm speaking in favor of it.
We are -- my brother and I are absolutely thrilled about this
because we had always felt that what we had looked terrible. We
wanted to improve it, but we did not have the wherewithal to make it
happen and continue to operate as we were.
We saw this as a fantastic opportunity once we met with Sanjay
and the members of VK Development in terms of what their plan was
to bring this wonderful facility to East Naples. So we're thrilled to
death with it.
As we look at it, we see that the intensity that we have in this
residential neighborhood is actually going to decrease, because as
some of the residents that other people have alluded to, we have new
boats coming in for delivery, we're off loading semis, I've got
outboard motors coming in and things like that, and so it makes for an
extremely intense environment that some of the local residents have to
put up with.
They will be thrilled to see the decrease in that very intense
commercial activity that we are conducting as to what it's going to be
after that. Basically people are coming to use their boats, and that's all
they're going to have.
And as far as trips, we've looked at kind of the number of trips
per day and things like that. With the number of boats that we have
coming in and out for storage and test rides and all the other things, I
think that in the end we'll actually probably see a decrease in the
number of both trips on the water as well as cars and such coming into
the neighborhood.
The improved parking, as has been mentioned, we're on-street
right now with a lot of that, and then also the southern boundary.
There's a lot of things that go on there.
Much of this -- in fact, I would say all of that is going to go
away, and it's going to really be a great thing for the neighbors there.
And as for what they're going to see, I think if they look down the
Page 158
November 28, 2006
street, what they're going to -- what they are going to see is going to
be one heck of a lot better than what they're seeing right now.
So we're wholly in favor of this, and I hope that you will vote
favorably for this rezone. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Ken Main.
MR. MAIN: He had to leave.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Lindsey Thomas. He'll be followed by
Richard Sullivan.
MR. THOMAS: Good afternoon. I'm Lindsey Thomas. I'm a
member of the Bayshore Advisory Board. I have been at two of the
meetings with the Treviso Bay people and their representatives
showing us what their plans were. Following also they had a public
meeting with many of the people invited to hear their concerns, and
that followed by the research by David Jackson and the other
associates within the administrative part of the advisory board, we're
here to speak on behalf -- in support of this project. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Richard Sullivan. He'll be followed by Tom
B ringardner.
MR. SULLIVAN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I only have
a few short things to say. I've had the pleasure of speaking to the
owner of the property and one of the people who's been developing it.
I live on Riverview Drive.
I'm thrilled that someone is going to clean up the mess that's at
the end of that street, and I would have been thrilled if they cleaned
their mess up in the past seven years as well, that's beside the point.
The size of this building is very large for the length of the street
that it's attached to. It's very high. And the setbacks being changed
may make it seem like it's even bigger. That is a concern. I hope it
can be addressed so that visually it doesn't, you know, turn our street
into a dark cavern, that we don't see any more blue sky.
One other thing that I'm concerned about is, currently if you're a
resident of this neighborhood, or even Collier County for that matter,
Page 159
November 28, 2006
you can have your boat repaired there, you can store your boat there,
you can purchase products there. It is a benefit to the people who live
on the canals to be able to use this facility for their boats and for the
purposes of repairing their boats.
As it's constituted, and I believe the people who will be able to
use this facility, must be members of Treviso Bay Golf Course, which
is pretty much establishing an absentee ownership. We aren't going to
be able to store our boats out there in a hurricane. We aren't going to
be able to get our boats out from there, unless they're planning on
offering that as a service to the neighborhood.
So I would like to make that point, that it isn't so much that
they're taking an eyesore and making it a large, pretty, not quite an
eyesore type of thing. We won't be benefiting from it.
And the mixed use thing as well, if it was, you know, a coffee
shop downstairs or residential that would bring people who live there,
walk the streets, bicycle the streets, instead of a few folks who pull
into the electronic gate, park in the lot, getting their boat, leave and
don't come back.
It's not as -- what we were planning when we spent all of these
thousands of dollars on consultants and engineers for this overlay
district that we've been paying full-time employees for. This wasn't in
the cards. This isn't what we paid these experts for.
What we paid them for was to bring in a mixed-use development
which would develop the area, not just turn an eyesore into a big
storage area. And either the consultants are wrong or this project
doesn't fit into it.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Tom Bringardner.
MR. BRINGARDNER: Commissioners, thank you. My name is
Tom Bringardner, and I've been a resident of Collier County for --
since 1977.
Like others who have come before me, I am here to speak in
Page 160
November 28, 2006
favor of this project for a variety of reasons, and I'll try to just
.
summarIze.
First of all, I think the developer used every effort to -- when this
was being designed and planned to incorporate neighborhood input in
this design and plan, and I think that kind of system is beneficial to
everybody even though every single person who gave input couldn't
be pleased. And you're just never going to please all the people all the
time. But incorporating that input is a very positive thing, and trying
to get that input from others.
This is going to dramatically improve the aesthetic appearance of
the existing marina and the surrounding area. It will certainly improve
the tax base, and it's -- project is consistent, you know, in its use with
the existing use, but as others have said before me, with less intense
use than may be the existing use it.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, I have a
legal question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ms. Student, I think we all
know that we don't enforce deed restrictions.
MS. STUDENT -STIRLING: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. In light of the fact of
Cap d'Antibes, should the Board of Commissioners take under
consideration deed restrictions?
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: I'm just going to quote to you what
our Land Development Code says, and that is the law of the county.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I know that. So that's just
what we're going to go by and that's it?
I have another easy question that I can ask. I mean, no offense.
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: Well, this isn't hard, but for the
Page 161
November 28, 2006
fact that I don't have a full background in cap d'Antibes, so --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I see.
MR. PETTIT: Commissioner, let me see if I can try. I think that
the code is relatively clear that our code provisions aren't to be
affected by deed restrictions and we don't enforce them. So as a
general matter, odd as it may seem, you can, in my opinion, in
discussions with Ms. Student, review this project in light of the code
requirements and the growth management requirements.
That certainly doesn't preclude somebody who is aggrieved with
the project to move forward in attempting to enforce the deed
restrictions such as they may be in a court of law.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. PETTIT: And that would be a private action.
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: I would just like to, for the record,
put this on the record so there's an understanding and it's fully in the
record.
Deed restrictions are private covenants between property owners,
and the local government is not involved in them. We have our
requirements to enact the comprehensive plan and land development
regulations that involve advertised public hearings with an opportunity
for the public to come and express their concerns about the proposal.
Private deed restrictions are in no way developed or approved in that
manner.
So I would say for a local government to consider and be
involved with private restrictions that have not been approved with
any of the safeguards that we have for our Land Development Code or
our comprehensive plan, I think we'd be running into problems. And
that's just kind of a background and aside to help you understand the
distinction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. And one more question
about the neighborhood information meeting. If it was publicized as a
commercial use -- and I think this involves two residential lots?
Page 162
November 28, 2006
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Four.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Four.
MS. VALERA: If I may, Commissioner. Carolina Valera,
Principal Planner with the Zoning and Land Development Review
Department.
The neighborhood information meeting letter did state all the lots
that were involved in this project, the letter. The sign did reference
the commercial portions only. But only the commercial portion of this
proj ect can request an MUP.
MS. STUDENT -STIRLING: And because that's a neighborhood
information meeting, and as I understand it the sign as well as the
letter, we're talking about the NIM; is that not correct?
MS. VALERA: Only the neighborhood information meeting.
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: The case law deals with
advertising for Board of County Commission meetings, and that
advertising was correct. For a NIM, I don't think we have that much
of a problem.
And furthermore, the case law dealing with infirmities for a
public hearing state that you waive the defect if you come and object
to it. So using that logic, these people have come and objected to the
NIM. So I would say even if there were a problem, it's been waived.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And Ms. Student, if I offended
you by my statement, I apologize.
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: Oh, not in the least.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Anything else, Commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Very well, we'll have the presentation by
Mr. Joyner.
MR. JOYNER: For the record, my name is Matt Joyner. My
office is in 909 6th Avenue North in downtown Naples. I've been
called a lot of things but never been called a lobbyist before.
However, we'll see how that goes.
Page 163
November 28,2006
Thanks again for adjusting for that, I guess, glitch we'll call it,
what have you. Thank you for your time today.
As we wanted to start out with Sanjay, again, you all are well
familiar with his family and their projects and their attention to detail
and the energy they put into what projects they take -- they take on
themselves.
What we're here to do today is -- let's see if I can get this back up.
I don't know why this is gone.
MR.OCHS: Let's see if I can help you.
MR. JOYNER: Let's see. Okay. To briefly give you what our
goals are, of course, in the overlay district the whole energy is about
revitalizing that area, in a nutshell. And I'll try to abbreviate my
presentation as much as I can.
Our goals in this project were to try to conform as best as
possible to the overlay guidelines that have been adopted, and we --
obviously as architects we strive to do that.
The LDC has requirements architecturally for projects that, of
course, add to what we try to accomplish, whether it's in the overlay
district or the county as a whole.
In this area, what we were trying to do, of course, was to provide
a nice project that would fit into the neighborhood overall and closing
the marina -- the existing marina process. It's quite open, a lot of boats
around the site and such, and I'll show you the site plan.
This is the existing site, if you'll have it. And we are providing
for -- as currently permitted, there's 100 -- they're permitted for 158
boat slips. We have reduced that down to 155 as a result of meeting
with one of the neighbors, and we'll show you that exercise shortly as
I move on through the presentation.
Existing conditions that we're trying to improve upon are the
parking along Bayshore Drive; it's rather unsafe. We'll -- in a --
direction from traffic, if you'll have it. Obviously the exposed boat
storage, all the stacking and such that goes on outside.
Page 164
November 28, 2006
And one of the processes that goes on quite a bit here, of course,
is sales, service and repair, which we'll be eliminating in the new
project.
The new project solely is for storage of boats. No maintenance
going on. There will be cleaning of the boats, obviously rinsed off
and such when they're brought back.
But as you can see in the site plan, what we're hoping to
eliminate, so what we will be proposing to eliminate is all the parking
along Bayshore here. We're closing the -- the transportation has asked
us to close off the cut-through here in the median.
You're going to see parking and boats along Lakeview on the
south, and you'll see boats along Riverview on the north. And then, of
course, you have your existing parking lots on the west side of the
property. Those will be remaining. We'll -- I'll bring up the site plan
shortly to show you that.
And also there's currently, through a previous SDP, site drainage
control along the western borders and also there are currently six-foot
high stucco masonry privacy walls that were previously done from the
previous owners. That will be remaining. All the waterfront
conditions on the site currently right now, the sea walls, the aluminum
docks, the plantings, the landscaping. There are mangroves currently
in this area. All of that will be remaining as is in this project.
Now, what I'm going to move on to is a -- it's what we've done.
We've taken our site plan and over-Iayed it on the aerial so you'll
understand the ramifications and -- a little clearer on what our site plan
is -- what our building is doing to this site.
Here, when you see -- what you see is a horseshoe-shaped dark
area. That is the building itself. That is boat storage. In this project,
as we stated before, primarily it's boat storage. There's a club facility
with two residences above on the northwest corner, on the Riverview
side of the property, up in this area.
Again, on the Riverview side, the Bayshore side, and on down to
Page 165
November 28,2006
Lakeview Drive, all of that is boat storage, and I'll be moving around
later showing you the elevations of the buildings as we go in a
clockwise manner, if you'll have it.
But to continue with what our site is proposing, is somewhat of a
valet drop-off area here where a use -- an end user would come in,
park their vehicles, unload them, stage them for loading their boat, the
boats would be tied up at the docks in the immediate vicinity of that
drop-off area, and then a valet would take that car and park it around
here on the site or along this street parking that's been shown.
Transportation had us flip the parking on the site, which is
currently parallel parking on Lakeview, as currently shown here, and
then the diagonal parking on Riverview, and more in the direction of
traffic flow.
What we are doing in our site management, we're trying to
contain end users right in this point and not get them anywhere in the
site. We don't want them back in here where the forklift is operating
the boat, and our staff is performing whatever functions that are
necessary to providing this.
So, again, we're trying to contain the users right within this area
and not letting them go any farther around the site.
With that in mind, you'll see also this building as we're -- the
footprint as we're showing here sits on top of where all these current
boats are outside. And again, our goal is to encapsulate all of the
boats within the perimeter of the building, behind the walls, so that
we're not -- those boats are not exposed along Bayshore, if you'll have
it. All the parking, again, has been eliminated so that folks are not
backing out onto Bayshore Drive.
And then on the Lakeview side, we have our parallel parking.
And through recommendation by the transportation department, we
located -- we initiated this parking 100 feet off of the point of
intersection at Bayshore Drive so it's a little -- it's considerably more
safe as far as people trying to park within -- near the boundaries of
Page 166
November 28, 2006
Bayshore.
And again, as I had indicated, the stormwater retention, the
privacy walls, if you'll have it, and landscaping in those areas are
. .
remaInIng.
We are -- by the building, we'll call it the red-shaded area
indicating the extent of our vehicular pavement, we're reducing
significantly some of the existing pavement in those areas. This will
now become landscaped areas, if you'll have it, and then along here
where the building steps back.
And footprint -- what's represented in the overlay district and in
the LDC code, once you have certain dimensions along a street
frontage, you have to step the building back certain dimensions.
And with that, I'm going to move on to just our basic site plan to
be a little more straightforward, not as confusing as having that image
below it.
It might be a little simpler for you to understand. Again, there's
the club facility and residences, the horseshoe-shaped buildings. This
area in here's open for forklift operation. This parking lot remains the
same as currently there. And, again, this was a drop-off valet area for
our end users. Makes it a little easier to see the parking along here.
We've eliminated it along Bayshore.
We'll be bringing in the sidewalk and the streetscaping and all
that's currently been planned for the Bayshore area. We'll be taking
that on along that street frontage there. And, again, you can see how
far off of Bayshore the parallel parking, as such, is.
The building in this area right here is at the five-foot built-to
limit, and then this is eight foot here, an eight-foot step back, an
eight-foot step back along here, along these corners here and in this
area. Again, that's part of meeting the LDC requirements for building
undulation, massing, et cetera.
With that, I'll move forward to -- this would be our rendering, of
course, our image, our concept. This would be the approach, which
Page 167
November 28, 2006
I'll come back to later on in the presentation of how this is the
BayshorelRiverview intersection. Bayshore Drive to your left;
Riverview to your right.
What this image represents is the massing of the building relative
to the economic model of different size boats. We balance that along
with the LDC code requirements for building massing, stepping it
back along the streets, so your longer boats will be down low, your
shorter boats will be up high, and that helps us to add to the
articulation of the building to create that movement in the massing.
