BCC Minutes 07/13/2021 RJuly 13, 2021
Page 1
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida
July 13, 2021
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
Chairman: Penny Taylor
William L. McDaniel, Jr.
Rick LoCastro
Burt L. Saunders
Andy Solis
ALSO PRESENT:
Mark Isackson, County Manager
Amy Patterson, Deputy County Manager
Sean Callahan, Deputy County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal K. Kinzel, Clerk of the Circuit Court & Comptroller
Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations
Page 1
July 13, 2021
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
July 13, 2021
9:00 AM
Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 – Chair – CRAB Co-Chair
Commissioner William L. McDaniel, Jr., District 5; - Vice Chair - CRAB Co-Chair
Commissioner Rick LoCastro, District 1
Commissioner Andy Solis, District 2
Commissioner Burt Saunders, District 3
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO 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.
REQUESTS TO PETITION 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.”
PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A
MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
Page 2
July 13, 2021
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
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.
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, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DIVISION LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend Beverly Duncan, Member of the Naples United Church of Christ
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (ex
parte disclosure provided by commission members for consent agenda.)
B. June 8, 2021 BCC Meeting Minutes
3. AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS
A. EMPLOYEE
1) Recommendation to recognize Heather Meyer, Growth Management
Department, Operations Support as the June 2021 Employee of the
Page 3
July 13, 2021
Month.
B. ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS
C. RETIREES
D. EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation recognizing Crystal Lake RV Resort as recipient of the Waste
Reduction Awards Program (WRAP) award, for contributing to the greater
good of Collier County by advocating the "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle"
message, thereby helping to prolong the usable life of the Collier County
Landfill. Presentation of the proclamation and a plaque will be conducted by
county staff at the Crystal Lake RV Resort.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation of the Collier County Business of the Month for July 2021 to
Hole Montes.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT
OR FUTURE AGENDA
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. NOTE: This item has been continued from the June 8, 2021 BCC
Meeting. Recommendation to adopt the proposed amendments to the Rural
Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the Collier County Growth Management
Plan (GMP), Ordinance 89-05, as amended, and to transmit the amendments
to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) and other
statutorily required agencies. (Adoption Hearing) (PL20190002292) (Mike
Bosi, Planning and Zoning Division Director) (District 5)
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Page 4
July 13, 2021
A. Recommendation to extend the Immokalee Impact Fee Installment Payment
Pilot Program, which provides for installment payments of impact fees for
new construction located within the Immokalee Community Redevelopment
Area, for one year and modify the payment terms and related program fees
in order to determine if such changes improve program participation.
(Commissioner McDaniel's Request) (District 5)
B. This item to be heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m. This Item continued
from the June 8, 2021 and June 22, 2021 BCC Meetings.
Recommendation for the Board to consider adoption of a County Ordinance
establishing Collier County as a Bill of Rights Sanctuary County.
(Commissioner McDaniel's Request) (All Districts)
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This Item to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Recommendation to adopt a resolution
approving the expansion of the boundaries of the Collier Mosquito Control
District, pursuant to Section 388.211, Florida Statutes. (Introduced by John
Mullins, Communications, Government, and Public Affairs Division
Director) (All Districts)
B. Recommendation to adopt a resolution establishing Proposed Millage Rates
as the Maximum Property Tax Rates to be levied in FY 2022 and Reaffirm
the Advertised Public Hearing dates in September 2021 for the Budget
approval process. (Edward Finn, Director - Corporate Financial Planning
and Management Services) (All Districts)
C. Recommendation to approve a Resolution directing the County Manager to
take immediate action to make the minimum necessary repairs required to
facilitate the transport of emergency service vehicles on 42nd Avenue SE
and approve all necessary Budget Amendments. (Michelle Arnold, Public
Transit & Neighborhood Enhancement Services Division Director)
(District 5)
D. Recommendation to increase Purchase Order No. 4500204651 issued to Q.
Grady Minor & Associates in the amount of $5,427,219.00 for the "Palm
River Public Utilities Renewal Project", Tasks 2 and 3 of Agreement 19-
7523, Projects #70257 and #60234; and authorize the necessary budget
Page 5
July 13, 2021
amendments. (Tom Chmelik, Public Utilities Engineering and Project
Management Division Director) (District 2)
E. Recommendation to accept the Water, Wastewater, Irrigation Quality Water,
and Wholesale Potable Water User Rate and Fee Study and direct the
County Manager or his designee to advertise a resolution amending
Schedules One, Two, Three, Four, and Five of Appendix A to Section Four
of Collier County Ordinance No. 2001-73, as amended, titled the Collier
County Water-Sewer District Uniform Billing, Operating, and Regulatory
Standards Ordinance No. 2001-73, as amended, with an effective date of
October 1, 2021. (Amia Curry, Manager, Public Utilities Financial and
Operational Support) (All Districts)
F. Recommendation to accept the Solid Waste Rate Study and Financial
Forecast that supports an annual average increase in tipping fees of 3.25%
and unifies the solid waste disposal rates among Service Districts I and II,
and to direct staff to incorporate the recommended tipping fee rates into the
annual rate resolutions, that will supersede Resolution 2020-154, as
amended, for fiscal years 2022-2024. (Kari Hodgson, Solid and Hazardous
Waste Management Division Director) (All Districts)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. CONSENT AGENDA All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 6
July 13, 2021
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
1) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Maple Ridge at Ave Maria
Phase 7A, (Application Number PL20200002567) approval of the
standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval
of the amount of the performance security. (District 5)
2) Recommendation to approve a Resolution for final acceptance of the
private roadway and drainage improvements, and acceptance of the
plat dedications, for the final plat of Addison Place, Application
Number PL20170004121; and authorize the release of the
maintenance security. (District 3)
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the
potable water utility facilities for the Quail Creek Plaza,
PL20210000816. (District 3)
4) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the sewer utility
facilities for Moorings Park at Grande Lake - Phase Three
(Clubhouse), PL20210001194. (District 4)
5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the
potable water utility facilities for the Inland Village, PL20210000392.
(District 1)
6) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer facilities for Davis Crossings, PL20120001771 and
PL20210000904, accept the conveyance of a portion of the potable
water and sewer facilities, and authorize the County Manager, or his
designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) in the
amount of $59,162.94 to the Project Engineer or the Developer’s
designated agent. (District 3)
7) Recommendation to approve a resolution approving Final Acceptance
Page 7
July 13, 2021
of potable water, wastewater, and non-potable irrigation water
facilities, and related conveyances, for all Outstanding Utilities
Projects that qualify for Final Acceptance, authorize the release of
related Utilities Performance Securities, and authorize the transfer of
the associated Final Acceptance Obligations Cash Bond(s) to the
Collier County Public Utilities Department. (This is a companion item
to #17B. Both items must be either approved or denied together on
today’s agenda.) (All Districts)
8) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a
Performance Bond in the amount of $25,000 which was posted as a
guaranty for Excavation Permit Number PL20190002540 for work
associated with the Shoppes at Fiddler’s Creek. (District 1)
9) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a
Performance Bond in the amount of $42,820, which was posted as a
guaranty for Excavation Permit Number PL20180001208, for work
associated with Maple Ridge Amenity Center – Lake #6A Expansion.
(District 5)
10) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid ("ITB") No. 21-7837
"Purchase and Delivery of Aggregates" to Grippo Pavement
Maintenance Inc. and J & Y Group Enterprises LLC, and authorize
the Chair to sign the attached Agreements. (All Districts)
11) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien,
with an accrued value of $67,513.21 for payment of $11,857.71, in the
code enforcement actions entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Albert Houston, Sr., Code Enforcement Board Case No. 2006070939
CEB No. 2007-64, relating to property Folio #25631120101, Collier
County, Florida. (District 5)
12) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien,
with an accrued value of $62,600 for payment of $700 in the code
enforcement action titled Board of County Commissioners v. Chad
Barancyk, relating to property located at 1974 Countess Ct, Collier
County, Florida. (District 2)
13) Recommendation to provide after-the-fact approval of the submittal of
the 2021 Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and
Page 8
July 13, 2021
Equity (RAISE) Grant application, sponsored by the United States
Department of Transportation, for the Golden Gate Parkway
Complete Streets Project, in the amount of $31,249,450.
(All Districts)
14) Recommendation to approve a Developer Agreement providing for
the acquisition of land and easements for roadway and related
improvements at the entrances to Greyhawk, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension (Project No. 60168). (All Districts)
15) Recommendation to approve an agreement between Collier County
and Olde Florida Golf Club for the installation and maintenance by
the property owner of landscaping in the right-of-way along the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project and the acquisition of land
(Parcel 172FEE) required for construction of the Project. (Project No.
60168.) (All Districts)
16) Recommendation to approve a Purchase Agreement for the
acquisition of a fee interest in unimproved land in Immokalee (Parcel
121FEE) needed for construction and maintenance access to
stormwater drainage improvements for the Eden Gardens segment of
the Immokalee Stormwater Improvement Project No. 60143 in the
amount of $1,700. (District 5)
17) Recommendation to approve a Purchase and Sale Agreement to
acquire a fee interest in unimproved land on Auto Ranch Road (Parcel
112FEE) needed for the stormwater management improvements as
part of Lake Park Flow Way Project No. 60246 in the amount of
$144,200, and to authorize the necessary budget amendments.
(District 1)
18) Recommendation to approve a Purchase and Sale Agreement to
acquire a fee interest in unimproved land on Auto Ranch Road (Parcel
110FEE) needed for the stormwater management improvements as
part of Lake Park Flow Way Project No. 60246 in the amount of
$144,200, and to authorize the necessary budget amendments.
(District 1)
19) Recommendation to approve a work order with Humiston & Moore
Engineers to provide professional support services for the application
Page 9
July 13, 2021
of a modification to Permit No. 0142538-018-JM to allow dredged
sand to be placed on Delnor-Wiggins State Park beach, under the
current library services contract 18-7432-CZ, for time and material
not to exceed $36,102.00, authorize the necessary budget amendment,
authorize the Chairman to execute the work order and make a finding
that this item promotes tourism. (All Districts)
20) Recommendation to approve the selection committee’s ranking of
Request for Professional Services (“RPS”) No. 21-7881, “Old Lely
Utilities Improvements,” and authorize staff to begin contract
negotiations with the top ranked firm, Johnson Engineering, Inc.
(District 1)
21) Recommendation to direct staff to advertise an ordinance amending
Ordinance No. 2019-01, the Floodplain Management Ordinance, to
allow the interior portions of enclosed areas below elevated buildings
and structures to be temperature-controlled. (All Districts)
22) Recommendation to approve the selection committee’s final ranking
for Request for Professional Services (“RPS”) No. 21-7857, “Design-
Build Services of Golden Gate Parkway over Santa Barbara Canal
Bridge Replacement,” and authorize staff to begin contract
negotiations with the top-ranked firm, Thomas Marine Construction,
Inc. so that staff can bring a proposed agreement back for the Board’s
consideration at a subsequent meeting. (District 3)
23) Recommendation to approve a resolution amending the
Administrative Code for Land Development, which was created by
Ordinance No. 2013-57, to change the timing of the soil and/or
groundwater sampling results for golf course conversion, by
amending Chapter Three, Quasi-Judicial Procedures with a Public
Hearing, more specifically Section K, Compatibility Design Review
and Chapter Four, Administrative Procedures, Section N, Intent to
Convert Application for Golf Course Conversions; and to increase the
mailed public notification distance requirement for land use petitions
within the Rural and Urban Golden Gate Estates of the Golden Gate
Area Master Plan by amending Chapter Eight, Public Notice -
Generally, Contents, Categories of Notice, and Notice Recipients,
Section C, and providing an effective date. (This is a companion item
to #17C) (All Districts)
Page 10
July 13, 2021
24) Recommendation to award Request for Professional Services (“RPS”)
No. 21-7847, “Goodlette-Frank Road Ditch Improvements Design
Services” to Water Resources Management Associates, Inc., in the
total amount of $598,817, authorize the Chair to sign the attached
Agreement, and authorize the necessary budget amendment(s).
(Project No. 60102) (District 4)
25) Request that the Board of County Commissioners determine a valid
public purpose and authorize payment, in the amount of $650, for
Collier County Planning Commissioner to attend Florida Chamber of
Commerce 35th Annual Environmental Permitting Summer School,
an Environmental Permitting Seminar for the dates of July 21-23,
2021. (All Districts)
26) Recommendation to approve Modifications to Subgrant Agreement
Nos. H0452, H0459, and H0469 with the Florida Division of
Emergency Management. Recommendation to extend the period of
performance for Agreements H0452 Freedom Park Pump Station and
H0459 Upper Gordon River Channel Improvements to November 30,
2022, and to extend the period of performance for Agreement #H0469
Pine Ridge Estates Stormwater Improvement to December 31, 2021
(Project No. 60102 and 60126) (District 4)
27) Recommendation to approve the award of Invitation to Bid (“ITB”)
No. 21-7852-ST “Bridge Replacement-Bridge Package D-1 Bridge-
Grant Funded” to Quality Enterprises USA, Inc. in the amount of
$2,664,766.70 and authorize the Chair to sign the attached agreement
related to Project #66066 - “Eleven Bridge Replacements east of SR
29” and approve the necessary budget amendments. (District 5)
28) Recommendation to approve the award of Invitation to Bid (“ITB”)
No. 21-7887 “Randall Blvd at Everglades Blvd Intersection
Improvements” to Pavement Maintenance, LLC. in the amount of
$1,109,001.92 and authorize the Chair to execute the attached
construction services agreement and approve the attached budget
amendment. (District 5)
29) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
Local Agency Program (LAP) Agreement in the amount of
Page 11
July 13, 2021
$2,099,296 with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to
receive reimbursement for the replacement of Bridge No. 030138 on
Immokalee Road (CR 846), related to Project #66066 - “Eleven
Bridge Replacements east of SR 29”, to execute a Resolution
memorializing the Board’s action, and to authorize the necessary
budget amendment. (District 4)
30) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager or his designee to
collaborate with the Naples Botanical Garden, Inc., regarding the
installation of landscaping materials on Davis Boulevard (SR 84)
from Santa Barbara Boulevard to Collier Boulevard, and direct the
County Manager or his designee to apply for construction grant
funding opportunities with the Florida Department of Transportation
(“FDOT”). (District 3)
31) Recommendation to award Request for Professional Services (“RPS”)
No. 20-7818, “Design Services for Upper Gordon River
Improvements,” to Johnson Engineering, Inc., in the total amount of
$1,024,166, authorize the Chair to sign the attached Agreement, and
authorize the necessary budget amendments. (Project No. 60102)
(District 4)
32) Recommendation to approve the submittal of a Derelict Vessel
Removal grant application for $14,455 to the Florida Fish and
Wildlife Commission for the removal of one (1) derelict vessel from
Collier County waterways at no cost to the County and authorize the
Chairman to execute the grant application. (All Districts)
33) Recommendation to appoint Trinity Scott, Growth Management
Deputy Department Head, to execute the Federal Transit
Administration’s (“FTA”) annual certifications and assurances for
Board approved grants and grant applications through the FTA’s
Transit Award Management System (“TrAMS”) system, and
authorize the Chair to sign the Designation of Signature Authority
form. (All Districts)
34) Recommendation to authorize the necessary budget amendments to
reallocate funds within the Growth Management Department
Stormwater Capital Fund 325 and Stormwater Bond Fund 327.
(All Districts)
Page 12
July 13, 2021
35) Recommendation to direct the County Manager or his designee to
work with the Florida Department of Transportation to advance FPN
4258432 – I-75 (SR 93) at SR 951 Interchange Improvement from
State Fiscal Year 24/25 to 22/23 (District 1)
36) Recommendation to authorize Budget Amendments for the Growth
Management Department in the amounts of $4,100,000, to allocate
Infrastructure Surtax Funding to 16th Street NE Bridge (Project
#60212). (District 5)
37) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to sign a
cooperation agreement with the South Florida Water Management
District, Florida Forestry Service, and the County to provide for the
implementation of the Picayune Strand Restoration Project, which is a
component of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, and to
enter into Mutual General Releases respect to various agreements
between the Board and the State with respect to any rights the County
may have, if any, to Public Access within the Picayune Strand.
(All Districts)
38) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve Petition VAC-PL20200000761, to disclaim, renounce and
vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the Utility
Easement as recorded in Official Record Book 1435, Page 2017 of the
public records of Collier County, Florida located approximately 1000-
feet east of U.S. 41 and Davis Boulevard (S.R. 858), south of Davis
Boulevard, within lots 14 & 15 of Triangle Lake, as recorded in Plat
Book 4, Page 38 of the public records of Collier County, Florida in
Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,
Florida. (District 4)
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as
the Community Redevelopment Agency Board, approve and authorize
the Chairman to execute a Landscape Improvement Grant Agreement
between the Community Redevelopment Agency and Nicholas and
Page 13
July 13, 2021
Elizabeth Reid in the amount of $2,500 for the property located at
2841 Shoreview Drive, Naples, Florida 34112 located within the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area.
(District 4)
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as
the Community Redevelopment Agency Board, approve and authorize
the Chairman to execute a Site Improvement Grant Agreement
between the Community Redevelopment Agency and Nicholas and
Elizabeth Reid in the amount of $6,715.50 for the property located at
2841 Shoreview Drive, Naples, Florida 34112 located within the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area.
(District 4)
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as
the Community Redevelopment Agency Board, approve and authorize
the Chairman to execute a Commercial Building Improvement Grant
Agreement between the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
and Southern Region Development, LLC, in the amount of
$30,000.00 for the property located within the Bayshore Gateway
Triangle Community Redevelopment Area at 2600 Davis Boulevard.
(District 4)
4) Recommendation to approve the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Public
Art Plan (Plan) for the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community
Redevelopment Area and authorize staff to submit a proposed change
to the Land Development Code related to murals in the Bayshore
Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area. (District 4)
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve a Resolution and Satisfactions of Lien
for the 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995 Solid Waste Collection and
Disposal Services Special Assessments where the county has received
payment in full satisfaction of the liens. Fiscal impact is $68.50 to
record the Satisfaction of Lien. (District 4)
2) Recommendation to accept the donation of 2 Spinner Bowls and 1 Tip
Carousel with Brace from the Northside Kiwanis Foundation Inc. and
approve the Temporary Right of Entry Agreement with Precision
Page 14
July 13, 2021
Contracting Services, Inc. to install donated playground equipment at
the Immokalee Community Park. (District 5)
3) Recommendation to approve a Certification of Financial
Responsibility required by the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection in connection with the renewal of an existing permit to
Operate a Non-Hazardous Class 1 Injection Well System at Collier
County's South County Regional Water Treatment Plant (SCRWTP)
Facility on City Gate Drive. (District 1)
4) Recommendation to terminate Agreement #20-7804 Janitorial
Services with Clean Space, Inc. for convenience, and activating with
secondary vendors, United States Service Industries, Inc., d/b/a USSI,
American Facility Services, Inc., and High Sources, Inc., as the
primary vendors for janitorial services under the agreement. (All
Districts)
5) Recommendation to approve a Second Amendment to City of Naples
Airport Authority Leasehold Agreement Land Lease North Quadrant
Land Fill Site for the Naples Recycling Center on behalf of Solid
Waste Division. (District 4)
6) Recommendation to approve a District Office Lease Amendment with
Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart for continued use of County-owned
office space. (District 1)
7) Recommendation to approve the selection committee’s ranking of
Request for Professional Services (“RPS”) No. 21-7884, “Design
Services for New Chiller Plant Building K, Jail Generator and
Platform,” authorize staff to begin contract negotiations with the top
ranked firm, Matern Professional Engineering, Inc., to bring a
proposed agreement back for the Board’s consideration at a future
meeting. (District 1)
8) Recommendation to approve a purchase order to US Water Services
Corporation, in the amount of $435,105.01, Request for Quotation
#19-7622-302.25, “Pump Station No. 302.25 Rehabilitation,” and
authorize the necessary budget amendment (Project Number 70145).
(District 1)
Page 15
July 13, 2021
9) Recommendation to approve the County’s standard form Temporary
Access Easement Agreement (“Agreement”) with an added provision
that provides an allowance for reasonable attorney fees to review the
Agreement. (District 5)
10) Recommendation to approve updated language to the Right of Entry
and Perpetual Driveway Access and Maintenance Agreement form
that is utilized for the Solid Waste Division’s Designated Driveway
Program. (All Districts)
11) Recommendation to approve an Interlocal Agreement with the District
School Board of Collier County, Florida to facilitate the statutory land
exchange of property required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road
Extension. (District 5)
12) Recommendation to approve Change Order #1 to Purchase Order No.
4500209955, “Buildings C1/C2 Reliable Upgrades” issued under
Agreement No. 19-7592, Building Automation Energy Management
Services, from Juice Technologies, Inc. d/b/a Plug Smart (“Plug
Smart”), in the amount of $98,157.75 (Project No. 50221) (District 1)
13) Recommendation to reallocate funding within the Public Utilities
Sewer User Fee Capital Project Fund (414). (District 2)
14) Recommendation to approve the selection committee’s final ranking
and authorize staff to enter contract negotiations with the top-ranked
firm, O-A-K/Florida, Inc. d/b/a Owen-Ames-Kimball Company,
related to Request for Proposal (“RFP”) No. 21-7883-ST
“Construction Manager at Risk for Main Campus Upgrade (MCU).”
(District 1)
15) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners approves a
Lease Agreement with United States Senator Rick Scott for use of
County-owned office space within the Administration Building at the
Main Government Center. (District 1)
16) Recommendation to award Request for Quotation #2021-200 “Growth
Management Department (GMD) Parking Garage Rehabilitation
Project,” under Agreement No. 19-7525, Annual Agreement for
Page 16
July 13, 2021
General Contractor Services, to EBL Partners LLC., in the amount of
$749,900 and authorize the necessary budget amendment. (District 4)
17) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the
Florida Department of Emergency Management Hazard Mitigation
Grant #H0419 agreement modification for fifty-three (53) portable
generators, with a 25% match obligation requirement and approve the
necessary budget amendments. (Project No. 33667) (All Districts)
18) Recommendation to approve a Utility Easement within County Right-
of-Way for existing and proposed wastewater facilities at an estimated
cost not to exceed $50, Project #70014.3. (District 2)
19) Recommendation to approve a First Amendment to Agreement No.
19-7525, “Annual Agreement for General Contractors,” for County-
wide general contractor services with Chris-Tel Company of
Southwest Florida, Inc. d/b/a Chris Tel Construction, Wright
Construction Group, Inc., Capital Contractors, LLC, Compass
Construction, Inc. and EBL Partners, LLC. (All Districts)
20) Recommendation to approve an Addendum to the Orange Tree
Integration Agreement, authorizing the County to vacate 7+/- acres of
the water treatment plant portion at the former Orange Tree Utility
Company’s treatment plant property, which is no longer required by
the County. (District 5)
21) Recommendation to approve attached Change Order No. 2 to
Agreement No. 19-7650, “Golden Gate Golf Course Redevelopment
Planning and Engineering," with Davidson Engineering, Inc.,
authorize the Chair to sign the attached Change Order, and authorize
staff to negotiate Phases Two and Three under the Agreement, so that
a proposed amendment may be brought back for the Board’s
consideration at a subsequent meeting. (Project Number 80412)
(District 3)
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve an “After-the-Fact” contract
Amendment, corresponding Attestation Statement with the Area
Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc., for the Community
Page 17
July 13, 2021
Care for the Elderly grant program for Services for Seniors to
decrease the allocation and the supporting Budget Amendment.
(All Districts)
2) Recommendation to approve an “After-the-Fact” amendment and an
attestation statement with Area Agency on Aging for Southwest
Florida, Inc., for the Emergency Home Energy Assistance Program to
amend contract language and replace attachments. (All Districts)
3) Recommendation to accept and appropriate a donation of $2,500 from
the Naples Woman’s Club to support the Collier County Public
Library’s Pee-Wee Summer Reading Program and authorize the
necessary Budget Amendment. (All Districts)
4) Recommendation to approve an “After-the-Fact” first amendment and
attestation statement with the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest
Florida, Inc., Coronavirus Consolidated Appropriations Act funding
under the Older American Act grant program for the Collier County
Services for Seniors Program to revise allocations for services, update
contract language, and authorize the necessary Budget Amendment.
(Net Fiscal Impact $64,733.40) (All Districts)
5) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairperson to sign the
First Amendment to the Drug Court Discretionary Grant Program
Agreement between Collier County and the David Lawrence Mental
Health Center, Inc., and the Office of Justice Programs Checklist to
Determine Subrecipient or Contractor Classification. (All Districts)
6) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairperson to sign the
First Amendment to the subrecipient agreement between Collier
County and the Collier County Sheriff’s Office, to increase the award
amount by $16,862. (All Districts)
7) Recommendation to approve a First Amendment to Agreement No.
20-041-NS with Commercial Energy Specialists, LLC for the
previously approved single-source purchase of BECS Technology
chemical and pool filtration system, parts, and materials for the Sun-
N-Fun Lagoon, increase the authorized expenditures under the
Agreement, and provide for an annual pricing update and discount
terms. (All Districts)
Page 18
July 13, 2021
8) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairperson to sign
three (3) subrecipient agreements between Collier County and
Immokalee Fire Control District ($225,000), Legal Aid Service of
Broward County, Inc., d/b/a Legal Aid Service of Collier County
($308,382), and Youth Haven, Inc., ($682,000) to assist in the
prevention, preparation, and response to COVID-19 under the
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG CV) program.
(All Districts)
9) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairperson to sign
two (2) agreements between Collier County and (a) Naples Senior
Center at JFCS, Inc., and (b) Redlands Christian Migrant Association
for COVID-related activities under the Collier County Assistance
Program. (All Districts)
10) Recommendation to approve the 2022-2024 Urban County
Cooperation Agreement with the City of Naples, authorize the
chairperson to sign the associated agreement and resolution, and
authorize staff to forward the supporting documentation to the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development. (All Districts)
11) Recommendation to waive the Board-approved rental fee to allow the
Immokalee Pioneer Museum at Roberts Ranch to host the Farm City
BBQ 2021 at no cost to Farm City BBQ of Collier County, Inc.
(District 5)
12) Recommendation to approve and authorize the chairperson to sign one
(1) mortgage satisfaction for the State Housing Initiatives Partnership
loan program in the amount of $5,200 and authorize the associated
Budget Amendment. (All Districts)
13) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairperson to sign the
Fourth Amendment between Collier County and Prestige Home
Centers, Inc., to extend the agreement term and increase funding in
the amount of $44,170 for the State Housing Initiatives Partnership
Demolition and/or Replacement of Manufactured Housing program.
(All Districts)
Page 19
July 13, 2021
14) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 21-7894, “NW
and SW Corner of Bluebill Avenue and Vanderbilt Drive Irrigation
and Landscape,” to Hannula Landscaping and Irrigation, Inc., in the
amount of $136,264.90, and authorize the Chair to sign the attached
agreement. (District 2)
15) Recommendation to approve the FY2020 Annual Progress Report of
the Collier County Transit Development Plan and authorize its
submission to the Florida Department of Transportation.
(All Districts)
16) Recommendation to approve the reallocation of previously approved
Beach Park Facilities funding within the existing Barefoot Beach
Parking and Road project and to make the finding that the
expenditures promote tourism. (All Districts)
17) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairperson to sign an
agreement between Tidal Basin Government Consulting, LLC, acting
as a repository of grant recipient information, and Collier County for
the purpose of data sharing between the State of Florida Department
of Children and Families “OUR Florida” program and the U.S.
Treasury Emergency Rental Assistance program administered by
Collier County to assure no duplication of benefits. (All Districts)
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve an Assumption Agreement assigning all
rights, duties and benefits, and obligations to Commercial Energy
Specialists, LLC, under Agreements #20-041-NS “BECS Chemical
and Pool Filtration Systems” and #18-7376 “Non-Bulk Chemicals,
Reagents, and Pool Supplies.” (All Districts)
2) Recommendation to award Agreement No. 21-005-NS, “Support By
the Hour Agreement,” with Safran Helicopter Engines USA, Inc., for
helicopter engine maintenance and parts replacement for the recently
acquired 2019 Airbus helicopter, and approve annual expenditures in
excess of $50,000 as a sole source. (All Districts)
3) Recommendation to approve the removal of uncollectible accounts
receivables in the amount of $4,015.00 from the financial records of
Page 20
July 13, 2021
the Emergency Medical Services Division in accordance with
Resolution No. 2006-252 and authorize the Chairman to execute the
attached Resolution. (All Districts)
4) Recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing the removal of
8,023 ambulance service accounts and their respective uncollectible
accounts receivable balances which total $5,374,560.99, from the
accounts receivable of Collier County Fund 490 (Emergency Medical
Services) finding diligent efforts to collect have been exhausted and
proved unsuccessful. (All Districts)
5) Recommendation to approve modifications to the 2021 Fiscal Year
Pay & Classification Plan which consist of three new classifications,
the removal of four obsolete classifications and three reclassifications
made from April 1, 2021 through June 30, 2021. (All Districts)
6) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to execute State-
Funded Subgrant Agreement A0182 accepting a Grant award totaling
$105,806 from the Florida Division of Emergency Management for
emergency management program enhancement and authorize the
associated budget amendment. (Project No. 33747) (All Districts)
7) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to execute a
Federally Funded Subgrant Agreement to accept the annual
Emergency Management Performance Grant G0267 (EMPG) in the
amount of $111,876 for emergency management planning, response,
and mitigation efforts and to authorize the necessary budget
amendments. (Project No. 33748) (All Districts)
8) Recommendation to award Request for Proposal (“RFP”) No. 20-
7772, “Audio Video Equipment for Four EMS Training Rooms,” to
United Data Technologies, Inc., authorize the Chair to sign the
attached agreement, and authorize all necessary budget amendments.
(All Districts)
9) Recommendation to approve the administrative report prepared by the
Procurement Services Division for disposal of property and
notification of revenue disbursement. (All Districts)
Page 21
July 13, 2021
10) Recommendation to approve the administrative reports prepared by
the Procurement Services Division for change orders and other
contractual modifications requiring Board approval. (All Districts)
11) Recommendation to approve the purchase of Group Life insurance,
Accidental Death insurance, Long Term Disability insurance, and
Short-Term Disability Claims and Family Medical Leave Act
Administration Services, collectively referred to as Agreement No.
21-029-NS, from the Standard Insurance Company for a three-year
period effective January 1, 2022, in the estimated annual amount of
$808,780, and authorize the Chair to sign the attached Master
Agreement. (All Districts)
12) Recommendation to approve an Assumption Agreement assigning all
rights, duties and benefits, and obligations to Universal Controls
Instrument Services, Inc. for Agreement #20-7750 “Instrument
Calibration, Repair and Replacement Services.” (All Districts)
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to award Request for Professional Services (“RPS”)
No. 21-7868, “Impact Fee Studies & Fiscal Analysis,” to Tindale
Oliver & Associates Inc., and authorize the Chair to sign the attached
agreement. (All Districts)
2) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the FY20-21 Adopted Budget. (All Districts)
3) Recommendation to approve a report covering budget amendments
impacting reserves and moving funds in an amount up to and
including $25,000 and $50,000, respectively. (All Districts)
4) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment for the Facilities
Management Division in the amount of $25,000,000 from the
Infrastructure Sales Tax Reserve Fund (318) to fund the Collier
County Mental Health Facility. (All Districts)
5) To authorize an expenditure of Tourist Development Tax funds for
Clam Pass maintenance in the amount of $357,739.80 for
Page 22
July 13, 2021
construction, engineering and surveying, monitoring, and permitting,
authorize the necessary budget amendments, and make a finding that
this item promotes tourism. (All Districts)
6) Recommendation to approve the use of Tourist Development Tax
Promotion Funds to support the upcoming September 2021 Sports
Tourism Event up to $3,820 and make a finding that this expenditure
promote tourism. (All Districts)
7) Recommendation to award Request for Proposal (RFP) #21-7860
“Tourism Research Services” to Downs & St. Germain Research, Inc.;
and make a finding that this action promotes tourism. (All Districts)
8) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution fixing September 9, 2021,
5:05 p.m., in the Third Floor Board Room, 3299 East Tamiami Trail,
Naples, Florida, as the date, time and place for the Public Hearing for
approving the Special Assessment (Non-Ad Valorem Assessment) to
be levied against the properties within the Pelican Bay Municipal
Service Taxing and Benefit Unit for maintenance of the water
management system, beautification of recreational facilities and
median areas and maintenance of conservation or preserve areas,
management of the dredging and maintenance activities for Clam Pass
for the purpose of enhancing the health of the affected mangrove
forest and establishment of Capital Reserve Funds for ambient noise
management, maintenance of conservation or preserve areas,
including the restoration of the mangrove forest, U.S. 41 berm, street
signage replacements within the median areas, landscaping
improvements to U.S. 41 entrances and beach renourishment, all
within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit.
(District 2)
9) Recommendation to approve amendments to Article 20 and Article 42
of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between Collier County and
the Collier EMS/Fire Bargaining Unit, Southwest Florida Professional
Firefighters and Paramedics, Local 1826, International Association of
Firefighters, Incorporated. (All Districts)
10) Recommendation to direct staff to develop a workforce development
grant agreement with The Immokalee Foundation, to offset
development costs on a housing subdivision for the Career Pathways
Page 23
July 13, 2021
Learning Lab, in the amount of $500,000, authorize the County
Manager or designee to execute the agreement, and authorize any
necessary budget amendments. (District 5)
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation to approve the after-the-fact submittal of the Airport
Improvement Program (AIP) grant application to the Federal Aviation
Administration requesting approximately $1,819,841 for the
construction of the rehabilitation and widening of Runway 15/33 at
Everglades Airpark with a total estimated cost of $2,022,045.
