BCC Minutes 03/27/2007 R
March 27,2007
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, March 27,2007
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
Tom Henning
Frank Halas
Fred W. Coyle
Donna Fiala
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB)
tl~"f
AGENDA
March 27, 2007
9:00 AM
Jim Coletta, BCC Chairman, District 5; CRAB Vice-Chairman
Tom Henning, BCC Vice- Chairman, District 3
Donna Fiala, BCC Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Chairman
Frank Halas, BCC Commissioner, District 2
Fred W. Coyle, BCC Commissioner, District 4
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL
RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY
THE CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53, AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, 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."
Page 1
March 27,2007
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBA TIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
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 A V AILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and
summary agenda.)
B. February 27,2007 - BCC/Regular Meeting
C. March 6, 2007 - BCC/Strategic Planning Workshop
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
A. 20 Year Attendees
1) Mark Burtchin, Transportation/ROW
2) Robert Wiley, CDES
3) Maria Sillery, Alternate Transportation Modes
Page 2
March 27, 2007
4) Judith Scribner, Emergency Management
5) John Poczynski, EMS
B. 30 Year Attendees
1) Jan Bennett, University Extension
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation to honor the North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District for
stepping up to the plate to help meet the housing needs of its employees. To
be accepted by Chief Michael Brown, North Naples Fire Control and Rescue
District.
B. Proclamation to honor and recognize the contributions Patricia McKay
helped visualize and commemorate her as a person who truly cared about the
people and the environment in which she lived. To be accepted by Mr.
Dennis McKay.
C. Proclamation to designate March 25 to April I, 2007 Philharmonic Center
for the Arts Week and March 31,2007 to be declared Myra Janco Daniels
Day. The Naples Philharmonic Orchestra is celebrating its Silver Jubilee,
with a star-studded anniversary gala honoring its CEO and the Founder of
the Philharmonic Center for the Arts, Myra Janco Daniels. To be read by
Commissioner Frank Halas and accepted by Ms. Myra Janco Daniels.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation by John Carlo on status of widening Rattlesnake Hammock
Road.
B. Recommendation to recognize Roger Jervis, Ivette Momoig, Judy Puig,
Mike Levy, & Connie Whiteway as Collier County's Outstanding Team for
Winter 2007.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
Page 3
March 27, 2007
A. Public Petition request by Dominic Chuirco and Marilyn Toohey to discuss
sound barrier for Berkshire Village along Santa Barbara Boulevard.
B. Public Petition request by Ronald Talerico to discuss permit to fill water
drainage area.
C. Public Petition request by David Crowther to discuss reduction of
compo sting material going into the landfill.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m.. unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEAL
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. 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 19,607 square feet 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.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Pelican Bay Services Division Board.
B. For the Board of County Commissioners to request that County Manager
Jim Mudd have EMS Director Jeff Page's letter to North Naples Fire Chief
Michael Brown, dated October 16,2006, officially retracted.
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 3:00 p.m. Request the Board of County
Commissioners to reaffirm the staff actions taken in association with the
Advanced Life Support Agreements.
Page 4
March 27, 2007
B. Recommendation to approve the approach to the Willow West Stormwater
Improvement Project located in the Willoughby Acres Area, County Project
No. 510076. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation Services)
C. This item to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. To review the written and oral reports
of the Advisory Boards and Committees scheduled for review in 2007 in
accordance with Ordinance No. 2001-55. (Mike Sheffield, Assistant to the
County Manager)
D. To be heard immediatelv followin!!: Item 14B. Recommendation for the
Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) to authorize the
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to coordinate with all
appropriate entities to secure and structure a loan in an amount not to exceed
$9,000,000 from a commercial lender selected via Invitation To Bid (Bank
ITB) to purchase certain real property within the Bayshore Gateway
Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency; authorize the CRA to execute
a commitment letter with the selected bank lender and to negotiate and
prepare for subsequent approval all required enabling documents to pledge
CRA funds as the loan repayment source; and authorize all necessary budget
amendments. (David L. Jackson, Executive Director, Bayshore/Gateway
CRA) (Companion Item to 14B)
E. Recommendation to: (I) Approve a Change Order to continue Phase II of
Work Order # UC-250 under Contract # 043535, Annual Contract for
Underground Utilities Contracting Services, to Kyle Construction, Inc. in the
amount of $848,020.00 for construction of fire and irrigation water system
improvements within the Strand Community in Pelican Bay, Project Number
74023, and (2) Approve a Budget Amendment of$I,181,157.00 for this
project. (Jim DeLony, Administrator, Public Utilities)
F. Recommendation to approve the filing of an action for declaratory relief
against the Clerk of Courts for a judicial determination as to whether the
Clerk of Courts is a fee officer or a budget officer.
G. Recommendation to approve an amendment to the October 14,2003
companion agreement to the Sabal Bay Developer Agreement providing for
reimbursement of construction and land costs for a portion of the Lely Area
Stormwater Improvement Project (Project No. 511 all) (Norman Feder,
Administrator, Transportation Services)
Page 5
March 27, 2007
H. Recommendation to approve the purchase of Property Insurance for the
period April I, 2007 through March 30, 2008 in the amount of $4,596,397.
(Len Price, Administrator, Administrative Services)
I. Recommend Board approval to upgrade the 800 MHz Radio system at a cost
of$4.8 million and to finance the upgrade with a loan from the Commercial
Paper Loan Program. (Len Price, Administrator, Administrative Services)
J. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Award contract
# 06-3962 to Municipal Software Corporation for the replacement of the
existing Community Development and Environmental Services computer
system. [$1.99 million] (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community
Development and Environmental Services)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. This item to be heard at 11:30 a.m. The executive summary is seeking to
have the BCC, acting in the capacity of the CRA; to review and approve the
2006 Annual Reports of the CRA required by 163.356(3)(c), Florida
Statutes, direct the County Manager or his designee to file the Annual
Report with the County Clerk and publish notice of the filling, and to modify
the CRA Bylaws, which require an annual meeting be held in January, to
require the annual meeting to be held in March to align with the Florida
Statute fiscal annual report March requirement.
B. Recommendation for the Collier County Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) to authorize the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Executive
Director to coordinate with all appropriate entities to secure and structure a
loan in an amount not to exceed $9,000,000 from a commercial lender
selected via Invitation To Bid (Bank ITB) to purchase certain real property
within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency,
and to negotiate and prepare for subsequent approval all required enabling
documents to pledge CRA funds as the loan repayment source; authorize the
Page 6
March 27, 2007
CRA Chairman to execute the real estate contract and execute a commitment
letter with the selected bank lender; and authorize all necessary budget
amendments. (David Jackson, Executive Director, Bayshore/Gateway CRA)
(Companion item to 10D)
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfactions of Lien for
payments received for the following Code Enforcement actions.
2) Recommendation to approve a modification to Resolution 2004-04
and Commercial Excavation Permit No. 59.648 "Winchester Lake
Commercial Excavation, located in Section 16, Township 48 South,
Range 28 East to allow for increased excavation to a depth of 30 ft.
3) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfaction of Lien for
payments received for the following Code Enforcement actions.
4) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfactions of Lien for
payments received for the following Code Enforcement actions:
Robert Chipman and Victor George
5) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution opposing enactment into law
proposed Florida Senate Bill 1772 (Companion to proposed Florida
House Bill 855) relating to Cable Television and video programming
services, removing all local cable television franchise authority and
provisions to grant or renew any cable television franchise certificates.
6) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution opposing enactment into law
proposed Florida House Bill 529 relating to Cable Television and
video programming services, removing all local cable television
Page 7
March 27, 2007
franchise authority and provisions to grant, renew, or extend any cable
television franchise.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve the purchase of 5 .15 acres of
unimproved property (Parcel No. 206) which is required for the
construction of a stormwater retention and treatment pond for the Oil
Well Road widening project. Project No. 60044 (Fiscal Impact:
$569,784.50)
2) Recommendation to approve an Access License between Collier
County and South Florida Water Management District to allow access
across County-owned property at no annual cost.
3) Recommendation to approve an Access Easement Agreement (AEA)
between Morande Enterprises, Inc. (Morande) and Collier County to
provide for shared access and interconnection for properties located
between Davis Boulevard and Radio Road.
4) Recommendation to approve the purchase of improved property
(Parcel No. 130) which is required for the construction of the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension project. Project No. 60168 (Fiscal
Impact: $567,450)
5) Recommendation to approve the Amended and Restated Agreement
for Haldeman Creek Disposal with Lakeview Drive of Naples, LCC, a
Florida Limited Company.
6) Recommendation to approve Work Order #QE-FT-3773-07-01 for a
construction project to Quality Enterprises USA, Inc. for Radio Road
(C.R. 856) Intersection Improvements at Livingston Road (C.R. 881),
using the Annual Contract for Roadway Contractors, Contract No. 05-
3773, Project No. 60016, in the amount of$328,044.l3
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfactions of
Lien for Solid Waste residential accounts wherein the county has
received payment and said Liens are satisfied in full for the 1991
Page 8
March 27, 2007
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments.
Fiscal impact is $30.00 to record the Satisfactions of Lien.
2) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfactions of
Lien for Solid Waste residential accounts wherein the County has
received payment and said Liens are satisfied in full for the 1995
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments.
Fiscal impact is $90.00 to record the Satisfactions of Lien.
3) 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 $200.00 to record the Satisfactions of Lien.
4) Recommendation to approve, execute and record Satisfactions for
certain Water and/or Sewer Impact Fee Payment Agreements. Fiscal
impact is $127.00 to record the Satisfactions of Lien.
5) Recommendation to award Bid Number 07-4114 Henderson Creek
Subdivision Water Distribution Improvements in the amount of
$775,081.65 to Kyle Construction Incorporated, to complete the
rehabilitation of the water distribution system to service the
Henderson Creek Subdivision, Project 710101.
6) Recommendation to award annual contracts to selected firms for
trenchless sewer system rehabilitation contracting services per bid 07-
4088, project 73050.
7) Recommendation to approve execution of a Proposal to Provide
Utility Consulting Services, not to exceed $9,500, to assist the Collier
County Water-Sewer District (the District) and the Florida
Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA) in the establishment of
wastewater service rates to provide bulk service to Golden Gate City
(the City) as served by FGUA, and to develop wastewater impact fees
for providing long term bulk service to the City.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
Page 9
March 27,2007
1) Recommendation to award bid #07-4076 to Cheney Brothers and
Vistar Specialty Markets/Roma Foods for concession food resale and
paper products at North Collier Regional Park at an estimated cost of
$145,000 for FY 07.
2) Recommendation to approve master agreements relating to grants
awarded to the Services for Seniors programs and authorize the
chairman to sign the master agreements between Collier County
Board of County Commissioners and the Area Agency on Aging for
Southwest Florida, Inc.
3) Recommendation to approve a Grant Application and Certification of
Application by the Board of County Commissioners, and the signature
of the Chairman, permitting the Collier County Public Library to
apply for a State Construction Grant in the amount of$500,000 for the
Marco Island Rose Hall.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners not renew
concession agreement #96-2611 with Fish Finders, Inc. d.b.a.
Cocohatchee River Marina Inc. and authorize the creation of2.8 Full
Time Equivalent (FTE) positions to establish marina operations at
Cocohatchee River Marina and approve necessary budget
amendments.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve the Collier County Group Health and
Flexible Reimbursement Insurance Plan Documents effective January
1,2007.
2) Recommendation that staffbe directed to develop an amendment to
Ordinance 2003-39 for the purpose of changing all references to
funding traffic education to driver education programs, increasing the
surcharge amount the Clerk of Courts may collect on all civil traffic
penalties from $3.00 per penalty to $5.00 per penalty and to require
that each Driver Education Program receiving funds require a
minimum of 30% of a students time be behind-the-wheel training as
authorized by Section 318.1215 of the Florida Statutes, entitled the
Dori Slosberg Driver Education Safety Act.
Page 10
March 27, 2007
3) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase
with Bernard Oetting and Gabriela Oetting for 2.28 acres under the
Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program, at a cost not to
exceed $51,500.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Recommendation to approve two after-the-fact letters of endorsement
to the East Naples Fire Control and Rescue District for Emergency
Medical Services Matching Grant Applications being submitted to the
Florida Department of Health
2) Recommendation to approve a Memorandum of Understanding
between the Ochopee Fire Control District and the National Park
Service, Big Cypress National Preserve
3) Recommendation to reject Bid # 07-4108 for the purchase of
Emergency Medical Services Uniforms.
4) Recommendation to approve the submittal of a grant application to the
Community Foundation to fund the attendance of staff to a
Conference in the amount of$I,700.
5) Recommend Approval of Resolution to allow the Tourism
Department to accept donations of meeting rooms from local tourism
attractions, hotels and other group function venues.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation to approve and execute Site Improvement Grant
Agreement(s) between the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency and a Grant Applicant(s) within the Bayshore
Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment area.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Halas requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended the VIP
Key Private Bank Sponsor Reception at Alico Arena on March 23,
Page 11
March 27, 2007
2007. $25.00 to be paid from Commissioner Halas' travel budget.
2) Commissioner Halas requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended the
Veteran Services Department luncheon, honoring volunteer drivers on
March 7,2007 at the Elks Lodge on Radio Road. $16.00 to be paid
from Commissioner Halas' travel budget.
3) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the EDC Excellence in Industry 2007 VIP
Kickoff Celebration on March 26, 2007 and is requesting
reimbursement in the amount of$19.95, to be paid from his travel
budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) To file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To obtain board approval for disbursements for the period of March
03,2007 to March 09,2007 and for submission into the official
records of the board.
2) To obtain board approval for disbursements for the period of March
10,2007 through March 16,2007 and for submission into the official
records of the board.
3) Request that the Board of County Commissioners authorize a public
notice to be published of one public hearing regarding Sheriff Hunter's
recommended Ordinance to establish policy regarding physical
separation at emergency shelters between potential sex crime victims
and sexual predators and sexual offenders, and to place this
recommended ordinance on the Board's summary agenda.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to Approve a Stipulated Final Judgment as to Parcel
116 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. David Lawrence Mental
Page 12
March 27,2007
Health Center, Inc., et ai, Case No. 06-0567-CA (Santa Barbara
Boulevard Project No. 62081). (Fiscal Impact: $27,600)
2) Request to Replace or Amend Collier County Ordinance No. 81-42, as
Amended, the Local Occupational License Tax Ordinance, to Change
the Phrase Local Occupational License Tax to Local Business Tax and
to Revise the Term License to Receipt as it Relates to Local Business
Taxes.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item requires that all participants to be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure provided by Commission members. Recommendation to
approve Petition A VESMT-2006-AR-l 0745 to disclaim, renounce and
vacate the County's and the Publics interest in a portion ofthe fifteen foot
wide utility easements B & C as recorded in and created by Official Records
Book 1648, pages 1502-1506 and lying over Parcel I & 2, according to a
plat of Berkshire Commons Parcels 1,2 & 3, filed in Plat Book 38, Page 30
and 31 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, said vacation area
being more particularly described in Exhibit A.
B. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. SE-2007-AR-11284:
An Ordinance to correct a scrivener's error in Ordinance Number 02-55, for
the Baldridge PUD, to correct the omission of Standard Industrial Code
(SIC) 6021 for commercial banks located in Section 18, Township 49 South,
Range 26 East.
Page 13
March 27, 2007
C. This item was continued from the February 27, 2007 BCC Meetin!!:.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUDZ-2005-AR-7820
Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, represented by Laura Spurgeon, of
Johnson Engineering, is requesting a rezone from the Agricultural - Mobile
Home Overlay (A-MHO) zoning district to the Residential Planned Unit
Development (RPUD) zoning district to consist of an affordable housing
residential neighborhood of 400 single-family, zero lot line, two-family, or
multi-family dwelling units in a project to be known as the Kaicasa RPUD.
The subject property, consisting of 100 acres, is located along the north side
of State Road 29, east of Village Oaks Elementary School, and is
approximately 2 miles east of the intersection of State Road 29 and County
Road 846.
18. ADJOURN
INOUlRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
Page 14
March 27, 2007
March 27, 2007
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Let's start offtoday's
meeting, the Collier County Commission meeting, of March the 27th
like we start all our meetings, with the Pledge of Allegiance, and then
Mr. Mudd's going to give an invocation.
Please stand.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Please remain standing.
MR. MUDD: Let us pray, oh, Heavenly Father. We ask your
blessings on these proceedings and all who are gathered here. We ask
a special blessing on this Board of County Commissioners, guide them
in their deliberations, grant them the wisdom and vision to meet the
trials of this day and the days to come.
Bless us now as we undertake the business of Collier County and
its citizens, that our actions will serve the greater good of all citizens
and be acceptable in your sight.
Your will be done, amen.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't know if the public's aware of it
or not, but Jim Mudd's invocation was probably written by his brother,
who's a priest.
I tern #2A
REGULAR CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA - APPROVED
AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
Okay. And with that, the approval of -- well, let's just go right
forward to the changes, Mr. Mudd. And would you please give us an
update?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Agenda changes, Board of
Page 2
March 27, 2007
Commissioners' meeting, March 27, 2007.
Withdraw item 6C. It's a public request by David Crowther to
discuss reduction of composting material going into the landfill, and
that withdrawal is at the petitioner's request.
The next item is item lOA. Page 8 of 10, the sentence in the
legend should read, table showing each department's total engine
reporting compliance for 2007, rather than 2006, expressed in days. N
equals 54 days, and that correction is at staffs request.
Next item is item 10E. Pages 10 through 19 of this item are
attached for item 16C7 rather than 10E, and that correction is at staffs
request.
Move 16A5 to 10M. It's a recommendation to adopt a resolution
opposing enactment into law proposed Florida Bill 1772, companion
to proposed Florida House Bill 855, relating to cable television and
video programming services, removing all local cable television
franchise authority and provisions to grant or renew any cable
television franchise certificates, and that item is being moved at
Commissioner Henning's request.
The next item is item 16D 1. Add as part of the fiscal analysis, at
this point the county is spending $145,000 and anticipating $420,000
in revenues. The county is marking up the food and drinks
approximately 60 percent, and that clarity item was asked for at
Commissioner Coyle's request.
Next item is to move item 16D4 to 10K. It's a recommendation
that the Board of County Commissioners not renew concession
agreement number 96-2611 with Fish Finders, Inc., d/b/a Cocohatchee
River Marina, Inc., and authorize the creation of 2.8 full-time
equivalent positions to establish marina operations at Cocohatchee
River Marina and approve necessary budget amendments. That item
was asked to be moved at Commissioner Halas's request.
Next item is to move item 16F5 to 10L. It's to recommend
approval of resolution to allow the tourist department to accept
Page 3
March 27,2007
donations of meeting rooms for local tourism attractions, hotels and
other group function venues. The item is asked to be moved at
Commissioner Coyle's request, but on my -- on my phone today
Commissioner Fiala also had a question to be answered, and I believe
it's the same one that Commissioner Coyle had. So I have two
commissioners that have issues on this particular item.
The next item -- the next part of our changes are time certain
items. It's basically a notice. Item 10C to be heard at 11 a.m., to
review the written and oral reports of advisory boards and committees
scheduled for review in 2007 in accordance with ordinance number
2001-55.
Item 14A to be heard at 11 :30 a.m., and this is an item where the
board will be the CRA. It's -- the executive summary is seeking to
have the BCC acting in the capacity of the CRA to review and
approve the 2006 annual reports of the CRA required by 163.5 --
excuse me -- 163.356(3)(c) of the Florida Statutes, direct the county
manager or his designees to file the annual report with the county
clerk and publish notice of the filings and to modify the CRA bylaws
which require an annual meeting be held in January, to require the
annual meeting to be held in March to align with the Florida Statute
fiscal annual report March requirement.
Next item is item lOA to be heard at three p.m. It's a -- request
the Board of County Commissioners to reaffirm the staffs actions
taken in association with the advanced life support agreement.
Next item is 10F to be heard at three p.m. It's a recommendation
to approve the filing of an action for declaratory relief against the
Clerk of Courts for a judicial determination as to whether the Clerk of
Courts is a fee officers or a budget officer.
And the last item is item 100, to be heard immediately following
item 14B while the board is still in the CRA capacity. It's a
recommendation for the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners, BCC, to authorize the Community Redevelopment
Page 4
March 27, 2007
Agency, CRA, to coordinate with all appropriate entities to secure and
structure a loan not to exceed $9 million from a commercial lender
selected via invitation to bid, Bank ITB, to purchase certain real
property within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community
Redevelopment Agency, authorize the CRA to execute a commitment
letter with the selected bank lender and to negotiate and prepare for
subsequent approval all required enabling documents to pledge CRA
funds as the loan repayment source and authorize all necessary budget
amendments.
That's all 1 have, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Mudd.
Is there anything from the County's Attorneys Office as far as
today's agenda goes?
MR. WEIGEL: No additional changes, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Weigel.
And we'll start with the -- as far as the ex parte disclosure for the
consent and the summary agenda by the commissioners. We'll start
with Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a correspondence on 17C
for Habitat for Humanity, and that's from Johnson Engineering. I have
nothing on the consent agenda, but I do have some -- I want to pull
some things off the consent agenda.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please continue, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. 16Al; and 16A5, I think
the county manager already covered on the change sheet, and 16A6.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. County Manager, would you
also read into the record exactly what those items are, too, as we move
them forward to the regular agenda?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. 16Al would become ION, and 16Al is a
recommendation to approve the release of satisfaction of lien for
payments received from the following code enforcement action.
16A5 is already moot based on the change, and that is 10M.
Page 5
March 27, 2007
And 100 would be 16A6, and it's a recommendation to adopt a
resolution opposing enactment into law of proposed Florida House
Bill 529 relating to cable television and video programming services,
removing all local cable television franchise authority and provisions
to grant, renew and extend any cable television franchise.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Commissioner Henning,
does that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- complete it?
Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have only 17C, and I just
spoke to staff and a member of the public on that one. I have nothing
on the consent, and nothing to change.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nothing to add.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And myself, as far as the regular
consent agenda, there's no item. On the summary agenda, 17C I've
received a piece of correspondence.
And with that, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning. On the consent
agenda I have no ex parte. Also on the summary agenda, A, B, and C,
I have no correspondence, no emails or any phone calls. Other than
that, that's it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no further changes to the
agenda, I have no ex parte disclosures for the consent agenda, and
with respect to 17C on the summary agenda, I have received a letter
concerning this petition.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Do I hear a motion for
approve of to day's agenda as amended?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So moved.
Page 6
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion for moving
the agenda forward by Commissioner Halas, a second by
Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it unanimously.
Page 7
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
March 27. 2007
Withdraw Item 6C: Public Petition request by David Crowther to discuss reduction of composting material
going into the landfill. (Petitioner's request.)
Item 10A: Page 8 of 10, the sentence in the legend should read: "Table showing each Department's total
Engine Reporting compliance for 2007 (rather than 2006) (expressed in days). N=54 days". (Staff's
request.)
Item 10E: Pages 10 through 19 of this item are attachments for Item 16C7 rather than 10E. (Staff's
request.)
Move 16A5 to 10M: Recommendation to adopt a Resolution opposing enactment into law proposed Florida
House Bill 1772 (companion to proposed Florida House Bill 855) relating to Cable Television and video
programming services, removing all local cable television franchise authority and provisions to grant or
renew any cable television franchise certificates. (Commissioner Henning's request.)
Item 16D1: Add as part of the Fiscal Analysis: "At this point the County is spending $145,000 and
anticipating $420,000 in revenues. The County is marking up the food and drinks approximately 60
percent." (Commissioner Coyle's request.)
Move Item 16D4 to 10K: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners not renew concession
agreement #96-2611 with Fish Finders, Inc. d.b.a. Cocohatchee River Marina, Inc. and authorize the creation
of 2.8 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions to establish marina operations at Cocohatchee River Marina and
approve necessary budget amendments. (Commissioner Halas' request.)
Move Item 16F5 to 10L: Recommend approval of resolution to allow the Tourism Department to accept
donations of meeting rooms from local tourism attractions, hotels and other group function venues.
(Commissioner Coyle's request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 10C to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. To review the written and oral reports of the Advisory Boards and
Committees scheduled for review in 2007 in accordance with Ordinance No. 2001-55.
Item 14A to be heard at 11 :30 a.m. The executive summary is seeking to have the BCC, acting in the
capacity of the CRA; to review and approve the 2006 Annual Reports of the CRA required by 163.356(3)(c),
Florida Statutes, direct the County Manager or his designee to file the Annual Report with the County Clerk
and publish notice of the filing, and to modify the CRA Bylaws, which require an annual meeting be held in
January, to require the annual meeting to be held in March to align with the Florida Statute fiscal annual
report March requirement.
Item 10A to be heard at 3:00 D.m. Request the Board of County Commissioners to reaffirm the staff actions
taken in association with the Advanced Life Support Agreements.
Item 10F to be heard after 3:00 D.m. Recommendation to approve the filing of an action for declaratory
relief against the Clerk of Courts for a judicial determination as to whether the Clerk of Courts is a fee
officer or a budget officer.
Item 10D to be heard immediatelv followina Item 14B: Recommendation for the Collier County Board of
County Commissioners (BCC) to authorize the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to coordinate
with all appropriate entities to secure and structure a loan in an amount not to exceed $9,000,000 from a
commercial lender selected via Invitation To Bid (Bank IT B) to purchase certain real property within the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency; authorize the CRA to execute a
commitment letter with the selected bank lender and to negotiate and prepare for subsequent approval all
required enabling documents to pledge CRA funds as the loan repayment source; and authorize all
necessary budget amendments.
March 27, 2007
Item #2B and #2C
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 27, 2007 BCC REGULAR MEETING
AND MARCH 6, 2007 BCC/STRATEGIC PLANNING
WORKSHOP - APPROVEO AS PRESENTED
Okay. Now, do I have an approval for the regular meeting on
February 27th and the BBC (sic) strategic planning workshop of
March 6th as far as the approval of the agenda and the minutes?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Halas and a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it unanimously.
Next is the service awards. Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDO: Sir, are you going to do it down here or are you --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, let's do it down there. I think it's
much more appropriate.
Item #3A
Page 8
March 27,2007
SERVICE AWARDS: 20 YEAR AND 30 YEAR RECIPIENTS -
PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Service awards, 20-year -- 20-year employees.
The first service award is to Mark Burtchin from Transportation and
Right-of-Way.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mark, congratulations. Twenty years,
that's quite remarkable. The next 20 will be a lot easier.
MR. BURTCHIN: No.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
MR. BURTCHIN: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: The next 20-year awardee is Robert Wiley from
Community Development's Environmental Services.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Come around here and let me get
your picture. Something you can save for years to come.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Robert, let us shake your hand.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Robert, thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: The next 20-year awardee is Marla (sic) Sillery
from Alternative Transportation Modes.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Great job.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Twenty years to get to this point.
MS. SILLERY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's do this. You'll never be able to
read it from that distance.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Maybe you didn't get one after all.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We'll catch you at 40. How's that for
a quick comeback. We'll have to get yours later.
Page 9
March 27, 2007
MS. SILLERY: All right, thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's on the top. Her name is Tessy.
MS. SILLERY: Tessy, yeah.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: In any case -- we did it right then.
MR. MUDO: The next 20-year awardee is Judith Scribner from
Emergency Management.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You must have started when you
were SIX.
MS. SCRIBNER: Ten.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Stand right there.
MS. SCRIBNER: Ten.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you so much.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Judy, don't you go away without a
hug.
MS. SCRIBNER: Thank you so much. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for all you do.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Congratulations.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, John Poczynski from EMS
couldn't be with us this morning, so that will bring us to our 30-year
attendees, and we have one 30-year awardee, and that's Jan Bennett
from university extension.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Congratulations. Please stand right
up here and let's get that 30-year picture.
MS. BENNETT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you so much. And we have a
present for you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: My son was four years old.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not that old.
Page 10
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: She was a baby.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks for all you've done for us.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Congratulations. Good to see
you agam.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you for 30 years of
dedication. Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that concludes our service awards
for today.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION TO HONOR THE NORTH NAPLES FIRE
CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT FOR STEPPING UP TO
THE PLATE TO HELP MEET THE HOUSING NEEDS OF ITS
EMPLOYEES. ACCEPTED BY CHIEF MICHAEL BROWN,
NORTH NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE OISTRICT-
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to proclamations.
4A is a proclamation to honor the North Naples Fire Control and
Rescue District for stepping up to the plate to help meet the housing
needs of its employees. To be accepted by Chief Michael Brown,
North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I requested this proclamation be
brought forward for a very good reason. We need to recognize the
positiv~ achievements that's taking place in the Collier County
community regarding affordable housing. And this is just one more
great example.
And if I may, with the proclamation -- please, right up front here,
facing the audience. We are so appreciative of the fact that you're
Page 11
March 27, 2007
here today.
Whereas, the professional firefighters throughout the State of
Florida are an extremely valuable asset in providing for health and
safety of our residents; and,
Whereas, there is a continuing need to provide affordable
housing in and around Collier County for the professionals providing
emergency service to our residents; and,
Whereas, the Board of Fire Commissioners of the North Naples
Fire Control and Rescue Oistrict have established a designated reserve
for affordable housing in the amount of $1 million by resolution
06-009 adopted March 9, 2006; and,
Whereas, the Board of Fire Commissioners of the North Naples
Fire Control and Rescue District, they developed a program utilizing
the designation -- designated reserves for affordable housing to
provide low-interest down payment loans to employees of their district
to assist in the purchase of housing in Collier and Lee County; and,
Whereas, the Board of Collier County Commissioners wishes to
express its gratitude and appreciation to the North Naples Fire Control
and Rescue District for initiating an affordable housing program to
benefit the employees of the district.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, on behalf of the citizens of
Collier County, the North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District is
hereby recognized for its efforts in initiating an affordable housing
program to benefit the employees of the district.
Done and ordered this, the 27th day of March, 2007, by myself,
James Coletta, the Chair, the signature. And motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion for
approval by myself and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
Page 12
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it unanimously.
Thank you so much.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Appreciate it. We're going to want
you to make a few comments and encourage other people to do
likewise, okay? Over there in just a moment. We want to get a
picture first. So if I can get you back up here holding the
proclamation facing the camera.
Thank you. And if you would inspire us as to how you did this,
and maybe others will follow likewise.
CHIEF BROWN: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board of
County Commissioners, I'm Mike Brown. I'm chief of North Naples
Fire Control and Rescue District.
I really want to give the credit where credit's due. The fire board
representative, Mike Davis, and Dudley Goodlette and our legal
representative Laura Donaldson, are the ones that pushed this issue,
put the money aside.
We have worked for the last six months putting together the plan
whereas to give low, very low interest only loans to employees if they
meet certain criteria, and basically have that refund itself as time goes
on and give early -- give recognition for employees and give
incentives to have it paid off in an early way.
We feel, and we've been told by a number of people in -- that it's
a good program, that it will work, and that it will last, and it's good for
the long-term. But we encourage everyone to do that.
Page 13
March 27, 2007
I think it's important -- we do have an affordable housing issue in
Collier County, as everyone knows, and we certainly want to do our
part. And I know you all have done your part.
So on our behalf, we thank you for the part that you've play in
this role, and thank you for the proclamation and for the honor
today. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
CHIEF BROWN: Appreciate it.
(Applause.)
Item #4 B
PROCLAMA nON TO HONOR AND RECOGNIZE THE
CONTRIBUTIONS PATRICIA MCKAY HELPED VISUALIZE
ANO COMMEMORATE HER AS A PERSON WHO TRULY
CARED ABOUT THE PEOPLE ANO THE ENVIRONMENT IN
WHICH SHE LIVED. ACCEPTED BY MR. DENNIS MCKAY -
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to 4B. It's a
proclamation to honor and recognize the contributions of Patricia
McKay -- contributions Patricia McKay helped visualize and
commemorate her as a person who truly cared about the people and
the environment in which she lived. To be accepted by Mr. Dennis
McKay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'd like to invite the other residents
from Port of the Isles who are also here, to come up front too and
share in to this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, my.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: A very well-thought-ofperson.
Page 14
March 27, 2007
Thank you for being here today.
MR. McKAY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's my pleasure, sir. Please right up
front facing towards the audience.
Whereas, Patricia McKay, a resident of Port of the Isles since
1998, was the treasurer for the Stella Maris Homeowners Association
and served on the board where she sought to improve the quality of
life for those living in the Port of the Isles community; and.
Whereas, through her involvement, she urged the Port of the Isles
community and district board to widen Newport Cay for a bike path, a
project which was completed last summer; and,
Whereas, she worked with the county staff and her community to
establish a local voting location so that residents could not have to
drive 15 miles to vote, initiating positive action to government
participation; and,
Whereas, the Florida Department of Transportation has
programmed $300,000 with federal enhancement program funds for
its five-year work program for enhancements along U.S. 41, State
Road 92 to the Dade County line, associated with its designation as a
national scenic bypass, and through the MPO, has requested to change
the designation, through Patricia McKay's involvement, the MPO
recommended that $300,000 be applied to a landscape and proposed
manatee viewing area project on 41 at Port of the Isles community and
the Faka Union Canal; and,
Where (sic), without her continuous involvement and passion for
the Port of the Isles community, this landscape beautification program
would not have been constructed; and,
Whereas, sadly and unfortunately, last year Patricia McKay
succumbed to cancer. The community wished to recognize the
contributions she helped visualize and commemorate her as a person
who truly cared about the people and the environment in which she
lived.
Page 15
March 27, 2007
And therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that Patricia McKay be
recognized as an outstanding community member and dedicate the
Port of the Isles landscaping to her memory and in her honor.
Done and ordered this, the 27th day of May, 2007, and signed by
myself, James Coletta, and I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we have a motion for approval
by Commissioner Coletta and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Is there any comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it unanimously.
Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're going to need to bring you in a
little bit tighter. Follow the instructions of our resident photographer.
Okay. Ifwe could face the camera there and hold the
proclamation out in front. Thank you.
Thank you, sir. Would you like to say a couple words? Right up
here at the podium.
MR. McKAY: Well, Commissioner, I believe you said it. I'm a
little heartbroken about it, but I really thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Once again, thank you so much for
Page 16
March 27, 2007
your contributions that your wife made and the community at large for
supporting these efforts. There is much yet to be done. We got a fire
station we're looking at for your community, and we're sure we're
going to be seeing you back here with some of your community
activism in the very near future. Thank you for being here.
MR. McKAY: I just wish she could be with us to accept it.
(Applause.)
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION TO OESIGNA TE MARCH 25 TO APRIL 1,
2007 PHILHARMONIC CENTER FOR THE ARTS WEEK AND
MARCH 31, 2007 TO BE DECLARED MYRA JANCO DANIELS
DAY. THE NAPLES PHILHARMONIC ORCHESTRA IS
CELEBRATING ITS SILVER JUBILEE, WITH A ST AR-
STUDDED ANNIVERSARY GALA HONORING ITS CEO AND
THE FOUNDER OF THE PHILHARMONIC CENTER FOR THE
ARTS, MYRA JANCO DANIELS. ACCEPTED BY MS. MYRA
JANCO DANIELS - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, the next proclamation is 4C. It's a
proclamation to designate March 25th to April 1, 2007, as
Philharmonic Center for the Arts Week and March 35th (sic), 2007, to
be dedicated to Myra Janco Daniels.
The Naples Philharmonic Orchestra is celebrating its Silver
Jubilee with a star-studded anniversary gala honoring its CEO and the
founder of the Philharmonic Center for the Arts, Myra Janco Daniels,
to be read by Commissioner Frank Halas and accepted by Ms. Myra
Janco Daniels.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, ladies and
gentlemen. It's a real pleasure to read this proclamation. This
particular --
Page 17
March 27, 2007
MR. MUDD: Myra?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Myra, could you come up, please.
I'm sorry. It's a real pleasure to read this proclamation. This
individual has worked very hard and diligently through the years and
has taken a rough diamond and polished it and cut it to the point
where it's the Hope Diamond of Collier County and of Naples.
Myra, it's a great pleasure to begin this proclamation.
Whereas, the Philharmonic Center of the Arts enriches and
inspires the lives of the citizens of Southwest Florida; and,
Whereas, the Philharmonic Center for the Arts is the premier
performing art hall in Southwest Florida, hosting more than 400
events each year, including world class dance, opera, classical and
popular music and Broadway musicals and enriching the cultural life
of Collier County and all of Southwest Florida; and,
Whereas, the Naples Philharmonic Orchestra provides artistic
excellence each season, increasing the repertoire and adding
challenging programs designed to stimulate and enrich audiences of
all age; and,
Whereas, the Philharmonic Chorale, Youth Chorale and the
Youth Orchestra provide community members the opportunity to
develop and grow their musical talents while enhancing and increasing
the musical experiences of concert goers; and,
Whereas, the Naples Museum of Arts strives to be a visual art
center for people of all ages and backgrounds while providing
educational programs and lectures; and,
Whereas, the Naples Philharmonic has grown from its roots of a
tiny volunteer Naples/Marco Philharmonic Orchestra in 1982 to the
award-winning world class institution it is today; and,
Whereas, this growth and development has made (sic) possible
through the generosity and the community spirit of hundreds of local
citizens who provide and enrich endowments, donations and volunteer
hours required for a successful community resource; and,
Page 18
March 27,2007
Whereas, the vision and guiding spirit of these great
achievements has been Myra Janco Daniels who has capped a highly
successful advertising career with her outstanding performance as
CEO and under whose inspiring and decisive leadership and constant
quest for perfection, the Philharmonic Center has grown and
established a $19 million, 90,275-foot -- square-foot performance hall
and administrative center, delivered on time and on budget; a $10
million, 30,000-square-foot art museum; a 40,000-square-foot
corporate center with two acres of additional land for future
enhancements of the center; a core of remarkable, talented musicians
and administrators; world class musical directors, conductors and
artists; financial stability and secure endowment, a truly remarkable
achievement in this time of struggle for orchestras and museums
across the nation; a carefully balanced program of programs and
presentations in the arts that surpass that available in many
comparable-sized communities and is the envy of many metropolitan
areas; and,
Whereas, the Naples Philharmonic Orchestra is celebrating its
silver and -- Silver Jubilee, a star-studded anniversary gala honoring
the CEO and founder of the Philharmonic Center for the Arts, Myra
Janco Daniels.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that March 25th through
April 1 st be designated as the Philharmonic Center for the Arts week,
and on Saturday, March 31 st, shall be declared Myra Janco Daniels
Oay.
Done and ordered this 27th day of March, 2007.
And I make a motion of approval of this very important
proclamation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, it looks like we've got a motion
Page 1 9
March 27, 2007
for approval by Commissioner Halas, but a second by three other
commissioners, and I'd like to include my name in there, but we're
going to recognize Commissioner Coyle as the second.
And with that, all those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes, of course, have it
unanimously.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Myra, thanks for all you do.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Myra, thank you for all your
contributions to our community.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Myra, if you'd like to say a few
words.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: First we're going to get a picture,
Myra.
MS. DANIELS: I appreciate the community allowing me to be a
baton twirler, but they have -- they have done some wonderful things,
and I am proud to be a member of Collier County, and we want to
keep it that way.
I have been amazed at the wonderful service that this county has
given the Philharmonic Center in security, in fast delivery of the fire
department. I cannot tell you how pleased we are with Collier
County.
So in behalf of the 400 employees that we have and a wonderful
board, I will accept this in their honor, too. Thank you.
(Applause.)
Page 20
March 27, 2007
Item #5A
PRESENTATION BY JOHN CARLO ON STATUS OF
WIDENING RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD - FUTURE
TRANSPORTA nON WORKSHOP PLANNED FOR DISCUSSION
REGARDING BURIED UTILITY ISSUES
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that is brings us to presentations.
The first presentation is a presentations by John Carlo on status of the
widening of Rattlesnake Hammock Road.
State your name for the record.
MR. MONKS: My name is Steve Monks (phonetic). I'm the
Regional Manager for John Carlo. I'm here to talk about the
Rattlesnake Hammock project today. I want to tell you right off the
bat that it's going very well. It's a good project. We've got some good
people on the job.
We've got an excellent management team, right from the designer
of record, ABB, to the CEI, WilsonMiller, to the county staff and our
people, are all working together. It's a very, very good job.
And it's scheduled for completion -- we have until January 8,
2008. We think we'll be done by then. We hope that we'll be done
early. We are cautiously optimistic that we'll be done early.
We're about halfway through the job, a little bit more than
halfway through the job, and we've completely a little bit more than
half of the work, so it's going very well. Everything is -- everything
looks very good.
We continue to meet -- we've met challenges and we will
continue to meet them. We've got a couple that are out there right
now, and I'll maybe list them for you just to let you know basically
where they're at.
They're not at the legal stage right now. We hope not -- that they
Page 21
March 27, 2007
won't go to the legal stage. We'd like to get them resolved. One is --
relates to a Teco gas claim. There's an existing Teco gas main on the
job. It was shown to be relocated as part of the new drawings. The
proposed drawings, the drawings we received to bid on, indicated that
they would be relocated.
Sometime between the time we bid the job and the time we
started it was decided not to relocate that gas main. We've incurred
some costs working around that gas main, and that's basically the logic
behind our -- that issue.
We've still got some issues with FP&L. I hate -- you know, this
is the third time we've been here on three different jobs. Every job I
mention FP&L utility relocations. It continues to be an issue. In fact,
there's one that just came up on Thursday.
We're desperately trying to get all the storm drainage in by the
end of the dry season. We've got a box culvert to run across the road,
and it turns out FP&L's got some cable in the way.
They didn't know it was there before, apparently, didn't know
that it would conflict with the box culvert. So, you know, those are
the types of issues that we're dealing with, but I -- as I said before, the
management team that is working on the job is very -- has been very
successful working through those problems.
So I don't have a lot else to say. It's a very good job. It's a
difficult job, but it's -- we seem to be doing fairly well on it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we really appreciate your
efforts that are being done and -- but Commissioner Fiala has a
question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, no question. I just wanted to
say I've been kind of observing. I'm sorry that I get onto the road and
bother the people, but you guys are doing a terrific job. There's so
much water there and so many other things that you're dealing with,
and you've just masterfully gone ahead and moved forward, and you're
right on schedule, if not a little bit ahead right now.
Page 22
March 27,2007
And I just wanted to tell you, from an East Naples resident, we
really appreciate all that you've done to keep that traffic flowing
through there.
MR. MONKS: Well, thank you. That really is part of the team.