One of the -- one of the interesting requirements of the overlay
guidelines was the desire to have clock towers as such, and obviously
we found that to be a really nice location right on the corner to kind of
soften that building as you approach the site to provide what is, in
essence, a clock tower.
And then the other end of the building itself is similar, but it's
still a little bit different in architecture, which we'll get to with the
elevations, so the street corners are not identical.
Moving on. Now we're going to talk about what I'd like to -- is if
I could take your attention to this site plan here, what I'm going to do
is show you the elevations of the buildings relevant to the west side,
which faces the residential district, and then take you along the streets
as we go around Bayshore and Lakeview, in this -- in the -- finishing
up the presentation. I'll try to move through it quickly again.
This is your view if you're approaching Bayshore on Riverview.
And, again, you're seeing exposed -- the boats stacked outside and
such. As you move along that street, you're going to start -- you're
going to see the west elevation first, and obviously as you move closer
to Bayshore Drive, you're then going to see the north elevation.
This would be the west end of the building as it faces the
residences. And, again, this is the club facility, if you'll have it, the
two residences above. And we've tried to create somewhat of a
residential character again using the guidelines from the overlay
Page 168
November 28, 2006
district.
Primary materials throughout the building; the ground level will
be a stucco, masonry, then the mid levels will be considered your lap
siding, which is your Hardie plank, and I'm sure most of you all are
familiar with that. Then the upper levels will be, of course, some
metal panels along with the roofing.
As we move around, this would be the north elevation of the
building. And, again, on your right-hand side, what we have is the
pavilion, the club facility, if you'll have it, and the two residences
above.
And we've stepped them -- we've progressed them back away
from the residence -- residential single-family homes which we'll have
would be to the right of this elevation, and then, again, continued with
that architecture, if you'll have it, moving to the BayshorelRiverview
intersection here.
And again, there's the clock tower. Now this is the -- again, the
north elevation so you're going to have somewhat of a skewed
perspective on that.
The building itself, again, with the stucco, the lap siding and the
metal roofing and all up higher, what you're going to see are actual
functional louvers where we have windows represented or primary
frames with no glazing. And, again, up higher you're going to have
additional louvers.
The attempts for all of this were to reduce the wind load on the
massing of the building. Basically this horseshoe-shaped building is
like a catcher's mitt in a high-wind condition. So we've punctured the
building quite a bit to try to reduce that heavy wind load on that
structure.
Now, this is the view looking onto Bayshore from the Eureka
Drive area. This will be the easterly side of the site looking to the
west. But, again, you see the boats to the north and then the building
as we know it today with parking and such in front. And we'll movet
Page 169
November 28, 2006
on to the Bayshore elevation.
Again, you'll see on -- up at the right-hand side, this is Riverview
intersection, if you'll have it. There's your clock tower again. Then as
we move farther south, you start seeing more modulation in the
building, their articulation, and then you'll see the southwest corner of
the building.
So even though we've got the same type of use going on inside,
we're trying to prevent just a total mirrored operation or aesthetic, if
you'll have it, of that building. And, again, you'll see all of the
openings along such.
And, again, it was a balance between the length of the boats, the
modeling as such, and then the codes requiring the building
articulation itself. So it was really a combination of things that were
already there for us to take advantage of.
This is an existing photo, if you'll have it, that kind of helps in a
lot of ways to understand some of the current conditions. This is
looking northwest, the intersection of Lakeview and Bayshore Drive,
showing some of the parking, if you'll have it, on the Bayshore area
where -- and, of course, this is a retail application currently. Also
people come in, I suppose, and deal with the servicing and storage of
their boats from the front office here. And then we have various
parking along the sides and, of course, boat storage.
With the parallel parking that we've currently established,
somewhere about right in here is where it will start. So from about the
back end of this vehicle up to the intersection will no longer be any
cars parked along Lakeview to minimize that traffic hazard of
proximity and being closer to Bayshore.
What we're looking at here is the south elevation on Lakeview.
And, again, you'll see the corner here. This is the BayshorelLakeview
corner of the building. We've tried to -- this is a flat roof right in here,
and it actually steps back to the taller building. But we're, again,
progressing on all -- both of these corners, we've tried to progress the
Page 1 70
November 28, 2006
building back so it's a much softer landing, if you'll have it, right at the
intersection of the streets. And, again, the continuity of the
architecture around the building.
At this application, this is -- this south elevation is showing the
result of a meeting we had with one of the homeowners. They had a
concern, a general concern about the height of the building in this
area.
This end of the building, of course, faces the -- again, the
residential district, if you'll have it. She had a concern over it, we
discussed it with her, decided to go with cutting off some of the boat
storage on the level up here, were able to reduce the roof structure.
Again, this was our original design, and then after meeting with her,
we minimized it a little bit by dropping this roof in here and turning
this hoop roof around the building.
And on the other -- I'll move to the other elevation shortly.
You'll see a little better attention to the residential character on that
side of the building also.
This, of course, is a photo showing your -- the image, if you'll
have it, the current image as you're approaching the site from
Lakeview moving toward Bayshore.
This is the elevation as a result, what they would actually see on
the corner. And, again, it's that roof as it dropped down. And in this
scenario here, this was the previous design where we have additional
slips up taller -- higher, if you'll have it, right here.
And the elevation was more of a commercial application. Once
again, we borrowed from the club facility and residential side -- two
residences, that side on the northwest corner, borrowed some elements
from that and brought it around to this side of the building to, in effect,
give it a little better -- a nicer character, and which was met with
approval, and obviously that's why we have made that adjustment.
This photo here, I wanted to come back to the front of the
building along the street.
Page 171
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Joyner, how much more time
do you have to get through your presentation?
MR. JOYNER: I can try to finish it in about three minutes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
MR. JOYNER: Again, that photo came back to the front of the
building. This is a section, if you'll have it, through the Bayshore
Drive portion of the building. I wanted to show its relationship to the
street as the building steps back again -- stepped back, again, in
response to sizing of -- and placement of boats along Bayshore.
This, again, is the RiverviewlBayshore image, if you'll have it.
Summing that up, again, with what we come up with as a solution to --
or trying to accomplish here.
And in summing it up, I think we have, in working with the
overlay district and its guidelines, I think we've met a pretty nice
solution to what is a -- it's a unique project. It's a marina. You're
storing boats. Unless boats are for sale, you don't really want to look
at them a whole lot.
So, again, we've tried to incorporate as much of the guidelines as
possible to accomplish this.
We had an awful lot of help, and we'd like to thank the CRA
Advisory Board, Dave Jackson. He was real helpful, I'm sure you all
know by now. All of staff, Carolina and her people. There was an
awful lot of input from a lot of people on this to get us to where we
are.
And with that, I'll turn it over for the next step. I'm a little out of
order, so I'm not sure what that is.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any questions by commissioners?
Commissioners, any questions?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not yet, not yet.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just of staff. I have questions of
our staff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. Anybody in particular
Page 1 72
November 28, 2006
on staff? Who do you want to talk to?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Carolina, I think, is the project
shepherd --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- or whatever you call it.
MS. VALERA: Carolina Valera, Principal Planner with the
Department of Zoning and Land Development Review.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. It was -- one of the
speakers said the use is -- in this overlay is supposed to serve the
neighborhood. I understand that the CRA is trying to attract people,
so it's kind of confusing with that statement. Is this a true statement?
MS . VALERA: Yes. One of the criteria of the -- to be approved
as a mixed-use project is to serve the surrounding properties as part of
it. There's several criteria. They meet all of them except for this first
criteria, which they partly meet, which is, it's a combination of how
much minimum commercial they have plus who those uses will serve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The next one is the
mixed use. Does it fit the intent of the mixed use within the overlay?
MS . VALERA: The overlay -- in order to be approved as a
mixed-use project in this specific overlay, it has a minimum
requirement of 60 percent of commercial. They're well above that.
There's no cap. There's not a maximum of how much commercial you
can have.
There's another zoned property -- other zoned properties in the
overlay that have a maximum of 20,000 square feet of commercial.
They're below that. But those are in other portions of the overlay.
But, again, they do meet the minimum requirement of this overlay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The next one is, we're
approving the use. We're not approving the Site Development Plan; is
that correct?
MS. VALERA: You're approving the conceptual plan and, of
course, the mixture of residential and commercial.
Page 1 73
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What about the parking?
MS. VALERA: They will have to meet the minimum
requirements of the code. You may impose, you know, stricter rules
to that, and that can be incorporated into a resolution.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it has to fit the rules of the
overlay for the parking?
MS. VALERA: When they come for Site Development Plan,
they will have to meet the minimum requirements that the overlay has.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'm not a planner, so I don't
want to, you know, redesign it. I think you all gave enough ample
input in this, and I guess I just need to trust. But I just have a concern
when you have 150 storage slips, and the parking that I see there, is it
going to be ample, so --
MS. VALERA: The approval -- if it is approved, the approval of
the MUP doesn't mean that they will be able to -- they will have an
exemption for any of the requirements of the code, so they will have
to meet all the requirements of the overlay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I need to ask them a couple of
things. Thank you very much. What are the hours of your operation?
I mean, is it -- I notice seven days a week, but is it 24 hours a day, 12
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: We haven't established formal hours
of operation yet, but we were thinking in the neighborhood of seven in
the morning till about five in the evening.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: One of the things I was concerned
with was, being that the back end will face the residents, and if you're
moving boats on and off of the storage lifts and so forth, you don't
really want to wake them up in the morning with the
beep-beep-beeping and so forth. Can you -- can you arrange so that if
Page 174
November 28, 2006
people call and reserve their boat to leave at whatever time, six
o'clock, seven o'clock in the morning, that that stuff is already taken
care of so it won't disturb the neighbors early in the morning?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: The day before, you mean?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Yeah, we can absolutely do that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Our goal here is to be a good
neighbor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, okay. That's good. And it
mentions here on one of the pages about redistricting water discharge
to water quality basins. Can you tell me where they are or what they
are on that map?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Sure. If I may, can I direct that
question to our engineer that's here as well?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure, sure.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Chad?
MR. LA TRELL: Hi. I'm Chad Latrell with GAS. I'm a civil
engineer and consultant. If I can just redirect you to one of the site
plans, if I can find it. Here we go.
If you look directly on the west end by the parking lots, there are
existing -- there are two existing storm water basins, one on each side
of the canal. They currently serve as water quality basins, and they
discharge directly into the canal.
By the increase of the green space on the site, we are going to be
supplementing that water quality in addition to adding some additional
water quality features within the site to capture runoff from boat
washing activities and from oil/water separation type things.
So we are, indeed, using what is there and enhancing it with
further mechanical means.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you very much.
Those are my questions.
Page 175
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. No other questions by
commissioners? I'm going to close the public hearing.
I think you've designed a very attractive project and I think it's a
great improvement over what has been there for many, many years. I
think it will be a benefit to the entire community, but I can't support it,
and the reason for that is that this is not a mixed-use project.
What you have really done is you have taken elements of a
mixed-use project and pulled it together in order to avoid going
through the entire approval process, and I don't think that's what we
envisioned.
Yes, it's 60 percent commercial, but it's not 60 percent
commercial that serves the neighborhood. It serves the residents from
someplace else. Nobody can go there and shop. Nobody can go there
and buy anything.
It's not pedestrian oriented, which is one of the criteria for mixed
use. The addition of a couple residences doesn't make a development
a mixed use.
I think we have distorted the purpose of a mixed-use
development in order to get a big boat storage facility developed here,
and I just can't -- can't support that.
Like I said, it would be a big improvement over what's there, but
it's not a mixed-use development. If you came in with a proposal to
build a marina and a few residences and it went through the proper
approval process and it was vetted before all of the other advisory
boards, including the Planning Commission, then I would feel more
comfortable about it, but I don't like shortcutting the approval
processes by manipulating the code and I think that's exactly what's
been done here, the staff support notwithstanding. This is not what I
had in mind when I was pushing mixed-use developments five years
ago.
But nevertheless, it only requires two commissioners to approve
this, so I'll -- if the commissioners have any comments.
Page 176
November 28, 2006
Okay. Commissioner Henning, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sir, you willing to continue it
and bring it back, re-work it for the board's consideration?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: To continue it under the same
mixed-use process?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Yeah, we can do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I'm going to make a
motion to continue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. There's a motion to continue by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- just say, I guess the board's
opinion, if you're going to add more residential to this project, and I
guess that's what I'm hearing and I support -- because that's not mixed
use. But if that's the intent of the overlay -- and that was my question.
But I'm going to support the commissioner of the district. Do you
think it requires a neighborhood information meeting again?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It seems to me that there's been fairly
good disclosure. The neighborhoods seems to understand fairly well
what's proposed here, although I believe that the elevations that have
been shown here today are new information for some of the members
of the public. I'm also concerned about the height of the building
adjacent to a residential community.
But the important point here that there are two members of this
commission who are missing, both of them might very well support
your petition, both of them might not support your petition. But in my
estimation, Commissioner Henning's motion is the correct one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: To continue, massage it, bring it
back.
Page 1 77
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: We can do that. And, you know, I'd
like to add, we weren't trying in any way to circumvent the process.
We have this project which we believe will be a great addition to East
Naples and the Bayshore area, and we were told that these were the
different rules that we could proceed under, and that's how we
proceeded. We operated in full disclosure to the community.
But I understand your concerns. And you know, we can go back
and talk with the neighborhoods and meet with whoever we need to
meet with to continue the process if we need to.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If this were a commercial project
with residences that served the community, there wouldn't be any
question, okay? But it really doesn't serve the community. And I don't
think it meets a lot of the criteria or it doesn't meet the intent of a
mixed-use development.
But you have to make the decision about how you present this.
That's your job. It's not mine. And I just react to what's presented.
So I'm going to call the question if there are no other comments
by commissioners. All in favor of Commissioner Henning's motion to
continue, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So it passes unanimously. Thank you
very much.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And good luck in working out those
problems. I think some improvement needs to be made there, and it
certainly looks like it's better than it is now.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Okay, thank you.
MS. VALERA: If I may, Commissioner. I believe that if they
are going to substantially change the project, then a neighborhood
Page 178
November 28, 2006
information meeting may be a good idea.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Well, you have to make that call.
Go ahead. If you think it's necessary, do it.
MS. VALERA: I will strongly recommend.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Very good, thank you.
MS. VALERA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now, for the benefit of those who have
been waiting here all day, this meeting is going to continue over until
tomorrow morning, and we're going to terminate this meeting, I hope,
by five o'clock today, and so there are two things that I would expect
to complete in the next hour.
The first will be the issue involving the citizens of Goodland and
the other will be the little league softball fields since most of you have
been sitting here for -- all day waiting for these things to come up. I'm
going to try to get them out of here, but I need your cooperation. What
we do not need is a parade of people coming here and all telling us the
same thing.