(District 5)
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous Correspondence (All Districts)
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment recognizing a
Florida Department of State, Division of Elections, 2021 Election
Security Funds Grant Award in the amount of $75,000. (All Districts)
2) Request that the Board approve and determine valid public purpose
for invoices payable and purchasing card transactions as of July 7,
2021. (All Districts)
3) To record in the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners, the
check number (or other payment method), amount, payee, and
purpose for which the referenced disbursements were drawn for the
periods between June 10, 2021 and June 30, 2021 pursuant to Florida
Statute 136.06. (All Districts)
4) Approve a budget amendment recognizing $900,000 in revenues and
expenditures in the Sheriff’s Office FY 2021 General Fund budget.
(All Districts)
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
Page 24
July 13, 2021
1) Recommendation to appoint a member to the Ochopee Fire Control
District Advisory Committee (District 1, District 5)
2) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to execute a
Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release in the lawsuit styled Anita
Vagnozzi v. Collier County Board of County Commissioners (Case
No. 19-CA-1074), now pending in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth
Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, for the sum of
$40,000 to be paid by the Contractor with no exposure to the County.
(All Districts)
3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to execute a
Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release in the lawsuit styled
Annette Riddle v. Collier County Board of County Commissioners
(Case No. 19-CA-0743), now pending in the Circuit Court of the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, for the
sum of $10,000. (All Districts)
4) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to sign an
Amendment to Retention Agreement for legal services with the
Workers’ Compensation law firm of Kelley Stiffler PLLC. (All
Districts)
5) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $10,000.00 with pro se Respondent for the taking of Parcel
1196RDUE, required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Expansion
Project, Project No., 60168. (All Districts)
6) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $6,000.00 with pro se Respondents for the taking of Parcel
1180RDUE, required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Expansion
Project, Project No., 60168. (All Districts)
7) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $53,400.00 with pro se Respondents for the taking of
Parcels 335FEE and 335TDRE, required for the Vanderbilt Beach
Road Expansion Project, Project No., 60168. (All Districts)
Page 25
July 13, 2021
8) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the total
amount of $77,500 plus $17,657 in statutory attorneys’ fees and costs
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 184FEE, required
for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168,
and delegate authority to the County Manager or his designee to
process payment of additional statutory attorney’s fees for
supplemental proceedings, if any, as authorized by Ch. 73, Fla. Stat.
(All Districts)
9) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the total
amount of $75,000, plus $17,601 in statutory attorneys’ fees and costs
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 210FEE, required
for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168,
and delegate authority to the County Manager or his designee to
process payment of additional statutory attorney’s fees for
supplemental proceedings, if any, as authorized by Ch. 73, Fla. Stat.
(All Districts)
10) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $126,000, plus $24,612 in statutory attorneys’ fees and
costs and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 186FEE,
required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project
No., 60168, and delegate authority to the County Manager or his
designee to process payment of additional statutory attorney’s fees for
supplemental proceedings, if any, as authorized by Ch. 73, Fla. Stat.
(All Districts)
11) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $120,000, plus $22,085 in statutory attorneys’ fees and
expert fees, for the taking of Parcel 194FEE, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
12) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $69,000, plus $15,106 in statutory attorneys’ fees and costs
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 225FEE, required
for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
Page 26
July 13, 2021
13) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $68,000, plus $15,205 in statutory attorneys’ fees and costs
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 1204FEE, required
for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
14) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $57,000, plus $13,885 in statutory attorneys’ fees and costs
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 1218FEE, required
for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
15) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $70,000 plus statutory attorneys’ fees in the amount of
$9,240 and expert fees and costs in the amount of $4,900, for the total
amount of $84,140 for the taking of Parcel 1233FEE, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Expansion Project, Project No., 60168
(All Districts)
16) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $60,000, plus $14,553 in statutory attorneys’ fees and costs
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 1215FEE, required
for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
17) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $57,000, plus $13,885 in statutory attorneys’ fees and costs
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 1212FEE, required
for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
18) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $204,000, plus $32,839 in statutory attorneys’ fees and
costs and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 180FEE,
required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project
No., 60168. (All Districts)
19) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $69,000 plus statutory attorneys’ fees in the amount of
$8,910 and expert fees and costs in the amount of $4,900, for the total
Page 27
July 13, 2021
amount of $82,810 for the taking of Parcel 1213FEE, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Expansion Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
20) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the total
amount of $39,000, plus $15,589 in statutory attorneys’ fees and costs
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 1253RDUE,
required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project
No., 60168, and delegate authority to the County Manager or his
designee to process payment of additional statutory attorney’s fees for
supplemental proceedings, if any, as authorized by Ch. 73, Fla. Stat.
(All Districts)
21) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $83,250, plus $18,682.50 in statutory attorneys’ fees and
costs and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 1116FEE,
required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project
No., 60168. (All Districts)
22) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $56,500, plus $15,725 in statutory attorneys’ fees and costs
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 185FEE, required
for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
23) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $75,000 plus $8,619.00 in statutory attorneys’ fees and
expert fees, for the taking of Parcel 1227FEE, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168, and
delegate authority to the County Manager or his designee to process
payment of additional statutory attorney’s fees, if any, for
supplemental proceedings as authorized by Ch. 73, Fla. Stat.
(All Districts)
24) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $136,000 plus statutory attorneys’ fees in the amount of
$25,773 and expert fees and costs in the amount of $5,000, for the
total amount of $166,773 for the taking of Parcel 1184RDUE,
required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Expansion Project, Project
No. 60168. (All Districts)
Page 28
July 13, 2021
25) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $61,000, plus $14,496 in statutory attorneys’ fees and costs
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 1119FEE, required
for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
26) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $134,400.00 plus $29,761.48 in statutory attorneys’ fees
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcels 1235FEE and
1237FEE, required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project,
Project No., 60168. (All Districts)
27) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $137,000 plus $32,044 in statutory attorneys’ fees and
costs and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcels 222FEE and
224FEE, required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project,
Project No., 60168. (All Districts)
28) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Order of Taking and Final
Judgment in the amount of $75,000 plus $11,754.75 in statutory
attorneys’ fees and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel
188FEE, required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project,
Project No., 60168. (All Districts)
29) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $67,000, plus $14,517 in statutory attorneys’ fees and costs
and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 1243FEE, required
for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
30) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $125,000 plus $22,920 in statutory attorneys’ fees and
costs and expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcels 1168FEE and
1170FEE, required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project,
Project No., 60168, and delegate authority to the County Manager or
his designee to process payment of additional statutory attorney’s fees
for supplemental proceedings, if any, as authorized by Ch. 73, Fla.
Stat. (All Districts)
Page 29
July 13, 2021
31) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $85,000 plus $15,875.74 in statutory attorneys’ fees and
expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 1240FEE, required for
the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
32) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Order of Taking and
Stipulated Final Judgment in the total amount of $60,000 with pro se
Respondent for the taking of Parcel 217FEE, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
33) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $62,350 plus $14,273.34 in statutory attorneys’ fees and
expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 196FEE, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168 and
delegate authority to the County Manager or his designee to process
payment of additional statutory attorney’s fees for supplemental
proceedings, if any, as authorized by Ch. 73, Fla. Stat. (All Districts)
34) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $73,808 plus $16,851.33 in statutory attorneys’ fees and
expert fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 240FEE, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project, Project No., 60168.
(All Districts)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 30
July 13, 2021
A. Recommendation to approve a Resolution amending the Collier County
Water-Sewer District’s Utilities Standards Manual to improve the utility
conveyance process (This is a companion Item to #17B). (All Districts)
B. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending the Collier County
Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance to improve the utilities
conveyance process (This is a companion Item to #16A7 and #17A).
(All Districts)
C. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance of The Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number
04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which
includes the Comprehensive Land Regulations for the unincorporated area of
Collier County, Florida, to clarify the density calculation for single-family,
two-family and duplex dwelling units on legal non-conforming lots of record
in the RMF-6 Zoning District, to increase public notification distances for
land use petitions within the Rural and Urban Golden Gate Estates, and to
clarify the requirements for soil and groundwater sampling in the
development review process for the conversion of golf courses, by providing
for: Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three,
adoption of amendments to the Land Development Code, more specifically
amending the following: Chapter One - General Provisions, including
Section 1.08.02 Definitions; Chapter Three - Resource Protection, including
Section 3.08.00 Environmental Data Requirements; Chapter Five -
Supplemental Standards, including Section 5.05.15 Conversion of Golf
Courses; Chapter Nine - Variations From Code Requirements, including
Section 9.03.03 types of non-conformities; Chapter Ten - Application,
Review, and Decision-Making Procedures, including Section 10.03.05
Required Methods of Providing Public Notice; Section Four, Conflict and
Severability; Section Five, inclusion in the Collier County Land
Development Code; and Section Six, Effective Date. [PL20190002818,
PL20200002505, & PL20200002512] (This is a companion Item to #16A23)
(All Districts)
D. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance of the
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending
Ordinance No. 02-51, the Lawmetka Plaza Planned Unit Development by
adding a third access drive on Wiggins Pass Road for delivery vehicles; by
Page 31
July 13, 2021
modifying the transportation commitment for turn lanes; and adding
deviations for additional signage and a reduction to a landscape buffer; by
revising the Master Plan, and providing an effective date. The subject
property, consisting of 34+/- acres, is located on the northwest corner of
Wiggins Pass Road (CR 888) and Tamiami Trail North (US 41), in Section
16, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
[PL20190001489] (District 2)
E. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance repealing Collier County Ordinance
No. 2018-55 which created the Collier County Fuel Pump Security
Ordinance. (All Districts)
F. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
FY20-21 Adopted Budget. (All Districts)
G. A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing
amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-
05, as amended, relating to the density bonus pool within the
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay and specifically
amending the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay of the
Future Land Use Element, to change requirements for the use of the density
bonus pool; and furthermore directing transmittal of the amendments to the
Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. [PL20210000603]
(Transmittal Hearing) (Companion Land Development Code Amendments,
to be presented with this petition during the adoption hearing.) (District 4)
H. NOTE: This item was improperly advertised by the Naples Daily News
and will be heard in the fall. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance of
the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending
Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land
Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations
for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the
appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification
of the herein described real property from an Agricultural (A) zoning district
to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for the
project to be known as Blue Coral Apartments RPUD, to allow development
of up to 234 multi-family rental units, of which 70 will be rent restricted as
affordable. The subject property is located on the south side of Immokalee
Road, approximately 1000 feet west of Juliet Boulevard, in Section 30,
Page 32
July 13, 2021
Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of
9.35± acres; and by providing an effective date. (PL20190001600) (This is a
companion to Item #PL20190001620) (District 2)
I. NOTE: This item was improperly advertised by the Naples Daily News
and will be heard in the fall. An Ordinance of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 89-05,
as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the
unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the
Future Land Use Element and Map Series by adding the Immokalee Road
Interchange Residential Infill subdistrict to the Urban, Mixed Use district to
allow development of up to 234 multi-family rental units, of which 70 will
be rent restricted as affordable. The subject property is located on the south
side of Immokalee Road, approximately 1000 feet west of Juliet Boulevard,
in Section 30, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida,
consisting of 9.35± acres; and furthermore, directing transmittal of the
adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity;
providing for severability and providing for an effective date.
[PL20190001620/CPSS-2020-2] (Companion to zoning petition RPUD-
PL20190001600, Blue Coral Apartments Residential Planned Unit
Development) (District 2)
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD’S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER’S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
July 13, 2021
Page 2
MR. ISACKSON: Good morning, Madam Chair,
Commissioners. You have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning. Thank you very
much. We're honored to have Reverend Beverly Duncan, who is a
member of the Naples United Church of Christ, here this morning.
And after we all stand for the invocation, after that I'd like
Commissioner Saunders to lead us in the Pledge.
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE –
INVOCATION GIVEN BY REVERAND BEVERLY DUNCAN OF
THE NAPLES UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST
REVEREND DUNCAN: Good morning, and let us be together
in one mind.
Creator and spirit of life, this body is together in this place today
to deliberate on behalf of the varied communities in which we live in
Collier County. We give you thanks for these elected individuals,
we give you thanks for the places and people they represent, and
thanks also for the larger community of all your people, most
especially those neighbors suffering in Surfside, all neighbors who
are hungry, and all of us who seek peace. We bless and ask you to
bless, Creator Spirit, the Empty Bowls program that we honor in this
room today.
We pray that these commissioners be always mindful in their
governing, may they hold tight to a higher and larger vision for our
country and our county. We pray for them a continued discernment
that is pure and not clouded by personal motives or gain. We pray
that each one always be open and fair in the matters that come before
them as well as alive to possibilities they might never have thought of
July 13, 2021
Page 3
before.
So grant them the kind of spirit that looks for blessings in the
business items, looks for new ways of thinking and hearing, and an
inclination that leans toward life in every decision they make. Bless
them with strength, perseverance, courage, and wisdom this day.
Shalom and amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. That was a
beautiful prayer. Thank you.
Before we continue, I want to bring of note here, we have an
extraordinary exhibit on the walls of the empty bowls. These are
empty bowls that are designed by individual artists. This is a
rotating exhibit. So in August it will change. It is an all-volunteer
organization, and its mission is to create awareness and raise funds to
eliminate hunger in our community one bowl at a time.
The pieces displayed in the back room are framed color
photographs of a small sampling of the thousands of treasured
hand-painted ceramic bowls, platters, and other original works of art
that have been individually painted by local artists, students, teachers,
and individuals from local groups and service organizations since
2007. And the 16th Annual Empty Bowl Naples event will return to
Cambier Park on January the 22nd, 2022.
So please enjoy them. Take some time. There's some
beautiful, beautiful pieces of art back there.
Thank you very much.
County Manager.
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODAY’S REGULAR, CONSENT AND
SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EX PARTE
July 13, 2021
Page 4
DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR
THE CONSENT AGENDA.) – APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED
W/CHANGES
MR. ISACKSON: Good morning, Madam Chair and
Commissioners. Let me go over some changes and notes to the
July 13th, 2021, agenda.
The first item was a -- was an item that was brought by
Commissioner Taylor. It was originally back in the June 8th
meeting, and it was a recommendation to direct the County Manager
to retain an outside consultant to review the Rural Lands Stewardship
Area Overlay Growth Management Plan. Commissioner Taylor has
subsequently requested that this item be withdrawn. It is not
connected, repeat, not connected with Item 9A on the agenda.
Item 16B4, I want to make a change in the title. The title
should read, it's a recommendation to approve the Bayshore/Gateway
Triangle Public Art Pilot Plan for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
Community Redevelopment Area and authorize staff to submit a
proposed change to the Land Development Code related to murals in
the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area.
That's at Commissioner Taylor's request.
Commissioners, we want to amend Item 16K28, which is a
recommendation to approve a stipulated order of taking and final
judgment in the amount of $75,000, plus $11,754.75 in statutory
attorney's fees and expert's fees and costs for the taking of Parcel
188FEE required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road project. It's Project
No. 60168. This request is at the Clerk's Office and the County
Attorney's Office, and the change is as follows: Paragraph -- Parcel
188FEE, Paragraph 11 is amended as follows: The amount of taxes
due and owing to be distributed to the Collier County Tax Collector
shall be $97.44.
July 13, 2021
Page 5
Likewise, Commissioners, amending Item 16K32. It's a
recommendation to approve a stipulated order of taking and final
judgment in the amount of $60,000 with pro se respondent for the
taking of Parcel 217FEE required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road
Extension Project, Project 60168, again, at the Clerk's Office and
County Attorney's recommendation. It's Parcel 217FEE.
Paragraph 8 is amended as follows: The amount of taxes due and
owing to be distributed to the Collier County Tax Collector shall be
$97.44.
Time-certain items today, Commissioners, Item 10B is to be
heard no sooner than 1:00 this afternoon. It's a consideration of an
ordinance establishing Collier County as a Bill of Rights Sanctuary
County. Item 11A to be heard at 10:00 a.m. this morning; it's the
Mosquito Control resolution for boundary expansion.
Some reminders, Commissioners. We had two public petitions
on the agenda that were subsequently removed at the petitioner's
request. Those will be taken up at a later date upon further
communication with the commissioners.
That's all I have at this point, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. And now
we'll do any ex parte or any changes to the agenda. Commissioner
McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Good morning.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Good morning. I have no ex
parte nor any additional changes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No ex parte and no changes
as well.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I will echo those words. I have
no ex parte and no changes to the agenda.
July 13, 2021
Page 6
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Same for me, no ex parte, no
changes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And for me, I have no changes. I
do have an ex parte disclosure on 17D, the Lawmetka PUD. I've had
many calls and e-mails over the years, really, with the leadership of
Tarpon Cove, staff, and other residents in the area. And I would just
say on that particular item, I would compliment our staff. That was
a -- what was a very contentious issue, I think, at one point that's
now -- the community is all in agreement with that, and I understand
that they're pleased with the way that happened and how it came
together. So thank you to staff.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Thank you very much.
So do I hear a motion to approve the agenda and the ex parte as
brought forward?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So moved.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Motion on the floor and a second.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
MR. ISACKSON: Ma'am, you have the minutes from the
June 8th meeting. Did you take that up with this?
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
July 13, 2021
Withdraw Item from agenda: *** This item continued from the June 8, 2021 BCC Meeting ***
Recommendation to direct the County Manager to retain an outside consultant to review the Rural
Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay Growth Management Plan, as amended, to estimate the
total Stewardship Credits available in the Overlay. (Commissioner Taylor's Request)
Note:
Item 16B4 title to read: Recommendation to approve the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Public Art
Pilot Plan (Plan) for the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area and
authorize staff to submit a proposed change to the Land Development Code related to murals in the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area. (Commissioner Taylor's Request)
Amend Item 16K28: Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Order of Taking and Final
Judgment in the amount of $75,000 plus $11,754.75 in statutory attorneys’ fees and expert fees and
costs, for the taking of Parcel 188FEE, required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project;
Project No. 60168. (Clerk’s Office & County Attorney’s Office)
Parcel 188FEE, paragraph 11 is amended as follows: The amount of taxes due and owing,
to be disbursed to the Collier County Tax Collector shall be $97.44.
Amend Item 16K32: Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Order of Taking and Final
Judgment in the amount of $60,000 with pro se Respondent for the taking of Parcel 217FEE,
required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project; Project No. 60168. (Clerk’s Office &
County Attorney’s Office)
Parcel 217FEE, paragraph 8 is amended as follows: The amount of taxes due and owing,
to be disbursed to the Collier County Tax Collector shall be $97.44.
Time Certain Items:
Item 10B to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm – Consideration of County Ordinance establishing
Collier County as a Bill of Rights Sanctuary County
Item 11A to be heard at 10:00am – Mosquito Control Resolution for Boundary Expansion
8/9/2021 10:42 AM
July 13, 2021
Page 7
Item #2B
JUNE 8, 2021 FROM BCC MEETING MINUTES – APPROVED
AS PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, I didn't. So let's do the minutes,
please. Any changes on the minutes? Are we all okay with the
minutes?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Move for approval.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Motion on the floor and a second.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. And that is
because of our extraordinary court reporter who works diligently and
accurately. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Pretty in purple.
Item #3A
RECOGNIZING HEATHER MEYER, GROWTH MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT, OPERATIONS SUPPORT AS THE JUNE 2021
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH – NOT PRESENT – READ INTO
THE RECORD
July 13, 2021
Page 8
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, Item 3A is an employee
recognition to recognize Heather Meyer, our Growth Management
Department operations support, as the June 2021 Employee of the
Month. We intend on having the individual employees recognized
publicly going forward. A little miscommunication on this one.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I dropped the ball. I could have
asked you and I didn't, so --
MR. ISACKSON: It's not your fault, ma'am. But let me
just -- let me just say a couple remarks, if I can, about Heather.
She's an operation analyst in the operations support division in our
Growth Management Department and has been with the county since
2016. Heather provides fiscal support for several sections of the
Growth Management Department, including Traffic Operations,
Coastal Zone Management, and Landscape Management.
In addition to her regular job responsibilities, she provided
invaluable support to the county's three airports when two key
management employees, during the busiest season of the year, were
lost. Even without direct airport experience, Heather was able to
assist the interim executive airport manager in several areas of airport
operations.
Heather's financial skills and great customer service and keen
business sense provide the necessary operational support for several
tasks and projects. She was on site and on point of contact for
several capital improvement projects at the Immokalee airport. She
coordinated a contract extension and was responsible for contract and
grant compliance for active airport FDOT projects, and was
instrumental in drafting previous -- and processing, excuse me,
numerous executive summaries for BCC approval.
Heather also actively participated in the FY22 preparation of the
budget and review along with the airport's five-year capital
improvement budget.
July 13, 2021
Page 9
In addition to providing support for the airports, Heather has
worked diligently to keep up with the demands of her regular job
responsibilities. Heather's willingness to go far above and beyond
what was expected of her, especially during times of record-breaking
business and several large capital improvement projects, making her
truly deserving of this recognition.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Is she here?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: She's not. Next meeting hopefully
we'll start lining them up.
MR. ISACKSON: We will make sure Heather gets the award,
and we'll circle back with the Board how we can get folks' photos and
things like that over the summer, so -- get their recognition.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It's extraordinary. It's such an
interesting time we're in, you know, when you have lack of
employees for various reasons, and you have a business that's just
booming, which is the private airport business. So good. Thank
you for that.
Item #4
RECOGNIZING CRYSTAL LAKE RV RESORT AS A
RECIPIENT OF THE WASTE REDUCTION AWARDS
PROGRAM (WRAP) AWARD, FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE
GREATER GOOD OF COLLIER COUNTY BY ADVOCATING
THE “REDUCE, REUSE, RECYCLE” MESSAGE, THEREBY
HELPING TO PROLONG THE USABLE LIFE OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY LANDFILL. PRESENTATION OF THE
PROCLAMATION AND A PLAQUE WILL BE CONDUCTED BY
COUNTY STAFF AT THE CRYSTAL LAKE RV RESORT –
READ INTO THE RECORD
July 13, 2021
Page 10
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, we have a proclamation.
It's the proclamation recognizing the Crystal Lake RV resort as
recipient of the Waste Reduction Awards Program for contributing to
the greater good of Collier County by advocating the reuse,
reduction, and recycling message, thereby helping to prolong the
usable life of the Collier County Landfill. A presentation will be
made by staff with the invitation of Commissioner McDaniel
sometime in November when most of their folks who live there come
back from season, so...
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Good.
Item #5A
COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS OF THE MONTH FOR JULY
2021 TO HOLE MONTES – PRESENTED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, 5A is a presentation of the
Collier County Business of the Month. It's for July 2021. It's to
Hole Montes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Are they here?
(A video was played as follows:)
MR. MULHERE: Hi. I'm Bob Mulhere. I'm the president
and CEO of Hole Montes. On behalf of our Hole Montes 60-or-so
employees and their families, I want to express my gratitude to the
Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce and, of course, the Board of
County Commissioners for this wonderful honor.
I'll tell you a little bit about Hole Montes. Hard to believe, but
Hole Montes has been -- working in Southwest Florida in Collier
County for 55 years this July. Started in 1966 by Stanley Hole and
Sergio Montes. And if you're an old-timer, you might have known
Stanley and Sergio. I did.
July 13, 2021
Page 11
And we've always been involved in the community. We've
always worked with certain organizations, even -- whether it was
coaching Little League or supporting FGCU School of Engineering
or supporting Naples Community Hospital or Habitat or the CREW
Trust. We've always been involved. That was a legacy started by
Stanley and Sergio, and it's continued for 55 years.
We have worked on so many different projects; some of them
projects on behalf of Collier County, like sewer and water plants or
roads, airport design, and others for private landowners, developers.
We've worked on projects from 3,000 acres down to 10,000 square
feet.
We've contributed in that way to the growth of Collier County,
and it's a beautiful community, but we've also contributed in being
involved in organizations, community organizations, civic
organizations, and many other organizations, and we'll hopefully
continue that for the next many decades.
And before we close, I just want to recognize a few of the folks
that work with me here. Starting with June Sapp (phonetic), Tom
Murphy, Terry Cole, Rick Brylanski. Paula, you and I are
short-timers. We've both been here less than a decade. But it's a
true honor. And, once again, I want to express my gratitude to the
Greater Naples Chamber and to the Board of County Commissioners,
and we'll see you soon. Thank you.
(The video concluded.)
(Applause.)
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA
July 13, 2021
Page 12
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 7,
public comments on general topics not on the current or future
agenda.
Troy.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, we have one registered speaker
for this item. Jacqalene Keay.
MS. KEAY: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning.
MS. KEAY: Last summer I saw countless Facebook posts
criticizing even peaceful protests calling for social justice. During
the Capitol riots and insurrection, the silence from these same
individuals was deafening. These events led me to wonder what
Martin Luther King, Jr., would think of what is going on in this
country today.
Would he be extremely disappointed to see we are moving
backward, especially as it relates to remnants of Jim Crow era.
The civil rights movement is about the denied guarantees of
equal treatment for African-Americans under the law. The
overarching goal was to achieve equal rights as well as activism for
social, political, legal, and cultural changes. The point was to keep
pressuring leaders in the nation through protests until change
happened, no matter the costs. The methods that were used, of
course, most effective were when pictures of these events spread
across the world and globally -- were globally condemned.
Leaders of the civil rights movement felt the best way to
accomplish their achievements or objective was to take their power
back by choosing which establishment and locations they would
frequent. Most importantly, they wanted to empower the people.
Their methods of choice is like cancel culture. You see, cancel
culture got its roots in the civil rights movement. The civil rights
movements utilize boycotts, sit-ins, and protests to pressure
July 13, 2021
Page 13
businesses, organizations, and the government to change policies and
enact laws. They activated their voices, which was louder than that
of their oppressors.
As a former member of the silent majority, I will no longer be
quiet and allow the voices of the few to control my life and my
destiny. I will stand up, speak up, and show up. I will disassociate
from people who are aggressive and perpetuate lies and hate. I will
boycott businesses and organizations with racial practices. I will
make my vote count by voting for candidates who care about all
people and doing the right thing. I am taking my power back and in
doing so I hope to empower others to do the same.
We have gone from condemning other countries to human right
violations to being called out by China and the United Nations. And
in a recent news article the United Nations condemned America for
racism and human rights violations especially as it relates to killing
of unarmed black people.
Is this the legacy we want to pass on to the next generation?
Adults have an obligation and responsibility to teach the younger
generation to be good citizens -- may I finish?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Go ahead.
MS. KEAY: Thank you.
So we have an obligation to teach young people to be great
citizens to include doing the right things, telling the truth, being kind,
and respecting the needs of others. Based on our current social
climate, we are failing the next generation miserably.
Thank you all very much for having me and me being able to
speak and share my concerns. I appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you, Ms. Keay.
MS. KEAY: Thank you.
Item #9A
July 13, 2021
Page 14
ORDINANCE 2021-28: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE
RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP),
ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, AND TO TRANSMIT THE
AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY (DEO) AND OTHER
STATUTORILY REQUIRED AGENCIES – ADOPTED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, 9A is an item that's been
continued from the June 8th, 2021, BCC meeting. It's a
recommendation to adopt the proposed amendments to the Rural
Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the Collier County Growth
Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, and to transmit the
amendments to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and
other statutorily required agencies. It's an adoption hearing.
PL20190002292.
Mr. Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director, will present.
MR. BOSI: Good morning, Commissioners. Mike Bosi, your
Zoning director. I'm here to go over the final step of the adoption
process of the Growth Management Plan. Of course, you know we
have a transmittal process and then it's followed up by the adoption.
So this is a final hearing related to the Rural Lands Stewardship
program amendments.
And I'm not going to go -- I'm just going to start with where we
started on the transmittal process. This process did start in 2007,
which was a scheduled five-year review. We also had a restudy that
was conducted, started in 2018, where these amendments were
arrived upon over extensive discussion with the community
stakeholders and various NGOs.
On September 20th, the CCPC recommended approval of the
proposed amendments with no changes and a recommendation to
July 13, 2021
Page 15
transmit to the Board of County Commissioners a 5-1 vote. In
November of 2020, the Board of County Commissioners
recommended approval to transmit to the state agencies with a -- with
recommendation for no changes, and that was a 4-1 vote.
November/December of 2020, the state agencies reviewed and
provided three individuals comments. I'll detail those comments on
the next slide. And in May of this year, the Planning Commission
heard the proposed amendments, had a couple modifications and, by
a vote of 5-1, recommended to adopt to the Board of County
Commissioners.
The state agencies that reviewed it were the South Florida Water
Management District, and their conclusion was there was no
impacts -- no adverse impacts to water resources, and provided no
further comments.
The Florida Fish and Wildlife, no comments, recommendations,
or objections related to the listed species or their habitat from their
review of what was proposed within the changes in the amendments.
The Florida Department of Transportation came to the
conclusion that there was no significant adverse impacts to the
transportation resources or facilities, and had no further comments.
And then, finally, the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection concluded that no adverse impacts to air, water pollution,
wetlands, and other surface waters, federal and state-owned lands or
interest of lands, and provided no further comments. So the main
state agencies reviewed the proposed amendments, and there were no
direct comments related to that.
There were three comments, and those comments came from the
Department of Economic Opportunity referred to as DEO. Their
first comment was to update all the statutory references within the
amendment, which has been done, included within your package.
Your second comment was related to the provision -- the
July 13, 2021
Page 16
addition of a regulation related to affordable housing, and they said
establish a definition of proximal and alternative options. The
CCPC, acting upon that comment, dictated within Policy 4.75 of the
proposed amendments that we provide a definition to determine
proximal within the SRA and provide guidelines and standards within
the LDC.
So if the Board takes action to adopt these amendments, the next
step in the process will be LDC amendments to implement the
regulations that are contained within the GMP amendments. And
that particular policy is saying within those LDC amendments, that's
where those specific definitions and those standards are going to be
contained.
Finally, the third comment from the DEO was fiscal impact
analysis, and it was revised Policy 4.18 to define a time frame for
fiscal impact analysis. The Planning Commission basically said we
have a public impact analysis. That public impact analysis has an
out-year, a window towards buildout. That is the year that we would
utilize for the fiscal analysis. So those addressed the three
comments that were offered by DEO.
And I'll just briefly detail a couple of the recommendations and
revisions that came from the Planning Commission. This is related
to Policy 3.13 which dictates for Water Retention Areas. Normally a
water retention area, if it's included within an SRA, would not be
included as part of the acreage calculation or credit calculation, but if
it's providing functional value to the water management system that
the SRA is dependent upon for the Water Management District
permit, then it will be included within the calculations and the credit
calculations.
4.9, basically, is another reference towards that where
within -- within a WRA, if it's -- if it's providing functional value to
the stormwater system for the SRA, it will be included as part of
July 13, 2021
Page 17
those acreage and credit calculations. It's another portion where we
indicate that change.
Policy 4.7.1, the most important, increasing the size of the
towns, but one of the things that was most important was the towns
shall include an internal mobility plan and shall include a transfer
station and a park-and-ride that's approximately located within the
town for public transportation. I know during the review of the
transmittal and the adoption hearings related to the walkability, that
was something that has always been an issue in terms of whether it
was determined walkable or whether it wasn't determined walkable.
So we're going to require towns and villages over a certain size,
500 acres, we'll require it to have narrative and illustrations of how
that mobility plan will be integrated and meet the goals and the intent
of the regulations.
This is Attachment C. Attachment C has the specifics of the
values related to the regulations for towns, villages, and the compact
rural development. These are updating the table to reflect the
amended amendments proposed in the package.
And, finally, this is a change in the Policy 4.20. Previously
public use -- or acreages that were dedicated to public benefit were
not counted towards the total acreage cap of an SRA. That's being
changed. Public benefits will now be included as part of it.
Affordable housing is one of those examples. We have a
provision where affordable housing now has to be provided at
2.5 percent of the overall acreage of the SRA, and that acreage, if it's
contained within the SRA, has to be included as part of the acreages.
It won't count against the credits needed to utilize it or to entitle it,
but it will be part of the acreages, and that was one of the final
changes that were provided by the CCPC.
Another point that was brought to our attention, April Olson had
indicated and I had confirmed in the review, Policy 5.1, there was
July 13, 2021
Page 18
some ambiguity as to whether the first four land uses were going to
be still eliminated from a FSA and suggested that there's a slight
clerical almost scrivener error to that, and we're asking the Board of
County Commissioners to recognize that there's a scrivener error in
Policy 5.1. And we're going to just provide the clarification that the
first four land-use layers that are currently eliminated will continue to
be eliminated from the FSA.
That's the conclusion of the presentation. We feel that the
amendments further incentivize the RLSA overlay, protecting natural
resources and habitat flowways, retaining agricultural lands, planning
for future growth and economic diversification, and we recommend
adoption of the overlay and the amendments with the revisions that
were indicated by the Planning Commission but also the revisions to
5.1 that were pointed out by the Conservancy.
There is a number of benefits that are contained within these
amendments. This program, the RLSA program, has been widely
recognized by the APA, by various groups, as an innovative and a
balanced approach to growth. And when we talk about balance, we
talk about the scales. And I know in these proceedings we always
try to evaluate a number of different factors. And the scales within
the RLSA program are property-right protection, environmental
protection, and agricultural protection. So we have three different
areas that are sometimes competing against each other. So we have
to weigh the scales of what's being proposed.
Over the past 13 years, we've taken painstaking efforts to
find -- to get the right program moving forward to improve this
program. And I think these amendments most certainly advance this
program moving to the future.