I mean, you know, the credit really should go to our folks on the site,
but the county people, Jim Zuver, Steve Ritter, you know, the folks
from the CEI, WilsonMiller, and the design engineer. It's going very
well, very well. Thank you for that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. Mr. Chairman, I just would
like to acknowledge John Carlo and its employees for the fine job
they've been doing for us, not only here, but in Goodlette Road. That
came in a little bit late, but there were a lot of complications that were
beyond your control there, and I think everyone is very happy with
what you have done.
I would like to see what we can do about resolving these two
issues. So I would like to ask staff to advise us about the progress in
getting these two problems resolved for you and see if we, as
commissioners, can do anything to facility that.
So I'm going to ask Norm Feder to come up and address that if you
don't mind, okay?
MR. MONKS: Okay. Thank you.
MR. FEOER: Commissioner, we'll be happy to do that. We're
working through the issues. We'll come back and advise you. As
we've spoken before, we're getting ready for a workshop to talk about
a number of these issues and how we proceed on the projects and
work through along with the contractor, so we'll be happy to do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: One of the things I believe we
should consider -- and I believe we talked about this at a previous
briefing similar to this -- whenever a utility company over which we
have no control finds some of their facilities in the way and they were
not properly located in the beginning, it seems to me that they should
Page 23
March 27, 2007
be responsible for any costs of delays associated with the contract.
MR. FEDER: We are bringing at that workshop some provisions
that go directly to that point for consideration by the board, and so
what I'll do is wait for the workshop, but I appreciate your comment,
and we are bringing some recommendations relative to our
right-of-way permitting that hopefully go exactly to that point.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And when do you think the
workshop is going to be scheduled?
MR. FEDER: Right now we're working with the Productivity
Committee along with the industry, CEIs and others. We've held a
number of meetings so far. I was hoping to let Productivity take the
lead, to a degree, on coming forward. I need to get with them, but I
imagine within the next month we need to be doing this.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would hope so. County
Manager, could we get a commitment maybe sometime in the next
month we'll get that workshop put together. Mr. Mudd? Would that
be reasonable?
MR. MUDD: The board's desire. We've got three nods.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Three nods.
MR. FEDER: We'd be happy to do so. We've got some good
items. I think we've come up working with a lot of people, and we do
want to sit down and talk to you about these issues.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. The longer it delays, of
course, the more costly the delays become. So I think it's important to
all of us that we try to resolve it as quickly as possible.
MR. FEDER: Again, and for the record, I'm not sure we totally
agree with the issues or delays here, but having said that, we've
worked very well with John Carlo. We're going to continue to, and
we want to resolve these and any other issues with them or any other
contractor in the county.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good. Thank you very much.
MR. FEDER: Thank you.
Page 24
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I'd just like to chime in. I
agree with what Commissioner Coyle said, but I'd like to also expound
a little bit more on, I believe that we have to find a way to legally
apply pressure to the utilities. I think the utilities is where our biggest
concern is with road building.
We experienced some huge delays by the utility company in --
when we were working on the first segment of Immokalee Road from
1-75 to Livingston, and I think that held up the contractor quite a bit
trying to get those utilities straightened around.
So I'm hoping that maybe there's got to be something that's got to
be applied up in Tallahassee in order to address these particular issues.
MR. FEOER: Commissioner, what I will relate to -- and, again, I
think we probably want to wait for the workshop for a lot of this
discussion -- but what I will tell you, for instance, one thing we're
looking at is, we charge liquidated damages to a contractor for going
beyond the contract days as may be amended for specific reasons.
One of the reasons we found that we've had to add days to some of our
contracts are because of utility items.
What we're going to recommend to you is, we have a provision
that, in fact, if a utility has not provided either the movement within
the schedule that they gave initially or hasn't identified items that they
should have identified and to give days added to the contract -- let's
say it was a 500-day contract and I'm having to add 20 days, if 15 of
those days were because of the utility, then that liquidated damages
charge, which won't be charged and is a statement of the public's loss
relative to the job not getting done in 500 days, is something we go
back to the utility on.
So we are looking at some things we'll bring to you in the
workshop, probably a lot of discussion, but I think it probably ought to
be done in a workshop setting.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Thank you very much,
Page 25
March 27, 2007
SIr.
MR. PETTIT: Chairman Coletta, I really have to chime in here.
Mike Pettit, Chief Assistant County Attorney. We are in a lawsuit
with this contractor for over $1.7 million.
I will tell you that there was no promised schedule in this
contract or under the law of Florida, submitted a bid and took any risk
of those delays. We have a no damages for delay clause in our
contracts. We think the contractor's lawsuit is ill-advised, and we're
going to defend that lawsuit to the hilt. So I just -- I'm not sure --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why--
MR. PETTIT: I just want to make sure that the board
understands that --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry, but why are you bringing it
up at this time?
MR. PETTIT: I'm bringing it up because of the discussion of
delays, and I don't want the record to suggest --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I understand.
MR. PETTIT: That somehow the contractor doesn't bear those
responsibilities also.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. But we can still recognize
positive achievements that are taking place at this moment in time.
MR. PETTIT: I agree, and I'm very happy, what I read about this
job.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much. We
appreciate it.
And thank you, sir. We appreciate you being here.
MR. MONKS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Looking forward to more positive
reports in the future.
MR. MONKS: Good deal. Thank you.
Item #5B
Page 26
March 27, 2007
RECOGNIZING ROGER JERVIS, IVETTE MONROIG, JUDY
PUIG, MIKE LEVY, & CONNIE WHITEW A Y AS COLLIER
COUNTY'S OUTSTANDING TEAM FOR WINTER 2007 -
RECOGNIZED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next
presentation. This is a recommendation to recognize Roger Jervis,
Ivette Monroig, Judy Puig, Mike Levy, and Connie Whitewall (sic) as
the Collier County's Outstanding Team for the Winter of2007.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you please come forward.
MR. MUDD: The intake team from zoning and land
development went above and beyond the call of duty in assisting with
the implementation of the application processing sufficiency review
intake process.
The team collectively assisted in creating a workshop guidebook,
a DVD explaining the new intake process and the presentation of the
intake process.
The team willingly gave up valuable weekend time to revamp,
collocate and purge the intake team file. The team updated all forms
and applications for internal and Internet users to ensure that all
information was accurate and consistent.
From July 3, 2006, to October 4, 2006, the intake team received
460 requests for one-on-one submittal and resubmittal meetings.
Before the launch of the new submittal process, a submittal took an
average of27 days before the planners saw the product. Now when
the request for a meeting is received, it only takes an average of 20
minutes to make contact with the applicant and set up a meeting.
And at this time I'd like to obtain approval from the Board of
County Commissioners to recognize the employees that stand in front
of you, Roger Jervis, Ivette Monroig, Judy Puig, Mike Levy and
Connie Whitewall (sic), as Collier County's Outstanding Team for the
Page 27
March 27, 2007
Winter of 2007.
(Applause.)
MR. SEABASTY: Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. For the record, Jim Seabasty, Zoning and Land
Development Permitting Supervisor.
It was my honor to make the recommendation for the team.
Ultimately, what Mr. Mudd has said leads to the fact that at this time
we have a 96 percent success rate for our initial submittals. This is
accomplished by the team interacting with our customers and our
clients and going beyond and making sure that when they do come in,
everything is ready, within three days now, from time of their
meeting, their initial request, within three days, the planners do see the
product, they see the package and it's sufficient for review.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir. And let's take just a
minute and pass these out. I want you to hold the plaques up for the
camera. Of course, take them out of the plastic.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll take the plastic.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you like to be up here, too, in
the picture? Please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's $5,000 in accounting.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And a parking place right up front.
Thank you very much for everything you do.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Nice teamwork. Thank you very
much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good to see you again.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good to see you again. Good
job.
Item #6A
Page 28
March 27, 2007
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY DOMINIC CHUIRCO AND
MARIL YN TOOHEY TO OISCUSS SOUND BARRIER FOR
BERKSHIRE VILLAGE ALONG SANTA BARBARA
BOULEV ARD - STAFF TO MEET WITH MEMBERS OF THE
COUNTRYSIDE COMMUNITY
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to public petitions.
The first public petition is a request from Dominic Ch --
MR. CHUIRCO: Chuirco.
MR. MUDD: -- Chuirco --thank you very much -- and Marilyn
Toohey, to discuss a sound barrier for the Berkshire Village along
Santa Barbara Boulevard.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Whatever podium is most
comfortable for you.
MR. CHUIRCO: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, I need you to come right up to the
podium.
MR. CHUIRCO: I was told that only one person could speak on
this subject, and Ms. Toohey and I worked on it together.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll allow for both of you to be at the
podium at the same time, and you can share the same time if you want
to go back and forth.
MR. CHUIRCO: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But no fair talking at the same time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It would be a sunshine violation.
MR. CHUIRCO: What was that? Sunshine who?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you for being here.
MR. CHUIRCO: Thank you, Mr. Commissioners, thank you,
board of directors.
I'll let Marilyn speak first on this, what you wanted to say here.
MS. TOOHEY: Well, actually -- where's my notes?
Page 29
March 27, 2007
MR. CHUIRCO: It's right here. There you go.
MS. TOOHEY: I'm actually speaking about the traffic light at
the corner of Golden Gate -- no, I'm sorry -- the corner of Santa
Barbara, St. -- just let me read what I have.
At an open house held in the Golden Gate Community Center in
late February, an engineer present informed us that the traffic signal at
the intersection of Santa Barbara Boulevard, Recreation Lane and
Prince Andrew Boulevard was to be eliminated and only right turns
would be allowed out of any of those locations.
A four-way light must remain at this intersection. Any other
arrangement will require cars wishing to cross Santa Barbara
Boulevard to drive one and a quarter miles to Radio Road and make a
U- Turn to access the other side. U-turns are always dangerous.
Any change to this intersection denies the 500-plus homeowners
of Berkshire Village access to the Collier County Park on the
northeast corner.
The pedestrians from Berkshire Village or those persons using
the CAT bus would be endangered trying to cross the highway, and
furthermore, school buses with children would be at risk without a
light there.
A four-way light must remain at this intersection. The nearest
traffic signal is one mile to the north at Golden Gate Parkway or one
and a quarter miles south at Radio Road.
Thank you for your consideration.
MR. CHUIRCO: Let me put my eyes on.
Good morning, commission and fellow commissioners. A special
thanks to all of you for letting me speak before you.
Let me go back to 2002 and then proceed from there. The road
was to be started at Pine Ridge and extended to Oavis Boulevard, if
you recall that time, approximately 5.1 miles. The project was to be
put on hold -- was put on hold, and Golden Gate came into play, the
overpass and the widening of Golden Gate, the exit and the entrance to
Page 30
March 27, 2007
Interstate 75. That was a $28 million project for the initial Pine Ridge
to Davis Boulevard.
Now we're going to head forward to February of2007. The
widening on Santa Barbara Boulevard from Copper Leaf to Davis
Boulevard, 3.2 miles; Radio Road four-lane west of Santa Barbara
Boulevard; and then west of Davis Boulevard, 1.2 miles. Sixty-two
million dollars total for 4.4 miles, which is a $32 million difference in
four years. That's a lot of money for the same amount of roadway.
Now, we found out that the -- you know, or having sound barriers
installed in front of some of the Shores and north and south of
Countryside, with Countryside footing the bill to fill in between the
county's sound barriers.
Now, I don't know how much of the sound barriers are being put
in by the county, how much it's costing, what does it cost, what is the
amount of roadway that it's covering -- extended, but if you go right
back to it, much is being held by the county a running foot.
Okay. If you've look at the topography of the land at
Countryside -- excuse me -- on the two walls that are being built and
the topography of Berkshire Village where Trafalager Square fronts
on the north and Canterbury Village is on the south end on in front of
this -- on Santa Barbara Boulevard, they're both a similar road with
this one -- the road goes up and over 75, which brings the road almost
eye level, second level, to the buildings at Countryside -- at Berkshire
Village. This creates the noise and all the rest that goes along with it.
Then you continue south to the bridge. All right.
Then the noise and pollution are going to be magnified and
unbearable. Berkshire Village must have a sound barrier. That is
being done to keep rain and flooding out of the area. Well, it's going
to keep the rain and flooding from going down into our area, off the
road, if we don't have a barrier.
And then when was the last sound test taken on Santa Barbara?
Last one I knew of was 2007. Am I correct in that assumption?
Page 31
March 27,2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're going to have Mr. Feder come
up in a few minutes, and he'll be answering a lot of these things for
you.
MR. CHUIRCO: Well, these are the things we're worried about,
plus, of course, the traffic light, but I thank you for --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, thank you for being here. This is
what the public petition process is all about, is to give the citizens the
chance to be able to talk directly to all five commissioners.
Now, there's two things. I've got Commissioner Henning, plus I
want Mr. Feder to be able to make a presentation. Commissioner
Henning, your pick.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we let Mr. Feder
come up, because the question's going to be directed to him.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. Then after Mr. Feders (sic),
you can go ahead and ask further questions if you like, Commissioner
Henning. Thank you.
Mr. Feder?
MR. FEDER: Commissioners, for the record, Norman Feder,
Transportation Administrator.
Hello.
MR. CHUIRCO: How are you?
MR. FEDER: Good morning.
First of all, we are maintaining the signal there at Recreation
Lane. We have had no intention, nor do we, of taking that out. That
signal will be there at the end of the project. It will go to a mast arm
installation, but the signal will be there, so clearly --
MR. CHUIRCO: Beg your pardon? What was that?
MR. FEDER: It will go to a mast arm. It will be fixed arms as
opposed to a wire.
MR. CHUIRCO: Okay. I understand.
MR. FEDER: So it will be a better installation, but the signal
will be there.
Page 32
March 27, 2007
The second part of that is on drainage. We have curb and gutter.
We will retain all the stormwater that's coming off the roadway and
we'll address that. It will not come onto your property. As a matter of
fact, by permitting we're required to do that.
MR. CHUIRCO: Okay.
MR. FEDER: So hopefully we can address that.
On the third issue of the noise wall, Gary Putaansuu of my staff
that works with the construction and does the studies will go through
that. But I will tell you that we've taken a strong effort at this county
of establishing basically the federal policy for noise wall analysis.
Many counties don't address noise walls at all.
This commission expressed that they wanted to address the
impacts of particularly six-Ianing as we went to retrofit the system
and, where appropriate, to put in the noise walls.
The basic criteria that we go through, as I set out the federal
criteria, first of all, it has to be over 65 decibels. Quite often that's
reached. It is in some of these areas.
Second one is that you have to be able to design an improvement
that, in fact, gives at least a five decibel reduction to be considered a
viable improvement. Once you design that, then you look at its cost to
implement, then it's got to pass that cost benefit.
And then now we're requiring that an easement be provided to
build that wall if it meets the other provisions, and then maintained by
the property owners.
So that's basically our basic process, and I'll ask Gary to go
through the specifics of what we did on the study, and both of us will
be available for any questions and be happy to meet with the
gentleman after this discussion outside.
MR. CHUIRCO: Appreciate it, thank you.
MR. PUT AANSUU: My name's Gary Putaansuu. I'm a
Principal Project Manager for Transportation Engineering,
Construction Management.
Page 33
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Just a little closer to the mike, please.
MR. PUT AANSUU: Okay. I'd like to apologize, for one, with
this project kickoff meeting and the misinformation they got about the
intersection there. It's a time where the contractor and CEI and the
design people all come together at a public meeting, and unfortunately
sometimes people can speak on a subject that they're not informed on,
just trying to be helpful, and that -- that would be the case here. And
we have never intended to take that light out, so -- and it will be in
there.
On the noise studies, there is a -- it's a federal and FDOT
procedure that we follow, the study followed that. There's -- I know in
your letter you mention about when the noise study was taken, the
readings, and possibly they might be outdated.
And there's a little bit of misperception, I think, sometimes by the
public and what -- how these studies take place. We take readings out
there to validate our study, what it says the existing is as opposed to
what it isn't.
But really the study is talking about what is the impact projected
out to year 2025, and so that really is the basis. So the only thing, that
the field readings are done, it's just to validate that the numbers that
we're generating are correct, and these are within that standard.
There's a certain standard that they have to correlate, and these studies
did.
Now, in the case of this location, it is like you say, there are
two-story units, the road goes up in the air, and that's wherein the
problem is with this being a feasible -- the study says that the noise
wall is not feasible there, that it has to meet a criteria of benefit, a
cross ratio of 30,000 per benefited receiver.
And in order for that to give protection for the second-story unit,
it has to be a tall wall, and a tall wall is quite expensive. And so it
runs into much more. And if we drop it to a lower wall, it doesn't
benefit the upper receivers, and so then you lose the number. So just
Page 34
March 27,2007
-- the numbers in the study don't support -- it's not a cost feasible
thing.
What happened up in Countryside is there is -- in fact, the greater
share of the wall doesn't meet the criteria because the receivers are
quite a ways back. Here again, a tall wall would be required.
What they've done is went ahead, and they're going to pay for
1,200 and some feet of wall themselves. They've paid to the county
$914,000 to pay for the cost of that wall being installed. And that wall
is a shorter wall. It really doesn't -- isn't going to function as a noise
wall because it doesn't reduce noise efficiently, but it does give them
-- it's a privacy wall at this particular point, and that is in the project.
MR. CHUIRCO: You have to understand that when we're
talking about the road, you're talking about -- you're taking a four-lane
road and you're making a six-lane road. You're coming 25- to 30-foot
closer to our buildings.
Now, if you don't have something to stop that noise from coming
in, I mean, it's going to be brutal. And I built two sections of wall
down to Countryside -- and allowing these people to fill in their own
volition, I could care less. I'm talking about, what is it costing us to
build these two walls for Countryside and why are they getting these
walls? Why? They are no -- they are no further away or closer than
we are, and we have the problem of a road that goes up and over the
bridge.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I may direct our staff to meet
with the directors of this community and explain the noise study. But
I would like to know in a future time from the County Attorney's
Office, if it meets certain criteria, what is the exposure of the board for
a noise -- a noise wall? It says it doesn't meet the criteria. I don't want
an answer right now.
But the most important thing is to understand the criteria. And
Page 35
March 27,2007
the gentleman had a question -- doesn't need to be answered now -- is,
the study was done in the summertime when the traffic was down.
How can you validate a study that was done off season, not peak?
And those are the questions you need to answer. I already know the
answer to it, but we need to respond to you, sir.
MR. CHUIRCO: But we're going back to 2002 now. We don't
have an upgrade -- we don't have an updated study.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, I understand that. And--
MR. CHUIRCO: You're extending new traffic, which is
tremendous now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sir, I understand, sir, I
understand.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to
just give us a few minutes to be able to work it out with staff to give
them direction.
MR. CHUIRCO: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Appreciate it very much.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And they need to come out and
explain it to you. So that's what I want to do, if the board agrees, is
ask for our transportation department to meet with the directors of the
community and explain how it is done and what is included and what
is not included in the study.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And what options exist past the point
that the county can do or can't do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, and I know the options, is
we either build it or don't build it. But we need -- for one vote up here,
we need to be consistent for all the residents in Collier County.
Dominic is saying we're not being fair, and I think we need to explain
that. And if we don't get a satisfactory answer, you get back to me,
okay? Fair enough?
MR. CHUIRCO: Let's put it this way, we're a family, okay?
We're all family. Now, to treat one part of the family different from
Page 36
March 27, 2007
another is not consistent. I'm from an Italian family. We call it la
famiglia. And if you don't do it by the family, you're not doing it by
anyone. And that's the problem I'm getting with Countryside against
Berkshire. I want to know why you're paying for their walls --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, forgive me. You're not going to
get an answer here at the podium, and --
MR. CHUIRCO: No, but I'm just explaining to you why I'm
here.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, I know. We got that direction
down pat.
MR. CHUIRCO: It's frustrating.
THE COURT REPORTER: Excuse me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we're directing staff now to
come back to you and be able to deal with it.
MR. CHUIRCO: Fine, I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we've handled this to what we
can do at this point in time at this commission, from the dais at this
time. At this point in time, your community will get together with
Commissioner Henning and tell them exactly what their feelings are,
and then Commissioner Henning will discuss with you what the
option is that we can go with.
MR. CHUIRCO: Very good. I appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Don't direct me what to do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Then I'll do it, if you'll like.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, you can do it, fine. But
you don't have the answers; I don't have the answers. There's the
experts. They need to explain it, and if you still have a problem with
it, let me know.
MR. CHUIRCO: I will do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I mean, that's what I
would like to do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And Commissioner Henning, I was
Page 37
March 27, 2007
not directing you. I was trying to give you the option of being the
commissioner of that district to be the one to be responding directly to
them.
But in any case, we do appreciate you being here today. Mr.
Feders (sic), Mr. Mudd, do you have your direction?
MR. FEDER: We do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we'll be awaiting the results of
that.
MR. FEDER: We concur, we need to be consistent, and we will
explain that process.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And Commissioner Fiala's got a
comment.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I just wanted to ask.
Commissioner Henning made a point of saying something about it, it
should be fair and consistent across the board no matter what. And
being that this sound noise study was taken in the summer five years
ago, and I'm sure things have changed, I would hope that as --
hopefully you'd take another sound testing, and that you do that across
the board because I'm sure that other communities will be dealing with
the same thing --
MR. FEDER: Noise--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- and possibly that might be a
practice that you want to continue.
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, the one thing I will say, and as
was explained -- we probably won't explain this all right here -- but I
want to assure you, and to others that hear this, that what you're doing
by taking the noise sample, knowing what your physical geometrics
are of the roadway at the time and your traffic at the time is calibrating
the model.
So once I've calibrated it, knowing that, then the model allows
me to change what my geometrics are, height, distance from, volumes
and other issues, and to take that into account. So even if I had taken
Page 38
March 27, 2007
it five years ago, I'm not out of the process.
But having said that, we will get with the community. We'll go
through in detail. And we agree strongly with this board, and that's
why we went after this process. We have to have a process that's
consistent and is applied consistently across the board. And we will
meet with them, and I appreciate their concerns, and we'll explain our
process.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much, Mr. Feders.
Thank you, sir, for being here.
MR. CHUIRCO: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, next item.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY RONALD TALERICO TO
DISCUSS PERMIT TO FILL WATER DRAINAGE AREA -
OISCUSSED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, the next public petition is a public
petition request by Ronald Talerico to discuss permit -- to discuss
permit to fill water drainage area.
Any podium, sir.
MR. TALERICO: Hello.
MR. MUDD: State your name for the record, sir.
MR. TALERICO: My name is Ronald Talerico. I live at 262
Kirtland Drive in Kirtland Pines.
And the reason I'm here is I would like to obtain a permit to fill
in my back yard, my drainage area. I moved into the area a couple of
years ago, and as I began to meet my neighbors, I found that their
drainage areas were all filled in, so I took it upon myself to fill mine
in, and then I was cited for a -- a citation for doing something I wasn't
supposed to do, but I -- I understand that a few years ago it was
Page 39
March 27, 2007
permitted to fill in their drainage area.
Out of the whole block, there's only three back yards that aren't
filled in. Mine happens to be one of them. In the summertime with
the rain, it stays there. It's about two feet of water. It just sits in the
area. It's a breeding pond for all types of insects, snakes, mice, and
actually it starts to smell after a while.
I don't know if you have the photos, but I've submitted about 25
photos of other people's back yards showing that they're all filled in.
One person just three lots away from me is in the process of building a
tiki bar on his drainage area. Another person next door to me has like
a sunbathing area on their drainage area with palm trees and little
sprinklers. Another person has a swing set on their area.
So I'm just trying to fill that in so I don't have this problem of
water, the smell, mosquitoes every time I walk out of the house. I feel
as though me and my two neighbors -- which I'm not representing
them -- we seem to be holding all the water for the whole block.
So I ask you if you can look into this for me and maybe help me
out.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If you don't mind, sir, I'm going to
call up Stan. Stan, he's our -- Stan Chrzanowski is our expert on
drainage for Collier County, and possibly Stan can give us some
insight into this.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir. I've met Mr. Talerico before,
and I told him I would not give him a permit to do this, which is why
he's here.
I started with the county 15 and a half years ago, and one of the
first projects we did was to enclose the Willoughby Acres roadside
swales, which were probably about, I'd say, three feet deep, and
usually when someone tells me they have a three-foot deep swale, I
don't believe them because that is a -- that's waist high. These swales
were, and they're fairly wide, and they were actually a hazard on the
side of the road.
Page 40
March 27, 2007
They closed in the swales. They created an MSTU. And as part
of that, they were supposed to have left six inches of roadside swale
for pretreatment prior to the water overflowing into the catch basins
that you see at every intersection there.
If you're not familiar with Willoughby Acres -- I was going to put
a map up, but Willoughby is on the north side ofImmokalee Road just
-- just east of Airport Road where Airport Road meets Immokalee.
And you have two north/south roads, Lakeland and Euclid. They're
about a quarter mile apart.
And then the lots are 130 feet deep, so about every 260 feet, you
have another cross road, Johnny Cake, Mentor, Kirtland that Mr.
Talerico lives on.
The original project has no water retention in any of the lots
between Lakeland and Euclid. The water just flows to Lakeland and
Euclid, sometimes through the back yard, sometimes through the front
yard swales.
The front yard swales seem to fill up more rapidly than in most
areas I know and have to be dug out occasionally. The swales along
Euclid and Lakeland are -- I just visited the site last week, and they're
filled in. You're getting no water retention at all from the entire
project that I can tell. It just flows into the catch basins, and the pipes
are concrete pipes, and they're fairly large.
If you look at the ends where they come out into the Cocohatchee
Canal, which goes right down into Wiggins Bay, they are probably 42
inch, I'd say, 36 or 42. They're -- I can't remember, but they're large
pipes.
The projects on the side of Willoughby Acres, you have Johnny
Cake, a little subdivision like the Kirtland area. And Kirtland -- we
had a couple of engineers that designed these projects and they came
in with a design -- they didn't want to use a lot for water retention, so
they held water in the back yard swale and the front yard swale, and
then they controlled it with a weir.
Page 41
March 27, 2007
There's a weir where Mr. Talerico's little so-many-unit
subdivision goes into the main system in Willoughby Acres. And the
canal -- or the roadside swale downstream from the weir does have a
blockage in it that I could see. It's holding water back. It's probably
about eight inches high, which would -- which would compound the
problems that's there.
But the problem we had with the Johnny Cake area and the
Kirtland area was that the percolation was probably not computed
right. These lots did hold a lot of water all year long.
And the -- a couple boards ago there was a commissioner that
had the transportation department do a test in the Johnny Cake area.
They installed what they called infiltrators in somebody's back yard,
basically as the county wanted to see if we could alleviate the
problem.
The infiltrator was installed by the transportation department.
They did an excellent job. But like all filters, filters clog, and they all
need to be cleaned. The problem with infiltrators is, it's almost
impossible to clean them.
The people next door to that site, when they saw this, they
thought, well, that looks good. Let us do it, so they came in for
permits, and naturally, since we had done one, we started permitting
others, only their installers were not quite as proficient as the county
transportation department, and they started getting sloppier. The fill
that was used is supposed to be clean rock around the pipes, was not
clean rock, and then they started using things other than infiltrators.
And we didn't have the manpower to go out and look at every one
while it was being done. We looked at them after the fact, and they're
kind of covered over.
So we put an end to that process by writing something into the
Land Development Code saying that you can no longer design a
project holding water on an individual lot, and that's what the Land
Development Code says now, except that I'm about to take that out of
Page 42
March 27, 2007
the Land Development Code because I'm writing an ordinance to try
to force people to hold water on their lots because we're getting
complaints that people are discharging water too rapidly from their
lots because their houses are too big.
So you can see my problem here. I don't know which way to go.
I sympathize with Mr. Talerico. I know his problem, and I agree, it is
a problem. And I can't -- we'd have to go back through the permit
files, which have been given to transportation -- because I think these
were done as right-of-way permits -- to figure out which people in his
neighborhood have permitted the swale filling in and which haven't,
and we don't know which ones are probably done and which ones
aren't. And it's been probably 10 years, and they haven't been
maintained, so we don't even know that they're working.
So I suppose I could come back and do a study, but --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No offense, Stan.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: You see my problem here?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, it's extremely complicated to
be handling under public petition. I don't know. I, for one, think that
this is probably something we should bring back because it's a concern
we can't answer today, and I hate to send you out of this room with a
we-don't-know answer. You know, it's a suggestion to my fellow
commissioners that we have this brought back with a more detailed
report sometime in the future.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner, I think that we're
going to be discussing an item very similar to this today on the
agenda. I forget what item it is, 10, on -- regards to water, addressing
water issues in the Johnny Cake area.
MR. MUDD: lOB, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: lOB, sir. So some more discussion
may be presented at that -- at that item on the agenda so we might get
a better understanding of what's going on.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Stan, when we get to that point in the
Page 43
March 27, 2007
agenda, I assume you'll be here for that.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: No, sir. I wasn't going to be.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How about now?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: I was only here for this.
MR. TALERICO: I do have a notice of violation that I have to
address as well. I don't know how to address that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, and that's a code issue, sir, and,
you know, I'm not too sure how we're going to get to that point. That's
why possibly we should hear the agenda item first, and then have Stan
here to be able to see how one might be able to be brought into the
other and see if we need to bring it back again for further
consideration.
Commissioner Henning, then Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What does the code violation
address. Is it the same thing?
MR. TALERICO: Yes. I had dug a pool, put a pool in the back
yard, and I had these huge six, eight foot, three, four foot wide
boulders. I couldn't get anybody to take them out, so I put them into
the drainage area.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. Enough said. If the
law permits for us -- the board's ordinance permits to fill it in -- I think
that's what I heard -- and he's not having the ability to submit a permit,
now that's a little concerning to me. But moreover, I think we need to
take a look at what federal and state permits he needs to fill in what
could be a wetland. But this issue we can't solve now --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, we cannot.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- Commissioner. And I would
like to know what the board's law is, and maybe we ought to have the
state take a look at it to find out what permits it would need. But it
needs to come back.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Once again, I think it needs to come
back, but do you really think that the item on the agenda today would
Page 44
March 27, 2007
be able to address this? I don't believe so.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes, it can help.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So I agree with Commissioner
Henning about bringing it back, but I don't know if I got a third
commissioner or not.
But let's go to Commissioner Fiala, then we'll ask the question
agaIn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just had a simple question. Is this
area that has been filled in by some of the other neighbors and that
you would like to fill in, is that considered a stormwater drainage
easement?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, ma'am, it's a stormwater easement.
It's a retention area. It's a designed part of their stormwater
management system. But like all systems, it needs maintenance, and
how much of this needs to be cleaned?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I've heard enough. I
don't want it to come back. If it's already a stormwater drainage
easement, you've answered the question, and you can't fill in a
drainage easement. So I don't want it to come back. He answered my
question. And you do have a code violation.
MR. TALERICO: Yes, I do, but there's only three of us out of
the whole block that aren't filled in.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you need to turn in your
neighbors then.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I tell you what, this conversation's not
going anywheres at the moment. 1 don't think there's enough support
to bring it back. 1 don't read the rest of my commissioner as agreeing.
I don't think we have all the answers to this, but without, you know,
enough interest to bring it back, we're kind of at an impasse, but that
doesn't mean that staff won't work with you to see what other options
might be available.
Page 45
March 27,2007
MR. TALERICO: 1 appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, we appreciate you being here
today, sir. I appreciate you coming before your commissioners to see
what might be able to be done.
MR. TALERICO: Thank you for hearing my request.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir, for being here.
Thank you, Stan.
Item #9 A
RESOLUTION 2007-72: APPOINTING THEODORE J. RAIA,
JOHN IAIZZO AND MICHAEL LEVY TO THE PELICAN BAY
SERVICES DIVISION BOARD - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 9.
MR. MUDD: -- 9, 9A, appointment of members to the Pelican
Bay Services Oivision Board.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to make a motion that we
approve the three highest vote-getters in regards to this, and that's
Theodore 1. Raia, John Iaizzo, and Michael Levy.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Halas to approve the three top vote-getters, and that
was seconded by Commissioner Henning.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
Page 46
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it unanimously. Thank
you.
Item #9B
COUNTY MANAGER JIM MUDD TO HAVE EMS DIRECTOR
JEFF PAGE'S LETTER TO NORTH NAPLES FIRE CHIEF
MICHAEL BROWN, DATED OCTOBER 16,2006, OFFICIALLY
RETRACTED - MOTION TO APPROVE CO-LOCATION AND
CO-OWNERSHIP OF THE EMERGENCY SERVICES BUILDING
WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE
OCCUPYING A SPACE; FORMAL LETTER TO BE SENT TO
CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS FOR INQUIRY OF INTEREST-
APPROVED; 2ND MOTION TO BRING BACK FOR
DISCUSSION ON FUTURE CONCEPTUAL PLANS FOR
COUNTY OFFICES FOR THE USE OF THAT BUILDING AND
FACILITY SITE - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9B, for the Board
of County Commissioners to request that County Manager Jim Mudd
have EMS Director Jeff Page's letter to the North Naples Fire Chief,
Michael Brown, dated October 16, 2006, officially retracted.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you, Commissioners.
The letter to the North Naples Fire Department Chief Brown is saying
that the county will have a long-term lease if they're interested for a
fire station at Heritage Bay.
The board approved the ordinance, creation of the Pelican Bay,
Page 47
March 27, 2007
which was a DRI, therefore, they must provide certain things above
and beyond just a normal PUD.
But in the PUD it says that the developer agrees to donate seven
and three-quarters acres to the county for utilization of the county for
-- as a satellite operation center, including Emergency Medical
Service, sheriffs substation, fire station, pump station, wellsite and
general government center, including offices of the constitutional
officers.
And this is a donation and is not to be accepted in impact fee
credits. Again, being a DR!, they need to provide certain things, like
they did affordable housing.
I don't know where we're coming up with this -- all this money to
take care of the world and building a fire station, because you can't use
EMS impact fees, which we know that we need to have those impact
fees to build EMS facilities. We're always saying, where are we going
to get the money; out of the general fund. That's, I would imagine,
where it would have to come from.
And I think it -- it is prudent that the elected officials work with
the elected officials, North Naples Fire Department, and see how we
can serve the public by creating ajoint facility. Commissioner Fiala is
absolutely right, last meeting, meeting before, we need to collocate
and work together.
And so I'm requesting the board to direct the county manager to
retract that letter, for the chairman of the Board of Commissioners to
write the chairman of the board of North Naples Fire Department and
stating the county commissioners wishes to work with North Naples to
have a collocation facility.
And I make that form of a motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Mr. Page, any comments?
CHIEF PAGE: For the record, Jeff Page with Emergency
Medical Services. We have always met with North Naples on this
Page 48
March 27, 2007
Heritage Bay property with the intent to collocate.
As the letter you're referring to on October 16th mentions, one of
the arrangements that we identified was the ability for them to lease
the shared area that they would occupy, similar to a lease agreement
that we have with North Naples at their station 46.
I have a letter here, or an email.It.s dated January 23rd, and let
me just put this on the visualizer here.
This particular letter here, we were trying to identify, there's an
option to lease, an option to join in the property, and there were
several other agreements that I sent along with this; a copy of the lease
agreement that we have with 46, the document with East Naples, the
Jeepers Drive, where we own 37 percent of the building, and then I
guess Grey Oaks where you have the property and the building jointly
owned.
So there never was an issue about them not collocating there,
from my perspective anyway.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Ifwe may, we have two
speakers on this, and then we'll come back, Commissioner Henning, if
you have some other comments, and then we'll try to figure out just
where we are and take a vote on it.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is John German. He'll be
followed by Mike Brown.
MR. GERMAN: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, John German. I'm the Assistant Fire Chief at North Naples
Fire District.
The concept of jointly locating fire and EMS has been going on
for quite a while. We have several EMS stations that are jointly
providing fire and EMS service now.
And we have a couple ofleases with Collier EMS. We at one
point allowed Collier EMS to build an addition onto one of our
stations in the '90s. And from about 2001 we've been interested in
Heritage Bay property because we're aware of the DRI.
Page 49
March 27,2007
Our deputy chief of fire prevention had discussions with the
developer earlier on separate from the county about us locating there,
so we knew that that provision was going to be coming in the DR!.
In 2004 I discussed that with Manager Mudd and Assistant
Manager Ochs, that we would be interested in collocating or locating a
fire facility at least in there if there was not going to be an EMS
facility. And he asked that we send our -- Manager Mudd asked that
we send our requirements for service to Skip Camp, director of
facilities, which we did back in earlier 2005.
And then that whole project seemed to slow down. It laid
dormant. There was issues of which constitutional officers were going
to be involved in the project or not, and it sat kind of still for a while.
And then back in February, Chief Page started talking to me
again about, hey, it's opened up, it appears like we're going to be able
to put some -- put up some units in there together. So we started
talking about that.
We also -- he also started talking to me at the same time about
the Logan Boulevard property. That was another property that had
opened up that we were going to collocate in.
I reported that to our Board of Fire Commissioners, and they
expressed an interest in doing just that, building jointly is what the
term, if you want to say -- the term was not collocating, but building
these facilities jointly. And we had just finished up probably a
three-year stint of building this Grey Oaks facility, which I think is a
tremendous success. We have three agencies inside this building that
have strategically located an emergency facility for all of them, and
it's working great. We want to duplicate those efforts anywhere we
can.
So we also extended an offer to Collier EMS; we have
Livingston Road site, and I discussed that with our board and
expressed it to Chief Page that we would offer them to build jointly
that facility.
Page 50
March 27, 2007
And then around September of 2006 -- no, let me say that in
August of 2006 we found another property, and that was at Oakes
Boulevard. This is in -- really in relation to the Logan property . We
found another property that was inside of our district. Our concern
with the Logan property, it was outside of our district. And our fire
board had two concerns. One, maybe there were issues with Golden
Gate -- might I have your permission to continue, please?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure if --
here's the answer we need. And I -- and the chairman of the fire --
North Naples fire wrote you a letter and said, we want to build a fire
station at this site. That's the bottom line is -- about this other stuff,
I'm not sure if it really pertains to the issue.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm not liking the message I'm
hearing, I'll be honest with you, the business about fire districts and,
you know, a whose -- Golden Gate or whatever, you know. We're
getting so far off the mark. You're right. We've got to concentrate on
where we are right now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Here's the question to the fire
department. You want to build a fire station there, or do you want us
to build it -- build it for you, or do you even want there?
MR. GERMAN: We have always expressed a concern -- or the
desire to build jointly. It's what we can, strategically smart, do from
an emergency management standpoint, fiscally responsible to the
taxpayers. That's what we've always intended, until September of
2006 we got a letter from Chief Page saying that he only wanted to
lease at these two sites, Logan and at Heritage Bay, and that was never
on the mark, and that's when the fire district bought the property at
Oaks Boulevard.
They concluded to buy that property in November after we
received this letter backing us out of this Logan Boulevard property.
That was a smart move that the fire district had to make, because for
six months, we had been interested and been a partner in this Logan
Page 51
March 27, 2007
property as a joint owner, as a co-builder, and then at the last minute it
shifted; it became a -- well, we'll lease space to you only on these
sites.
And I'll say that Chief Page did caveat that he would be
interested in building jointly maybe at other locations, but they were
going to -- they were going to build in these separately, independently,
and then offer to lease the space to us.
Now, it is -- it is certainly our desire to continue, but we would
like some assurance from the board -- and I appreciate Commissioner
Henning bringing this up. We've communicated our intent to
Commissioner Henning and through our chair to your chair, to
Commissioner Coletta, that we've always wanted to build jointly.
We would like some assurance that that's your policy and that when
we plan with your staff to build these stations jointly that, if at all
possible, we're going to continue that from the start of the project to
the end and not leave -- not leave either of us hanging.
You know, we don't want to turn around and -- and we certainly
wouldn't do that to EMS. Ifwe were designing a station together,
we're going to go from the start to the finish. We have that intent.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let me see if I can try to sum this up
so that we can get on with the rest of this item and on to the rest of the
agenda.
MR. GERMAN: Certainly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think this commission has been in
agreement for a long time. We're looking for something in the way of
consolidation by units wherever possible, EMS, fire stations, multi fire
stations, same thing. Your talk about district lines and everything was
very disconcerting. I didn't -- I didn't like that talk at all.
MR. GERMAN: You didn't allow me to finish.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I know, but in any case, let's go back
to where we are. Square one is, how does this commission feel about
collocating units in the same building? I don't think you'll find a
Page 52
March 27, 2007
commissioner here that's against that. I don't -- I'm just guessing, but
from what I gather from what I've heard in the past, what we're
concerned with is how is the mechanism to get there? We want to
make sure there's no impediments there so that people can't follow
through with that particular directive we issued some time ago and we
might have to reaffirm today.
I appreciate Commissioner Henning bringing this up, because I
think you're both off the mark, to be honest with you. I don't think
either one of you got the message straight. We're looking for
cooperation. We're looking for unification. We're looking for some
point in time, the reason to be called consolidation, either in the near
future or the distant future, for it to take place.
We definitely don't want to see division. We don't want to see it
spread out across the map. We don't want to see every little feat come
out there existing as they've been existing forever. We need to have
better cooperation.
And so, I don't think -- what's the directions from this
commission? To send them back and tell them to get it right or--
Commissioner Coyle, then Commissioner Halas. I haven't seen your
light on.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I hate to do this, but I really need to
try to get this straight. This is very, very confusing for me, but let me
see if I understand this.
The Heritage Bay PUD required that they donate 7.73 acres for
utilization by the county as a satellite operation center, which would
include EMS, sheriffs department, fire station, pump station, wellsite;
and then Collier County, our EMS director, sent you a letter in
October 16, 2006, saying that we'd be happy to negotiate a long-term
lease with you.
My first question is, how do we take 7.73 acres that are designed
for a satellite operation center, which would include not only fire
stations, but also a sheriffs substation, and decide that we own it all
Page 53
March 27,2007
and that we're going to lease part of it out to someplace else? Okay?
I've got a problem with that. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Now, on January the 23rd, I think it was, Jeff, you sent a letter to
Chief Brown that says there, okay, we'll be happy to share
construction costs with you, but the fire department had already made
a commitment for another location. You'd purchased some more
property. Do I have it right?
MR. GERMAN: No, sir. And maybe I confused the issue by
discussing two locations at one --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Well, let's forget about that
part then, okay.
MR. GERMAN: No. We have interest in the Heritage Bay
property .
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So you want to share in the
Heritage Bay property, right?