What I'm going to do is permit you a specified amount of time to
present your case, and that's it. We're going to cut off the public
comment. We're not going to be duplicative, and then we're going to
try to make decisions.
So we're going to try to get this done by five o'clock. That leaves
us an hour for two items, which with a number of registered speakers
will alone take us close to an hour. So we've got to do something with
respect to that. Now, I hope I can depend upon your cooperation. So
let's start now with 8D.
Item #8D
ORDINANCE 2006-57: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AMENDING THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF
Page 1 79
November 28, 2006
COLLIER COUNTY AT CHAPTER 130, TRAFFIC AND
VEHICLES, TO ADD A SECTION ALLOWING FOR THE USE
OF GOLF CARTS UPON DESIGNATED COUNTY ROADS IN
GOODLAND, FLORIDA SUBJECT TO SPECIFIED
RESTRICTIONS; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE
OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT
AND SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE - ADOPTED W/STIPULATIONS
MR. MUDD: 8D is a request that the board approve an
ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, amending the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier
County at Chapter 130, traffic and vehicles, to add a section allowing
for the use of golf carts upon designated county roads in Goodland,
Florida, subject to specified restrictions; providing for inclusion in the
Code of Laws and Ordinances; providing for conflict and severability;
and providing for an effective date.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Teach, and Mr. Chairman,
if you don't mind.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Does the staff support
everything here in the ordinance?
MR. TEACH: Yes, sir. Bob Tipton was out of town, so I was
here to present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Does any of the residents
have any concerns or issues with the ordinance?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. Well, I'm going to make a
motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I should --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, no. That's all right, that's all
Page 180
November 28,2006
right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I'm going to ask some questions,
okay? We have a motion for approval by Commissioner Henning and
a second by Commissioner Fiala.
I have problems with the issues relating to liability . You
responded to my question. I did not agree with the response, so I'd
like to pursue that a bit.
I'm not in any way going to oppose the petition to permit the
people in Goodland to operate golf carts on their streets, okay? If they
want to do that, they should be permitted to do that. But the county
should be not -- should not be subjected to the risk of liability in the
event of accidents.
MR. TEACH: Commissioner, if I could follow up on the
response I provided with you yesterday.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. TEACH: It's my opinion that the decision to allow the golf
cart operation in Goodland in the specified area is a planning level
decision and, therefore, the county would be protected from liability
under the principle of sovereign immunity.
At the most, if you were to extrapolate that down the road and if
we put up signs, and let's say we didn't maintain those sign or there
was some issue where an accident happened, they would still be
limited under the Florida Statutes to the limit of liability for agencies
such as ours. But as far as this goes, as far as this decision itself, it's a
planning level decision and we're protected by sovereign immunity.
I wanted to add, and I know you're aware, that the ordinance also
requires the drivers, the operators of the golf carts, to carry insurance,
golf cart insurance, which I had discussed with some of the residents.
And the minimum amounts for golf cart insurance coverage that
I'm familiar with were 50,000, 100,000 or 300,000 ranges, which is
more than we require automobiles -- minimum amount for
automobiles in the State of Florida, so I think we're fairly well
Page 181
November 28,2006
protected there.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How do you intend to assure that those
insurance coverage's are, in fact, in existence?
MR. TEACH: Well, Commissioner, right. There is no
mechanism there for that. It's a requirement of the ordinance, and if
they do not have it and they're stopped by the sheriff who has been
stopping them out there, it is an infraction. They're going to have to
produce to the sheriff, as the ordinance provides, that they're going to
have to have evidence of their driver's license, evidence of their
insurance at that time. And all operators have to be at least 16 years
of age.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You don't think some registration
process would be a lot simpler for enforcement?
MR. TEACH: Well, one of the things I recommended when I
responded to you was that there is a possibility of doing a -- sort of an
annual decal on the golf cart registration process, and I referenced that
in the content of another question you had.
Everglades City has something like that. I was trying to
streamline it, because we do have an enforcement mechanism that the
sheriff can enforce if they don't have these -- the insurer proof of
insurance and whatnot on there. But I mean, there's always a
possibility that you can throw in an annual registration requirement. It
was just a level that I was trying to streamline.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, you see the problem with the
police officer? If he goes down to Goodland and pulls over 10 golf
carts, it could be that every single one of them has insurance. He
would not have to inconvenience those people by pulling them over
and checking to see if they had insurance if they had a decal displayed
on their golf cart.
So you see, it makes it a lot more efficient if there's a way to tell
by sight whether or not there is an existing current decal on the golf
cart.
Page 182
November 28, 2006
MR. TEACH: I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That solves everybody's problem. The
residents aren't inconvenienced by being pulled over and the police
officers don't waste their time.
MR. TEACH: No, I appreciate that. I guess -- I mean, there
would have to be developed a mechanism that they'd get it through
code enforcement or something. I don't know at this point.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Would the motion maker be inclined to
require a decal of some kind annually that would indicate the
existence of necessary liability insurance?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to leave that to the
second --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- since its her district, and
maybe we could do this at the annual pancake breakfast or --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Being that we've never ever had an
accident in Goodland, I would still like to comply with whatever. So I
spoke with Connie last night, just jumping to the conclusion maybe
somebody would ask that question, and I asked if you could have
some kind of a decal so that -- although you said that they would be --
they must have their insurance papers and driver's license in the
vehicle, or a copy of them at all times, if you'd like to maybe make a
decal from your organization and just distribute them to everybody
who has a license and maybe that would answer it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't think so. I think an annual decal
issued by the county would be a far more effective way to deal with
that.
MR. TEACH: Would this, be a -- would there be a fee associated
with it, Commissioner, or is it just to check to see --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Manager? There can't be much
cost associated with this.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if you're talking about the decal
Page 183
November 28, 2006
and just somebody to -- as part -- you know, it could be at the north
government center, it could be here where they get a beach sticker,
they come in, show their insurance costs. We have a sheet that says,
this is what you have to have --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And give them decal.
MR. MUDD: -- you give them a sticker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: It might cost a buck or something to make the
sticker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Too bad we don't have those on cars
where drivers don't have licenses, huh?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Too bad we have drivers who don't have
licenses. Maybe we need to get rid of them.
Now, the other issue is, are we going to put up caution signs?
MR. TEACH: Signs, yes. There will be signs. And I wish Bob
Tipton was here, Commissioner. But there will be signs notifying
drivers of golf cart operation and, you know -- on the designated
streets.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And should the community not be
responsible for the cost of those signs?
MR. TEACH: That's a decision up to the commission.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I mean, whenever we decide to
put additional landscaping somewhere because people -- a community
wants it, the community pays for it.
MR. TEACH: I've already -- I waved that question in front of
some people in Goodland yesterday, and they seemed to be inclined to
be able to absorb that fee, if that's the commission's --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could have another pancake
breakfast.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. I'd just like to treat all
communities alike. You know, when a community's requesting
Page 184
November 28, 2006
special treatment on certain things, they should -- they should incur
the costs associated with that, and my own community included.
MR. TEACH: Commissioner, I mean, if the board directs me to
make this change with regard to an annual decal, I probably could put
some language in there that -- regarding the cost of the additional
signs and future maintenance as well.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. If -- I would ask that either -- the
second of this motion consider that, and hopefully the motion maker
will consider it. If not, I'm outvoted anyway.
MR. TEACH: I want to raise one other issue, too. I had heard
earlier this morning when I came here that CDES was uncertain who
would enforce this. Would it be the sheriff, would it be Code
Enforcement. And I could even make that even a little bit more clear
in section one of the ordinance. Subsection 4 where it talks about the
violations of the statute, I was going to suggest that I throw in a
sentence there just to make no confusion. The Collier County
Sheriffs Department shall be charged with enforcement of this
ordinance, just to erase that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. We don't want to have to worry
about this.
You guys can do it, right? Do you have any input on this?
THE SHERIFF: I've never gotten to speak before. My only
thing is, on the decal, sir, maybe this will help you with that. If the
ordinance is for specific boundaries, the Goodland community, and it's
readily identifiable, technically anybody can ride a golf cart down
there then because it would be with county ordinance.
So theoretically, you could have people truck in golf carts down
there just to drive around on Goodland streets if they wanted to.
From an enforcement standpoint, I think the decal would
somewhat be irrelevant because even your vehicles now have tags
with decals. When we stop them, we still ask to see the driver's
license and insurance. And if they were committing some type of an
Page 185
November 28, 2006
infraction upon a roadway, that would have to be the reason for the
stop versus they're just driving a golf cart on a roadway.
So I don't see where the decal would sort of help them with that.
They're still going to have to produce it if they're stopped at that time.
I haven't read the ordinance. I don't know if there's any more specific
details related to that, but that may help you with the decal question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, may I ask a
question of Connie Fullmer, please?
I'm about ready to remove my motion and continue it. I mean,
there's so many things running around my mind about things that
we've done for different communities that came out of general funds,
and I just can't see this item over a hundred bucks. So I'm thinking
about removing my motion and continuing it.
MS. FULLMER: What item being over a hundred bucks? I'm
not --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pardon me? The cost of these --
the signs and --
MS. FULLMER: We don't have a problem with that,
Commissioner, doing fundraisers. We would be much more happy to
get a decision -- a positive decision from you today and do fundraisers
to raise some money for the signs because folks have been scared for
the last year and a half to be able to use their carts that we've
historically used for 30 years out there because they don't want to get
$150 ticket and then, you know -- so we're happy to do fundraising to
raise the money for the signs, and if you think decals are needed, we
can do that, although I really defer kind of to the county sheriff here,
that if they feel they need to stop a cart, they're going to look -- ask for
those license, the copy of the license and insurance anyway.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But Commissioner Coyle's
concern is more of a liability factor of the county.
MS. FULLMER: That's been addressed in two ways. One,
Page 186
November 28,2006
because Scott here, county attorney, has researched and said that from
Florida Statutes as well as the Constitution of the State of Florida,
provides that the county will not be liable for the use of golf carts.
But in addition to that, for extra coverage for you all, in the
petition, or in the ordinance that Scott drafted, we're required to carry
our own insurance, so that's double coverage. So that really,
hopefully, will address that.
We're just anxious to get back to be able to use -- historically
there. And safety features have been provided for in the ordinance,
sunrise to sunset. I really feel he's addressed all of what had been --
appeared to be your concerns.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But the problem is, we're all
going to have to vote yes on this.
MS. FULLMER: Two out of three.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you need a three --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Only two.
MR. PETTIT: Commissioner, maybe I misunderstood your
question earlier. You have a majority -- you have a quorum. In order
to vote on anything, you have to have a quorum. But a majority of the
commissioners voting once you have a quorum can carry this item.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. All right. My motion
stands. And the only reason it is is we have truly did above and
beyond for different communities, and I think that's what we're here
for in certain cases, as long as it's reasonable. And I think if this item
expenses is, 100 or 200 dollars, my goodness, it's not going to break
the bank.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And my second stands.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Page 187
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It carries unanimously.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item, based on--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How we doing on break time?
THE COURT REPORTER: I just need two minutes to call my
office.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Why don't we take a five-minute
break. Okay . We'll take a five-minute break.
(A brief recess was had.)
Item #10B
RECOMMENDATION TO DENY A PETITION TO CONVERT
FIELDS AT VETERANS COMMUNITY PARK TO (2) LIGHTED
LITTLE LEAGUE, (1) LIGHTED GIRLS SOFTBALL, AND (1)
LIGHTED BASEBALL FIELD - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO
THE JANUARY 9, 2007 BCC MEETING WITH A TIME
CERTAIN OF 4:00 P.M. - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, I had a conversation during the break. There were
a lot of people -- and I know that folks are here and the young ones are
here. And the petitioner had basically mentioned that a lot of folks
that were here had to leave, okay. I mean, we've had ball teams in and
out all day with parents and everything else.
And he would prefer if -- with the absence of those folks, that if
this board would continue the item until the 9th of January time
certain four p.m. in the afternoon so those folks wouldn't have to take
offwork, the kids could come after school or whatever, in order to do
Page 188
November 28,2006
that, in order to get this little league ball field issue heard correctly.
And that's up to the board at that particular time.
I know there's some folks here. But if the petitioner could come
forward and at least talk --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, let's make sure we understand.
This is not a popularity contest, and the people who bring in the most
people and who talk the longest don't necessarily win, okay. This is a
simple procedure. You've been before us before. You've told us why
you need this done.
MR. CALANDRA: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We asked parks and recreation staff to
tell us why it shouldn't be done. They're telling us we shouldn't do it.
So now it's a simple matter of just sorting out the logic so we can
make a decision. It doesn't make a bit of difference if you march
5,000 people through that door, it's not going to change the result.
MR. CALANDRA: I understand.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we've got a lot of stuff to cover.
And I know you've been sitting here for a long time today, and I know
it's an inconvenience, but we need to settle some of this business. We
can't just keep postponing it.
MR. CALANDRA: Well, I understand exactly what you're
saying. And it really -- and the main reason for a continuance was not
that I wanted to march 5,100 people up and give their three-minute
speech, but really what it amounts to is I did -- through no fault of
their own, they didn't allot a proper amount of time for today.
And what's happened -- it's not so much that they want -- half the
people weren't going to speak, but they took the time off and they felt
strongly about coming down here just for support, that it was an issue
__ win or lose, win or lose. A lot of people here were ready to accept
the fact that, hey, we might not get the fields, we may get the fields.
But what -- my only point in getting a continuance in January is
just to let the people be a part of the process that they gave -- they did
Page 189
November 28, 2006
give -- a lot of people did give a good portion of their day -- their day
today. A lot of people gave up wages for the day.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, I don't doubt that. I just hate to see
them go through that and then not get a decision now and have to
come back and do it in January.
MR. CALANDRA: Well, it's not so much getting a decision
now or -- today or in January, it's a matter of -- you know, we
encourage -- when I emailed people to come here today, what I
encouraged them to do was to be part of the process, to be involved in
the process, and they went ahead and did it. And here they are now,
most of them like -- as I said, whether it's to go home and cook dinner,
whether it's to go pick up another kid, they ended up having to leave.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I understand.
MR. CALANDRA: As I say, what January represents is a -- the
ability to once again be part of the process.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is there a motion to continue this
until the first meeting in January?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to continue --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- to the meeting in January.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second, time --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- time certain at four p.m.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Time certain at four p.m. Okay.
MR. CALANDRA: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 190
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It's postponed until that point in
time.
MR. CALANDRA: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry you had to
wait all day, but, you know, there's a lot of business we've got to take
care of.
MR. CALANDRA: I understand.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They love the process that man said.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He's always got a piece of candy in
his mouth.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am, right there.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Where do we go now?