Now, we know the future or the buildout date for the RLSA is
30, 35, 40 years out into the future. We don't quite know what that
conclusion's going to be, but we do know that we've got periodic
July 13, 2021
Page 19
reviews that are contained within the program, within the
amendments. So every seven years we're going to be going through
another revision, another analysis, looking at the various components
that make up this program, looking at those scales of the competing
interests and making sure we're trying to find the correct balance, and
these programs -- and this is a -- this is a step forward, and I feel that
the benefits that are provided will outweigh any of the negatives as to
what we may not have gotten perfect, but I think we are most
certainty on the right path, and staff's recommending adoption of the
program.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah, just a quick question. In
regards to that first -- I think the first comment was regarding the
water retention and the calculation of credits. I mean, I'm just
curious, when would a -- or how could a water retention area not
provide a functional value if it's retaining water? I'm just -- I mean,
that just came to me. I'm trying to figure out, when would that not
apply?
MR. BOSI: It always has a functional value. It's when the
system is programmed within the Water Management District that
actual direction of some of the flowways to that -- to that flowway.
When that's utilized within the permitting process, that's when the
WRA is brought into the SRA acreage.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Oh. So say, for example, there's
an existing lake that's a natural lake. It's not something that was
engineered as part of the stormwater system or something. Is
that -- would that be an example?
MR. BOSI: Lake might -- I think lake probably wouldn't meet
the classification.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
MR. BOSI: And it's --
July 13, 2021
Page 20
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: A wetland.
MR. BOSI: An existing wetland, a flowway towards where
they were disbursing some of the water that's within the SRA to
that -- to that wetland, then that would be included within the
acreage.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. Okay. All right. Thanks.
MR. BOSI: Yep.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. Mike, I wanted to
just maybe make a couple statements.
And first of all, you're really well suited to lead the charge on
this. I mean, you might be a new employee, but as a lot of us know,
you've come back here, and you have a lot of history with this. And
so -- and I also think you bring a very balanced approach, so I think
that's what we need here in the county.
One thing I would just restress is, you know, I get a little
concerned when I hear about something was adopted or it was taken a
look at in 2007 and every five years we're going to take a look at it
and then it's more than five years. So, you know, your statement of
in seven years, or whatever the amount of time is, let's make sure we
do that. I mean, you know, it's a great disservice to this process if
we're supposed to take a look at it every five years and we kick the
can for whatever reason. There were some reasons, but I think the
reasons were thin.
You know, under your leadership, let's make sure that, you
know, we're definitely doing that because, as you said, this is such an
important program. So I guess better late than never.
But, lastly, I just wanted to really stress not only the importance
of the RLSA but the misconceptions of citizens out there. You
know, when we took the vote on the villages, you know, I explained
my vote in my newsletter, and I was flabbergasted how many citizens
July 13, 2021
Page 21
who have lived here for 30 years, way longer than me, hadn't even
heard of it. You know, they thought we just sort of gave the okay to
build on 3,000 acres of land and we killed all this wildlife.
And, you know, then when we educated them about how we
preserved 12,000 acres and what the RLSA has done over the last 20
years -- so as we continue to improve this process, I think the
education piece is -- there's so many new citizens that have recently
moved here, and maybe they don't know the 20-year history of the
RLSA, so, you know, it's important to get that word out there and
correctly. Not just throw it on our website but -- you know,
sometimes I see things in the news, and their -- their soundbites don't
really totally reflect, you know, the entire story, but it's important
because this is how we preserve land here. This is how we decide
development. I mean, all the things that everybody in this room
knows, but I was really surprised how many folks, you know, didn't
really understand it.
So as we improve it, you know, let's make the education piece
an important part however, you know, you see fit, but it needs to be
more than just throwing it on the website. So -- but thank you for
your, you know, work on this, and let's make sure we don't miss any
of those milestones to blow the dust off it or take another look at it
the way we have in the past.
Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. I had spoken
with April Olson at the Conservancy, and I received an e-mail from
her with a question. And I know she's going to address this in her
comments, but I want to raise this question with you, and I'll raise the
question with representative of ECPO as well. And this concerns the
number of acres that are actually going to be preserved and the
number of acres that are going to be developed.
July 13, 2021
Page 22
And let me just read the question, and this is the question from
the Conservancy. Because landowners always have the option to
build one -- build at one home per five acres, is it possible that more
than 45,000 acres of the RLSA will be developed and there will be
less than 130,000 acres in preservation? If you could address that, I
think that would be helpful.
MR. BOSI: The direct answers to that is yes. There most
certainly is going to be a cap of 45,000 -- 45,000 acres of compact
urban development, the type of development that you will get when
you utilize credits. But if you have a landowner of 10 or 15 or 20
acres that has agricultural property that isn't interested in joining in
this overlay, they have the right associated with that land to develop
one unit per five acres.
So there can be some leftover development. One of the things
that we've talked about with the Conservancy -- and we've
talked -- and I think I wanted to raise with the Board today would be
that's another area we think, during the next restudy, that we can
maybe take a better tackle at.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah.
MR. BOSI: What is the leftovers? The leftovers, is there a
better way that we can incentivize those leftover lands that aren't
within that 45,000 footprint but we don't know has the development
rights associated with it? Is there a better way that we can
incentivize them to participate in a similar type of program, or what's
a better strategy? I don't quite know what that is right now, but most
certainly there could be.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. And that may very
well be something for our staff to -- as you said, to answer over the
next several years.
Thank you for that. That's all for right now.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay, good. Well, I have a couple
July 13, 2021
Page 23
of technical questions. In the executive summary, under
considerations you talk about develop a regional water partnership to
address regional water matters. Who's going to be partnering in
that? And, certainly, it's on the minds of all -- everyone that I talk to
about the development. We don't have enough water. How are we
going to avoid building desalinization plants and the price of water
going up? Who's going to be involved in this regional water
partnership, or do you anticipate?
MR. BOSI: Well, I wouldn't have the exact characters within
it, but we know we would start with the Water Management District.
We know we would start with Collier County Utilities. We know
that we would start with the property owners, and we know we would
start with the NGOs. All of the interested groups that have vested
stakes within those eastern lands need to be brought to the table and
discuss water availability and the assurance that we can maintain the
levels of service that we need to be able to provide adequate water
supply to the populations that we have today but the populations that
we know we're projecting when we look out to the future of the
buildout of Collier County.
You're talking about 800,000 to a million people. So we need
to have a strategy. And I think we -- it's not like we're devoid of any
strategy. But we have to have a better coordination amongst all the
players from the state level down to the local level to make sure that
we're addressing that in a holistic way that we can give the greatest
confidence to our future citizens that it's not going to be an issue, and
then we've got the information we need to tackle the problem.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, I think our -- under Dr. Yilmaz, I
think we definitely have a plan, and I think it's something that in
your -- with your ideas, we need to start promoting that and making
folks understand that for maybe six years we have -- this plan has
been out there. So this is good.
July 13, 2021
Page 24
Okay. And then can you define proximimal [sic] SRA? What
is that?
MR. BOSI: No, I can't exactly, but the LDC process that we're
going to engage upon --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay, good.
MR. BOSI: -- hopefully after this meeting, we will have the
specific parameters of what the proximal is.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Proximal, okay. I said proximimal.
Proximal SRA, good. So we're going to get that defined for us?
MR. BOSI: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. BOSI: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Any other questions from
here?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. At this point we have
some public comment and speakers.
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. We have 16 registered speakers
for this item. Your first speaker will be April Olson. She's been
ceded additional time from Julianne Thomas and from Ellen Murray.
She will have a total of nine minutes, and she will be followed by Al
Reynolds and then Susan Calkins. Give me just a minute while I
find her --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And we --
MR. MILLER: Which one is it, April?
MS. OLSON: Right here. Can I click on it?
MR. MILLER: Absolutely.
MS. OLSON: And then let's go from the beginning. Why is
this not working? There we go.
Okay. Good morning.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning.
July 13, 2021
Page 25
MS. OLSON: April Olson here on behalf of the Conservancy
of Southwest Florida and our over 6,400 supporting families. And
thank you for this opportunity to have our final comments on these
RLSA amendments.
And, Commissioner Saunders, thank you for raising that
question, I really appreciate it, and for -- Mike for clarifying some
issues and bringing up that scrivener's error.
The existing RLSA program has some really great protections:
90 percent of the 90,000 acres of Flowway Stewardship Areas,
Habitat Stewardship Areas, and Water Retention Areas, sorry, are
protected from residential development. This is due to the
regulations within the existing Group 5 policies and Area of Critical
State Concern policies shown on this slide. These policies protect
those lands by restricting uses and significantly limiting land
clearing. So the program isn't entirely voluntary, contrary to what
has been stated at many of the RLSA meetings.
The map on the right shows the spatial extent of the minimum
amount of protected lands, which is green, to maximum lands that
could be developed in those lands in yellow.
This deal was struck many years ago in exchange for giving
landowners the opportunity to build compact, more cost-efficient
towns and villages in the pink open areas at a much higher density.
Our review of the RLSA focused on the lands that were truly
vulnerable to development and don't have those built-in regulatory
protections, which are those agricultural lands in the pink open areas.
So we provided the county with a solution to protect those
vulnerable lands. Our plan -- or you'll likely remember this map.
It's our vision master plan for the RLSA. Our plan has the potential
to protect over 47,000 acres of Primary Panther Zone habitat, and
41,000 acres of agricultural lands within those vulnerable open areas.
Our plan would achieve the RLSA's goal of directing incompatible
July 13, 2021
Page 26
uses away from habitat and our plan would create an overall more
compact, less sprawling plan than the existing plan. So fewer miles
of pipes and roads would be needed, thereby saving taxpayer dollars.
But Eastern Collier Property Owners, or ECPO, didn't like our
plan or our map because they already had in mind where they wanted
to build and even knew where a new billion-dollar road network
would go to connect 45,000 acres of their new towns and villages as
you see from ECPO's 2008 map.
So, unfortunately, our plan didn't make it into the amendments.
Instead, ECPO endorsed a different plan, a plan that is about 13 years
old. Except for a few minor tweaks, the amendments before you
today are based on the 13-year-old amendments called a five-year
review. They ignore much of what we learned over the past 13
years.
The amendments before you provide for an even larger, more
sprawling towns and villages, they provide zero guarantees that
restoration will be done and done right because those R1 credits are
still in existence, they continue to place much of the burden of the
infrastructure and road costs on taxpayers, and the most important
panther habitat areas are still not protected.
And, by the way, Item 11E on today's agenda provides evidence
that taxpayers are going to be paying for these towns and villages.
Item 11E claims there's a need for a rate increase for water -- for all
water/sewer district users. The item says that the rate increases are
needed partly due to new capital facilities and infrastructures. And,
as you know, 100 million-dollar-plus water and wastewater plant is
being built to serve ECPO's towns and villages.
But now back to those vulnerable agricultural lands. Here is a
map of the different types of agricultural lands within the open areas.
The open area is a massive area larger than the land mass of Tampa.
The orange areas on this map are citrus groves. The green are row
July 13, 2021
Page 27
crops and pastures. Not only do these farms provide food and jobs,
but they also provide water recharge, habitat for listed species, habitat
connections and flood risk reduction for our area. So there are many
reasons to protect these lands from premature growth, as the RLSA
goal requires.
Oops, sorry. The shaded pink areas on this map provide the
spatial extent of a 45,000-acre footprint for SRAs, which are what the
amendments propose, which is about equivalent to two Fort
Lauderdales, so it's no small potatoes. But as you can see, outside of
those pink areas there is still a tremendous amount of additional
agricultural lands that are vulnerable. Those are the 40,000 acres of
lands that we are most concerned about being converted to even more
development, because landowners have that baseline right to build at
one home per five acres in the open lands, which is what Mike was
talking about. No matter what anyone tells you, RLSA owners,
ECPO and non-ECPO landowners, have the right to build one per
five acres if they so choose.
But ECPO says, don't worry. In their campaign and website,
which is ironically called "The Truth Matters," they state, quote,
more than 130,000 acres, 10 times the size of Corkscrew Swamp, will
be protected at no cost to the taxpayers. The 130,000 acres they are
talking about includes those 90,000 acres of FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs
that I mentioned are almost all protected through the existing Group 5
policies; therefore, the additional 40,000 acres of those are for the
vulnerable agricultural lands.
Here's yet another statement by ECPO rep at the recent Planning
Commission hearing. Quote, and if -- and if you adopt these
amendments, three out the four acres is not going to be developed
either for natural resource protection, wetlands, uplands, water
retention or agriculture, end quote. We remind you that two-thirds
of these lands are already protected by existing policies.
July 13, 2021
Page 28
And here's ECPO's pie graph which they provided at the recent
Planning Commission hearing, and they have shown similar versions
of this at numerous RLSA workshops. The graph on the left
represents the existing program. It shows that 87,000 acres of lands
can be built within the RLSA, but the right-hand graph shows that if
the recommended amendments are adopted, only 45,000 acres would
be developed. There would be no other development beyond
45,000 acres. All other acres would be protected.
So the question is, can ECPO keep their promise? It would be
difficult since ECPO doesn't even own all the lands they claim will
be protected. See the blue areas on this map? There are over
12,000 acres of non-ECPO lands in the open areas, above and beyond
45,000 acres worth of towns and villages, which is represented in
orange.
So has ECPO given away other people's property rights? What
if those other landowners choose to build their lands at baseline
development? Also, ECPO has about 29,000 acres outside of their
proposed 45,000-acre development plan shown in red. Is ECPO
willing to place all of their remaining agricultural lands in
preservation once that 404,000 credit cap is met or 45,000-acre cap is
met? While that wouldn't keep their entire promise, it would sure at
least show that they're acting in good faith; however, we suspect they
will still keep their baseline rights.
You deserve to have all the facts. Contrary to what is being
advertised, we believe that with the amendments, there's no way to
ensure that those additional agricultural lands will be protected. We
believe that these amendments would still allow development over
45,000 acres.
If we are right, then the truth must come out so that the
conversation can go forward to be open and honest. And Mike told
you that those one-per-five lands are still vulnerable. But we
July 13, 2021
Page 29
need -- if they are vulnerable, which we know they are, we need to
work on a plan to protect those lands.
The 2002 board and the public was fooled once into supporting
a plan for the RLSA only to later find out that the program allowed
250 percent more development than they were promised. We can't
let that happen again, and we must go into this with our eyes open.
After all, the truth really does matter.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, your next speaker is Al
Reynolds. He's been ceded additional time from Stephanie Schaffer.
Raising her hand.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm sorry for a second. Excuse me,
Mr. Reynolds.
Ms. Olson, I made a mistake. Commissioner LoCastro has a
comment.
MS. OLSON: Oh, sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: A question.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Hey, April.
MS. OLSON: Hi, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: One comment I want to
make, and then I do have a question for you is, I really respect you
and your organization's professionalism. You know --
MS. OLSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- what makes democracy
great is checks and balances, and we're going to hear some other
things later today. Sometimes it doesn't have that same sort of, like,
what is it, congeniality, you know, type of thing, I guess, and maybe
there's other better words for it. But coming here and working
together, I think, is important, and keeping it professional.
I guess the big question I have is -- and I think you answered it.
I just want to hear you confirm it or correct me -- is if there was one
July 13, 2021
Page 30
thing that's the biggest concern you have in the way that we're going
forward is the 14,000-acre delta that you think is still vulnerable; is
that correct?
MS. OLSON: Forty thousand acres.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'm sorry. Yeah, I wrote
down there 45,000 acre that we don't -- that we maybe don't have the
right verbiage in there that's strong enough for you to feel ensured
that that that acreage is, no kidding, protected. Is sort of the big
thing? You know, you mentioned a bunch of other things, but I was
like, you know, what would be the one thing?
MS. OLSON: Yeah. Well, the amendments do propose
agricultural SSAs, okay, and those will protect some of those lands.
But what we need is an open and honest conversation that
landowners still have the opportunity to build one per five. And
once you have -- right now there's not much of a road network out in
the RLSA. When you have 45,000 acres with the towns and
villages, you're going to have that road network; you're going to have
the businesses all to draw or let's say to entice one-per-five
development.
So landowners still are going to have that right, and there's
several, like I showed, landowners who own land out there besides
ECPO. So it needs to be an open and honest conversation that these
lands are vulnerable to development, that it's not going to be just
45,000 acres.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Right.
MS. OLSON: And we don't think it should be any more than
45,000 acres because it's already been increased far beyond what the
public was told when the program was adopted.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Well, let's make sure we
continue to have that open and honest conversation. Like I said
earlier, I'm very surprised how few people -- or I thought there would
July 13, 2021
Page 31
be more people, especially those that have, you know, grown up here,
and, you know, constantly remind me they've lived here for 40 years,
and then when you say RLSA, they say, what is that? So continuing
to educate on how we're improving the RLSA, but it doesn't mean
that we should just walk out of here and then in seven years we
regroup. This should be a very fluid conversation.
And, you know, we can always come back to the table anytime.
You know, there's nothing tapped in stone tablets that says, you
know, we can't continue. So, you know, I encourage you and it
sounds like you already will be working with Mike and our staff.
And, you know, everybody wants the same thing, which is as strong a
process as possible. Nothing's flawless or perfect, but I think
everybody would look at the RLSA and agree that it's done a lot more
positives, you know, than negatives. I mean, I don't think anybody
can debate that. But there's always, you know, things that can be
stronger. But, you know, I'll go back to my first comment where I
just really appreciate, you know, your professional approach to, you
know, work with somebody that maybe -- maybe you disagree with
or maybe, you know, you have some, you know, other views, but
we're not going to be able to make anything better if we don't come
together like that. So thank you very much.
MS. OLSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And, you know, I appreciate
your comments this morning as to where there could be some gaps or
just some tightening and, you know, we'll continue to work that, you
know, with your leadership, and also, obviously, with Mike's, and our
team. Thank you.
MS. OLSON: Thank you, Commissioner. I appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
MS. OLSON: Oh, sure.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Actually, I have a question
July 13, 2021
Page 32
for Mr. Bosi and a question for the County Attorney, but stay at the
podium, if you would.
MS. OLSON: Okay. Sure.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Obviously, on the 45,000
acres, that's kind of creating the conversation right now, and if
property owners have a right to develop at one unit per five acres, we
have the Bert Harris property-rights law and other laws in Florida
that kind of guarantee that those rights cannot be taken away; is that
correct?
MR. BOSI: Correct, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. So you're
thinking about in the future developing some sort of incentive plan to
deal with that 45,000 acres. My question is, in order for individuals
to develop at one unit per five acres on that 45,000 acres, what type
of a road -- a county road network would have to be developed for
that, just in general? Because I'm not exactly sure where that 45,000
acres is and how you would get to it.
MR. BOSI: There's a tremendous amount of variables. But I
think what -- the point that was trying to be made is after the 45,000
acres of compact urban development has been developed and the
major roads -- the Big Cypress Parkway have already been imported
and developed into the system, the system has a more functional
network. Within that, you could have spines off of that network to
be able to reach those individual -- individual acres that are still
zoned agricultural, not part of the program.
So I couldn't give you the specificity, but it would be one-offs of
the existing roads network that services the towns and villages that
are going to be developed that could provide those opportunities.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's kind of the question
that I'm asking is: Those roads that are going to be necessary to
service those villages, what roads are those that we're talking about?
July 13, 2021
Page 33
You mentioned Big Cypress Parkway. What other major roads
would have to be built to service those villages? Because the
villages that we've just approved, they already have access.
MR. BOSI: Yes, yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And they don't really need
the Big Cypress Parkway necessarily to have access. What I'm
talking about is the 45,000 acres. And I see Trinity Scott's --
MR. BOSI: Yeah, I was going to say, we're getting into the
2045 LRTP and beyond. I will turn to our deputy head of
transportation to give a little more specificity in terms of what
those -- where those major roads would be expected.
MS. SCOTT: Thank you. Good morning. Trinity Scott,
department deputy head, Growth Management Code.
So we plan for growth based to 2045. So based on what we
have within the 2045 long-range plan, that is what we're anticipating.
As Mr. Bosi talked about, those offshoots of if someone wanted
to do the one-to-five off of a major roadway, that would be private
that they would have to build on their own. So those -- unless they
were included within the long-range plan, it would be open to the
public, which would be a policy decision by the MPO board and
ultimately the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And my question really is,
what are those major roads that would have to be developed that
those property owners could tap into? I understand Big Cypress
Parkway.
MS. SCOTT: It would be our existing major roadways that we
have that are identified in the long-range plan. You have Oil Well
Road, Immokalee Road, Everglades Boulevard, Randall Boulevard,
et cetera, those major collector and arterial roadways that, for the
most part, already exist within the Eastern Golden Gate Estates area.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So on those roads that would
July 13, 2021
Page 34
be necessary, again, looking at the 45,000 acres, we would have to
build those roads to -- extend those roads to create that access, or is
it -- or is the existing pavement all that's necessary?
MS. SCOTT: I couldn't tell you that. So we only plan through
2045 for the roadway network. And each -- as you know, from the
Long-Range Transportation Plan, every five years we do a major
update to accommodate what growth we anticipate coming in that
next, you know, five years.
So as we go through those additional iterations in the
future -- but as of right now, we have identified -- for the most part,
it's within the existing roadway network, and we're also working
closely with the residents of Golden Gate Estates, the rural Golden
Gate Estates, to try to maintain those roadways at four lanes and not
go to six-lane facilities throughout the Golden Gate Estates area.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. And a question for
the County Attorney -- and I've asked this before, but I just wanted to
make sure I understand this. Obviously, if we build the road, we
have an obligation to maintain it and maintain traffic flow on it. But
do we have any obligation to extend roads, to build new roads?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. So the issue -- and
this is not an issue that this board's going to be dealing with. This is
going to come up in somebody else's lifetime not, perhaps, our
political lifetime here. But the point is that this board will be
making decisions as to whether or not to extend roads, build new
roads, and we don't have a legal obligation to do that. That will have
an impact on that 45,000 acres, I would suspect. But that was the
point of trying to raise that.
MS. OLSON: Can I make one follow-up statement on that?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Please.
MS. OLSON: That 2008 map that I showed you, that roadmap
July 13, 2021
Page 35
from ECPO, we calculated all of the new and expanded roads that
would be needed to accommodate their vision, and there's 200 miles
of new and expanded roads to connect the towns and villages.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's what I understood.
MS. OLSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: It sounds like, according to
the County Attorney, we don't have to build those roads.
MS. OLSON: It's good to know that -- what the plan --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'm just planting that seed for
the future.
MS. OLSON: Sure. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Mr. Reynolds?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, I'm so sorry. Commissioner
Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: If I can. I was just going to -- and
more a question for Mike along the same line, that -- I mean, a
landowner, they have the right to build one per five and put in their
own roads. I mean, we have private roads all over the Estates, right?
I mean, that's one way of getting access to their property.
MR. BOSI: That most certainly is an option where the
individual -- the property owner will bear the cost of the road that
covers within his property and also pay his proportionate share in the
impact fees that are going to be associated with the houses that
eventually will come out of that development.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. And that's the impact on
the existing -- maybe on the existing roadway, if we're not going to
build any new ones. So that -- the county not building the roads
doesn't necessarily prevent these landowners from not developing at
one per five and selling lots.
MR. BOSI: No. The requirement for proportionate share, the
July 13, 2021
Page 36
availability of proportionate basically says that if that property owner
pays their proportionate share of the volume that they're going to
command on that future road, they have satisfied their requirement to
pay for that growth.
Now, the other portion of that cost would be associated with the
county, and that would be part of the CIP process to identify as part
of a Long-Range Transportation Plan, bring it to the 5- to 10-year
plan to where the out-years become a little bit closer, the specificity
and the details of the need for that road become a little more defined,
and then bring it into the first five years where the road is planned,
financed, and identified.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And from a -- it seems to me from
a -- from a planning perspective, too, I think there's an agenda item
on the summary -- or the consent agenda, rather, where we're having
to go in and, on an emergency basis --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It's on our -- we're going to hear it.
It's 11C. It's on our --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Oh, it's 11C. It's on the regular
agenda. Yeah, we'll hear that later. I mean, that's -- you know,
that's a different kind of cost. But, okay, I just want to clarify that.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I'm not trying to be facetious,
but to me this concept of how we develop out there with these
five-acre ranchettes is similar to years ago. They used to call them
squatters. You know, they'd go out, and this is the land, and they
would buy the land, but maybe way back then they didn't buy the
land. But it's this idea that when you create these attraction centers,
people will come. And, unfortunately, roads and towns are every bit
of that.
MR. BOSI: Well -- and April painted the picture of the future.
That's towns and villages. That's economic activity, that's social
July 13, 2021
Page 37
activity that's further defining the community in a way that we think
is balanced. We think this program provides for the set-aside from
an environmental protection. And then the allowance for each one
of the infrastructure providers sitting at the table and saying this is
what I'm going to need if this town or this village or this side's going
to be provided for.
The economic development opportunities, we've allowed for the
Florida targeted industries now to be identified within these SRAs
and be promoted and developed, because the economic development
of the eastern portion of the county has an effect and a positive effect
upon our transportation system in the revenue that we need for that
transportation system, because when you put jobs, services, economic
opportunity towards the east, those commuting patterns start to
change. And when those commuting patterns start to change, you
decrease the road miles traveled from an individual to satisfy all
those needs.
So in that future, if those 45,000 acres of towns and villages
come to fruition, we have a vibrant economy in the east to provide
opportunities so we have a more balanced approach towards how our
commuting patterns and how our transportation system can work.
So that's where our land-use planning is in combination with our
transportation planning, and at the end of the day that is good
planning.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: If you had three commissioners that
would agree with it.
MR. BOSI: Yep.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Al Reynolds. He's
been ceded three additional minutes for a total of six minutes, and he
will be followed by Susan Calkins and Gaylene Vasaturo.
MR. REYNOLDS: Good morning, Madam Chair --
July 13, 2021
Page 38
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning.
MR. REYNOLDS: -- members of the Commission. My name
is Alan Reynolds, and for the last 23 years I've had the privilege of
representing the Eastern Collier Property Owners in the process that
led to the creation of this program and, since then, our review and
culminating with our hope for a vote today to adopt these
amendments.
And if I may, I'd like to tell you who Eastern Collier Property
Owners are because, you know, we talk about ECPO. ECPO is
actually made up of 12 different families and companies that
represent the agricultural legacy of Collier County: Alico, Inc.;
Barron Collier Partnership; Collier Enterprises; Consolidated Citrus;
King Ranch, the English Brothers partnership; Gargulio; the Half
Circle Ranch; the Heller Brothers Packing Company; JB Ranch; Owl
Hammock; Pacific Land; and the Sunniland Family Partnership.
One of those members, the JB Ranch, who you know, Russell
and Liesa Priddy, were just honored by the Florida Cattlemen's
Association and received the award for outstanding stewardship for a
ranch in the state of Florida for 2021. And if you haven't had the
chance to visit some of these properties -- I know the Priddys are
very proud of what they've been doing to really demonstrate what
stewardship is all about.
And so it really is a privilege to represent this group. And
ECPO supports the amendments. They support the staff's efforts to
reach some consensus in bringing forward enhancements to the
program.
ECPO is committed to the Rural Lands Stewardship program.
To date they put roughly a third of their land into Stewardship
Sending Areas, and they have done that at a rate that far exceeds the
market demand for credits. And that was the goal behind the
program is to get the environmental protection in place in advance of
July 13, 2021
Page 39
the potential for growth as it occurred in Eastern Collier County. So
there are a lot of credits that have already been created by protecting
land that are being held in reserve for a future that could be 80 or 100
years before we see these final numbers that we keep talking about.
So, yes, it's been pointed out that the amount of land that we're
protecting just for natural resources and agriculture is about 10 times
Corkscrew Swamp. It really is important to understand the scale of
what this program is doing through incentives as opposed to
regulations.
There are some really important enhancements to these
amendments, and sometimes we get down into the minutiae. But
let's not forget, with the adoption of these amendments, we will have
the potential to protect another 40,000 acres of agricultural land that
will be kept permanently in agricultural production, and that is all
done through incentives and the credit system.
And the other significant add on the natural resource side is the
creation of two new panther corridors that, combined, equal the size
of Pelican Bay, and those will be designed specifically to create
interconnections so that panthers can move through the landscape of
these protected areas. Those corridors do not exist today.
So these are really important enhancements to the program and,
frankly, there are property owners in Eastern Collier County that
have not been able to participate because the agricultural credit
was -- or the incentive was not as good as it needed to be to convince
property owners to give up their valuable rights forever and stay in
agriculture. But rest assured, there are property owners who are very
interested in seeing these amendments adopted and implemented
because they plan on putting land into agricultural SSAs. They're
not developers. And, in fact, of the 12 entities I mentioned, two of
them actually develop land. The rest are farmers and ranchers. So
it really is important to do this.
July 13, 2021
Page 40
The county staff has done an extraordinary job in this
process -- because this does go back to 2007. This is literally the
adoption of enhancements that we started working on 14 years
ago -- but to take it through the process of more than, I don't know,
70 public meetings that I've counted with all the different
stakeholders and to arrive at amendments that create a balanced
approach to enhancing a program that is already working quite well
by everybody's acknowledgment.
So I really just want to ask you to support these amendments.
Bill McDaniel served on the committee, those many years ago, that
actually worked through the rigorous process of coming up with these
enhancements. And, you know, it is time for us to move forward, to
put these amendments in place, to work on the Land Development
Code, and work with some of the other issues that have been raised.
And, you know, no program is perfect, but just remember, this is still
an incentive-based program. So the conversation about retaining
one-to-five rights, that was the bedrock of the entire design, which is
you have to start by saying property owners are not giving up their
rights without some way of getting some benefit for that.
So, yes, some of those rights were removed through Section 5,
but the tradeoff was to have a program that works for property
owners.
So thank you very much to you, to your staff. This has been a
long process, but it's one that I think is culminating in a good
decision.
And I'd be happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No questions. Thank you very
much.
MR. REYNOLDS: Okay, thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Susan Calkins. Three
additional minutes from Alison Wescott, and she will be followed by
July 13, 2021
Page 41
Gaylene Vasaturo, and then Meredith Budd.
MS. CALKINS: Good morning. And I am providing
comments from the League of Women Voters this morning. And I
am Susan Calkins, as was just stated.
As we have noted previously, the Collier League of Women
Voters has a long history with the RLSA program from its inception
through the RLSA restudy in 2009. We continue to be committed to
getting the RLSA overlay revised to meet its goals: Preserve
agriculture, direct development away from wetlands and listed
species, and to avoid sprawl through innovative planning.
As we expressed last November, these amendments, which has
been stated, are almost entirely the 2009 five-year review
recommendations do not accomplish all that's needed. Rather, we
feel, they add unnecessary credits to the system, they increase the
development footprint, and they do not address the critical need to
revise the overlay so that habitat identified as essential to the survival
of the panther, and thus other species, is protected.
We voice some of our concerns again requesting that you, first
and foremost, recalibrate the credit system. It's already apparent that
program will generate far more credits than can be utilized.
Currently, over half of the available credits are committed, yet
development within the RLSA has essentially just begun.
As the staff's 2019 white paper recommended, the relationship
between available credits, the 404,000, and the development cap of
45,000 acres needs to be recalibrated. To help bring that program
back into balance, we need to stop awarding credits to landowners for
simply designating lands for restoration.
Policy 3.11, restoration designation credits should be eliminated.
Credits should only be awarded after real restoration has taken place.
Further, to bring the program into better balance, we also need
to increase the number of credits required for each acre of land
July 13, 2021
Page 42
developed. The proposed amendments change that requirement
from eight to 10 credits, but earlier staff reports recommended 14
credits per acre.
I think we know why that balance is important; because when
we reach the program's limit of 45,000 acres of development, there
will be too many credits left over. And then what? Will the
developer be left with worthless credits or the landowners be left with
worthless credits? Will the county be pushed to develop the very
lands the program is designed to protect?
Don't put the burden of dealing with a faulty credit system on
future generations and commissioners. It would be nice to get it
right now.
Secondly, I think -- we think we should reject those amendments
like 4.71 which increase the size of towns and villages and compact
rural developments, as these amendments will increase sprawl, not
avoid it. Staff in their March 9th draft amendment stated that there's
no rationale for increasing the size of RSAs [sic] rather than increase
the footprint of towns and villages, create a minimum and a
maximum density.
Thirdly, reject Policy 4.72, recommendations to increase the size
of a village to 1,000 acres in the Big Cypress Area of Critical State
Concern. This is important because villages of 1,000 acres in the
Area of Critical State Concern are contrary to the state directive to
protect these areas and contrary to Growth Management Plan Policy
4.21, which limits development in critically -- in critically important
surface water and wetland systems. In this case the OK Slough.
And, lastly, we just talked about wildlife corridors. We need to
identify specific wildlife corridors. Policy 3.11.2 concerns credits
for panther corridors, but it fails unless the corridors are shown in
detail on the map, and credits are not awarded until all segments of
the corridor are protected by a sending area.
July 13, 2021
Page 43
In conclusion, before you vote today on the RLSA amendments,
we hope you fully consider the future ramifications. The RLSA was
meant to be a plan to protect agriculture, our wetlands, and our
wildlife, not merely an economic development plan for Eastern
Collier County. As currently proposed, it will not meet its
objectives. We hope that you will not accept all these
recommendations but, rather, select those that you realize are critical
to the program.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Gaylene Vasaturo. She'll
be followed by Meredith Budd and then Marley Monacello.
Ms. Vasaturo's been ceded additional time from Loralee
LeBoeuf and Patricia Forkan. She will have a total of nine minutes.
MS. VASATURO: Sorry. Good morning, Commissioners.
I'm Gaylene Vasaturo. I have a couple comments -- couple matters
that can be easily -- can be addressed with very limited -- very little
delay. But first I wanted to -- one of the comments, I wanted to
thank Commissioner Saunders and April Olson for raising the matter
of preservation of 130,000 acres of open land.