MR. GERMAN : Yes, sir, always, since 2001.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And Jeff Page has
indicated, at least in January of this year, a willingness to share
construction costs for those facilities?
CHIEF PAGE: We've actually made the design changes that
they requested --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHIEF PAGE: -- back in March or June when we met.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And how about the sheriffs
office? There should be some involvement with the sheriffs office if
it's going to be a combined operation center of some kind. It was -- it
was designed for that purpose; it was donated for that purpose.
So I guess Commissioner Coletta is correct. I think from a --
from the standpoint of the commissioners, we still think it's in the best
interest of the taxpayers to put them together, but I'd like to get
everybody together. I'd like to get the fire department together, the
sheriffs department together, or any other constitutional officers that
Page 54
March 27, 2007
can utilize a facility, and we can all share that cost, and it would
reduce your cost, too, wouldn't it?
So I think it's a good idea to do that, and I'm confused about why
there's this debate. But nevertheless.
CHIEF PAGE: Commissioner, if I could. What we were trying
to do was trying to level the playing field. Currently, we have a lease
agreement on station 46 in North Naples, and we're paying $10 a
square foot. Now, that's the only station in North Naples where we
actually have a lease payment as far as I can remember. We actually
pay a proportionate share of the electricity and water at the others.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: When you say we have a lease,
you're saying that EMS has a lease from the fire department?
CHIEF PAGE: Correct. They rent us this space.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHIEF PAGE: And what we're trying to do is trying to level the
playing field similar to this letter that I had sent Chief Peterson in
September.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're really getting off here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, because they're charging us
rent in one place, we want to charge them rent in some other place.
CHIEF PAGE: And what I offer is this: Let's just do away with
the rent, not either one charge the other for rent at all, and we just
share the expenses, like we did at Grey Oaks. And whether they want
us to build it or if they want to do it jointly, however they want to do
it, that's not an issue with me. It never was about keeping them out of
Heritage Bay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then can we ask Chief
Brown to tell us whether or not he's interested in pursuing it on that
basis, and then we can reach a conclusion on it real quickly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you for being here today,
Chief.
CHIEF BROWN: Thank you for having me here. I'm Chief
Page 55
March 27, 2007
Brown from North Naples, and I appreciate you asking me to come up
and speak. And Commissioner Henning, I appreciate you bringing
this issue forward.
We're certainly interested in either -- in co-building a--
collocating a station at Heritage Bay, have been. We have an issue
with, we think the footprint needs to be changed a little bit to facilitate
us moving in. Hopefully that can be facilitated.
Other than that, there's no issue, we're willing to come up with an
appropriate payment for the building of that station. We would like
that to move forward as quickly as possible. That's our full intent.
That's -- and I've taken that to the Board of Commissioners and
they've accepted that and encouraged us to move forward in that
direction.
And while I'm up here, just -- not to change the course of this
discussion, but we were precluded from joining in at Logan by the
elimination of a bay and the -- taking the doors down to a point where
a fire truck and -- fire trucks were not allowed in that station.
We have a piece of property within a half a mile there that we
paid for that's 3.4 acres, no wetland issues, that we'd love to collocate
with county EMS on as quickly as we possibly can as well.
So I encourage you to look at that proposal as well. But we
certainly, from this specific issue at Heritage Bay, we're interested in
moving forward as quickly as possible, barring any unforeseen issue
in Tallahassee.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're going to go to Commissioner
Fiala, then we'll come back to you, Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just -- I just want to make
sure I understand all that I just heard. When Chief Page said they
were making design changes, that -- does that mean that then you both
co-own the building or they own the building?
CHIEF BROWN: Our assumption is that we'll co-own the
building.
Page 56
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that the way you assume that it
is?
CHIEF PAGE: Well, I sent him a copy ofa lease agreement
where -- and then another agreement where we co-own property and
station, and then another agreement where it's just the station that's
co-owned. So it's up to him.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Let's find out -- okay. So
now -- and if he says it's up to you, he's given three proposals, you
assume that it's co-owned. So really what you have to get down to is
that agreement, right? If it's co-owned, then you both have a say in
how the design is and you both have a say in how high the doors are,
right? And that way we've got -- we've got a group working together
as they did in Grey Oaks; is that correct?
CHIEF BROWN: That's what we had hoped for.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And that's acceptable to us, right?
CHIEF PAGE: Correct. We just ask that they be -- reciprocate
with their property.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We've got a motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. We have a motion on the floor
and a second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And you know, I'm
going to remove my motion because it sounds like we do have an
understanding. The issue is the commissioner of North Naples wishes
to locate in there. There is some correspondence that I didn't get the
whole thing. And if you have a problem, come to us. We need to do
something with this, so I'm going to make a motion to dispose of this
item from the agenda.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm not too sure about that, but go
ahead. I mean, you got a second?
Commissioner Coyle, you got a comment or--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Maybe I'll just clarify. What
Commissioner Henning is really saying is, he is saying we ought to
Page 57
March 27, 2007
withdraw the offers here and he's recognized that during this
discussion there really is agreement, a potential for agreement.
CHIEF PAGE: A lot has happened since October.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, yeah. And so it would be
inappropriate to withdraw it because it would complicate it, but you've
got a sense from the commissioners that we want to work together on
these things, so you've got guidance to proceed.
And if you will proceed and work out an arrangement, my only
clarification here is, we've left out the sheriff. Ifthere's going to be a
sheriff substation there, it's going to require some more redesign, and
it's going to require the sheriff to participate in some costs with respect
to building. Okay. What do we have to say about that?
MR. HOVELL: For the record, Ron Hovell, Principal Project
Manager in the Facility Management Department.
Skip Camp is out of state today, but he was more directly
involved in how we scoped the particular project. But as the board is
aware, the 7.7, approximately, acres, was originally intended for a
number of different entities.
About a year and a half or so ago we had an architect put together
a conceptual site plan based on everybody's input. And at -- during
that process, it's my understanding that the sheriff declined to further
participate in the project.
So we were left with the utilities folks, EMS, and a potential
future unknown that we called a main government building, and we
scoped out what the maximum that we could put in there under some
different scenarios. Part of the complication here is the availability of
funding for the different slices and entities and trying to coordinate
them all into one project.
So what we have today is we have long ago recorded the
easements for the two utilities' desires, then we put in the EMS station,
which my understanding has been that it's a jointly-designed station to
accommodate sleeping arrangements and two bays for both fire and
Page 58
March 27, 2007
EMS, we've pushed that as far north in the parcel as we could to
maintain the flexibility for whatever that future might bring for the
remainder, and I can show you the details if you'd like.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, can you put up the -- can
you put them up on the overhead?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, my concern is that we don't
do something that eliminates the possibility for adding other
constitutional officers here if it makes sense, and I think it makes
sense to consolidate as many of the similar services as you can in a
single building rather than building multiple buildings for each
constitutional officer or fire district.
And I'd just like to be assured that whatever the plan is, that it's
sufficiently flexible to take into the consideration the sheriffs future
requirements, if we wish to do that, or the tax collector's future
requirements or a driver's license facility, or any other congressional
officers. The Clerk of Courts, as an example.
I understand that you want to proceed quickly, and that's a wise
thing to do, and I understand it's complicated if you try to get all of
these people together right now. But please give me some assurance
that your plans are sufficiently flexible to be able to cost effectively
add these other constitutional officers or services in the future if we
wish to do so.
MR. HOVELL: Well, the divisional display that you see shows
an EMS station on the north edge of this site and then a sort of vague
five-story building there kind of in the middle. This was one of these
concepts that our architect could put together.
And given the projects that went forward and got funding, we
went with this concept showing a separate EMS station which was
intended to be collocated with fire, and then any future construction
would hopefully be captured into one bigger building.
We've been discussing potentially putting in as an FY-2009
budget request to design a high-rise building to accommodate
Page 59
March 27, 2007
whatever specific occupants might want to go in there in the future.
An example might be potential to put in something like the tax
collector and/or Board of County Commissioners, depending on the
master plan for this site. There's a lot of flexibility in there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And see, that's been coming up,
and I apologize I'm getting out of turn. We need to get -- start talking
about this because I'm not sure if I agree to move this office at this
location, okay? So we need to give direction to get this on the agenda.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- I'm going to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If that's a motion, I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- jump in here for a minute.
Commissioner Fiala's going to speak next, then we'll go to
Commissioner Halas. Then we'll come back to Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. First of all, I'd like to second
the motion. That was a motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Here's what we need to do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That isn't what I was going to do.
Just to bring that issue back.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, no. We still need to get
back to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- we've got a separate EMS
building.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, then let me -- I have a motion
for that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'd like to make a motion to
approve the collocation and co-ownership of an emergency services
building with the provisions that the sheriff could add on or also
become a part, and also to expand the additional part of a building that
Page 60
March 27, 2007
he would own for his services as well ifhe so desires.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I would like to second that
motion if you include in your motion that we direct the county
manager to bring back on the agenda the conceptual plans for the use
of this building.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll include that in my motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I'm sorry. We're going to deal
just with the motion. Before we had a motion on the floor but it never
got a second, I believe, just so we're clear there.
MS. FILSON: He withdrew it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So we're clear there, that motion's
removed from consideration, the previous one.
We're going to go to Commissioner Halas, Commissioner Coyle,
then I have some comments too.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And we have to have a break here
pretty soon.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We do, but deal just with the motion.
MR. MUDD: The motion -- one clarification for the motion.
The sheriff can't own buildings and things. You own them for him
and he uses them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN CO LETT A: Okay . You want to address the
motion, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What I'm concerned about is, we're
talking of EMS, fire and the sheriff, and it sounds like the sheriff
doesn't want to play in the same sandbox, so I'm not sure how you can
design a building to take care of EMS, fire and sheriff and any other
constitutional offices unless they don't -- you know, because I'm
assuming that what's going to come online first is the EMS and fire,
okay.
And what we're trying to do -- I think what you're trying to do is,
Page 61
March 27, 2007
save the taxpayers even more money by hoping that we can address
the sheriffs issues. Ifhe wants to collocate in this particular area,
now, we can't wait around and figure out what he wants to do. It
might be two years from now, it might be 10 years from now, or it
may never be.
And I'm not sure if you've approached the other constitutional
officers in regards to what their needs are and what they desired. So I
think that -- I think we've got a problem here. I mean, it's nice to say.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think my motion --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, it does. Commissioner Fiala's
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think my motion addresses that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- addresses that. If it has to come
back before us for further discussions, they're going to have a chance
to work it --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: They don't know the answer now.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, just -- I would like to add
one thing to that. I would like to have official correspondence going
to every constitutional officer asking them if they want to participate
with us in this facility, and if so, to what extent and when. And they
can reply no, yes, or maybe, but at least we will have an official
notification to them that we have a facility that we're willing to share.
And we don't have to wait for all of them to make up their mind before
we proceed with our portion.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, in 2004 --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're not talking about the same
building, are we?
MR. MUDD: -- I directed -- in 2004 -- just for clarification. In
2004 I directed Mr. Skip Camp to make contact with everybody,
Page 62
March 27, 2007
including North Naples, anybody that had any interest, every
constitutional, if they had interest in this parcel, and to basically state
what that interest is, so at least we could understand what we were
going to try to do a Site Development Plan for this 7.3 acres.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But yet we've got confusion right
now between our staff and the fire district about what really is
planned. And if there wasn't confusion, we wouldn't be here talking
about it right now.
So I'm just saying, you know, can we have an official notice go
to all the constitutional officers saying there's 7.36 acres here, we're
planning on doing something with it. Are you interested in
participating, yes or no, and let's put it to bed.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would that be part of the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, because I thought we were
talking about two separate buildings.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you see, it doesn't make any
difference. If we go design the site with parking lots and/or egress and
ingress without taking into consideration some of the other needs, the
time might come when we don't have an option to do anything with it.
And ifthere is probably no reason why the sheriffs facility
shouldn't be located in this same building, why would we want to put
it in a separate building? We don't do that at other places where
developed --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, we can't -- we can't force him,
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I understand that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What I -- let me just break this
down a little bit further. What I understand is, we're talking about
emergency services. We don't want people wandering around trying
to find out where they're going to get their license plate in the middle
of fire engines leaving their station.
I would assume, or suggest, that we have two separate facilities,
Page 63
March 27,2007
one for emergency vehicles of any sort, whether they -- if the sheriff
wants to be collocated there, that's great, and we can do that. And I
think -- I'm all for that, but I don't believe that we want to put the tax
collector and the driver's license bureau in the same place, but
probably on the land that we own there, but in -- but I would guess
that that's a separate subject altogether.
I think that we have the land there to do that with, we just -- we
just have to plan it properly. I'm sure Ron's done that already.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. And I can understand
Commissioner Coyle's comments in the fact that when we layout this
particular emergency facility, if they occupied the land in such a
footprint that nothing else can be accommodated, then we're at a
disadvantage.
We don't necessarily have to honor the request. I mean, if it
won't fit in. Suppose all the constitutional officers come forward and
they say, we all need 10,000 square feet, and it's not going to be
practical. At that point in time we have to make another decision what
to do. It doesn't necessarily have to be the same building. It could be
separate buildings. They might share the same firewall or something
or the same parking lots, but whatever. There might be ways to do it,
but I think it's good to keep this open in the discussion. That would be
my opinIOn.
How do you feel, Commissioner Henning? You were the motion
maker --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I am.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- or was it Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I think it's good. My main
motion was just addressing the issue.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And to add that on to it as to further
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine, that's fine.
Page 64
March 27,2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- plan for other constitutional
officers, I would add that, as long as we're not talking the same
building, but the same --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right, okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The same property footprint.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, do you
agree?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay, great. I think we've come a
long ways. I'm going to make a couple comments. I've remained
quiet for longer than normal. Commissioner Coyle will share that
with you.
But once again --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Put the timer on.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- I do believe that we have had a
failure of communications here. This commission has been -- they've
been continuous in the message what they've been trying to tell
everybody what we expect to be done.
At some point in time we need to be able to think about maybe
doing a workshop on this to really get down to the nitty-gritty, to be
able to explain it in more definite details or we're going to have this
happen every time we're going to have a new facility going in.
We have to get those ground rules down there just as plain as all
day so we don't have situations like this coming up.
I did not like the statements such as building designed with low
doors, district fire lines, and concerns how the other district might feel,
the leveling of the playing field. These are things that are not
conducive to interaction between different agencies and to be serving
the public well.
But other than that, you're all doing a wonderful job. I think
you're on the right page. I think you're going to go forward.
And with that, I'm going to call the motion.
Page 65
March 27,2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can you just restate the motion so I
got some clarification, because there's --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sure, Commissioner Fiala --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- so many additions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- will be happy do it. Go ahead,
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: A motion to approve the collocation
and co-ownership of an emergency services building with the
provision that the sheriff could add on at such time and expense -- and
I've been corrected -- at such time as he thinks that he might want to --
want to move forward, and then there was an addition to that that we
will also take a further look at the property and investigate if we want
to ask -- no, no, not investigate. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Advise.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: To invite other constitutional
officers to see if they would like to also collocate on our property at
another point on the property.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, good.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And Commissioner Fiala agreed
to direct staff to bring back --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- an item about the -- what their
idea of this site is, and what I hear is moving the county seat.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we want to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I did include that in my motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: To move the county seat.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, no, no. To bring it back to
discuss.
Page 66
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, to discuss. I mean that's
basically what I heard the plans are, so we need to -- before we invest
a lot of time in this design.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll make that as a separate motion
from the rest of it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's your motion, right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. But we can make it a
separate motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's to bring it back. They
already have plans --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I like the first part of the motion,
all the collocation and everything of that nature.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We need to discuss it more.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And I'll bring up that motion
right after we approve this one.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay, after this one. So we've got
this clarified. Can we proceed now with the vote?
Okay. All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. The ayes have it, 5-0.
Now the second motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We do agonize over these things,
don't we?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But we have a good time with it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'd like to make a motion that
we bring the -- an item back to discuss what other plans are being
Page 67
March 27,2007
discussed for this property outside of our emergency services
buildings, mainly to discuss what we're talking about as far as other
government buildings on the property.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I'm sorry, Commissioner Fiala.
There was something about relocating the county seat?
MR. MUDD: No. Commissioner, here's the issue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second the motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, for clarity, you have approved a
master plan, okay. That master plan calls for a building this size to be
right next door. When that happens, you also have to build another
parking deck, okay.
You have an opportunity on this 7.7 acres, okay, with the parking
spaces that you can put on it, to be able to build a building, okay,
without the expense of a parking garage in order to do that.
What I would suggest that we do, based on what I just heard, the
motion and whatever, is you bring not only that back, but once we
figure out, we reinvite the constitutionals to tell us what they need at
that site, at the issue, to take all of that stuff into account, talk about
what this site can take, okay, what you can legitimately develop on it
based on the Land Development Code, and then get the board's desires
to see if they want to amend their master plan for this additional
building that's on it right now and an additional parking garage. And
then you've got the whole picture and it isn't -- and it isn't a piece one
way or the other, and you can make a decision on what you want to
do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. It's not in any case saying
we're going to dismantle the county buildings here and clear this site
to be able to move it --
MR. MUDD: No, sir, there was no intention to clear the site.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand, fine. So just bring it
back for consideration, see what the possibilities may be.
Page 68
March 27, 2007
Okay. Commissioner Coyle, then we're going to get this to a vote and
take a break.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, that's okay. As long as it's
coming back, we can discuss what I have to say later.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Okay. No other discussions, seeing none, all those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0.
And we're taking a 10-minute break and coming back for our 11
o'clock time certain.
(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: Thank you.
Yeah, please take your seats so we can -- we've got a very, very
ambitious schedule. We're going to be breaking for lunch at 12 to one.
And I'm going to have to remind my fellow commissioners we're
going to have to stay with it if we're going to finish tonight by six
o'clock. If not, I checked with three commissioners, and they do have
their schedule cleared for tomorrow so we could continue tomorrow.
Commissioner Fiala, would your scheduled be cleared for the
morning?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know what, I don't know what
my schedule is. I have to ask Kendra. Can I please go on faith?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we'll deal with this when we get
Page 69
March 27, 2007
to it, but I just wanted to remind you, we have to keep it moving
forward, please.
Item #10C
TO REVIEW THE WRITTEN AND ORAL REPORTS OF THE
ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMITTEES SCHEDULED FOR
REVIEW IN 2007 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE NO.
2001-55: IMMOKALEE ENTERPRISE ZONE OEVELOPMENT
AGENCY - FRED THOMAS; IMMOKALEE LOCAL
REOEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD - FRED THOMAS;
LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD - LORETTA MURRAY;
PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD - JIM BURKE
-PRESENTED
MR. MUDO: Commissioner, this is item 10C. It's got an 11
o'clock time certain. It's to review the written and oral reports of the
advisory boards and committees scheduled for review in 2007 in
accordance with ordinance number 2001-55.
Mr. Michael Sheffield, Assistant to the County Manager, will
present.
MR. SHEFFIELD: Good morning. Mike Sheffield from the
County Manager's Office. Today you will be reviewing five advisory
committees; the Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agency,
the Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board, the Library
Advisory Board, the Pelican Bay Services Division Board and the
Tourist Development Board.
The written reports are included in your agenda packet. It is
requested that you either accept the reports as presented or to propose
any changes that you would like to see happen with that committee.
And ifthere are no questions at this point, we'll begin.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, there is a question. The reports
Page 70
March 27, 2007
that are going to be given, what time frame do we have for each
report? How long have the reports -- told to prepare the reports for?
MR. SHEFFIELD: Basically I've instructed those presenting to
simply go up to the podium and ask if you have any questions. I know
-- I've informed them that you've reviewed their reports and that you
ask questions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much.
MR. SHEFFIELD: Okay, you're welcome.
So the first person then would be Fred Thomas representing
Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agency.
MR. THOMAS: Good morning, Commissioners. First let me
thank you for helping us to respond to IF AS -- I mean, not IF AS, but
to NAFT A by doing a number of things in Immokalee over the years,
and I'll just take a very short time to say these thank yous.
For forming the airport board so that we can begin to look at
industrializing our state -- I mean our airport -- our airport, rather.
Expanding our enterprise zone so that we can look at the overall
industrialization and hook up with some of the things that are
happening around us that -- so fast around us.
Allowing us to do a new master plan with the Land Development
Code that would be more conducive to Central Florida, because we're
in the situation where, for example, out at Arrowhead, they have
130,000 square feet of com -- opposed -- I mean approved retail
commercial, and we don't want to have a problem in not being able to
get a Wal*Mart -- not a Wal*Mart, a Publix grocery store who would
want to build the same kind of grocery store in Immokalee that they
would build in Arcadia, Lake Placid or Sebring.
And we further thank you for approving an office to be set up out
there in the future so we can -- to further take advantage of our
enterprise zone and some of the other activities so that we can become
the industrial hub for you in our county.
Thank you very much. I'll answer any questions you may have.
Page 71
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any questions on behalf of the
commission?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Thomas, I want to thank you
personally for all that you've done for Immokalee, as long as I've been
involved there, I've seen you everyplace. A meeting -- there isn't a
meeting unless there's a Fred Thomas present. And we're looking --
we're seeing great things coming from Immokalee. And with your
leadership, I'm sure we're going to see many more things coming
forward in the future.
MR. THOMAS: Yeah. We're working as hard as we can and
we're working as fast as we can. We hope to have our master plan to
you before your summer hiatus.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. We'll be looking forward
to that.
The next presentation, is that also by --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's him, same guy.
MR. SHEFFIELD: Yes, it is, representing the Immokalee
Redevelopment Advisory Board.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Now you've got to change
your voice a little bit so we know it's something different.
MR. THOMAS: The CRA advisory board is a way that we're
going to be able to fund some of the incentives, fund some of the
infrastructure that we need in order to attract industry to our area.
Again, I've said this before. We are in the perfect location to be
the industrial hub of South Florida. We've got easy access on so many
different TV markets, and now because of the outstanding efforts of
the Economic Development Council under the leadership of Tammie
Nemecek, we're in a position to be a part of the V ASAKE (phonetic),
that helps us to be part of a major marketing schedule for activities in
our area, high-tech human resources, human -- health-related
industries.
Page 72
March 27, 2007
And the CRA will provide the funding to help make this happen.
And the more development you get, the more CRA monies we
get, the more -- a better community we can make our Immokalee.
Any questions on that report?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any questions about the CRA?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Once again, too, it seems to be going
forward in the right direction, and we're looking for great things to
come from it. Thank you, Mr. Thomas.
MR. THOMAS: Thank you, sir.
MR. SHEFFIELD: Okay. The next speaker is Loretta Murray
representing the Library Advisory Board.
MS. MURRAY: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning.
MS. MURRAY: You have our report in front of you, and I hope
that it meets all your exceptions.
Any questions?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sure it does. But Commissioner
Fiala has a question for you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it does meet our expectations.
I'm happy to see that you're moving forward. I love the designs that
have been picked out for the new south library and for the Golden
Gate library. They're looking outstanding.
I wanted to know, it was saying here that you're going to evaluate
for one year the usage of the East Naples branch, the little library that
exists right now. And I was wondering, being that it's located in an
area where there are a lot of retirees, as well as a huge number of
children from really underprivileged families who might be able to use
it -- and right now, of course, being that it's so small, it's hard to offer
too, too many children's programs.
I was wondering in that year that you're going to take a look and
Page 73
March 27, 2007
evaluate it, would you be offering more children's programs now that
we'll have another library there to accommodate other people so that
they're designed really for the people in that area that need the
service?
MS. MURRAY: Marilyn is going to assist.
MS. MATTHES: Yes. Last year in your budget approval, the
board approved another children's library imposition, so now currently
we have one children's librarian for every location. The last one that
you approved started last Monday, a week ago yesterday.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that in the East Naples library
now?
MS. MATTHES: Actually she's working in Marco, but that
allows the children's librarian to spend all of her time at the East
Naples library and develop that program more extensively than when
she had to divide her time between Marco and East Naples.
So yes, it's going to expand and we're going to offer more
children's programs. And we've added a children's librarian to the
branch permanently, the usage by kids has increased, the usage by
their parents has increased, and the number of programs offered has
also increased for that location, and we anticipate the same thing
happening now for both Marco and East Naples since they both have
children's librarians assigned to them permanently,
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's wonderful, because a lot of
times if you're calculating or evaluating the usage, if you offer
programs that are designed to meet the needs of that particular area,
you'll see the usage go up; whereas, if you design it for people that
wouldn't use it, it will certainly function lower.
MS. MATTHES: Definitely that's our goal to look at the
community and have a better chance to look at that community as well
as Marco and provide services that are needed for each location.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much.
MS. MATTHES: You're welcome.
Page 74
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. SHEFFIELD: Okay. The next speaker is Jim Burke
representing the Pelican Bay Services Division Board.
MR. BURKE: Commissioners, Jim Burke, Chairman of the
Pelican Bay Services Oivision Board. You have my report, our report,
and I'd be glad to answer any questions you may have.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I just wonder if the
communication between the county and the board has gotten better
over the last year or so.
MR. BURKE: Yeah. In fact, I do want to address that as part of
what I think is our major accomplishments the past year or so. My
predecessor as chair of the board, Jim Carol, about three years ago
began a proactive effort to develop a productive effort with the county
commissioners and the county staff.
I became chair a year ago, and I've kind of expanded on that. We
appointed a vice-chair of government relations, Oon Spanier, and he's
reached out to the county, in a few cases the city, and, importantly,
our neighbors, which was -- we were in need of repairing some
relationships with neighborhoods.
We're very active within the commissioners' District 2 advisory
committee, very active. And as chair, I meet monthly with
Commissioner Halas, I meet bimonthly with Deputy Manager Ochs.
And I also feel if at any given time I need to meet with any of you, I
can call you and do so.
The -- these efforts have put us in touch with much of county
staff, so we have open doors there if we have issues to address, and
I've just had some recent experience with that.
Most of our issues, as you know, are minor, but what I have
found is, if we address them early with the right people, they stay
minor, and that's good and that's progress for us.
In some cases we get resolution. Some cases we get advice and
Page 75
March 27, 2007
direction. And to be quite frankly -- frank about it in some cases,
we're told to forget about it, you're way off base, but that's good to
know.
Net-net, I know think Pelican Bay is well represented within
Collier County government through all these efforts. We have a
mutually productive relationship.
And I want to close my remarks by saying, I want to thank you,
the manager's office and county staff, for all that, you know, you've
done to work together with us, so I appreciate it.
If you have any questions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, sir. Thank you very much --
MR. BURKE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- for your dedicated service.
MR. BURKE: Thank you.
MR. SHEFFIELD: And the last speaker is Jack Wert,
representing the Tourist Development Council.
MR. WERT: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Jack Wert, Tourism Oirector.
And the four-year report is before you. And each of you have
had the opportunity to serve as chairman of the TDC, so I'm confident
that you've seen it from a close-up perspective that this committee
works very hard and is certainly performing as it was intended.
And I'll answer any questions that you might have.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion that the board
accepts the reports and finds that these committees are applicable to
their creation, and also I want to thank Mr. Wert for the changes he's
made in our community.
Page 76
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. So we have a motion by
Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0.
Mr. Mudd, what can we cover that will get us to 11 :30 so our
time is when it's supposed to be?
Item # lOB
THE APPROACH TO THE WILLOW WEST STORMW A TER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT LOCATED IN THE WILLOUGHBY
ACRES AREA, COUNTY PROJECT NO. 510076 - APPROVED
W/STIPULATIONS; & CITIZENS NEED TO SETUP MSTU FOR
CULVERT AND ORAINAGE ISSUES
MR. MUDD: Sir, I think we could cover lOB, which has to do
with a recommendation, and it will keep us on schedule. That has to
do with a recommendation to approve the approach to the Willow
West stormwater improvement project location in the Willoughby
Acres area, county project number 510076.
And Mr. Gene Calvert -- and hopefully Stan is still here, that
Page 77
March 27,2007
could talk about the particular issues.
MS. FILSON: And Mr. Chairman, I have two speakers for this
item.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
Gene, you might just want to give us the highlights, and then the
commissioners may ask questions after that.
MR. CALVERT: Absolutely. For the record, Eugene Calvert,
Stormwater Management Director, Transportation Services Division.
In your packet you received a location map of where this is
located, Willoughby Acres, as well as Willow West. Willow West is
part of Willoughby Acres, located north of Immokalee Road.
The subject property that we're talking about now is just west of
the previous petitioner's, private petitioner, up in that area.
The matter we're bringing before the board today is to gain
approval on improvements we are planning for the Willow West area.
These are drainage stormwater, drainage improvements. The system is
that we're -- has been designed is actually two parts. There is a major
or drainage system behind the homes as well as a tertiary drainage
system within our county road right-of-way.
Mentor Orive, as well as Johnny Cake Drive, are both county
roads, and the improvements that are scheduled under this executive
summary is improvements to the drainage system located within the
county road right-of-way along Mentor Drive and Johnny Cake Drive.
The improvements -- the approach that we're asking the board to
consider is to complete the improvements in two different phases,
really looking at just one phase. Its design was completed to look at
the entire system, looking at improvements both behind the homes, in
the drainage swales behind the homes, as well as drainage swales and
improvements along the county road. The system was designed as
such.
The system behind the homes is a private tertiary system. The
system in our county road system is our county-maintained tertiary
Page 78
March 27,2007
system. And so our approach on this project is to complete only those
improvements within the county road right-of-way, the tertiary.
Granted it will not complete -- take care of all the drainage issues
in the area, but we recognize that the homeowners certainly have an
interest in this area as well. And the homeowners in that Willow West
subdivision has incorporated into a homeowners association, and they
are re -- taking over responsibility for maintenance and improvements
to what we call phase two, or those improvements behind the homes.
And so our approach to this project is for the county to fund the
improvements in the county road right-of-way and the homeowners to
take over the improvements and maintenance of the tertiary system
behind the homes. Might want to also point out that we have not
received any grant funding for this project, so it will be wholly fund
through the stormwater management program.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Halas, then
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Maybe Jerry can help on this. The
portion that -- behind the homes is -- is this in regards to the public
petition that was brought up this morning?
MR. CALVERT: It's not directly related, but, however, it is
related in the fact that there were some drainage swales created in the
development of that area, and those drainage swales have not been
maintained historically. In fact, some of the drainage swales have
been filled in, as the previous petitioner that was here talked about this
mornmg.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. The citizens that live in that
area, they're going to undertake this themselves? Are they going to
establish an MSTU? Or how are they going to approach the -- I
believe it's called phase two; is that correct?
MR. CALVERT: That's correct. They have incorporated so that
they actually have a homeowners association, have an entity. It's up
to them, as an entity, whether they want to create an MSTU or collect
Page 79
March 27, 2007
homeowners association dues.
As I understand it -- and there are public speakers and
representatives from the homeowners association -- that they are
collecting dues and realize that it is their responsibility.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So I assume that they're
going to address some of the people that have already filled in the
easements for stormwater; is that correct?
MR. CALVERT: Again, the responsibility falls with the
homeowners association. Now, we do not endorse filling in those
easements from a drainage standpoint; however, it is outside the
county's maintained drainage system.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But -- I understand that, but that--
that's basically -- those easements were put in there by the developer
of that community, and hopefully they can get those reestablished. I
think that would help a lot with their flooding issue; is that correct?
MR. CALVERT: It would certainly help.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Calvert, the board's policy
-- does this conform to the board's policy?
MR. CALVERT: As I had mentioned earlier, we are not
receiving any type of grant funding to make up any type of match
source through there. We attempted to separate this project into two
phases to comply with the board's policy, the funding policy.
As we said, we looked at a complete package to complete all the
improvements. The improvements behind the homes is the
responsibility of the homeowners, and we feel that is at least in the
spirit of funding policy, looking at local support to complete
improvements.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. But is there any
guarantee to the county that those improvements will happen?
MR. CALVERT: No, there is no guarantee. It's up to the
Page 80
March 27, 2007
homeowners association.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So really what you're
saying right now is, we have 100 percent of stormwater responsibility
that goes above and beyond the board's policy of a third and a third
and a third?
Because we don't know if the homeowners association is going to
do what they -- emails that we received. We don't have any grant
funding.
Should the board change its policy to be fair and equitable to all
the other citizens in Collier County?
MR. CALVERT: Of course, that discussion is probably beyond
our meeting here today. Weare certainly keeping track of what
funding is utilized on our stormwater projects. We plan on providing
an annual report to the board so that we can evaluate that policy in the
future.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Has any of the other
communities that you came to us, whether in design or actually
construction of, fit the board's policy in the past?
MR. CALVERT: Strictly speaking, I would have to say it's -- no,
strictly speaking. Now, we are certainly striving towards that means,
particularly if we look at the capital projects where we're looking at
one-third, one-third, one-third, with our one-third being local
participation and one-third being county participation and one-third
being grants.
Certainly our LASIP project is approaching that. As we look at
some of the developer contributions being easements in right-of-ways,
we take that into that equation where we're approaching that one-third.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioners, in our policy
that we set forth and adopted -- and I don't think it was a majority --
but also in our AUIR, capital improvement plan, we recognized
certain funds to get these projects done.
So we're going to have a shortfall if we continue this and something is
Page 81
March 27,2007
not going to be done unless we put more money into it. And I think
that -- I'm not sure if we should approve this today until we come up
to a fair and equitable solution for all the residents set forth by the
policy of the board.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner -- excuse me. Mr.
Feder, and then Commissioner Halas.
MR. FEDER: Obviously -- for the record, Norm Feder,
Transportation Administrator. I appreciate the commissioner's
concern. It's also one we discussed during the AUIR.
First of all, what we're doing on this process here is we've got a
roadway that's being undermined because of lack of drainage
treatments along the roadway.
What we're providing in overall improvement -- when you look
at the roadway and the rear that's really required to meet stormwater
issues -- is 100 percent of 50 percent solution. I'm not trying to throw
numbers at you. What I'm saying is, is that we will not go beyond our
50/50, which is on a tertiary, by doing the improvement, and we will
protect our roadway.
What we did do though, consistent with what the commissioner's
raising and what was discussed before, is there was no homeowners
association. When we went in with them and they wanted relief from
stormwater and we needed it for our roadway, we discussed with them
that they would have to take on that rear lot improvement to get the
overall stormwater solution, and they agreed by forming a
homeowners associations.
But the commissioner's correct in his question, is there anything
that forces them to follow through and do that, and no, there isn't. But
we're not going to go beyond what would be 50 percent solution to the
overall drainage issue.
And we're finding ourselves there. There are a lot of issues.
How do we force the MSTUs and the other issues, and I think that's
being discussed. But I'm comfortable that we are staying within our
Page 82
March 27,2007
funding formulas and trying to find a way to force those issues, in this
case forming a homeowners association. But even that 50 percent
solution up front is important to us because the roadway's getting
undermined because of the water.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas, then
Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My question -- another question I
have on this particular subject is, we're having problems with the
roadway staying intact. How come we've had this storm water issue
where it's undermining the roads? Oid somebody fill in swales there?
MR. CALVERT: A good number of the driveways in that area
are inverted driveways, and with time -- this is an older subdivision --
some of that has filled in. Currently you have a swale in some of
those areas that is only six inches deep or even less, and maybe the
low spot of the swale is actually the driveway because of the sod, and
with time, it's filled in.
What this project will do is to reestablish those swales so that
we're going to have anywhere from 20 to l8-inch minimum depth for
our swales, get the water away from our road and actually provide
culverts across these driveways so they don't have that standing water
in through there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The culverts are going to be paid
for by the homeowners?
MR. CALVERT: No. This project we will-- proposing that the
culverts will be paid by the county.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Are we setting a precedent
here?
MR. CALVERT: I'm not sure if we're setting a precedent.
Certainly whenever we do -- look at any roadway improvements,
whether it's a major roadway construction, a pavement of our
roadways along the limerock roads, we're looking at the drainage
trying to establish it, and we are covering some of those costs.
Page 83
March 27,2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My concern is, there's been other
people in other areas, even in my district, that say -- when the culvert
collapses, they come in and tell me that it's the county's responsibility.
I've researched this and I've been told that the county -- it's not the
county's responsibility. It's the homeowners' responsibility. So why
are we going to set a precedence here?
MR. CALVERT: Well, for one thing, this is not maintenance of
an existing culvert, but rather, in a lot of cases, an installation of new
or replacement of culverts that are -- that are not at the proper grade.
And whatever the reasons why they were not set at the proper grade,
I'm not privy to that, but we have a number of those that were installed
that are completely out of grade as well.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, we've got -- they've got
issues in Naples Park where the grades aren't set the same. So what
are we going to do there if we go into that area and start setting up a
stormwater -- trying to address the storm water issues that lie in that
community? Or another one is Pine Ridge. How we going to address
those if the culverts aren't the right size, if somebody didn't put the
culverts in at the right size, didn't put them at the right grade, whatever
reason? How we going to address that?
MR. CALVERT: I think it's important that the stormwater
management department takes a lead at identifying areas that are
susceptible to major flooding and to address those. Whether that's
through the individual homes or -- homeowners or by the county.
Certainly our -- one of our missions and our goals is to reduce
flooding for all residents in the county.
And in this case, in this Willow West, it has been identified that
we have received some major flooding through that area. While they
have not approached actually into homes, the water has got into
certain -- up driveways and into certain garages, so it is approaching
that level.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So if we -- if we approve this item
Page 84
March 27, 2007
on the agenda, it's basically -- I think what you're trying to tell me, this
could be under the auspices of health, safety and welfare because if we
undermine the roads, we're going to have potholes and it's going to
cause other problems; is that what you're trying to tell me?
MR. CAL VERT: Yes, I am. It's more than just the health, safety
and welfare too. It's looking at, system-wide, and identifying those
issues that need to be identified and corrected and taken at a
case-by-base basis.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The last question is, I do have
some reservations in this in that I want to know what the commitment
is from the citizens. And hopefully maybe when they come before --
before us, they'll give us some indication where we should be. And I
reserve the right to make a -- to motion later on after we find out what
is really going to be taken on by the citizens here.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How important are the side lot
drainages and the rear lot drainages?
MR. CALVERT: As you look at -- in fact, Mr. Chrzanowski has
a lidar map. And as you look at some of those topographies, certainly
the rear lot drainage is very important. You can see that it's low. And
if we don't have drainage out of that area, then it will fill up and flood
into the back yards and approach the homes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And did it negate the
improvements that we'll be taking in the right-of-way as far as
drainage is concerned?
MR. CALVERT: No, because it -- in fact, they'll complement
one another. The improvement to the right-of-way can stand alone. If
no improvements are ever made along the rear swales, we'll certainly
improve, dramatically improve, drainage in that area, regardless if the
homeowners do the rear lots or not.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But if they don't do the rear lots
and if they don't maintain side lot drainages, they're still going to have
Page 85
March 27, 2007
flooding on their property; is that correct?
MR. CALVERT: That's correct. Really the side lot drainages
already -- we're going to be cleaning out some culverts. There are
some existing pipes that bring the water from the rear lots to the front,
to the roads. Those pipes are in good shape. We're going to be
cleaning them, but we're not going to be addressing those in any
manner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But if the rear lot drainage areas
are filled in, the side lot drainage is not going to serve its purpose.
MR. CALVERT: That's true. It won't be able to drain the rear
lot areas.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So the half of the equation that's
missing as far as the back lots go, it can't be fixed or it can be fixed?
It would be a major --
MR. CALVERT: We can dramatically improve that drainage
area by just improving the drainage along through the county road
right-of-way. We can probably take care of two-thirds to
three-quarters of the drainage problems in that area by improvements
strictly along our county road right-of-way.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MR. CALVERT: There will still be drainage problems in the
rear lots.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now, question, just so I can bring
some balance to this whole thing in my mind. Golden Gate Estates,
we have the expansion that goes on forever, streets that are a mile
long. The drainage ditches that are there, we maintain them. But the
part where it goes underneath the driveway, whose responsibility is it?
MR. CALVERT: The culverts -- the maintenance and
replacement of the culverts, if they fail, generally the responsibility of
the homeowners.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. But in this case we're talking
Page 86
March 27, 2007
about doing the culverts, too.
MR. CALVERT: We are for this particular case, yes, similar to
what we may do for some of the other improvements --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand that. But if we do this,
I'm going to be coming back in the near future for residents in Golden
Gate Estates, which number -- instead of 40 homes, 20,000 homes,
and they're going to be asking for the same consideration, so we've got
a little bit of a problem here.
There is no way we can come up with one-third, one-third,
one-third deal. We couldn't find a grant or something from water
management to be able to cover a third, we cover a third, and have the
homeowners come together in an MSTU to cover the other third?
MR. CALVERT: No. The Big Cypress Basin and South Florida
do not normally fund any type of tertiary drainage improvements.
They're geared towards the primary, the capital projects.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So this would also apply to
such places as Golden Gate Estates or other places in North Naples or
East Naples, too?
MR. CALVERT: That's correct, on any of our tertiary systems.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So it's a question of what kind of
policy we set and that carries forward. And I agree with my fellow
commissioners, you know, the policy, if we change it at this point in
time, we could be at a disadvantage.
In order to be able to improve the system there, less the culverts that
go underneath the driveways, the cost would be pretty minimal for the
county, wouldn't it?
MR. CALVERT: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I don't know. I think maybe we
should come up with something for like an MSTU to be able to cover
that portion of the cost where the culverts have to be replaced. The
costs wouldn't be out of this world. I assume that we could put it into
an MSTU and break it down over a number of years, couldn't we?
Page 87
March 27, 2007
MR. CALVERT: Oh, absolutely, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, that would be my
recommendation, but I'd leave it to the commissioner of the district to
make a motion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Why don't we hear the people.
Maybe --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. That's right. Let's go to the
speakers.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, we have two speakers. Robert
Dayburo (sic), Sr.
MR. DRYBURGH: Dryburgh.
MS. FILSON: And he'll be followed by Darrell Thompson.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, you didn't pick a good
one, by the way.
Yes, sir. Please state your name for the record, and you have
three minutes.
MR. DRYBURGH: All right. Good morning. My name is
Robert Dryburgh, and I've lived in 44 Johnny Cake Drive in Willow
West for 12 years. And a lot of my neighbors and fellow homeowners
couldn't be here. There's only about five of us here. Some came and
left. But we're here to represent them and speak for them.
Like September of '06 we started with a meeting at Vanderbilt
Presbyterian Church. It was -- Mr. Halas was there, and surveyors and
engineers and Gene Calvert and Val Prince. A lot of people were
there to discuss the issues.