Item #8G
ORDINANCE 2006-58: AN ORDINANCE THAT ESTABLISHES
A PROCESS AND PROCEDURE PROVIDING FOR
EXCEPTIONAL BENEFITS COMPENSATION FOR
CONVEYANCE OF AN INTEREST IN CONSERVATION
COLLIER LANDS - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to our next item,
which is 8G, and that is a recommendation that the Board of County
Commissioners adopt an ordinance that establishes a process and
procedure providing for exceptional benefits, compensation for
conveyance of an interest in Conservation Collier land.
And Ms. Alexandra Sulecki, your Project Manager for
Conservation Collier, will present.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And have both the commissioners read
this and do you have any questions concerning this item?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have to get there.
Page 191
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Very briefly it says that if Conservation
Collier is going to sell any property to a governmental agency,
including our own governmental agency, that it must do so at a price
higher than what you paid for it, with exceptional financial benefit.
MS. SULECKI: That's right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And there's good reason for that. It's
modeled on a successful ordinance in another county, and I'm ready to
hear a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MS. FILSON: I have two speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We do have two speakers. Do
the two speakers want to talk us out of this stuff?
MS. FILSON: The speakers are Bridget Washburn and Will
Kriz.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want to talk us out of this, huh?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That means you can waive and just
say no thanks.
MS. WASHBURN: My name's Bridget Washburn, and I'm
representing the Conservancy of Southwest Florida, and I'm here to
support adoption of the ordinance today.
We believe the ordinance would provide a clear process to direct
the conveyance of Conservation Collier lands to outside entities or
departments and to make sure there's a fair process which to follow
that's clear and that everyone understands.
However, we also support its use only in the very rare cases that
there is a substantial need for land convenience in order to provide
necessary public infrastructure. And we would rather really seldom
see this -- we would rather not see this ordinance have to be used very
often.
It is also critical that each transaction be carried out in light of the
golden parvices (sic) of the Conservation Collier Program.
Page 192
November 28, 2006
This fall we saw that there was an overwhelming amount of
support for continuing the Conservation Collier Program, and I think
that really shows that the public sees conservation of these areas as
something of utmost importance.
So we, therefore, support a strict interpretation of criteria in the
ordinance that will uphold the program's intent, the long-term
protection and preservation of Conservation Collier lands and full
compensation to the Conservation Collier Program both
environmentally and financially for any exchange.
One thing we were a little concerned about was the language that
calls for an exchange of greater value, and we were just a little afraid
that that was ambiguous, but we hope that good opportunities for
public input will make sure that the exchange is, in fact, there.
So one suggestion that we did have was that exceptional benefits
could be changed over to fair compensation, as there's no direct ratio
of compensation that has been determined before the process occurs
unless you will ensure that actually the exchange is an exceptional
benefit to the program. It's just some language that we were
concerned with.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Will Kriz.
MS. SULECKI: Commissioners, Will Kriz was a part of my
presentation, and he is the -- one of the committee members. He's also
the chairman of the subcommittee that developed this ordinance. And
he's retired now, but in his former life, he was the head of the land
acquisition bureau for the National Park Service, so he brings a lot of
.
expenence --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He's not here?
MS. SULECKI: And he is here. He's been waiting, so if you
hear from anyone, could he come up now and just give you what his
perspective is?
Page 193
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You've got three minutes.
MR. KRIZ: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Will Kriz. I'm
the -- I'm a member of the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition
Advisory Committee and also chairman of the ordinance policy and
regulation subcommittee of the full committee.
I would just like to say that, number one, this ordinance will
allow what is now not possible, and that is to make essential
infrastructure possible on Conservation Collier land.
Secondly, we drafted this ordinance with -- of course, with the
staff, but also with the departments of utilities and transportation.
And thirdly, I'm afraid there's going to be a temptation to use
Conservation Collier lands because they're owned by the county and
convenient. But the ordinance will establish a process that's going to
assure that all other possibilities have been explored and none are
available so Conservation Collier lands will have to be used.
And other than that, I would just ask you to adopt the ordinance.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Mr. Kriz.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any further speakers?
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning, did you have
something?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, I did.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'm assuming that the full
committee made recommendations on this. Here's my issue -- and it
was a first campaign also. The campaign was to buy lands to slow --
you know, slow growth down or those lands won't be developed on.
And the latest campaign -- I'm surprised that Alan Goetz even
sent me one after my editorial. But it's a picture about traffic. And it
says, there's a natural way to stop more development, more people and
more traffic, and that is to buy the land.
Page 194
November 28, 2006
And I agree, to help this situation, there are some cases
transportation administration needs to have those lands to make -- to
stop that. But for a wellsite, it will not enhance that one bit.
And I don't think that's -- and I know this is not our advertising or
what we told them, but it's -- the understanding of the public is, in
order to change this, we need to spend your tax dollars to stop that.
And I can't support it if it's a way for all different needs of different
departments to come to Conservation Collier to purchase some land
for their needs. I can understand it for transportation, but I will not
support the ordinance as it's written.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I'm going to call the question.
We have a motion on the floor.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes 2-1.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But we will be able to -- any time
that land -- anytime anybody wants to buy that land, I mean, any
department, it will come to us first, right?
MS. SULECKI: Yes, it will.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And Conservation Collier Advisory
Committee will first take a look at it, and they will decide if it can be
detrimental to the property there; is that correct?
MS. SULECKI: That's correct. The process is to make an
application showing how you've met the criteria to the Conservation
Collier Committee, who would make a recommendation that would
then be brought to you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you. Because I -- you
Page 195
November 28,2006
know, Commissioner Henning has a point here, and we want to make
sure that whatever we're doing, we have a say-so in it, and so does the
committee before it even gets to us, because they're putting things out
like this, and he wants to make sure to back them on that.
MS. SULECKI: Well, the committee actually didn't put that out.
That was put out by the political action, which is separate from our
county committee and staff.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see.
MS. SULECKI: But, yes, it would be certainly vetted, and the
process would be a way for you to see whether it is needed and
essential to the growth of the county. And, perhaps, a well wouldn't
be or would be, who knows at some time in the future when there was
a need that we would have. We can't prejudge that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, no, we can, and I think if
the ordinance is written in a particular way, it would solve my
concerns. It doesn't matter. It passed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We can always consider modification.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. What would you -- how would
you modify it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would just, you know, say for
transportation needs. I mean, I can't think of anything else that would
-- any other infrastructure that would support growth.
The -- we know that we have a transportation infrastructure
shortage now, and we have to put it wherever we need to, widening
roads or whatever. A wellsite, you know, it might cost a little bit more
to locate it down the street and purchase some more property. That's
not the issue.
I think the true issue is what the voters understand. You know,
understanding is two things in my mind, is to save sensitive lands, for
one, is that's a good thing for the county, and the second thing is so it
won't be developed. But if we put a wellsite -- cut a little corner out
and put a wellsite there, that's supporting for the growth. That's my
Page 196
November 28, 2006
opInIon. But we -- I mean the vote passed.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's move on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ifwe're going to try to resolve it, we
should do it during the workshop with the whole board there, so
maybe at some future point in time if there's still some concern about
it, we can deal with it, okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
MS. SULECKI: Can I just -- can I just add -- no? Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's done.
Item #9A
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE EAST OF 951
INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES HORIZON STUDY
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION MASTER PLAN COMMITTEE
MOTION TO CONTINUE - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 9A.
MS. FILSON: And Commissioners, I'd like to request that this
be continued. There's two parts to it. You need to appoint two
members and you need to waive section 5D of the ordinance for two
other members, and we can just continue the whole thing until the next
meeting, if that's okay, or would you --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We've got a lot of stuff for the next
meeting. But is there a reason? Do you commissioners want to see
this continued or did you have some recommendations you'd like to
make?
MS. FILSON: Well, the two members you have to waive has to
have unanimous vote by the board, all five members.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All five members.
MR. PETTIT: The language is -- the language of the ordinance
Page 197
November 28, 2006
says unanimous of the commission.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a motion to continue?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to continue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to continue by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Henning.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
MS. FILSON: Thank you, and I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All opposed, by like --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aren't we supposed to do 8J, which
was 16A3? That was something you pulled?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. Those are all on the county
manager's side of it.
MS. FILSON: Yes. That's under 10.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think we'll get to that later somewhere.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
Item #8I
PUDEX-2006-AR-9610 G.L. HOMES OF NAPLES II
CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ROBERT DUANE, OF
HOLE MONTES, IS REQUESTING TWO 2-YEAR PUD
EXTENSIONS FOR THE TERAFINA PUD (ORDINANCE 04-15)
WHICH IS SCHEDULED TO SUNSET ON MARCH 9,2007. THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTS OF 636.8 ACRES AND IS
LOCATED 1 MILE NORTH OF IMMOKALEE ROAD, NORTH
OF THE OLDE CYPRESS PUD AND EAST OF QUAIL CREEK,
IN SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - MOTION TO CONTINUE
Page 198
November 28, 2006
INDEFINITEL Y - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Mike, let me ask you a question real quick, just for
clarification. Leo and I are having a little dialogue, and I'm -- 81.
MR. PETTIT: That's what I was just wondering.
MR. MUDD: Okay. And I believe it can pass with a majority
vote.
MR. PETTIT: Yes.
MR. MUDD: But just for clarification, the petitioner asked that
this item be continued indefinitely, and I'd like to get a board vote to
continue 8I so that we -- we're scare with that particular --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll move to have 8I continued
indefinitely by Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner
Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And it is done, approved unanimously.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2006-313: APPOINTING WILLIAM F. RAFELDT
TO THE ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT
ADVISORY COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion
to appoint the members of the Isle of Capri Fire District Advisory
Committee and accept the committee's recommendations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
Page 199
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And the vote is unanimous for William
F. Rafeldt.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2006-314: APPOINTING ROBERT DAVID
VIGLIOTTI TO THE BOARD OF BUILDING ADJUSTMENTS
AND APPEAL - ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion
to appoint Robert Vigliotti to the Board of Building and Adjustments
Appeal (sic).
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner
Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala to appoint Robert Vigliotti to
the Board of Building Adjustments and Appeals.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2006-315: APPOINTING WILLIAM DEYO TO
THE IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
Page 200
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
motion to appoint a member to the Immokalee Beautification MSTU
Advisory Committee, William Deyo.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner
Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala to appoint Mr. William
Deyo.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Item #10C
RESOLUTION 2006-316: , AUTHORIZING THE BORROWING
OF NOT EXCEEDING $32,900,000 FROM THE POOLED
COMMERCIAL PAPER LOAN PROGRAM OF THE FLORIDA
LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE COMMISSION PURSUANT
TO THE TERMS OF THE LOAN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
COMMISSION AND THE COUNTY IN ORDER TO REFINANCE
A PORTION OF A LOAN PREVIOUSLY MADE TO FINANCE
THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN LAND WITHIN THE
COUNTY, INCLUDING LAND USED AND REFERRED TO AS
CARIBBEAN GARDENS; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF
A LOAN NOTE OR NOTES TO EVIDENCE SUCH
BORROWING; AGREEING TO SECURE SUCH LOAN NOTE OR
NOTES WITH A COVENANT TO BUDGET AND
APPROPRIATE LEGALLY AVAILABLE NON-AD VALOREM
REVENUES AS PROVIDED IN THE LOAN AGREEMENT;
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF SUCH
Page 201
November 28, 2006
OTHER DOCUMENTS AS MAY BE NECESSARY TO EFFECT
SUCH BORROWING; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
- ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 10C, which is a
recommendation to approve a resolution to the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, authorizing the borrowing
of not to exceed $32,900,000 for the Pooled Commercial Paper Loan
Program of the Florida Local Government Finance Commission
pursuant to the terms of the loan agreement between the commission
and the county in order to refinance a portion of a loan previously
made to finance the acquisition of certain land within the county,
including the land used and referred to as Caribbean Gardens.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- the resolution.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No discussion. All in favor, please
signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Thank you.
Item #10D
RESOLUTION 2006-317: AUTHORIZING THE BORROWING OF
AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,200,000 FROM THE
Page 202
November 28, 2006
POOLED COMMERCIAL PAPER LOAN PROGRAM OF THE
FLORIDA LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE COMMISSION
PURSUANT TO THE LOAN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE
COMMISSION IN ORDER TO FINANCE THE ACQUISITION
AND EQUIPPING OF FOUR (4) AMBULANCES FOR THE
COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES (EMS)
DEPARTMENT; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LOAN
NOTE OR NOTES TO EVIDENCE SUCH BORROWING;
AGREEING TO SECURE SUCH LOAN NOTE OR NOTES WITH
A COVENANT TO BUDGET AND APPROPRIATE LEGALLY
AVAILABLE NON-AD VALOREM REVENUES AS PROVIDED
IN THE LOAN AGREEMENT; AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF SUCH OTHER DOCUMENTS
AS MAY BE NECESSARY TO EFFECT SUCH BORROWING;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner, next item is 10D (sic).
It's a recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing the borrowing
of an amount not to exceed $1.2 million from the Pooled Commercial
Paper Loan Program of the Florida Local Government Finance
Commission pursuant to loan agreement between the Board of County
Commissioners and the commission in order to finance the acquisition
and equipping of four ambulances for the Collier County Emergency
Medical Services Department.
Commissioners, you authorized last year to -- told us to go
borrow the four am -- go borrow -- go buy the four ambulances at that
time during that discussion. It was disclosed that we would have to
borrow the money in order to do that.
Weare ready to go order the ambulances. We just wanted to
make sure that you were aware that we would have to borrow the
money for a short period of time in order to finance the new
Page 203
November 28, 2006
ambulances.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion
we approve this good resolution.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner
Henning to approve, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It pass unanimously.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Thank you.
Item #10E
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION BY C-
TECH MANUFACTURING FLORIDA, LLC FOR THE JOB
CREATION INVESTMENT PROGRAM AND THE FEE
PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND TO CONSIDER ALL
FOUR ECONOMIC INCENTIVES AS ONE BUDGET - MOTION
TO CONTINUE - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 10E. It's a
recommendation to approve the application of C- Tech Manufacturing
Florida, LLC, for the Job Creation Investment Program and the Fee
Payment Assistance Program and to consider all four economic
incentives as one budget. And Mr. Joe --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, Tammie
Nemecek was here earlier. Can we put this off till tomorrow, or is that
a problem?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're going to be finished tonight if we
keep at this current pace.
Page 204
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, C-Tech is a company that is going
to build a facility out at the Tradeport. They're coming forward with
200 new jobs. They have applied for the incentives that they're
authorized to apply for.