ECPO's promise of preserving 100,000 acres of open
land -- 130,000 acres, 10 times the size of my Corkscrew Swamp, is
based on all 40,000 acres of the open land being preserved in ag
SSAs, and ECPO owns over -- well over half of those 40,000 acres.
So I just would add to what's already been said that -- ask ECPO
to stand behind their promise by agreeing to relinquish their rights to
develop one per five acres on their open land that remains after
development of 45,000 acres.
Now my comments. First, preservation of open land is also one
reason why it's important to limit excess credits. The amendments
will create far more than 404,000 credits. If you don't take steps to
July 13, 2021
Page 44
limit excess credits, then the RLSA program will not accomplish its
goals, especially the goal to preserve ag land.
The county's August 2020 credit analysis on which these
amendments are based significantly underestimates potential credits.
All in all, there could be well over 500,000 credits. The analysis
contains many errors, omits several categories of potential credits,
and writes off over 44,000 credits with no reasonable basis for doing
so. And I'll give you some specifics on that. That's just a visual aid
that -- I'm going to speak on that. But more specifically, the county's
analysis estimated over 448,000 credits could be created. It reduced
this number by first writing off 20,000 restoration credits -- you can
see that I have that in the first line there -- because, according to the
analysis, these credits are subject to substantial variation. Then the
analysis subtracted another 3,500 credits to get to 425,000, which
was explained as this is a reasonable estimate.
And then, lastly, the analysis subtracted another 21,000 credits
to match the 404,000 credit cap stating that this reduction was just a
.04 percent reduction in total credits, but that was a math error.
Actually, it's a 5 percent reduction, so that's much more significant.
So in addition, the county's calculation that the amendments
could create 448 -- over 448,000 credits is based on errors and
omissions. One example of an error, the county's analysis only
assigned four credits per acre for restoration of wading bird habitat
when the Policy 3.11 provides 10 credits per acre. That's at least
11,400 credits that weren't counted.
And then the analysis does not consider any base credits for
restoration potential nor any credits for restoration of Water
Retention Areas, which the amendments will now allow, nor base
credits for ag SSAs. These amendments create so many excess
credits that the problem is, ECPO will have enough for 45,000 acres
of development and reach the 404,000 cap with no credit incentives
July 13, 2021
Page 45
left remaining for the -- with no credit incentives left for landowners
to preserve the remaining 40,000 acres of open land. And without
the -- and perhaps without the need to restoration or preserve panther
corridors, because these items are always left till last.
Contrary to what ECPO is promising now, instead of 40,000
acres being preserved in ag SSAs if the credit cap is reached, some of
these or many of these lands are more likely to be developed at one
per five acre. And I strongly encourage you to work, as Mr. Bosi
suggested, to figure out what we can do on that.
But also excess credits will lead -- eventually lead to pressure on
the county to repeal the cap to allow more development, to allow -- to
really then -- oh, we need to meet the RLSA goals, so we have to
have more credits so we can preserve the ag land. Any of those
things can happen.
Correct the errors, omissions, and write-offs that I've talked
about, which is -- and then recalibrate, increase the number of credits
required per acre, and you can significantly reduce excess credits, and
that will help preserve ag land.
And then second, I'd ask you to remove the revisions to Policy
4.72 and 4.21 that increase the allowable size of villages in the Big
Cypress Area of Critical State Concern to 1,000 acres. A 1,000-acre
village is contrary to the purpose of Policy 4.21 to protect this Area
of Critical State Concern and detrimental to the purpose of the
recently enacted Florida Wildlife Corridor Act.
Current Policy 4.21 says, villages are not to be more than
300 acres. And then -- and then I'll quote, provided, however, that
two villages or CRDs of not more than 500 acres each shall be
allowed in areas that have frontage along State Road 29 and that as of
June 30th, 2002, had been predominantly cleared as a result of ag
Group 1 or earth mining and processing uses. There's no discussion
or explanation in the entire record for this increased village size in the
July 13, 2021
Page 46
Area of Critical State Concern. The county staff stated in its
presentation of the amendments only that this revision was just
retaining the existing 1,000-acre limit for villages within the Area of
Critical State Concern but this is incorrect.
4.21 restricts, as I just read, restricts village sizes to 500 acres
and only allows two such villages. It restricts the development in
this area to protect this Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern,
the Okaloacoochee Slough area. And, really, allowing a 1,000-acre
village in this area would be inappropriate for the rural character of
the area and be destructive to the water resources of regional
significance. Also, about two weeks ago the Governor signed the
Florida Wildlife Corridor Act to establish a wildlife corridor from the
Panhandle to the Everglades. Big Cypress Area of Critical State
Concern is shown as part of that corridor. There's a map. All the
traffic, noise, lights, and people that will result from a 1,000-acre
village will be a big deterrent to wildlife, especially panthers.
So I ask you to -- ask you, will you sacrifice the protection of
this important regional wetland system to allow a 1,000-acre
village -- a 1,000-acre bedroom community for Broward County to
be built? I ask you to reject this increase in village size for the
ACSC. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Meredith Budd. She'll be
followed by Marley Monacello and then Fasian Venegas-Ramos.
MS. BUDD: Good morning, Commissioners. Meredith Budd
on behalf of the Florida Wildlife Federation. As you know, the
Florida Wildlife Federation was one of the organizations that was
involved in the 1997 litigation that led to the creation of the Rural
Lands Stewardship Area program. So the Federation is wholly
committed to ensuring that the intent of the final order is realized and
that the initial intent of that litigation itself is realized as well, to
ensure large landscape-scale preservation across a large vast
July 13, 2021
Page 47
landscape of land that is largely privately owned protecting
agricultural fields, forests, and critical wetlands.
These areas are already zoned to be just like Golden Gate
Estates sprawling development, and that will come along with all the
impacts that we see happening in Golden Gate Estates that -- to
wildlife and to water quality, catastrophic wildfire.
The amendments before you today for adoption present a
brighter future for that region, and it will lead to permanently
protecting up 134,000 acres of land to support habitat for wildlife,
provide corridors, and, of course, at full participation in this
voluntary program, that's what we want.
We want to incentivize landowners to opt in because that
134,000 acres is only preserved at full participation. That's what this
is about, and that's what the RLSA and these amendments today are
about. It's an admirable investment in preservation and
conservation. It will be the biggest private preserve east of the
Mississippi.
Since its establishment, the RLSA has already proven its worth
by protecting over 55,000 acres at no cost to the taxpayer. It's a
voluntary program where higher density development is directed to
areas of lesser environmental value. In exchange, the landowner
commits to preserve large landscapes of higher environmental value.
And these preserved lands have the opportunity for restoration. That
would be not funded otherwise without this program.
The amendments, which were the result of meetings, consensus
building among stakeholders, they enable incentives to protect
farmlands, create wildlife corridors, a more fair credit exchange.
In fact, we worked with staff to address that R1 credit issue. Is R1
credits eliminated? No. But is it more equitable now with these
amendments? They will be.
They are similar to the five-year review amendments, and that's
July 13, 2021
Page 48
a good thing. These amendments were vetted. These five-year
agreements [sic] were vetted through a very public process, and they
enhance the program, providing unprecedented landscape benefits on
private lands. They will allow the program to be more equitable and
will lead to a greater preservation footprint across Eastern Collier
County and for the region.
The Federation appreciates all of the opportunity we've had to
engage with the county as well as the other local stakeholders to
ensure that these recommendations before you today will enable the
greatest preservation outcome on the landscape, and we do look
forward to working with the staff as they work through the LDC
language to implement these changes.
So we urge you to adopt the amendments before you today, and
thank you so much for the time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I have a question, Ms. Budd.
MS. BUDD: Of course.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Does Florida Wildlife -- are they
concerned about the excess credits?
MS. BUDD: With the cap on credits and the cap on acres, no.
I think that there is checks and balances in place. By putting the
caps on both ends, it would correct itself.
Now, perhaps, there may be inequities on the landowners' end,
but if the landowners as the stakeholders are supportive of the
amendments and the program as it moves forward with those caps,
then from a county perspective and a taxpayer perspective, no, there
are checks and balances with the caps.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Would you -- would you participate
in any kind of review as our Mr. Bosi has suggested that we look at
incentivizing the five-acre properties that could be built?
MS. BUDD: Sure. Yeah. So when you look at the program,
the program was initiated because of that sprawling five-acre -- one
July 13, 2021
Page 49
unit per five acres. So this is an option so that we can try to lessen
that sprawling impact. So if there's a way that we can incentivize it
even further to eliminate or reduce, rather, the potential for those
one-unit-per-five-acre ranchettes, of course, that's definitely
something we'd welcome to participate in.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you.
MS. BUDD: Thank you so much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Marley Monacello,
followed by Fasian Venegas-Ramos, and then Lupe Gonzalo.
MS. MONACELLO: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning.
MS. MONACELLO: My name is Marley Monacello. I'm a
homeowner in Golden Gate Estates where I live with my wife and
one-year-old, who I'm sure would insist on me sharing that she's
one-and-a-half.
We moved to the Estates in May of 2019 in large part because of
the more quiet rural life that that would provide for us and our
children. The amendments to the RSLA [sic] that you're considering
today, if not properly strengthened in the future, we have great
concern will do real and lasting harm to the rural way of life that we
sought when we moved there, because they haven't been properly
evaluated for some of the reasons that you've already heard.
They also ultimately threaten to carve up and decimate the
peaceful, natural environment of Eastern Collier all in exchange for
the profits potentially of a select few developers and landowners.
In 2002, after years of planning and input from a broad section
of the community, as you all know, the RLSA was put into place in
order to prevent the premature conversion of ag lands, to protect the
incredibly valuable wildlife corridors and natural resources of the
county, and to prevent poorly planned urban sprawl. However, as
you know, in the last minute the policy was tweaked, and 2.5 times
July 13, 2021
Page 50
more land was ultimately made available for development than was
originally promised to the public.
Today we, once again, risk ceding more of this land than is
intended for development without properly -- without a properly
strengthened process. And the staff of the Conservancy have
diligently and tirelessly demonstrated in both written and public
statements to everyone who's voting today that the amendments
proposed and some of the projections of their impact are based on
math that does not always add up.
And what hangs in the balance is more than the difference of a
few villages here or there across Eastern Collier. Premature and
unnecessary development of tens of thousands of acres of the RSLA
[sic] puts at grave risk the economic well-being and physical safety
farmworkers in the Immokalee community in particular, where I've
had the privilege of working for the last nine years.
Seventy-one percent of the available RLSA lands potentially
targeted for development are rows of vegetable and quiet citrus
orchards without which the agricultural industry that has long
supported the county will vanish.
The extreme heat caused by climate change, which
proportionately impacts farmworkers, landscapers, and other
low-wage workers in Immokalee, will only intensify as we pave over
the undeveloped land in Eastern Collier.
And moreover, the agricultural industry, of course, here
produces over $200 million worth of agricultural products every year,
and even more than being an economic powerhouse, it is also the
birthplace of what has been called the best working environment in
American agriculture. That is the Fair Food Program.
When it comes to human rights and social responsibility, in the
entire United States agricultural industry, Collier County is world
renowned as a place for innovation. Immokalee has received former
July 13, 2021
Page 51
presidents, United Nations, and countless human rights practitioners
and supporters from across the country and the world precisely to
visit the farms that are here and to see the community where the Fair
Food Program first took root. It would be a travesty to wipe out this
important part of the county of which we should all be proud, and I
hope that the Board of County Commissioners in the future will take
measures to effectively evaluate and protect these lands.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. MONACELLO: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Fasian Venegas-Ramos,
followed by Lupe Gonzalo, and then Brad Cornell.
MR. RAMOS: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Fasian Ramos. Oh, I was raised in Immokalee my entire life, and
agriculture has always been a part of Immokalee. It is central way of
life here.
Although I personally have not worked in the Florida
agricultural fields, my mom has worked as a farmworker for almost
25 years, and she has shared her experiences with me when I grew
up. For her, it is a job to put food on the table, to pay the bills, and
to provide a roof over our heads. Our lives have revolved around
agriculture, and this is also true for many others in Immokalee.
I grew up seeing the buses that carry farmworkers to the nearby
agricultural fields, unloading workers by La Fiesta, a grocery store in
Immokalee, after a long day of toiling in the fields underneath the
Florida sun. I know that developing agricultural land will impact
Immokalee significantly in various ways: Economically, because it
will threaten the incomes of the farmworkers that rely on these fields;
physically, because it will weaken our natural environmental
protections from hurricanes and flooding from the wet season; along
with other things such as intense heat caused by climate change.
Immokalee already faces challenges like hurricane flooding, as
July 13, 2021
Page 52
was experienced with Hurricane Irma four years ago, and developing
nearby rural land will exacerbate these environmental conditions
which will harm Florida communities in the long run. And it is
these specific decisions that disproportionately impact vulnerable
black and brown communities which historically bear the brunt of
climate injustices in our society.
And so I urge you all to consider and to further explore the
harmful consequences this will have on people, the wildlife, and the
land. I hope you all consider the lives and well-being of people over
money and the endangered wildlife over money.
We must think about future generations to come and the world
we want to leave behind for them. The future is not ours. We are
borrowing it from younger generations. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Lupe Gonzalo followed
by Brad Cornell and then Rich Yovanovich.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Are you going to translate?
MS. MONACELLO: Yes, ma'am. Why don't you switch
places. There we go. Thank you.
MS. GONZALO: (Through an interpreter.) So good morning.
My name is Lupe Gonzalo. I am a long-time resident of Immokalee
and worked for many years in the agricultural fields of this area.
Immokalee is a farmworker town and is really the heart of the
agricultural industry of this state.
We put our faith in all of those elected officials to consider all of
us who live in Collier County. And not only are jobs at stake with
developments such as these, but also our very safety, in particular
with the rising temperatures that have a disproportionate effect on
farmworkers, hurricanes that are driven by climate change, seeing
that especially as development increases over the decades to come,
that will ultimately lead to worse effects.
Right now many of the underdeveloped areas in Collier County
July 13, 2021
Page 53
help to defray the effects of climate change on our community. And
so this -- this type of development can ultimately not only put us at
risk but also put at risk our children and our grandchildren and future
generations.
And it's very clear from the diligent work of the Conservancy
that the analysis that's been done around these policies still has more
work to do. And so I join them and broadly call for a more
independent analysis, a deeper analysis to really evaluate the effects
of these policies and the lands that will be at risk because of them.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Gracias.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Brad Cornell. He'll be
followed by Rich Yovanovich and then David -- I'm having trouble
reading this. I think it's Grayson.
MR. CORNELL: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Brad
Cornell, and I'm here on behalf of Audubon Florida and Audubon
Western Everglades, and I appreciate the opportunity to address you,
Madam Chair and Commissioners.
As was stated by my colleague, Meredith Budd, 24 years ago in
1997 we filed a lawsuit against the county and ultimately against the
landowners because 300,000 acres of rural resources and farms were
not being protected in Collier County adequately, and there was
another one that happened two years later. Those two lawsuits
basically set the stage for a community discussion and study and
planning effort that resulted in the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District
and the Rural Lands Stewardship District, as you all know.
And now we've had almost 20 years of implementation of these
plans. These plans are vital for protecting our economy, our way of
life of farms and, in Audubon's concerns, of our natural resources.
The resulting part of that implementation, which was restudy
and five-year review, has pointed towards several important
July 13, 2021
Page 54
improvements in those programs, and in particularly Rural Lands
Stewardship. And we have waited almost -- over 10 years to
implement many of these. Are they all that we need? No, but they
are a very important start, and they are very overdue for being
implemented.
If you are concerned about panthers, there are two Florida
Wildlife Commission studies that show that the cleared farm fields
that these new developments are being directed to are not Florida
Panther Habitat. Also, it is very clear when you look at the
regulatory regime that the Rural Lands Stewardship Area, through the
Endangered Species Act, is mitigating for the heavy impact on
Primary Panther Habitat in the north Golden Gate Estates. There is
no mitigation for all the development in north Golden Gate Estates.
It's being mitigated in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area.
If you're concerned about too many credits, these amendments
are going to be reducing the designation credits and incentivizing and
pushing the landowners towards actual restoration. If you're
concerned about farms, obviously we're creating the agricultural
Stewardship Sending Areas that you heard April Olson talk about.
That's an important improvement. And, ultimately, if you're
concerned about sea level rise, hurricanes, harmful algal blooms, this
is a 50-year plan. This is the scale on which we should be working.
I commend the staff and the county. You all are working on the
scale that needs to be engaged to solve these kinds of problems.
And, clearly, people are coming here. This is not drawing people
here. We have to figure out what to do with them and, ultimately, in
a 50-year plan, there are going to be people migrating inland. So we
need to have a plan like this that's also going to protect 134,000 acres
of preserves.
So we urge you to adopt these today. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
July 13, 2021
Page 55
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Rich Yovanovich. He'll
be followed by David Grayson.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's actually David Genson.
MR. MILLER: Genson.
MR. YOVANOVICH: You have a very long agenda, and most
of everything I was going to say or Mr. Genson was going to say has
already been said. So Mr. Genson and I, we're going to go ahead
and waive our time. And we thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: That is our final public speakers for this item.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So I think -- would you
like -- shall we do a break? Because we're about 10 minutes overdue
your break.
THE COURT REPORTER: If we can finish this item, I'm
okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You want to finish this item? Okay.
All right. So we're going to finish this item.
And Commissioner LoCastro and then Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Mr. Bosi, could you come
forward. I have some questions for you.
So, you know, I like everything everybody said. I mean, my
summation is that the things that we're doing are long overdue, and
hopefully we don't make that mistake again. We continue to blow
the dust off of this and continue to improve the RLSA. But having
said that, the things that we're proposing today have incredible
positives. I mean, I really like what Brad Cornell said from the
Audubon Society. But having said that, hearing from the other
citizens that still feel like there's some gaps, do we have the ability to
be dynamic enough to continue this conversation, or maybe we are,
or are we going to wait for five years again and then actually it will
turn into 12 years if we make the same mistakes again.
July 13, 2021
Page 56
I mean, you know, there's some things that some citizens
brought forward here that I actually think have significant merit to
add to the RLSA, to make it even better. So what is our
going-forward point? I mean, I realize that this vote today isn't
ending it all and then we'll come back here in five, seven, 12, 14,
years, you know, hopefully not that. But, you know, do we have the
ability to be dynamic and continue these conversations and talk about
the things that possibly could even add and make the RLSA even
stronger that a lot of these citizens have raised? What's our strategy?
MR. BOSI: Absolutely and most certainly. Just because we
have a seven-year review process doesn't mean these issues aren't
going to be discussed and we don't have the ability to continue to try
to advance upon the process. And if you think about it, I correlate
it -- and the development of the RLSA, the amendments that are
being proposed, I correlate it to how -- and I mentioned before how
we do our capital improvement programming. We have a
Long-Range Transportation Plan. We have a long-range parks
master plan. We have a long-range utilities master plan, and those
look out 40 years, 45 years, sometimes 25 years, 30 years, but way
out into the future.
And when you try to find out what that condition that you're
trying to work against 25 and 30 years into the future, you're not
looking for a decimal point. You're not looking for an accountant's
[sic] determination of how many credits or how many acres or how
many road miles you're going to need, but you're going to find
yourself within a range, an approximate range as to what you're going
to have to deal with.
And then as those out-years become closer, as that program goes
from a Long-Range Transportation -- or a long-range plan to a
five- to 10-year window, you've got more specificity. You've got
more information. You've got more details. You put more meat on
July 13, 2021
Page 57
the bone towards the plan to be able to address those conditions that
you have more certainty of, whether it be numbers of credits that
have been developed, number of acres that are going to be left over
outside the program, and then you make adjustments, and then finally
you've got a five-year window when the road -- when the rubber is
going to hit the road, and you provide final revisions to it.
Unlike -- or just like we do our Capital Improvement
Programming, we do our long-range master planning. We do our
Growth Management Plan, and this is a component. And this is no
different than that. We have the -- I mean, the dynamicism of the
process is contained within the interest that these groups continue to
show within the program, the voices that they bring to the meetings,
the e-mails that they provide to the commissioners.
We know that these issues are going to be here; we're going to
continue to try to tackle them. And within the next seven years,
we're going to identify -- I know we will identify additional areas
where we want to make improvements to the program.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I guess my
summation would be, we have a seven-year plan, but we didn't follow
it or we didn't follow it perfectly. You know, here we are years later
and whatnot. So I guess my challenge would be, I'll be very
impressed if you and the team comes back to this room at some point,
you know, in the future and says, you know, we found a couple of
other improvements. You know, this should be a very dynamic
process, not that we just make an improvement today and then, you
know, we group here in 14 years for our seven-year review and then,
you know, don't make those improvements, because a lot of their
comments had merit, and we can continue to revise it.
So, you know, we're looking for your leadership and the
partnership with the organizations and the citizens who spoke to
make sure this continues to be a dynamic process, which I don't think
July 13, 2021
Page 58
it has been as much. You know, it sort of has sat for a bit, and I
know, you know, we're trying to accelerate it now and give it a little
bit more air speed. And I, you know, really applaud what we're
doing going forward. We can't go back. But let's make sure we're
doing that, I guess, would be my summary.
MR. BOSI: And I would give you an example -- not to counter
you, but I would give you an example of where the dynamicism of
this process has worked. You know, at the June, I believe it was, 8th
Board of County Commissioners -- or June 9th Board of County
Commissioners meeting when the villages were approved, those
villages were approved. They weren't entitling at eight acres a unit,
because that's what the current regulation said. You know what they
were entitling at? Ten units an acre. So they were looking forward.
They were looking forward to the conversation that we had of
increasing the expenditure rates. And they willingly participated at a
rate that, per law, they're not -- they weren't obligated to. But
because of the pressure that has been placed upon this program to get
it right and do the right thing, that action was taken.
So those -- that's an example, and that's only one example of an
official action that was taken by this body that was influenced by the
folks in this room that was agreed upon by the private-property
owners that had significant fiscal impact but has a beneficial impact
upon this program. So we will continue to provide those
opportunities and provide dynamicism. Remember, every time an
SRA comes before you, remember, every time an SSA comes before
you, it will be my job as the zoning director to reflect on how that fits
within the issues that we're dealing with, the other outside issues that
we maybe haven't gotten quite right, and how that fits together. So,
yes, we will most certainly have that opportunity.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No, that's a great example
from the villages. I guess what I would say is more of that, you
July 13, 2021
Page 59
know, more of that dynamic approach. It doesn't necessarily mean
we'd make, you know, that decision every time that changes or
whatnot, but at least having that conversation and make sure people
are heard. And then if, you know, we all agree that there could be a
better approach, that we don't feel like we have to wait seven years to
make it, and then it really turns into 14 years and, you know, all those
other things.
So thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. Quick question
for the County Attorney, and then I want a question for Mr. Bosi.
Mr. Klatzkow, this is an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan.
Is this -- what's the vote requirement, basically, is what I'm --
MR. KLATZKOW: A supermajority.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. So a
supermajority, obviously, four --
MR. KLATZKOW: Four votes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: It requires four votes, okay.
Mr. Bosi, I'm a little bit on the fence here; have been. I
understand that, you know, this is -- these amendments have been
kicked around for a long time. But we've heard some comments
today in particular from Ms. Vasaturo concerning the size of the
villages and that sort of thing. Have you had an opportunity to kind
of take a look at those? Because we are in a position, if this board
wants to make changes to what's been presented to us, we obviously
can do that.
MR. BOSI: Yes. Yes, I have. And in regards to increasing
the size of the villages, increasing the size of the towns?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes.
MR. BOSI: I'm most definitely in support of that, because what
if we -- you know what we're trying to do? We're trying to promote
July 13, 2021
Page 60
sustainability. And sustainability within these towns can only be
attained if we have the economies of scale to support the needed
commercial operations to support the needed employment
opportunities that are going to be demanded to be able to provide
jobs, services, and economic opportunity. And if we do it at too low
of a density and too small of a scale, we're not going to be able to be
a fully sustainable town-village community that we're developing.
So, yes, the increases of the villages and the towns, I'm supportive.
And one of the things -- I wrote down the number of
about -- there was 15 different items that I identified as
improvements. One of the last things that I identified as an
improvement was elimination of the hamlets. Now, a hamlet has
never been proposed. A hamlet was anywhere between 40 and
100 acres of residential development. And to me, that was -- that
was the component of the RLSA program that I was not a big fan of
because that doesn't give you an opportunity for sustainability. It
doesn't give you an opportunity for diversity within that
development. That's just a residential development that's out there,
and hopefully it's in close proximity to where a town and village was,
and that's what the design of it was, to be able to put a
residential -- only residential community that's close enough to where
goods and services were.
But the elimination of that provides for more sustainability,
because the type of developments that are going to be coming will
have that economies of scale built in within them, and those are the
things that provide the sustainability and the value of the program.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Were there other changes
that staff had sought that were not agreed upon that are not contained
in this document?
MR. BOSI: I think there are -- one of the things that was
brought up was during the white paper it was suggested that maybe
July 13, 2021
Page 61
13 units per acre was the right -- was the right number for the
entitlement of one acre, but at the end of the day, between discussion
with the property owners and the estimations that were done during
the five-year review and then during the restudies, it was determined
that we weren't quite sure what that number was going to be, and that
10 was one that was suggested as the five year, was agreed to by the
property owners, and that's why we decided to move forward with
that.
Moving into the future, I think that will be one of the things that
we as a staff have to provide the most acute eye in terms of how we,
one, model the number of credits that could be generated by the
system moving forward, and then what is the appropriate expenditure
rate based upon what we're seeing within the SSA and SRA
applications that come in between now and when we make those
determinations.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Why wouldn't we just
incorporate that into this document now?
MR. BOSI: I think we have. We have -- went from eight to
10. We don't know what the specific number is beyond 10, and
we're confident that the property owners are willing to agree to the
increase to that expenditure rate.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. No other
questions right now. I'll just listen to what everybody else has to
say.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. Can I just ask a
follow-up. Or, I'm sorry, unless you've got a light.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: If you've got a follow-up, go
ahead.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No. I mean, I just wanted to
continue what Commissioner Saunders had said. So they agreed to
July 13, 2021
Page 62
10, but do we lock that in for a certain amount of time, or do we have
flexibility, you know, fluidity here to -- you know, what's
the -- where are we?
MR. BOSI: Right now we're at -- the current rules say eight
credits per acre.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Right. Okay.
MR. BOSI: And it's in our Growth Management Plan. If this
is adopted, it will be 10. The manner that we would go about to
change that would be an amendment to the Growth Management Plan
to change those -- that regulation. It requires to set a transmittal
hearing with the Planning Commission and the Board of County
Commissioners and an adoption hearing. Everything within your
Growth Management Plan could eventually be -- at direction of the
Board of County Commissioners can be changed.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: As you said, the staff will be
watching that, so we're not locking in at 10 and then, you know,
covering our eyes. You know, we can go forward, and, I mean,
continue to make improvements to that number, if we see fit, right,
and bring it back here, or where are we?
MR. BOSI: The concern expressed by a number of the
speakers were this outyear. This outyear there's going to be an
excess number of credits. We have a cap of 404,000 -- or 404,000
credits.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Credits.
MR. BOSI: To date 174,000 credits have been generated.
That's less than half of what that is within a 20-year period.
As we move forward, we'll continue to look at what's the
appropriate expenditure rates to make sure that what we expect or
remodel towards the number of credits aligns with what that
expenditure is at. So we most certainly will always have that
opportunity.
July 13, 2021
Page 63
And I -- one of the reasons -- or I wrote down these 15 benefits
of improvements for this -- of the program because I wanted to be
able to illustrate and document the benefits that will be known, that
will be certain if we adopt these programs. What in -- if we don't do
that because we're concerned of a hypothetical situation that's 25 and
30 years out, that we know we're going to have another crack at
the -- another opportunity to review three to four times before that
outyear gets here, would seem like the cost-benefit analysis does not
outweigh the benefits that are being provided for by these
improvements.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Would you agree, though,
with what you just described as far as how we can go forward and
how we can be dynamic and make sure we watch, you know, the
program as closely as possible and continue to make improvements,
we haven't done that very well in the past, correct?
MR. BOSI: No, we haven't adopted. We have most certainly
spent a lot of time, a lot of time --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, I know we've spent the
time. I know we've spent the time.
MR. BOSI: -- of trying to identify where these improvements
are, arriving upon these, trying -- in 2010, we were hit by a unique
economic downturn that prevented us from moving forward.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Sure.
MR. BOSI: And then the restudy -- this is where we're at -- I
mean, allowed us to come here. So the second crack, we're
hopefully making progress in terms of taking what was identified
from those countless hours of community discussion and bringing it
to the Board for further action.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No, that's my -- yeah, that
was my point. I mean, I know there's been tons of hours and
meeting and whatnot. But, you know, it's been going forward and
July 13, 2021
Page 64
making improvements and continuing to be dynamic. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Now I'm ready. Okay.
I'd like to maybe talk with Mr. Bosi just a second. You know,
there's been several comments made, and I haven't heard a
commitment from our staff, concern raised by you, Commissioner
Saunders, Commissioner LoCastro, with regard to the next review.
And just as a slight correction -- and this has been a very dynamic
process. There hasn't been a lot of action taken by the boards in the
past.
I served personally on the five-year review committee. I was at
every single one of the public hearings during the recent review
process that was done in '18 leading up to now. There has been a lot
of adjustments made, suggestions made. Commitment-wise, when
can we expect to touch this again?
MR. BOSI: Per the regulations that were suggested, by the date
of the adoption, we will -- within seven years we will provide for
another review.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Maybe we can have a
discussion about tightening that up a little bit sooner.
MR. BOSI: Well, I think what that does is it says by -- within
seven years. It gives -- you know, it doesn't say it has to be at year
seven.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I understand.
MR. BOSI: But within seven years, that's the out -- that's the
out maximum we can go before we've conducted this again.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. My suggestion is
maybe we come up with a time-certain sooner than that so that there
is some certainty added to the concerns that have been raised with
regard to that. I mean, I'm okay with the process. I just -- I want to
July 13, 2021
Page 65
add some assurance that we're not just going to pass or not pass and
then not look back and touch this ever again. I mean, there have
been concerns that have been raised. One of the things that was
raised, I think Ms. Olson raised some of the lands that are included
within the bounds of the RLSA are not part of the ECPO property
owners. There are lands that are included in there and who still do,
in fact -- everybody within the bounds of the RLSA has that right to
develop at one unit per five acres.
I think it's important for this board to know and understand that
the currency within the RLSA program is, in fact, the credits. So
touching it sooner to develop value for those credits to incentivize
people to participate in this voluntary program is imperative for us as
a government body. I believe that's the success of this overall
program is the voluntary participation of everybody within these
bounds and taking advantage of the incentivization away from that
true definition of sprawl, which is one unit per five acres, into these
compact rural developments that have significantly less of an impact
on our environmentally sensitive lands.
Do we have a value, a dollar value for these credits? Has
anybody ever been able to ascertain that?
MR. BOSI: We've done extensive work and analysis on the
TDR program, but the RLSA program, we've never tried to place a
monetary value. I'm sure an economist and an accountant could
probably come together and reach a reasonable conclusion.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, one of the things I'd
like to do is for us to ascertain what that is. I know when I served on
the five-year review committee we saw some deficiencies in the
program. We saw some -- not a sufficient amount of preservation
and protection put forward for agriculture. Huge, huge industry, as
you heard several of our public speakers talking today how important
agriculture is to our community.
July 13, 2021
Page 66
And so the preservation of agriculture that's actually included in
this five-year review, I think -- I think it's absolutely imperative that
we move forward with these recommendations.
Now, Commissioner Saunders asked about the increasing of the
size of the -- I think it was the villages and the towns both. We've
approved or allowed for the increases there. Could you just reiterate
for me the rationale behind -- behind those suggestions.
MR. BOSI: And I referenced it was economies of scale. The
larger these villages and towns are, the more population they have,
the more diverse commercial establishments that they can support.
The more -- the more economic development opportunities within the
form of new businesses and industries these towns can support, these
villages can support.
So when you provide for a little bit larger of a footprint, you
provide for more of those economies of scale for the market to react
to. If you -- I mean, you firsthand knew how long it was in the
Golden Gate Estates before a shopping center was provided at that
Randall Curve, and that's all about the marketability and the
economies of scale and the lack of economies of scale that a
spread-out diverse population was provided for.
Once it hit a certain critical mass, the market responded to it,
and that's similar to what the thinking is behind -- within the
increasing these towns and villages is allowing for the market to
provide for a greater diversification of the type of businesses and the
type of employment opportunity centers that will be developed.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Gotcha. It was always
contemplated when we adopted the Golden Gate Master Plan that we
would preserve the rural character of Eastern Collier County in the
Golden Gate -- specifically in the Golden Gate Estates area and that
we would allow for growth and development on the perimeters of
Golden Gate Estates to maintain that rural characteristic that's so
July 13, 2021
Page 67
important to the residents in Golden Gate Estates vis-a-vis the Rural
Fringe Mixed-Use District and then, in fact, the RLSA.
So I think -- is the proposed plan perfect? Time will tell. But
is it an enormous improvement to what we already have?
Absolutely. Are we going to touch it again? Are we going to
review and further publicly vet some of the concerns that have, in
fact, been raised? Absolutely.
As Commissioner LoCastro said, this needs to be a dynamic
plan. It needs to be touched on a regular basis.
And unintended consequences that potentially could come need
to be addressed in as expeditious a manner as is possible.
With that, I'd like to make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. There's a motion on the floor
and a second. I'd like to -- and I've got permission from
Commissioner Saunders. I'd like to bring Mr. Reynolds back up to
the podium. We had a conversation in my office last week, and the
excess credit issue was something that I, as you know, was very
concerned about. And I would appreciate you repeating what you
told me and how ECPO looks at the issue of excess credits.