And we worked together for the last seven months. We did the
petition, and we set up a bank account for future maintenance like of
the north/south trunk lines, and the rear swales, we -- a lot of them are
-- were completed 10 years ago with the infiltrator system, and that
was under -- George Archibald, you know, set that up for us.
And mine works fine in the back. I have the infiltrator system. I
was one of the first ones, and it still works fine 10 years later, and it
Page 88
March 27, 2007
runs into my back basin and then out to the front of the road.
But anyway, we're working on the front phase one of this with
Gene and Val for several months, and our main concerns are the
problems with the water that lays in the front yards, like in our
driveways and -- like the park. We put in a park on Mentor, you all
did, and you put in a sidewalk all the way to the park. And when we
have minimal rain, you know, it floods, and the water stays there.
And then like when rainy seasons come again, it will rain every day
and the water won't go away for weeks, sometimes months.
And we've got the kids going to school every day through -- you
know, they've got to get through the water every day and in the
driveways. And then the kids go in the park, they can't walk on the
sidewalk because it's underwater.
And then after a while, the sediment goes to the bottom, and then
people walking out just to get to their mailbox -- into their mailbox to
get the mail, they'll slip or whatever. And the same with the park.
You know, you can't even walk to the park on the sidewalk because
it's underwater for months at a time.
So we were hoping that you'd vote yes on this project and
alleviate this problem. Like if we have a downpour right now, you
know, this afternoon, if we have a downpour there, the whole road is
covered, and then it will subside to the edge of the road and it will stay
in the swales, but it will stay in the driveway, you know, for a few
days. But if it rains the next day, it turns into weeks, into months for
rainy season. And I was just worried about the health issues for the
kids and --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, if you could, Commissioner
Coyle, I think, wants to address some of your -- I'm sorry,
Commissioner Halas, excuse me.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, I put my light on for a motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's for after?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
Page 89
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Forgive me. Ms. Filson, you're
not running the timer?
MS. FILSON: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, in any case, please continue. I
didn't mean to interrupt you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's been three minutes.
MR. DRYBURGH: Anyway, we did set up a bank account for
the future maintenance for the north trunk south -- north/south trunk
lines. It's something we'll have to maintain and clean out every few
years.
And the back swales, that's another issue altogether. That's phase
two, but that's going to be taken care of by the homeowners. And
we're going to set up, you know, the funding. Our bank account
mostly is going to be funding for storm water maintenance because we
don't have many issues with our 40 people.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, thank you, sir.
Who's the next speaker, Sue?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker --
MR. DRYBURGH: All right. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: -- is Darrell Thompson.
MR. THOMPSON: Hi. Darrell Thompson, 37 Mentor. I want
to thank you guys for the opportunity to speak here today. I also want
to mention that staff has been excellent to work with, very
professional. That says something for what you guys do. It filters
down. It really helps.
A lot of issues here. I hope you might let me have more than
three minutes, if it gets to that. I'm actually speaking for 48 units, I
believe, four of which are owned by county, Collier County Parks and
Rec.
Robert covered the health issues. Where do you go from here?
You have an antiquated document that really needs to represent the
Page 90
March 27,2007
current condition of the association, if you want to call it that.
I would be interested in maybe some direction from you guys to
maybe direct some legal wording and/or verbiage of the current
document, because you can't just say you're going to start an
association and all of a sudden you're going to be able to take care of
this issue.
Yes, we've collected funds for that. You know, to change these
documents, you have to -- there's a lot of legalese to be sure that those
things are done, like the park at the end and whatnot. I would like to
have the county's position on that, that way we get that wording when
we do change the -- either the bylaws or the covenant to maintain
those north/south trunk lines and the rear swale.
As far as maybe addressing the issue on the actual culverts, those
culverts are going to be installed by the -- your department.
In your Golden Gate area there's already existing culverts. So if,
say, 10 years from now my culvert breaks down, that could even be
written into the changes of the documents to reflect that, that that
would be the homeowner responsibility if that comes.
I don't see why there's anything that really, logically, we can say,
well, we shouldn't vote no on this today. I think more of it's a yes vote
and maybe contingent on whatever else we need to do, because it's
something that's really kind of a time-is-of-the-essence matter, and we
would love to get this done before the rain.
We're setting up the north/south trunk line maintenance in those
documents of that association and putting some teeth and only teeth,
because most of the people in this community don't want to have an
association, that's why they live there, okay.
So we need teeth in that document to actually control that
drainage in the rears, and that's what we need to do. That's why we
would kind of like a little direction as to what the county would like to
see in that.
But really, contingent on anything, I really see no reason, when
Page 91
March 27, 2007
you look at it logically, why you would vote no. I think it's more of a
yes vote. I can't see any real reason to say no. It's more of a yes-yes.
It's a win for everybody. This water is going to be taken away from
Willoughby Acres area, all of it. And if you take a look at it, it's a
lower lying area. You know, who else knows which way the water
drains than the people that live there.
I've lived there eight years. I fell twice last year in my swale, my
drain, just walking to get the mail. I watched my neighbor fall. I
watched the kids play in this water.
What's in that water after it sits there for three months? I want to
thank you for your time. And any questions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, thank you, sir. After we finish
with the next speaker -- I think we've got one more?
MS. FILSON: No, sir. He's your final speaker.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, that is. Well, what we'll do is
we'll call you back, sir, if we have some questions directed to you.
We thank you for being here today.
MR. THOMPSON: All right, thanks.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This is somewhat of a health,
safety and welfare issue because I think a lot of the homes there have
septic fields; is that correct?
MR. CALVERT: There are septic fields, yes, particularly in the
southern portion of the development.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Now, are the septic fields located
in the front of the property or back?
MR. CALVERT: I believe they're in the rear of the property.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I think the community here
really has to step up to this portion of the flood problem.
I still don't feel comfortable, and I don't think my -- the rest of
my board members feel comfortable -- about putting in or replacing
culverts. I have a problem with that because, as Commissioner
Page 92
March 27,2007
Coletta brought up earlier, there may be 20,000 culverts that are not
set at the proper elevation.
So the county's going to come in here, redo the swales -- which I
agree 100 percent needs to be done, but I believe there needs to be an
MSTU set up for this group because, yes, they have a bank account.
But if somebody gets upset a year from now, he's going to pull out and
say, I'm not going to put any more money into their kitty.
So what needs to be really done, I believe, is an MSTU to be set
up to address the culvert issue. I think it is the responsibility of the
county to make sure that the swales are clean, to make sure that we
have -- the grade is set right so that the water flows away from the
front of the property, flows away from the road, so that we don't -- it
doesn't cause a particular problem with the school children getting to
and from school or to the bus, whatever the case may be.
But when it comes to the county getting involved in putting
culverts in, that doesn't sit too well.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Make it in the form of motion to have
staff work with them?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I think staffs got to work
with these people to get an MSTU established. So I'm going to make
a motion that we approve this but only on the aspect that the citizens
set up an MSTU in regards to addressing culverts if culverts need to
be built or put in place at the front of their property at the driveways,
okay, and also, that they need to figure out what they're going to do to
address the fill-in of back yards that's caused the problem to be even
worse, compounded the problem.
So I think there's a lot that needs to be addressed here, and I think
that really the way to go on this is we can approve the county getting
involved in taking care of the swales in the front of the home, but that
the citizens have to have an MSTU to address the back lots and also
the culverts.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. and I'm going to second your
Page 93
March 27, 2007
motion, and I want to add a couple little caveats to what you just said.
You mentioned that some of your residents there moved there because
they didn't want to be involved. Well, guess what? This is the real
world. They got to get involved. You're here today because you're
getting involved.
An MSTU gives you that certainty that everybody pays a fair
proportion to what you need to be, and it could be stretched over a
number of years. You can bond it out and then pay it off over a period
of time. The cost will not be insurmountable. And you know your
neighbors are paying their part.
The county would be involved so you'd have some certainty of
what's going to take place as far as the agreement that's going to be
reached. I'm not sure how they draw that up. That's all taken care of
through the County Attorney's Office and the county. They do it all
the time.
But it's the way to get you where you need to be. Problem being
is, if they ever passed it today and saying, yes, we're going to replace
the culverts, health, safety and welfare issue, I can come right back
with 20,000 homes out in the Estates that state the same thing, septic
tanks in the front yard, flooded driveways, kids playing in the water,
and the culverts need to be replaced there, and of course, it would
become an unbelievable burden to the county. And we've been telling
people as a regular basis throughout that whole area, even during the
major flooding, that culverts are their responsibility and they remain
so.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm not sure if that's the
policy of the board. I kind of remember, I thought that we were going
to replace culverts or reset culverts or something like that.
I would like to just stick to the board's policy and -- so that we
don't -- we don't deviate and get ourselves in trouble in the future on
the resources of the capital improvement plan.
Page 94
March 27, 2007
I can't support the motion the way it is, but we need to do
something here.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Is there any other discussion
on the motion?
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. It was my understanding
there are no culverts there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, there are.
MR. CALVERT: Some of the driveways do have culverts.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How about those that don't?
MR. CALVERT: The majority of them don't.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what I thought.
MR. CALVERT: There's actually inverted swales for the
driveways.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what I thought. So the board
policy with respect to replacing culverts would not apply in this case
because the government never installed the culvert?
MR. CALVERT: Well, based on the motion that I'm
understanding from Commissioner Halas, I would -- to complete these
improvements, we really should have culverts at all those driveways.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Who is -- who -- under the
board's policy, who is responsible for the initial installation of
culverts?
MR. CALVERT: The homeowners are if it's a -- you know,
somebody comes in and wants to build a home now, they're
responsible to put in a culvert. They get a right-of-way permit.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right. And if there is -- there
happens to be a culvert there and it is in a bad state of repair, the
homeowner's responsible for replacing that culvert, too.
MR. CALVERT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That is correct, okay. So the policy
of the board then would be that you've got to pay for your culvert; are
Page 95
March 27, 2007
we correct here?
MR. CALVERT: One of the reasons we're here, to get that
confirmation or get direction.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I know. But what is the current
policy?
MR. CALVERT: Current policy is the responsibility for culverts
is the homeowners association -- homeowners.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So--
MR. CALVERT: There are exceptions. Anytime we do a major
improvement for a roadway, we take care of the culverts.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: lfwe come in and build a roadway
or widen a road, we're going to replace it the way it was before we did
this, okay. We were going to -- we'll improve it, but that's not the
situation here.
MR. CALVERT: Right. We are -- this particular project is
strictly to improve the drainage facilities, not the roadway.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Calvert, have we replaced,
the board, reset culverts in Golden Gate Estates?
MR. CALVERT: I don't know the answer to that. I don't know if
there was any that were reset during the recent limerock paving. I
believe there were a few.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. You believe there was a
few. What about Livingston Woods?
MR. CALVERT: I couldn't tell you there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Well, I'm told that the
county did replace them or reset them, so I'm not sure if we're getting
correct answers to make a good decision.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But I think this is dealing with a
policy that we're trying to put together now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. We already have a policy.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You don't agree with the motion?
Page 96
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I don't.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, that's fine. That's good. Do you
want to discuss it anymore or --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You give us -- could you give us
some help on this to -- my understanding is that if we get -- if we set a
precedent, then we're going to be involved in a whole lot of replacing
culverts. Now, when you reset a culvert, do you save that culvert, or
do you have to put a new one in?
MR. CALVERT: For the most part -- depending on the culvert,
but for the most part, it's replacement. They just put a brand new
culvert in there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If! may, what we're dealing with here
is a situation where they're going to -- everybody's going to benefit
from this. We're not talking about an expense where anybody's going
to have to pay up front. We're talking about something that's going to
have compounded effects if we take on the whole bill because we
know it's not going to end here. There's going to be -- it's going to
continue right on through.
So at a time when we're going to a very uncertain budget year
and future years coming up, do we really want to take on the
responsibility of paying for these culverts, or do we want to use
government at its best to be able to negotiate something that's
extremely reasonable with an MSTU, bond the money, be able to get
the work done now and have it paid off over a period of time?
I think that's the way to go. I think your motion was very clear in
that direction.
Is there any other discussion on this motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor of the
motion, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
Page 97
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Let the record show
Commissioner Henning was the opposing vote.
We're running close --
MR. CALVERT: Thank you very much for your direction.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you so much. You did a
wonderful job, Gene. We're looking forward to you working with the
neighbors and reporting back later.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I hope you understand where we're
coming from. But you have to realize that once we do set -- replace
culverts or put culverts in on every one of these homesites, that
everybody in Collier County, when something comes up, they're going
to want their culvert replaced, and then we don't have any defense on
it, and it's going to -- it's going to be huge as far as the taxpayers'
money.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If we could, I want to get on to the
next item. We're going to run just a little bit late. But I think we can
move through the CRA stuff fairly quick, Mr. Mudd? No?
MR. MUDD: I hope so, sir, but you've got to -- you have to
switch hats right now because --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have--
MR. MUDD: We have a time concern.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How about fellow commissioners?
Do you want to run a little bit late or do you want to pick this up after
lunch?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're talking about taking 14A
only?
MR. MUDD: Taking 14A. That's all you need.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That should be real fast.
Page 98
March 27, 2007
MR. MUDD: That's all you're going to be able to get to.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay, great. Do your thing,
Commissioner Fiala.
Item #14A
CRA RESOLUTION 2007-72A: THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IS
SEEKING TO HAVE THE BCC, ACTING IN THE CAP AClTY OF
THE CRA; TO REVIEW AND APPROVE THE 2006 ANNUAL
REPORTS OF THE CRA REQUIRED BY 163.356(3)(C),
FLORIDA STATUTES, DIRECT THE COUNTY MANAGER OR
HIS DESIGNEE TO FILE THE ANNUAL REPORT WITH THE
COUNTY CLERK AND PUBLISH NOTICE OF THE FILLING,
AND TO MODIFY THE CRA BYLAWS, WHICH REQUIRE AN
ANNUAL MEETING BE HELD IN JANUARY, TO REQUIRE
THE ANNUAL MEETING TO BE HELD IN MARCH TO ALIGN
WITH THE FLORIDA STATUTE FISCAL ANNUAL REPORT
MARCH REQUIREMENT - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. The meeting will come to order
for the CRA Board.
MR. MUDD: Okay. This is a Community Redevelopment
Agency. The executive summary is seeking to have the BCC, acting
in the capacity of the CRA, to review and approve the 2006 annual
reports of the CRA required by 163.3506(3)(c), Florida Statutes, direct
the county manager or his designees to file the annual report with the
county clerk, and publish notice of the filing and to modify the CRA
bylaws, which require an annual meeting be held in January to require
that annual meeting to be held in March to align with the Florida
Statute fiscal annual report March requirement. And I already --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve
Page 99
March 27,2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Approved.
MR. MUDD: Did you have to put anything on the record?
MR. BOSI: Terrific. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you so much. And with that, I will
adjourn --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You want to do B?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You want to do B?
MR. MUDD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Are we going to do B?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: B ought to go pretty quick.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay,
MR. MUDD: If you want.
Item #14B
THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZED THE BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y
Page 100
March 27, 2007
TRIANGLE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO COORDINATE
WITH ALL APPROPRIATE ENTITIES TO SECURE AND
STRUCTURE A LOAN IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$9,000,000 FROM A COMMERCIAL LENDER SELECTED VIA
INVITATION TO BID (BANK ITB) TO PURCHASE CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y
TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND
TO NEGOTIATE AND PREPARE FOR SUBSEQUENT
APPROV AL ALL REQUIRED ENABLING DOCUMENTS TO
PLEDGE CRA FUNDS AS THE LOAN REPAYMENT SOURCE;
AUTHORIZE THE CRA CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE REAL
EST A TE CONTRACT AND EXECUTE A COMMITMENT
LETTER WITH THE SELECTED BANK LENDER; AND
AUTHORIZE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS -
APPROVED
Commissioner -- Mr. Jackson, if you could come forward to help
us a little bit. This is 14B. We're still-- you're still acting as the
Community Redevelopment Agency. It's a recommendation for the
Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency, CRA, to
authorize the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA executive director to
coordinate with all appropriate entities to secure and structure a loan
in an amount not to exceed $9 million for a commercial lender
selected via invitation to bid, a bank, ITB, to purchase certain real
property within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community
Redevelopment Agency and to negotiate and prepare for subsequent
approval all required enabling documents to pledge CRA funds as a
loan repayment source, authorize the CRA chairman to execute the
real estate contract and execute a commitment letter with the selected
bank lender and authorize all necessary budget amendments.
Mr. David Jackson, your Executive Director of the Bayshore
Gateway Triangle CRA, will present.
Page 101
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a--
MS. FILSON: I have a speaker.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- motion on the floor by Commissioner
Coyle and a second by Commissioner Henning. You say there's one
speaker?
MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Lindsey Thomas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Maybe he wants to waive.
MR. THOMAS: Waive.
MR. JACKSON: He wants to waive it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, Mr. Thomas. That was a good
speech and great presentation, David.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Perfect. Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we could now switch from CRA to
the regular board meeting because there's really a companion item to
14B, and that's lOD. It deals with--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So then I will close the CRA
board meeting and --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the commission meeting will
now readjourn.
Page 102
March 27, 2007
Item #10D
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AUTHORIZED
THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO
COORDINA TE WITH ALL APPROPRIATE ENTITIES TO
SECURE AND STRUCTURE A LOAN IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $9,000,000 FROM A COMMERCIAL LENDER
SELECTED VIA INVITATION TO BID (BANK ITB) TO
PURCHASE CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE
BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY; AUTHORIZE THE CRA TO
EXECUTE A COMMITMENT LETTER WITH THE SELECTED
BANK LENDER AND TO NEGOTIATE AND PREPARE FOR
SUBSEQUENT APPROVAL ALL REQUIRED ENABLING
DOCUMENTS TO PLEDGE CRA FUNDS AS THE LOAN
REPAYMENT SOURCE; AND AUTHORIZE ALL NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENTS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this is 10D, to be heard
immediately following I4B. It's a recommendation for the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners to authorize the Community
Redevelopment Agency, CRA, to coordinate with all appropriate
entities to secure and structure a loan in an amount not to exceed $9
million for a commercial lender selected via invitation to bid, a bank,
ITB, to purchase certain real property within the Bayshore Gateway
Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency, authorize the CRA to
execute a commitment letter with the selected bank lender and to
negotiate and prepare for subsequent approval all required enabling
documents to pledge CRA funds as the loan repayment source and
authorize all necessary budget amendments.
And, again, Mr. David Jackson, would be your presenter.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
Page 103
March 27,2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I have a motion -- oh, sorry.
I'm not that chairman. Excuse me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Boy, I tell you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Pushy, isn't she?
CHAIRMAN COLETT A: You need some lunch, yeah.
Commissioner Coyle made the motion for approval, Commissioner
Henning made the second.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0, and we are
adjourned one hour for lunch. Boy, look at that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, my goodness.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Right on time.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
Item #8A
RESOLUTION 2007-73: VK HOLDINGS TREVISO BAY
MARINA, LLC REPRESENTED BY C. MATT JOYNER, P.A.
ARCHITECT, REQUESTS A MIXED USE PROJECT IN THE
Page 104
March 27, 2007
BA YSHORE DRIVE DISTRICT OVERLAY, PROPOSING 2
RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 19,607 SQUARE FEET 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-
ADOPTED W/STIPULATlONS
Next on our agenda is advertised public hearings. You have one
on the agenda today, and it's item 8A. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
commission members.
It's 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 Bay 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.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Mudd.
All those wishing to participate, please stand at this time and be
sworn m.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Now disclosure by
commissioners. We'll start with Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I have -- of course,
we have heard this item before, we've had a public hearing on it before
and some debate at that point in time, and subsequent to that, I have
Page 105
March 27,2007
received numerous emails and telephone calls, I have met with the
developer, I've met with staff, and all of those communications are
here in my correspondence file.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, thank you. I've had
correspondence, emails, talked with staff on this, and as was brought
up earlier by Commissioner Coyle, this has been discussed before.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And just basically the same here. I've
had correspondence, emails, talked to staff, and we discussed it at a --
this at a previous meeting.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And same here, we've not only
had a meeting on this once before -- and we did some background
work on it at that time. Here we are again. I've spoken with staff a
number of times, I've spoken with the developer and with his architect
and with his staff.
I also sat in when they had a public hearing. I just wanted to hear
what was going on in the audience and how the audience felt, and I've
spoken to our own staff. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Whoever the presenter is.
MR. MUDD: State your name for the record.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Sanjay Kuttemperoor with VK
Development, Owner of VK Holdings Treviso Bay Marina.
Before Matt Joyner, our architects, get started with the presentation, I
just want to make a few brief comments.
As you mayor may not know, my family is the owner of the
Treviso Bay project in East Naples. We are well underway toward
developing a very high-end community in that area. We're excited
about the project. As you drive by, you can see the fantastic entry
walls, our sales center, under construction. Sales center's actually
open.
The Treviso Bay Marina will be an amenity to the project. As
Page 106
March 27,2007
was noted before, we had a -- we had appeared before you back in
November on this very item. We've had two neighborhood
informational meetings. And in addition to that, last week we offered
to have an informal meeting with the neighborhood on site. And at
that meeting we presented a question and answer document in
response to some questions that were raised during the second
neighborhood informational meeting. We can hand that out to you
just so you --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You could give it to the county
manager, I guess, and he can distribute them. Thank you. I'm sorry.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Thank you. As I said, the question
and answer was provided in response to questions that were raised at
the second neighborhood informational meeting about a few topics.
We distributed copies during this informal meeting, told those that
attended to distribute them to the neighborhood.
And, you know, to the extent that there are any differences
between what's contained in that document and the document that was
distributed by Ms. Valera under her executive summary, we'd like the
provisions in that Q&A to control.
So with that, I would like to turn over to Matt, and he can give
you a brief presentation on our marina. Thank you.
MR. JOYNER: Thank you, once again, Commissioners, for the
time to present our work with you all. I'll try to move this along a
little quicker so you can -- as opposed to last time.
What we have first is a -- basically an aerial. And I believe you
all had previously received a package with the graphics, so you're
somewhat familiar.
To the north, of course, is Riverview, to the south Lakeview, and to
the right-hand side is Bayshore Drive currently showing existing
conditions with the boats outside and fairly small metal building that
currently exists there.
The next slide shows I'll project, if you'll have it, overlaid on the
Page 107
March 27, 2007
top of the aerial. The red areas, if you'll have it, are parking, both on
site and on the adjacent streets. The dark portions of the overlay
represents the actual rooftop of the boat storage itself. The lighter
corners, if you'll have it, respond to the retail space that came in as a
result of one of our previous meetings.
This is a little clearer graphic, if you'll have it, just to reiterate the
site issues. To the north is the club facility along Riverview. This
club facility has two residences above. Again, on the intersection of
Bayview -- I'm sorry, Bayshore and Riverview is a retail space, and to
the south, Bayshore and Lakeview.
All of the water conditions will remain the same, the docks, the
seawalls, et cetera, that are currently there. There will be some repair
and maintenance on some of the wood docks.
This is, if you'll have it, the image we're trying to create, trying to
follow, again, what was outlined in the overlay district, the language
as such. We've gone to a lot of effort to try to create a facility that
doesn't look like what we all perceive to be a boat barn.
It's obviously not a -- it's not a cheap building structure to make,
but we hope, again, to be a significant part of the revitalization of this
area, following through with the architectural style that's been
requested that we follow, along with the LDC, the language that sets
precedence for building articulation and such.
To move you forward, this is the -- this would be a view from the
northwest corner of Riverview looking onto the project. This would
be the corner of our structure that responds to that northwest view.
This would be the club facility on the ground level, and then the two
residences above.
Moving on is the north elevation on Riverview. And, again, the
articulation of the building, the location of the retail space on the
intersection to the left, and on the right-hand side where the club
facility and two residences are, we stepped the building back in an
effort to kind of respond to the residential character that we're abutting
Page 108
March 27,2007
up near.
Otherwise, in between and farther down Bayshore is the boat
storage, behind these components in the architecture.
This is the view looking east of Bayshore back toward the site,
showing the metal building and the intersection of Areca. This would
be the primary elevation on the east side of the structure. The clock
tower and such on the right. Again, that's the retail. And then on the
other corner, the southeast corner, again, is the retail addition that we
have brought about.
This is the intersection of Lakeview and Bayshore. What we will
be eliminating is all parking along Bayshore. We'll be coming in and
tying in the sidewalks much to -- I believe Gail Boreman (phonetic)
has a master plan, if you'll have it, for handling street scaping and
sidewalks, et cetera. The boat storage on this side, that's actually in
the -- little bit outside of the setbacks currently. Again, all the boats
will be concealed within the structure.
This is a -- the south elevation, if you'll have it, along Lakeview.
In one of our previous meetings with residents, they had asked us if
we could look at possibly modifying the southwest corner of the
buildings to respond a little more to the residential structures that
continue on down the street. We revised this end here, eliminated a
few boat slips to accomplish it. But we're trying to, again, step the
building down to kind of respond to their wishes.
This is -- this would be the view from the southwest looking to
what would be the northeast, back toward Bayshore. And this is the
elevation. Again, on the bottom, is the final end result of modifying
the structure previously noted above, again, to respond to some of
those wishes.
This is a section, if you'll have it, through the building, and
through Bayshore Drive, to kind of help you understand how the
building itself steps back responding to both boat length and LDC
requirements on the building massing and such, showing the sidewalk,
Page 109
March 27, 2007
out here the building stepped back, some potential landscaping, the
two lanes, if you'll have it, of Bayshore.
And with that, I'll sum it up. Again, there's the overall end
product of what we've been working at, starting this process in the fall
of 2005 working through the MUP process.
So with that, I'll entertain any questions as best I can.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before we go to questions, do we
have speakers, too?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. We have one speaker.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why don't we do the one speaker.
MS. FILSON: David Woodworth.
MR. WOODWORTH: I have a couple pictures.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Woodworth, come right over
here if you have pictures. Have you been sworn in, sir?
MR. WOODWORTH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. And please state
your name for the record when you get to the mike.
MR. WOODWORTH: My name is David Woodworth. I live on
Lakeview Drive.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Woodworth, they'll assist you
with the pictures to get them up on the screen.
MR. WOODWORTH: Excuse me?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: They'll assist you getting the pictures
up on the screen.
MR. WOODWORTH: Oh, you mean it's not preloaded.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. You got a CD. I
thought you had physical pictures.
MR. WOODWORTH: Well, they don't have floppies anymore.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll tell you what, sir, if you're going
to be a few minutes setting up, maybe I'll let the commissioners go
forward --
MS. FILSON: I had two additional speakers, Mr. Chairman.
Page 110
March 27,2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't think he heard you. She just
found two more additional speakers.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Let me do this, sir. While
you're setting --
MR. WOODWORTH: I'm -- this is the picture of the front of my
house.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Please proceed.
MR. WOODWORTH: This is a picture of my house. As you can
see, the existing structure there that -- the marina, it's a closed
structure. It's -- it only operates six days a week. This new facility's
going to operate seven days a week. We won't even be able to sleep in
on Sunday anymore.
The building -- that one is 45 feet, so you can imagine right in
here -- well, I can go -- let's go back.
All right. Right in here is going to go at least another 10 feet, and
plus it's like about another 50 to 100 feet closer, so it's -- I'm going to
be able to see boats walking out in front of my -- it -- you know,
maybe driving along the street you'll see their little fronts, you know,
their -- I guess it's -- to me it's a set, like a movie set.
You have three sides, and if you're in the back like I am, I'm
going to see the back of the set, and it's not going to look very pretty.
I'll think I'm in an industrial area. I won't -- you know, I'm ready to
move. But, you know, the way things are going in the real estate
business, people can't move very easily, you know.
Anyway, the first thing is that I read that 60 percent of a
mixed-use area, the commercial part is supposed to provide services to
the residents, which there won't be any residents in this place because
it's two residences, but they're not selling them, they're not renting
them, so they don't have any residents.
So you're talking about 60 percent of services to the
neighborhood. They're providing 10 percent of the commercial space
for services to the neighborhood, that's all. And if you can't get to the
Page 111
March 27,2007
60 percent, you need to change the rules, I think. But right now the
rules stand at 60 percent.
The other thing is it's -- you know, like it's only a building -- it's
not a building. It's a set that has three sides and no back. Everything
hangs out.
Earlier at the last presentation they talked about closing off
Areca. Now, I don't understand why Areca has anything to do with
this facility except it's directly across from it.
I own property down Areca. I'm -- if you close off Areca, you
should close all the streets up and down Bayshore Drive. Everybody
should be in the same boat. We go down all the way down to
Thomasson and come back again, you know. I mean, there's Cocoa.
Cocoa's the worst street to me. If you're going to close any street,
Cocoa is the one, you know.
Also, I sent you an email talking about the Bonita Beach situation
with these beach clubs. If you allow Treviso Bay to build a marina
here, the next three streets will have one probably within the next five
years. They'll be big, massive metal buildings. That's all we'll have
on Bayshore Drive.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. I'm going to have to ask
you to wrap it up, sir.
MR. WOODWORTH: Excuse me?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You'll have to wrap it up, sir.
MR. WOODWORTH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Your three minutes are up.
MR. WOODWORTH: Okay. Well, you know, I don't know if
you want just bunches of, you know, sets along Bayshore Drive, but I
-- to me, it's -- let me show you what I --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, after the picture I'll have to --
MR. WOODWORTH: My dock. You can see right there, you
can see their existing dock there. I can -- you know, all I see is little
tiny -- I'll be seeing a big, massive building here, the back side of it.
Page 112
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, we appreciate very much you
being here today.
MR. WOODWORTH: Okay. Well--
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is David Jackson. He'll be
followed by Steve Main.
MR. JACKSON: Good afternoon. David Jackson, Executive
Director for the Bayshore Gateway Redevelopment Agency.
The local advisory board has been supportive of this evolution
and this mixed-use project since its inception. We've walked with the
developer and the new purchasers of the land from the preapp.
meeting and through all the public meetings that they've had. They've
had two great neighborhood meetings in which the people came and
voiced their opinions and their concerns.
For the most part, all the concerns were met in some form or
fashion. We all know that you can't do 100 percent. There's no such
thing as 100 percent, and most of the time, especially when you have
involvement of neighborhood and residences.
The last meeting they had, they brought people down to the
marina and they walked the site, and they, again, addressed their
concerns and made other concessions to those residents in the area.
Now, the mixed-use project, this is C-4 land. Collier County
Land Development Code allows a 75-foot building on that site. With
the overlay, by them opting into the mixed-use program, they are
limiting their height as long as they can meet the other criteria, the
parking, the landscape, and the rest of the neighborhood portions of it.
The local advisory board is in total support of this project. We
feel that it's going to be a good genesis project for the area and that it
will be a good milestone as we go along to redeveloping the rest of the
C-4 land that's up and down Bayshore.
Now, this will be a project -- it will be better than what was there
before environmentally, physically, aesthetically, and also height-wise
for the neighborhood. Thank you.
Page 113
March 27, 2007
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Steve Main.
MR. MAIN: Good afternoon. I'm Steve Main, current -- or
former owner of the property and current occupant on there. I just
want -- and also member of the CRA advisory board for Bayshore
Gateway Triangle.
And I just want to kind of reiterate what David has already said.
We on the board are very much in favor of the project, and we, the
former owners of the property, are very much in favor of it just
because we feel that it's going to add something to the neighborhood
that we were unable to do throughout the time that we had it.
And I have attended nearly every meeting that has been held,
both the neighborhood information meetings and many of the others,
and I must say that the Treviso Bay owners, VK Development, have
done everything they can to try to meet, as much as possible, all of the
concerns that have before raised by many of the residents both in the
immediate neighborhood, Lakeview and around there.
And they're doing all they can, and I must say that it appears to
me that primarily the support -- what I've been hearing from those
people at the meetings is that they're very happy about what's
happening and they want to continue to work with VK to make it a
better asset to their neighborhood and see what they'll do. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can you give me some direction in
regards to looking at this picture here. The overall length of this
building -- you've got two sides here. Can you tell me what the length
of the --
MR. JOYNER: Let me see if! can go back to the site plan.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You're right here, yeah. No, I'm
just looking at this building here that we've got presently. What's the
dimensions of the building from the left to center where the clock
Page 114
March 27, 2007
tower is, and then from the clock tower to the right?
MR. JOYNER: Along Bayshore it's approximately 250 feet.
Along Riverview -- I'm trying to recall that dimension. Along
Riverview, it's about 130 foot.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Is this going to have the
effect of overpowering the neighborhood, the surrounding
neighborhood? Is it pretty much residential or is it pretty much
commercial in that area?
MR. JOYNER: Primarily it's residential to the west. Of course,
north of it it's commercial along Bayshore. To the south it's
commercial, and then to the east across Bayshore, there's commercial
property .
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The gentleman that spoke in behalf
of saying that the back side was going to be open, I take that that you
-- or he must have been referring to Lakeview, right? As you're going
down Lakeview he's -- is he located on Lakeview?
MR. JOYNER: I believe he was located on Lakeview, is that--
MR. WOODWORTH: I'm on Lakeview.
MR. JOYNER: Okay. He's on Lakeview.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And -- sir, I'm asking--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, I'm sorry. I'm going to have to
ask you not to speak from the --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So his residence is very close to
this. Then is -- all he is -- the only thing he's going to see is boat
racks; is that true?
MR. JOYNER: Well, no. He's going to see the houses and the
trees that are in between his house and this building. And if he got out
in the middle of the canal and looked due east, he will see the back
side of our building. And then as you approach Bayshore along
Lakeview, if you look to your left, you're going to see what would be
a building, whereas, right now you're seeing boats sitting out in the
openmg.
Page 115
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. JOYNER: The parking lot stays, the current parking lot
that's here --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
MR. JOYNER: -- on the southwest corner, as does the parking
area on the northwest corner.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Now, the back side, is this going to
be enclosed or is this going to be open?
MR. JOYNER: Along--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right where you got your pointer,
is that going to be open or closed?
MR. JOYNER: This will be enclosed.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what about up here at the top
where it says -- oh, club facilities and residence, okay.
MR. JOYNER: This is the entrance side to the club facility --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. JOYNER: -- and the two residences above.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And where are the boats going to
be stored?
MR. JOYNER: The boats are going to be stored, if you can
follow my pointer --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
MR. JOYNER: -- the boats would be stacked that way --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. JOYNER: -- from that direction and this way. Primarily it's
open back here for the operation of the forklift.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, okay. So as far as this
gentleman seeing the actual boats, it's going to be difficult; is that
correct?
MR. JOYNER: He's going to have to make a concerted effort to
go and see a bunch of boats. We're maintaining the privacy wall and
the landscaping on both the southwest property owner's side and the
Page 116
March 27,2007
northwest that came along in a previous SDP.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. As far as you can see, or
that you know, the area around here, what is the general height of the
residences and any other commercial that's in this area? Does it
conform with the general area?
MR. JOYNER: No, sir. This is taller than the general area,
given the age of the general area. This current building is about
40-foot tall to the peak of the boat storage building that's there
currently. And then as you go up and down Bayshore in this area,
you're going to see two structures up to two-story including their roof.
That's primarily the --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is there any possibility of a
compromise of possibly lowering this down to 48 feet?
MR. JOYNER: Well, I'd -- of course, I'd have to leave that up to
my client to make that call.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: If there's a possibility you could
lower it to 48 feet, it might blend in better with the surrounding
community there. But I hope that we can come to some kind of
compromise on that.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Well, can I answer that?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: One of the things that we did -- you
know, when we started the process, the existing facility is zoned for
158 slips, and that's what our first application requested, you know,
approval to continue with that process under our new development
plan.
And as a result of some of the comments that came about from
the first meeting in terms of creating retail spaces for the use of the
general public, we added 1,000 square feet, 500 square feet on both
corners for retail usage open to the general public.
Now, that addition of retail space reduced the number of boat
slips that we could accommodate at the facility, assuming we don't get
Page 117
March 27,2007
other off-site parking. And so we're now down to 135 boat slips,
assuming the same parking count.
Now, we'd like to keep the building at the same height, because
as Mr. Jackson points out, you know, under the current zoning for
those parcels, we could go higher, up to 70 some odd feet. We're only
at 56. We need to maintain the height only because we need the
flexibility in trying to figure out how we're going to configure the
boats.
I mean, the facility is designed to accommodate boats from --
anywhere from 20,25 feet, all the way up to 40. In terms of the
40-foot boat, we made another concession after hearing comments
from the neighbors. We said -- you know, there was a concern that
they thought 40 feet was too big. So we said, okay, fine, you know.
They wanted 30 feet, we said we'll compromise. We'll go down to 35
feet, and that's what's reflected in here.
But we still need to maintain the flexibility in the height of the
building so we can accommodate this boat matrix that's still yet to be
determined.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The commercial that you're going
to put in there, can you tell me basically what kind of commercial is
going to be put in there?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Well, it's 500 square feet on either
end. I mean, that could be some type of little boutique, ice cream
store, a coffee store. I mean, whatever's --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You must have some idea what you're
going to put in there, don't you?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: To be honest with you, we're not sure
yet. It's really going to be determined by market conditions. And I
know there's a lot of redevelopment up and down Bayshore. There's a
little coffee house right down the street. I mean, it could be a ship
store open to the general public. But whatever it is, we're going to
keep it open to the general public, and it won't be for the exclusive use
Page 118
March 27, 2007
of the community. And it's hard for us to commit to what that specific
use would be. And I think a little coffee store or an ice cream store or
something like that would be great.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, okay. Obviously you know
where I stand on the building height on this, so I'll just leave it at that.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And Commissioner Fiala, then I'm
going to take a turn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I was -- I was really pleased.
At the first meeting there were a lot of people that were in opposition,
and when you had your next meeting, I saw that you reconfigured the
building. And actually, I don't think I've ever seen a developer work
so much with the community before, really. Everything that they've
asked for that I could see, they got.
And when we had that second meeting -- and the reason I came
in and sat in on it, I just wanted to see what the temperature of the
group was like. I wanted to hear what people had to say. And they
asked about the meeting room. Yes, they could use the meeting room
for their neighborhood meetings. They asked about the sales centers
on both ends, and they asked about the height and the boats. They
didn't want large boats.
And it seemed that, other than this gentleman, everybody --
everybody walked away feeling a lot better about the project, and I
haven't even received -- I don't know about the other commissioners --
but I haven't received any -- any other emails saying anything to the
contrary .
So I feel that you've really stepped up to the plate and answered
the needs of the community, as well as your own.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Thank you. And toward that end,
when we got the questions from the neighborhood, you know, they
wanted us to put it in writing, so to speak, so we said, okay, we'll do
that, and that's why we came up with this document so everyone could
Page 119
March 27,2007
see very clearly what our intentions were.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So I'd like to make a motion to
approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, if! could, if this property
remained the same as it is right now, someone could come in there and
build up to 70 feet tall without any approval from us whatsoever?
MR. JOYNER: Seventy-five.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Seventy-five feet tall, okay. And
you're at 58.
MR. JOYNER: Six.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So I think your project is
substantial improvement for that area. I think it will be a very
attractive addition, and I also will support this project.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I have a couple of questions,
sir, and plus I've got some concerns, I've got to be honest with you.
I'm looking at the size of this and the amount of impervious area that
you're paving over. Where's your drainage go?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: We're actually containing all of our
drainage. Our engineer is hear to help answer some of those questions
to explain what we've done on the drainage system. So if! may, I'll
turn it over to Chad from --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Looking at the picture that we have in
front of us right now, possibly you might be able to indicate where the
drainage is going?
MR. LUTTRELL: Yes, sir. Chad Luttrell with GAS. I'm the
engineering representative for VK Holding.
There's a couple things going on here with the drainage that need
to be understood. One, we're dealing with quantity, and of course,
we're dealing with water quality, both parameters of which we have to
Page 120
March 27,2007
maintain, according to the South Florida Water Management District.
Currently on site there are two existing basins that essentially handle
the lion's share of the drainage from the bisecting middle of the site
over as we head west, and they lie in here and they lie in here.
And the way they operate is that they both have control
structures. And it's -- very simply, the water builds up, it spills over in
the control structure, and it dumps out into a canal. You do get a little
bit of water quality with the bleeder that's designed in there.
We do plan on maintaining that system, but that's not all we're
planning on doing. In addition, what we're planning on doing is,
because of the nature of the project itself, the remaining outfall from
the existing site would tend to flow off into the right-of-way from
these sides. They would just -- they would flow off.
Weare self-containing it and we are going to do a number of
different things. And we haven't gone through the full design yet, but
what we're planning is a series of water quality treatment facilities,
whether they're mechanical means or whether they're infiltration
means underneath the boat slips, in addition to the potential for
possibly some in-ground retainage, if necessary.
We feel that when you take a look at the impervious area now
versus what's out there, it's very comparable. The South Florida
Water Management District is only demanding of us that we retain the
difference in this particular situation. We've been in conversation with
them. We think that's easily achieved either by depressional areas
underneath the boat storage or within the green space.
So we're going to be handling the detention that is required, and
we will be handling it in several various means, the water quality
parameters that are required from the water management district.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now, another thing, too, we seem to
be in this decline of places for people to be able to -- public to be able
to pull up a boat -- with their boats. Any of these slips, are they for
the general public if they want to use to them to store?
Page 121
March 27,2007
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: To add to that, the existing facility--
and Steve Main can comment on this -- doesn't allow for the general
public to come on and unload their boat, and I think we're just sort of
continuing with that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So I mean, there's nothing
here that will meet the needs of the general public?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Not--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Other than two small 500-square-foot
stores for like ice scream or --
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Well, you know, we've -- well, we've
got four uses, so to speak. We've got the boat storage, we've got the
retail, we've got the community space, and we've got the residential
units. You know, from our perspective, three of those four are really
for community use.
I mean, we've got the retail. We've made the club space available
for neighborhood association meetings. And with respect to the other
two units, I mean, the gentleman said they're not for sale. That's not
true. I mean, we could -- we're not sure what we're going to do with
them at this point. Ultimately someone's going to reside in these units.
So we're not sure. We'll probably sell them or rent them, but we really
haven't thought through that, but we can figure that out. But it will be
-- it will be for the general public. So I think that covered the three
uses, three of the four, so to speak.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. It's just that there is a general
concern over there about the lack of launching spaces and dock space
for the general public. And you know, the meeting room, that's a
wonderful gesture. And I know years and years ago in Golden Gate
when the community was first growing, Golden Gate City, they had a
local hotel that offered all the amenities for people that came there and
they could use the swimming pool and the tennis court. Well, that
went away as the population started to grow, and it wasn't something
that you could enforce. This is going back 25 years.