In order to fund those incentives, they applied for -- we will have
to use our entire budget for '07 on economic incentives in order to pay
or incentivize this particular manufacturing company.
The question before you today is, we would like -- we're going to
have to pool our monies in order to make good on the economic
incentives for this particular manufacturing company in the job
creation program that they're going to do.
And then the next question I have for the board is, now that we've
__ I'm assuming now that you're going to approve the pooling in order
to incentivize this particular manufacturing company in order to create
the jobs in Collier County.
With that done, there is no more budgeted money in the
economic incentive funds for this year, '07. We will have spent them
all.
I need some direction from the board. Do you want us to stop
taking applications this year and wait till we budget those dollars
again in '08? Because our process up to this time has been, when we
get a new company that comes in, we allocate those dollars based on
board approval throughout the year, and then at budget time we fill
those buckets for economic incentive back up to the amount that
you've authorized with your approval again, and then we start the next
.
year agaIn.
So I'd like to know if you want us to stop the program, or do you
want us to continue to accept those applications and continue to bring
them to the Board of County Commissioners for your approval, and
then we will have to do a budget amendment and probably take some
money out of reserves if we get those in the future, and that's the kind
Page 205
November 28, 2006
of direction that --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. I don't know if I expressed
my feelings loud enough, but I can't understand why we're trying to
attract new companies when we say we don't have enough housing for
assisted -- for our existing employees to serve our existing jobs.
That's where I come from.
It only takes two to approve this one. I'm not going to support it,
not that I don't support the company or anything. If we were going to
do anything, we need to support existing businesses of retention and
expansion, you know, but -- until we solve this, what some people
consider a housing crisis. But I'll keep quiet from now on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, the problem is that what we were
trying to do is to encourage companies that pay higher wages so that
the people who came here to work actually could afford housing.
In this particular case, it's only 106 percent above, or is it 106
percent of the average or median pay? I think it's only 106 percent of
the median pay, which is only 6 percent higher than the median pay.
That's not enough to really create any substantial high-paying jobs that
could afford housing here in Collier County.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And it's, isn't it average? So that
means there are going to be just as many -- or there are going to be
many below that and the top company --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's true.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: --person could be make 150,000,
and everybody else could be making 23-.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That could be. That's one of the
problems. Usually we've been looking at wage rates that were 150
percent of the average, and that seems more attractive.
But perhaps -- perhaps this is something that would be best
continued until we could get a full report from the EDC.
But now with respect to your question about whether we cut off
Page 206
November 28, 2006
applications. These expenditures really wouldn't occur until 2008 and
2009 because they're not going to have the jobs until those years.
So you don't obligate the government to pay anything to anybody
until they actually have the jobs. And when they have the jobs, we
pay the job incentive payments to them. And they won't have the jobs
until --
MR. MUD: We've obligated the money if it comes in front of
the board because you go into --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If they get the job.
MR. MUDD: If they -- if they're coming forward on this thing,
they've got a plan to bring the dollars. We obligate the money, they
come forward and we carry those monies through to the next year so
that we've got a checkbook, okay. If they don't come forward with the
jobs, then we bring the money back into the reserves, into the county,
in order to do that.
Otherwise, if you decide next year that you don't want to budget
anything to this particular company and yet you approve this today, he
goes out and starts building based on what this county promised, some
$1.6 million, and then he doesn't get it, you put him in a terrible
predicament in order to at least start his business in the black.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Commissioner--
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner Coyle?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Another thing that I wanted to
mention along the same lines, and that is, if we -- EDC continues to
try and generate new business to come into the area and attract new
employees here, then afterwards they and the chamber come in and
say, we need more housing, we need more housing, and they say
there's a crisis -- and I'm saying almost exactly the same thing as
Commissioner Henning, and that becomes a vicious cycle then where
we're never catching up because we're trying to attract more jobs.
And we can't even attract people here to fill the teachers' jobs right
Page 207
November 28, 2006
now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's nothing wrong with attracting
more jobs if they're higher paying jobs. That helps us with the
affordable housing problem. But if we're attracting more jobs that are
just around the average, you're right, we're not helping anything.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I think what you'd like to do
when they tell us this, when they give us a report like that and they
give us the average wage of, I would like them to tell us the highs and
lows, so if they -- if they plan to attract 106 percent, how many are
coming in at 70 percent and how many are coming in at 150 percent?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Commissioner Coyle,
maybe you could help me out and maybe I just have a
misunderstanding.
If we have a shortage of housing in the price range of 150 to, I
think it's 275 now, basically you would have to have an average
family income from 50,000 to 110,000.
So if those are the -- those are the incomes that you're looking for
to replace those low paying jobs is that -- is that range?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd like -- no, I'm not saying that we
want to replace those jobs, because those people are probably always
going to be working here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I shouldn't say replace.
Augment our workforce --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- at higher-wage jobs.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But that's the same price line
that we're trying to find housing for is that 150 to 275. And if we're
trying to get wages out -- our people to come down here to fill the
average price of a home, which is, I think, 450,000 in Collier County,
how much of a wage would they have to earn?
Page 208
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: A little over 100 -- 30 percent, about
$138,000, but that's family income. That could be two people who
earn 70,000 each. But it's -- the debates gets fairly complex.
The problem, you see, is that -- is that we never are able to solve
the affordable housing problem because if we spend money on trying
to find people housing right now who need it and can't afford it, 82
percent of all the jobs that are being created in Collier County every
year are less than the average wage.
And if we keep having this big influx of people that earn less
than the average wage, we keep getting further and further and further
behind.
Now, we cannot and do not want to replace the construction,
agriculture or tourism business, but we certainly want to see other
segments of the economy grow so that banking and insurance and
some of those things that pay really higher wages become -- our
economy becomes more balanced under those circumstances. So we'll
never solve the problem completely of those people who are working
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I totally agree with that. But
what I hear is a crisis.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I do too, and I think it's sometimes
manufactured for other purposes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I don't know. I'm
not an employer right now. The county manager is. So I can't really
attest to the problems that --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He doesn't look like he has a crisis.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no gray hair.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He's sitting there smiling and relaxed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just --
MR. MUDD: I've got two right here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Look at Leo.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We're burning daylight, folks.
Page 209
November 28, 2006
MR. MUDD: Sir, you want to continue -- you want to continue
this item until the 12th?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If the other commissioners are -- want to
do that I would be -- I would be interested in finding out why we're
spending so much money getting jobs that are paying $37,000 a year
when we know the people who are working at them can't afford the
housing we've got here anyway.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think a lot of questions need to be
answered.
MR. MUDD: Can we continue this? I believe Tammie
Nemecek --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion -- is there a motion to continue?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to continue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: By Commissioner Fiala, second by
Commissioner Coyle.
MR. SCHMITT: I had one item. At the next meeting also will
be your annual report of all the incentives.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: So it will be --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: A good time.
MR. SCHMITT: This will be with it, but your annual report for
the entire four programs, it will lay -- the spreadsheet will lay the
entire program out. So you'll get a -- you'll get a snapshot of the entire
program as well as this one then, and I think that will be a good time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Good.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, when you lay that out, will
you tell us what the low-end paying jobs are --
MR. SCHMITT: For the -- I'll try and capture that--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- for this program.
MR. SCHMITT: -- Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For this C- Tech?
Page 210
November 28, 2006
MR. MUDD: Break out what the job --
MR. SCHMITT: Specifically for this C- Tech, not the ones that
we've already awarded?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
MR. SCHMITT: Good. Okay. Joe Schmitt, for the record. You
know who I am.
MR. MUDD: Can we take the vote?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Item #10F
THE FY 07 CONTRACT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FOR
OPERATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY HEALTH
DEP AR TMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1 ~690~800 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 1 OF. It's a
recommendation to approve the FY -'07 contract between Collier
County and the State of Florida Department of Health for operation of
the Collier County Health Department in the amount of $1 ,690,800.
And Ms. Marla Ramsey, your Administrator for Public Services,
will present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve the contract.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Page 211
November 28, 2006
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is approved unanimously.
MS. RAMSEY: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to lOG.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And those -- the next two are -- were
pulled because of Commissioner Coletta's request. Do you know
why?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I have -- and I have his notes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good.
Item #10G
BUDGET AMENDMENTS FOR THE COURTHOUSE ANNEX
PARKING GARAGE, PROJECT 52010, IN THE TOTAL
AMOUNT OF $400,000 - APPROVED; MOTION TO BRING
BACK ORDINANCE AFTER STAFF REVIEW - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Okay. The next item is lOG, which was formerly
16E3. It's a recommendation to approve a budget amendment for the
courthouse annex parking garage, project 52010, in the total amount
of $400,000.
Commissioner Coletta's asked to pull the particular item, and his
particular questions on lOG are:
Number one, were the sprinklers really necessary? Okay. And
there's three questions. Were the sprinkler's really necessary? How
much time was lost for public use due to the addition of the
sprinklers? Okay. And can the county do the fire inspection
in-house? Were the three questions that he had.
Page 212
November 28, 2006
Now, in the parking garage, the SDP for the parking garage was
submitted without sprinklers and was approved. As we went into the
permit process and the inspection, it was later found by the fire
inspector that we need to have sprinklers on the garage, and we had to
go through a change order in order to do that.
That particular request for sprinklers caused the project to delay,
okay? So that's where the questions, are, and I'm reading those to you,
Mr. Chairman, to ask staff.
Mr. Hovell, if you could answer those questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, yeah. Why don't you, Ron, take a
shot at answering those for us, and I have a couple for you, too.
MR. HOVELL: Yes, sir. For the record, Ron Hovell, Principal
Project Manager in the Facilities Management Department.
I believe the first question was, were the sprinklers required?
The -- because of the Collier County ordinance, I believe 2002-49,
there's a calculation based on square footage and some other factors
that talks about the water flow necessary for either sprinkled or non-
sprinkled buildings of various types. And the bottom line is that, yes,
a sprinkler system is required for this parking garage.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: A concrete parking garage?
MR. HOVELL: Yes, sir, because of the Collier County
ordinance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Which we passed?
MR. HOVELL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I just want to make sure we identify the
idiots who did this.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because it says here that the state
doesn't require it; isn't that right? It says -- and someplace else it said
that somebody else doesn't require it, yet for some reason we do in a--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- cement parking garage.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
Page 213
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Hovell, do you think this is
a wise expenditure? Would we get a use out of these sprinkler
systems, sprinklers?
MR. HOVELL: I would really have no idea.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I think the answer is no,
. . .
In my opInIon.
MR. HOVELL: I can just tell you that we've built three garages
in recent history, the one here for the Naples Jail addition, which when
in issue came up about the next one -- and it does have a fire sprinkler,
by the way. It was my understanding it had a fire sprinkler system in
large part because there is one office in there and it's an occupiable
building in that sense.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MR. HOVELL: The Vanderbilt Beach parking garage does not
have a fire sprinkler system.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you have an opportunity to
come to the board and say, you know, Commissioners, we could either
spend $550,000 between redesigning it and getting the necessary
permits to change the Site Development Plan for sprinklers, or
whatever you have to do, plus the cost, do you have that opportunity
to come to the board and let us make that decision?
MR. HOVELL: I think there would be -- if you're talking about
the ordinance itself, I think there's probably a variance process. And
had we run across this in the Site Development Plan stage and not in
the middle of construction, it might have been worth the time to do
that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: Can I give you some background on the
ordinance?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, wait. I've got a couple questions
about the ordinance, you know . We passed the ordinance.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
Page 214
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But in the ordinance it specifies the
minimum flow rate that is required.
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's also a formula that permits you
to calculate minimum flow rate based upon the type of materials.
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The separation from other flammable
structures.
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Several other criteria. And I'd like to see
that formula calculated, because I'd like to find out what it is. And
secondly, I don't understand why we have this formula for a parking
garage. It doesn't seem to me that the ordinance was passed with a
parking garage in mind.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, I can't answer that. This is an
ordinance that was passed, brought to you by your fire official. It was
basically an ordinance that went through the DSAC. And I asked Ed
Riley to be here today. They thought this would be continued till
tomorrow and they departed.
But this was an ordinance that was passed basically amending a
local ordinance requiring these various aspects of the enforcement of
the -- basically the floor to fire prevention code. These were additional
requirements county -- for the county to actually apply to county
facilities.
Your building director, Mr. Hammond, is here behind me. Both
he and I concur that this building did not need to be sprinkled. It was
his professional opinion as well that it met all the requirements of the
Florida Building Code and the fire prevention code; however, this
code that was passed in 2002, it went through all the appropriate
subcommittees, committees, the DSAC, and came to you in 2002 and
was passed, basically left us with no choice but to comply.
It was our recommendation that we should take this and object to
Page 215
November 28, 2006
the state and pursue this through the date for a decision --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's not a state law.
MR. SCHMITT: Well, let me--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The state doesn't require that.
MR. SCHMITT: Let me have Bill come up so he can explain the
state --
MR. HAMMOND: For the record, Bill Hammond, the Director
of the Building Review and Permitting Department.
What -- what occurred in the ordinance is there are portions of
the Florida Fire Prevention Code that are in the -- that are in the
appendix and not in the main body of the Florida Fire Prevention
Code.
They are basically not binding unless they are codified and
adopted by a local authority having jurisdiction, an enforcement
agency, which would be the local fire districts and, by ordinance, the
ordinance they submitted.
So it was -- it is a requirement that exceeds the Florida Building
Code. The Florida Building Code does not require that type of
protection for a parking garage built of this construction type, nor
necessarily did the Florida Fire Prevention Code; however, the Florida
Fire Prevention Code does allow for it to become binding once it does
get adopted by a local jurisdiction.
And that's what -- that's what the fire districts did in this case. It's
based on an insurance services organization calculation for fire flow
for buildings of a certain type of fire resistivity. It had been used for --
by the fire districts prior to it being incorporated into the ordinance.
It's just once it got into the ordinance, that's when the binding
factor about that came around and actually became law and
enforceable under the Florida Fire Prevention Code at that time,
Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: This reminds me of the delay in the
Botanical Gardens construction process awaiting a fire inspection of a
Page 216
November 28, 2006
rock wall fountain. This is crazy. So what can we do about this?
MR. HAMMOND: At this time that requirement for fire flow
protection for buildings of a certain construction type is a binding and
a lawful requirement under the Florida Fire Prevention Code. It would
have to be -- you know, the code -- that portion of the code would
have to be amended to take that specific restriction out, but --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, why don't you bring -- why don't
you bring that to us, Joe?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, I would recommend this board direct us
to come back to review the ordinance, 2002-49, to re -- to have this
reviewed, sent through the appropriate committees again, and
basically to publicly vet this and bring it back for amendment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. In other words, we just wasted
$500,000 of taxpayer money putting a sprinkler system in a concrete
parking garage.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That makes absolutely no sense.