MR. REYNOLDS: I'd be happy to, thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. REYNOLDS: Madam Chair, you know, we have a
program that, when it was adopted, there was no history. It was an
innovative program, never been done before. And we now
have -- after 20 years, we have 20 years’ worth of data on exactly
how the program is implemented. We know exactly how many
acres have been put into the various classifications. We have over
half of the total natural resource areas that are to be protected, have
already been scored, put in the system.
So the data right now -- and this is a data-driven
July 13, 2021
Page 68
program -- confirms that the recalibration of the credit system that
was done back in 2009 -- and even since that time, there have been
additional data collected -- confirms that, in fact, the calibration was
extremely accurate and that the credit ratio for stewardship credits to
receiving area is now that 10 is, in fact, the number that creates a
balance in the program of credits and acres.
Now, yes, the program is subject to decisions by property
owners about the degree to which they participate. So you're always
going to have, you know, some pluses and minuses in a program.
And all of these numbers presume a 100 percent property-owner
participation rate. Not just ECPO, but all property owners in the
system, if you will.
I don't think it's realistic to think that any program that's an
incentivize-based program is ever going to have a 100 percent
participation. So I think the credit system has been examined,
carefully calibrated for this restudy, and all the data that we have
right now supports what is being proposed in the amendments.
That being said, in seven years, we'll have another seven years'
worth of data. We'll have the data for the first time on the ag SSAs.
So right now we have no track record on the SSAs because it's a
brand-new incentive program, but we will have data that will now
show us if, in fact, the credit incentive is the right incentive and if it's
working properly.
So I think ECPO -- you know, the conversation about is this the
end of -- you know, we make this decision and nothing happens,
absolutely not. I mean, I think if nothing else, we have shown a
willingness to listen, to sit down at the table, to collaborate, to adjust,
to look at improvements, and that will continue, because 10 years
from now there may be other issues that we're looking at that are
important that we can address.
So we -- our track record, I think, supports the fact that it's
July 13, 2021
Page 69
not -- it's never been anything but an open collaborative process.
Mike had mentioned, we've got a Land Development Code process
that's going to probably take us the better part of a year just to
implement what we're talking about. But ECPO has been very clear
that we think these amendments are unfinished business. It's
business that, you know, would have been nice if it had happened
sooner, but we need to move forward today with these amendments
so that we can set the stage for the continuation of the program.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And setting the stage, if at the
end -- and we probably -- we won't be here. But if at the end when
that 45,000 acres has been hit or the 404,000 credits and there are
excess credits, what is the position of ECPO on this in terms of --
MR. REYNOLDS: Well, ECPO agreed in 2009, against our
wishes, to a credit cap. Our position in 2009 was an acreage cap is
the right way to do it because acres is what, you know, you have to
measure in terms of the impact. The agreement to the credit cap was
a compromise that ECPO made because the Conservancy was
insisting on a credit cap, and we made that agreement, and we made
it on the record. We have stood by it every day over the past 14
years, and we will stand by it in the future. We agree that that is a
credit cap that, so long as we don't, you know, reinvent the system
and cause that credit cap to fail, that we're comfortable with it, and
we think it works.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But if there are excess credits,
how -- you know, you've --
MR. REYNOLDS: Right. So if there are excess credits, then
there are several options that the Board has. The first option -- and
this is presuming that the Board is -- the boards in the future are not
going to continue to respect an agreed-upon cap. But if there are
additional credits in the future, or potential credits, the first thing that
happens is that the Board has the full authority to approve or not
July 13, 2021
Page 70
approve restoration credits. Those are the variable that are under
complete control of the Board.
So if 30 years from now and we're up to 350,000 credits and
somebody comes in and they're proposing restoration credits, just as
you would today, the Board can say no, we're not going to approve
that restoration.
So you have the ability -- and the restoration credits are 144,000
of 404-. So you've got a lot of -- you've got a lot of ability to throttle
the system just on the restoration alone, number one. Number two is
that the state statute for stewardship, which our program was the
model for and which our program is now recognized as a statutory
program, says that there are other ways of dispensing with credits.
And one of the ways that it contemplates is that public or private
entities can purchase credits and retire them as a potentially
cost-effective way for accomplishing natural resource protection less
expensively than public purchase, because in stewardship the
private-property owner maintains the obligation to maintain the land.
When you buy it as a public entity, the public entity assumes that
expense and obligation.
So just on that alone, you could potentially acquire and retire
credits -- not just excess credits. You could do it at any time -- as a
way of enhancing natural resource protection and driving down the
footprint of development. It's allowed by the statute. It's
contemplated. It hasn't happened yet. But I think, frankly, that
that's probably one of the most important features of the statewide
program is, if you think about what it costs, if you look at that
comparison of the cost for, you know, Conservation Collier to buy
land versus what it costs or doesn't cost to protect land under
stewardship, think about, okay, maybe some credits can be acquired.
And our analysis shows that as you start buying down credits, you
don't have enough credits to ever get to the 45,000-acre cap. I mean,
July 13, 2021
Page 71
it's -- within tolerances, it's very balanced.
So I think there's a couple different ways to deal with that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. REYNOLDS: And that's probably a long ways in the
future.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. Thank you.
Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. For the County
Attorney, just a real quick question. This is an overlay. So I'm
assuming that we can make changes to this overlay at any point in
time, especially during the five-year review, that would not trigger
any Bert Harris claims or property rights claims because the
underlying zoning is still basically in place.
MR. KLATZKOW: Correct. You could end the RLSA
program today if you wanted to.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. So we don't have to
worry about the property rights, and that's been a bit of a concern of
mine, but that addresses that.
And then, Mr. Bosi, is there anything that staff had suggested as
additions to this program that you would want to include that are not
included right now? And I know there was a negotiation, and I
know that there was some compromise on both sides. But anything
that was agreed upon and all -- obviously, it's incumbent upon the
Board to make the final determination on this.
So the question is, is there anything else that we -- from your
perspective, from staff's perspective, that should be included in this
or any changes that should be made to this document?
MR. BOSI: Commissioner Saunders, again, I'm somewhat at a
disadvantage. Been back for a month. I've reviewed all the
material. I don't believe that I have identified something that the
staff had -- has documented that they were looking for that hasn't
July 13, 2021
Page 72
been included within the --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Is there anybody on staff
that's here that could address that, potentially?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Anita.
MR. BOSI: Well, I think Mr. French or Ms. Jenkins, who was
involved in the program, could --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: If Ms. Jenkins could come
up, then. And, again, the question is, obviously there's been a
long-term discussion concerning this document. Is there anything
from staff's perspective that you would have preferred to be in this
document that's not in here right now or any changes to this
document?
MS. JENKINS: Anita Jenkins, for the record, division director
with Growth Management Department.
No, sir. I think that it was fully vetted from the time that the
five-year review came forward. The Board gave us direction to
bring the five-year review back. We vetted that thoroughly. We
did add some policy language in addition to those five-year review
comments, specifically on affordable housing, that we thought was
necessary for the Board. And those were the only changes that we
brought forward, and we haven't identified any other changes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Commissioner Solis and then
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Just very quickly, you know, I
think I -- I'll just kind of revisit a little bit of the history why we're
here today talking about some of the five-year review changes.
You know, I think for me the largest part of the delay in getting
any of this done, which needed to be done, was the prior boards.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's right.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean, this thing has been kicked
July 13, 2021
Page 73
down the road. I mean, it's -- you know, the staff was running up
against a wall, I think.
So, number one, I think it's incumbent upon us to keep moving
this forward, especially as the Land Development Code provisions
come back. I feel confident staff's going to do that in a timely
manner and that it's -- you know, it's really going to be incumbent
upon us to, you know, make decisions.
But in terms of the seven-year review, you know, it just
occurred to me, because of term limits, I think Commissioner
LoCastro will be the only one of us that will still be here because of
term limits.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It depends on the reelection
process, sure.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Sure. But, I mean --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Or if I want to do this again.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: But in any event, however it goes,
because of term limits that we have right now --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's the problem.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- we won't be here.
So I'm just wondering if -- and maybe staff is already going to
do this. But maybe there's a schedule of some kind that we could
talk about for the next seven years, you know, so that the public also
has a sense that there is something going on, you know, just -- instead
of waiting till the last minute -- not that that would happen, but that
might be the appearance of things -- that then suddenly there's a
scramble, that's not, Commissioner McDaniel, what happened in the
five-year review, because there was a lot of -- a lot of work went into
that. It was just the adoption of it.
So maybe staff can come back with just a long-range kind of,
you know, thumbnail schedule for how we would kind of start
considering these things. And it might help the staff's planning
July 13, 2021
Page 74
process as well on how to time some of this instead of doing it in a
vacuum.
But that's all I had. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, I echo that. I sort of
wrote down a similar thing. But no doubt a lot of action has been
taken, you know, Mr. Bosi and to others who spoke. But action
doesn't mean results. So you can have 70 meetings and then walk
out of them and do a whole lot of nothing, and we've done plenty of
that in this county, and other counties have not as well, so I'm not
throwing spears or anything.
But as we want to move forward, I think, you know, this panel
here and with the new staff, renewed County Manager and whatnot,
we don't want to just have meetings for the sake of meetings and
then, you know, just photocopy the RLSA and go, yeah, it's good
enough.
I like what Commissioner McDaniel had said is that it's great to
say a seven-year review but maybe better terminology is no later than
seven years. And to Commissioner Solis' point, a timetable that
maybe has us revisit, and we might even say, no revisit is needed, but
we at least brought it up as a topic.
Because I think one of the eloquent things said was, believe it or
not from Mr. Reynolds -- no, I'm just kidding. I appreciate the time
I spent with you. But you said, these amendments are, you know,
great, but they are unfinished business. Our job is to make sure we
finish the business as we learn some things. And, you know, you
continued to say, hey, in seven or 10 years, we're going to have a lot
of data. Well, if we have data in one or two years, we better come
back here and not just kick the can and not make those changes.
So having something dynamic enough, like we're saying,
July 13, 2021
Page 75
regardless of if we're here or other folks are here, that pings us to
continue to look at this process and improve it so we don't have
unfinished business that continues to float for -- you know, on a
seven-year plan and it floats for 12 and 14 years, I think, is critical.
So I don't think it holds up this vote if we are that dynamic and fluid
in this process. I would just say, let's continue to make sure we do
those things so this doesn't die on the vine and we miss some of those
unfinished business areas for improvement.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. Just as an aside, I had
one point with regard to the restoration credits, and that was one of
the reasons why I was looking for a value for those -- for the actual
dollar value for the credits.
One of the deficiencies we saw in the original program was the
lack of the actual restoration that had been done and the
environmental enhancement that could transpire from that. And
when you don't have an economic basis to be able to make a
decision -- and I think we delineated three different types of
restoration and certain credits that are attributable to those different
types.
So that was one of the reasons that I was quite pleased to see this
coming back forward, because there is now credit attributed to
specific types of restoration and the enhancement of those habitats
that can come from that restoration and actually having it being
completed. So this program, in fact, does that. Again, it protects
and enhances the protection of agriculture which has a basis of
habitat in and of itself.
I'd like to ask the seconder, the person who seconded my
motion, if I could make an amendment. And it's a brief one.
I just would like to ask staff -- Mr. Bosi, if you would,
July 13, 2021
Page 76
please -- can you give me a commitment -- I'd like to make it as a
portion of my motion that you commit to a time frame for when we
will come back and review the program other than before seven
years.
MR. BOSI: As a staff member, I'm obligated to whatever rules
and regulations that are going to be developed and agreed upon by
the Board of County Commissioners. I would say if we wanted to
say -- and just let me -- before I get into the schedule of when we're
going to pick this back up, the effort for the development of that Land
Development Code, you're looking at a year, this is going -- there is
going to be a lot of attention upon it. There's going to be -- and the
specifics of the Land Development Code, when you get into some of
the applications within the credit and the credit systems and the
specifics that need to go -- and the attention that is going to be needed
to develop those Land Development Code regulations is going to
require a little bit of a time, and we know it's going to have a lot of
public participation.
So we're going to need at least a year after, if we receive a
motion to adopt, to develop the Land Development Code regulations.
And then my suggestion would be within -- within three years from
the adoption of those Land Development Code for staff to develop
the -- to develop the schedule to initiate the beginning of the
seven-year review. I think that will be at year four. And the way
that the pace of these programs have gone, we need two to three years
to get these things to -- we get to a point where we're at an adoption
hearing.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So let me make it easier for
you. Can you, at my next meeting in September, come back with a
written schedule and, as I think Commissioner Solis called it, a
thumbnail schedule of time frame for the LDC review and then a
proposition of picking up the review of the GMP amendments?
July 13, 2021
Page 77
MR. BOSI: Yes, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So is it all right that he just -- you
don't have to incorporate that into your motion. There's a --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, I don't. I'm okay
with -- he said that on the record, and he'll come back to us with
something in writing in September at our first meeting in -- real
meeting in September.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. So there's a motion on the
floor and a second. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
Thank you. We are going to break for our hardworking court
reporter. And we will come back at, let's see, that would be 25. So
maybe 20 minutes to 12:00. How's that?
(A brief recess was had from 11:22 a.m. to 11:39 a.m.)
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a
live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
Item #11A
RESOLUTION 2021-156: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
EXPANSION OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE COLLIER
July 13, 2021
Page 78
MOSQUITO CONTROL DISTRICT, PURSUANT TO SECTION
388.211, FLORIDA STATUTES – ADOPTED
MR. ISACKSON: That brings us to our 10:00 time-certain. It
is the recommendation to adopt a resolution approving the expansion
of the boundaries of the Collier Mosquito Control District pursuant to
Section 388.211, Florida Statutes. I've asked Mr. John Mullins to
introduce the item and then follow that up with questions and
discussion from the Board.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And hopefully we have discussed
this. So I think we decided to push it to another meeting because of
Commissioner McDaniel, so -- and his concern.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: What'd I do this time?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So go ahead.
MR. MULLINS: Commissioners, for the record, John Mullins,
your director of Communications, Government, and Public Affairs.
And at your last meeting, you heard a presentation from the
Collier Mosquito Control District on the need to expand their
boundaries.
Yesterday their board adopted an expansion resolution, an
identical draft of which was provided in your materials along with a
map depicting the new boundaries. The signed, sealed, and
delivered copy was provided by Ms. King this morning and has been
submitted for the record.
Per Florida Statutes, you have been requested by the District to
approve these changes, and you have a board resolution before you
that accomplishes this. If adopted, the District will move forward
with the goal of presenting a local bill to our legislative delegation on
September 15th for their consideration for filing for the 2022 regular
session, and Mr. Lynn and Dr. Lucas from the District are here to
answer any technical or financial questions you may have.
July 13, 2021
Page 79
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, would you
entertain a motion to approve?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I will second it.
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was just going to do that.
Since you blamed me for delaying it, I was going to go ahead and
move it forward now. So I'm good.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Very good. So there's a
motion on the floor and a second.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, I have three registered public
speakers for this item.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Go ahead.
MR. MILLER: Your first speaker is Meredith Budd. She'll be
followed by Brad Cornell and then Gary Bromley. I'll ask our
speakers to queue up at both microphones.
MS. BUDD: It's still morning. Good morning. Meredith
Budd on behalf of the Florida Wildlife Federation. Thank you for
the time.
I want to thank the Mosquito Control for their engagement with
the stakeholders. I know that I have chatted with them several times.
I know they've met with a broad range of members of this community
to discuss this expansion.
A couple things I wanted to just note. For urbanized areas, the
Federation is supportive of expanding the boundary. There are areas
proposed within the expansion that are not urban. So we're looking
at 67,000 acres of Picayune Strand all to be included in this boundary
expansion. There's a lot of areas within the Picayune Stand that may
be adjacent to some urban areas where it's appropriate to treat, and I
do understand that, but the rest of this forest that is pretty far away
from the urban areas, the Federation believes it's an inappropriate
July 13, 2021
Page 80
area to include within the boundary.
As far as I understand, the boundary expansion enables a taxing
authority. So since no one lives in Picayune Strand -- I spoke to
Mosquito Control and I offered the suggestion that perhaps if there is
a need to spray in the more -- the areas closer to the urban area within
a state forest like Picayune that it could simply be excluded from the
actual boundary and an agreement with the forest service to evaluate
and spray appropriately could be implemented, similar to the
agreement that they have currently with Ave Maria.
So it's -- they have an agreement currently with a different
entity, so it seems like something that they could do, presumably, and
since no taxing dollars would be brought in that area, it wouldn't be a
loss in that income stream.
The other thing I want to point out is that there are areas within
Collier County that I think should be treated a little bit differently
than just the general boundary expansion, similar to how they had
proposed to treat some of those public lands, specifically
Conservation Collier property and then also Stewardship Sending
Areas within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area.
So those areas are set aside in preservation for a reason.
They're environmentally, potentially biologically productive, and I
believe in the statutes that enable Mosquito Control, it speaks to those
two characteristics for requiring an Arthropod Management Plan and
being more thoughtful in the execution of treatments.
So for Conservation Collier and the Stewardship Sending Areas,
I urge you to request and suggest that Mosquito Control implement
those Arthropod Management Plans appropriately for those areas as
well and not just state and federally owned lands as previously
proposed.
Thank you so very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Brad Cornell. He'll be
July 13, 2021
Page 81
followed by Gary Bromley.
MR. CORNELL: Hello, Madam Chair and Commissioners.
I'm Brad Cornell here again now on behalf of Audubon Florida and
Audubon Western Everglades. Appreciate the opportunity to
address this Mosquito Control District expansion issue.
We did meet with the Mosquito Control District staff and
appreciate that opportunity very much with them. We listened to the
presentation they made to the Board at your last meeting, and I have
also consulted with Audubon Florida Science staff, Dr. Marianne
Korosy, Dr. Shawn Clem, Dr. Paul Gray, and also Dr. Jerry Lorenz,
who are our statewide science staff in the Everglades system around
Lake Cocohatchee, at Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary, and our bird
conservation program, Marianne Korosy.
Their consensus is, one, that it's clear we need to address
populated areas where there is a threat of diseases that could harm
human health and safety. Although this is an ecological compromise
that Audubon recognizes the sort of necessity for, it's not something
we're happy about. When you kill parts of the food chain, it has
consequences, and we have seen those consequences, but we
recognize that necessity.
There's also a strong consensus that we should not be including
in this expansion area the public conservation and private
conservation lands that have been proposed, and those include
3,000 acres that Audubon owns in Rookery Bay. It's a Critical
Wildlife Area. The Rookery Bay Critical Wildlife Area designated
by the state, we object to that. Those are our particular conservation
lands.
We also object to including the Rookery Bay National Estuarine
Research Reserve itself. Picayune Strand restoration, which is a
55,000 acre CERP project for Everglades. Nobody lives in these
places. There's no tax base. There's no population. There's no
July 13, 2021
Page 82
human-health threat from these lands.
The Collier-Seminole State Park. Camp Keais Strand portion
of the CREW project, the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed,
is included in this project. It should not be. And Conservation
Collier preserves, as you heard Meredith Budd address.
So because these places have no tax base and no population, we
don't see the reason for including them in this expansion. We
recognize the needed to do this in populated areas and support that,
but we do -- we strongly object to including these conservation lands.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have a question for him.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Brad. Mr. Cornell, forgive
me.
MR. CORNELL: Yes, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: During my discussion with
our folks at the Mosquito Control yesterday, I brought up some
residential yet rural areas that are in close proximity to the sanctuary
and expressed a similar concern and was assured that though the
boundary was all encompassing, they weren't going to exceed the
allowable treatment processes that are currently existent today.
They could come on to -- one of my friends owns a piece of property
that's bounded by the Corkscrew Sanctuary both on the north and on
the west, and that person could engage Mosquito Control to come and
treat mosquitoes on his property but, literally, wouldn't be able to do
anything about those that didn't read the sign on the property line and
come over from -- specifically from the sanctuary.
So I was fairly well assured that the practices weren't going to
be intrusive on these environmental sensitive lands. But a request
was made or expressed that the Mosquito Control would like to
July 13, 2021
Page 83
engage with the sanctuary to whatever extent is possible to do further
testing and studies with regard to the types of mosquitoes, how many
there are, and so on, and having access to the sanctuary.
MR. CORNELL: So Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary is not
included in this boundary expansion. The land I was referring to is
down in Rookery Bay, so it's actually Rookery Bay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, sir. I'm aware of that.
MR. CORNELL: Yeah, yeah. And so we're happy to
collaborate and coordinate with the staff of the Mosquito Control
District. We're always willing to share science, but our science staff,
all of them uniformly said there's no reason to include in a Mosquito
Control District or an Arthropod Management Plan public
conservation lands, and that would be the one that I just shared with
you that are included in that that we have strong concerns that
that's -- it's a waste of taxpayer money, and it's in conflict with the
ecologic principles of the conservation purposes for which those
lands were bought with public tax dollars.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. CORNELL: If that makes sense.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It does. Absolutely. Thank
you.
MR. CORNELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Go ahead.
MR. MILLER: Your final speaker is Gary Bromley.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mr. Bromley, beg your pardon.
MR. BROMLEY: Good morning, Madam Chair and
Commissioners. Thank you for giving me the time. I concur with
the points that were already made by the two previous speakers, so I
won't bring those up again.
But I think that what Commissioner McDaniel just stated about,
he was fairly sure, reasonably sure, I think it was one of those couple
July 13, 2021
Page 84
of words, about not having this Mosquito Control kind of blanket
environmentally sensitive areas, which have been enumerated as
examples. I think that that's imperative. I don't see any kind of
scientific evidence being brought forward at this point to say that if
you did that, that that would be problematic for populated areas. In
other words, is there some concern that if you don't blanket an entire
area that there's going to be some kind of wind event or something
that will, you know, carry that -- carry the mosquitoes over? You
know, I just don't hear any kind of specifics on the science of why
this is necessary to do it in all areas that -- particularly small
populated areas, I don't see the need for that.
And I've been kind of a naturalist myself and go out frequently
to areas like Corkscrew and Rockery Bay, and I can control the
mosquitoes by a net hat, by products that I put on my skin, et cetera.
So, you know, that -- I just don't see the point of including these areas
in the spray area.
And that's all I have to say today. Thank you so much for your
time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
Before we hear from Commissioner LoCastro, I'd like to ask
representatives, whomever, from Mosquito Control to come up.
Now, I seconded this motion, but I have listened to the concerns
of Audubon and, clearly, it makes great good sense, if there's no
population there, what is the downside of agreeing -- changing the
boundaries on a place like Rookery Bay so it's not included here and
the conservation lands and the -- I think the CREW lands so that
there is -- they're not included in the boundary but there is a
cooperation, an understood cooperation, a collaboration ongoing with
the different environmental agencies?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
July 13, 2021
Page 85
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Let me just interrupt for a
quick second. I fairly quickly made the motion. And maybe to get
this discussion in the right posture, I would withdraw my motion if
you will permit me to withdraw it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm very happy to do that.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. So there's no
motion.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No motion. Okay. All right, sir, so
the floor is yours. Tell us why you have to include these
conservation lands.
MR. LYNN: Well, quite simply, it's not -- it's not cut and
dried. It's not something that really has anything to do with there not
being a tax base. It is the biology of the mosquitoes. It's the flight
range. It's the production of mosquitoes that can carry or vector
disease that will affect the communities that are adjacent to these
areas.
And even more importantly than that, for these public lands, an
Arthropod Management Plan by definition says that we will
collaborate with these managing agencies in order to come up with a
plan. Our Integrated Mosquito Management Plan is one that will
look very different in one location versus another.
So what those opponents are alluding to when they say we don't
have a problem treating areas where people live, we don't either, and
we do that to protect, first and foremost, public health.
The issue is we need to get into these areas that historically did
not abut development where people are moving in droves. They are
at much greater threat now in terms of public health. What we need
to do is to get into these areas, engage in research. It may be several
years before we exert any kind of control in these areas, but we need
to collaborate with management. We need to, essentially, educate
one another on what the mosquito threat is and what the threat to
July 13, 2021
Page 86
public health and comfort and safety is. And it's not -- it's not
exclusive is what I'm saying.
So to include the entirety of the Picayune is strategic in that we
have one land manager, we have an area that we're expecting
significant change in the hydrologic profile in the coming years, and
if we don't -- if we don't engage and get into these locations, we're
going to be behind the curve when it comes time to -- when there is a
disease threat.
The expected areas of growth in Collier are all within the flight
range of mosquitoes that can vector disease. And we are Mosquito
Control, not mosquito annihilation. We don't eliminate mosquitoes
from the food chain. They are not a keystone species.
And we're happy to have -- to continue to have that
conversation. But we have reached out, and we will continue to do
so throughout this process, but it is absolutely critical that everyone
understand that Mosquito Control efforts in these areas will look
significantly different. It may only be larvicide, much like we do at
Wiggins. We're in and out of there before 8:00 in the morning. We
put in a simple bacteria, BTI, and that keeps the salt marsh
mosquitoes from coming off, and it's reasonably effective.
So I would like to offer to Dr. Lucas if she has anything to add.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course.
MR. LYNN: Okay. Thank you.
DR. LUCAS: Yeah. I would just like to add, part of like
Patrick said, these areas that are publicly owned do require an
Arthropod Management Plan. So just because it's included into our
district doesn't mean we get to blanket the entire area with pesticide.
The plan has to be with the land manager, and we have to make an
agreement together.
Part of the reasons why we want to get into areas such as
Rookery Bay is because those mosquitoes, the salt marsh mosquitoes
July 13, 2021
Page 87
are migratory. They fly as far as 20 to 40 miles, and to continue
with our Integrated Mosquito Management Plan, we do want to be
able to have access to those lands and work with these land
managers.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But my question wasn't answered.
Why -- what is the downside of carving them out of this -- out of the
boundaries that you want to treat and having these agreements going
forward?
MR. LYNN: It's -- I don't think -- it's important to say that Ave
Maria is actually under a contractual agreement and spends upwards
of $300,000 a year on mosquito control.
These areas are not -- we cannot engage in a contractual
agreement. There is no -- we're not seeking revenue from these
areas. We simply need to get in there and perform research and have
access to areas that are as yet undecided how close the civilization is
to the area of habitat and the source for mosquitoes.
Again, it may just be larvaciding efforts. But we feel strongly
that not taking it into the district would be foolish at this juncture
given everyone's willingness to work together, because in a few years
we'd have to come back and go through this entire process again to
take it into the district. The growth in Collier County is substantial,
and we need to be out in front of it, and we're not, we're -- we're not
grabbing land here. What we're trying to do is to see the future
threat of -- to public health by mosquitoes and comfort and, quite
frankly, real estate values, tourism, and more where our presence in
Rookery, we feel, is absolutely essential. It's long overdue because
Rookery is actually an island that produces enormous quantities of
mosquitoes that blow into portions of Olde Naples and such where
the majority of our revenue comes from, and there's nothing we can
do about it as it stands.
We need to heal those old wounds, get in there, engage in
July 13, 2021
Page 88
research, and exert some control in the form of, hopefully,
larvaciding. I hope that helps.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It helps. And I'm going to -- I have
lots of questions up here. Commissioner LoCastro, then
Commissioner McDaniel, then Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I was actually going
to call Dr. Lucas forward, so since she's already here. For anybody
that doesn't know, she's the smartest person in the room when it
comes to mosquitoes.
So, you know, my district is affected quite a bit. I mean, like
you said, I don't think mosquitoes are smart enough to hit the
property line of Rookery Bay and turn around and not the hit the
residential areas. And if they fly 20 or 40 miles when they leave
Rookery in masses, they're hitting a lot of areas in District 1.
I like what you said, Mr. Lynn, about maybe those
environmentally sensitive areas don't get blanketed maybe the same
way. And not that you blanket residential areas, but it's a different
approach to maybe thin out the population.
But, you know, I'm very supportive of addressing those areas
that are even environmentally sensitive because maybe 20 years ago
the residential population around those areas was minimal. It's not
now, and I hear from those residents repeatedly. And so they wear,
you know, hats with nets and spray themselves with Off and all of
that, but I think a lot of them feel, and I think you echo it, that some
of those infestations come from nonresidential areas that are adjacent
to where they live.
So I think we have to have a much more dynamic approach to
make sure that these residential areas, you know, have a positive
effect for what you do, and that has to be more than just spray, you
know, their neighborhoods. It's the surrounding area. And you've
already done, you know, some of that research. And so, you know, I
July 13, 2021
Page 89
have a feeling, you know, you've already sort of answered that. But
I'm very supportive of addressing that as long as maybe we don't go
above and beyond, you know, in those environmental areas. But
they certainly do affect the residential areas, and a lot of them are in
District 1.
So, you know, I'm here speaking for a lot of citizens that know
mosquitoes -- who know that mosquitoes aren't smart enough to turn
around, you know, and stay in the Rookery Bay area. So they're
crossing over into the residential areas, and especially this has been a
really bad year. So I think this is long overdue.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I think I'm coming
over to Patrick, Doc.
This is a less technical question for you. Who ultimately makes
the decision as to what you can do and what you can't do within the
bounds that you have?
MR. LYNN: That's an excellent question. We are beholden to
several agencies and organizations. Our primary oversight is from
the Florida Department of Agriculture, and then within that we have
Florida Statutes, our particular board, our five-member Board of
County Commissioners sets policy and, ultimately, the decisions are
made in-house about what we're going to do and where and when and
what we're going to use based upon label restrictions.
So the DEP in the state, the EPA federally, we abide by all of
those regulatory agencies. And we have limitations on what we can
use where and when.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And so here today you're
asking -- your board, who is an independently elected board, an
independent taxing district, when you make a decision, you or the
doc make a decision to do a particular treatment, I don't ever
remember you coming and asking this board about what you can and
July 13, 2021
Page 90
can't do. You don't.
You're here today to talk to us about the expansion of your
district area. Those decisions are still going to be made internally
with the governing agencies that you are already answering to, along
with your independently elected independent taxing district will make
the decisions of what you can and cannot do within the bounds of
what you have, correct?
MR. LYNN: That is correct. And I'd like to add that the vast
majority of the areas that we're taking in that are public lands require
an Arthropod Management Plan, and that process itself guides our
science team and operations team. And we will have to establish a
means of control in those areas that's acceptable to all parties.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. And then so -- and
that's specifically where I was going, because I have an enormous
amount of respect for Meredith and Brad and the concerns that they
expressed. But the expansion of the bounds doth not mean that
you're going to run in there and spray it all of a sudden.
MR. LYNN: No.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's not how the process
actually works.
MR. LYNN: Not even remotely.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So I wanted to share that, say
that -- I was fairly well aware of that, but I wanted to express that out
loud and that you're not going to deviate. By the expansion of these
bounds, you're not going to deviate from your regulated law-abiding
practices that you've always been doing.
MR. LYNN: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So if there are no others, I
would make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll second that at this point.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I just had just one question.
July 13, 2021
Page 91
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm sorry. I didn't mean to
jump ahead of you.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No, that's okay. That's fine. I'm
going to support the motion, I think, based upon what I hear, but -- so
these areas that are managed by the Forestry Service or some other
agencies, I mean, you will have contact with these agencies in terms
of what, if anything, you do, as Commissioner McDaniel was
pointing out. This doesn't mean that you're just going to spray the
entire Picayune, right?
MR. LYNN: That's exactly -- we could not afford to do so.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. So -- and explain a little bit
about these Arthropod Management Plans. I mean, so state lands
have to have a plan for specifically dealing with mosquitoes?
MR. LYNN: Yes, that is true. To the best of my knowledge,
we have, in one respect, an Arthropod Management Plan, and in
another we have a Mosquito Management Plan. In both cases --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Oh, I thought they were the same.
MR. LYNN: In both cases we're talking strictly mosquitoes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
MR. LYNN: In order for us to be more data driven and more
effective at meeting our mission, having access to these areas for the
purposes of research and establishment of an Arthropod Management
Plan agreed upon by all parties -- and it may turn out to be a bit of a
tussle, but we will get there. If we don't engage in this process, then
we're going to be, as I mentioned before, behind the public health
threat curve in short order.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. Okay. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So we have a motion on the
floor and a second. Is there any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Just because I think we need to hear
July 13, 2021
Page 92
from it again, I think either Ms. Budd or Mr. Cornell, will you come
back up and refute this? I still haven't gotten my question answered:
Why do we have to extend the boundaries if you're willing to
cooperate?
MS. BUDD: For the record, Meredith Budd, Florida Wildlife
Federation.
That is still my question. I 100 percent am in support of
Mosquito Control expansion to areas that are at the interface and
close to the urban areas where we have people living. And I think
it's great to be able to work with the Forest Service and other entities
to be able to study those larger areas. I don't think it has to be
included in the boundary to do that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah.
MS. BUDD: I think that there is an ability to have some sort of
agreement, whether it be an MOU document, whether it would be a
contractual agreement, however you want to word it, to work with
these entities to do exactly what they're proposing to do for the safety
of everyone here in Collier County without including it in the taxing
boundary. If it's not taxable, a taxable area, I don't understand why it
has to be included in the taxable boundary.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Mr. Cornell?
MR. CORNELL: Brad Cornell, for the record, for Audubon
Florida and Audubon Florida Everglades. Thank you for that
follow-up question, Madam Chair.
I agree with Meredith Budd that there's no need to include
public conservation lands in a Mosquito Control District in order to
coordinate on research, on monitoring, on strategies, and I want to
emphasize strongly what our science staff said to me very, very
vociferously, which was, it's a compromise to be spraying areas that
have population, because this is a very sensitive part of the Western
July 13, 2021
Page 93
Everglades.
And so the fact that Rookery Bay surrounds Marco Island, I
understand, Commissioner LoCastro, why that's a concern to your
constituents and all of us. I go to Marco Island all the time.