Page 122
March 27, 2007
It's just something that's a beautiful convenience to offer for local
residents, but it's not a community center and it's not something
anyone but the residents of that area can offer -- can receive it.
Now, if this happens up and down the area, the same particular
venture is repeated over and over again, what's going to be the end
results for the public out there that expects some amenities? That's a
concern, a real concern.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: I mean, obviously I can't speak to
what other developers do down the road from us, but, you know, that
was sort of why we put this in writing. I mean, we're a family-owned
business, and when the neighbors came out there and said, you know,
suppose things change and, you know, that's the benefit of being a
family-owned business.
People call me all the time. We're developing Treviso Bay. The
residents of Trail Acres call me. They've got my cell number. If
they've got a complaint about something, they are not shy about
calling me, and they do, and I respond to them.
And the same thing with the community center and the club and
making that available. We put it down, that's our commitment. We're
not going to change that. And we're there to be good neighbors, as we
-- as we feel we are in the Treviso Bay neighborhood and by Trail
Acres, and we're going to continue to do that, and that's why we've
been accommodating and making all these changes to be good
neighbors.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How many jobs are you going to be
offering for your facility, do you think?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Frank, our operational-- how many?
Seven to run the facility, yeah.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And they'll be mechanics or -- I'm
sorry .
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Yeah. I mean, they'll be a variety,
and there'll be obviously somebody in charge of the concierge type
Page 123
March 27, 2007
service. There'll be mechanics and Frank --
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Forklift drivers and dock handlers.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I'm sorry. Commissioner
Henning next, Commissioner Fiala, then Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I need to give ex parte, Mr.
Chairman. Beside what we heard at our last meeting, to add to, Mr.
Joyner sent me two documents and, of course, Mr. Woodworth sent
me his comments and so on and so forth, and I'm ready to get her
done.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Well, we still have a couple of
speakers here.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to add, when you were
talking about the need for boat spaces and so forth. Well, this would
be 135 boats that they'll be able to get them off of the rolls to need
another launch space, because they'll able to use this one.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. You know, if you're so
inclined to be able to afford that, yes, that's true.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, otherwise, if they don't have
this, they'll need some of our own public docks then.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's also absolutely correct, too --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just brought -- thought I'd throw
that in.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- 35 out of thousands and thousands.
Commissioner -- I'm sorry, Commissioner Fiala. Were you done?
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I'd just like to amplify on
that. Bayview Park is just down the road. It's a public boat lunching
facility. We're enlarging it substantially. And as Commissioner Fiala
has pointed out, if you don't have this boat storage facility, the boats
that would be there will be down at Bayview Park trying to launch, so
it does serve a purpose of taking some of the load off of the public
Page 124
March 27, 2007
boat launching facilities.
And once again, I think it's a good project. Change does happen.
We have to get used to it. It is not excessive. It is attractive. It's
probably the most attractive boat storage facility I think I have seen in
the Southwest Florida area.
If you go down to Marco Island, if you go even down to opposite
Tin City, those storage facilities are not nearly as attractive as this.
You've really gone to extra lengths to make it acceptable to this
community. And I think that's demonstrated by the fact that there is
only one person in the entire community who is opposing this.
The other point is that many of the people who live in the
Bayshore area live on the water. They have canals. They have their
boats there; not all of them, but many of them do. So they are not
suffering from having this marina storage facility built here. They
couldn't use it before, so they can't use it now as a public boating
facility.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So in summary, you think this is a
good idea?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And with that, is there any other
comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing one, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And it's unanimous. Thank you.
Page 125
March 27, 2007
MS. VALERA: If! may, Commissioner, Carolina Valera,
Principal Planner with the Department of Zoning and Land
Development Review.
Commissioner, the Q&A sheets that the applicant handed over to
you have some differences in regards to the conditions of approval
that are in my executive summary. If you want me to, I can go over
those and you may decide --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please do.
MS. VALERA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm going to ask the motion maker to
listen carefully and pick up on it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MS. VALERA: In regards to the hours of operation, the
petitioner is asking to also exclude the club facility from those hours
of operation. In regards to the number of boats, they're asking to have
158 maximum instead of 135, as I stated in my executive summary.
Also in regards to the length of the boats, they're asking to be allowed
to do -- to have up to 40 feet (sic) boats instead of35, as they offered
at the neighborhood information meeting.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: That's 35. We're going to go down to
35.
MS. VALERA: Okay. So they will keep the 35. They did offer
at the NIM, okay. So that's not a difference.
And also to allow boat repair only for the boats that will be in the
marina, and to allow fuel sales for -- also for the members that will be
-- members of the marina. So those are the differences between the
conditions of approval in my executive summary and what was
handed to you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see. And what we did was we
approved the one in the executive summary.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right, and that's what we were
Page 126
March 27, 2007
voting on.
MS. VALERA: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. At least that was in my
motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's what I understood it to be, too.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: There was not going to be any fuel
sales there.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Yeah. I had alluded to that when I
started. I mean, there were some differences between what was in the
executive summary and what was in our Q&A, and it namely had to
do with the length of boat. I think Ms. Valera's executive summary --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Ms. Valera's executive summary
stated that the boat length would be limited to 30 feet. We had said,
well, our original request was 40. We'll compromise and go to 35.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, that's true. You did say that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I voted on what was on -- written
in here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: See -- and I have a problem with
that. I reviewed the executive summary, and to add and change the
petition without staffs input and, in fact, the Planning Commission --
I'd be happy to reconsider it so you can take it back through the
process again. That's your choice.
MS. VALERA: Just to clarify, Commissioner, this didn't go to
the Planning Commission, as you may remember. Just to clarify.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I did state that just now.
You didn't get a chance to review this, the Planning Commission
didn't get a chance to review this, and, quite frankly, it might trigger
an environmental review.
Would you like us to reconsider this and -- so you can go through
Page 127
March 27, 2007
the process again, sir?
MS. VALERA: Again, I just want to make sure that it is
understood, the Planning Commission does not have to hear MUPs.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, that's right, and now I heard
you. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So if there's no other action of
this commission, then our vote stands as is from the summary agenda.
Is there anyone that wishes to change the vote?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's going to stand as the
recommendations that was put into our agenda?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's correct. Mr. Weigel, you seem
a little nervous. Is there something that's concerning you?
MR. WEIGEL: I'm no more nervous than usual, but I just
wanted to make sure, when you said the summary agenda -- in your
previous sentence you said summary agenda, so I kind of was thinking
about that a moment. I think you mean the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The executive summary.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Executive summary.
MR. WEIGEL: Oh, okay, fine. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. Thank you for correcting
me on that. I think we all knew what we were voting on, and I don't
think there's a will here from anyone else to change it unless --
Commissioner Halas, did you want to change it?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. I just want to make sure that
he understands -- this gentleman here understands the
recommendations that was put in here other than what was given to us
here a few minutes ago.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, he understands.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, all right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Let's go on to the next item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I do have a question.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead, Commissioner Coyle.
Page 128
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How do -- how do you operate a
boat storage facility without having fuel for the boats?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: That's what I'm confused about. See,
the reason -- I had a discussion with Ms. Valera when we first saw the
executive summary. And I think there was some confusion as to what
discussions took place at the neighborhood meeting.
And I said, how about if we do a question and answer to the
neighbors, because Ms. Valera said, if the neighborhood is okay with
it, I'm okay with it. And that's why I presented the Q&A, because you
can't have a boat operation without fuel. And the executive summary
seems to state that there's no fuel sale at all, so obviously you can't
operate in that manner.
That's why I clarified, well, the intent -- the discussion at the
neighborhood meetings revolved around fuel sale to the general public
and repair to the general public, and that was sort of the thing that
needed to be clarified in our Q&A, and that's what I attempted to do.
You know, obviously we can't understand precisely what's stated in
the executive because I don't know that it entirely makes sense.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I'm going to interrupt right now.
We're -- if we're going to deal with this, we're going to have to have a
motion for reconsideration, then we can bring it back on the floor, and
then we can bring whatever we want into it.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is that correct, Mr. Weigel?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: We can't--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. Is somebody talking to
me? That's correct, right? I couldn't catch it. I don't hear an
argument, so it must be --
MR. WEIGEL: No, no.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hold on. He's still --
MR. WEIGEL: No, I'm about to respond. The -- and Marjorie,
you may want to assist me here. If this item is not quasijudicial --
Page 129
March 27, 2007
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: It is quasijudicial.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. By virtue of the fact that it is
quasijudicial and it has been voted upon, it -- the idea of bringing it
back for reconsideration -- I'm walking through this -- is based upon a
vote of those whom voted in the majority for this -- well, we don't
have a denial here, no, Marjorie. We have an approval -- but 2-42
under the code talks about a denial of -- and reconsideration on a
denial is brought back by the petitioner.
Reconsideration may be brought back by a person who voted in
the majority if it is not a denial. And under 2-41, it conceivably could
be done at this very meeting. I've walked through it, and yes, you may
do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then I'm going to make a
motion it be brought back, because a couple of things happened. You
know, staff has an obligation to tell us if they have any difference with
the presentation made by the petitioner before we vote. Staff did not
do that. Staff waited until after we voted to come up and tell us they
had some problems with the differences.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine. Make the motion, and
let's --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I make a motion for
recons i derati on.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do I have second? I have a motion
and I have a second for reconsideration.
Is there discussion on this motion?
Commissioner Henning, did you want to address this motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And with that, I'm going to--
all those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
Page 130
March 27,2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll go with it. We've got one
opposed. So we're bringing it back for reconsideration at this point in
time.
And, Commissioner Coyle, it's back to you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. You know, it is nonsensical
to me why you would want to prohibit a marina from selling fuel. I
mean, when people want to have their boats launched, they want to
have the boats' fuel tanks filled up, so how are you going to get the
boats filled up?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Well, yeah. That's why we want to
clarify it --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: -- in those -- in those answers,
because I had that very discussion with Ms. Valera, and I said, I'll
present it in Q&A. And as I said, she said, if the neighborhood is
okay with it, I'm okay with it. So that's why I was asking that the
approval be based on the responses in the Q&A because I think
Carolina, as staff, is okay with it.
MS. VALERA: Commissioner, and if! may. Sorry that we came
at the time that we came, but I was trying to come up here before you
made the motion. Unfortunately you did make the motion before I
could speak. And typically we do a presentation, and I did not.
But in my executive summary it's what I heard at the neighborhood
information meeting, so that's what I put as a condition of approval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MS. VALERA: I did offer the applicant, at the informational
meeting and after the day of the informational meeting to let me know
if those conditions that they had offered to the neighbors will be
Page 131
March 27, 2007
acceptable to their client. I did not get an answer until yesterday
afternoon.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that was earlier than now.
MS. VALERA: Absolutely, yes. And as you know, the
executive summary was loaded for your review a week ago, and I
cannot put in anything for you to review after that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There could have been a correction
sheet this morning. We go through corrections on the agenda; first
thing every morning the county manager does that. It could have been
talked about then. We could have been told about this at any point in
time today before we got to it.
But let's not belabor that. I just don't understand the logic of
telling a marina that they can't sell fuel.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle, make a motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then I make a motion for
approval and excluding the reduction in the number of proposed boat
slips from the originally proposed amount of 158, I would suggest we
leave it at 158, and eliminate the exclusion for -- or the prohibition of
fuel sales within the marina.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What about the length of boats?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Length of the boats would be 40
feet maximum length.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second it, but with -- I would like
to make that 35 feet because then I think we're going along with the
neighbors, because that's what they wanted.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right, that was compromise.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was the compromise.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Change it to 35 feet.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And the second thing -- and I'm
seconding it, but will this fuel be allowed -- say, for instance, this man
here has a boat and he wants to buy some fuel there, he's just about
Page 132
March 27, 2007
out. Will the neighbors be allowed to buy fuel there as well?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: If that's okay, yeah. I mean, if it's
okay with you, it's okay with us.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It will attract more boat traffic
when you do that.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Yeah. I mean --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's another service to the
community .
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Can I ask where we would draw the
line, so to speak, in terms of -- we're willing to do that, but I just want
to make sure that all of a sudden people in Port Royal aren't pulling up
to our marina to fuel up their boats. So I mean, if -- maybe you could
give us some guidance on where to draw that line. We'll be more than
happy to offer fuel sales.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who don't you like in Port
Royal?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Their boats are too large to get up
Henderson Creek. There's no chance of that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't think I could add a limit. I
would just think that that would be a --
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: We can work with the neighbors. We
can figure it out on a case-by-case basis, but we're more than willing
to do that. And I assume that goes with the repair as well? Obviously
the boats that are at our facility need some limited repairs, so --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine.
Commissioner Halas, then Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Let me get this straight. First of all,
this is a private marina. And Commissioner Coyle, you said you were
going to go -- not restrict them down to 135 boat slips?
Page 133
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That you wanted to go to a
maximum of what?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, 158, which was the original
proposal.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what did the neighborhood
want? Was that a compromise from the neighborhood?
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Well, based on the parking that we
have right now, we can only accommodate 135 boats. But we want
the flexibility to -- if we, for example, buy off-street parking, to go up
to 158. And I think -- I mean, I think the neighbors are okay with that.
I can't speak for the neighborhood.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I've got some concerns that
this was just dropped off. Obviously you are the one that presented
this piece of paper.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And it differs vastly from what I
was prepared to vote on today, okay. And --
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Well, is there--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'll let it go at that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
MS. VALERA: Just want to clarify that 135 was the number that
was mentioned at the second neighborhood information meeting.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Was that what the neighborhood
approved of?
MS. VALERA: That's what the neighborhood heard they will
have at the marina, the maximum that they will have at the marina.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. My understanding
of this amendment, when Mr. Jackson brought it back, this mixed use
is to service the neighborhood. This is in the Bayshore area, and I
think this board could interpretate (sic) this language is to serve the
Page 134
March 27,2007
Bayshore neighborhood.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not sure I follow you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we're talking about boat
repair, fuel sales.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Fuel sales, definitely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I mean, it's a
neighborhood service. So then can we put in that the interpretation of
that is to service the Bayshore area?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure. Bayshore community.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yep, Bayshore community.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: With fuel and repair?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: I don't have a problem with that. I
mean, as a practical matter. Ifwe can accommodate it, we will.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So that's included in the
motion now, the wording?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Let's make sure we're clear
on the number of boats. They can only put 135 boats in there right
now because they don't have parking for any more. If they get
parking for more, they can go up to 158, but they can't go beyond 135
under this particular petition, okay.
MS. VALERA: What if they did get off-street parking, off-site
parking?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Will they have to come back to us
to get approval of use of that? That's a question, not a statement.
MS. VALERA: That was a question. If they do get approval for
an off-site parking, will they be allowed to have up to 158 boats in this
site?
MR. MUDD: No. What the question was, if the board -- if the
Page 135
March 27,2007
board approves up to 158 boat slips today, even though the site will
only be able to accommodate 135 for parking, will they have to come
back and ask for the 23 spaces? And I don't believe it would be. I
believe if you basically approve that it's 135 today, if they get off-site
parking, they would have to come back to you and ask for the 23 slips.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think I'd rather have it that way.
So that it's approved for 135, and if they want to expand it in the
future, if they can get additional parking spaces, they would have to
come back to the board for approval and conduct another
neighborhood meeting. Okay. Do we have it all --
MS. VALERA: And the maximum boat length?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thirty-five feet. So 35-foot boat
length, 135 slips. If they want to go above that, if they get additional
parking, they come back to the Board Of County Commissioners.
They have maintenance facility -- maintenance --
MS. VALERA: In general.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- in general there that will be
available to the community on a space-available basis, that they will
have --
MS. VALERA: Fuel.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- they be authorized to sell fuel
there to the community as well as to the members. And I think that's
everything.
MS. VALERA: Will they be allowed to exempt the club facility
from the hours of operation? That's the other item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I don't see a problem with
running the club facility itself. It's the noisy part that you don't want
operating early in the morning and late at night.
MS. VALERA: Thank you.
MR. KUTTEMPEROOR: Thank you. Sorry for the confusion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We understand what the
motion is.
Page 136
March 27, 2007
You agree with the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there any questions regarding this?
(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.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it 4-1, with
Commissioner Halas being the opposing vote.
Thank you very much.
Item # lOE
A CHANGE ORDER TO CONTINUE PHASE II OF WORK
ORDER # UC-250 UNDER CONTRACT # 043535, ANNUAL
CONTRACT FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES CONTRACTING
SERVICES, TO KYLE CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE
AMOUNT OF $848,020.00 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FIRE AND
IRRIGATION WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN
THE STRAND COMMUNITY IN PELICAN BAY, PROJECT
NUMBER 74023, AND (2) APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT
OF $1,181,157.00 FOR THIS PROJECT - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. That brings us to -- that brings us to 10E.
This is a recommendation to approve a change order to continue phase
two of work order number UC-250 under contract number 043535,
annual contract for underground utilities contracting services, to Kyle
Page 137
March 27, 2007
Construction, Inc., in the amount of $848,020 for construction of fire
and irrigation water system improvements within The Strand
community of Pelican Bay, project number 74023 and to, number two,
approve a budget amendment of $1,181,157 for this project.
And Mr. Claude Nesbitt, Project Manager, Public Utilities
Engineering Department, will present.
MR. NESBITT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Claude Nesbitt, and I'm with the Public Utilities Engineering
Department.
Let me pull this up for you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, if you'd drag the mike a little bit
closer to you, I'd appreciate it.
MR. NESBITT: Absolutely. We're here to recommend that you
approve the 848,000 change order to the existing work order that was
outlined and approved by the board on October 24,2006. We ask that
you also grant a waiver to the contract statement of work that limits
this work order to $750,000, and we ask that you approve the budget
amendment of a hundred and -- I'm sorry, of a million point two.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The executive summary says
this project is consistent with the 2005 wastewater -- or -- yeah,
wastewater master plan.
MR. NESBITT: That is correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can't find it.
MR. NESBITT: In the wastewater master plan?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
MR. NESBITT: It's in there, sir, as the Pelican Bay irrigation
and fire improvement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So I guess I just need to
accept that if I can't find --
MR. NESBITT: No, no. If you'd like, we can find it for you at
some later date.
Page 138
March 27,2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you're asking me to make
an approval on something based upon a document that the board
approved, and I can't find it.
The second thing is, the original contract is more than doubling.
These fees are coming out of the user fees for the total district that
services -- basically the urban area. And we're going to be putting in
fire hydrants in Pelican Bay down in the most expensive part. And is
it the board's policy to put fire hydrants in communities, and when are
we going to put it in Naples Park? When are we going to put it in
Poinciana Village?
MR. DeLONY: For the record, Jim DeLony, Public Utilities
Administrator.
Sir, let me, if I might, I'll answer questions as best I can with a
little context. First of all, the contract itself that was awarded back in
October when we brought it to the board provides for a phase one and
phase two. And at that time we asked for approval of the concept and
that we would be back with the specifics of phase two at this time
once we were able to get closure on the exact means and methods for
this final phase implementation of this conversion.
With regard to construction of fire hydrants, this is -- certainly
there will be some hydrant reconnects or connects made, but this is --
this is a conversion approved by the Board of Commissioners back in
the '90s to move the fire suppression system at Pelican Bay from reuse
water or irrigation quality water to potable water because of the
reliability factor that that brings into play.
And so over the last seven years, this is the last leg of that -- of
that project. I think we're about -- at about -- I think at the time we set
up budget for about $6 million to do this job, and I kept that budget at
that level and to see just how this would play out at the end, and
knowing that this would be the last part of it. And so this budget
amendment represents the last part of that phased project over the
seven years.
Page 139
March 27,2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: So with regard to our ability or inability to
deliver fire hydrants, that really is not what this project is doing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It is just taking fire hydrant off
of reuse?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. And we've been doing this --like I
said, this is the last phase of a multi-year project. This is the very end
of it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. Is there any others out
there in the community where --
MR. DeLONY: No, sir. This is the only place in the system
where we have irrigation -- had irrigation water in the fire suppression
business. And we've made -- we'll never do that again, I can tell you
that. Ordinance doesn't provide for it anyway at this stage of the
game.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The board -- County accepted
those back when.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir, back when, but the county also made a
decision, I think in 1999 to -- because of the reliability factors, to
convert or do this conversion.
MR. MUDD: Jim, it was 2001 when the board made this
decision to start.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I get it now.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What it really says -- and I went
back to the other one, it appeared that we were putting in fire hydrants
for --
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- fire protection.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. And I apologize if we misled you.
Page 140
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's not a bad idea to do
so. I just want to know, if that was the case, when we're going to do it
for Naples Park.
MR. DeLONY: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I get it, and I'm going to make a
motion to approve.
MR. DeLONY: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion for approval and a
second. We only need three votes on this. I think we're pretty safe on
it?
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see you down
there, sir. All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: (Absent.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR. DeLONY: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 4-0, with
Commissioner Fiala being absent.
Item #lOG
AN AMENDMENT TO THE OCTOBER 14,2003 COMPANION
AGREEMENT TO THE SABAL BAY DEVELOPER
AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF
Page 141
March 27, 2007
CONSTRUCTION AND LAND COSTS FOR A PORTION OF THE
LEL Y AREA STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT -
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is lOG. This is a recommendation to approve an amendment to
the October 14,2003, companion agreement to the Sabal Bay
Developers Agreement providing for reimbursement of construction
and land costs for a portion of the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement
project, project number 511011.
Mr. Gene Calvert, your Administrator for Stormwater -- your
Director for Stormwater, will present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: (Absent.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 4-0. Very good
presentation.
MR. CALVERT: Thank you.
Item #10H
Page 142
March 27, 2007
THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY INSURANCE FOR THE
PERIOD APRIL 1,2007 THROUGH MARCH 30, 2008 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $4,596,397 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Next item is 10H. It's a recommendation to
approve the purchase of property insurance for the period April 1,
2007, through March 30, 2008, in the amount of$4,596,397. And Mr.
Jeff Walker, your Director of Risk, will present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion for
approval by Commissioner Halas and a second by Commissioner
Coyle.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor, indicate by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: (Absent.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it 4-0.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I'd also like to commend Mr.
Walker publicly for the job here that he basically went out of the box
last year or a year before that to basically update this on an 18-month
period so we got out of peak season for hurricanes. That decision by
Page 143
March 27, 2007
this board at his recommendation saved us some $1.7 million.
And if you looked at the executive summary, it mentioned that
we're basically getting coverage at 55 cents on the hundred. And if
you look at some of our neighbors, they're getting it at 86 and 94 cents
on a hundred, which is a significant savings to this county. And that
decision by this board saved us about $1.7 million.
MR. WALKER: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 10H, and this is a
recommendation to approve the purchase -- excuse me, we just did
that one.
Item #101
TO UPGRADE THE 800 MHZ RADIO SYSTEM AT A COST OF
$4.8 MILLION AND TO FINANCE THE UPGRADE WITH A
LOAN FROM THE COMMERCIAL PAPER LOAN PROGRAM -
APPROVED
This brings me to 101, which is a recommendation to recommend
board approval to upgrade the 800 megahertz radio system at a cost of
$4.8 million and to finance the upgrade with a loan from the
commercial paper loan program. And John Daly, who basically runs
your 800 megahertz system in Collier County, will present.
MR. DALY: John Daly, Telecommunications Manager,
Information Technology Department.
Basically what we're proposing today is to upgrade the control
system for the sites on the western side of the county. The 800
megahertz system has been operational for more than 10 years now.
That original technology has reached the end of its life expectancy.
We're still getting support on it, we're still able to get support, but at
this point we need to move forward to the current generation of
Page 144
March 27,2007
simulcast technology for the radio system.
This is an upgrade that primarily replaces the infrastructure site.
It has no impact on the end-user equipment that the people in the field
carry. There's no fiscal impact on the replacing of radios or any of
that type of technology.
And this upgrade also prepares the system for any future needs in
terms of additional sites and additional channels that we would have to
meet the growth that we're seeing in certain areas of the county . We're
not buying more sites at this point, but we are expanding the
infrastructure to support that capability when the need arrives.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I think you answered part of
my question. You said basically this was the western part of the
county?
MR. DALY: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I was concerned about what
we're doing to address issues out in the eastern part of the county as
far as coverage out there.
MR. DALY: We still have the four sites we've had originally. In
the northeast part of the county toward Immokalee, we're monitoring
that growth. We did, three years ago, add a site in Corkscrew and a
site on 41 east of 951 that did improve coverage in that eastern fringe
area, and we're monitoring that development around Ave Maria and
those areas to see if we're going to have either coverage issues or
system capacity issues, that is, you know, enough channels for the
users to talk on.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So we're talking also that the--
what you're requesting will be upgrades of that -- in those particular
areas with newer equipment; is that right?
MR. DALY: Well, those sites use a different technology than--
the six sites on the western side of the county operate as one system.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Are they compatible?
Page 145
March 27,2007
MR. DALY: Yes. They all talk together and all the sites work
together, it's just there's different types of technology based upon
population density and the amount of channels we're running at those
sites.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. The sites in the eastern part
of the county, how long have they been up and running?
MR. DALY: They've been up and running 10 years also.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And so we can plan that we're
going to have to upgrade that system also?
MR. DALY: Yeah. We do have some enhancements within the
next three years. They would be less expensive because the
technology that runs those sites is a little less intensive and has less
hardware.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do I hear a motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion for approval by
Commissioner Halas, a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5-0. Thank you.
Page 146
March 27, 2007
MR. DALY: Thank you very much.
Item #1 OJ
A WARD CONTRACT #06-3962 TO MUNICIP AL SOFTWARE
CORPORATION FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE EXISTING
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES COMPUTER SYSTEM. [$1.99 MILLION] -
APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, your next item is 10J,
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners award
contract 06-3962 to Municipal Software Corporation for the
replacement of the existing community development and
environmental services computer system at a cost of 1.99 million.
And your Finance and Budget Director of Community
Development, Gary Mullee will present.
MR. SCHMITT: And project manager.
MR.OCHS: And project manager.
MR. MULLEE: Thank you very much. After a thorough
selection process which involved every CDES, involved the IT
department, purchasing department, and representatives of the
buildings industry, Municipal Software Corporation was selected for
continuing the CDES project, resuming the CDES replacement
project, replacing our existing system, which is the 1 O-year old CD
plus system.
Not only did municipal meet all of CDES's business needs which
were outlined in a 150-page RFP, but they did so at a cost which was
lower than all their main competitors. Everyone in CDES is looking
forward to starting this implementation again.
Of course, pending board approval, our kickoff date is Monday,
April 2nd, and everyone on staff and CDES is very much looking
Page 147
March 27, 2007
forward to the kind of efficiency gains that this system will bring the
organization in terms of reporting, visibility of work flow through the
system, GIS integration, and being able to provide the industry some
direct feedback in real time as far as the status of their applications.
We have three representatives from Municipal Corporation here.
Woody Jackson, Dennis Ashbury and Ian MacLean, who have come
here, and they, along with myself and Joe, will be happy to address
any questions you have.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there any -- Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just a couple of questions. Number
one is, is this going to be user friendly?
MR. MULLEE: It's going to be very user friendly. That was one
of the main criteria. As we brought in all the potential vendors, we set
up a proof concept process where they had a set script and they had to
go through things, and that was one of the real feedback that we got
from staff, that it had a very good feel to it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Will this system be able to be used
outside of community development?
MR. MULLEE: If you mean by staff outside of development,
yes, it has full integration and our field staff, the building department
and code inspectors will be able to access the system live.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Do you have any idea of the
potential savings for person hours, I guess, man-hours or person
hours?
MR. MULLEE: You know, one of the real difficulties with our
current system is really being able to quantify numbers. And yes, we
have a very good sense that this is going to create efficiencies within
the organization, that it will create personnel efficiencies within the
organization, but it's difficult at this point to quantify that. But we
could be happy -- as we go through the process, we'll be happy to
provide the actual results to you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think it would be -- I think that
Page 148
March 27, 2007
would be beneficial; that way, I think the taxpayers would get an
understanding that a lot of these concepts and ideas that we come up
with want to make sure that we end up with a cost savings as far as
man-hours or person hours in the departments. And I think that you
could come back at a later date and let us know about how many hours
a day or a year that we save on something of this nature, that we can
take the people that are presently there and move them to other areas.
MR. MULLEE: I'd be very happy to do that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I have a motion for approval by
Commissioner Halas and a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor, indicate by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5-0.
MR. MULLEE: Thank you.
Item # lOK
TO NOT RENEW CONCESSION AGREEMENT #96-2611 WITH
FISH FINDERS, INC. D.B.A. COCOHA TCHEE RIVER MARINA
Page 149
March 27, 2007
INC. AND AUTHORIZE THE CREATION OF 2.8 FULL TIME
EQUIVALENT (FTE) POSITIONS TO ESTABLISH MARINA
OPERA TlONS AT COCOHA TCHEE RIVER MARINA AND
APPROVE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS-
APPROVED
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're going to the--
MR. MUDD: That brings us to 10K.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- 10K.
MR. MUDD: 10K. It used to be item 16D4. This is a
recommendation that the Board of Commissioners not renew
concession agreement number 96-2611 with Fish Finders, Inc., d/b/a
Cocohatchee River Marina, Inc., and authorize the creation of2.8
full-time equivalent FTE positions, to establish marina operations at
Cocohatchee River Marina, and approve necessary budget
amendments.
This item was asked to be moved by Commissioner Halas. And
Mr. Berry Williams, your Director of Parks and Rec. will present.
MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioners, good afternoon. Barry
Williams, for the record, Parks and Rec. Director. Just if you have
any questions about the item, certainly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why it was pulled, I guess, is the
main reason from yourself or Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I think that the person that
presently owns the marina, we wanted to give them equal time to tell
us why it shouldn't be cancelled, and I think that we need to bring
forth if there's any other concerns that the county had before we move
on.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. We do have that person
here, I believe.
MS. FILSON: I have one speaker. Michael Grace.
MR. GRACE: Good afternoon. My name is Mike Grace. Thank
Page 150
March 27, 2007
you very much for your time.
I have just a couple of questions really. Obviously I'd like to have
the concession renewed, but the county -- or the parks want to do
something different. What I'd like to know is, what is the reason for
this not renewing?
MR. WILLIAMS: Absolutely. Thank you. We are looking at
this as an opportunity . We have a couple of long-range ideas in mind,
and they are, through your direction, beach access in particular.
We see this as an opportunity. And the concession has done a good
job with us, and we're pleased with that, but it became an opportunity
for us to, without cause, end this agreement.
The opportunity that we have is through a beach shuttle system
that is in the plans where the beach shuttle would leave from this spot
and go to Barefoot Beach, and that's part of our long-range plans that
we're working on. So this is just a good opportunity.
To renew the concession agreement at this point would be for a
five-year term, and within that five years is the time that we see this
beach shuttle coming to fruition.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: My question would be, if you got a
five-year span, do you have an actual point in time that you would do
it? I was wondering, I mean, we got a concessionaire that, I guess, is
providing a service that meets the needs of the public, and we have an
undetermined amount of time that we -- right now it's a five-year span.
Possibly a contract of shorter duration that might mesh with the needs
for the shuttle. Would that serve the purpose of everyone, or no?
MR. WILLIAMS: Well, this isjust the best time for us to move
forward with this is our recommendation to you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. But do you know when this
shuttle -- when you would need that actual physical space to be able to
do what you need to do? Would it be this coming year?
MR. WILLIAMS: The capital improvement plan, I believe, has
it for -- I'd have to ask for a little help on this.
Page 151
March 27, 2007
MS. RAMSEY: Commissioners, for the record, Marla Ramsey,
Public Services Administrator.
We actually see this as a bigger issue than just the beach parking
element of it. Over the years we've had a number of complaints about
being able to have some fishing access at this location, which we can't
currently have with the license agreement that we have at the site.
There is the shuttle opportunity. There is the opportunity to collect
more of the launch fees at this ramp, because currently it's done with
the master meter, and we think we'd lose a lot of that.
There's also an opportunity with us, as we look to the future, to
bring that whole thing together holistically at this particular site. It is
a location for our park ranger supervisor, so we have a lot of staff on
site already.
And as we move forward, there's a lot of repairs that we need to
be doing to the docks, et cetera. And so there's some opportunity
when we're probably going to have some of them down. And so as we
move forward with it, it just seems to be the right time for us to make
some changes and improvements at that location.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry, but I didn't quite hear the
answer I was looking for. My concern is, if we've got a delay that's
going to run over a year before we ever break ground, before we ever
utilize it, at that point in time, you know, what's -- how is the public
served if nothing's there at all? So if I know you're going to be doing
it the coming year --
MS. RAMSEY: Actually, we don't see this as nothing there at
all. We see this more as the county taking it over with county staff
providing the customer service and the lease agreements and the -- and
the -- also the bait house and the sales at that location.
We'll also tell you that as we move forward within the next
probably two to three years, there will be another concession that will
be coming online. I know the staff has had conversations with Mr.
Grace and his partner about the future at that location. And when
Page 152
March 27,2007
Aqua comes online with their bait house and their sales and whatnot,
there's probably going to be some down in sales, too.
So as we look at this holistically -- and the lease agreement
comes up at this particular time. You could extend it for one year, but
I think there's a lot of opportunity to serve the public in other different
ways, and one of those is also the Coast Guard that currently has some
sites there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So in simple terms, the best thing for
the public is to allow this not to renew the lease agreement and to be
able to go forward with the plans you got, and we can meet more of
the public needs by doing that, that's correct?
MS. RAMSEY: That's correct. And I think it's cleaner to do it
now.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's a simplified answer.
Commissioner Henning, then Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You can turn mine off.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- Coyle, Halas and Fiala.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You've answered my questions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, Henning first.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I have no problem with
being not renewing the contract. What I have a problem with is
growth of parks and rec., what the private sector should do. So if
we're going to approve this, I'd like to put conditions on it that the
board puts this out to bid for the service, and parks and rec. can
definitely participate in that bid if they want to run the park. The best
person wms.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, let's see. Who's next?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Fiala.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just wanted to ask. You
were saying that one of the things that caught my attention was, you
would begin fishing from that area.
Page 153
March 27, 2007
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you can't do that now because
of the license that they hold. Well, we've had a few people saying that
the fishing places are just drying up. Will you be able to start that
fishing immediately?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. That's part of our plan.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good, okay.
MR. WILLIAMS: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We have a number of docks there.
How many docks do we have there that's controlled by the county?
MR. WILLIAMS: Currently there's no -- none. They all are
controlled by the concession. There are 37 slips that are rented by the
. .
conceSSIOnaIre.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. But they would come under
our jurisdiction; is that correct?
MR. WILLIAMS: That is correct. And as part of the concession
agreement, if this agreement is ended, the county would honor those
lease agreements.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. That's my concern because
there is a lot -- all those, I think, are presently filled. And would the
leases be still intact until -- at such time as they're up for renewal?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So with that I'm going to make
a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have motion for approval from
myself, Commissioner Coletta, and second by Commissioner Fiala.
MR. GRACE: One more question, if I may.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, I'll allow you one more question,
but we have taken all our testimony. But go ahead, please.
MR. GRACE: Well, my question is, how do we operate? I
Page 154
March 27, 2007
assume we are -- you're doing this for the convenience of the county,
is the reason you're taking it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's correct.
MR. GRACE: How do we operate the marina until this is done?
And when is it done?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. That's a good question.
Barry, do you have the question now? When does the lease run out? I
guess that would be the question.
MR. WILLIAMS: The agreement, May 20th. With this motion
what we're asking for is to give the company 30 days notice effective
April 20th. That would be a 30-day period with us taking over the
operation May 20th.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. There's the answer.
MR. GRACE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. And with that, is there
any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the dissenting vote was
Commissioner Henning.
Item # lOL
RESOLUTION 2007-74: ALLOWING THE TOURISM
DEPARTMENT TO ACCEPT DONATIONS OF MEETING
Page 155
March 27, 2007
ROOMS FROM LOCAL TOURISM ATTRACTIONS, HOTELS
AND OTHER GROUP FUNCTION VENUES - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 10L. It used
to be 16F5. It's to recommend approval of a resolution to allow the
tourism department to accept donations of meeting rooms from local
tourism attractions, hotels and other group function venues.
The item was asked to be moved by Commissioner Coyle, but I
also mentioned this morning, Commissioner Fiala had some questions
on this particular item. And Mr. Jack Wert will be -- will present this
particular item.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's go right to the commissioners.
Commissioner Coyle was the first one to ask for it pulled. We'll go to
him first, then Commissioner Fiala, if you don't mind.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. The executive summary
clearly states that the objective is to allow the tourism department to
accept donations of meeting rooms from local tourism attractions,
hotels and other group functions.
I, quite frankly, don't have any problem with that. But buried in
the considerations section is a blanket permit that the employees of the
county, Collier County, in the tourism department will be able to
accept food and refreshments that are not permitted under the
provisions of our current ethics ordinance, and I think that's a very
dangerous thing to do. I think Mr. Pettit has probably addressed the
Issue.
But my reaction is that as long as the people who participate, the
employees who participate, are essential personnel for that meeting,
and that there is a certification by the department director that they are
essential personnel and it serves a public purpose for them to do so, I
would think it would comply, and we would keep records on those
kinds of things.
Page 156
March 27, 2007
Is that essentially what you have?
MR. PETTIT: Thank you, Commissioner Coyle. Mike Pettit, for
the record.
Actually you put some language in there that I can easily add to
the resolution. All I had at this point was -- and understand that 1
agree with you, we should have had the reference to'the food and
beverages in the title.
All we had at this point was that the tourism department shall
also file a list of names of county employees who attend the meetings
where food and beverages are donated. We can beef that up in
accordance with what you said and bring the resolution back for
execution if it's approved by the board.
Understand that this came up because the tourism department,
working with local tourism industries, meets outside of the county
offices. We understand this to be a public benefit and in furtherance
of their mission.
They have been -- they were allowed to donate rooms. For
example, at a hotel -- I'm just going to use -- I don't know if they've
ever done it, but the Ritz, perhaps, has donated a room or would do it.
Sometimes with those rooms comes coffee, cookies, those kinds of
things.
There are multiple people in attendance at these meetings, people
from the tourist industry, people from the tourism department here,
Collier County employees, and as I understand it, possibly even
tourism promoters.
One of the things we did is also we now have a provision in this
resolution that there would be a limit of a per diem amount and that it
would be the responsibility of the tourism department to provide a
written -- to ask for a written per-person cost breakdown so you would
have that filed with the county managers along with a list certified,
maybe signed off on, I guess, by the director, that those people needed
to be at that meeting for purposes of their employment.
Page 157
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Just a brief note of
explanation, and then caution. If you have one of our hotels in Collier
County who wants to donate a room for a meeting room, it makes
absolute sense for our employees to be able to use that room without
having to pay for it because it would be just taking money out of one
pocket and putting put it in the other pocket. It's an inefficient way to
do it.
Here's the -- here's the potential problem. You mentioned that it
could be a tour promoter who is doing this.
MR. PETTIT: I don't think tour promoter would be donating the
room. I think -- and I'm going to ask Jack to help me. I think they
might be present at one of the meetings, perhaps.
MR. WERT: They might, in fact, be a participant at the meeting
to make a presentation to the tourism industry, which includes hotels,
attractions, shopping venues and so forth. They're there at each of
those meetings to find out how we're promoting the county and how
other people might help them.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But we wont be accepting anything
from the tour promoter.
MR. WERT: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So this doesn't include tour
promoters?
MR. PETTIT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, one other point that we have
to be careful of. Since we are, that is, our tourism department, is
involved in steering people from one place to another based on their
professional evaluation of where these people might like to go, we
want to make sure that the acceptance of a free room and food from
some hotel is not in any way used to influence the selection that you
would make, okay. That's just something you have to be careful
about.
MR. WERT: We understand.
Page 158
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But I think that with the language
that Mr. Pettit has incorporated into the ordinance, I think we would
be reasonably safe under the ethics ordinance. It's just that Mr. Wert's
going to have to certify that those people were essential to be there.
And I, quite frankly, think it's inefficient for us to take the tourism
money out of one pot and pay it for the employees out of the other pot.
But as long as we keep the record, I think we're clean.
Is that right, Mike?
MR. PETTIT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's go to Commissioner Fiala, then
Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Down in the resolution in
number three, it talks about the tourism department may accept the use
of the donated room, da-da-da-da. In the last line it says, and not just
county employees, and provided -- provided that the items are in
compliance with the per diem allowances in section, yada, yada.
Who's going to check to see that they're in compliance? I just --
MR. PETTIT: Commissioner, the version of the resolution you
have -- and I'm actually making additional changes based on
Commissioner Coyle's comments as I'm standing here -- does not
include some changes that we worked on yesterday.
We will be having the tourism department obtain a written per
cost -- per-person per cost breakdown from each hotel. So, for
example, if the hotel provides doughnuts and coffee and that turns out
to be $50 and there are 20 people in attendance, they can provide a
written document to Mr. Wert or his employees, which then will be
filed with the county manager so somebody can come and look at that,
bring up a file for the monthly recordings, because that was -- that
concern was raised by Ms. Kinzel and I tried to address that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ifwe could, I think the simplest thing
Page 159
March 27, 2007
to do -- this is what I do when I go someplace. I don't know if you
noticed, from last meeting, there was a $5 thing in there from me. It
was a Chamber of Commerce breakfast where they gave me a cup of
coffee. I left a check for $5 to cover it. Does that seem extravagant?
Maybe it does, but the thing is, is it's been covered, there's no
problems. As far as I'm concerned, it's washed out, and it comes off
my travel budget.
So I'll probably still continue if the Ritz-Carlton puts this on, find
out my share of it and just make out a check and then get reimbursed
if possible from my travel budget, just to be able to keep everything
really simple on my end.
My no gift policy doesn't have allowances for this. I do this
through the Florida Association of Counties when I go to their
meetings. If they have a provider that's putting on the meal there, one
of their sponsors and it's sponsored, what I do is I have them itemize it
for me, they tell me how much that breakfast was or that break time,
and then I write out a check for it to the association and claim it
against my travel budget, and there's absolutely no problems, because
it's so darn hard to follow it any other way.
Now, I don't care how you do it with the rest of the county
employees, but I know how I'm going to do it at my end.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I guess I'm concerned where
this might be leading us. We have a newspaper in town that seems to
have perceptions, and I'm concerned about the kind of perception this
is going to be.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm not.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I hope that we can get this
tightened to the point where there's no perceived notions that we're
taking something for nothing, or that the employees are, okay? So I
guess we have to make it tight enough.