MR. SCHMITT: Well, there are many other stories out there as
well. This is just one.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, okay.
MR. SCHMITT: This is one where we disagreed all the way up
until almost the placement of the fourth floor. And Ron, if I'm not
mistaken, you didn't get your final building permit till almost the
fourth floor.
We would have delayed this project, but we could have went to
the Florida Building Commission and debated this in front of the
Florida Building Commission.
There is an issue that, does this ordinance really become an
amendment to the Florida Building Code? And that could be argued
as well, but I would recommend, frankly, in order to preclude any
such incidence in the future, at least from a perspective, we ask them
to bring this back, amend it, to vet it through the DSAC and other
committees so it can be reviewed and properly debated, again, in front
Page 217
November 28, 2006
of the board.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I'll make a recommendation that
we provide staff guidance to bring this ordinance back for review
through the appropriate advisory boards.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Third.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Passes unanimously.
MR. MUDD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Didn't he have one more question?
MR. MUDD: Well--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We still need to approve the --
MR. MUDD: You've still got to approve the particular budget
amendment. But how much time was lost on the building for public
use because of the sprinklers; Commissioner Coletta is to get that
answer. And can the county do the fire inspection in-house?
MR. HOVELL: I can answer the second question, and then I
think the third will be back to Bill Hammond.
The original completion date, had the building permit been issued
in a, what I'll call, a more timely manner, the original completion date
would have been back in July, and instead we got open in November.
So what's that, about four months of time?
We're paying, you know, a lot of different professionals to be out
on site due to that fourth-month delay. We were paying for tram
services during that time. And obviously in the end, even Kraft
Page 218
November 28, 2006
Construction wound up with extended time on site.
So we -- you know, there were a bunch of costs related to that
above and beyond the direct costs of the nearly half a million dollar
change for all the -- all the fire sprinkler system, labor and materials,
et cetera.
So I think that answers that piece, unless there's any questions.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we build an East Naples
Fire Department for that?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We can try.
MR. MUDD: Okay. And about fire inspections in-house?
MR. HAMMOND: Again, for the record, Bill Hammond, the
Director of the Building Review and Permitting Department.
Right now, in accordance with the interlocal agreement that the
Board of County Commissioners signed with independent fire districts
in November of 1997, all authority of the county to enforce the Florida
Fire Prevention Code was ceded to the independent fire districts at this
point.
And that -- and that was to -- in order -- the independent fire --
allow the independent fire districts to enforce the Florida Prevention
Code ( sic) for Collier County in accordance with Florida Statute 633.
Florida Statute 633 is the statute that empowers authorities having
jurisdictions, as long as they're licensed correctly under that statute, to
endorse the Florida Fire Prevention Code.
And it is a separate statute from 553, which governs the Florida
Building Code, the statute under which I hold my licensure.
So at this time, I don't have any authority, Collier County doesn't
have any authority or Florida fire safety inspector licensed persons, to
perform those inspections. They are all employees of the independent
fire districts in the fire code official's office.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. The only remaining thing to do is
to approve the budget amendment for $400,000.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but you didn't finish that one.
Page 219
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not -- right. I'm not sure --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's the one. We're still on that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- that Commissioner Coletta's
question was answered.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think he asked, can we take
over the fire plan review and inspections; is that what he asked?
MR. MUDD: He said, can the county do the fire inspections
in-house, but I believe that's really the intent that he's asking. Can the
county bring the fire planning and fire inspection in-house, into the
county, in order to put it under one head so that there isn't -- you
know, one -- a year ago it was North Naples running it. Now it's East
Naples running it. And so there is some dissatisfaction with that, who
do you call when you have a problem?
MR. HAMMOND: The interlocal agreement does allow for
either party unilaterally to withdraw from the interlocal agreement;
however, it would probably best be served if it were the elected
officials that desire it to be done transitionally because at this time
there are no Collier County employees who are licensed to enforce the
Florida Fire Prevention Code. They're employees of the independent
fire districts.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And I don't want to deal
with it while there's consolidation issues. But anyways, at least his
question got answered.
Motion to approve this item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 220
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Item #10H
AWARD BID NO. 06-4055 FULL SERVICE AUCTIONEER TO
ATKINSON REALTY & AUCTION, INC. AND Al ASSET-
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is 10H, and that used to be 16E4. It reads, it's a
recommendation to approve the award of bid number 06-4055, Full
Service Auctioneer to Atkinson Realty and Auction, Inc., and A-I
Assets.
The item was asked to be moved by Commissioner Coletta. And
his question -- and his question to be answered during this time was,
why not try eBay for some items to see if we can increase our return
on the dollar?
MR. CARNELL: Okay. For the record, Steve Carnell, your
Purchasing/General Services Director.
And the answer to the commissioner's question is that we actually
intend to do that and pursue that option over the next year or two;
however, in order to use eBay as a method of selling property, we
have to assume a number of responsibilities that right now would be
otherwise provided by the full service auctioneer, including publicity,
marketing, clientele, identifying targeted clientele who might be
interested in the items, and then also the actual logistics of transferring
the items being sold, and that includes physically shipping them --
packaging them, shipping them, and also passing the title, paperwork,
collecting sales taxes.
There's a number of things that have to be done, and if we want
to get into selling by eBay, we have to staff up and adjust to be able to
handle that. So we are looking at that along with several other options
Page 221
November 28, 2006
for marketing and selling surplus property that we'll be telling you
about in the coming months.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's go to the next item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Henning.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Item #10I
CHANGE #3 TO CONTRACT #05-3852, DESIGN AND
RELATED SERVICES FOR THE SOUTH REGIONAL LIBRARY
WITH SCHENKEL SHULTZ ARCHITECTURE, INC. FOR
ADDITIONAL DESIGN SERVICES RELATED TO CHANGES IN
EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR DESIGN, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$64~420~ PROJECT 54003 -APPROVED W/CHANGES
MR. MUDD: Commissioner that brings us to 10I, which used to
be 16E8, and this is a recommendation to approve change number
three to contract 05-3852, design and related services for the South
Regional Library with Schenkel Shultz -- yeah, it's easy for me --
Schenkel Shultz Architecture, Inc., for additional design services
related to changes in exterior and interior design in the amount of
$64,420, project number 54003.
The item was asked to be moved in the regular agenda by
Commissioner Fiala.
Page 222
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, and I'll just go right into it and
say that according to all of these things this I read in here, they said
they had to change the style to old Florida, but originally, it was
supposed to be old Florida style, and this has been discussed within
the community for years and years.
Somehow they produced Sarasota modern. I don't even know
how that happened. When -- and poor Marilyn Matthes, she came to
the meeting. I felt so sorry -- you tried so hard. She came to the
meeting, showed everybody. She was proud of what she was showing
everybody. And they came down upon her and said, that isn't old
Florida style.
And so then we had to have a meeting with the architects, and
they came back with something like western barn for their second
choice of old Florida. It was just awful looking. So then we rejected
that.
And I couldn't understand why we would choose a firm, have it
in the RFP that we would like Key West style or old Florida style,
depending on which one you look at, and they come up with
something completely the opposite, and now we're being charged
$64,000 because we wanted them to do it right in the first place, and
we lose 307 days on the building because the architectural firm didn't
do it right in the first place.
And it says, I wanted it changed. All I wanted was what we
asked for. And I just wanted to clear that up on the record.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. I read the contract,
and it did say old Florida style.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What do we do in this case? At
least two of us feel that they didn't produce what was asked for it.
MR. HOVELL: Well, perhaps I can give more of the details of
the timing of the project, and then we'll go from there.
Page 223
November 28, 2006
But this contract was awarded about a year ago, September of
2005. The -- there were a number of design meetings through the
winter. The rendering -- which I can show if you care -- in May of
2006, they were still in a design development stage, so the pictures
were pretty much just that, pictures.
But based on the meetings we had at that time with
Commissioner Fiala and Bob Murray and some others, the project
design team, they made some final -- what we thought were final
changes to the drawings and actually proceeded into design
development with specifics of, you know, designing mechanical
space, doing the Site Development Planning.
And let's not forget, this is on the same 20-acre parcel with the
emergency services center, which we were trying to fast track. So
we're kind of doing some give and take with the overall schedules
here.
So they had to establish a building footprint and go forward in
the Site Development Plan. They had to have architectural renderings
in that Site Development Plan submission. And all those were done
the first go-round back in the April/May time frame. Staff processed
that first change order back in the May/June time frame to make some
of those changes.
When the -- I'll call it the current version of the design was
reviewed again in September the request was made to add a porch and
to add some dormer windows over the meeting room and to the
building, and those changes at that point in time required the design
team, not just from an architectural standpoint, but site civil
engineering, mechanical, electrical, everything had to be re-Iooked at
because of the changes to the building.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But they didn't do it right in the first
place is what I'm trying to say.
MR. HOVELL: Well, ma'am, I appreciate that you didn't like it,
but there's no formal process, as we've discussed other times, to bring
Page 224
November 28, 2006
these things to the board.
And the directions that were being given by the collective project
team to the architect were that they were on the right track. And so as
changes were made -- we've looked at the rationale behind this and the
things that had to be done, and it's in front of you today for a
recommendation for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's interesting because when Bob
Murray first brought it up to the architect and the architect says, well,
you tell me what old Florida style was. And Bob said, I'm not the
architect, you are. You should know what old Florida style is. And he
says, well, show me pictures.
And I thought, that's rather interesting. I went down to the office
downtown of a local well-known architect, and I asked the secretary,
do you have any pictures of old Florida? She says, sure, here are a
whole bunch of books. Somehow she knew it, the secretary over there,
but the architect didn't know it. I don't ever want to see him in East
Naples again, I want to tell you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Cost us 64,000 and 307 days.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Hovell, in the contract it
states -- gave accolades to Commissioner Fiala and the East Naples
Civic Association for making this happen, but also, didn't it say that
they were to work with the community to bring the design?
MR. HOVELL: I don't recall the change order specifically
saying that. I'd have to go back --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, not the change order, the
contract itself, the original contract.
MR. HOVELL: Oh, the -- from the beginning there was a
member of the public that was part of that project review team.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. HOVELL: And I know, from that standpoint, that there was
Page 225
November 28,2006
involvement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know, in talking about
this, if it will do any good.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I don't think so. I just wanted to
-- it made it look like I was somebody changing the entire design
when that was what was called for in the first place, and that it's my
fault. And to see 307 days delayed for something that you said, for a
couple months, that seems a crying shame as well.
I know Marla said, well, you know, this is the design. If you try
and change it now, it's going to delay the project. And I told her, then
delay the project because it should be something we have to live with
for 50 years, we have to look at it every day. Of course, she didn't say
almost a whole year for a couple months.
MR. HOVELL: Well, I'm not sure where you're coming up with
the 307 days, Commissioner.
But let me back up a little bit.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Here. I can show you. It's right in --
it's right in the paperwork that was supplied to us. There. The time
for completion shall be increased by 370 (sic) calendar days due to the
change order. This is on page 5 of 15.
MR. HOVELL: Okay. But that's -- that's a specific contract with
Schenkel Shultz. That's not the project schedule that's been impacted
by 307 days.
Typically -- and you've got to remember, you know, way back
when this was proposed -- they were selected, Schenkel Shultz was
selected, they provided a proposal. They laid out a project schedule
and gave an estimated completion date that probably wasn't in concert
with what we thought of as the project schedule that included more
time for Site Development Plan approvals, building permit approvals,
before we actually got under construction.
The original executive summary in September of '05 projected
that we would get under construction in this winter, and now we're
Page 226
November 28, 2006
projecting -- actually next meeting I'll be in front of you with the site
work piece of that. Since it's all on one site, we were going to have
Kraft do both the emergency services center and the library site work,
and then the buildings will be done by two separate contracts. So it
will be under construction this winter.
So from a project delivery point of view, we've lost nowhere near
307 days.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I just knew what I was
reading, and so I didn't realize that that meant something different.
MR. HOVELL: Sure. The second piece --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can we -- can we --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- solve this by acknowledging that,
number one, the contract actually provided for the old Florida style,
and for whatever reason it didn't get done. And let's not blame it on
Commissioner Fiala that this cost overrun occurred because she
wanted old Florida style, because based upon what all of us believed
to be the case, it was supposed to be old Florida style from the first
step.
And I can remember when it came before us last time, and I was
appalled at the design. I thought it was awful, and I can't imagine how
anybody got that far out in left field.
MR. MUDD: And the board -- and the board did give
Commissioner Fiala the -- said, go get it right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, you betcha.
MR. MUDD: Okay, so.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, they did.
MR. MUDD: So it was with board consent that that all
happened.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So if there's a cost overrun, I'd suggest
we just take it out of Commissioner Fiala's travel budget and get on
with this.
Page 227
November 28, 2006
MR. MUDD: Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, can I -- can I make a
recommendation?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Go ahead.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I would say approve that particular
item minus the exterior design revision, which is $9,725, because I
believe it should have been old Florida and it wasn't, and I would also
say that the revision to the SDP re-submittal shouldn't be our problem
for $16,915.
So I would suggest that you approve this change order with the
construction document revision of $16,100 and expand -- in expanded
interior design services, which did happen, for $21,680.
So that would be a change order that is $37,780, and that's what
I'd ask the board to approve and we tell the contractor that he didn't do
what he was supposed to do with the old Florida, and he eats that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll make a motion in that -- to that
effect.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. A motion by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Henning, to approve a total amount of
how much, 37,000 --
MR. MUDD: 37,780.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: 30,780 (sic)?
MR. MUDD: No, $37,780.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: $37,780. Okay. All in favor, please
signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
Page 228
November 28, 2006
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Now, I want to -- just a little kudo to
Marilyn. She brought some new design work in, some new colors into
that library that are fantastic, and we were just so pleased to see what
you've done on the inside. But we never requested it. I thought it was
beautiful. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Brings us to 10J?
Item #10J
AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PUBLISH PUBLIC NOTICE OF ONE
PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A STAFF RECOMMENDED
ORDINANCE TO AMEND ORDINANCE 2001-75, AS
AMENDED, THE PUBLIC VEHICLE FOR HIRE ORDINANCE,
AND PLACE THE RECOMMENDED AMENDING ORDINANCE
ON THE BOARD'S SUMMARY AGENDA FOR POSSIBLE
ENACTMENT - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: 10J, which used to be 16A3.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I pulled that one primarily --
MR. MUDD: And that is a recommendation to authorize staff to
publish public notice of one public hearing regarding a staff
recommended ordinance to amend ordinance number 2001-75 as
amended, the public vehicle for higher ordinance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And I pulled that one because I
have an objection to one of the changes being considered here, namely
change number four, which says, charter service vehicle operators
need not display driver's ID except upon request by authorized
requesters.