So that's an issue for populated areas. So we're willing to make
that compromise and recognize the need for public safety, comfort,
and health, that we have to do mosquito control in populated areas
but not in conservation areas. That does not make sense to us. It
conflicts with the science and the reason for buying these
conservation lands and protecting them, and an Arthropod
Management Plan should recognize that important ecological value,
and it just -- you know, I guess, if we're going to talk about science,
that's the science.
And I also want to emphasize that it's not really fair to say there
is nothing that the Mosquito Control District can do when migratory
salt marsh mosquitoes end up in urban or populated areas. That's
what adulticiding is. They've been doing that for decades, and
they're very good at it, I have to say, because I live in one of those
areas where it used to be DC-3s flew over my house every night, and
now it's helicopters. So they're good at that. That's the response to
migratory mosquitoes. Thank you. I'm sorry, was there any other --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, unless -- I don't have any other
questions here.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I mean, I'd like to hear the
rebuttal, because the part I'm sort of missing is -- I understand not
spraying the protected areas, but the part about they're migratory for
20 or 40 miles, like I said, the mosquitoes aren't going to turn around
when they hit the Marco Island, you know, boundary.
So, I mean, I think what they're saying is it does affect those
residential areas, and they're also committing that they're not going to
spray as aggressively or they're going to work with you. I think all
July 13, 2021
Page 94
they're looking to do is have that part included in the map so they
have the authority or maybe the update to say that that's an area we
will -- we now have the authority to look at in cooperation with your
organization. I don't think it's giving them a blank check on all of a
sudden, you know -- you know, fire up the helicopters or the
airplanes or whatnot.
MR. CORNELL: They're not going to do that today, as
Mr. Lynn told you, but that is something that they said was down the
road possibly. And whether it's larvaciding or adulticiding or
integrated management with other strategies, undermining the base of
the food chain is what our science staff are concerned with, and it's
not a small issue. And so I beg to differ with what you're hearing
from the District. We think that they can accomplish what they need
to do in terms of research, coordination, and collaboration without
including these public conservation lands that have no people or tax
base in their district.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Don't you think, though, they
would only come to you if their research, in collaboration with you,
showed that the populations of mosquitoes in these protected areas
were such that there was an overabundance, you know, that they're
not just spraying because it's that time of the year, but they're noticing
an unbelievable infestation that is affecting the surrounding
residential areas, and that would be the times that they would want to
address it with you, and I would hope -- and I would think you
would, you know, be open to that.
MR. CORNELL: So they have monitoring programs that, you
know, they send some poor guy out into the woods to watch --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: That's Richie, I think, right?
MR. CORNELL: Yeah. So -- and other ways to do that, of
course, the carbon dioxide traps and all that kind of stuff. So they
have ways to certainly determine whether there's a problem and,
July 13, 2021
Page 95
certainly, constituent complaints is not the least among those. And
I -- you know, we're sympathetic to that, and we want to collaborate
and coordinate with them. For generations we have not needed to do
that on conservation lands. You know, there are black bears that live
in Golden Gate Estates. There are panthers across Southwest
Florida. There are mosquitoes. That's where we live. So take
the -- as Gary Bromley noted, you know, you wear DEET or you
spray your arms, you wear long clothes and long sleeves, and you're
smart.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: But decades ago we didn't
have the density that we have of residential areas now, so things have
changed, and I think that's why they're bringing it to us. I'm not
sitting here banging on tables saying that, you know, they're
100 percent. We're trying to have a collaboration here, but things
have changed in those areas, especially in District 1 where the density
of residential homes and communities and whatnot have grown
exponentially. So I know we haven't done it before, but I think that's
why they're here, because they think it might be long overdue to at
least add it to the map. It doesn't mean they're going to be spraying
every day.
MR. CORNELL: I don't see what they gain by adding it to the
map, though, Commissioner, with all due respect.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay.
MR. CORNELL: I see their tools adequate to address the
issues through adulticiding and larviciding, as they are doing. I
think they are -- they are robustly equipped to address the problem
even with our increased populations, even with the expansion into
eastern areas of the county. I guess I take issue with that assertion
that there's something to be gained by adding these conservation
lands, and that's perhaps something we agree to disagree on, but
that's -- I guess that's our view.
July 13, 2021
Page 96
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. CORNELL: Sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. There's a motion on the
floor and a second, to the background of thunder outside, I guess.
All right. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed?
Aye.
It carries 4-1.
Item #10A
EXTENDING THE IMMOKALEE IMPACT FEE INSTALLMENT
PAYMENT PILOT PROGRAM, WHICH PROVIDES FOR
INSTALLMENT PAYMENTS OF IMPACT FEES FOR NEW
CONSTRUCTION LOCATED WITHIN THE IMMOKALEE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA, FOR ONE YEAR
AND MODIFY THE PAYMENT TERMS AND RELATED
PROGRAM FEES IN ORDER TO DETERMINE IF SUCH
CHANGES IMPROVE PROGRAM PARTICIPATION –
APPROVED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, that brings us back to
Item 10A, which was brought forth by Commissioner McDaniel. It's
a recommendation to extend the Immokalee Impact Fee Installment
Payment Pilot Program which provides for installment payments of
impact fees for new construction located within the Immokalee
Community Redevelopment Area for one year, and modify the
July 13, 2021
Page 97
payment terms and related programs fees in order to determine if
such changes improve program participation.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do we have staff report, or
do you want me to go?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel. No, it's
your turn. You're bringing it forward. I think we've all read it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I mean, I think we've all read it. Are
you --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make a motion for
approval. Do you want me to sell you on it, or --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I mean, it's really quite
simple. I'd be happy to give a brief explanation.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, give us a short version.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The program was established,
I think, in 2017/'18, shortly after I became the commissioner. It
hasn't been participated in, and it's largely due to the lack of
economic feasibility with the program that was adjusted to what we
currently have now. And we're making adjustments to make it
almost be equal to paying your impact fees up front and putting them
in your mortgage and/or attaching them as a non-ad valorem
assessment.
The interest rate fluctuation, I think Amy shared with me this
morning, is real close, but the benefit is, it's a user-based fee, so you
pay for your portion of ownership and the impacts of that ownership,
and then when you sell your home, it travels on to the next.
So I'll make a motion for approval.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. There's a motion and a
July 13, 2021
Page 98
second. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously, sir.
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #11B
RESOLUTION 2021-157: A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING
PROPOSED MILLAGE RATES AS THE MAXIMUM PROPERTY
TAX RATES TO BE LEVIED IN FY 2022 AND REAFFIRM THE
ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING DATES IN SEPTEMBER 2021
FOR THE BUDGET APPROVAL PROCESS – ADOPTED
MR. ISACKSON: Item 11B is a recommendation to adopt a
resolution establishing proposed millage rates as the maximum
property tax rates to be levied in Fiscal Year 2022 and reaffirm the
advertised public hearing dates in September 2021 for the budget
approval process.
Mr. Edward Finn, the director of Corporate Financial Planning
and Management Services, will present or answer questions.
MR. FINN: Thank you, Mr. Isackson.
Good morning, Commissioners, Edward Finn with the Office of
Management and Budget.
Just a couple of matters for the record. July 1 begins the formal
truth in millage process, which we call TRIM. That's -- the statute
July 13, 2021
Page 99
governs that to govern our budget process and the adoption of
millage rates.
On July 1, the Property Appraiser provides to us certified
taxable values, and he has done so. Today we're proceeding with the
next step in our TRIM process. This step requires adopting a
resolution, establishing the proposed millage rates as the maximum
millage rates to be levied in FY22.
The attachments to this item, 11B, provide the maximum
millage rates that are proposed, tax dollars raised by those millage
rates, and the July 1st certified taxable values.
The resolution also affirms, or reaffirms, September 9th and
September 23rd, 2021, at 5:05 p.m. as the dates of the public hearings
to adopt the FY21/22 budget.
The last thing that I would like to mention is that the Board's
tentative budget will be provided on or about July 16th. This
document will incorporate changes driven by the July 1st certified
taxable values as well as other changes coming out of workshop
discussions.
Staff recommends adoption of the resolution.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's no questions up here.
Mr. Miller, do we have any --
MR. MILLER: No public comment, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So seeing none, do we have a
motion or a second here? I'd like to move for approval.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Motion on the floor and a
second. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
July 13, 2021
Page 100
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you.
MR. FINN: Thank you very much. Thank you.
Item #11C
RESOLUTION 2021-158: A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE
COUNTY MANAGER TO TAKE IMMEDIATE ACTION TO
MAKE THE MINIMUM NECESSARY REPAIRS REQUIRED TO
FACILITATE THE TRANSPORT OF EMERGENCY SERVICE
VEHICLES ON 42ND AVENUE SE AND APPROVE ALL
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS – ADOPTED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, that moves us to Item 11C.
It's a recommendation to approve a resolution directing the County
Manager to take immediate action to make the minimum necessary
repairs required to facilitate the transport of emergency service
vehicles on 42nd Avenue Southeast and approve all necessary budget
amendments. Ms. Michelle Arnold, the director of your Public
Transit and Neighborhood Enhancement Services, will present.
MS. ARNOLD: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
I'm here to present an item that came to us from the Fire
Department, the Greater Naples Fire Department, after an inspection
that they did on that particular road noting the conditions of 42nd
Avenue Southeast as being approximately a 30-plus
minute -- causing a 30-plus minute delay in emergency vehicles if
they're able to respond to incidents for fire or other emergency
services.
You-all have a process that's in place that allows you-all to
July 13, 2021
Page 101
conduct repairs, emergency repairs on private property. I'm bringing
forward to you this process now and asking that the Board, as a part
of that process, waive notices to the public hearing, although we did
provide a courtesy notice to all the property owners along that
roadway; direct the County Manager to take immediate action to
complete minimum repairs of that facility; and follow the
necessary -- following the necessary repairs, direct the County
Manager to place an item on your agenda so that we could establish
an MSTU or BU to recollect the monies that were expended to do
those repairs.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So, Ms. Arnold, you've noticed the
property owners that -- for this hearing, or you've noticed them that
the intent of the county is to establish an MSTU, that there is another
hearing that has to have that happen?
MS. ARNOLD: We notified of this particular hearing.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of this particular hearing.
Mr. Miller, anyone?
MR. MILLER: We have one registered public speaker, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Let's hear from --
MR. MILLER: Your registered speaker is William Spencer.
MR. SPENCER: Good afternoon.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good afternoon.
MR. SPENCER: My name's William Spencer. I don't know if
you know the history of 42nd, but when my parents moved back out
there in the '70s, they had -- it was called an access road off of 84,
and their address was an 84 address. It was like 300 and something
thousand 84, State Road 84 address.
When I-75 came through and cut off that access road, the state
sent -- and I saw these documents from George Archibald when he
was the transportation director -- stating that the state has turned all
the access roads off that was cut off by the I-75 to the county. Then
July 13, 2021
Page 102
when -- and George maintained that road for -- while he was in
office. He didn't do it -- he only did it when it was necessary. He
didn't have a regular maintenance on it, because it was only just my
father and mother living there. Since then there's two more houses
plus a brand-new one going up now on that road.
But since then, since that access road was turned over to the
county by that document -- but the way it reads, it's not 42nd or that
particular access road. It's all access roads adjacent to I-75 through
Golden Gate Estates. That's the way it was written. And since then
the county made new addresses out there and presented it as 42nd
now Avenue, which I believe has included that road in the Golden
Gate Estates system. And we've been paying taxes on that for more
than 40 years. And I hear her say that they want to put an MSTU on
it, and that means I'll have to pay for that again after paying taxes on
that property for 40 years.
And I don't think that's right at all to be able to have to do that.
You should be at least -- it's a lime rock road. At least make it
passible for the emergency vehicles.
And I see my time's up, and I hope you agree with me and not
make that an MSTU. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: County Manager, do we have any
record of the county repairing that road?
MR. ISACKSON: I have to rely on our staff, but I know of no
such record.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ms. Scott's coming forward.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Is it -- is it a private road, or is
there a right-of-way?
MS. SCOTT: So we went back to look -- the roadway actually
falls within the Florida Department of Transportation right-of-way
for I-75, and there is an easement for the roadway. That easement is
not to benefit the public. It's not a public easement. It's an
July 13, 2021
Page 103
easement -- an access easement for the benefit of the property
owners. We have documentation from the Florida Department of
Transportation dating back to 2007 where this issue had come up
previously where they provided to us that they do not maintain the
roadway and that, in our research, we did not maintain the roadway
either. So that was a private roadway with an access easement to the
benefit of the Gulf American Land Corporation and future lot owners
to construct and utilize the service road.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So do they pay -- have they paid
taxes on this easement? No?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No.
MS. SCOTT: No.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No taxes, okay, on the easement
itself. No.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Just on their land.
MS. SCOTT: It's a -- they pay their typical property taxes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Property taxes.
MS. SCOTT: Property tax, yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course.
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I'd like to make a
motion to act upon number -- staff's recommendation for 1 and 2 and
set aside 3 and 4 until September when we come back and address
the issue in a different manner than just -- I mean, our emergency
services have told us there's dire need for people with the fires and
access for our first responders. So I'd like us to take care of that and
then come back in September and address the "how it's going to get
paid back" issue.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'll second that motion. That's a very
fair way of doing this.
Commissioner Solis.
July 13, 2021
Page 104
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'm just trying to figure out if it's a
private road and it's really just a private easement for the property
owners to maintain the road, what's going to change by September?
I mean, that's a legal issue. And we get back to the issue that you
and I have discussed before.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, we're going to get to
debate that again in September. Because, again, this is a county --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I just --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't want to -- so having
said all that, I don't want to implement an MSTU just on this
particular street, because there is a far more equitable way to take
care of all of our public roads for emergency access than the
implementation of a specific MSTU on the residents and the owners
of this road, and we could -- we'll debate that in September, not
today. But today is to take care of the recommendations of our first
responders.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's a flag gone up, so now you're
considered warned, right?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And 1 and 2 completely does
that, right, Ms. Arnold?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: But if you don't go 3 and 4, we don't bring
it back.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: It's got to come back.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's got to come back. So we would come
back when the repairs were completed and then ask you whether or
not you're going to consider this a public road, in which case we do
nothing, or private road in which case we do something.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean, we -- question for the
County Attorney. If it's a private road and we -- and we improve it
July 13, 2021
Page 105
with public funds, can we waive that? I mean, that's -- there's issues
with having private --
MR. KLATZKOW: The Board would have to make a finding
that this is a public road to use public funds.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: But we're not necessarily at that point in
time. Staff will come back, and on the issue of whether or not to
establish an MSTU, the Board can make that determination.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. That's --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So am I crossing the line
legally by only taking care of 1 and 2, or can we take care of the
entire --
MR. KLATZKOW: But if you only do 1 and 2, staff doesn't
come back.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. Well, the staff is
coming back, because I'm going to generate staff to come back with a
different mechanism for the repayment.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. But now you're -- but now you're
using public funds on what staff believes to be a private road.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'm asking you. So if I
need to do 3 and 4 to accomplish the first responders' need, then I'll
do 3 and 4 now and then amend accordingly when we come back.
MR. KLATZKOW: I would recommend you do 3 and 4, and
your particular item, you can bring forth at that very same time.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Then that's -- I'll amend my
motion to do that, because the important thing is is to be able to get
the protection --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Get it done.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- for the people and
then -- and the maintenance.
July 13, 2021
Page 106
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'll agree to the amendment. So we
have a motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
It is 12:30 right now, and we will break an hour for lunch, but
we have business, the county business to do and to complete before
we hear our hearing at 1:00. And if you remember the agenda, when
it was published, the issue of the Bill of Rights Sanctuary -- County
Sanctuary is not to be heard before 1:00, which means it could be
heard at 2:00 or 3:00 or 4:00. I'm not suggesting that, but we will
complete the county business before we go to this hearing.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want to go ahead and
take care of them now? I mean, most --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, you don't.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So I think right now we're moving
into 11D; is that correct?
MR. ISACKSON: You have 11D, 11E, and 11F. You have
three items on the agenda on the County Manager's side.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's fine. If there's an agreement
up here, I think we should just go through these three items and then
break for lunch.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's what I just said.
Item #11D
July 13, 2021
Page 107
INCREASING PURCHASE ORDER NO. 4500204651 ISSUED TO
Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES IN THE AMOUNT OF
$5,427,219.00 FOR THE "PALM RIVER PUBLIC UTILITIES
RENEWAL PROJECT", TASKS 2 AND 3 OF AGREEMENT #19-
7523, PROJECTS #70257 AND #60234; AND AUTHORIZE THE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS – APPROVED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, that brings you to Item
11D, which is a recommendation to increase [sic] Purchase Order No.
4500204651 issued to Q. Grady Minor & Associates in the amount of
$5,427,219 for the Palm River Public Utilities Renewal Project,
Tasks 2 and 3, of Agreement 19-7523, Project 70257 and 60-234; and
authorize all necessary budget amendments.
Mr. Tom Chmelik, your Public Utilities Engineering and Project
Management director, will present.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I would make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I would second it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's a fine presentation.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do we have any public speakers?
MR. MILLER: No, ma'am, I don't have speakers on any of
these next three items.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Thank you.
All right. So we have a motion on the floor and a second.
There's no other discussion up here. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
July 13, 2021
Page 108
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you
very much.
MR. CHMELIK: Thank you, Commissioners and Madam
Chair.
Item #11E
THE WATER, WASTEWATER, IRRIGATION QUALITY
WATER, AND WHOLESALE POTABLE WATER USER RATE
AND FEE STUDY AND DIRECT THE COUNTY MANAGER OR
HIS DESIGNEE TO ADVERTISE A RESOLUTION AMENDING
SCHEDULES ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE OF
APPENDIX A TO SECTION FOUR OF COLLIER COUNTY
ORDINANCE NO. 2001-73, AS AMENDED, TITLED THE
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM
BILLING, OPERATING, AND REGULATORY STANDARDS
ORDINANCE NO. 2001-73, AS AMENDED, WITH AN
EFFECTIVE DATE OF OCTOBER 1, 2021 – APPROVED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, Item 11E, it's a
recommendation to accept the water, wastewater, irrigation quality
water, and wholesale potable water users rate and fee study and direct
the County Attorney or his designee to advertise a resolution
amending Schedules 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of Appendix A to Section 4 of
the Collier County Ordinance No. 2001-73 as amended titled the
Collier County Water and Sewer District Uniform Billing, Operating,
and Regulatory Standards ordinance as amended with an effective
date of October 1, 2021.
Ms. Amia Curry, manager of the Public Utilities Financial and
July 13, 2021
Page 109
Operations support sections, will present.
MS. CURRY: Good morning, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning.
MS. CURRY: Or afternoon. I'm Amia Curry, the Public
Utilities Financial and Operational support manager.
This presentation summarized the Water/Sewer District User
Rate Study recommendations that we developed with Reftelis our
rate consultant.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm sorry. If you could just speak a
little bit -- yes, thank you.
MS. CURRY: And this covers Fiscal Years '22 through '24.
The primary driver of the proposed rate is capital reinvestment.
That's to repair, rehabilitate, and replace our infrastructure. District
utility infrastructure is continuously growing and aging, and it
currently includes more than $1.66 billion in total assets, which are
depreciating at more than $47 million each and every year.
Cash and carry, current year in process, and planned capital
investments through Fiscal '24 for critical infrastructure investments
total $409 million.
Inflationary effects on operating costs are also a contributing
factor, and the National Association of Clean Water Agencies, or
NACWA, Cost of Clean Water Index reports historical and forecasts
nationwide utility cost increases well in excess of inflation suggested
by the Consumer Price Index. The District is experiencing this
firsthand through significant cost increases for utility parts commonly
used in the system like meters and PVC pipe.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can you back up that last
slide just one quick second for me, please. I just want to just make
sure I have that all in my brain.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: PVC pipe.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I know. That was curious. PVC
July 13, 2021
Page 110
pipe. Why that?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. What's that attributable to;
petroleum costs or --
MS. CURRY: It's the cost increases we're experiencing for the
parts related.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Parts.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And, again, relatively
speaking, this is a -- these are short-term impacts on a cycle that
we're going through right now. This is not the impetus for the rate
increase. The rate increase suggestion is to support the expansion of
the overall system and the repairs and maintenance that we have
necessarily going on forever. Some of the reasons that -- I mean,
it's -- hopefully it's going to be a short-lived circumstance with the
cost of materials and things that we're going through right now.
MS. CURRY: Specifically the repairs, maintenance, and
replacement. The growing infrastructure is covered by impact fees.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. You can proceed on.
I'm --
MS. CURRY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you. Thank you for
that.
MS. CURRY: The NACWA Cost of Clean Water Index
averages 3.7 percent over the period covered by the previous and
current rate studies, and district user rates proposed by those studies
average only 3.64 percent over that same period.
Construction indices are also relevant, and they reflect average
cost escalations similar to NACWA and significantly higher than
CPI.
The proposed user rates in this study provide the revenue
required to operate and maintain the utility; to restore critical funding
to repair, rehabilitate, and replace utility infrastructure; to meet user
July 13, 2021
Page 111
fee debt service obligations; and to maintain the disciplined rate
setting cited by Fitch in their reaffirmation of the District's Triple A
credit rating.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I ask a quick question?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Of course.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Is this -- these are all
programmed expenses that are all part of our capital asset and
maintenance and replacement budgeting that we're going through?
MS. CURRY: As well as operating for the future.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MS. CURRY: The water, wastewater, and irrigation-quality
water will be adjusted on a percentage basis as indicated with the
exception of Fiscal '22, which will be adjusted by 2.9 percent, and
backfilled by one-time CARES federal funding of $10 million for
capital improvements.
The study also addresses miscellaneous service fees which are
adjusted based on actual direct costs for labor, materials, and
equipment. And while the District does not have any current
wholesale water agreements, rates are established for use as needed
and moved by 4.9 percent.
There are many factors that affect user rates, including the
treatment type required, affluent disposal, the size of the utility, bond
covenants, level of capital investment in the utility infrastructure, as
well as fiscal policies.
The District's proposed rates remain competitive. They're
higher than 14 but lower than six of the utilities surveyed as part of
the rate study and, notably, 11 of the surveyed utilities plan to
conduct or implement their own rate revisions within the next 12
months.
The District recommends that the Board accept the user rate and
fee study and direct advertisement of a resolution amending the rate
July 13, 2021
Page 112
schedules with an effective date of October 1st, 2021.
Thank you for your consideration, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll move for approval.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'll second.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Motion on the floor and a second.
Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you.
MS. CURRY: Thank you.
Item #11F
THE SOLID WASTE RATE STUDY AND FINANCIAL
FORECAST THAT SUPPORTS AN ANNUAL AVERAGE
INCREASE IN TIPPING FEES OF 3.25% AND UNIFIES THE
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL RATES AMONG SERVICE
DISTRICTS I AND II, AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO
INCORPORATE THE RECOMMENDED TIPPING FEE RATES
INTO THE ANNUAL RATE RESOLUTIONS, THAT WILL
SUPERSEDE RESOLUTION 2020-154, AS AMENDED, FOR
July 13, 2021
Page 113
FISCAL YEARS 2022-2024 – APPROVED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, Item 11F is a
recommendation to accept the Solid Waste Rate Study and Financial
Forecast that supports an annual average tipping fee increase of
3.25 percent and unifies the solid waste disposal rates amongst
Service Districts 1 and 2, and district staff to incorporate the
recommended tipping fee rates into the annual rate resolutions that
will supersede Resolution 2020-154, as amended, for Fiscal Years
2022 to 2014.
Kari Hodgson, your Solid Waste and Hazardous Waste
Management director -- division director will present or answer
questions.
MS. HODGSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I've
prepared about a five-minute presentation if you'd like to see, or if
you have any specific questions.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do it in three.
MS. HODGSON: My name's Kari Hodgson, your director for
Solid Waste, for the record.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Anybody? Commissioner
McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make a motion for
approval.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I've already seen it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I have a quick question.
MS. HODGSON: Sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I know we harvest the methane,
correct?
MS. HODGSON: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. I was listening to the radio,
July 13, 2021
Page 114
and I don't know if we're on the forefront of it, but I think we've been
doing it for several years; is that correct?
MS. HODGSON: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. We are on the forefront of it
as a county, are we not?
MS. HODGSON: Absolutely. We collect the methane that's
generated from the landfill, and we take that, convert it to energy, sell
it back to the grid.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. Congratulations.
MS. HODGSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I just want to echo,
you know, we've got -- sometimes we get stones thrown at the county
staff here and there of all the things we're not doing, and this, that,
and the other.
You've got one of our superstars right here doing amazing
things. I mean, I've seen it firsthand. You know, you've taught me
a lot, taught all of us a lot. So I just want to say in public that, you
know, continue what you're doing. You have a bright future whether
you continue to work for us in government or do other things. And
you really have a staff that you have energized. They have an
incredible, you know, amount of enthusiasm and whatnot for
something that maybe isn't as popular of a topic to a lot of people.
But you all certainly think it's great and wonderful, and that's all we
care about.
But great work, Kari, for what you-all are doing and the awards
you're winning and your initiative and your hard work.
MS. HODGSON: Thank you for your support. Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You hear that. That's all
them clapping for you.
July 13, 2021
Page 115
MS. HODGSON: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. So there's a --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Don't get cocky.
MS. HODGSON: Keep it trashy.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's a motion on the floor and a
second. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Congratulations. And
congratulations to Dr. Yilmaz who started this.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. He's the one that's
orchestrating all that.
MS. HODGSON: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. All right. I think we've
completed our morning business; is that --
MR. ISACKSON: You have. Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. So at this point we will
break for one hour and come back at 1:40.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's 59 minutes.
(A luncheon recess was had from 12:41 p.m. to 1:40 p.m.)
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a
live mic.
Item #10B
July 13, 2021
Page 116
RESOLUTION 2021-159: BOARD TO CONSIDER ADOPTION
OF A COUNTY ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING COLLIER
COUNTY AS A BILL OF RIGHTS SANCTUARY COUNTY –
MOTION TO APPROVED – FAILED; MOTION TO ADOPT A
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE CONSTITUTION AND BILL
OF RIGHTS – ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good afternoon. We are here this
afternoon to discuss one item, and that is the bill of
sanctuary -- county sanctuary item that is on our agenda. Thank you
for your patience this morning. We took care of the business of
Collier County.
We are going to have at this point -- and, Mr. Miller, if you can
tell us, please, how many speakers and how long you anticipate it to
go to.
MR. MILLER: We -- assuming now we're stopping
registration at this point, we have 117 registered speakers both online
and here in person. That comes out to three hours and -- or excuse
me, five hours and 51 minutes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So six hours of public comment, and
that does not count for people coming up to the podium or for any
questions that may come from this dais to you.
So it is my intention to have each speaker be given three minutes
to speak, and that would bring it to six hours of public comment.
Unless I hear differently up here, that's what we're going to do.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Just with the proviso, there
again, if someone else has already said what you have said, you can
just come and affirm that, state your name and such for the record,
and reaffirm what's already been said in advance just so we aren't
repeating.
July 13, 2021
Page 117
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We are going to have a break. We
will take that break accurately not -- we're not going to interrupt
someone from speaking. They'll be -- the breaks will be at 3:15 to
3:30 for our court reporter, and we will have a dinner break, an hour,
at 5:00, and we'll come back at 6:00, so you know that. And then
we're going to have another break at 7:30 until quarter to 8:00, and
then we'll have another break at 9:00.
We're ladies and gentlemen of the jury listening to ladies and
gentlemen. We ask you to respect the speaker that's up here.
Whether you agree with them or not, just respect them. And we look
forward to a very vigorous discussion this afternoon. Thank you.
So go ahead.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Can I just make a comment?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: As long as it's about procedure.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, it's about -- it's about how
we're going to go about this process.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm going to address that for a
minute.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, I just wanted to -- you know,
right now there's a lot going on in Cuba. And the people in Cuba
that don't have the ability to do this, you know, because -- and that
have been subject to not having any rights for decades are right now,
in the middle of, you know, government oppression, reprisals, arrests
that -- the president there has called for, you know, civil war.
You know, this is a process that we're very fortunate to have,
and we ought to treat it that way. A lot of people around the world,
especially in Cuba, don't have, you know, what we're blessed to have
July 13, 2021
Page 118
and which is the bedrock of our democracy, and that is the ability to
come here and have a civil discourse over something that we all feel
passionately about. And so I hope -- I hope that while we're going
through this we can keep in mind what's going on in Cuba, how
blessed we are to be able to do this and to treat it as, you know, a
sacred thing, because not everybody has this opportunity.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So we'll begin with Commissioner
McDaniel, who brought this before us, but I didn't see an executive
summary on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There was no need for an
executive summary. We were just bringing it back for an adoption
hearing. We already advertised it as such.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But I didn't see an executive
summary in the other one and, unfortunately or fortunately, the
executive summary, one of the things that talks about is fiscal impact
of whatever we're bringing. There's no fiscal impact, there is fiscal
impact, have you made that determination? No.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Me, myself, no.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I mean, there are -- I haven't
made those fiscal -- that fiscal impact determination. That's not a
requisite of mine to do.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. All right. Well, I think what
I'd like to do is the way we're going to proceed with this is I'm going
to ask our County Attorney to speak to us, and then we're going to go
right into the public speaking, and we're going to take folks -- I've
asked the Rosenbergers to speak first, and I think Ms. Heuser will
speak second, and then we are going to follow the list that came to
our -- Mr. Miller.
July 13, 2021
Page 119
So, County Attorney Klatzkow.
MR. KLATZKOW: The narrow issue presented to the Board is
whether or not the Board wishes to adopt the ordinance that is
presented to it.
You just had a few comments as to what this ordinance actually
does. First off, it defines as an unlawful act a federal statute or
regulation that restricts or violates an individual's constitutional
rights.
With that as the starting point, it provides that any official of
Collier County presumably, together with their employees, while
acting in the official capacity, is in violation of this ordinance if they
intentionally participate in an unlawful act -- again, that's a federal
act or regulation that is unconstitutional -- or utilizes any funds
allocated by any entity to Collier County to engage in the
enforcement of an unlawful act.
The act does a couple of things. One, understand that by
official of Collier County we are talking about the five of you, we're
talking about the five constitutional officers, and we're talking about
the five members of the school board. Those 15 people constitute
the officials of Collier County, together with their staffs.
The ordinance creates an implied waiver of legislative
immunity. Typically when the Board of County Commissioners acts
in a legislative manner, if suit is brought against you, you are not
personally liable. This ordinance specifically provides that you are
liable if you are in violation of this ordinance. And, again, that
includes the constitutionals and the school board.
There is no standing requirement. You do not have to allege
that you, yourself, were harmed in order to bring a cause of action on
this one. And I say that because the big issue here is not going to be
damages. It's going to be attorney's fees, all right. And there's an
incentive for attorneys to bring actions under this because every hour
July 13, 2021
Page 120
they put in is an hour they can bill presumably at -- if they're
successful.
The last thing is that this includes the acceptance of a federal
grant. Again, it includes funds allocated by any entity to Collier
County. And Mark Isackson can confirm that federal grants come
with a substantial number of requirements that you comply and
enforce federal law. And I'm just going to put on the monitor some
of those requirements that we have to engage in.
This list was prepared by Terese Stanley who is in charge of our
compliance for grants. That's Page 1. Mr. Isackson, if you could
put on Page 2; that's Page 2. If you could put on Page 3; that's Page
3. If you could put on Page 4; that's Page 4. Could you put on
Page 5.
All right. I will note that this board at every meeting on the
consent agenda approves items that will include a federal grant.
Same goes, I presume, for the school board as well. If anyone
challenges any of these grants and any one of those plethora of
ordinances, rules, and regulations is deemed to be
unconstitutional -- and I cannot tell you whether or not they are or not
because again, it's a plethora of them, and they change them all the
time -- you'll be personally liable. That's what this ordinance does.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Are there any questions?
Okay. Good. Yes, Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Just a couple of questions.
Mr. County Attorney, in terms of the waiver of statutory immunity, I
mean, theoretically we could do that if we wanted, right?
MR. KLATZKOW: If you adopt this ordinance --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: You would be.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- you would be. Now, you have the
supervisor of elections. A substantial part of her job is the
enforcement of, well, the federal elections laws. She has statutory
July 13, 2021
Page 121
immunity. I do not believe you can waive that, but that will be a
fight before a judge somewhere along the line. But you clearly
would be waiving your own legislative immunity.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: But we as a County Commission
cannot waive another constitutional officer's immunity. It's their
immunity. It's not our immunity to waive for them.
MR. KLATZKOW: That would be my legal argument if I was
representing them, yes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That's all I wanted to know.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: When you started talking
about immunity, I was thinking about -- I'm seeing a representative of
the Sheriff's Office here. I assume he'll be speaking on this. When
you mentioned immunity, I was thinking of qualified immunity. So
this will not affect law enforcement officers' qualified immunity. Is
that accurate, or does it raise a question as to whether it does?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think that goes along with Commissioner
Solis' comments. I don't really -- I don't really think you can waive
another constitutional officer's statutory immunities. It would be
something that would be argued before a judge. But I do think you
can clearly waive your own.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And on that note, Madam
Chair, you listed off a few people that were coming to speak. I
would like to invite Colonel Bloom. I believe he is serving as the
sheriff today while our sheriff is off doing whatever he's doing. So
I'd like to have him come sooner than later. Not exactly -- you
know, you already invited the Rosenbergers and Ms. Heuser, but I'd
like to make sure Colonel Bloom gets up as well.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Any other questions?
July 13, 2021
Page 122
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. We're open for public
comment.
MR. MILLER: All right. Madam Chair, we did get -- close
the registration online. That number went up slightly. So we're at
123. I will remind our speakers to please use both podiums and
queue up. I also want to alert you that 30 seconds before your time
is up, you will hear a single beep -- do not let that startle you -- and
then you will hear a repeated beep when your time is up.