I think we have some rules in place now. It's what, up to $2 or
Page 160
March 27, 2007
$3. What is it that --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't know. I write a check out for
everything.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I do, too. If! go to a homeowners'
meeting, they've got cookies and coffee there, I lay a couple of dollars
on the table and that clears my conscience so somebody can't come up
and tell me that I'm taking something on the take.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, you know, we've got to keep
cognizant of the fact that this is a special situation. We can't expect
people in the tourist industry to all of a sudden start following the
rules of an elected official.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I wouldn't expect them to. I wouldn't
want them to. And I don't want to put it to the point where we hinder
people that attend these things.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner, the only thing that I
want to make sure of is that -- is the employees of the county are
protected so that they don't run into any problems. That's my only
concern.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I think they're protected
adequate by what's here.
Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Coyle for approval
and second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
Page 161
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. All five ayes.
And what we're going to do is take a quick break, 10-minute
break, be back here and go through the rest of these and be here in
time for our time certain, the three o'clock. We're doing very well, by
the way.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, you are.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Item #10M
RESOLUTION 2007-75: OPPOSING ENACTMENT INTO LAW
PROPOSED FLORIDA SENATE BILL 1772 (COMPANION TO
PROPOSED FLORIDA HOUSE BILL 855) RELATING TO
CABLE TELEVISION AND VIDEO PROGRAMMING
SERVICES, REMOVING ALL LOCAL CABLE TELEVISION
FRANCHISE AUTHORITY AND PROVISIONS TO GRANT OR
RENEW ANY CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHIS CERTIFICATES
- ADOPTED
Commissioners, that would bring us to 10M on your agenda.
That used to be item 16A5. The item was asked to be brought back to
the regular agenda by Commissioner Henning.
It's a recommendation to adopt a resolution opposing enactment
into law, proposed Florida bill -- excuse me -- Florida House Bill
1772, companion to proposed Florida House Bill 855 relating to cable
television and video programming services, removing all local cable
television franchise authority and provisions to grant or renew any
Page 162
March 27,2007
cable television franchise certificates.
And Mr. Jamie French, who happens to be your ombudsman and
MR. FRENCH: Operations Manager.
MR. MUDD: -- Operations' Manager--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm going to jump in front of you for
just a second.
MR. MUDD: -- in community development --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 16A5 and 16A6, are they quite a bit
similar?
MR. FRENCH: Very similar.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why don't we plan on doing them
both together. And Commissioner Henning is the one that brought up
the questions on both of them, was it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why don't we go right to
Commissioner Henning's questions and then you can answer the
questions, if you don't mind.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, 16A5 on page 11, it says,
continue to access and maintain public education and government
channels.
MR. FRENCH: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So we understand, if the
legislators pass this, that that service is not discontinued?
MR. FRENCH: Again, for the record, sir, Jamie French with
Community Development.
With House Bill 855 and Senate Bill 1772, there are some
provisions for your public education and peg channel, so to speak,
public access.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, okay. Just so that's clear,
because my impression by the executive summary, it sounded like we
were going to lose those.
Page 163
March 27, 2007
You know, this is really a pass-through cost that we all get to see
on our cable bill. The cable company doesn't eat it. It's just a hidden
tax on the cable bill. And I personally feel, I don't approve of hidden
taxes. It goes into the general fund to support general government,
and that should be provided by property taxes.
In my opinion, we should support these bills, but I probably will be
the only one with that opinion up here today. I just cannot support it.
And I --
MR. FRENCH: If! can, Commissioner Henning, these dollars
are used to support customer service complaints, billing disputes. This
also allows for private industry to use public lands for private gains.
That's what this money is assessed to the cable industry or to their
customers.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. FRENCH: So they are using public right-of-way to run
their business, so to speak.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But it's public benefit. If it is a
public benefit and this bill is correct, to provide other cable companies
to provide a service, you have more competition. That's basically
what your executive summary says, and you agree with the bill on that
part. The part that you don't agree with, and I understand, is the
county will lose $4.5 million. And -- correct?
MR. FRENCH: Well, this bill does a couple different things, and
each bill is close to 50 pages each, and we've analyzed all three of
them. This bill takes out any local government control and it turns it
over to the Department of Agriculture.
So what happens is, if you've got a dispute, your cable company
no longer has to provide a local office. Your cable company -- in
order to complain, you're going to call the Department of State to
complain on your cable company. They're going to refer it to the
cable company, and if resolution -- they're going to work as an
ombudsman, so to speak, and if the cable company cannot resolve
Page 164
March 27, 2007
this, the only way you can challenge this under these bills is, you're
going to have to take the cable company to court.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Let me ask you
something. To run the department, the local department for
complaints of cable --
MR. FRENCH: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- how much is that budget?
MR. FRENCH: The budget that we take is close to about
$100,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So approximately $4.4
million doesn't support, you know, customer service?
MR. FRENCH: No, sir. That's unrestricted use that goes right
into your MSTlll.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. FRENCH: MSTDlll.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And see, that's my problem with
it, and that's all. And I'm not going to sit up here and argue with
anybody. I just cannot support this. I'm going to make a motion to
dispose of this resolution and create a new resolution supporting of
House Bill 855 and Senate Bill 1732.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So we have a motion on the
floor by Commissioner Henning.
Is there a second?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And I apologize for
wasting your time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You made a good point,
Commissioner Henning, however -- Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would like to say the same
thing. I think Commissioner Henning makes a good point, but I think
his good point is overridden by the fact that the best government is
local government. It is not good to see more and more of local control
Page 165
March 27,2007
taken away from local governments and sent to Tallahassee or to
Washington, D.C. That is the most inefficient kind of government we
can possibly ever get.
Local government is more responsive to the taxpayers. The
taxpayers have more access to us. There is -- there's more visibility
over what we're doing and how we're spending the money here than
there ever is in Washington or Tallahassee.
And if the taxpayers don't want us -- don't like what we're doing,
they can throw us all out of office and replace us. They can't do that
with the people in Tallahassee and Washington D.C. Even if they
threw the entire Southwest Florida delegation out of Tallahassee, they
still can't change the vote in Tallahassee.
So it's very important that we maintain government as close to the
people as we possibly can. And for that reason, I will make a motion
to approve these items.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Coyle, a second by Commissioner Halas. And we have 13 speakers.
MS. FILSON: No. For lOA, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How many, eight?
MS. FILSON: No. lOA we have 11 speakers.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, lOA?
MS. FILSON: The three o'clock time certain.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay, fine. But this one we have no
speakers.
MS. FILSON: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. I feel a little bit better now.
For a while there you had me really concerned. There's a hidden
element out there I don't know about, I was thinking.
Okay. We have a motion, we have a second.
Any other discussion?
(No response.)
Page 166
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor, indicate by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And let the record show that
Commissioner Henning was in the negative on that.
Item #100
RESOLUTION 2007-76: OPPOSING ENACTMENT INTO LAW
PROPOSED FLORIDA HOUSE BILL 529 RELATING TO CABLE
TELEVISION AND VIDEO PROGRAMMING SERVICES,
REMOVING ALL LOCAL CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE
AUTHORITY AND PROVISIONS TO GRANT, RENEW, OR
EXTEND ANY CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE - ADOPTED
Now, let's go right to the related item, which would be 100,
which was formerly 16A6.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And that read, recommendation to adopt
a resolution opposing enactment into law proposed Florida House 529
relating to cable television and video programming services, removing
all local cable television franchise authority and provisions to grant,
renew and extend any cable television franchise.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Same objection, Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's it, yeah.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Same motion.
Page 167
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: For approval.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion for approval, second by
Commissioner Henning -- excuse me. Commissioner Coyle, second
by Commissioner Halas.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those if favor, indicate by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And once again, let the record show
that Commissioner Henning is in the negative.
Item #10N
THE RELEASE AND SA TlSF ACTIONS OF LIEN FOR
PAYMENTS RECEIVED FOR THE FOLLOWING CODE
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is ION. ION used to
be 16A 1. The item was asked to be pulled from the consent agenda to
the regular agenda by Commissioner Henning. It is a recommendation
to approve the release and satisfaction of lien for payments received
for the following code enforcement actions.
And Ms. Michelle Arnold, your Director of Code Enforcement,
wi II present.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, before you present, let's go
Page 168
March 27, 2007
right to Commissioner Henning, then if we've got questions, we'll
come back.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, on the executive
summary, let's see, almost to the bottom, it's a 2004090706, Martinez,
32 -- almost $33,000 fine for what? I already know the answer, but
I'm going to ask you anyways.
MS. ARNOLD: The violation was erecting a shed without
getting a permit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. ARNOLD: For the record, Michelle Arnold, Code
Enforcement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I understand the shed is
down.
MS. ARNOLD: The shed has been removed, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And I just have a
problem charging somebody almost $32,000 for not having a permit
for a shed.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And the circumstances for--
the reason for the fine? Was this something when we discovered it,
we assessed a $32,000 fine the day we discovered it?
MS. ARNOLD: No. The process is, my staff goes out and
notifies the property owner that the violation exists and gives them
time to comply. If they fail to comply in a timely manner, we can
proceed with bringing this matter before one of our hearing processes,
whether it's the Code Enforcement Board process or the special master
process.
In this particular case, it went before the special master on
February of -- February 25, 2005, and the property owner basically
ignored the order of the special master.
There was another hearing after that because they failed to
comply timely to impose fines for failure to comply, and the property
owner, again, ignored that hearing process. Both were served and
Page 169
March 27, 2007
they signed for the notices. It wasn't until they were refinancing that
they took it seriously, and the fines had accrued at a rate of $50 per
day for over 642 days.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Was there numerous attempts made to
collect this money?
MS. ARNOLD: There was numerous attempts to --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Violation--
MS. ARNOLD: -- get compliance, and there was numerous
attempts to try to get the property owner to listen to those orders, and
they fell on deaf ears.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Was the property -- and I'm sorry,
Commissioner Henning. I know this was your item, but I'd like to ask
a couple more questions, if you can bear with me.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Then go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I was just kidding. Go
ahead.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Was -- I noticed -- and I don't mean
to imply that he doesn't speak English, but by any chance, does this
gentleman have one language, and it's not English, that he
communicates with?
MS. ARNOLD: My staff tells me that there was no problem
communicating. One of the investigators went as far as to find out
who the manufacturer was of the shed and provide them information
with who that was so that they can get a master permit for the shed so
that they wouldn't have to get an engineered drawing or anything else,
and that was just ignored as well. They didn't proceed to that. The
way they ended up complying with it is to remove the shed.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Now what happens at this
point with what's before us?
MR. ARNOLD: They've paid the fines--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
Page 170
March 27, 2007
MR. ARNOLD: -- and what we're asking for is to release the
lien that's on their property so that they no longer have that
encumbrance on the property.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
Then I believe, Commissioner Coyle, is your light on from before?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It must have been before.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Statute 162, the code
enforcement statute, basically tries to give the opportunity, and code
enforcement did the right thing on my feeling. I don't know the details
of it, but the biggest thing is try to abate the problem and then fines
may be imposed, and I feel that it's correct.
But I just have a fundamental problem accepting almost $32,000
for a shed that did not have a permit. That's all.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the -- it's resolved. The
shed's gone.
So I'm going to make a motion to approve with the amendment of
this particular code action, 2004090955, the amount to be zero.
MS. ARNOLD: Commissioner, they've paid it. It's been
deposited in the county's --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, give it back.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, don't go too fast or too far.
We have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Henning. Do we
have a second?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I don't think that was any
surprise though, really. Your heart's in the right direction, but the
thing was, if you wanted to forgive this one, if we agreed to do it, I
would go back and want an analysis of everyone and give them back
also, and we would be no place.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you had the opportunity to
Page 171
March 27, 2007
analyze it. It's on the agenda today.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand that, but I --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you've had the agenda
since Thursday.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I took the opportunity to read
the agenda.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And this is the only one --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I think -- and in my
opinion, this is way too excessive government to charge a property 30
-- almost $33,000 for not having a permit for a shed.
MS. ARNOLD: Can I just --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is our argument, Ms.
Arnold.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I need you to stand back just a little
bit for a moment, Michelle.
We're going to go to Commissioner Halas and then
Commissioner Fiala --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: First of all --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And then come back to you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. This person had the
opportunity to address this issue by going before the Code
Enforcement Board. Obviously he took the road that he wasn't going
to. He was in violation of the county laws. So the longer that he held
out, the more that the fine was going to be.
He had that understanding. Obviously Commissioner Coletta
said that he -- that he asked the question about, was there a possibility
of him not understanding the language? But yet he accepted the
registered mail that came to him. He knew what the consequences
were. So the end result is, if you don't want to play within the
confines of the law, you're going to have to pay the person or the
government that's involved with it.
Page 172
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, if you feel
comfortable --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I feel very comfortable.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- with charging somebody --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hold on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- $32,000 for not having a
permit, that's your objective.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. If I may, Commissioner Fiala,
and then we'll go back to you, Commissioner Henning, for a closing
statement, then we'll go from there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think 32,000, that caught my eye
too, as I was going through, and I thought that was awfully excessive.
And I have noticed in others cases where the special magistrate
comes in and you start to work it out, and then 10 and behold, you
bring the amount down to a reasonable rate. Apparently that didn't
happen in this case. I don't know why it didn't happen and -- but I
would have thought that possibly that it should have happened like it
does for everybody else.
MS. ARNOLD: Right. And the property owner is allowed to
ask for a reduction or abatement of fine. In this case the property
owner did not ask -- make that request.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did he know that other people do
and have gotten them?
MS. ARNOLD: On the order itself --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MS. ARNOLD: -- it indicates that, and we have rules that we
provide to the property owners that spells out what they can do to
request that abatement or reduction of fine, and staff is in
communication with all the respondents.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So he -- in other words, staff told
him, well, you can deliberate on this and negotiate a little bit, and he
said, no, no. I just want to pay $32,000, and I'll tear my shed down?
Page 173
March 27, 2007
MS. ARNOLD: No. I think what happened is that I don't think
he thought it was -- he didn't take it seriously. I mean, I don't want to
put words into his mouth, but I just think that, you know, he didn't
think it was going to be a big thing, but once he went to refinance, he
realized there it was. The fines were there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And they just took it off of the
amount that he wanted to refinance, right --
MS. ARNOLD: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- before he could even negotiated
or anything, right?
MS. ARNOLD: That's right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So he didn't even -- he didn't even
make out that check and -- I just feel that possibly in this particular
case, being that we've done it for everyone else, that possibly he didn't
understand that there was that -- even though you say that it's written
on there, we've come across a lot of things where people see it written
and they still don't understand what's written possibly it was
excessive, and possibly somebody ought to sit the guy down and say
MS. ARNOLD: Well -- and again, the title company was
advised as well at the time that they could make that request, and the
request wasn't made. I mean, the county doesn't normally make the
request for a respondent.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And the title company says, here,
you can get some money off, and of course, they probably make more
of a commission on 32,000, rather than a 1,000.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we take a vote?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala's very passionate
about the subject, and I don't want to cut her short on it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sorry. That's all right. I'll stop.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm done.
Page 174
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Do I hear a motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by -- for approval
by Commissioner Halas, a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. Ooh, no.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What? You want reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I wanted to vote against it. Excuse
me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And those opposed?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Please let the record show that
the -- opposition to the motion was Commissioner Fiala and
Commissioner Henning.
Item #lOA
TO REAFFIRM THE STAFF ACTIONS TAKEN IN
ASSOCIATION WITH THE ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT
AGREEMENTS - APPROVED W/CHANGES
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our three o'clock
time certain item. It's number lOA. It's a request to the Board of
County Commissioners to reaffirm the staffs action taken in
Page 175
March 27, 2007
association with the advanced life support agreement. And I believe
Mr. Jeff -- excuse me, your Medical Director, Dr. Tober, will present.
MS. FILSON: And we now have 16 speakers.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Give me a break. Come on.
DR. TOBER: Good afternoon, everybody.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good afternoon, Doctor.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. One point of business. At
this point in time we have 16 speakers. And just to make sure -- I
think we've got a very good cross-representation. It's the policy of this
board to cut off the speakers at the point that the presentation started.
So I -- that will be it, Ms. Filson, as far as speakers go. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir?
DR. TOBER: Thank you for inviting me back today. I want to
give you some final, very much unprepared thoughts today on what
has transpired over the last few weeks and to try as best as I can to
sum up my own feelings which sometimes are ambivalent and
difficult to nail down because we're working in a system here that has
so many heterogeneous motivations, inputs and complexities with so
many independent organizations that it is very, very difficult to pin the
tail on the donkey, so to speak, as to exactly how we fix what we're
supposed to fix here to have a safe and sane pre-hospital medical care
system.
Generally speaking, my view of things is the following: The fire
departments have and continue to provide an outstanding BLS safety
net for the entire community if and when they arrive at the scene of an
emergency before an ambulance does.
And that is the prevailing thing that happens on most days is that
if they arrive first, they arrive there within a few minutes of the arrival
of an ambulance and they provide reasonable and much needed BLS,
although that needs a little bit of tweaking, which I'm certain that we
can do as soon as we formalize these interlocal agreements so that we
Page 176
March 27, 2007
have the checks and balances and the type of quality assurance that is
expected and assuming that occurs in the EMS environment in Collier
County EMS as it has existed for so many years.
Number two, in a rare but occasional circumstance, ALS
activities do occur. They probably do not occur often enough to raise
the competency level of the paramedics providing that ALS service
from the fire departments as high as I would want.
But nevertheless, occasionally that ALS can and might save a
life, and I would never want to think that I didn't do everything
possible in any certain circumstance to ensure that that occurs.
And I think after all the fading to the right and fading to the left
and overcorrecting that we've done over the past few weeks, that it is
not unreasonable to preserve a certain conservative and modified ALS
protocol for the fire departments assuming that they live by the same
rule book that my own paramedics live by at EMS in terms of
documentation, quality assurance, continuing medical education and
us basically having a handle on all the medical activities being
conducted in Collier County.
I think, although it, in many respects, was the straw that broke
the camel's back, when all of this started to spin out of control, what
really happened was we had a wake-up call to take a look at exactly
how fast the base of the organization was expanding without a
correlating increase in the oversight of the system, and that led to this
sense that we were running a free-for-all out there with not having all
of our I's dotted and our T's crossed.
And I think that this office of medical direction, which at the
moment you've empowered me to look over, my responsibility to all
of you and to this community is to ensure that a -- that first of all, the
right medicine is being practiced out in the street until a higher level
of care arrives, that this medicine is safe, conservative and supported
by the best experimental evidence that it is the right thing to do.
And I think with the institution and tweaking of some good
Page 1 77
March 27, 2007
interlocal agreements and an understanding on the part of all players
in this system of pre-hospital care, that the -- that we do have a central
authority for how medicine is going to be practiced out there. What
you have to do to maintain that level of authority, maintain the right to
practice that medicine and the ability to oversee it through
documentation and quality assurance that we can move on and
continue to weave one of the tightest safety nets of pre-hospital care
anywhere on earth.
It has been difficult. I have shared some of my stresses and
concerns with some of you to try to find a happy road that works
through all this. And anyone that looks at this for the first, second or
third time can be dazzled because, unfortunately, there are many
different motivations in this system, and we still have the wrestling
match of what to do with multiple independent fire departments and
multiple independent directions from the heads of those independent
fire departments, and at the very least, we could try to coalesce the
medical care being provided here, and then scratch our heads at a later
date about how, if and when anything can be done to coalesce some of
the other administrative activities.
But medical care is, in reality, one of the largest fields that all
organizations here participate with. And I think if everybody
understands that there is one rule book, that everybody sings by it, and
that everybody participants in the same reasonable and enthusiastic
manner, that things will work.
We certainly have evidence that this can work in some fire
departments. I don't know why it can't work in all fire departments.
And my hope is that if and when the commission approves to move
forward with whatever, that we do this in some sort of unified manner
so that everyone is not only mandated to sing from the same book but
chooses to sing from the same book.
It's tough if one of the EMS medics gets on scene and doesn't
have a cooperative and sort of an esprit de corps interacting
Page 178
March 27,2007
relationship of the paramedic from the fire department, because as
Mother Nature is difficult and confounding enough without there
being critical and not necessarily constructive oversight coming from
one side or the other when we're all trying to participate and do the
same thing, and there should only be one enemy out on the street, and
that is a threat to somebody's safety and life. Nothing else matters.
Ifpeople have issues that they need to discuss with one another,
it should take place after an incident is done, but there needs to be a
cooperative and really spiritually uniformed working relationship
between all the medics that get to the scene or EMTs that get to a
scene.
And I'm not sure I have anything else constructive to say in
introductory comments other than to answer any questions or specific
directives that you might -- or inquiries that you would have.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm going to take the liberty of going
first this time, which is first today, by the way. Just wanted to
mention it to you so you don't think I'm trying to get pushy.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Start the clock, please. Go ahead,
start the clock. He's got three minutes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ALS service that's provided, tell
me about the ALS service provided in the City of Naples.
DR. TOBER: Are you talking about ALS engine service by the
City of Naples Fire Department?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's correct.
DR. TOBER: What would you like to know about that?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What kind of ALS service do they
provide there or in the city of -- or the township of Immokalee or the
DR. TOBER: Well, the ALS service in the city has -- has
worked probably more on the successful side than the unsuccessful
side. I think the participants there, for the most part, are uniformly
more enthusiastic. You know, unfortunately it only takes one sort of
Page 179
March 27, 2007
negative apple in a big bushel of medics to kind of taint the sense of
what we have in general.
But I don't -- I haven't had a lot of confrontational issues coming
from the City of Naples. We have to understand that the City of
Naples is a fairly tighter zone than some of the outskirts zones. Their
transport times are shorter, their response times tend to be shorter
because they're not going the distances of other areas, and the
response by paramedics is short-term and the location of a hospital is
close by.
So generally speaking, if my entire county -- not my -- if our
entire county could work as cooperatively, as an example, the City of
Naples, I have no major burning issues other than to make sure that we
have our ducks in a row in terms of documentation, quality assurance
oversight and remediating problems as they pop up.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, how about moving inland,
Golden Gate City, and such places as Immokalee?
DR. TOBER: Well, Golden Gate City and lmmokalee right now
do not have ALS engine services per se. One of the other
confounding issues in this entire dilemma is that we have a contiguous
square miles of what -- how many square miles are in Collier County,
2100, something like that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 2025.
DR. TOBER: 2025, okay. But we have irregular participation
and inconsistent participation of ALS engines in certain areas, and the
coverage is spotty.
For instance, in Corkscrew we happen to have one extremely
gifted paramedic who was -- who worked under my medical direction
for years, but he is one solo person. I don't know if there are any other
medics out there. Corkscrew is sort of a big, wide lonely area that
certainly, in a certain circumstance, might have a delay of EMS
coverage, and to add that additional safety net with a paramedic, even
if it only occurred once in a blue moon, probably would not be
Page 180
March 27, 2007
unreasonable if we try to use as a goal that we're going to try to make
the very best use of every player we have in the system.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I understand, Dr. Tober. My
concern is, is that -- the underserved of the county, which is a larger
area than the served area. There is -- there's tremendous areas. So
what we're doing is we're creating an unbalanced system.
We have EMS at one part, but if you live in an affluent area who
possibly can raise a bigger tax base, you have an enhanced service that
you can offer, while meanwhile, the rest of the county is left to their
own resources that are out there. So I'm concerned at the fairness of
this whole thing, that's why I believe in regionalism and consolidation,
whatever you want to call it, efforts that we can be able to offer the
service to be uniform throughout the county to all our citizens. If we
save one life, we should be able to save that same life in Immokalee.
DR. TOBER: I have no argument with you. And when we
started emergency medical system back in '79, that's exactly what we
tried to do. We tried to provided, within reason, a homogeneous
safety net of way from -- all the way from Immokalee all the way to
the Gulf coast.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How do we get there?
DR. TOBER: Well, that's not, I think, just up to me. I think that
the effort on the part of the commission to at least get a grip and sort
of purse string medical services in general is a first reasonable step
towards homogenizing the medical care throughout the community.
I'm thinking completely impromptu and out of the box right now, but
another -- another conceivable plan with the endorsement of multiple
agencies and multiple coordinations would be to take some of the
gifted paramedics who, perhaps, overpopulate one particular fire
department and spread them out, or at least loan them or have them
cross borders, for instance, take, for instance, a medic that works at
fire department A and deploy him to Immokalee this day so that at
least one ALS engine with a highly competent medic could be at --
Page 181
March 27, 2007
you're asking me for ideas. I have no idea --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're wonderful.
DR. TOBER: -- if these things would be palatable to fire
departments. But as I've said to some of you on an individual
conversational basis, if I had a magic wand, I'd put my hands around
every competent paramedic I have in the system, some of which used
to be in EMS, some of which were home grown in certain fire
departments, and best deploy them in a homogeneous spread across
the checkerboard in this county, but I don't have that power, and all I
can do is give you a wish list of what I think is the right thing to do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I thank you for that, and I can
hear some people clearing their throats, so I think I better move on to
the next commissioner.
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I was next.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You made too much noise.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Doctor, thank you. Doctor, the
-- so, you know, I look at ALS as an enhanced service to what we
provide. You agree with that?
DR. TOBER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you want to take --
DR. TOBER: If it's carefully monitored.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And it needs to be
monitored better, from what I'm hearing.
DR. TOBER: Yes, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it really needs to have more
of your input than it does today from what I'm hearing.
DR. TOBER: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And so far we agree.
DR. TOBER: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The issue of providing the same
kind of service countywide is totally impossible right today, and the
Page 182
March 27,2007
reason is, I think we can assume today that North Naples Fire
Department is probably more affluent as far as property taxes. They
can provide an enhanced -- and maybe even the City of Naples. They
can provide even more of an enhanced service than the community of
Corkscrew or Immokalee.
I don't know Statute 191 -- I believe it is the fire district statute --
to where they can take their resources and spend it in another area. It
has to have a benefit to those taxpayers.
And I'm concerned if that's where we're going to go, we're not
going to have any enhanced service through the people in the district
that elected members of the community to provide service. So if we're
going that way, then why don't you just say, we don't want ALS
service?
DR. TOBER: Well, I guess that would be one conclusion.
Another conclusion is, you restructure the entire system altogether so
that you do deploy paramedic talent throughout this county in a
homogenous manner. Certainly EMS does that. We--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're right, and we're one
district. EMS is one district that serves countywide, and it is different.
The enhanced services is what I'm concerned about. The guys and
girls on the street work together. The boys and girls in the office don't
work together, okay? That's where the problem is.
And is there a better way besides giving a time line to expire
these contracts? Can we just say, you guys go work it out; come back
with something? With -- also what we need to the agreement this time
is your signature and the elected officials. Can we do that?
DR. TOBER: You're asking me -- certainly your commission
can do whatever your group of officials decides is in the best interest
of the county. I think what you're asking me is, do I think that's the
best idea? I'm not sure I know the answer to that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And I'm not saying it's
the best idea. Would you accept that if the board approves not
Page 183
March 27,2007
expiring, but give it direction for the staffs to work out these issues?
DR. TOBER: Well, you know, it's an interesting thing. I've
always remarked to people who asked me about my job in the
emergency room, and I said, there are few places on earth where I can
stand and touch two stretchers and on one I have one of the richest
people in the world and on the other I have one of the poorest.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
DR. TOBER: And they can hold hands if they reached out and
stretched out and tried to touch one another on a busy day in the ER.
And certainly the amount of attention and care that I give to both of
those people is equal.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are equal.
DR. TOBER: I have, for many, many years, been trying to bring
together all facets of a very diverse and politically complex structure
in this community called the independent fire districts. And it was like
-- it was like coming from Mars when I came from a metropolitan city
and saw this many different entities within a relatively small
geographical area all operating under their own flagships. And it's
part of what makes things difficult today.
So to cut to the chase, you're asking me, how do we get all of
these people together? The only definite answer I have for you is that
I'm empowered as your medical director to pull them together either
happily, kicking or screaming into one consolidated medical protocol
that they will have to live with, or I will not permit them to operate,
period, okay? Whether or not that could -- whether that could serve as
a meaningful first footstep to bringing all of these diverse groups
together, I have no idea, because you don't just have fire chiefs, you
have unions, you have fire commissioners, you have a myriad of
interests in the separation, and I don't really know that I have the
answers to how you untangle that snarl.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I leave the boys and girls at
home.
Page 184
March 27, 2007
DR. TOBER: Well, I'm not sure I know who the boys and girls
are.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll get together with you later.
DR. TOBER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Halas is clearing his throat again.
We're going to go to Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect
to everybody here, we haven't even gotten to the subject yet. The
subject of this item is whether or not we're going to affirm a letter sent
by staff to the fire districts to negotiate new agreements.
We're not here to rehash responsibilities, to re-assign EMS
delivery in Collier County. We're here to answer only one question.
We're going to have this kind of a discussion whenever we get
those agreements back before us. Why do we have 16 speakers here
who are going to talk to us about whether or not our staff has the right
to send a letter out to the fire districts? What are we going to talk
about?
We're going to talk about responsibilities when we come back
with the agreements, and that's what they're supposed to be getting
together to do. We decided that at a workshop with all of the fire
districts represented, or at least most of them.
What are we doing here now? What do we really expect to get
out of this? I say, I'm going to make a motion to reaffirm the letter
that was sent out to negotiate new agreements. Most ofthe people I
know and most of the representatives of the fire districts that sat the
workshop table said, yeah, we need some new -- we need to nail down
some things. We need to clarify some things. And they all agreed to
go back and negotiate the agreement. What is it we're trying to --
we're arguing about here?
So I make a motion that we affirm the fact that our staff send
letters to the fire departments saying, let's renegotiated the agreements.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second.
Page 185
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think it was the right thing to do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Just the way the staffhas it
recommended?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just exactly the way it is right here.
There's nothing to argue about.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Coyle, a second by Commissioner Halas, to go with staff
recommendations.
With that, let's see. We -- Commissioner Halas, you're next, then
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I want to thank everyone that took
time out of their schedule to come here. I think we've got probably one
of the best firefighting groups in America right here in Collier County,
and that's all the people that are involved in this.
I think we also have the best EMS group in the world, and I think
that the responsibilities are, if you're in EMS, you take care of the
people that are involved in accidents and if you're involved in fires,
obviously EMS is not going to be fighting fires.
So my feeling is that there needs to be some agreement, there
needs to be an understanding in regards to medical protocol and taking
care of people. And if the fire department is first on the scene, they
need to understand the ramifications in regards to this.
I believe Collier County is the license holder, and not the fire --
not the fire districts. And we want to make sure that when there is
medical procedures and services provided by -- whether it's a fire
department or EMS, that it's done correctly so that the county is not
put in a precarious position, and that's why I seconded this motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Then we'll go to the speakers.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you. I just had a little
question here about, it says, reaffirm the staff action of notice of
Page 186
March 27, 2007
termination. But did we ever affirm it in the first place? We didn't
find out about it until after the fact. I don't know how you can
reaffirm something when you didn't approve it in the first place. It
was just told to us after the fact.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Interesting point.
And with that, we're going to go to the speakers. Now, you're
more than welcome to speak for your full three minutes, and we'd love
to hear what you have to say; however, you may wish to consider the
fact -- if you're repetitive, you may wish to just stand, waive, say you
agree with the previous speakers or the one before that. And with that,
we're going to call the first speaker.
MS. FILSON: Frank Messana. He'll be followed by Christopher
Spencer. If I can get the second speaker to come up and stand at the
other podium, we could go quicker.
MR. MESSANA: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Frank Messana, and I'm a property owner at
Imperial Golf Estates. I'm also executive officer from the 150
member local 2227 North Naples Professional Firefighters. Equally
important, I'm here speaking as a resident and taxpayer of North
Naples.
My sole motivation for speaking today is for the safety of my
family. My wife lives and commutes to work from Imperial to NCH
downtown on a daily basis. My in-laws reside in Bay Colony.
That being said, you can tell I have a vested interest in the safety and
well-being of my family as well as the community in which they
reside.
If the commission decides to follow staff recommendations and
terminate the advanced life support agreement with the local fire
departments, I'll have great concerns about the level and quality of
service of or lack thereof, of ALS providers in the north end. I live in
Imperial, and there's a gigantic hole ALS-wise without North Naples
providing that service in Veteran's Park. That's where their station is.
Page 187
March 27,2007
I'm a lieutenant with North Naples and served this community for
I I years. I have been a medic for eight of those I 1 years. I've
watched this community grow, particularly in the fire service, and a
decision to follow staff recommendations will be a tragic step in the
wrong direction.
People often ask me, what's the worst thing in fire service I've
seen. In the past, I've been on scene with patients in a life or death
situation with a delayed ambulance out of zone. I have not been able
to provide advanced life support.
Although I was a paramedic, I was not able to use my advanced
skills and knowledge I was trained namely because of bureaucratic
decisions made by past legislature while being misled or misinformed
by our county emergency services department staff.
We have played by the rule and done all the count staff has
asked. We have been able to make a difference.
I'm in this from my heart, Commissioners. I ask you to vote
against staff recommendations to cancel the agreements, particularly
you, Commissioner Halas. As my representative, please make the
correct judgment that will best provide for the safety of my wife and
family.
I ask you to vote to reinstate the ALS program immediately for
the local fire district. You Commissioners hold the health and safety
in your hands with your decision today.
In closing, Commissioners, I'm on the road every day. Fire
departments are there first, and seconds count, and when seconds
count, don't tie my hands and prevent me from using my advanced life
support skills to save a life, please. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Christopher Spencer. He'll be
followed by James Cunningham.
MR. SPENCER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. It was good
seeing you guys up there in Tallahassee, and I appreciate all the work
you're doing for us.
Page 188
March 27, 2007
We're here today to talk about this ALS agreement and the
importance it means to everybody, not just the fact that my family
lives here and I work here. We have millions of tourists coming
through here.
Any decrease in the service that we have right now will
ultimately result in the deaths and prolonged injuries of individuals
because we're not going to be there. We're not going to be able to do
what we are trained to do.
A paramedic in the State of Florida is a paramedic. Our guys are
trained. We constantly go to in-services with the county. We have
trained year in and year out, and yet the fire departments do not -- are
not able to achieve that level of being Dr. Tober-certified to go out
there and get his confidence. No matter what we do, no matter where
we go, and yet they can take a person off the street and in a couple of
months they're out there, maybe in a couple of weeks, and they get
that certification. We are doing the job. Our citizens, your
constituents, all of us together, either it's Naples Park, Immokalee,
City of Naples, we're all in the same situation. Don't stop this
agreement. Thank you for your time.
MS. FILSON: James Cunningham. He'll be followed by Don
Peterson.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before you go forward, sir,
Commissioner Halas, did you have a question to ask now or did you
want to wait?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to make it clear that
what we're trying to do is get all the players to the table to get an
understanding of exactly who's -- where the responsibility is, and that
when people go out on ASL (sic) engines, that they follow the
protocol. That's the only issue that we have here, and that's the reason
that we have this letter.
Am I correct, Dan Summers? This isn't to cancel totally. This is
to get some understanding exactly what the responsibilities are?
Page 189
March 27, 2007
MR. SUMMERS: Commissioners, for the record, Dan Summers,
director of the Bureau of Emergency Services. Our intent was never
to terminate an ALS program. Our intent was to take -- was to bring a
procedural issue to you to bring new agreements where some of the
expanded services that has been requested were properly identified, to
bring you a new agreement so that there was a period we're in the
same action, we terminated an old agreement and brought a new
agreement, and that's the last sentence of our letter which, again, I'll
take responsibility as not maybe wordsmithing or not being crafted
very well to make sure.
My goal was to bring something to you within a timely fashion,
which I felt was appropriate under medical control advice under
general Florida Administrative Code, and, again, to bring a new
agreement that more defines the picture and what folks -- or what
these organizations wanted to do, and terminate the old agreement so
there was no lapse in service.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's exactly right. Thank you
very much for clarification.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And thank you for your patience.
We'll start your time now.
MR. CUNNINGHAM: Thank you. Good afternoon,
Commissioners. My name is James Cunningham. I'm the President of
the North Naples Professional Firefighters. And in addition to that
position, I was the advanced life support coordinator since the
inception of the advanced life support program in North Naples, which
was voted in by you, the Board of County Commissioners, as well as
the Board of Fire Commissioners of North Naples to be effective May
1,2005.
Just a few months ago, I was promoted to another position but in
-- during my tenure as ALS coordinator, I trained and supervised the
North Naples 50 paramedics and 84-plus EMTs. I had regular
interaction with the EMS administration as well as medical director,
Page 190
March 27, 2007
Dr. Tober, continuously striving to meet the growing demands on the
EMS system, but never, and I repeat never, willing to compromise
patient care.
In 2006 North Naples Fire Department responded to more than
5,000 emergency medical calls, of those 5,000 calls, North Naples
firefighter/paramedics provided or assisted with delivering advanced
life support procedures in nearly 1,500 calls.
Also in 2006, North Naples Fire District apparatus were on scene
of medical emergencies 364 times with a five-minute on-scene time
with no EMS transport unit available, 364 times an ALS engine or
ladder sat in North Naples with no EMS unit.
In addition to those 364, there was 94 -- 92 calls in North Naples
in 2006,92, where there was no EMS unit on scene while North
Naples firefighter/paramedics had a unit on scene having patient
contact.
One thing in your executive summary is correct, that the majority
of the medical emergencies are BLS. But for those nearly 1,500
patients, and the other ones that I spoke of, I hope you place them and
any other citizens that may be the recipients of ALS engine care
anywhere in the county, view it as an essential component of the
emergency medical system. It is imperative to provide patient care
ahead of politics, I would suggest.
I can tell you that your county staff has a hidden political agenda
and is only providing a small piece of the information. They went
beyond their scope of duties when they issued this letter of termination
of the existing programs. This should be unacceptable by you, the
board.
Ifthere are issues of concern, it would be more appropriate to
allow the fire districts to work out a successor agreement without the
threat of termination of quality patient care, which this letter here has
stated here it will terminate within 90 days if no resolution is reached.
If they don't come into a resolution within sufficient time, this board
Page 191
March 27, 2007
could then at that time evaluate its alternatives, and would be -- that
would be the proper procedure to be followed.
I ask you, the Collier County Commissioners representing all the
citizens of Collier County, to place patient care first before politics,
therefore, denying the recommendation by county staff.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Don Peterson. He'll be
followed by Andrea Schultz.
CHIEF PETERSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My
name is Don Peterson, Fire Chief, Golden Gate Fire Control and
Rescue District.
At your joint commission workshop this past Monday with
elected fire commissioners, your direction was clear, the steps taken
up to that point was not at your direction. Not all departments have
been included in this latest process. Cancelling agreements is not
required to bring about change, changes asked or changes needed.
Swapping of a person is still being required by Collier County to meet
the needs of your own union contract, and we should not have to pay
for your union contract.
ALS engine is not the solution or issue. Providing a paramedic
approved by Dr. Tober is the issue and getting them in the -- getting
them there in a rapid fashion, but how they get there in that rapid and
timely fashion is what everybody wants. It's a common goal. That's
where the intervention needs to be.
We support Dr. Tober in his need for medical direction and
oversight, what that ALS activity is, how it's provided. He is the
medical director, and Collier County is the entity that's identified as
providing that service countywide.
Patient transport is a separate issue. Patient transport does not
have to be tied to the same ALS care. ALS engines should not destroy
(sic) first responder help to any call for service anywhere in the county
or anyplace in the state.
The agreement -- the current agreement is between elected
Page 192
March 27, 2007
officials, and elected officials should be dealing with this.
We did not -- also we do not support the recommendation in the
executive summary, as it's inconsistent with the -- what you shared in
your workshop with the elected officials.
And I would like to share, the reason that I did put a speaker slip
in is because your requirement speaker slip has to be put in prior to the
start of the event. It doesn't necessarily mean that there would be a
comment on that item. But in this particular case, because of the
direction it went -- so I would just share with you, the submittal of a
speaker slip isn't necessarily a negative situation there.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Andrea Schultz. She'll be
followed by -- and I think it's Eric Cleve.
MS. SCHULTZ: Clere.
MS. FILSON: Thank you.
MS. SCHULTZ: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Andrea Schultz. I'm currently the emergency
medical services coordinator of East Naples Fire Department, and I
am the Med Com 25. That's the controversial Med Com 25 out there.
And I can assure you that your staff is well aware of who I am
and my credentials and qualifications, as I, too, used to wear the East
-- or I'm sorry -- the Collier County EMS patch on my arm, and I too
served as the training captain within EMS providing training for both
Collier County EMS personnel, fire department personnel, working
hand in hand with Dr. Tober producing medical protocol and yet in
recent -- in the recent weeks, I've been labeled as a renegade ALS
provider, and all of my equipment has been stripped from my vehicle
and I've been downgraded to a BLS provider.
Needless to say, I'm here today to try to urge you to deny this
executive summary, as I can assure you that your staff has
misrepresented you in both the interlocal agreements that have
occurred already and they're certainly misrepresenting the fire
Page 193
March 27, 2007
departments and fire districts here today.
For instance, East Naples came to the negotiating tables to
renegotiate this interlocal agreement, and miraculously we did come
up with a unified interlocal agreement that has somehow stopped and
is in the hands of one of your staff.
And, again, I state that your staff has misrepresented East Naples
Fire Department in the sense that -- take the EMS 2000 patient care
reporting software. I have been actively requesting that for over a
year since, August of2007 (sic). It's only been the week of March 19,
200 -- I'm sorry, August 2005. It's only been the week of March 19,
2007 that East Naples Fire Department has finally had access and had
those EMS 2000 reporting -- patient care reporting software installed
on our computers so that our paramedics can accurately depict patient
care.
Understand that it's from those patient care reports that these
fancy graphs were depicted and are included in your executive
summary and understand that that's where the quality assurance
review begins, and also understand that it's based on the
cross-checking or the cross-referencing of this common medical
protocol, that unfortunately I would submit that you have renegade
staff within your EMS division who have edited and augmented this
protocol, sent it to print, distributed it to the various fire districts,
which Dr. Tober himself has demanded that we remove from our
apparatus, as it's deemed medically unsound yet your staff on the
ambulance continues to use this medical protocol.