I think anytime anybody gets in a taxi or limousine there should
be a name and a picture of the driver there that is visible for the
Page 229
November 28, 2006
passengers to see. They should know who they're dealing with so if
something goes wrong, they can -- they have a name. And I don't -- I
will not approve this, I will not vote in support of it with that change.
I think they should also have their driver's identification and
picture ID visibly displayed whether it's a limousine or taxi.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree.
MR. SCHMITT: Okay. For the record again, Joe Schmitt. The
-- this is just a request to advertise, make the change. You would --
what I hear you saying then is you want to advertise, but you want
staff to note that the board does not support item number four.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, don't advertise it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, wait a minute.
MR. SCHMITT: We will still advertise the ordinance, we will
still note that it's going to be heard, and it's going to be coming back to
you for final approval. We'll just take it back to the PV AC and let
them know that, in fact, you all disagree with the portion where it says
-- at least that they're going to be required to display the ID tags.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, it's not the advertising I'm
disagreeing with.
MR. SCHMITT: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's the fact that this change is
contemplated --
MR. SCHMITT: I understand.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and I disagree with the change itself.
End of story.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So what are we doing here?
Are we letting PV AC tell us what to do or--
MR. SCHMITT: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- we telling them what to do?
MR. SCHMITT: That's your advisory committee. Certainly you
can --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's try telling them what to do.
Page 230
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's what I was trying to
figure out.
MR. SCHMITT: I think you have every right to, and then we'll
take it back to them certainly, and that's the way we'll bring the
ordinance back to you. What this is just asking is that we authorize to
advertise.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I think when we advertise this and
when we consider it, we might have a positive statement that charter
service vehicles -- in fact, all public service vehicle operators need to
display a drivers ID. End of story.
MR. SCHMITT: We'll advertise it that way, Commissioner,
based on your vote.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that okay? That was my motion. Is
there a second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Second by Commissioner
Henning.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And it passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could you at some time -- I know
we have to get out of here now. Could you tell me in my office what
six and seven really mean and what that really entails? I just was
wondering if it takes any safety out of this or any restrictions on some
-- I don't -- I didn't want to lighten any restrictions on the drivers.
And to me, I got a little confused there. It sounded like we were
letting people drive that maybe shouldn't be just because they didn't
have a -- it says, unrelated to competence to operate a motor vehicle.
In other words, they could -- anybody else could get that license then.
MR. PETTIT: Commissioner, Mike Pettit, for the record.
Page 231
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But we can talk about it later.
Explain it to me.
MR. PETTIT: I can explain that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, good. Yeah, if you would,
please, thank you, because we voted already.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That was taken care of. We are
at the end of the story.
Do we have public comments?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. County Attorney Report?
MR. PETTIT: Nothing to add, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. No other constitutional officers or
Airport Authority. How about staff?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They'd be pleased to talk with you
at the helm here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, I hope so.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I'd just like to bring to the board's
attention and that of the public that on November 11, 2006, John Jack
Robert Humphrey passed away. And Mr. Humphrey served on the
education's facility authority and the industrial development authority
for this county for many years, and his passing will be a great loss to
this county.
The next item, Commissioners, you didn't -- I'm going to have to
come back next meeting with a Joe Schmitt, community development
item, okay, based on the budget subtraction out of that bill.
On 20 June you gave him authority to execute certain renovation
projects minus the lobby. The lobby, he had to come back to this
Page 232
November 28, 2006
board in the process. And he was in the process of executing based on
your guidance, and right now we'll put those things on hold and come
back to you on the 12th of December to let you know what things are
midway through and where we are in those particular bills. But I'll
just let you know that -- that that's there.
The next issue is, I received a letter -- I received a letter from the
manager on Marco Island talking about consolidated fire rescue and
EMS service. The board's guidance to me and to my deputy was, let
the independent and dependent fire districts work the merger so that
there is one fire district in Collier County, and when that happens, get
into the discussion about merging EMS with that one unified fire
district.
In this particular letter, it starts to talk about going away from
that particular direction of the board. It doesn't specifically state it,
but you can see the subject line, consolidated fire rescue and EMS
.
servIce.
I'm a little skeptical of this particular request. What I was going
to ask the board was to set up the -- this meeting, listen to what they're
proposing, and then come back to the board and talk about that
particular issue, not to agree to anything, but to listen to see what their
.
Issues are.
I believe -- this is my opinion, and I don't have the facts. But I
believe that they are having problems with their cap and paying their
firemen, okay. That's what I've been led to believe with conversations
with my staff. I have not heard it through the City of Marco Island,
and we need to figure out if that really is an issue in Collier County
and see what we can do about it.
So my request to the board is, even -- I understand your guidance
from before. I'm not trying to circumvent that guidance, but I need to
know if -- what they're asking for in order to bring that back to the
board for some kind of direction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it might be an issue where
Page 233
November 28, 2006
Isles of Capri Fire and Rescue can take in Marco Island Fire and
Rescue, and maybe that's part of the discussion, and all that is is a
countywide merger. It's just taking two departments and bringing
them together.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, and that could be, but I have to have that
conversation --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MR. MUDD: -- in order to find that out, figure out what the
severity of the particular issue there is. And if they have hook and
ladders and we have hook and ladders needs that are across the street
because -- there might be some ways to save money for the taxpayers
of Collier County, too. So I'm asking your permission to set up one
meeting to find out exactly what they -- what their needs are and what
their thoughts are and then come back to you to get further guidance
from you. Is that okay?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's okay with me.
MR. MUDD: Okay. We received a letter. We, the
commissioners. And I was copied on a letter from Commissioner
Halas that talked about negotiations reference the Collier Park of
Commerce annexation. The county has received a resolution now
from the City of Naples that basically says that they are ready to do
part two of Florida Statute 1 71. It talks about the annexation
discussions for an interlocal agreement.
I would personally feel a lot better if I had a commissioner that
was assigned from this board in that negotiation with the City of
Naples and formalize that a little bit, and then that commissioner can
then talk with you on the dais about those negotiations, because that
goes from this negotiation to a potential interlocal agreement. If an
interlocal agreement can't be had, Mr. Pettit, you're going to help me
here, please, I believe it goes into some kind of arbitration? Is that --
chapter 164 with the two commission -- or with the counsel?
Page 234
November 28, 2006
MR. PETTIT: You're catching me up short, but I think it goes
into 164, which is -- we've heard about that from the South Florida
Water Management District issues, which has a series of mediation
processes which could culminate in the board's meeting.
MR. MUDD: And what I'm asking for is the board to designate a
representative. I believe that Commissioner Halas is -- in this memo
to you, has asked that he be considered for that particular person.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we get Sue Filson to
do it?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, that's an idea.
You know, I always believe that, in most cases, that the chair
should be the one representing the board in these kinds of discussions.
My question is, when are these discussions going to occur?
MR. MUDD: We have to -- we have to -- I believe this will
happen right after the first of the year, first meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So Commissioner Halas will no
longer be the chair.
MR. MUDD: Possibly, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: In fact, probably during the entire
portion of this negotiation. It probably makes sense not to have me do
it because it might be a conflict of interest since the City of Naples is a
big part of my district.
But I like the idea of deferring to the chairperson for these kinds
of contract negotiations because he is, after all, the person who guides
the board during that period of time.
But if we nominate someone now who is not going to be the
chair during the discussions, that tends to create a problem. But I'm
not going to -- if Commissioner Halas wants to do that, I'm certainly
in favor of letting him do it, it's just that I don't want to offend the
chairman at that point in time who really should be conducting those
negotiations.
MR. MUDD: This board could designate the chairman of the
Page 235
November 28, 2006
Board of County Commissioners, and whoever sits in that particular
seat at the time of the negotiations is the person that's on -- all I'm
doing is bringing it to your attention that we received a resolution
from the City of Naples.
We also have a corresponding resolution received from East
Naples. They will be part of the negotiation process, and I'm just
asking for the board to designate a member of the Board of County
Commissioners to be in the initial negotiations and take part in that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Well, I just know that in the
interest of impartiality, I don't think it should be me, but -- so I'll let
the other commissioners make their designations as they see fit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I agree. If you feel it
should be the chair as the spokesman, I'm going to make a motion to
nominate Commissioner Coletta.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Or just the chairman of the Collier
County Commission, whoever that might be.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll change that then.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'll second that.
MR. MUDD: I have direction. That's all I have --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And if the discussions occur between
December and January, you know, it will be Commissioner Halas.
After that, it will be Commissioner Coletta, and after that, it will be
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Might go on forever.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. Okay. Anything else?
MR. MUDD: I've got direction. That's all I need.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning,
anything?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I have Commissioner
Coletta's time?
Page 236
November 28, 2006
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, then I don't have anything.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's not transferable.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't have anything.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. How about Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I have nothing.
Thank you very much. I appreciate your willingness to move
quickly this afternoon. Thank you.
And it's been a pleasure being back as chair, and I hope it doesn't
happen again for four more years.
Thank you very much. We're adjourned.
* * * * * Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Fiala and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted * * * * *
Item #16A1
LETTER OF CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000.00 ON
BEHALF OF FLORIDA AUDUBON SOCIETY PURSUANT TO
THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
RESTORATION AND MAINTENANCE (ERM) TRANSFER OF
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) BONUS CREDIT
REQUIREMENTS - THE COLLIER COUNTY LDC REQUIRES
FINANCIAL SURETY IN RELATION TO ALL PRIV A TEL Y
IMPLEMENTED RESTORATION AND MAINTENANCE PLANS
Item # 16A2
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "BLACK BEAR RIDGE -
PHASE 3", APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
Page 237
November 28, 2006
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY - W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A3 - Moved to Item #10J
Item #16A4
AN INDIVIDUAL CALCULATION OF GENERAL
GOVERNMENT BUILDING IMPACT FEES FOR THE
PROPOSED CITY FURNITURE/ASHLEY FURNITURE STORE,
RESULTING IN A RATE OF $194 PER 1,000 SQUARE FEET, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 74-
202(L) OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES, WHICH IS THE COLLIER COUNTY
CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE, AND AS
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY COLLIER COUNTY'S
IMPACT FEE CONSULTANT - TO BE BUILT NORTH OF THE
INTERSECTION OF TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH AND OLD U.S.
41
Item #16A5
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "MANDALA Y PLACE",
APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY -
W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16B1
AMENDED FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE SOUTH
Page 238
November 28, 2006
FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FOR AN
ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $100,000.00 FOR CONSTRUCTION
OF THE GORDON RIVER WATER QUALITY PARK - TO HELP
ALLEVIATE FLOODING RESULTING FROM STORM EVENTS
Item #16B2
AWARD BID NO. 07-4060 TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA,
INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE FOURTEENTH STREET
OUTF ALL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, PROJECT NUMBER
510059 IN THE AMOUNT OF $482,895.18 - AWARDED TO
QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA~ INC.
Item # 16B3
RESOLUTION 2006-300: A FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM (LAP)
AGREEMENT FOR RECEIPT OF FEDERAL DOLLARS FOR
LIGHTING AT BA YSHORE DRIVE BRIDGE AND FOR A
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE BOARD'S CHAIRMAN TO
EXECUTE THE LAP AGREEMENT. ($200K) - TO BE
COMPLETED ON OR BEFORE DECEMBER 31 ~ 2008
Item # 16B4
EXPENDITURE OF $54,860 FROM THE FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION (FT A) FY07 5307 GRANT FOR THE
PURCHASE OF A FORD PARA TRANSIT VEHICLE FROM THE
FY06 FLORIDA VEHICLE PROCUREMENT PROGRAM AND
WAIVE THE COMPETITIVE PURCHASE PROCESS
Item #16B5
Page 239
November 28, 2006
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING AN ADDITIONAL
$195.00 IN TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED (FUND 427)
TRIP AND EQUIPMENT GRANT FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR
2007
Item #16C1
RECORDING THE SATISFACTION FOR A CERTAIN
W A TERlSEWER IMP ACT FEE PAYMENT AGREEMENT
Item #16C2
RESOLUTION 2006-301: APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
LIEN FOR A SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNT
WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND
SAID LIEN IS SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1992 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT
Item #16C3
RESOLUTION 2006-302: APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
LIEN FOR A SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNT
WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND
SAID LIEN IS SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1993 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT
Item #16C4
RESOLUTION 2006-303: APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
Page 240
November 28, 2006
LIEN FOR A SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNT
WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND
SAID LIEN IS SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1995 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT
Item #16C5
RESOLUTION 2006-304: APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
LIEN FOR A SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNT
WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND
SAID LIEN IS SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1996 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT
Item #16C6
SOLE-SOURCE PURCHASE OF BIOXIDE, FOR USE BY THE
WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT IN THE
ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $500,000 PER YEAR-
FROM SIEMENS WATER TECHNOLOGY
Item #16C7
SOLE-SOURCE PURCHASE OF REPLACEMENT PUMPS,
SPECIFIED REPAIR PARTS AND MATERIALS FOR
APPROVED SUBMERSIBLE LIFT STATIONS IN THE
ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $700,000 - FROM ITT FL YGT
CORPORATION
Item # 16C8
Page 241
November 28, 2006
SOLE- SOURCE PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT FOR THE
REPLACEMENT OF FIVE (5) DRIVE REDUCERS IN THE
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $123,864 FOR THE NORTH
COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY
REHABILITATION, PROJECT NO. 725112 - FOR THE
OXIDATION DITCH AERATOR SYSTEM
Item #16D1
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH THE
AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION FOR
$235,180 TO PARTICIPATE IN THE LOWER INCOME POOL
PROGRAM FOR FEDERALLY QUALIFIED HEALTH CENTERS
FOR SERVICES PROVIDED FOR THE COUNTY'S MOST
VULNERABLE CITIZENS AND TO GENERATE $326,263 IN
FEDERAL MATCHING FUNDS FOR COLLIER HEALTH
SERVICES, INC. - FOR SERVICES AT HORIZONS PRIMARY
CARE CENTER AND OTHER SITES
Item #16E1
A WARD CONTRACT 06-4054, ON CALL SOFTWARE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, TO THE FOLLOWING THREE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRMS FOR A TERM OF TWO
YEARS: IDEA INTEGRATION IN JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA;
LATITUDE GEOGRAPHICS IN VICTORIA, BRITISH
COLUMBIA AND SKILLSTORM IN BRADENTON, FLORIDA-
USED FOR CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS
Item # 16E2
CONFIRM AND CONSENT TO THE NAME CHANGE OF
Page 242
November 28, 2006
CONTRACTOR ON CONTRACT NO. 04-3588 TITLED FIXED
TERM MATERIAL TESTING SERVICES FROM
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING & INSPECTION CO., INC.