As the Chairman alluded, James Rosenberger and Carol DiPaolo
would like to use their three minutes together for a total of six
minutes, and they will be followed by Kristina Heuser, and then Scott
Relf.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And we're going to hear from our
sheriff.
MR. MILLER: You want to hear from him first?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The third speaker.
MR. MILLER: Oh, you want -- yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. And if you'd like to use
the other podium, ma'am.
Are you all right?
MR. MILLER: Possibility of a late ceding of time. I don't
have it here. I'll look for it while we get started.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And if you are ceding time to a
speaker, you need to be present. Now, you might be in another
room. We have -- I believe we have some communication with the
other room. You need to raise your hand or notify us that you are
here. Other than that, you will not have the additional three minutes.
MR. ROSENBERGER: Good afternoon, Madam Chair,
County Commissioners, local officials, as well as the citizens of
Collier County. I want to thank everyone for being here. I am the
July 13, 2021
Page 123
petitioner for the Bill of Rights Sanctuary County ordinance. My
name is James Rosenberger.
First I'd like to acknowledge what Commissioner Solis said
about the situation in Cuba presently. He's 100 percent on the
money. There's an oppressive government there, and that's why I
stand here today, because I do not want our government overreaching
or overstepping their bounds.
Today marks the culmination of many months of work to finally
bring this issue to a vote. I would like to thank all of those involved
in this effort, because without so many people in the background
working so hard, I would not be standing here today.
Fourth of July just passed nine days ago. I hope everyone
enjoyed the day and celebrated what has been deemed the birth of our
country. Most people don't realize this, but it was a treacherous act
to sign the Declaration of Independence. The 56 signers of the
document knew that they were putting their names on that paper, and
they were signing their own death warrants. Their signatures
assured that they were willing to die for what they believed in. They
were truly ahead of their time. We had a mantra in the fire
department. It was lead, follow, or get out of the way.
I understand the concerns expressed by counsel regarding
liabilities by approving this ordinance. I can't help but wonder what
the signatories of the Declaration of Independence would have in
response to those concerns. They faced death.
We here in Collier County have the capability to move this
ordinance forward and be the first county in the state of Florida to do
so. We have the potential to bring this statewide as suggested by
Congressman Byron Donalds, Legislator Bob Rommel, and Sheriff
Kevin Rambosk. We can either lead, follow, or get out of the way.
I prefer to lead. Others will follow. Today you have the
opportunity to lead from your position of power. You were elected
July 13, 2021
Page 124
to represent we the people.
I implore you to give your utmost consideration and pass the
Bill of Rights Sanctuary County Ordinance for Collier County. You
can lead today. You can always follow because that's the safe route,
or you can get out of the way. If you're incapable of leading today,
maybe this job isn't for you, and I suggest, along with we the people,
that we get -- that you get out of the way, step down, and make room
for someone who will lead us like our forefathers did almost 250
years ago.
Thank you for your time.
(Applause.)
MS. DiPAOLO: Thank you, Commissioners. For the record,
here is a brief history on how we got to where we are today. In the
month of February of this year, seven people, acquaintances, sat
around a kitchen table. We were Jewish, we were Protestants, we
were devout Catholics. We were from New Jersey, Massachusetts,
Wisconsin, and South Africa.
What did we have in common? Concern, anxiety, fear, and
anger. Concern due to the government's overreach precipitated by
the COVID emergency, anxiety from the draconian measures taken in
each of the states we were fleeing from, fear from the threats coming
from D.C., and anger that our rights were being trampled upon.
What was the cause of this fear and anger? President Biden and
his pen. The executive orders he was signing and the threats coming
from Congress. We asked ourselves, what was the most pressing
concern and decided it was gun laws and their regulations and
restrictions. On March 23rd we came before you with the Second
Amendment Preservation Act but hit a stumbling block in Florida
Statute 799.33. This was a huge disappointment since, we along
with the people in the community, worked for three long weeks in hot
blistering sun collecting 6,000 signatures supporting the cause.
July 13, 2021
Page 125
Around March 25th, we were contacted by Keith Flaugh from
the Florida Citizens Alliance and Cary Scott, general manager of the
Alamo, both of whom we did not know. Within a very short period
of time, my husband and I found ourselves meeting with some very
influential and prominent people here in Collier County.
With the help of Keith Flaugh, Kristina Heuser, and the Sheriff's
attorney, a new document was drawn up, hence the Bill of Rights
Sanctuary County ordinance. It is not just the Second Amendment
that's being infringed upon. It's all of our rights.
Commissioner Taylor, during our phone conversation last week
I informed you about Biden's secretary -- Press Secretary Jen Psaki
telling the public on July 6th during a press conference that there will
be a strike force of people going door to door coercing unvaccinated
people to take the shot. Would I be in error to say that there was
concern? This would be violating our Fourth Amendment right.
Our constitutional rights coming under attack has caused
concern from the community at large. At the last meeting you heard
from Congressman Byron Donalds who has his finger on the pulse in
D.C., and even he warned us of the current administration's attack on
our constitutional rights. Bob Rommel felt it important enough to
send his executive assistant in support of this issue, and Sheriff
Rambosk himself stood before you saying he is 100 percent behind
this. I am certain he would not put himself nor his deputies at risk of
unforeseen legal issues that may arise from this document.
It only takes one to turn on the news to see what happens when a
government becomes too powerful, oppresses its people, and
becomes totalitarian. Their people will rise up and fight back. Just
take a look at Cuba in the news this week.
So now I humbly request that you take a minute and think about
what vote you will cast today.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
July 13, 2021
Page 126
MS. DiPAOLO: This is not a partisan issue. Will you vote
out of fear due to the potential of unintended consequences, or will
you vote out of a position of confidence knowing that you took a
stand and forged a way for 66 other counties here in the state of
Florida to follow suit? The choice is yours, and I pray God will
grant you the wisdom to make the right decision.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Kristina Heuser. She'll
be followed by the Sheriff's Office representative and then Scott Relf.
MS. HEUSER: Thank you. Before you start the clock, I just
want to ask a procedural question, if I may. Last time we were here,
following public comment when the Commissioners engaged in their
discussion, there were some questions that arose. And I would like
to have the opportunity if that happens again today to respond to
those questions.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You will have the opportunity if
you're called up. I had no idea that you were the attorney that
drafted the ordinance, unfortunately. We were not given that
opportunity to meet with people in advance. So at this point, we
know who you are. So if there are questions, and certainly the
questions will have to come from these folks here, yes, you will be
given that opportunity, for sure.
MS. HEUSER: I appreciate that. Thank you.
And I also intend to respond to the comments made by the
County Attorney; however, I did commit to reading a statement from
the American Constitutional Rights Union, so I'm going to start with
that.
The American Constitutional Rights Action Fund, formerly a
Washington, D.C., based organization, now headquartered in Naples,
Florida, exist to defend the constitutional rights of all Americans.
July 13, 2021
Page 127
Founded over 20 years ago by close advisors to President Reagan,
including founding board member Attorney General Edwin Mease,
III, we work every day to safeguard the liberties enshrined in our
Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The ACRU Action Fund stands against harmful
anti-constitutional etiologies that have taken hold in our nation's
courts, culture, and bureaucracies. We defend and promote free
speech, religious liberty, the Second Amendment, American values,
and our national sovereignty.
The ACRU Action Fund respectfully calls on the Collier County
Board of Commissioners to support and pass the Bill of Rights
Sanctuary County Ordinance.
The founding of the United States was a novel and difficult
thing. Never before had a nation designed itself from the ground up
under the guiding principles that man is born with inalienable
God-given natural rights that he can self-govern and that he is
capable of voluntarily surrendering certain individual rights to a
government created solely to protect them.
Sadly, our politicians in Washington have forgotten the sole
reason government exists, to protect the natural rights of those who
elect to be governed. No longer do our elected officials respect our
nation's core values like freedom of speech, religion, and
self-governance, and so we ask our elected local leaders to step up
and protect these rights.
Why is a local ordinance so important in the scope of national
politics? Because our federal government has wantonly exceeded
the bounds of its authority. Worse, the federal government has
forgotten the very source of what power it holds, the collective
citizenry represented by state and local governments.
Simply put, the federal government holds no power whatsoever
except that explicitly enumerated and granted by its citizens and the
July 13, 2021
Page 128
states representing them. We look to the Bill of Rights Amendments
9 and 10 for clarification on the proper balance of power between
Washington, D.C., states, and citizens. Amendment 9, the
enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment 10, the powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the
state's respectively or to the people.
Simply put, any powers not enumerated and granted to the
federal government are assumed to reside with the citizenry and the
states in which they reside. When viewed through a lens of this
constitutional principle, the issue of declaring Collier County a Bill
of Rights sanctuary should not be considered in the least
controversial. It should be viewed as a statement of the obvious.
If some extraordinary display of courage is required for Collier
County to reaffirm the most fundamental principles of our nation,
have we already passed a point of no return?
Thank you for your consideration, and we urge you to remember
your duty to protect the natural rights of Collier County citizens by
supporting and passing the Bill of Rights Sanctuary County
Ordinance, and it's signed by Laurie Roman, president of the
American Constitutional Rights Union and Collier County resident.
Could I briefly respond to the County Attorney's points?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think we're going to save that.
We're going to --
MS. HEUSER: Somebody's ceding me time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Excuse me. All right. So someone
wants to cede you three minutes, and would you please state your full
name.
MS. NYSTROM: Denise Nystrom.
MS. HEUSER: Thank you, Denise.
July 13, 2021
Page 129
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. HEUSER: So it concerns me deeply that these
representations were made, because that's not an accurate explanation
of the ordinance. So first, the County Attorney stated that this
ordinance creates an implied waiver of legislative immunity. Any
immunity that presently exists in the law will still exist if there's a
challenge brought in court pursuant to this ordinance. There is no
such thing as an implied waiver. There has to be an explicit waiver,
and that doesn't exist.
And as a matter of fact, in the original draft of the ordinance,
there was a waiver of qualified and sovereign immunity, I believe,
and after discussing it with the Sheriff's attorney, we removed that.
So there is no waiver of immunity.
He also stated that there's no standing requirement. Also not
true. Courts fundamentally determine if a person has standing to
sue. That is not something that can be waived. If a person is not
aggrieved by an unlawful act, as defined in the ordinance, they don't
have standing to bring suit.
Also, the most alarming, that very long list of all the federal
grants that the county receives, if there is -- if there are monies that
the county presently receives that have strings attached to it that
require the county to violate its citizens' constitutional rights, frankly,
you shouldn't be accepting those monies to begin with.
(Applause.)
MS. HEUSER: And if that did exist presently, there's a means
right now under the law to challenge it. 42 USC, Section 1983, a
person can go to court and sue all of you right now. So all of these
scare tactics, I mean, they need to be recognized for what they are.
These are scare tactics to dissuade you from supporting the
ordinance. And all the ordinance does is create, firstly, a criminal
penalty, a misdemeanor, the same penalty that all of your other
July 13, 2021
Page 130
ordinances in your code carry with it, and creates the opportunity for
a person aggrieved by the ordinance to bring suit in the local court.
That's what this ordinance does.
So thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify that, and I
look forward to responding to any other questions that may arise.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is the representative from
the Sheriff's Office. He will be followed by Scott Relf and then
Keith Flaugh.
COLONEL BLOOM: Good afternoon, Madam Chair.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good afternoon.
COLONEL BLOOM: Commissioners, Jim Bloom,
undersheriff with the Collier County Sheriff's Office.
I believe there was a question -- I'd like to start, if that's okay,
Chairwoman, with the question that was asked last time with the
enforcement and read the letter in.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
COLONEL BLOOM: I believe that will be the correct -- and
then from there we can go.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course.
COLONEL BLOOM: It says, Dear Chairperson Taylor and
Board of County Commissioners, in the meeting of June 22nd
questions were raised regarding the county ordinance enforcement
process. In general, our existing process for enforcing current
ordinance is as follows: Misdemeanor enforcement is limited in
many cases, unless specifically exempted, by requiring that the
violation be witnessed by a law enforcement officer. In most cases,
law enforcement receives a complaint, prepares a report, obtains a
sworn statement from the witness. The case file is then routed to an
investigator.
Investigators then review the information submitted to
July 13, 2021
Page 131
determine if sufficient evidence exists for supporting the allegation.
They then can collect additional information or evidence and forward
the completed file to the State Attorney's Office for their
determination if there is sufficient evidence for formally filing
charges. If the State Attorney's Office makes a determination for
formally filing the charges, a warrant, capias, or summons will be
issued, Kevin J. Rambosk, Sheriff, Collier County.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
COLONEL BLOOM: In laymen's terms, I'll just could
ahead -- because that could be complicated reading if you didn't have
it in front of you. This enforcement would be no different than any
other -- if you selected, as the Commission, to approve it, than any
other ordinance that we currently enforce as far as the practice and
process of enforcing that ordinance. This would be no different than
that process.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders, you have a
question, and then I'm -- I think we -- you're going to address this
particular statement by Colonel Bloom; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'm concerned about the
enforcement.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I understand how you
enforce our codes and the misdemeanor ordinances that we have as
well as state statutes. I understand how you do that.
COLONEL BLOOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: But if an individual says that
a federal law, order, rule, or regulation unreasonably impinges upon
the individual's constitutional rights and they provide information
concerning the fact that that rule has been applied, what do you do
with that? Now, if the allegation is that the violation is a violation of
the Constitution, how do you enforce that? I understand how you
July 13, 2021
Page 132
enforce ordinances, but I just don't understand how you enforce that.
And that's been the big question I've had from the very beginning.
COLONEL BLOOM: If you choose as the Commission to
adopt this, obviously, we would take the information, there wouldn't
be an arrest on site. Take the information -- go ahead, if you have a
question.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No, I'm listening. I'm
waiting for you to finish. I have a follow-up.
COLONEL BLOOM: Take the information, look at what
evidentiary value it has, if we believe there's anything to move
forward with, put the case file together, then forward that over to the
State Attorney's Office.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. And I understand the
collection of evidence and how you -- how you do that.
COLONEL BLOOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: The question is, how do you
determine that the rule or the law or the regulation is unconstitutional
so you can then take that evidence and make an arrest? That's the
key to this ordinance is that there has to be a determination by
somebody that the rule is unconstitutional as applied to the
individual, and that individual's filing a complaint. Do you make
that determination that the statute or the rule is unconstitutional?
COLONEL BLOOM: We would take the information and
compile it, yes, sir. Then that would be up to the determination of
the State Attorney's Office if they believe that it rises to the level of
the violation of the ordinance.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So all of --
COLONEL BLOOM: My interpretation of it. Once again, I'm
not a legal analyst. Our legal counsel's not here today. But what I
will tell you is we would do this like any other ordinance; take that
information, put it all together, forward it over like any other
July 13, 2021
Page 133
ordinance that we have --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay.
COLONEL BLOOM: -- and get that assessment.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I'll address my question,
then, to the State Attorney because, ultimately, then, the State
Attorney would be making the decision as to whether the rule or
statute was unconstitutional as applied. The State Attorney would
make that determination, not the Sheriff's Department?
COLONEL BLOOM: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You want to continue, or is that what
you --
COLONEL BLOOM: No. Just -- yeah, if that answers
Commissioner Saunders' question. We just wanted to read into the
file the question on how the enforcement would take effect. And,
once again, the Sheriff, at the last meeting, gave his stance in support
of that, and that's all we have at this point.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. And I don't
think -- but if there is a representative from the State's Attorney's
Office here, I would welcome them to come up to the podium. And
we can certainly continue with the public comment if they're in
another room. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next registered speaker is Scott Relf.
He'll be followed by Keith Flaugh and then Lynne Hillman.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Before Mr. Relf starts, I would just
say that I spoke with the State Attorney's Office --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- and they had not been consulted
on how this would work. I spoke with Mr. Montecalvo because
Amira Fox was out of town. So I'd just put that out there.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
July 13, 2021
Page 134
MR. RELF: Good afternoon. My name is Scott Relf.
Typically you want to know that we live in Collier County. I live at
6020 Autumn Oaks Lane. I spoke here a few months ago regarding
the Naples Senior Center. I appreciate that you folks did approve
that project.
So today marks what I think may be one of the most important
days in recent history for this commission. Why? The citizens of
Collier County like me now view the Commission in a completely
different way. Prior to COVID, most citizens, including myself, did
not know the names of all the commissioners, and we were only
vaguely aware of what this commission did: Road improvements,
building codes, public bathrooms at the beach, evacuation orders
during the hurricanes, that sort of thing. Now every citizen knows
your power, the power of five commissioners to protect us, to keep us
safe, and also the power to rule over us like tyrants.
You folks now can decide whether businesses live or die. You
can decide whether a person has a job or gets laid off. You can
decide whether we're free to move around or we have to stay home.
You can decide whether we go to church or not. You decide
whether we cover our face.
And, importantly, no one knows what future decisions this
commission will need to make. No one anticipated COVID. We
don't know what's next.
I respect all of you. You've done your very best. I may not
have made the same decisions that you made on some things, but you
did your best. You were elected, you represented us, you made
decisions, and we're past that.
I voted for you, Mr. Saunders. Thank you for your service.
Thanks for representing me.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I appreciate that. Thank
you.
July 13, 2021
Page 135
MR. RELF: Today I petition you to publicly and unanimously
secure my rights as a citizen of this county. Now, I know how
powerful you are, and I really care deeply about your willingness to
be the protector of my rights. Today is the day to rise to that
challenge, to demonstrate that you are worthy of the trust of your
citizens, including me.
Please approve this Bill of Rights ordinance. A vote against is
a vote to reserve your option to be a tyrant over your citizens,
including me, and to permit your fellow commissioners and all future
commissioners to also be tyrants.
The hallway has pictures of all the County Commissioners over
the decades. You will forever be known as the Commission who
stood for freedom and rights for the citizens of Collier County or as
those who failed to do so.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Keith Flaugh. He's been
ceded three additional minutes from Karen Flaugh.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And before Mr. Flaugh, you come
forward, I just had to ask my attorney friends here, my colleagues, it's
my understanding we did not close churches. It's my
understanding --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We didn't close anything.
We restricted parking in our parking garage. We didn't close
anything.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We closed the beaches. We
closed the beaches. We did the mask mandate. We didn't restrict
churches.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We didn't close anything.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We did not close businesses. That
was the state.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Madam Chair, can I -- and I
July 13, 2021
Page 136
just want to remind you that, I mean, folks are -- I mean, a lot of folks
come to our podium and say a lot of things that aren't as explicitly
accurate, necessarily, as they can be. There were churches within
the state of Florida that were shut down, there were businesses that
were --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But we did not do that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I know we did not do that. I
know we did not do that.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Nor did you oppose it.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Why don't we stay focused
on this.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mr. Flaugh.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Keith Flaugh. He's ceded
three additional minutes from Karen Flaugh and from Bob Bunch.
MR. BURCH: Burch.
MR. MILLER: Burch, I'm sorry. Trouble with the
handwriting, Bob -- for a total of nine minutes, and he will be
followed by Lynne Hillman and then Susan Cone.
MR. FLAUGH: Good afternoon. My name is Keith Flaugh, a
resident of Collier County. I understand that each of you have
received hundreds if not thousands of e-mails regarding the Bill of
Rights ordinance. Isn't it fascinating that a concept so simple as
supporting our Bill of Rights has generated so much interest and
adversity.
There seem to be two factions: Those supporting individual
rights that you swore an oath to protect and those who support an
unfettered federal government control of our everyday lives.
Andy, I'm going to response to your comments in the last
session. Your lack of knowledge and display in the first hearing of
this ordinance regarding the U.S. Constitution was nothing short of
amazing and shocking. The Supreme Court of the U.S. is not an
July 13, 2021
Page 137
unfettered law of the land. The Supremacy Clause is quite clear.
The Constitution and the laws of the state of -- of the United States,
which shall be made pursuant thereof, shall be the supreme law of the
land.
The operative phrase there is "what shall be made pursuant
thereof." So the federal government and all three branches -- and
this is for all of you. The federal government and all three branches,
including the Supreme Court, are a product of the compact of the
Constitution of the United States and of the -- of the 13 sovereign
states. The federal government was not a party to that compact.
SCOTUS, as a part of the federal government, can only legally
opine on 18 powers delegated, not granted, in the U.S. Constitution.
All other actions and opinions are usurpations of unconstitutional
authority. Each sovereign state has the constitutional authority to
declare them null and void. That's why we have a Ninth and Tenth
Amendment. The power resides with the Governor and under the
principles of federalism with each of the lower level of elected office.
In all cases, the rights are retained by the people.
I'm not going to reread the Tenth Amendment; you've heard that
addressed several times before.
On June 22nd we all now can understand why several of you
have trampled on our constitutional rights over the past years,
because of this misunderstanding of the Constitution. To any
commissioners considering voting no on this, your fear of unintended
consequences is unacceptable. The time for fear is over. Some of
you may attempt to turn this into a resolution. Your attempt to turn
this into a meaningless resolution just proves your fear and failure to
stand on your oath of office and to protect and preserve our
constitutional rights.
We are in unchartered waters. Consider just a few of the daily
attempts by Biden and the Left to trample our God-given rights.
July 13, 2021
Page 138
Nancy Pelosi just recently directed Capitol Hill police to establish
offices in Florida to seek out and establish or root out insurrection.
Biden introduced door-to-door teams of vaccinations. There
are reports that this will be accompanied by federal agents or military
officers.
Senate Bill 1 for the Peoples Act of 2021, it would federalize
elections essentially built on the California election process. Clearly
unconstitutional on the face. You don't need a state attorney to tell
you that. You can read it for yourself. This would have dramatic
impacts on not only you as County Commissioners, the commission
of exhalation [sic], and it is up to you all and the Governor to just say
no if it passes.
And then we have the Equality Act. This extreme and
dangerous legislation, which is only one vote in the Senate away
from being passed into law, would create unprecedented harm to
businesses, charities, medical professionals, women and children and
entire families. It might be struck down in the future depending
upon whether the court is packed or not, but that takes years, and in
the meantime all of the folks that are impacted by it are impacted by
it.
If Biden packs the Supreme Court, SCOTUS becomes
irrelevant. SCOTUS being the Supreme Court. It literally becomes
irrelevant. And the duty and the responsibility will fall to each of
you at local and state level to just say no. You have no other
recourse. If the Court is packed, you have no other recourse. If
Schumer voids the filibuster, the only way forward is the Tenth
Amendment. We're one vote away from him doing that this
summer.
You either face it with courage of our Founding Fathers who
pledged to each other their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor, or you
cower in fear of the unintended consequences and join the ranks of
July 13, 2021
Page 139
Benedict Arnold and the Tories. There are unintended consequences
of getting out of bed every morning. Don't be afraid of that. Face it
with a strong faith and a strong ability to stand up for what you know
is right.
The world we live in today is facing unchartered waters. We
are not a democracy, Mr. Solis. We are a constitutional Republic.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: With all due respect -- and this is a
point of order -- please direct any -- do not address the
commissioners individually, please. Just direct it through the Chair.
Thank you.
MR. FLAUGH: Okay. Without peeking -- you're going to
have a number of people, I suspect, who come up and argue that
they -- that you should not accept this. Without peeking -- there was
an interesting survey done a number of years ago by one of our
Supreme Court justices here in Florida. How many of you can name
and how many in this room can name the five rights guaranteed in the
First Amendment without peeking? Two percent. Two percent. If
we don't know our rights, how do we know when they're being taken
away?
I would argue here that people who are convincing you to let the
federal -- to strike down this ordinance don't really understand their
constitution, and I encourage them to do a much better job of that.
For any of you that decide to vote no on this, I would urge you
and suggest you only have one honorable course of action, to resign
before you disgrace yourself any further.
(Applause.)
MR. FLAUGH: I ask you to consider a very, very simple
question. How can you vote against the Bill of Rights and your oath
of office in these uncertain waters, uncertain times? We just heard
conversation about Cuba. That's so prevalent. We're this close in
July 13, 2021
Page 140
this country to becoming the next Venezuela or the next Cuba. And
unless you-all stand up and represent us, unless you-all stand up and
represent us, where do we turn?
Remember Congressman Donalds, your Sheriff, and Rep
Rommell all encourage you to do so. Time for fear of unintended
consequences has long, long passed. Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Lynne Hillman. She'll be
followed by Susan Cone and then Omar del Pozo. I hope I'm
reading that right, sir.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: If you would be so kind, would you
repeat who --
MR. MILLER: Yes. Lynn Hillman will be followed by Susan
Cone. If we could have Ms. Cone at the other podium. And they
will be followed by Omar del -- I'm reading this as Pozo. I hope
that's correct. It could be Poro.
MS. CONE: Hello. My name is Susan Cone, and I came with
Lynne Hillman, but she had to leave for a dental appointment.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, okay.
MS. CONE: Should I go ahead?
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
MS. CONE: Thank you. Good afternoon, Commissioners.
My name is Susan Cone, and Naples has been my full-time home for
46 years. That's a long time. It's been a wonderful place to raise
my children and to work and now to be retired.
I love Naples, and I also love America, and I value my freedom,
but I'm very concerned about the turmoil and the divisiveness that we
see in our country. And passing this ordinance would do nothing to
help that situation. And I'd like to ask if perhaps there would be no
cheering or clapping while other people are commenting.
July 13, 2021
Page 141
I'm no legal scholar, but I do know that the framers of our
Constitution created three distinct branches of government in order to
prevent concentration of power and provide for checks and balances.
The executive branch enforces laws, the legislative branch writes
laws, while the judicial branch interpreters laws and determines if a
law or action is unconstitutional.
This proposed ordinance seeks to totally sidestep the judicial
branch. Neither local governments nor the Sheriff have the power to
declare a federal law unconstitutional without involving the courts.
As previously stated, this ordinance originated with the same group
that is behind the Second Amendment Protection Act. It is stoked by
fear and misunderstanding that any gun safety legislation is an
infringement on Second Amendment rights, which will ultimately
result in everybody's guns being taken away. This fear has been
carefully manufactured by the gun lobby. It's simply math. More
fear equals more guns equals more profits.
So let's suppose that this dangerous ordinance passes. Which
gun laws, I wonder, would be deemed unconstitutional. Background
checks which prohibit convicted felons and domestic abusers from
acquiring guns or perhaps reg flag laws which very well could have
prevented the Parkland massacre, or maybe stopping the sale of ghost
guns which can be printed with a 3D printer and no serial number, or
how about all gun laws? Guns for everyone everywhere all the time.
Unfettered access. No limits.
Just imagine the chaos created if every county can pick and
choose which federal law to follow. It's a very frightening thought.
I urge you to vote no on this dangerous amendment. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Omar del -- Pozo.
MR. POZO: Pozo.
MR. MILLER: Either podium, sir. He will be followed by
July 13, 2021
Page 142
Kate Tardiff and then Jose Josamillo.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ms. Tardiff, if you're here, if you
could come to the other podium. Thank you.
MR. POZO: Good afternoon. Thank you for inviting me to be
here. My name's Omar del Pozo Bararo (phonetic), and I'm
American doctor [sic] and a former political prisoner. I spent nine
years in isolation in Cuba because I tried to create a political
opposition party. So I think that the Bill of Rights it the same to
their right, their right [sic].
So in this moment in Cuba -- I spent nine years in prison. I was
condemned to 15 years in a military jail [sic] without -- without any
rights. So I know very well what is communist.
And in this moment in Cuba people are on the street fighting for
their liberty and dying for their liberty. And what happened in Cuba
amongst her (unintelligible) Fidel Castro took power and
(unintelligible) destroy, suppress the constitutional. We had a
beautiful constitution before 1959, but in Cuba, Castro destroyed
everything. So Cuba's an example where the people have no right at
all, no right at all.
So the Bill of Rights is an example that our constitution try to
keep the balance of power. This is more most beautiful, the United
States Constitution. So in order to avoid that the federal government
could impose anything they do other than what the Constitution have
them to do, at the same time the Bill of Rights give the state -- when
they say state, say people, individual people, because the Constitution
do it for the individual, for people.
When we talk about rights, we have to talk about natural rights,
rights with people born. The right for anything. The Pope [sic], the
federal government. It's for God.
So in this ordinance, the Bill of Rights give the state the right to
keep this balance, and that is the people of the state. At the same
July 13, 2021
Page 143
time that avoid the federal government from take property impose
other things, other imposition than what is -- give the state the right to
defend the people and keep this balance.
I said, tyranny when there's no balance, when the government
can do whatever they want to do. So we have -- we encourage
you -- you have this moment, this historical moment here. You have
the possibility to make a choice, but you have to make the right
choice to approve this bill. Approving this bill going to be the
people of the United States, the people of Collier, the right to be
defended -- you are going the defend the natural rights of the citizens
of the Collier County.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. POZO: So I enjoy you -- enjoy you -- or give you this
message to approve this Bill of Rights. Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. POZO: God bless everybody here. God Bless America.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Kate Tardiff. She'll be
followed by Jose Josamillo and George Dohbanville.
MS. TARDIFF: Thank you. Pardon me. Can everyone hear
me?
Thank you, Commissioners, for this time to address you and our
fellow Americans. Hopefully today we'll hear why an all-American,
still available, legitimate, and legal strategy to resolve the apparent
issue of locally unacceptable interpretations of our Bill of Rights,
because one way or the other the courts is exactly where we will land
if the federal versus local discrepancies are so odious as to lower you
to declaring sanctuary county status.
Sanctuary status is becoming a common strategy and relies on
nullification tactics promoted mostly by special interests. That
means, essentially, canceling or ignoring federal law and substituting
local counter governance. Long term, that strategy does nothing
July 13, 2021
Page 144
except create chaos that can only be resolved through litigation.
There we are, the courts again.
But to get there, we are all in for all hell breaking loose. Who
decides what's law and what's not and when? What guidance do
governing bodies use? Who communicates to all affected to
facilitate abidance and when? The State Attorney's Office cannot
even say when.
When I was a kid a long time ago, I believed in America. I still
believe in America, and I want to believe in America. My country,
right or wrong. When right to be kept right; when wronged to be put
right. Not violently, for God's sake. And I saw us doing this
together legally, constitutionally, peacefully together.
Nullification divides to conquer. It's not protecting. It's
corrosive and divisive. It divides families, friends, business
colleagues, communities. Here in Naples in Collier County we've
been pretty peaceful. So much so, in fact, that we're now offended
when we don't make at least the top 10 best places to live, vacation,
part-time reside, go to the beach. Hey, enjoy our Blue Zone status.
No neighbor-against-neighbor violence, no chaos of the new rules
and new rules of engagement.
Nullifying is not the way to humanely and positively,
productively deal with this discrepancy challenge. Running away
does not solve problems. It never has. It never will.
Be brave. Dealing with challenges and problems legally,
patiently, through our American instruments of law is the clean
long-term solution. If we choose running away, we'll pay a bigger
price later.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jose Josamillo. He'll be
followed by George Dohbanville and then Desré Buirski.
July 13, 2021
Page 145
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Donbanville.
MR. MILLER: Thank you.
MR. JOSAMILLO: Good afternoon, Commissioners. This is
my first time addressing you. And I'm a -- I am a resident of Collier
County for 30 years. I'm also -- I was born and raised in a
third-world country; it was called Mexico, where the law of the land
is, whatever you can get away with it, you can do.
As growing up, I heard there was the greatest constitution in the
world, my Mexican constitution; therefore, I question everything that
happened. I seen things that I -- I am so blessed to be in America for
30 years. And seeing my kids, giving them the privilege that they
never got to see anything that I seen. Bad things that I didn't choose
to see that was exposed to me.
Yes, going back to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I
became a U.S. citizen about nine years ago, and I started my journey
of understanding why this country is the greatest country in the world
where more than 99 percent of people wants to be here outside this.
And the more I see in the last couple years, what's taking
precedence in this country, it reminds me what I came from. And
there was an incident after our recent elections. What I got to
see -- and for the last 30 years I never fear so much when I see what's
happening. I seen things that I had seen in my country over and
over. I was young. I didn't know exactly what I was seeing, but
now that I see the contracts -- the contrast between America and the
world, I see America degrading, going backwards.
As elected officers, you've sworn an oath to the Constitution.
And I seen all my previous governors doing -- undermining that
constitution. I honestly ask you to vote yes for this amendment,
this -- I'm a little nervous now. To vote yes on the resolution,
because I seen what it could happen after, if we don't stand on our
Bill of Rights.
July 13, 2021
Page 146
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is George Donbanville.
He'll be followed by Desré Buirski and then Drew Montez.
MR. DONBANVILLE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My
name is George Donbanville. I reside here in the county. I've
resided here for nearly 40 years.
I had all kinds of stuff I wanted to say to you, but the two ladies
that stood at this podium just a couple minutes ago, one after the
other, I think said it very eloquently. But I want to address it from
my background and my knowledge from the times that I went to high
school, through college, through law school, through my legal career.
I never heard anything like what this ordinance is. Never.
I practiced for Joe D'Alesandro, who was the first state attorney
that was in South Florida when they divvied up the different districts
of the state as far as judicial districts. He was followed by Steve
Russell. I stood shoulder to shoulder with Steve and prosecuted
cases, and then went out in private practice. I stood on the other side
of the courtroom and argued against him. We argued constitutional
things to the Court all the time.
And Amira Fox, if she had her person here who was -- if she
was here, I think she would be just like Mr. D'Alesandro and just like
Steven Russell, and they would tell you, how am I supposed to do
what you're going to ask me to do if you pass this ordinance? And
not only them, all you have to do is just go right to the start of this
whole thing and look at the first whereas clause and start reading
down some of these, and then go to the third page where it has -- at
the end of the third page -- I get a little lost. Oh, after where it has
the laundry list of the first 10 amendments, and then it talks about
Collier County has the right to be free from commanding -- the
commanding hand of the federal government and has the right to
July 13, 2021
Page 147
refuse to cooperate with the federal government officials in response
to unconstitutional federal measures. Who decides all that? Who
decides all that? The constitution of the United States? Our former
government says the courts decide that. They don't say that
somebody else does it.