So once again, I urge you to gather all the facts from all sides of
the forum here and make your appropriate decisions. You as the
policy makers should be the sole policy breakers. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Eric Clere. He'll be followed
by Matt Johnson.
MR. CLERE: Good afternoon. For the record, my name is Eric
Clere. I am a firefighter/paramedic with East Naples Fire Department,
Page 194
March 27, 2007
and I'm here today representing East Naples Professional Firefighters
Local 2396. I'm also a former employee of Collier County EMS.
I'd like to draw your attention to pages 7 and 8 of the executive
summary that you've been provided for by EMS. There's a graph that
is a -- it's dramatic in effect, however, if we dissect it we'll understand
that this graph is misleading and inaccurate in several ways.
First it is labeled to be compliant reporting, and one would be led
to believe that this compliant reporting references compliance with
protocol equipment or emergency response, when actually if you read
the fine print, all this states is the amount of days in a particular time
frame that the fire departments reported to Collier County EMS which
units beyond the ALS engines and units that are described in the
interlocal agreement are actually in service.
Again, this is something that the interlocal does not require yet
EMS took the time to make these graphs and point out the amount of
time that we've actually reported this.
There's inaccuracies in this. On page 7 you'll notice that it
references an N equals 309 at the bottom, which I'm assuming is the
amount of days that we're reporting yet under the ICFD you'll notice
that 365, which I'm assuming is 365 days.
There's also some inaccuracies on page 8 where the top says ALS
engine report 2007, and in the bottom it says compliance for 2006. So
the raw data that was obtained to compile this graph is in question, and
Captain Schultz is in the process of obtaining that from EMS to check
the relevancy of this.
Also, you'll notice following an email communication from EMS
to Captain Schultz in 2007, East Naples reporting increased to 81
percent. Previously reporting this information was done every
morning at radio check.
This procedure was changed by EMS to a fax that was sent from
the East Naples captain to battalion chief 81 of EMS. So this means
of obtaining this information has a lot of chances for error, as it
Page 195
March 27, 2007
involves multiple people, fax machines, and we all know that, you
know, we forgot to put paper in the fax machine before.
The basis of this is that Collier County Sheriffs Office dispatch
is not concerned with these extra units as to whether they're ALS or
BLS. They're only concerned with the 24/7 ALS units which are
outlined in the interlocal agreement, which in East Naples' case, is
ALS engine 22.
You've also, real quick, been handed a graph of ours that the
interlocal states that Collier County is supposed to provide East
Naples with a firefighter/paramedic on medic 22. This graph shows
that 71 percent of the time, since June of2006 through December
2006, they've only provided us with a firefighter/paramedic 27 percent
of the time. So EMS is in violation of their own interlocal.
Thank you for your time.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Matt Johnson. He'll be
followed by Grant Danskin.
MR. JOHNSON: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of
the board. For the record, my name is Matt Johnson. I'm a Lieutenant
with the East Naples Fire Department and a local of -- a member of
Local 2396 of the International Association of Firefighters, a union
with over one-quarter of a million members.
I would like to address your attention to part of the executive
summary that was presented to you today, in particular on page 1
where it reads in part, and refusal by some fire districts to respond to
specific emergency incidents. I'd like to repeat that. And refusal by
some fire districts to respond to specific emergency incident types.
I've been a firefighter for over 20 years and not once have I failed
to respond to the call of duty, promptness and efficiency. Last year,
East Naples Fire Department answered that call over 7,500 times. To
make this statement a personal affront to all those who have entered
this most noble profession with only two goals in mind, to save lives
and property.
March 27, 2007
Any perceived failure to respond should be addressed by those
committees overseeing dispatch, the EMD review board, to include
the CCSO, understanding that the EMD cad system can only be
effective as the information they receive from the caller or the person
in need. The only times we do not respond is when cancelled by
control or a higher medical authority already on scene, period.
Anything short of that, we're coming. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Grant Danskin. He'll be followed by Kevin
Nelmes.
MR. DANSKIN: Good afternoon. My name is Grant Danskin.
I'm a Firefighter/Paramedic with East Naples Fire Department, and I'm
a proud member of Local 2396.
On the issue of duplication of services, which is in the summary, most
of the time, due to the limited amount of ambulances, the fire
department is the first to arrive on scene with either EMT or -- and/or
paramedic.
With this personnel, we are able to evaluate, treat, and have the
patient ready for transport and further care as deemed necessary by
EMS. It is a -- it is purely a matter of logistics on that matter.
Many times an ambulance is coming from out of zone or when
there is not a unit available in zone. With highly qualified personnel
provided by the fire departments who are first to arrive, patient care is
immediate and without further delay.
In closing, it only gets -- it is not a duplication of services in my
opinion. It is enhancing patient care. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Kevin Nelmes. He'll be
followed by Diana Watson.
MR. NELMES: Good afternoon. Thank you for allowing me the
opportunity to speak here today. My name's Kevin Nelmes and I'm a
FirefighterIParamedic with East Naples Fire Department, as well as a
proud member of the Local 2396 East Naples Professional
Firefighters.
Page 197
March 27, 2007
First I'd like to bring attention to page 5 in the packets that you
have. It's a pie graph labeled first quarter '06/07, quality assurance.
review. Bottom line on this document, in fact, is the pie graph is
statistically -- excuse me -- statistically insignificant. This would
account for East Naples Fire Department 7,500 calls, and that would
only mean that 165 would be considered ALS where we were on
scene providing treatment prior to the county's arrival.
Just in the last two shifts, just imagine yourself not being able to
breathe because you're drowning in your own blood from heart failure.
Imaging that being one of you or your family members, and being--
us having the knowledge and the skills to help and not having that
equipment or medications to intervene in that person's life. It's --
excuse me. Imagine us having the skills and not having the
medications and, outlined in this agreement that, if you took our tools
away, we wouldn't be able to do our jobs.
I wish Commissioner Coyle was here to address his issue of
where there's 16 people here. We have a passion for this industry.
We chose this job to save lives and help people. That's why we're
here.
And if I could just use the example, we wouldn't give deputies
guns with no bullets or no handcuffs. We're paramedics, firefighters,
EMT, we need our equipment. We want to save lives and do our jobs.
And I ask that you please not follow the executive summary. Thank
you.
MS. FILSON: Diana Watson. She'll be followed by Keith
Teague.
MS. WATSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name's
Diana Watson. I work for East Naples Fire Department. As of
December 2006, I worked for Collier County EMS. I finished up 10
years. I was in my eleventh year when I decided to go to East Naples
to provide medical training for their staff.
I am known as Lieutenant 25 by East Naples. And one of the
Page 198
March 27,2007
reasons they chose me for the position was because when I was with
EMS, I was a field training officer. And one of the goals of that
position was to make sure that your personnel, your paramedics and
your EMTs were medically and operationally capable to run calls and
to do the job of saving lives.
When I came over and became Lieutenant 25, it's very different
being on the other side of the fence. I didn't realize how different until
I got on the other side of the fence.
I want to talk to you a little bit about the Dan Summers letter that
was sent out with the termination clause. When Dr. Tober talks about
multiple motivations, I agree with that. There are multiple
motivations going on, and we at East Naples are extremely concerned
that you are not all aware of every single motivation that's going on,
that's why we're here.
So as Lieutenant 25, my capabilities are to be a supervisory
medical personnel. So I have my own truck which had ALS
equipment in it until the beginning of February when we were told to
strip our trucks of all ALS equipment. I think the thing that was most
upsetting to me was, I was good enough to be a paramedic and
provide ALS care for Collier County EMS for 11 years. Three
months later, I'm no longer good enough. I can't provide the same
exact care. Why is that? That's politics. It's nothing more. Nothing
else has changed.
I'll tell you right now, I've been on numerous calls needing ALS
care. I was by myself. I have no ALS equipment. All I have is basic
life support. I can give oxygen. And those patients would have been
directly positively impacted by having ALS care on their scene
immediately.
I'm very concerned, Commissioners, that what happened was, all
of a sudden all this hoopla happened, and all of a sudden it was
decided, let's lower the standard of care for Collier County citizens.
I completely disagree with that. Patient care is what EMS is all about,
Page 199
March 27, 2007
whether it's provided by Collier County EMS or is provided by fire
departments. We all should be here for patient care.
Stripping vehicles that EMS was fully aware were running as
advanced life support supervisory cars, just like their own battalion
chiefs are not licensed because they don't need to be licensed. That's
not what state statute says. State statute makes it clear, as long as the
medical director agrees with what you have on your truck as a
nontransport unit, you don't need a license. And EMS has been well
aware that Lieutenant 25 has not had a license for years.
And to come in now and say that we are acting in an egregious
manner and we're doing all this under the cuff and hiding, it's very
disturbing, especially if -- someone who used to work for EMS and
knows what the county government stands for and that you are the
makers of the policy, and they did not follow your policy. They
decided to go above and beyond it. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Keith Teague. He'll be
followed by John German.
MR. TEAGUE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
my name is Keith Teague. I'm a Deputy Chief with the Training
Division for the East Naples Fire Department.
And before I start, just to address one of Dr. Tober's opening
comments. Let me clearly define that our motivation -- I know there's
different motivation, but let me clearly define, our motivation at the
East Naples Fire Department is to provide the highest level of
emergency care possible, end of story. That's our job. That's our
mission. That's our motivation.
I, too, here -- am here to speak on this executive summary and
speak against the termination of this agreement. I'm not a politician,
so I'll apologize if I offend any of you up front because there's a good
possibility I may do that.
I also publicly acknowledge -- and I think we're all in agreement
and we have been in agreement that the agreements -- the interlocal
Page 200
March 27, 2007
agreements needed to be tweaked. I don't think a threatening
termination letter was necessarily the most politically correct way of
going about doing that.
If! don't miss my mark, I think that all of the fire districts have
gotten together and they've come up with workable agreements, but
again, your staff has not informed you of that or you don't have a copy
of those agreements.
I, too, have a timeline. There was a timeline generated, I guess,
in response to justifY this unsigned fax of notification to terminate our
interlocal agreements. Well, let me give you the true timeline.
All of this stuff started when the EMS administrator started
hearing the terminology Med Com 45, Med Com 25 on the radio. The
fire departments are clearly, if you look at the communications
manual, clearly within their rights to use those -- that radio designation
but somehow that ruffled some feathers.
We got a letter from Dr. Tober next outlining, hey, we got these
road vehicles out there. I need to know what kind of equipment are on
them when, in fact, the equipment originally provided to those
vehicles was provided by EMS.
Okay. No problem. I was assured by division chief Dan
Bowman, hey, Keith, this is just a ruffle in the road, don't worry about
it. It's not big deal. Again we were assured by Chief Page at a Collier
County fire chiefs' meeting that, look, we can deal with this, it's not a
big deal, we just need to tighten things up.
And I believe he quoted that we could do this in about 20
minutes. I thought that was a little ambitious, but, hey, maybe a
meeting or two, we can put all this stuff behind us.
Then came the unsigned fax terminating the agreement. And I
understand that the commission had a problem with staff speaking for
you, and maybe they were operating outside the auspices or the
authority of their office.
Now comes this timeline that somehow is supposed to justifY --
Page 201
March 27,2007
somehow supposed to justifY the need to terminate these agreements.
I can tell you that we have been misrepresented, we have been --
there's inaccurate data in that time line, and I -- and make no mistake,
if you terminate this agreement today --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, I have to ask you to wrap it up.
MR. TEAGUE: Yes, sir. If you terminate this agreement today,
patient care, without a doubt, will be compromised. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is John German. He'll be
followed by Orly Stolts.
MR. GERMAN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, John German. I'm the Assistant Fire Chief in North Naples.
MS. FILSON: Oh, German.
MR. GERMAN: That's okay. Everybody gets it wrong.
I appreciate you giving the respect to these speakers, to stay and listen
to what they have to say. I would like to get back to the agenda item
as it is presented to you. The agenda item deals with you approving of
staff action or reaffirming that which you haven't affirmed yet. So
that's why I'm saying, approving staff action to terminate these
agreements, or at least to imply the threat of termination of these
agreements if we cannot renegotiate them. That's fact.
And I was going to say that when this had been presented to you,
that you probably asked some questions about, what are we going to
do if we have to terminate these agreements, but Commissioner Fiala
kind of led me to the conclusion that you've never been really
presented with these proposals or this draft of letter to terminate the
agreement. I find that real disturbing.
And so the question would be -- and I would think that if you had
been presented with this, your concern if it was presented, well, we're
going to send this letter out and we're going to terminate these
agreements if we can't renegotiate them in 90 days, the question would
have been, what's the plan? How are you going to provide the same
level of ALS service in these areas that have these agreements if you
Page 202
March 27, 2007
pull these engines off?
In North Naples we have eight ALS engines that are running, and
so we enhanced the system. We arrive many times minutes, many
minutes, ahead of an EMS transport unit. Those people are still going
to be sick, they're still going to need care, and I haven't heard from
EMS or emergency management or Dr. Tober what the plan is to
replace those eight units, and I would like to know what that is.
And I don't believe that if that was thought out that you would
have taken such a drastic step, or ifthere was no plan, you wouldn't
have taken this drastic step to threaten to terminate these agreements.
So, you know, until you can give a straightforward answer, an
honest answer that's understandable by the common man as to how
you're going to protect that and how you're going to provide this
service, then I don't know how you, in good conscience, can approve
of this action. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Orly Stolts. He'll be followed by Robert Metzger.
MR. STOL TS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Deputy Chief Stolts with North Naples Fire Department, and I want to
thank the four of you for taking your time to sit and listen to us. We
really appreciate it. You can tell we're kind of a passionate group.
We feel strongly about what we do.
I have confidence. I have a lot of confidence in the staff that's
sitting right here, Dr. Tober, Jeff and the EMS staff and all the fire
districts within Collier County and the cities within the county can sit
down and come up with a great agreement to where we can go out
there and do what it is we're really supposed to do, and that's to
provide the best patient care for the citizens of our county. I have
confidence that we can do that.
And you know, I hate to have a time limit on it, as we have been
given, but I think we can work that out, and I think we'll come up with
it. We're all professionals. We're going to do a good job in putting
this together for you.
Page 203
March 27, 2007
I just -- on the earlier comments by the commission, I had a
couple interesting thoughts.
Commissioner Coletta had some concerns about ALS service out
in Immokalee and Golden Gate City, I believe he referred to, and then
Commissioner Halas stated that the EMS paramedics don't fight fires.
I got a great idea. Four Collier County paramedics are riding on fire
trucks every day within the county; Marco Island, City of Naples, East
Naples, and North Naples. Those are great paramedics. Wouldn't it
be great if we could take those folks off the fire trucks being as they
don't fight fire, and put them out in Commissioner Coletta's concerned
area --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Interesting.
MR. STOL TS: -- ofImmokalee and Golden Gate. There's four
great paramedics right there that are riding in areas that have staffs of
paramedic firefighters that are already working in those areas. Seems
like we're having people riding around on fire trucks that should be
out there with the people that are really needing the ALS care. It's just
a thought. I don't know, sounds like common sense to me.
Thank you for your time.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Robert Metzger. He'll be
followed by Mike Brown.
MR. METZGER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I just got
done listening to Mr. Summers telling us that it wasn't his intent to
cancel the agreements, and I would point out that, in fact, that wasn't
what he told us during the February fire service steering committee
when he went on the record as telling us that he had no choice but to
cancel the agreements. That's on the record.
Assuming you take up the recommendation by staff, this action
will have the chilling effect of legitimizing Mr. Summers' action of
February 15th in which he provided that notice of suspension of all the
ALS engine -- excuse me -- all the ALS engine agreements.
This notice was made outside the statutory authority of his
Page 204
March 27, 2007
position, outside the provisions of the interlocal agreement, and
without your official action. County staff has created an executive
summary that purports to support this request. This executive
summary is fraught with misrepresentations and half truths.
The reality is, the system isn't broken. It remains working, but in
the absolute worst-case scenario right now, what you see is a vigorous
discussion about the present state of the ALS engine partnership and
how it needs to be improved. And we all agree, there needs to be
improvement and there's ways to do that.
The ALS engine partnership is based on a national model. This
concept is used nationwide with great success. We didn't reinvent the
wheel here. It's resulted in increased patient survival rates, improved
patient outcomes, and this is strongly supported by national published
data.
Locally, your EMS staff has produced data minimizing the effect
of this program and the importance of fire department ALS engines.
Why does it work everywhere else, but not here? The fact is, it does
work here. Why doesn't present data reflect this success? I think
there's two reasons. I believe that the data that empirically supports
this has yet to be collected, and that the data that has been presented to
you is incomplete.
The ALS engine program well serves the constituencies of each
district. ALS first responders often arrive well before Collier EMS
medic units, initiating interventions that save lives, and North Naples
is committed to providing this service to its citizens. Don't take that
away from us.
The contemplated action before you is unnecessary as the
participating agencies have been meeting regularly to revise the
existing interlocal agreement.
We have another meeting scheduled tomorrow, and I would
invite any of you to come out and participate or at least observe that.
We anticipate completing the final draft of the agreement at the
Page 205
March 27, 2007
meeting; very possibly this could be done.
I urge you not to support the measure before you. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Mike Brown. He'll be
followed by George Aguilera.
CHIEF BROWN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Been a long
day. For the record, my name is Mike Brown, and I'm the Fire Chief
in North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District, and I thank you for
allowing me to speak to you today.
I'm here to ask that you not reaffirm previous actions taken by
Director Summers as it pertains to cancelling the existing ALS
agreement and that you adhere to the current ALS agreement between
the Collier County Commission and the North Naples Board of Fire
Commissioners until its expiration date or until an amended version is
brought before you for your consideration.
The ALS agreement has been hugely successful, and regardless
to (sic) testimony to the contrary, there have been numerous lives
saved, and patient care has been enhanced as a result of this program.
I'm very concerned that half truths and misinformation that have been
provided to you will negatively influence your decision. Improving
patient outcome and enhancing medical treatment to the sick and
injured must be the basis for your decision.
I've been involved in the fire rescue business for 31 years. The
ALS engine program with the EMS transport component is a proven
method of providing pre-hospital patient care. It is beyond my
comprehension that we could have trained, experienced paramedics
respond to an emergency scene within two to five minutes and not
allow them to provide needed ALS intervention because of some
political issue or turf war.
The ultimate loser, who certainly doesn't deserve it, will be the
innocent resident or visitor to Collier County requiring the lifesaving
ALS treatment. Basic life support and advanced life support are not
mutually exclusive. They work hand in hand. At the same time first
Page 206
March 27,2007
responders perform BLS procedures, they also provide ALS
intervention.
North Naples has sought out and employed professional EMS
leaders, hired experienced paramedics, and sent numerous firefighters
to paramedic school. We've invested a great deal of time and
resources to ensure the success of this program, and the results have
been hugely successful from a pre-hospital patient care perspective.
Professional firefighters and paramedics from the fire districts and
Collier County EMS who provide patient treatment work very well
together. Their coordinated effort ensures the residents and visitors of
Collier County receives needed ALS care by the closest fire or rescue
unit.
There are many ways that we can expand this success story to
easternmost Collier County, and I commit to you my efforts and
resources in an effort to enhance the ALS engine program for all
residents and visitors within the county.
In closing, my predecessor, Chief Webb, was treated for a serious
medical emergency by our paramedics at station 45. Their rapid ALS
intervention may very well have saved his life. There are numerous
examples of lives that have been saved as a result of this ALS
program.
I urge that you not reaffirm the actions taken by Director
Summers that provides for a termination date for the existing ALS
agreement and that you abide by the terms and conditions of the
current ALS agreement until it expires or an amended version can be
brought before you for your consideration. I am confident that you
will base your decision on what is best for the health and safety of our
residents.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: George Aguilera.
MR. AGUILERA: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, for the
record, my name is George Aguilera. I'm the Deputy Chief of EMS
Page 207
March 27,2007
for the North Naples Fire Department.
Up to July of2006 I was also a paramedic and employee of
Collier County EMS for 20 years. The last 10 plus of those years I
held a position of the division chief of training. I worked hand in hand
with Dr. Tober for over those years to oversee, direct, give input and
participate in the overall medical direction of the EMS system.
And the reason I'm here and talking is obviously, as the division
deputy chief of EMS for North Naples, I am concerned about the
system of what we're moving through with this negotiation or with this
interlocal agreement and the current executive summary.
I can tell you, Bob -- and I'll talk to you directly. I've said this to
you in private and I've also said it to you in not so private. The sky is
falling scenario that's been provided to you is not true. As a person
you've trusted for many years with the protocols and the tutelage of
your paramedics, it's not true.
Your legacy as the medical director for this county is
unchallenged, remarkable, and will never be challenged, but
unfortunately great physicians can make a misdiagnosis when given
bad information, and I'd tell you, you've been given bad information.
The results here is, we want to make this program work. We're
committed to it. Chief Brown, my chief, just stood up here and gave
you his commitment. All the chiefs have sat down at the table in the
spirit of good negotiations to put together an agreement that meets the
spirit and the medical perspective of Dr. Tober. Nobody denies that.
Could the agreement be better? Absolutely. Could both sides work
better? Absolutely.
What I sit here and ask you today is simply this: Look at that
executive summary. Don't reaffirm something that you haven't
affirmed. Weare sitting in the spirit of cooperation in working on an
agreement that we can bring to you hopefully in the next couple of
weeks so you got -- so your group could take a look at it and give your
opinion and your vote.
Page 208
March 27,2007
So with that said, please let the process continue not under this
threat of a cancellation. It's not in the good spirit.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, that was your last speaker.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we're going to take a 10-minute
break at this time. We ran a little bit over, and I apologize for that.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Now, where we left off a
moment ago is we had all 16 speakers speak their mind, and we
appreciate very much them doing so.
We do have a motion on the floor that's by Commissioner Coyle
and a second by Commissioner Halas, and I have three lights on. And
ifI remember correctly, Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner Henning,
then Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, it was Commissioner Henning,
and then Commissioner Halas, and then me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I had that totally wrong.
Thank God Donna's here to get me straight. Okay. Commissioner
Henning, please go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, sir. Thank you. Please
help me out. Page 5, it provides annual update to the inventory
reporting. That was presented in our AUIR. What's the purpose of
this being in our agenda?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I believe that -- and I didn't write
the executive summary, but I believe that the item was added to that
executive summary to basically talk about the commission -- the
commissioners' dialogue during the AUIR talking about ALS trying to
get agreements whereby the ALS engines and services that are out
there could be -- a count could be used to minimize the number of
Page 209
March 27,2007
EMS paramedic units that would be needed in the mutual future.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Let me ask you then.
Now, if your staff can't do that through the dialogue of the
independent districts, what's going to happen then? Ifwe can't count
them -- they say nah, we don't want you to count them in your
inventory .
MR. MUDD: You don't count them right now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. It's not going to be an
issue during the discussion with the fire departments; is that what I
understand?
MR. SUMMERS: Commissioner, for the record, Dan Summers,
Director of the Bureau of Emergency Services. Our intent there, when
the AUIR was presented, was that you had some desire to take a look
and see if the ALS engines --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. The county manager said
that.
MR. SUMMERS: Right, could provide that. To take that one
step forward, it is a sidebar issue for me amending these ALS engine
agreements so that if there is an ability to make sure that we have
something there in the fashion that we're all comfortable with, again,
trying to meet those requirements of the AUIR, that's 24/7/365, the
suggestion from the Productivity Committee was to make sure we
captured that in a format that we could report to you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I remember that.
MR. SUMMERS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Here's my question--
MR. SUMMERS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll state it again. If the
independent districts don't want to be a part of that 24/7, seven days a
week, year-round, is that a deal breaker?
MR. SUMMERS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
Page 210
March 27, 2007
MR. SUMMERS: One's not contingent upon the other, I owe
you as much service delivery measurement as I can provide.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just so that we have an
understanding.
MR. SUMMERS: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: East Naples interlocal
agreement, it was stated it was ready to go; is that true?
MR. SUMMERS: We have a number of agreements in process,
and I would say probably six of the -- I mean four of the six are -- we
have a number of them. We haven't completed our staff review of
that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. SUMMERS: Chief Page is working with the districts, and
there's great cooperation there, great progress. I don't -- I'm not ready
to bring you final documents at this point.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So East Naples interlocal
agreement is not ready to come to the board. The county manager
staff has not accepted those and okayed them?
MR. SUMMERS: We are still working on those documents, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. So ifI do a public
records research, I won't find any of your staff agreement to the
interlocal agreement?
MR. SUMMERS: Agreement, no, sir. There's no execution
without your approval, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, yeah, I know that; it's just
your recommendations. Edit of -- medical protocol that was brought
up, was the protocol, the new protocol that was printed signed off by
the -- Dr. Tober.
MR. SUMMERS: Let me let him -- Dr. Tober and Chief Page
address the protocol.
DR. TOBER: The new -- the newest protocol had some old --
older protocols in it that have been updated by new ones, and we are
Page 211
March 27,2007
struggling to finish it. It's a very complicated process to go through
the protocol book and be comfortable that you've absolutely got every
I dotted and T crossed before you hit the print button and spend as
much money as we have spent to create these color protocols for
everyone.
And we've been trying to go through them piece by piece to
make sure. There is nothing in the old protocols that is dangerous to
the public. There are simply some newer protocols that, once we have
them written down securely, we need to in-service everybody on them
and then get those out to the street.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So a new manual hasn't
been printed?
DR. TOBER: It's very close to being printed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you, Doctor.
One question. Commissioner Fiala brought up about, the action
requested by the Board of Commissioners is reaffirmed. And I -- I
have the tendency to agree with her. How can you reaffirm an action
that you haven't affirmed? So are we affirming the action of our staff,
of the county manager's staff?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We are reaffirming staffs direction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But we didn't affirm it in the first
place.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you haven't affirmed it in the
first place -- and it's very important. I'm not trying to be difficult here,
okay? It's the board's agreement that most of us had knowledge but
we did not give direction in the sunshine. All right. That's why this is
back on the issue -- back on the agenda.
So if we approve it -- Mr. Weigel, you have to help me out -- if
we approve it, an action that didn't take place in the sunshine, isn't that
a violation of the sunshine law?
MR. WEIGEL: No, and I think you're -- your question is -- has
Page 212
March 27, 2007
to be redefined. You mentioned that apparently board members had
independent knowledge outside of a meeting of certain facts relating
to the relationship of the county, the Bureau of Emergency Services
and the fire districts. The fact that individual commissioners have
individual knowledge brought to them or discuss it with others than
other commissioners outside of the sunshine is not a sunshine issue at
all.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, I know that. I know that.
MR. WEIGEL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But the request is -- the request
for the Board of Commissioners to reaffirm the staffs action to notice
the termination of the ALS engine --
MR. WEIGEL: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- agreement.
MR. WEIGEL: It's just a question of semantics, but I think it has
nothing to do with the sunshine law, and I think that Ms. Fiala's point
is more grammatically correct. It would appear to be affirm or ratify
as far as that goes, ratifying the action taken by staff at the prior time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me ask you, would it
be more appropriate to -- for the board -- or the motion maker to direct
staff to send a letter to the independent districts, a notification similar
to the one that was done before?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, that would be perfectly appropriate, that
the board could -- the board has great flexibility in what it may wish to
do at this point in time, and that is certainly an option that the board --
the board -- what you're asking or suggesting here operationally is that
the board potentially would be giving a letter at this point that takes --
becomes operational or effective at this point in time as opposed to
ratifying or affirming the prior letter which had an earlier time frame
of operation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: County Manager, do you want to
Page 213
March 27, 2007
expound upon the county attorney's explanation?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Maybe it was a lack of -- bad word to say
reaffirm. But on the 27th of February, Mr. Dan Summers, during
communications, got up and basically briefed four board members that
were on the dais about the situation in the 15 February letter that went
out and the reasons why it went out.
At that time there was only one commissioner on the dais that
had questions about the interlocals, and he cautioned staff at that time
that any interlocal that was agreed to had to come back to the Board of
County Commissioners for approval.
And having staff work with the fire district on ALS agreements,
there is -- there is no guarantee that what's been worked out will be
agreed to by the board, and that was quite clear at that time.
Well, I considered that an affirmation to some extent of what had
happened prior to clear the air and to let the commissioners know, so
therefore the word reaffirm. But if that does -- if that does not -- and
so I want to make sure that everybody understands there isn't
something that was outside the sunshine that transpired in this
particular case.
So if it's to affirm staff actions officially, I understand that, but
understand why it said reaffirm, and my apologies if I created any
confusion in that regard.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's go to Commissioner Halas, then
Commissioner Fiala, then Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: First of all, I know this is a very
emotional subject, and I don't think any of us on the -- sitting on this
dais was here to completely sever all ALS activity.
I believe what transpired -- and correct me if I'm wrong. But I
believe what transpired, there was a number of occasions when Dr.
Tober and the EMS director needed to get people together at the table
to discuss differences, and I believe that there was some reluctance on
the part of some individuals, whether it was on our staff or whether it
Page 214
March 27, 2007
was in the fire commission, different fire commissions, in regards to
addressing what we felt was some concerns, and we hold the license to
emergency medical service.
And so I think what took place is that we had no intent of
completely severing these agreements, that it was -- a letter was
written that was very strong and maybe shouldn't have been as strong
as it was, that says, you know, we'll give you 90 days or we're going
to sever the agreement.
And we were hoping in that 90-day period that there would be
some discussion, open dialogue, so that the -- the areas of concern
could be addressed and, therefore, we would end up hopefully getting
agreement.
So I would hope that the motion maker would possibly put a
deadline of two to three weeks that we can have all of these interlocal
agreements taken care of by the fire districts, ifhe would put that in
the motion, so that we can get some resolution on this so that we can --
everybody is going to be happy and we're going to take care of the
necessary issues.
So motion maker, to move this along, I'm hoping that you could
put in your motion that we give them a deadline of three weeks to get
everything taken care of and get back to us in regards to reinforcing
the interlocal agreements and everybody understanding what needs to
be take -- that everybody needs to be on the same page and on the
same playing field.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, first of all, the staff doesn't
have the authority to cancel the agreements, okay. We have to cancel
the agreements.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And it was --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't care what the staff said.
The staff and the medical director were under the impression that there
were serious failures in coordination that could have resulted in
problems with respect to treating people injured or ill in our county.
Page 215
March 27, 2007
They had every right to take immediate action to alert the fire
districts of their concerns and to propose a solution. If their solution
was, we're going to cancel, it was a bad choice of words. It might
have said, we're going to recommend that it be cancelled to the Board
of County Commissioners, but it didn't say that.
But I'm not going to quibble about semantics. The point is, we
hold the responsibility for cancelling the contracts. There is nobody in
their right mind who is going to cancel a contract if it will place
citizens in jeopardy in Collier County.
Weare going to demand that there be appropriate procedures to
coordinate our efforts to make sure we serve the people of Collier
County in the best possible way.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't know that there's anything
that we need to change. We sat right there at a workshop with many
of the fire districts represented, and we all agreed we need new
agreements and we're going to work together on them jointly and
we're going to get it done. I don't want to give anybody a deadline.
You know, I don't think a deadline is necessary. I think when it gets
to the point where we feel no progress is being made, then we have a
hearing on the cancellation of those contracts.
And up until that point, I would suggest we just work toward an
agreement and get it done and quit all this bickering. You know, this
is taking us down the road that is not going to benefit anybody and it
erodes public respect for the fire districts and for the Collier County
Commission.
Now, I don't believe anybody in this audience can sit there with a
straight face and tell me that we have the kind of coordination and
working relationship that we want to have in Collier County. We've
got a lot of things to improve on both sides of this effort, and we can't
do it -- either side can't do it alone.
So let's quit bickering about this. We know we've got
Page 216
March 27, 2007
coordination problems. Let's get an agreement worked out that we can
all live with and let's get on with life.
So my motion still is to affirm the effort that was begun by the
county staff and the medical director as an appropriate action, and let's
get it done as quickly as possible. And if we find out that appropriate
action is not being taken, then we as a board can call another hearing
with the intent of considering the cancellation of some of these
agreements, and that way we'll have this same debate again and we'll
do it all over again just to make sure everybody has absorbed it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Now, being that you jumped in front
of me, I will now take my turn.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Fine.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: First of all, you said you didn't want
to terminate these things. You wanted these guys to work together to
come up with an agreement but yet your motion is ratifying the
termination letter, and I think -- so I believe that maybe you didn't
quite mean that you wanted to terminate them after all. What we want
to do is get these people to sit down and start working together
because when we draw lines in the turf, then you have a separation.
You don't have an agreement where you work cooperatively, and that
isn't what we want to do.
I mean, our EMS guys and our fire guys, they work so well
together until higher officials get in there and mess up the whole pot.
And I think that we want -- we all want to work together.
So my suggestion -- I can't -- I can't vote for it this way because I
feel that what we need to do is ask our guys to go back out. I
understand that East Naples already has an agreement in place and it
just -- somewhere it's disappeared, but it will resurface again.
I think we need to continue on, and by telling them, terminate
and so forth, I don't think we're accomplishing that, and I think we
need to say to these guys, come on, let's go back out and let's work
together and put together an agreement. And we have so and so time
Page 217
March 27,2007
limit because -- and I know you said no time limit, but I feel we
should put a time limit in place because we do have to come up with
an agreement. We can't just let it sit and languish. And that's about
what I had to say.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now let me make sure that
you understand that there's nothing about my motion that transfers
responsibility from the board to the staff to cancel anything.
Weare saying, I am saying, they took exactly the right steps to
initiate renegotiation of these agreements with the exception of saying
we will terminate. They should have said, we will recommend
termination, okay? They felt there was a serious safety problem.
Now, you really expect them to come back to us at some future
Board of County Commission meeting and bring this up and go
through this discussion in order to get something started? I don't think
that's prudent. But the point is, what are you trying to accomplish?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We want them to work together.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Are they not working
together?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I think -- I'm fearful that a
letter like this separates them, and I figure if we just say, come on, let's
-- our effort is to combine these efforts and come up with agreements
that satisfy Dr. Tober and that satisfy the fire departments so we can
all save lives. I wonder if, for instance, this 90 days expires because it
started on February 15th--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We learned about it on the 27th of
February.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So -- which was 12 days later that
this letter was even sent. Now, I wonder if this -- if the 90 days runs
Page 218
March 27, 2007
out and they're just about there, but now everything is terminated and
there's no negotiations?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And nothing could be terminated
without bringing it back before the Board of County Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're both saying the same thing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, we're not saying the same
thing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-uh. Because it says--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You can't terminate --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- reaffirm the staffs actions of
notice of termination. Termination, that's what it says.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You just clarified what termination --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's exactly right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Say it one more time, please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We are not ratifying or transferring
our responsibility for termination to the staff by this motion.
If the agreements are to be terminated, we're going to have to
schedule it on a future Board of County Commission agenda, have a
public hearing, and then we will consider whether or not it will be
terminated.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let's ask the county attorney.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We are merely saying that there
was nothing wrong with this county staff sending a letter to the fire
districts to initiate the negotiation of agreements with the exception of
one phrase, and that phrase was, we will terminate. I said, it should
have said we will recommend termination.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Is that in your motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was in my motion the first
time --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's not --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- it's in my motion the second
time, it's in my motion a third time.
Page 219
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have the motion clarified.
We have the second clarified.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I want to hear the motion one more
time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. You're pushing the wrong
button, Commissioner Halas.
Go ahead, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Again, Ijust want to make sure that
people understand -- I'd just as soon that the commissioner here would
put a deadline of three weeks because I think if people are really
serious about getting all together and getting this thing totally rectified
and everybody's on the same page, that within three weeks time, that
all these fire districts could get this whole system together.
And don't sit back there and keep shaking your head no. I want
to see some positive come out of this thing, okay? I don't want to see
everybody back there shaking their head no. It's the idea that we all
need -- we all need to work together on this plan and get it taken care
of in the shortest possible time. Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're inviting him up, okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What's your name?
CHIEF SCHANK: Chief Bob Schank, East Naples Fire
Department.
Commissioner Halas, first of all, we get this letter. Whatever
happened to a phone call? All of a sudden -- I have talked to Jeff Page
over spot checks. Hey, we doing okay in this program? Everything's
fine. I'm believing everything's fine.
I get a letter saying all these problems are out there. I never
knew those problems were out there until the day I got that letter.
So when you said get -- it's always seems to be -- you kind of sway me
to think it's the fire district, the chiefs causing all this mess. It's not
true. It's not true.
Page 220
March 27, 2007
We met, the fire chiefs involved in those two districts, plus the
two cities, with your staff, and we came up with an agreement. Now,
I think there's only one little issue in that original agreement in
question, and it's minor.
We're meeting tomorrow because? Why because? Because staff
had some concerns. I think it came from the manager's office,
according to the email. So we're going back tomorrow.
Please, whatever you do, don't think we're just sitting back being
trouble makers here. We have done everything, everything in the East
Naples District to comply with the demands of EMS.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I'll appreciate it if you don't
invite people up from the audience without checking with the chair in
the future, okay? Okay.
With that, you're done for the day, you know that. Okay. I'm
turning your light off.
With that, we have a motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the motion?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You want Commissioner Halas to
repeat it again? He'll be more than happy -- or excuse me, Coyle.
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Please. I need to understand it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, would you repeat the
motion as you understand it.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. It's to affirm the actions of the staff by --
in which on 15th of February staff sent a letter. There was one clause
in the letter that should have been, termination with the approval -- the
intent of termination with the approval of the Board of County
Commissioners at the time, and it was not stated in that particular
regard, okay. But the letter basically said, let's get this thing done in
90 days and then let's get it back to the board so it's done. I believe
Page 221
March 27, 2007
that's what the motion was, because that's what the letter said.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what it said.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And the word termination?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There was no word of termination.
Termination can only be done by this board in a future publicly
advertised hearing, end of story.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And that's understood and
accepted by the second?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Any other questions about the
motion? Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm not going to support
it because I do not believe it's legal. It's -- the board should have sent
out the notice. It is the board's agreement. It should have -- not have
been staff. The board never approved that going out. It has a
termination clause that does not fit the agreement, and I won't vote for
it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay, that's fine. Now, we appreciate
that input. Okay.
So now we have the motion before us, we have the second.
We've had it explained, we've discussed it. We have heard from many
people.
And with that, I'm going to call the question. All those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And let the record show that
the ones voting in the negative were Commissioner Henning and
Page 222
March 27,2007
Commissioner Fiala.
Thank you very much for being here. We'll take it up when
everyone has a chance to work it. Looks like East Naples' got this well
under control. I hope that everyone else follows likewise.
I'm going to have to continue this meeting, so I'm going to ask
you to please step back from the dais so we can continue, and thank
you very much for being here.
Item #10F
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE FILING OF AN
ACTION FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF AGAINST THE CLERK
OF COURTS FOR A JUDICIAL DETERMINATION AS TO
WHETHER THE CLERK OF COURTS IS A FEE OFFICER OR A
BUDGET OFFICER - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the last item on the agenda -- the
next item on the agenda is 10F. It's to be heard at three p.m. It's after
three p.m.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we did a good job there.
MR. MUDD: It's a recommendation to approve the filing of an
action for declaratory relief against the Clerk of Courts for the judicial
determination as to whether the Clerk of Courts is a fee officer or a
budget officer. And I will present.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we're going to hold questions
until after we have the staff presentation, in this case Mr. Mudd. And
then please take notes, and then at that point in time questions will be
taken. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Copious notes?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hey, watch your language.
Please continue.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, the reason for item
Page 223
March 27,2007
10F has basically two particular outcomes that need some kind of
resolution. First is, we have a CAFR, an annual report, on the
finances of Collier County that is proceeding and should be presented
to the board, which one of the issues is, I have to sign a management
letter.
Up until, I'd say, November, I was under the impression as the
county manager, based on actions that have been -- that have
transpired in this boardroom during budget workshops, that the Clerk
of the Courts was a budget officer.
The Clerk of Courts, every year for the last four that I've been the
county manager, and five when I was the deputy county manager, has
come to this board during the workshops, presented his budget, had
this board approve his expanded positions and any other budget
changes during that particular workshop.
Nowhere in any of those times in front of this board has the clerk
ever said that he is a fee officer in front of this board and said to you
that the only reason he's doing this, because you don't have approval
authority, is because he just wanted to provide a public service. I don't
ever remember that being said in front of this board.
So I will tell you I was under the impression that he was a budget
officer and acted as a budget officer just like every other person under
-- as my administrators and department directors do. When they
amend their budgets, it comes in front of the Board of County
Commissioners, and when the expenditures happen, they come in
front of the Board of County Commissioners for approval of those
particular expenditures.
The second -- the second -- and so based on that belief, at
turn-back time I noticed that the budget that was approved at the
workshop in 2006 for the '07 budget had -- had a different amount of
turn-back in fund 011 that was -- that was predicted, and it differed
significantly from the amount of money that was turned back by the
Clerk of Courts in that particular fund, which is 011. And it was -- it
Page 224
March 27, 2007
was some -- it was about $2 and a half million difference.
So I asked -- I asked the question why that money wasn't turned
back. I got an answer, that I'm a fee officer and with -- what I do with
my fees is my business. And I basically asked then for the closeout
document from his financial system that basically laid out the
expenditures in the amendments to the budget.
After review of that particular document by myself and Mr. Mike
Smykowski of -- the office and management director, we noticed that
the budget had been amended by some $4 million, $4.2 million, and
that there had been expenditures of some $3.1 million, all of which
hadn't been approved by the Board of County Commissioners.
I asked the question of our external auditor, KPMG, I said, hey, I
just don't understand this. I don't understand, ifhe gets a budget
approved by the Board of County Commissioners, how he can amend
the budget and then spend monies without the Board of County
Commissioners' approval, especially when it has to do with the Board
of County Commissioners' side of his finances.
My conversations with KPMG were, you know, it kind of walks
like a duck, swims like a duck, I think it's a duck, but I can't tell you
for sure.
He looked into that particular issue, came back with a response to
a letter that I sent him about the exact subject, and he basically said,
hey, look it. I don't find anything inappropriate with what he did. It's
in keeping with other county clerks throughout the state in which he
audits, he said, but as to the question of fee and budget officer, I
cannot make that determination, and he recommended that the clerk
go to the Attorney General's Office to seek his opinion in that
particular regard.
Also in this particular letter he basically said that if he was a
budget officer that there would be a material finding in our CAFR on
that particular item because there was some serious issues with Florida
Statutes in that regard if that would be the case.
Page 225
March 27,2007
The second -- the second issue that's important -- and one has to
do with the CAFR and that dialogue. The second issue for the county
manager's agency and for the Board of County Commissioners is,
what do we do about this next budget year that comes up? Is he a fee
officer or is he a budget officer?