(PEICO) D/B/A US LABORATORIES, INC. TO BUREAU
VERITAS NORTH AMERICA, INC. - DUE TO A CHANGE IN
OWNERSHIP
Item #16E3 - Moved to Item #10G
Item #16E4 - Moved to Item #10H
Item #16E5
SECOND AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH
ROGER CARVALLO C/O SUN REAL ESTATE FOR THE
CONTINUED USE WITHIN COURT PLAZA III FOR THE
CLERKS FINANCE DEPARTMENT AT AN ANNUAL RENT OF
$80,347.44 - THE LEASE WILL RENEW ANNUALLY AND THE
RENT WILL INCREASE EACH YEAR BASED ON THE
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
Item #16E6
GRANT OF A DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT TO THE
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
(SFWMD) FOR THE EMERGENCY SERVICES COMPLEX (ESC)
AND SOUTH REGIONAL LIBRARY AT A SITE LOCATED ON
LEL Y CULTURAL P ARKW A Y IN COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA AND AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $61.00,
PROJECTS 52160 & 54003 - IS REQUIRED BEFORE A STORM
WATER PERMIT MODIFICATION IS GRANTED
Page 243
November 28, 2006
Item # 16E7
SOUTHERN FOLGER DETENTION EQUIPMENT COMPANY
AS THE SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER FOR THE REPAIR AND
REPLACEMENT OF THE NAPLES JAIL EMERGENCY GANG
LOCK RELEASE SYSTEM, AND AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE
OF A PURCHASE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $495,536.00 -
IN ORDER TO REMOVE PRISONERS QUICKLY AND SAFELY
IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY
Item # 16E8 - Moved to Item # 101
Item #16E9
DESIGN FOR A SECURITY LOBBY FOR THE W. HARMON
TURNER BUILDING TO ACCOMMODATE THE GENERAL
PUBLIC AND STAFF - DUE THE INCONVENIENCE OF THE
CURRENT LOCATION INCLUDING CONFUSION OF THE
PUBLIC ENTRANCE
Item #16F1
A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN
THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS (CCBCC), THROUGH ITS EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, AND THE CIVIL AIR
PATROL (CAP) THROUGH ITS FLORIDA WING - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16F2
BUDGET AMENDMENT #07-079 FOR THE INCREASE OF A
Page 244
November 28, 2006
HALF-TIME EMPLOYEE TO A FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE FOR
THE SPORTS COORDINATOR POSITION ORIGINALLY
APPROVED BY THE BCC ON MAY 9~ 2006
Item #16F3
RESOLUTION 06-BAR-01: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS
OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2005-06
ADOPTED BUDGET - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Item #16Gl
RESOLUTION 2006-305: AUTHORIZING THE COLLIER
COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO, MODIFY,
OR TERMINATE MASTER JOINT PARTICIPATION
AGREEMENT (MJPA) 2007-A WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO FUND PROJECTS
AT THE EVERGLADES AIRPARK, THE IMMOKALEE
REGIONAL AIRPORT AND MARCO ISLAND AIRPORT - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16G2
AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE FOR THE
PURCHASE OF THIRTY-SIX (36) ACRES OF PANTHER
MITIGATION LAND, TO SATISFY THE UNITED STATES
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR
DEVELOPMENT AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL
AIRPORT/TRADEPORT, AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED
$319,500 - LOCATED IN THE F AKAHA TCHEE STRAND
Page 245
November 28, 2006
PRESERVE OFF OF STATE ROAD 29 AND SOUTH OF I-75
Item #16H1
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE NAPLES PRESS CLUB
FOR 10 YEARS OF COMMITMENT AND CONTRIBUTION TO
THE CULTURAL AND LITERARY LIFE OF COLLIER COUNTY
- PROCLAMATION WILL BE PICKED UP BY RECIPIENT MS.
JOAN CURLEY
Item #16H2
DESIGNATING CHILDHOOD CANCER AWARENESS WEEK
NOVEMBER 27, 2006 THROUGH DECEMBER 6, 2006-
PROCLAMATION WILL BE MAILED TO STEVEN A.
FIRESTEIN
Item #16H3
COMMISSIONER HALAS REQUESTS BOARD
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING THE BIG CYPRESS
BASIN HOLIDAY LUNCHEON ON THURSDAY, DECEMBER 7,
2006, AT BIG CYPRESS BASIN IN NAPLES, FLORIDA; $10.00
TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HALAS' TRAVEL
BUDGET - LOCATED AT 6167 JANES LANE~ NAPLES
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER FIALA REQUEST'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
HA VING ATTENDED THE GOVERNMENT DAY LEADERSHIP
COLLIER CLASS OF 2007, ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 5TH,
2006, AT THE COLLIER COUNTY MUSEUM; $15.00 TO BE
Page 246
November 28, 2006
PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET -
LOCATED ON THE GOVERNMENT CAMPUS, TAMIAMI
TRAIL EAST
Item # 16H5
COMMISSIONER FIALA REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT FOR
HAVING ATTENDED THE NAPLES CHAMBER FARM CITY
BBQ ON WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2006 AT THE
NOBLES COLLIER PACKING PLANT; $18.00 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET -
LOCATED IN IMMOKALEE
Item #16H6
COMMISSIONER FIALA REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT TO
ATTEND THE MARCO ISLAND CHAMBER CITIZEN OF THE
YEAR/CHRISTMAS GALA ON WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER
6TH, 2006; $65.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - AT THE OLDE MARCO INN AT
6:00 P.M.
Item #16H7
COMMISSIONER HENNING REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT
FOR HAVING ATTENDED THE BLUE CHIP COMMUNITY
RECOGNITION BREAKFAST ON NOVEMBER 2, 2006, AT THE
HILTON NAPLES & TOWERS; $10.00 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED
AT 5111 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH~ NAPLES
Item #16H8
Page 247
November 28, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT
FOR HAVING ATTENDED THE GOLDEN GATE CITIZEN OF
THE YEAR AWARD BANQUET ON NOVEMBER 10, 2006, AT
THE STRAND COUNTRY CLUB; $35.00 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Item # 16H9
COMMISSIONER HENNING REIMBURSEMENT FOR HAVING
ATTENDED THE COLLIER BUILDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION, INC. INSTALLATION OF THE 53RD BOARD
OF DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS, AND BUILDER AND
ASSOCIATE OF THE YEAR AWARDS EVENT ON NOVEMBER
18, 2006, AT THE NAPLES GRANDE RESORT & CLUB; $125.00
TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRAVEL
BUDGET
Item #16I1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR
REFERRED:
THE FOLLOWING MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE, AS
PRESENTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
HAS BEEN DIRECTED TO THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS AS
INDICATED:
Page 248
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
November 28, 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) October 21,2006 through October 27,2006.
(2) October 28, 2006 through November 3, 2006.
B. Minutes:
(1) Collier County Airport Authority: Agenda for October 9, 2006;
Minutes of September 11,2006.
(2) Lely Golf Estates Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee:
Revised Agenda for November 16, 2006; Revised Minutes of
October 19, 2006; Budget FY 2005-2006.
(3) Golden Gate M.S.T. U. Advisory Committee: Agenda for
November 14, 2006; Minutes of October 10, 2006.
(4) Collier County Historic and Archaeolooical Preservation Board:
Letter Stating September 2006 Meeting Cancelled Due to Lack
of Quorum; Agenda for November 15, 2006; Minutes of October
18, 2006.
(5) Isles of Capri Fire and Rescue Advisory Board: Minutes of
November 2,2006; Agenda for November 1,2006.
(6) Immokalee Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee:
Agenda for November 15, 2006; Minutes of October 18, 2006.
(7) Collier County Contractor's Licensino Board: Agenda for
November 16, 2006; December Meeting Cancelled.
H:\DATA\FRONT DESK - 2006\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\112806_misc_corr.doc
(8) Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee:
Minutes of October 17, 2006; Agenda for November 21,2006.
(9) Collier County Plannina Commission: Revised Agenda for
November 2, 2006; Agenda for October 19, 2006; Agenda for
November 16, 2006.
(10) Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee:
Agenda for November 13, 2006; Minutes of October 9,2006.
(11) Pelican Bay Services Division: Agenda for November 15, 2006.
(a) Budoet Committee: Minutes of September 6, 2006.
D. Other:
(1) Southwest Florida Expressway Authority Board of Directors:
Agenda for November 16, 2006; Minutes of October 26, 2006.
(2) Collier County Tax Collector: Budget for FY 2006-2007.
(3) Florida Department of Law Enforcement: Letter confirming
receipt and acceptance of all financial and programmatic
reports applicable to Contract No. 2006-JAGC-COLL-1-M8-01 O.
H:\DATA\FRONT DESK - 2006\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\112806_misc_corr.doc
November 28, 2006
Item #16J1
AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT #03-3497, "AUDITING
SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY", WITH KPMG LLP, FOR
$15,000 IN SERVICES RELATED TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT BONDS,
SERIES 2006 - FOR THE PROVISION OF A PARITY LETTER
Item #16K1
TWO AGREED ORDERS FOR PAYMENT OF EXPERT FEES IN
CONNECTION WITH PARCELS 105/705 AND 111/711 IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. RA YMOND A.
MCCAULEY, ET AL., CASE NO. 05-0633-CA (COUNTY ROAD
951 (CR 951) PROJECT #65061) (FISCAL IMPACT: $19~068.00)
Item #16K2
AN AGREED ORDER A WARDING APPRAISAL FEES FOR
PARCELS 131 AND 132 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER
COUNTY V. WEST COAST DEVELOPMENT CORP., ET AL., CASE
NO. 06-0708-CA (SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD PROJECT
NO. 62081) (FISCAL IMPACT $6~000.00)
Item #17 A
RESOLUTION 2006-306: THE APPROVED RESOLUTION NO.
2006-188 HAS AN INCORRECT DATE OF FEBRUARY 10,2007
FOR CUE-2006-AR-9424, AMERICAN DREAM BUILDERS,
INC'S MODEL HOME AND MODEL HOME SALES CENTERS
CONDITIONAL USE EXTENSION, THE CORRECT DATE HAS
BEEN CHANGED TO NOVEMBER 28,2007. THE SUBJECT
Page 249
November 28, 2006
PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 4050 13TH AVENUE SOUTH
WEST, AT THE CORNER OF 13TH AVE SW AND COLLIER
BLVD (CR 951), IN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST~ COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2006-307: 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
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2006-308: PETITION A VESMT-2006-AR-10083,
THE ROOKERY AT MARCO TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND
V ACA TE 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
Item #17D
ORDINANCE 2006-54: AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY
ORDINANCE NO. 72-1, AS AMENDED (THE COLLIER
COUNTY LIGHTING DISTRICT) BY AMENDING SECTION
Page 250
November 28, 2006
ONE, AREA ESTABLISHED, BY DELETING THE EDGEWILD
SUBDIVISION~ NOW KNOWN AS QUAIL WOODS ESTATES
Item #17E
RESOLUTION 2006-309: 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
Item #17F
RESOLUTION 2006-310: PETITION AVESMT-2006-AR-9951,
TOWNHOMES AT RAFFIA PRESERVE, DISCLAIMING,
RENOUNCING AND VACATING THE COUNTY'S AND THE
PUBLICS INTEREST IN TWO EXISTING PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-
WAY EASEMENTS, ONE BEING THE WEST 30 FEET OF THE
SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST OF THE NORTHWEST,
TOGETHER WITH WEST 30 FEET OF THE NORTH OF THE
SOUTHWEST OF THE NORTHWEST OF SECTION 34,
TOWNSHIP 48, RANGE 26; THE OTHER BEING THE EAST 30
FEET OF THE NORTH OF THE SOUTH NORTHEAST OF THE
NORTHWEST, TOGETHER WITH THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE
SOUTH OF THE SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST OF THE
NORTHWEST AND THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE NORTH OF
THE SOUTHEAST OF THE NORTHWEST OF SECTION 34,
TOWNSHIP 48~ RANGE 26~ COLLIER COUNTY~ FLORIDA
Item #17G
Page 251
November 28,2006
RESOLUTION 2006-311: PETITION A VPLA T -2006-AR-981 0,
1487 BEMBURY DRIVE, DISCLAIMING, RENOUNCING AND
VACATING THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLICS INTEREST IN
THE TEN-FOOT WIDE DRAINAGE EASEMENT
ENCUMBERING THE EAST FIVE-FEET OF LOT 12 AND THE
WEST FIVE-FEET OF LOT 11, STORTER SUBDIVISION, AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 5, PAGE 106, OF THE PUBLIC
RECORD OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND MORE
SPECIFICALL Y DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A AND TO ACCEPT
A REPLACEMENT DRAINAGE EASEMENT, AS DEPICTED
AND DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT B IN PLACE OF THE VACATED
EASEMENT
Item #17H
ORDINANCE 2006-55: AN AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO.
80-80, AS AMENDED, TO EXTEND THE REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS TIMEFRAME OF THE EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES ADVISORY COUNCIL
Item # 17I - Continued to the December 12, 2006 BCC Meeting
PETITION AVROW-2006-AR-9477, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES
UNIT 95 TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND V ACA TE THE
COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLICS INTEREST IN A 60 FOOT
WIDE RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT KNOWN AS 7TH AVENUE
NW (CHERRYWOOD DRIVE) OVER PORTIONS OF TRACTS
15 & 16, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 95, ACCORDING TO
THE PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE
45, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AND MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED IN
Page 252
November 28, 2006
EXHIBIT A, AND TO ACCEPT A 20 FOOT WIDE AL TERNA TE
DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND TWO 10 FOOT BY 10 FOOT
ALTERNATE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS OVER PORTIONS OF
TRACT 15, AS MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED IN THE
A TT ACHED EXHIBITS
Item # 17 J - Continued to the December 12, 2006 BCC Meeting
PETITION A VESMT-2006-AR-9775, HANSON TO DISCLAIM,
RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND THE
PUBLICS INTEREST IN THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF THE SOUTH
HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST
QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 24,
TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5:32 p.m.
Page 253
November 28, 2006
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
.Y>~
FRANK HALAS, Chairman
ATTEST:
~: ~. ~a.(.
WIGHT E..R .....K, CLERK
These minutes approved by the Board on \-cq --acD'7 , as
presented ~ or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY
COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI
LEWIS.
Page 254
_> _..a_..,_.-.........__~,,,'__..,~,. .",'^C"'_' -"'-.---.