If he's a fee officer, his fees are supposed to cover his budget and
his expenses, okay, and yet in the '07 budget, you've given him, the
Clerk of Courts, $4.8 million of ad valorem money in order to run his
-- to run his operation on the Board of County Commissioners' side.
That's -- 64 percent of his budget comes from ad valorem and yet you
have no authority to determine if he amends that budget or how he
expends it over the amount of money that you budget for him.
So you have a decision to make at budget time if he -- if, indeed,
a judge determines that he's a fee officer, is his fees sufficient to run
his organization per his fee officer status, and I think that's important.
Never before has this board had to grapple with that particular
decision because for the last five years, since I've been here, I haven't
-- I haven't had that topic come in front of the Board of County
Commissioners during that workshop.
Now, not trying to splatter the Naples Daily News with this
particular item, I tried to talk to the state. I talked to -- I sent a letter to
the auditor general and I sent a letter to the chief financial officer, and
I've also sent a letter to the legislative committee that basically sets the
tasks for the auditor general, and I basically asked him this question --
and I also provided him outside legal counsel from Nabors, Giblin that
basically says, in his opinion, or in their opinion, that he is a -- that he
is a budget officer -- to basically ask them to take a look at the
particular case and please help us try to answer that question.
Auditor general basically wrote back and said they weren't going
to tackle this issue on their own but they would support the chief
financial officer if they chose to take a look at this particular item.
Chief financial officer wrote back and said, nope, we don't want to get
Page 226
March 27,2007
involved in a local issue because we've heard that this particular item
is part of a lawsuit that's ongoing since 2004 with the Clerk of Courts,
and we don't want to get involved.
This morning I received a copy of a letter that was sent by Mr.
Daniel Sumners (sic), the general counsel for the Florida Department
of Financial Services, and that's one of Alex Sink's offices that she
runs, and it basically -- and it basically states -- and it states right here
that the specific legal issue of the Clerk of Courts is the fee officer or
budget officer under chapter 144 (sic), Florida Statutes.
Neither the chief financial officer nor the Department of
Financial Services has the authority to resolve this legal issue. In our
judgment, the appropriate forum for resolution of the legal dispute is
in the court.
Again, I didn't have that yesterday when I talked to all
commissioners, but I received a copy of that this morning on my chair
before the meeting started.
So I think there's two issues here. One is, how does our annual
audit go about? And I believe at this juncture I have no recourse in
my management letter but to caveat this particular incident, okay,
when I -- when I sign it, to let them know that I believe there's an issue
that needs to tran -- that KPMG and the reviewers of KPMG need to
know about.
And number two, you have a budget issue that you need to get
resolved, I believe, before you set the next budgets.
Outside of that, I believe there's been a lot of dialogue in those
letters that I did send forward to the state staff. I did provide copies to
the Board of County Commissioners, and I also provided copies to the
Clerk of Courts to make sure that he was aware of what I was trying to
get resolved.
And I believe at this juncture I am no closer to finding out ifhe's
a fee officer or a budget officer than I was when I started on the quest
to figure this out, and that's where I'm at.
Page 227
March 27, 2007
And I believe at this juncture, I don't -- I believe the board needs
to go to court and get a judge to make a ruling on this particular issue
-- it's a matter of law -- and try to get this resolved once and for all.
That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We'll go to the commissioners
now. Commissioner Henning, then Commissioner Coyle.
There is no speakers; is that correct?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: County Manager, I have several
questions, but why can't we go to the state's attorney general and ask
his opinion?
MR. MUDD: Well, that's a good question, and I believe you
need to address that with the county attorney. But what I've been told
is that without -- without -- the Board of County Commissioners
cannot go to the attorney general to seek an opinion, or they won't --
or they won't take the case at the Attorney General's Office -- to seek
an opinion on a constitutional officer without the constitutional officer
and the agency, in this particular case the Board of County
Commissioners, going there hand in hand in order to get that legal
OpIniOn.
I will -- I will state to you that Mr. Jones, who's the
representative from KPMG, that basically, in his response to me -- and
which Mr. Brock received a copy -- had recommended that Mr. Brock
go to the Attorney General's Office in order to get this rectified so we
can get some clarification on the particular issue.
As of last week, Ms. Robinson -- and she is -- Ms. Hubbard is
here to -- and she can tell you about the dialogue that she had with the
representative of the AGO, but there has been no -- there has been no
request filed for clarification by our clerk.
And Ms. Hubbard can talk about that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Maybe he feels that he
Page 228
March 27, 2007
knows what he is and the confusion is over on this side of government.
But you asked KPMG to do a performance audit, and you got an
opinion from Nabors Giblin, right, about this issue of fee officer or
budget officer?
MR. MUDD: I asked KPMG to do a performance audit? I don't
understand that. I asked Nabors Giblin through the County Attorney's
Office to please get -- to see -- try to answer the question for me to see
if I was out -- completely out in the woods. It just didn't make any
sense to me --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: -- how the board can approve a budget, and then
all of a sudden have a budget amendment and an extra expenditure,
money not returned, and have him come in front of the board and ask
for the budget to be approved every year.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, here's -- here's a subject
that you sent to the board, a request for an opinion of the performance
audit of the Clerk of the Court authorized -- in unauthorized budget
expenditures. Did you get that performance audit?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, okay.
I sent the -- you an AGO that I found last night. It's 99-63, and I
gave it to David, and I think it really clearly spells it out, what you
need to go by to find out whether he's a budget office or a fee officer.
And the state's attorney says -- and quoted a Supreme Court case,
Alachua and Powers, we feel that it is properly interpretive of the
various statutes, is -- that were Circuit Court -- Clerk of the Court
agrees to turn over all fees collected by their office to -- sorry, my
screen just went out -- to the Board of Commissioners as they become
county budget officer by resolution of the board pursuant to statute
145 that you just provided, .022(1). And it's saying -- you know, and
it has to be absent of an agreement, a resolution.
The Clerk of the Courts remains a county fee officer responsible
Page 229
March 27,2007
to establish his own annual budget, and he is required by law to
merely file for his proposed budget with the clerk of the county
government authority by September 1 preceding the fiscal year of the
budget to make an annual report. And it just goes on.
So, you know, is he -- do we have an agreement with the Clerk of
Court?
MR. MUDD: I don't know, sir. I don't know what you'd call his
budget workshop when you sit there and approve his budget --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
MR. MUDD: -- when it comes to you. Is that--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's a workshop. An
agreement is two bodies agree, two people agree. Do we have an
agreement? Do we have a resolution?
MR. MUDD: I think you need to talk to the county attorney --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Tripp might have that
information.
MR. MUDD: -- because I believe there's a Supreme Court case
that basically came out in 2000 that basically says that is not
necessarily the cornerstone on this particular issue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. But you've got to go by
statutes. And 145.022 says, any board of commissioners with
concurrence of (sic) county office involved shall be resolution
guaranteed and appropriated a salary for a county official in the
amount of -- specific in the chapter of all -- if all fees collected by
such official are turned over to the Board of Commissioners, such
resolution shall apply only to the -- respect to the county official who
concurred in it, in its adoption, and only during such -- of the official's
teniture (sic) in his or her current term office.
So he is a budget officer if we have an agreement. I mean, that's
what I get from the AGO in 142 (sic).
MR. MUDD: I agree. And an AGO is an opinion, okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, okay. But you're asking
Page 230
March 27,2007
us to take action like we did before.
MR. MUDD: But there was a Supreme Court decision, okay,
done by judges of the Supreme Court of the State of Florida that
basically say -- and overruled that AGO to a certain extent, and I'm
going to defer to the county attorney at this particular time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. IfI could finish. You're
asking us to take action like we did before. How many millions of
dollars are we into that action? Is there a better way to do this?
Two items on today that had to do with elected officials. And I
think the people in Collier County would like us to work together, and
this is not working together. Ifwe have a disagreement, is there a
better way?
I can tell you, I already have my answer here according to the
AGO and according to the statutes. I want to know where the
agreement is. I want to know where the resolution is.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Let's do this. Let's -- we can
ask the county attorney. We can --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I need an answer to that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Well, then we'll direct that--
we'll direct it to the county attorney and counsel and take it to that
point there, and then we're going to go to Commissioner Coyle, and
then we'll come back to you after we go to Commissioner Fiala.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
The -- Jim has framed the questions noting that there are two sides of
the clerk's operation, the Clerk of Courts and the Clerk to the Board of
County Commissioners. They're separate fiscal or budgetary aspects
to both of those operations. The question in regard to a budget officer
may not be decided through the attorney general opinions that have
issued in the past because typically attorney general opinions are fact
specific to the facts that are placed before it.
I've had the opportunity to review attorney general opinion 99-63
briefly, and what I noted was that it was, in fact, ajoint request from
Page 23 1
March 27, 2007
the chairman and the clerk of Suwannee County back in 1999, and
they stipulated that the clerk in their particular county was a fee
officer, so that was never a question before the attorney general to
decide.
And although it did provide in there some of the statutory
language pertaining to an opinion, pertaining to what constitutes a fee
officer in some cases, that was not a question being decided by that
particular attorney general opinion.
Now, there is case law out there, both the Escambia County case
of 1980 and even the Alachua County v. Powers case where there is a
-- which speaks to the effect of other factors that may come into
effect, into play, to determine whether a clerk is a fee officer or a
budget officer.
And from that standpoint, the courts are definitive and
determinative, the opinions of the attorney general are merely
opinions. They are not binding law.
I would suggest that Ms. Hubbard will speak and Mr. Tripp will
speak in a moment both with regard to the facts as they understand it
that apply to the question of resolution or agreement, and Ms.
Hubbard will also comment in regard to her personal conversation
with the Attorney General Office relative to an attorney general
opinion request.
But additionally I just wanted to mention that, again, the facts
that we have here in Collier County are different than the facts of
Suwannee County. They're different than the facts of Escambia
County. They're different from the facts of Alachua County for many
years. And from that standpoint, the courts have spoken from time to
time since then, and we even have a few other aspects that have come
into play, such as Article V, affecting budgets and county
responsibilities in the last few years.
So I mention that, and then I'll turn it over to Jackie who can talk
about her conversation with the Attorney General Office.
Page 232
March 27, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before we do, Commissioner Coyle,
you didn't want to wait till we finish the presentation from the
attorney?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I really don't. I think it is a
really bad strategy to sit here and discuss our legal position about an
issue we intend to bring before the Court. I think it is only sufficient
at this point in time to determine whether or not there is -- there's
uncertainty as to what the clerk is.
If there is uncertainty, you've got to resolve the uncertainty, and
the only way you can do that is by court. An attorney general's
opinion is -- as the county attorney has said, means little or nothing
because you can find attorney general opinions that very clearly state
the clerk is a budget officer, you can find those that ambiguously state
they are both but don't really provide much guidance as to how they
deal as a fee officer versus a budget officer.
So are there three commissioners here who will agree that there's
uncertainty here that needs to be resolved? Ifthere is uncertainty that
needs to be resolved, then the only place you can resolve it is in a
court of law. It will do no good whatsoever to go to the attorney
general for another opinion because it is not binding in a court of law.
So why don't we just agree that there's uncertainty. It's to our
benefit and it is to the clerk's benefit to get this resolved. It gets us
closer to that -- to resolving one of these stumbling blocks that keeps
us from working closely together. Let's get it resolved, and whichever
way it comes out, we're going to play by those rules, and it should be
fairly simple, if I remember correctly.
It's -- there are very clear facts associated with this. The judge
just has to say, yeah, okay, it's this or that or it's both, and then that's
the end of the story. We should get a fairly quick hearing on it. It
shouldn't cost us much money, right? Ted Tripp's going to do this pro
bono.
So, you know, can we just have an agreement? I'd like to make a
Page 233
March 27,2007
motion that we proceed with this to clarify it rather than sitting here
and laying out all of our arguments about why it should be done that
way.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So at this point in time we got
a motion by Commissioner Coyle, second by Commissioner Coletta.
And the -- Commissioner Henning, we're back to you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I need to have my
question answered.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we did cut it short, but that was
Commissioner Coyle's request, but we'll continue the discussion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, that's fine. I
appreciate you recognizing that I do have a right to get my question
answered.
County Attorney -- or County Manager had a correspondence
yesterday, and it reverts back to 145. Statute 145?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you put that on the
visualizer. The Nabors and Giblin opinion you got also states 145,
and in 145 there's a resolution by the Board of Commissioners,
because that's who does resolutions, and an agreement. So where's the
agreement and where's the resolution? Do we have an agreement and
a resolution? Can somebody answer that?
MR. WEIGEL: We can answer that. And, again, we recognize
Mr. Coyle's discussion or recommendation regarding strategy, but,
yes, we can answer that.
So either Ms. Hubbard or Mr. Tripp, would you please respond.
MS. HUBBARD: Yes. I would answer that by saying that the
courts, contrary to the attorney general, have answered that question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, do we have --
MS. HUBBARD: But may I finish? Because the courts have
Page 234
March 27,2007
answered the question regarding whether or not you need an explicit
resolution, and they answered that question back in 1980.
And I would note for you that the attorney general opinions that
have been referenced today do not speak to court cases, but court
cases are controlling.
And in that court case, the Court basically said that if a Clerk of
Courts receives money from the county commission to operate his
office, even without a resolution, that specifically speaks to an
agreement, that the Clerk of Courts is a budget officer.
And the case is Escambia County versus Flowers (sic), and the
citation for that case is 390 So. 2nd, 386, and it is a First DCA
opinion. And in 2000, which is one year after the 1999 attorney
general opinion that you referenced, in 2000 the Florida Supreme
Court referred back to the Escambia County case.
Now, granted it was dicta, but the Court did say and did approve
the reasoning and the decision that was made by the Escambia County
court, which is -- ifI could summarize it, it's basically that if you are a
fee officer, you operate your office by your fees.
If you are a budget officer, you operate your office based upon
money that the Board of County Commissioners allocates to you to
operate your office. And -- which gets us back to the point -- one of
the points being that the county funds, including ad valorem taxes and
all public money, are subject to the discretionary spending of the
board and the board only. Discretionary spending of public funds, we
don't think, resides in any other office.
So if money to the extent of over $4 million is being spent
without oversight from the board, we basically need to know if that's
right or if it's wrong, which is the reason that we were seeking
declaratory relief.
And we do anticipate -- and I'd ask Ted to speak to this briefly.
We anticipate that this is solely a legal question which can be
answered by the Court, and we would hope that the clerk would join
Page 235
March 27, 2007
us in the legal action in saying, this is the proper way to get a
definitive answer, would be for both of us to go over to the Court and
say, are we right, the Board of County Commissioners, or is the clerk
right?
And if we could agree that that's the remedy that we want, I
would think a Court would entertain it fairly quickly.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. HUBBARD: And then we'd know.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner, why don't you just
call --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, you're not going to stymie
me. I am a client -- I am a client of, one of five, and I have a question
that you're trying to make -- have us make a decision, and I can't base
my decision without the question being asked.
Does the county commissioners have an agreement and a
resolution with the Clerk of Courts?
MS. HUBBARD: David, do you want me to speak to that also?
MR. WEIGEL: Go ahead, Jackie.
MS. HUBBARD: One of the things that our outside counsel did
examine -- and if you read his opinion again, you will see that he talks
-- Greg Stewart talks a great deal about, what are the facts that
determine whether a constitutional officer is a budget officer or a fee
officer.
In terms of the resolution, as you know, every budget year the
Board of County Commissioners approves a budget by resolution, and
within that resolution is the budget that was proposed by the Clerk of
Courts to you to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That's a resolution, thank
you. Do we have an agreement?
MS. HUBBARD: We don't have an agreement in the sense that
there's a piece of paper, a document that says, this is an agreement.
Page 236
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. HUBBARD: But bear in mind, the courts have said that you
don't really need either one because the determinant is not the
agreement or the resolution. The determinant is -- would be the facts
of how the particular Clerk of Courts in a particular county operates
his office.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you so much. I was
waiting for those.
MS. HUBBARD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, you'd be next.
Could I just have -- no, go ahead. I'll follow you, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'm just --I'm kind of -- I
wish Dwight or one of his representatives would have been here as
well.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right down here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. But she's just here to listen.
She's not here to defend anything.
And so I think the most fair and unbiased manner in which to
come up with a correct interpretation is just to take it to a judge, and I
would guess that the clerk would feel the same thing. I mean, we both
want an interpretation, and neither -- and we both have our own ideas
of what it means. We might as well just take it to a Court and let them
tell us and stop this bantering back and forth.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And a reply to that, ifI may. Thank
you very much. I'm glad that you did go before me, because that's the
way I feel, too. And -- but the thing is, is rather than leave everything
in suspended animation, maybe you might want to direct the chair to
write a letter to the clerk inviting him to join us to be able to bring this
to a swift and final conclusion and save the taxpayers a considerable
amount of funds.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I will do that, but our going to
court should not be conditioned upon, okay? I will add that request to
Page 237
March 27, 2007
my motion, that we take this before a judge to resolve it, that we invite
the clerk to join with us in seeking this decision from the Court. But if
the clerk declines to participate with us to do that, we should still take
it to the Court.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I wasn't putting a condition that ifhe
said no, we'd stop.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then by all means -- oh,
yeah. I think --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Just a polite letter of --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, we should. It should be ajoint
-- he must be as interested in getting this resolved as we are, and so
let's try to do it quickly. And by all means, send him a letter and
invite him to join us on this thing and see if we can't get it fixed pretty
quickly and stop all this bickering.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And with that, we have a motion by
Commissioner Coyle, a second by myself, Commissioner Coletta.
Is there any other comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor of the
motion, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And let the record show
Commissioner Henning was in opposition.
Fine. So now we're down to the -
Item #11
Page 238
March 27, 2007
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. MUDD: Public comment and general topics, paragraph 11.
MS. FILSON: No public comments.
Item #15
ST AFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. MUDD: Brings us to staff and commissioner general
communications.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right. Well, you have -- how about
yourself, Mr. Mudd. Do you have anything to share with us?
MR. MUDD: No, sir, I don't.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How about you, Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: No, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We'll start off with
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, thank you. Tomorrow
night is the first meeting that I'm going to sit down with some of the
fire district members on the consolidation. It starts at seven o'clock. I
think it's duly noticed. It's at Big Cypress Elementary, so I regret to
say that I cannot make it to the District 2 town hall meeting. I
apologize, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's okay. I understand.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: May I share with you something for
that meeting you're going to have?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's purely a suggestion, I had it
earlier. The discussion from the fire departments got so heated that I
didn't want to broach the subject, but it's just purely a thought that may
be able to get us to the next base that we need to go to, and that was
Page 239
March 27, 2007
looking to the countywide interlocal agreement with all the fire
departments, with all the fire districts that would set up a special --
what do you want to call it -- consolidation of the ALS engines to be
able to cover the whole area, and we would set it up in such a way that
it would be five commissioners be appointed by the governor, later to
be elected.
The idea being is real simple, that if we could get something like
that set up to that point where we had it separated from that, maybe
governed by five commissioners, that the next step could be, is
possibly take EMS, join it with that, and it would be the start of their
consolidation.
Just a thought. It's extremely rough. But maybe somewheres
along the line if somebody put it out there, it might be able to
embellish upon it and it may get us to the next step.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So let me get this right.
You would like an equal ALS program throughout the county --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- with the independent districts.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With the idea that we have not only
money from the districts itself, you know, where --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- they can contribute, but we also
have money from EMS, we have personnel, we could join them
together to be able to form this coalition effort.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now, is this -- who's
going to appoint this oversight?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, in the scheme that I have for
the whole thing, the idea that I got is, I think I'd be very uncomfortable
with this commission doing it, and I think the fire districts would be
too. There may be a number of people that could be put up for
consideration and the governor could appoint them. We could have
our state legislative body run something through that would be able to
Page 240
March 27, 2007
make it work.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What happens if you have a
democratic governor?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, listen, this is -- if somebody can
come up with a better idea, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But this is the beginning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I am there to be
a -- to have a dialogue --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- the board to have a dialogue
and a catalyst to resolve some of these issues, so I'm going to take
your suggestion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They might think it's stupid, but,
you know, that's their opinion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, ifit goes over great we'll give
you credit for it. If it doesn't go over, you can always blame me.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I won't blame you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can I just add something to that,
maybe make a friendly modification to that. I know that the word
consolidation is not a word that fire districts like. It seems to be
threatening. Maybe we could start calling this unity of command or
something.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I don't think --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Golden voice.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- they're opposed to, that
Commissioner. But right now, here's what I understand -- I want to
verify it tomorrow night -- but I did -- commissioner -- a fire
commissioner did tell me that Golden Gate, Corkscrew and
Immokalee are talking about consolidation, and then the issue that we
Page 241
March 27, 2007
got asked by Marco Island is to consolidate, too. So, I think -- you
know, it's happening, and if the right pieces are put together, the whole
thing might come together.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, okay, all right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I'll let you know in an open
meeting.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You'll report back to us at the next
meeting. Appreciate it.
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nothing, except I will note that all
of you guys have on black jackets and some form of red tie. But other
than that, I have nothing else to mention.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's a Republican thing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mine's blue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't look blue; you look black.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I just want to say that I
appreciate everybody's effort to keep the meeting moving forward
today. We have accomplished quite a bit.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. This question is directed to
Sue Filson. Sue?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I understand that I'm getting to the
bottom of my expense account. Can you tell me if there's a
commissioner that's got a fair amount of money in his budget so I
could ask that person for a loan?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can I volunteer something?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Since I am very frugal and I don't
go off on a lot of these junkets wasting the taxpayers' money, I do
have leftover money in my travel account that I will reluctantly give
up to those people who have overspent their travel accounts and I -- so
Page 242
March 27, 2007
you can take whatever -- well, not whatever, but -- how much --
MS. FILSON: I really prefer you give me an amount.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How much do you think is
appropriate?
MS. FILSON: Out of 4,000, I think you have 3,000 left.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. You need 1,000, and then
could it help several other commissioners or is it just to go to our
frequent flier?
MS. FILSON: I'm not sure that he'll use 1,000 for the rest of the
year because the F ACs are --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How much do you think will be
required?
MS. FILSON: Five hundred.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't know, probably.
MS. FILSON: And then the one sitting next to him is running
low, too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How much?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: A thousand.
MS. FILSON: Maybe 1,000 and split it up between--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right. I'll be happy to
make that transfer.
MS. FILSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And please note the names of the
people who are the spendthrifts here.
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Halas and Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: She did.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: She did.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. What else you going to do to
us?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Anyway -- thank you very much,
Fred. I really appreciate that. That was brutal.
Anyway, we did travel, we did travel to Tallahassee, and we did
Page 243
March 27, 2007
go around and talk to our elected representatives. And as everyone
knows, that it was interesting to find out the reception that we got up
there wasn't very pleasant. But, of course, we have the Senate to look
forward to. They haven't come up with any particular package, and
we're looking forward to seeing where they lead this.
So all I'll say is, as the legislative session winds down, we may
be -- or I'll speak for myself, I may be making another trip up to
Tallahassee, especially in the eleventh hour, especially to make sure
that the taxpayers here in Collier County and also the State of Florida
are represented, to make sure that we can address the future growth
that's going to take place here in the State of Florida, so --
CHAIRMAN COLETT A: Yes. And ifI may expound upon
that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure, go ahead.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: While the news was less than
encouraging, our local legislative delegation was very receptive to our
ideas and very supportive; however, they seem to be at the moment
severely outnumbered. But thank God for Mike Davis, Garrett
Richard (sic)--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Richter. Trudy Williams. Who else
-- who am I missing? I got distracted.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: David Rivera.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: David Rivera and --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: David Rivera, very much so, and Burt
Saunders.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, and also Grimsley.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yeah, Denise Grimsley.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Denise Grimsley.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I also want to bring out -- I didn't
get quite finished. I ran into Commissioner Coyle's favorite senator at
an outing -- in fact, it was Colin Powell's deal, and the senator was
looking for Commissioner Coyle so that he could make a public
Page 244
March 27, 2007
apology in regards to the newspaper article that was printed.
So I told the senator that I would deliver that message personally
to Commissioner Coyle. So, Commissioner Coyle, he wants to make
an apology to you for the statements that were made, and he said that
that was taken out of context by the newspaper. And I said, that
newspaper is always perfect with every comment that's made.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We gave you a lot ammunition here.
Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Larry Hannon seldom gets
it right -- wrong, wrong, wrong. I'm sorry, Larry. He seldom gets it
wrong. So I trust Larry in what he wrote. But nevertheless, that's
good to hear.
Have we made any progress in getting our legislators here for a
budgeting 101 class?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the letters were sent out.
Commissioner Coletta signed them. We have not received any
replies.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. It's going to be really
important. They're going to take a break here pretty shortly, and I
don't know of any reason why they couldn't come and spend some
time with us.
So I'm anxious to -- most of you have said, I believe, that the
common impression is in Tallahassee that local governments have too
much money and they just waste it, and nothing could be further from
the truth.
I will -- I will stack our budgeting and spending controls up
against the state's any day in the week, and I think we can demonstrate
we do a far better job than the state does in administering taxpayer
money.
But -- now the last thing is, are we compiling the votes of our
legislators on the issues that we think are important? Do we know
how they are voting in committee on these bills that we are opposing?
Page 245
March 27, 2007
Ifwe don't, I'd like to make a request to get a consolidation of all of
the votes of our legislative delegation on any of the bills that we either
support or oppose. And I'm going to -- and I'm going to rent a
billboard on Highway 41 and I'm going to post it there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is that going to be coming out of
your travel expenses?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. That's coming out of
the rest of my travel expenses.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's hitting them right between the
eyes with an olive branch.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. You brought up a point, and I
thought it was interesting. Something I learned while in Tallahassee.
They were talking about government spending and it's run amuck and
so forth, and then later on we heard that the reason they're saying that
is that different counties tax their people differently, or rather let me
say, appraise properties differently.
And I found this to be very interesting. We appraise properties at
their true value; whereas, in Dade County, which is where
Representative Rubio, Speaker of the House Rubio, lives and why he
has made the statements, they tax them on a highest and best use of a
property .
And someone in our contingent was telling us that he had a
seven-room motel is right on the water. The seven-room motel prime
location, but he is taxed for a 10-story condominium building because
that would be the highest and best use for his property. And, of
course, he cannot keep this seven-room motel any longer.
And I was amazed. I had no idea how differently other -- that
other counties could tax their people, and so then they get all of that
extra money, and that's where this is coming from.
MR. MUDD: I believe Senator Pruitt in our meeting confirmed
that in his comments.
Page 246
March 27, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My light's on for just a second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, it is. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I could make a comment very
briefly. That is one of the reasons that legislators should not be
proposing statewide tax reforms merely because they had an
experience in their county that was unfavorable. And the same thing
applies with growth management. We all have different problems, we
all have different solutions, and somehow we've got to get that point
across in Tallahassee.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're right.
With that, we're adjourned.
* * * *Commissioner Halas moved, seconded by Commissioner Fiala
and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Item # 16A 1 - Moved to Item # 1 ON
Item #16A2
A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION 2004-04 AND
COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION PERMIT NO. 59.648
"WINCHESTER LAKE COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION",
LOCATED IN SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 28
EAST TO ALLOW FOR INCREASED EXCAVATION TO A
DEPTH OF 30 FT - SINCE THE AREA LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF OIL WELL ROAD IS BEING CONSIDERED
FOR REZONING
Item # 16A3
Page 247
March 27,2007
THE RELEASE AND SA TISF ACTION OF LIEN FOR
PAYMENTS RECEIVED FOR THE FOLLOWING CODE
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS - AT A COST OF $10 EACH
(TOTALING $100) TO RECORD THE SATISFACTIONS OF
LIEN
Item #16A4
THE RELEASE AND SA TISF ACTIONS OF LIEN FOR
PAYMENTS RECEIVED FOR THE FOLLOWING CODE
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS: ROBERT CHIPMAN AND VICTOR
GEORGE - AT A COST OF $10 (TOTALING $20) EACH TO
RECORD THE SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN
Item #16A5 - Moved to Item #10M
Item # 16A6 - Moved to Item # 1 00
Item #16Bl
THE PURCHASE OF 5.15 ACRES OF UNIMPROVED
PROPERTY (PARCEL NO. 206) WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A STORMW A TER RETENTION AND
TREA TMENT POND FOR THE OIL WELL ROAD WIDENING
PROJECT. PROJECT NO. 60044 (FISCAL IMPACT: $569,784.50)
- LOCATED BETWEEN IMMOKALEE ROAD AND CAMP
KEAIS ROAD
Item # 16B2
AN ACCESS LICENSE BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT TO
Page 248
March 27, 2007
ALLOW ACCESS ACROSS COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY AT
NO ANNUAL COST - RELATED TO THE LIVINGSTON ROAD
CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FOR PARKING AND A FOOT
PATH FOR THE PUBLIC TO ACCESS THEIR BOARDWALK
Item #16B3
AN ACCESS EASEMENT AGREEMENT (AEA) BETWEEN
MORANDE ENTERPRISES, INC. (MORANDE) AND COLLIER
COUNTY TO PROVIDE FOR SHARED ACCESS AND
INTERCONNECTION FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED BETWEEN
DAVIS BOULEVARD AND RADIO ROAD - SHARED ACCESS
WILL IMPROVE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION AROUNG THAT
AREA
Item #16B4
THE PURCHASE OF IMPROVED PROPERTY (PARCEL NO.
130) WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT.
PROJECT NO. 60168 (FISCAL IMPACT: $567,450) - LOCATED
BETWEEN COLLIER BOULEVARD AND WILSON
BOULEVARD
Item # 16B5
THE AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT FOR
HALDEMAN CREEK DISPOSAL WITH LAKEVIEW DRIVE OF
NAPLES, LCC, A FLORIDA LIMITED COMPANY - LOCATED
SOUTH OF THE MAIN CHANNEL AND OFFERS SEVERAL
ACRES OF LAND
Page 249
March 27, 2007
Item # 16B6
WORK ORDER #QE-FT-3773-07-01 FOR A CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC. FOR RADIO
ROAD (C.R. 856) INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT
LIVINGSTON ROAD (C.R. 881), USING THE ANNUAL
CONTRACT FOR ROADWAY CONTRACTORS, CONTRACT
NO. 05-3773, PROJECT NO. 60016, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$328,044.13 - TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND RELIEVE
CONGESTION, WHICH WILL START IN LATE APRIL
Item #16Cl
RESOLUTION 2007-68: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
SA TISF ACTIONS OF LIEN FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL
ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED
PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR
THE 1991 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. FISCAL IMPACT IS
$30.00 TO RECORD THE SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN
Item #16C2
RESOLUTION 2006-69: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL
ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED
PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR
THE 1995 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. FISCAL IMPACT IS
$90.00 TO RECORD THE SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN
Item # 16C3
Page 250
March 27, 2007
RESOLUTION 2007-70: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
SA TISF ACTIONS 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
$200.00 TO RECORD THE SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN
Item #16C4
RECORDING OF SATISFACTIONS FOR CERTAIN WATER
AND/OR SEWER IMPACT FEE PAYMENT AGREEMENTS.
FISCAL IMPACT IS $127.00 TO RECORD THE
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN
Item #16C5
BID NUMBER 07-4114 HENDERSON CREEK SUBDIVISION
WATER DISTRIBUTION IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AMOUNT
OF $775,081.65 TO KYLE CONSTRUCTION INCORPORATED,
TO COMPLETE THE REHABILITATION OF THE WATER
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM TO SERVICE THE HENDERSON
CREEK SUBDIVISION, PROJECT 710101 - TO ADD A SECOND
WATER MAIN THAT WILL DECREASE SERVICE
INTERRUPTIONS
Item #16C6
ANNUAL CONTRACTS TO SELECTED FIRMS FOR
TRENCHLESS SEWER SYSTEM REHABILITATION
CONTRACTING SERVICES PER BID 07-4088, PROJECT 73050
Page 251
March 27, 2007
- AWARDED TO REYNOLDS INLINER AND MILLER
PIPELINE CORPORATION AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Item #16C7
UTILITY CONSULTING SERVICES, NOT TO EXCEED $9,500,
TO ASSIST THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER
DISTRICT (THE DISTRICT) AND THE FLORIDA
GOVERNMENT AL UTILITY AUTHORITY (FGUA) IN THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF WASTEWATER SERVICE RATES TO
PROVIDE BULK SERVICE TO GOLDEN GATE CITY (THE
CITY) AS SERVED BY FGUA, AND TO DEVELOP
WASTEWATER IMP ACT FEES FOR PROVIDING LONG TERM
BULK SERVICE TO THE CITY - AWARDED TO PUBLIC
RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC. (PRMG)
Item #16Dl
BID #07-4076 TO CHENEY BROTHERS AND VIST AR
SPECIALTY MARKETS/ROMA FOODS FOR CONCESSION
FOOD RESALE AND PAPER PRODUCTS AT NORTH COLLIER
REGIONAL PARK AT AN ESTIMATED COST OF $145,000 FOR
FY 07 - FOR PATRONS DURING NORMAL OPERATING
HOURS
Item # 16D2
MASTER AGREEMENTS RELATING TO GRANTS A WARDED
TO THE SERVICES FOR SENIORS PROGRAMS AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE MASTER
AGREEMENTS BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
Page 252
March 27,2007
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE AREA AGENCY ON
AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC - FOR THE
DELIVERY OF VARIOUS SERVICES TO THE COUNTY'S
ELDERLY PREVENTING PREMATURE AND COSTLY
INSTITUTIONAL PLACEMENT
Item #16D3
A GRANT APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF
APPLICATION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, AND THE SIGNATURE OF THE
CHAIRMAN, PERMITTING THE COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC
LIBRARY TO APPLY FOR A STATE CONSTRUCTION GRANT
IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000 FOR THE MARCO ISLAND
ROSE HALL - FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 4,000 SQUARE
FOOT ADDITION
Item # 16D4 - Moved to Item # 1 OK
Item # 16E 1
COLLIER COUNTY GROUP HEALTH AND FLEXIBLE
REIMBURSEMENT INSURANCE PLAN DOCUMENTS
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1,2007 - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 16E2
AN AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 2003-39 FOR THE
PURPOSE OF CHANGING ALL REFERENCES TO FUNDING
TRAFFIC EDUCATION TO DRIVER EDUCATION PROGRAMS,
INCREASING THE SURCHARGE AMOUNT THE CLERK OF
Page 253
March 27, 2007
COURTS MAY COLLECT ON ALL CIVIL TRAFFIC
PENALTIES FROM $3.00 PER PENALTY TO $5.00 PER
PENAL TY AND TO REQUIRE THAT EACH DRIVER
EDUCA TION PROGRAM RECEIVING FUNDS REQUIRE A
MINIMUM OF 30% OF A STUDENTS TIME BE BEHIND- THE-
WHEEL TRAINING AS AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 318.1215
OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES, ENTITLED THE DORI
SLOSBERG DRIVER EDUCATION SAFETY ACT
Item #16E3
SALE AND PURCHASE WITH BERNARD OETTING AND
GABRIELA OETTING FOR 2.28 ACRES UNDER THE
CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM,
AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $51,500 - LOCATED IN
GOLDEN GATE EST A TES ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE
ESTATES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Item #16F 1
TWO AFTER- THE-FACT LETTERS OF ENDORSEMENT TO
THE EAST NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT
FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES MATCHING GRANT
APPLICATIONS BEING SUBMITTED TO THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH - TO ACQUIRE SEVEN (7)
AUTOPULSE DEVICES, A "VEST COMPRESSION" DEVICE
THAT IMPROVES CPR
Item #16F2
A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT AND THE NATIONAL
Page 254
March 27, 2007
PARK SERVICE, BIG CYPRESS NATIONAL PRESERVE - TO
PROVIDE MUTUAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE IMMEDIATE
SURROUNDING AREAS
Item #16F3
REJECT BID # 07-4108 FOR THE PURCHASE OF EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES UNIFORMS - THE TWO RESPONDING
FIRMS DID NOT MEET THE COST NEEDED FOR THE
SPECIFIED LINE ITEMS AND THE PURCHASING
DEPARTMENT TO RE-SOLICIT BID
Item #16F4
A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE COMMUNITY
FOUNDA TION TO FUND THE ATTENDANCE OF STAFF TO A
CONFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,700 - FOR
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TO ATTEND THE NATIONAL
CONFERENCE ON COMMUNITY PREPAREDNESS IN
ALEXANDRIA, VA AT THE HILTON ALEXANDRIA MARK
CENTER ON JUNE 10-13,2007
Item #16F5 - Moved to Item #10L
Item #16G 1
SITE IMPROVEMENT GRANT AGREEMENT(S) BETWEEN
THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND A GRANT APPLICANT(S) WITHIN THE
BA YSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AREA - FOR APPLICANT, MARTHA
LOPERA, LOCATED AT 2080/2082 PEL TON AVENUE
Page 255
March 27, 2007
Item #16Hl
COMMISSIONER HALAS' REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT
FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE VIP KEY PRIVATE BANK
SPONSOR RECEPTION AT ALICO ARENA ON MARCH 23,
2007. $25.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HALAS'
TRAVEL BUDGET - PRESENTATION BY GENERAL COLIN L.
POWELL, USA (RET.)
Item #16H2
COMMISSIONER HALAS' REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT
FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE VETERAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT LUNCHEON, HONORING VOLUNTEER
DRIVERS ON MARCH 7, 2007 AT THE ELKS LODGE ON
RADIO ROAD. $16.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
HALAS' TRAVEL BUDGET
Item #16H3
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER PAID IN
ADV ANCE TO ATTEND THE EDC EXCELLENCE IN
INDUSTRY 2007 VIP KICKOFF CELEBRATION ON MARCH 26,
2007 AND IS REQUESTING REIMBURSEMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $19.95, TO BE PAID FROM HIS TRAVEL
BUDGET - HELD AT THE TOWN OF AVE MARIA
Page 256
March 27, 2007
Item #1611
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 257
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
March 27,2007
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS
DIRECTED:
A. Districts:
(1) Port of the Islands Community Development District: Document
from Minutes of Special Meeting of January 22, 2007; Minutes of
October 13, 2006; Agenda for October 13, 2006.
(2) Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District: Five Year Plan
2007-2012.
H:\DA T A\FRONT DESK - 2007\2007 Miscellaneous Correspondence\032707 _ misc _ corr.doc
March 27, 2007
Item #16J1
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 03, 2007 TO
MARCH 09, 2007 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE OFFICIAL
RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 10, 2007
THROUGH MARCH 16, 2007 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 1613
A PUBLIC NOTICE TO BE PUBLISHED OF ONE PUBLIC
HEARING REGARDING SHERIFF HUNTER'S RECOMMENDED
ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH POLICY REGARDING
PHYSICAL SEPARATION AT EMERGENCY SHELTERS
BETWEEN POTENTIAL SEX CRIME VICTIMS AND SEXUAL
PREDATORS AND SEXUAL OFFENDERS, AND TO PLACE
THIS RECOMMENDED ORDINANCE ON THE BOARD'S
SUMMARY AGENDA
Item #16Kl
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO PARCEL 116 IN
THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V DA VID
LAWRENCE MENTAL HEALTH CENTER, INC., ET AL, CASE NO.
06-0567-CA (SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD PROJECT NO.
62081). (FISCAL IMPACT: $27,600) - FOR PROPERTY
ACQUIRED BY ENTRY OF AN "ORDER OF TAKING" ON
AUGUST 4, 2006
Page 258
March 27, 2007
Item #16K2
REPLACE OR AMEND COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO.
81-42, AS AMENDED, THE LOCAL OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE
T AX ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE THE PHRASE LOCAL
OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE TAX TO LOCAL BUSINESS TAX
AND TO REVISE THE TERM LICENSE TO RECEIPT AS IT
RELATES TO LOCAL BUSINESS TAXES
Item # 1 7 A
RESOLUTION 2007-71: AVESMT-2006-AR-I0745, TO
DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTYS AND
THE PUBLICS INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE FIFTEEN
FOOT WIDE UTILITY EASEMENTS B & C AS RECORDED IN
AND CREATED BY OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1648, PAGES
1502-1506 AND LYING OVER PARCEL 1 & 2, ACCORDING TO
A PLAT OF BERKSHIRE COMMONS PARCELS 1, 2 & 3, FILED
IN PLAT BOOK 38, PAGE 30 AND 31 OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SAID
V ACA TION AREA BEING MORE PAR TICULARL Y
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A
Item #17B
ORDINANCE 2007-33: SE-2007-AR-11284, AN ORDINANCE TO
CORRECT A SCRIVENER'S ERROR IN ORDINANCE NUMBER
02-55, FOR THE BALDRIDGE PUD, TO CORRECT THE
OMISSION OF STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CODE (SIC) 6021
FOR COMMERCIAL BANKS LOCATED IN SECTION 18,
TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST
Page 259
March 27, 2007
Item #17C
ORDINANCE 2007-34: PUDZ-2005-AR-7820 HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY, REPRESENTED BY
LAURA SPURGEON, OF JOHNSON ENGINEERING, IS
REQUESTING A REZONE FROM THE AGRICULTURAL -
MOBILE HOME OVERLAY (A-MHO) ZONING DISTRICT TO
THE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD)
ZONING DISTRICT TO CONSIST OF AN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OF 400 SINGLE-
FAMILY, ZERO LOT LINE, TWO-FAMILY, OR MULTI-
F AMIL Y DWELLING UNITS IN A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN
AS THE KAICASA RPUD. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY,
CONSISTING OF 100 ACRES, IS LOCATED ALONG THE
NORTH SIDE OF STATE ROAD 29, EAST OF VILLAGE OAKS
ELEMENT ARY SCHOOL, AND IS APPROXIMA TEL Y 2 MILES
EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF STATE ROAD 29 AND
COUNTY ROAD 846
*******
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5:40 p.m.
Page 260
March 27, 2007
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
~~~
JAMEg' COLETTA, Chairman
. t';',I'. ~ <'. . '~:::~ ,/
A TrEST: .....
D:Wl~I-I'r ~ S.ROCK, CLERK
?o--t: ., CUic:( Q ~t ( DC
, _$1 a$ to Chalnl4ft s
S 1 Qna.t'lr~ OIl 1 . I
These minutes approved by the Board on 4- () 4 10+-. , as
presented ~ or as corrected I
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY
COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INe., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 261