They drew up a nice document. We now know who drew up
this ordinance. Maybe we now know why they drew it up. In fact,
the stumbling block that she spoke of is, I think, the stumbling
block -- she used that word -- those words. That stumbling block is
our form of government. The courts make those decisions. Your
own attorney sitting right over there says that this thing flies in the
face of the Constitution. You can pass it if you want, but you're
going to get to serious financial problems if you do. So those aren't
scare tactics at all. I mean, thank you very much for your time.
Please don't pass this.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Desré Buirski. She'll be
followed by Drew Montez and then Randy Harris.
MS. BUIRSKI: Thank you for this opportunity to address you,
again, Madam Chair and the Commissioners. I really do appreciate
this time. And as Commissioner Solis mentioned, the craziness
going on in Cuba right now. Has anybody even heard of what's
going on in South Africa in the last 48 hours? My ex-country's
burning down. People are getting maimed, killed, and murdered,
and it's because there's no law and order.
This wonderful country that I'm so blessed to come to, I'm so
privileged to be here to stand in front of you to live in Naples, to live
in Florida, to be an American citizen. I think most American
citizens have forgotten the power of their freedom that they have. If
you easily let it slip away, it's not coming back. Freedom isn't
July 13, 2021
Page 148
something that grows on a tree. It has to be minded. It has to be
looked after. It has to be cherished. And it's not about each of us
going against each other.
We're all Americans here. This is about unifying us under the
protection of the constitution. Now, why is this constitution so
amazing? I sometimes think most of the world doesn't even know.
The difference between this constitution and every other constitution
on earth is that the states have the power. The people have the
power. In any other and all other governments the people have no
power.
And the fact that we're here begging, all of us, to take heed of
this fact, we're asking you to protect us, protect our rights, protect our
freedom because if we don't the whole world is about to collapse.
Nobody here can actually stand up and tell me that something isn't
very wrong in our world, in our country, in our government. And if
we're dead to say nothing's going wrong, I'm going to say we're all
gone crazy. We're now saying that what's right is wrong, what's
good is bad, and the people that are fighting for good are being told
we're terrorists, but all we want to do is protect each other and our
rights.
I'm asking you, please, to take heed to what's here. It's not
about us fear mongering to come after you. It's not about you
coming after us. It's about us coming together as Americans to
protect each other from the lawlessness of this globulous system that
wants to take out the western world. Take heed, people, because if
you don't do it now, it's gone forever.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Drew Montez. He'll be followed by Randy
Harris and then Reverend Tony Fisher.
MR. MONTEZ CLARK: Awesome. So Drew Montez Clark.
There's a lot of people that have shared some things, so I had to
July 13, 2021
Page 149
switch up what I was going to say in interest of not saying the same
thing. But I wanted to address a few things.
Number one, our rights come from God. And the government
was instituted, the Constitution was instituted to guarantee and
protect those rights, not to strip them or infringe upon them.
And we're talking about right now a Bill of Rights, and it baffles
me why we have to have a conversation about partisanship or
anything else when we talk about the Bill of Rights and why elected
officials may be hesitant to hold themselves accountable to a Bill of
Rights or a constitution that they swore to uphold.
So what I wanted to do was I wanted to read the oath of office.
I wanted to remind everyone in the room what the oath of office
actually says, what it is. And it says, I do solemnly swear or affirm
that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States
against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear truth, faith,
allegiance to the same; that I will take this obligation freely without
any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and
faithfully discharge the duties of office on which I'm about to enter,
so help me God.
That is the oath of office that every elected office takes, and in
that it talks about defending the Constitution. The Bill of Rights is
part of that, so I do not understand the hesitation at this particular
point to hold ourselves accountable to what we took an oath of office
for.
Someone made earlier -- well, just to answer this question or
talking about giving unilateral power and control to local officials,
this ordinance says nothing of the sort, to give unilateral control to
anyone here to decide whether something is unconstitutional or not.
We've heard from the congressman from this district. We've
heard from the state house rep from this district. We've heard from
the Sheriff's Office of this district. And they've all said expressly
July 13, 2021
Page 150
that this will be handled exactly like any other ordinance, which
means that if there is a proposed violation or supported violation,
evidence would be gathered. It would be turned over to the State
Attorney. The State Attorney themselves don't decide whether it's
constitutional or not, only whether or not there's grounds to bring
charges sufficiently enough based on the evidence presented, and
then a court does decide whether that happens.
So I would challenge everybody at this particular point, if there's
hesitation to hold myself accountable to an oath that I took, I would
question my motives at this point because you are in a position to
lead, and when you decided to take that position of leadership, we
also took the responsibility of that leadership, and that is to abide by
the oath.
I'll read the First Amendment, right. I won't go through all of
them. But there's five express points in that First Amendment. And
I'll just go through those five points. There's freedom of religion,
there's freedom of press, there's freedom of -- there's freedom of
speech, there's freedom of assembly, and there's a right to petition the
government. There are five guaranteed rights just in that First
Amendment buried. And we could go through this whole list, but
that Bill of Rights in the Constitution is for we the people and you all
are elected officials that are supposed to represent we the people.
This is not about partisanship. It's about patriotism to this country
and our forefathers for creating the greatest country on the face of
this planet.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Randy Harris. He'll be
followed by Reverend Tony Fisher, and then Kelly Yahl.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you very much.
I would like to say that I agree completely -- because I'm not
going to take much time. You've got a lot of speakers. And what
July 13, 2021
Page 151
has been said before in wanting this passed I agree with totally.
Drew did a wonderful job, but this Desré back here, if I would
have known, I would have ceded my three minutes to her. She was
very powerful, and I agree 100 percent with her.
Let me just say this: I'm old enough, as you can tell by looking
at me, to remember how free this country really was. And I know
that people will disagree, but I can remember living in an Andy
Griffith type atmosphere when I was a small child. And I also
remember as the government began to move in, the federal
government began to move in and began to change things and started
moving against my freedoms. And you can say, oh, we're the freest
country in the land. We are and we were, but we're not quite as free
as we were back when I was a child.
I stand here today to support this amendment, this ordinance,
because I really believe that our federal government has the potential
to flop over and lap up our freedoms just like a thirsty dog laps up
water out of a bowl. I believe that we need this. Some say it's
redundant. Well, you know what? It's another extra layer of
protection that we have to keep America the greatest nation on the
face of the earth.
We're a light shining in darkness to this world. And if we lose
America, I can promise you -- someone will laugh when I say this,
but it is the God's truth -- this world will fall next. And our
amendment, our Bill of Rights are called the essential freedoms that
we have. Not superlative. Essential. Meaning they are the least,
and they are necessary for us to have.
Drew did a wonderful job. He stole my thunder. I was going
to read the First Amendment, but that's okay, Drew. I forgive you.
The Second Amendment's important. The Tenth Amendment.
Folks, it's very simple. I love this country, and I want to see it
stay free as it has ever been. And I want to thank you for the
July 13, 2021
Page 152
opportunity of sharing this with you. I ask that you vote in favor.
Thank you, and God bless you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Reverend Tony Fisher.
He'll be followed by Kelly Yahl, and then Marcy -- Marcy [sic], I'm
having trouble reading your handwriting -- Doveas-Pitzi, I think this
says.
REVEREND FISHER: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
Thank you for this opportunity to speak and for everybody to speak
today. I'm grateful for the work you do to keep this community safe,
workable, and also welcoming to people from all over the country,
both it's own citizens and from those afar.
I'm hopeful that you will continue that focus representing our
county in the positive way that it does in representing us to the wider
governments of our state and our nation.
I grew up in a faith tradition that gave a lot to the birth of this
nation. Preachers within my denomination spoke for revolution
during the 1770s. They spoke for abolition in the 1800s. We seek
social justice in every place where we see rights of people being
denied.
We do this based on our understanding of the worth and dignity
of every person. We do this with the understanding that we are
interdependent in all the things that we do.
There are folks here who, over the past four years, have feared
our national government. There are folks here who currently in this
new -- in this administration fear our federal government. So we all
have a concern about how things work.
However, your job is to serve us in this county and to do it to the
best of your ability. You have taken an oath of office, which we just
heard, to uphold the Constitution of the United States, and we do
appreciate that. You also, if I understand correctly, have the right
July 13, 2021
Page 153
and the authority to challenge federal law, action, or any kind of
government issued -- I'm sorry -- law or executive order through the
courts, and I don't understand -- I haven't been told. I don't
understand through the initial language of this ordinance why this
additional ordinance is necessary. You have the rights, you have the
authority to challenge where challenge is due. If you see that your
citizens are being threatened by actions of the federal government,
you have that authority already. Why do you need another
ordinance to do that?
We talked about the divisions within this country, and I think
one of the things that we need to do as citizens -- and I think it's been
affirmed by both sides on this issue -- we need to work stronger, we
need to work harder to uphold the systems and the due processes of
our government as they exist. It is our responsibility to hold our
elected officials accountable. That includes you, in the roles that
you have accepted, and I believe that you understand and, therefore, I
urge you to dismiss this ordinance as a possibility, because you
already have the authority to do everything that's listed there, and
there's no reason to take on this ordinance which is divisive,
obviously, and create an environment within Collier County that is
not as welcoming as it has been. So I urge you to say no to this
ordinance, and I appreciate your time.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Kelly Yahl. She'll be
followed by -- I believe this now says Mary Doveas-Pitzi, and then
Melanie Chadwick.
MS. YAHL: Hi. My name is Kelly Yahl. Give me -- thank
you for giving me the opportunity to speak.
I don't have a prepared speech, so this is going to be a little
different. I'm not here today to fight. I am so tired of fighting. I'm
here to surrender, but not to the tyranny and not to the globalists.
July 13, 2021
Page 154
I'm here to surrender to God. And I want to repent for my part in
getting our country to where we are.
I think we've already lost this battle. I think that we have three
commissioners very concerned about unintended consequences about
this ordinance when they were completely unconcerned about
unintended consequences of forcing masks on people demonstrate
that we already lost.
But we didn't -- this didn't start with COVID, okay. We started
teaching the theory of evolution as the only original theory in our
school classrooms in the 1960s. Doing that violated the
establishment clause, because when we stopped teaching a balanced
treatment, which we did have for 35 years -- we taught both -- both
theories in the classrooms. When we stopped having that balanced
treatment, we started establishing a preference for atheistic,
humanistic, and secular religions, and we started making those who
still believe in God almighty the idiots, okay.
And I'm responsible because I was raised in a Democratic
household with a Socialist father whose hero was Bernie Sanders and
whose favorite quote was one of his, that communism would be the
best government in the world if we just had a benevolent dictator.
Of course, that ignores the fact that benevolent people are not
attracted to that kind of power.
Nonetheless, it helped me to see the things that the Left wants
and what they fight for, and it helped me to have compassion for
those things. The problem is, the Left has gone so far left we are
now on the right on the other side, okay.
Evolutionists fought for the right in 1925 to teach evolution,
okay. Now we can't teach creation. Gay people and people of other
orientations fought for the right to be married because we can't tell
them how to define marriage, but now -- somebody -- but now we
have to accept their definition of what marriage is, okay.
July 13, 2021
Page 155
When you answer questions from an evolutionary world view
and a creation world view, you can get very different answers.
When it goes to science and medicine and what we have seen for the
last year, if you are standing on an evolutionary platform, then you
think we all got here by accident, and human beings are smart enough
to improve on the design that we have.
MR. COX: I cede. John Cox cedes his minutes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Three minutes from John Cox.
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am.
MS. YAHL: Okay. They think that it all got here by accident,
and if they study it enough, they can improve upon it.
When creationists do science, we look at the design that's there.
We discover how it works. We learn what it takes to keep it
working properly and how we can fix it.
I'm not telling you you have to accept my world view, but you
can't force your world view on me. And if I believe that a mask is
inherently harmful to me and my child, you can't force me to wear it,
not in this country, not under this constitution.
And the last couple things I wanted to say in response to the two
people that are opposing this, the fear around the Second Amendment
rights did not start and was not manufactured by this group. The
fear around the infringement on Second Amendment rights was
created by all the authoritarian genocides that occurred throughout a
human history always against unarmed people.
I support this ordinance. I'm distressed that we have to have it.
I'm distressed that I never went to a school board meeting to fight for
creation to be taught in the classroom. That's where I'm responsible.
I'm distressed that I never showed up to a Collier County
Commission meeting until now when my -- when my country, I
believe, is lost.
I think it's too late. The globalists have control. The science at
July 13, 2021
Page 156
the top is dictating what everybody has to do. Everything is
protocols and pathways. There's no such thing as a doctor-patient
relationship where a doctor evaluates a patient individually, looks at
the physiology, and decides what's best to do, because that doctor's
first priority has to be his authority [sic] to the employer that he
works for. And trust me, that's been going on in this county for 40
years that I've been here. I've been fighting for medical freedom for
all of that 40 years and losing.
I think it's sad we have to have this ordinance, but the federal
government is going crazy. It wasn't a lot better before, but now it's
really going crazy. And what I'm afraid is that we are -- we've lost
the chance to use the Constitution to stop this; that too many people
have shredded it, too many people have run over it, too many people
have inserted the separation of church and state, which is nowhere in
the Constitution in and out of context way.
So I'm asking you -- you're basically, by voting for this
ordinance, only voting to uphold an oath you've already taken. By
voting against it, you're letting us know that you don't intend to
follow through with that oath.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, before we get to the next public
speaker, Representative Rommel has arrived in the room, and I do
believe he would like to address the council, if you'd like to hear
from him at this time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Then we'll get back to our public speaker right
after that.
REPRESENTATIVE ROMMEL: Thank you. Thank you,
Commissioners, and the public, thank you for being here and not
minding that I jump the line a little bit.
July 13, 2021
Page 157
I rise today in support of this ordinance. And, you know, over
the last year and a half, we've all seen a lot, and it actually is sad that
we have to vote on an ordinance like this.
As a legislator, one of the most important bills that we filed,
passed, and the Governor signed this year was to make sure that next
time something happens, that local government doesn't overstep their
bounds and that we limit power.
What's great about Florida, too, are our sheriffs. They're the
leading law enforcement official in the state, and it's great to know
that we have a sheriff that is supporting this ordinance, and he's going
to make sure that whether it's Collier County, the City of Naples, the
State of Florida, or the federal government, if they come up with
some rule, some law that is unconstitutional, they're not going to
enforce it.
It was really sad over the last year and a half that, you know,
local government decided some people couldn't go to school, some
people couldn't go to church, some people couldn't work. Couldn't
work. Couldn't go to work, but it was okay for others to go to work.
And, you know, I have to, you know, give a little plug to our
governor that he didn't use the heavy hand of the law. He
understood that citizens knew what was best for them, and they were
going to make their own decision. You know, he didn't mandate
people not go to work, not go to church, wear masks, be vaccinated.
And you say why is this necessary? You know, just recently,
yesterday Governor -- I mean President Biden said that the Capitol
police are going to open office in Tampa? They're going to come
open an office and investigate it. You know what? If there's an
investigation, I want my local sheriff involved because, you know
what, I know that he's not going to put politics in the way of policy,
and he's going to follow the Constitution in the State of Florida and
the U.S. Constitution.
July 13, 2021
Page 158
(Applause.)
REPRESENTATIVE ROMMEL: You know, I don't get up and
speak very often, but this is so important, and to see what's happened
over the last year and a half where individuals like myself, but not
me, I didn't do it, that have been voted by the people that have
decided to erode our God-given constitutional rights to be beings,
human beings. And maybe this is just a small step, but it's not
symbolic. You know, when our sheriff is willing to get up and say,
listen, I'm going to uphold the constitution no matter what
Tallahassee or Washington or Collier County does -- and, you know,
I urge everybody here, anything less than a unanimous support will
be extremely disappointing.
(Applause.)
REPRESENTATIVE ROMMEL: And I do want to thank you
for having -- it shouldn't be courage, but putting the bill up. You
didn't have to do that. So I want to thank you for doing that and look
forward to all of your up votes. So thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Mary -- I'm going to have
to ask you to state your name. I can't really make it out. She'll be
followed by Melanie Chadwick and then Jacob Wagganer.
Are you Mary?
MS. DOVEAS-PITZI: I'm Mary Doveas-Pitzi, and I feel
compelled to be here. I want to thank you for taking the time to hear
all of us. I was responsible for getting thousands of signatures for
the Bill of Rights Sanctuary Act.
People in this community are passionate for it. They're seeing
what's going on; that there's been a lot of -- of a lot of federal
overreach. We all know it. I don't want to repeat anything. I'm
here to just say please do the job that you were elected to do. It's
about we the people, and we're asking you to stand up. Thank you
very much.
July 13, 2021
Page 159
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Melanie Chadwick.
She'll be followed by Jacob Wagganer and then Gary Green.
MS. CHADWICK: My name is Melanie Chadwick. I've been
a full-time resident of Naples for four years.
When the pandemic hit, I had just started a new job as the music
director of a little church in Naples. I had rehearsed the choir a few
times, and we were excited about singing in the sanctuary. But as
COVID got worse, the church elders voted to close the church.
Some members were angry. They felt that the church was wrong to
close.
The head of the music and worship committee was a British
woman married to an American man. She was truly puzzled by the
anger of those who wanted the church to stay open. I don't
understand, she would say, don't we have a duty to protect each
other? Isn't that what Christian love is all about?
Having the church closed was hard on many people, no
question. For many, Sunday morning was their only social outlet
during the week, but just because something is difficult or
uncomfortable or time consuming or a nuisance doesn't make it an
infringement of our rights.
In fact, law professors in Texas and Georgia wrote an article
titled "Forced closing of houses of worship during the Coronavirus
both legal and right."
The premise of the proposed ordinance is that the federal
government infringed on our rights during the pandemic. James
Rosenberger is quoted as having said, I know for a fact that the
federal government has overstepped its authority. It's simple acts
such as closing down places of worship; these brief examples clearly
show the intent of our government to insert themselves in our daily
lives. But, in fact, the Supreme Court has held otherwise in an
July 13, 2021
Page 160
opinion authored by none other than the late Justice Antonin Scalia,
both a devout Catholic and a fierce defender of religious liberty.
That Americans do not have a constitutional right to disobey
generally applicable laws that were enacted without an intent to
discriminate against religion.
Churches were closed. So were schools. So were museums.
So were stores. There was no infringement of our right to practice
religion. It was a public health emergency.
But suppose the federal government had overstepped its bounds
and had infringed on our constitutional rights. Would an ordinance
like this be the correct response? No, not at all.
We are the United States of America. Counties and states don't
get to ignore or flout federal laws they don't happen to like. I don't
like paying taxes. I don't like registering my car in Collier County.
I don't even like waiting at red lights when I'm in a hurry, but I do all
those things because I have a responsibility as well as a right as a
citizen of this country.
This country tried the experiment of states deciding that they did
not want to belong to the Union. That experiment cost 750,000
American lives, and it ended in 1865.
This country is founded on the rule of law, not on mob rule or
vigilantism. If you would prefer to live in a country where
individuals can routinely disregard laws without consequences, such
countries are easy to find, and they're full of people who are
desperate to come to this country where we live under the rule of law.
In short, the Board must vote no to this ordinance. In doing so,
the Board upholds the Constitution of these precious United States.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jacob Wagganer. He'll
be followed by Gary Green, and then Patricia Hoover.
MR. WAGGANER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Thank
July 13, 2021
Page 161
you for allowing me to come up and speak a little bit of my mind and
everybody else here in the room. Thank you. It's really good to see
educated Americans pursuing their civil duties and civil liberties, so
thank you for that.
I want to speak in support of this county ordinance. I'm born
and raised in Naples. I'm a proud Floridian, a Florida man, if you
will, and I'm blessed, and we are all blessed to live in the freest state
in the country, in my opinion.
We've seen for months California, New York, people are
coming from those states here to enjoy the freedoms that we have
been given, that are given by God, by the Constitution from our
Founding Fathers.
And it's quite upsetting when there's folks in the audience and
folks in this country that believe the Constitution is something Trump
would use for an argument. As far as I'm concerned, the
Constitution was signed in 1787, and Donald Trump was born in
1942, give or take a few years. So for the Constitution to have any
relation to a former president of the United States is an absolutely
absurd notion.
I also believe that even discussing such a -- such a topic that
should unite all Americans, the Bill of Rights, something that
Americans have died for, something people all over the world have
died for and fought for, and those in many countries just 90 miles off
our shores can't even get, being shot by the police in Cuba with a
communist dictatorship.
My family has emigrated from Cuba. Well, my grandparents
escaped Fidel Castro. And I've been out to those -- the rallies
recently in support of Cuba freedom and imagined the kind of outcry
that would come from that community in particular to see that their
own local government didn't support their own rights and what kind
of flashbacks that would bring to people who have experienced
July 13, 2021
Page 162
communism and who have experienced socialism.
I've been to Central America several times. I worked in an
orphanage for 10 days in Guatemala, and I've seen the ideologies and
what the police and the government do to people that don't have their
rights. They don't have an opportunity to come and speak. They
don't have laws and regulations. They don't have that. They have
control. There's one person, and that's it.
And I think it's pretty cut and dry, the Constitution. It's pretty
cut and dry who will decide the fate of an elected official if they so
choose to violate their oath and violate the Constitution of the United
States.
And I think it's unfortunate that we have to even have this
discussion. It should be common sense. It should be common
knowledge. When you raise your right hand and say "so help me
God," that right there is enough -- is enough to affirm that each of
you should uphold your oath and uphold the Constitution and support
we the people because at the end of the day, we're the government,
and we tell you what to do. That's the bottom line.
Thank you for your time. Appreciate it.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Gary Green. He'll be
followed by Patricia Hoover, and then BT.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Would you repeat his name again.
MR. MILLER: Gary Green. Is there a Gary Green present?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ms. Patricia Hoover, if you're here,
will you please come up.
MS. HOOVER: I've ceded my time to BT. I was told by the
person that was out there she would make that happen on my form.
Apparently she didn't do it.
MR. MILLER: Well, we have two other people who ceded
July 13, 2021
Page 163
time BT; Matthew Hoover and Carla DeVille.
MS. HOOVER: He's my husband. He's not here.
MR. MILLER: Okay. So is BT present?
BT: I'm here.
MR. MILLER: Please come up, sir. He's been ceded time
from Matthew Hoover and Carla DeVille.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So --
MR. MILLER: I guess it would be Patricia Hoover.
Matthew's not here.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So Mr. BT is coming. I'm going to
be very, very strict about this, because we have a court reporter that
needs her break. So with --
BT: Do you want to take a break right now?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think so, before you speak, sir --
BT: Sure.
MR. MILLER: It will be nine minutes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- if that's okay. I think we're going
to take a court reporter break, and we'll be back at 3:30. Thank you.
(A brief recess was had from 3:13 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.)
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a
live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We've got little housekeeping items
to do, and I'm going to ask my colleagues about a couple of things.
We've got some folks that actually signed up to speak virtually last
Thursday, and so there's some questions about the virtual speakers.
Some of our aides are getting these calls, you know, when is it our
opportunity to speak. A lot of times what we've done is we have had
a speaker here and then a speaker online. And I'm quite comfortable
with that, if my colleagues are.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: However you want to do it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. That's good.
July 13, 2021
Page 164
Now there's another little thorny question, and that's -- this is
problematic. We've got some folks that signed up, but maybe their
slip is at the bottom of the pile and they have to leave. And I'm
thinking that just for -- and I'm turning to you also. I think that it
would be fair if the folks that have to leave because of other
engagements -- and please be honest about this. I'm not suggesting
this is fun for you to sit here for six hours. I'm not suggesting that at
all, but we do have some folks that have valid issues coming up. If
we could hear them before the rest of the people, that would be very
helpful, if my colleagues are in agreement to that.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, that might be particularly
difficult for me to try to sort through while I'm timing people and
doing people online. I will do my best, okay?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. That's fine. So what I would
ask those folks that are here in the room that absolutely have to
leave -- and I heard from some of you at the break -- if you would be
very quiet. While we're hearing someone online, if you could come
up and tell Mr. Miller about that, that would be very helpful. Thank
you.
Okay. Let's begin.
MR. MILLER: Okay. Your next speaker is BT. He's been
ceded additional time. We checked that before the break. He'll
have nine minutes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
MR. MILLER: And then after him we will have Carla DeVille
and then Carol Laher.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And anyone online?
MR. MILLER: Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot we were doing that.
So --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
MR. MILLER: -- after BT we will be going to -- let's have BT,
July 13, 2021
Page 165
and then I need to check to see who's online. Right now all I have is
registration at this point.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's fine. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. BT.
MR. MILLER: Sir, when you're ready.
BT: Thank you, folks. My name's BT. I come from Northern
New Mexico, and I'm American Indian. And I want you to know
that I've experienced socialism. Our family has firsthand. We were
the first socialist program in the United States, being placed on
reservations.
I come to you today with an open heart, and I want you to
understand that there are two forms of government right in front of
us. We have Collier County, the corporation, and we have the
municipality which works in constitutional and in corporate. What
we're here today to discuss is the constitution, the reality.
I was educated by the first constitutional sheriff in the United
States according to Paul Harvey. My father kicked out all the
federal agencies in his county of Northern New Mexico.
So we've talked about federalism and federal here today, but let's
define what the term "federal" means. Some of you have handed out
books, but on Page 9, the definition is this: Federal, pertaining to a
league or treaty, derived from an agreement, a covenant between
parties, especially between nations, constituted by compact between
parties. So it's pertaining to a league.
So let's look what the league definition is. League, criminal
law, contracts. In criminal law a league is a conspiracy to do an
unlawful act. Think about that.
So what is conspiracy? Conspiracy is an agreement or an
engagement of persons to cooperate in accomplishing some unlawful
purpose or to doing any act with the intent to prevent the course of
justice or to affect a legal purpose with a corrupt intent or by
July 13, 2021
Page 166
improper means.
So the federal government was pretty much right on when they
told us what they were going to do. They were going to conspire to
take our rights away.
The federal government existed in 1871 through the act when
the United States became a full corporation, just as Collier County, if
you look here in front of us, is representing, all in capital letters.
I've lived and experienced both areas of government, both the
constitutional side as well as the corporate side. We live in a society
of individual consent, according to the statutes, under color of law
within every state. You have to have consent.
We are a constitutional republic where, unless there's a true
injured party, there is no law broken and not a democracy governed
by corporations/structures under the presumption, rules and policy
mandates and ordinances, which violate the United States
Constitution through compact as well as the State of Florida's
constitution.
What is a full corporate county? It's a mere governmental
agency known as a political subdivision under corporation status, just
like McDonald's. Outside of the municipality of government, there's
no constitutional protection of your God-given rights while providing
services while they compete with business.
So what is a municipal corporation? It's a corporation of the
inhabitants, a special region such as Collier County, for the purpose
of local government as a distinct entity and not connected to a
political subdivision. In other words, it's not a full corporation
demanding our rights the way they seem to fit.
When we look at ordinances, ordinances are not law. They're
corporate bylaws. Did any of you know that? This is supported by
case law as well as jurisdictional principles. So I ask you, the
County Commissioners, today under -- on the record, which
July 13, 2021
Page 167
jurisdiction are you at today? Are you a constitutional elected
officer, or are you an agent, principal agent of the corporation? Who
are we addressing? Do you know why we don't have rights?
The reason I ask this is that everybody knows that only one
game can be played on the field. You can't play baseball on a
basketball field on the same time. So, again, which area are you at?
Are you under the true municipality of constitutional protection, or
are you ruling us today through the corporate status, in all cap letters,
of Collier County?
The continuation of unlawful and illegal acts within our county
and failure to disclose contractual agreements happens daily here in
Collier County as well as the other 3,000-plus counties in the United
States.
Here locally, when we look at some of the contractual
agreements, if you own a home and you're under the Homestead Act,
the domicile that they place you in actually puts you into the
corporate structure outside of the constitutional protection of owning
property outright. Think about that. That's what's taking place not
just here in Collier County but around the United States.
This ordinance is just like others that are brought forth under the
definition of terms, when you look at the ordinance, the top section of
the ordinance is in all capital letters. There's a reason for that;
because that's how the corporate spelling is done for laws within that
status.
So in laymen terms, we, the inhabitants of this community, are
addressing the corporate system as stakeholders and not free
constitutionally protected living beings created by God. This is due
to the presumption of your corporate name.
So I ask all of you, pull out your driver's license. Look how
your name is spelled. Look how everything you got from the
corporations are in all capital letters. That means you are a
July 13, 2021
Page 168
corporation according to the Administrative Procedure Act within
most of the United States. Some people actually bring it out.
Others hide it because they don't want you to know that you're
actually considered a corporation.
So today we ask this community, these County Commissioners,
again, are you going to protect your oath of office, or are you going
to just pass a bylaw or say no to a bylaw? We the people of the
county, are asking for our constitutional Bill of Rights. We
shouldn't have to ask it under an ordinance, but since we are
operating as a commercial entity, quasi in rem, we have to do this to
be able to protect our rights.
I've witnessed personally the most ridiculous statements on both
sides of this situation. Some good and some bad. Most people
don't understand the standing in courts. Not one person in here has
standing in courts except myself and my partner, and that's proven,
because we've been in the court system many times. Won many
times, and I've lost a few times. That's because of corruption
through the interpretive rule making that corporations are allowed.
So when I ask you to look at the future, it isn't so much the
County Commissions that we have to worry about. We have to
worry about the Sheriff. Will the Sheriff take control of the Sheriff's
Office and stop utilizing it as a corporation for rules and mandates
and violations? We have to look at the county clerk. The county
Clerk's Office protects your private-property rights as well as your
real property rights, not through presumption that you're part of the
corporation. Then we have to look at the coroner. Most of you
don't realize, but the coroner's the only person who can arrest the
Sheriff. Think of that. That's our balance.
Today is a special day here for Collier County. God has
brought you to me, and I have brought you to God because God will
determine your future, not I.
July 13, 2021
Page 169
Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, your next speaker online will be
Pat Roberts, followed by Carla DeVille here in the room, and then
Deborah Cruise online.
Mr. Roberts, you're being prompted to unmute yourself. If
you'll do so at this time. I see you're unmuted. You have three
minutes, sir.
MS. ROBERTS: Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Ma'am, sorry.
MS. ROBERTS: No problem.
America has been a republic experiment for more than 200
years. A group of citizens agreeing to abide with what our elected
representatives believe is the right thing to do. It's sort of like living
on a very large, long one-way street, and we all agree that we will
drive one direction and obey the rules for the benefit of all.
I am sure you've seen in your own experience with one-way
streets, there's also some folks that live on one end that just don't
understand or agree with having to drive the whole entire street when
they could easily and effectively come from the other way. It's
better for them, and unless someone else is coming, it's really no big
deal.
Well, there are folks on the other end who feel exactly the same.
As time goes on, folks on each end of the street have more and more
friends and neighbors who see this and think, well, I'm not that much
further up the road, so I should be able to take that route, too.
What happens when the whole street feels that way? Are we
going to change the direction of the street? Is this what this
ordinance is about? I would caution us to consider how the other
end of the street is doing with their type of sanctuary cities; San
Francisco, Seattle, and Portland come to mind. They were deemed
July 13, 2021
Page 170
sanctuary cities for those who felt just as strongly as the people here
who are proposing this ordinance do. And what happened after
those ordinances passed?
We've seen it on TV, we've read in the papers that thousands
upon thousands of people that have been attracted to this kind of
political touchstone. The extremists from each end of the street see
this as a perfect battleground.
Why would we want to invite this in a place where we are or
were known as a great city to live, a vacation and retirement hotspot,
a beautiful sanctuary away from the divisive rhetoric and the violence
that's plaguing so many of our cities? What a tragedy it will be to
see Collier County on TV.
Collier County has residents from all over America and the
world. Our visitors are also from the four corners of the earth, and if
we pass an ordinance that clearly defines our wish to arbitrarily go
against the direction of the United States of America whenever some
few on one end of the street feel like it, we will have no one to blame
but ourselves when we, too, look like those cities to the west that we
see on television.
Thank you very much for your time.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker will be Carla DeVille.
She'll be followed by -- online by Deborah Cruise, and then back in
the room by Carol Laher.
Is Carla DeVille here?
MS. DeVILLE: I gave my time to BT, so he's already used my
time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: All right. I did not have that; I'm sorry. Carol
Laher and Robert Laher, I'm told now, have both had to leave.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, they're here.
MR. MILLER: Oh, why was I just --
July 13, 2021
Page 171
MS. LAHER: We have to leave.
MR. MILLER: Thank you. Misunderstood.
So we'll start with Carol Laher, then we'll go to Deborah Cruise,
and then we'll come back to Robert Laher. Thank you.
I'm sorry. Go ahead.
MS. LAHER: Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairwoman
Taylor, Vice Chair William McDaniel, and Commissioners.
Every year on December 15th, our family celebrates Bill of
Rights Day because it was on December 15th, 1791, that the first 10
amendments to the United States Constitution were ratified. Let me
repeat that year. 1791. How many years ago was that? Exactly
230 years.
The Bill of Rights is a list of personal freedoms for all
Americans. These are rights that no one can take away, because the
Constitution itself protects them. This structure has been in place for
230 years. But now, in the year 2021, right here in Collier County,
way down on the southwest coast of Florida, there has appeared a
most unusual proposed ordinance.
I speak today against this unusual ordinance. I ask, why Collier
County? And I ask, why now? Why not ever before in the 98-year
history of Collier County? Surely there have been times, many
times, when Collier County citizens were concerned with the possible
overreach of our federal government. I bet everybody here thinks
that complaining about the federal government is one of the very best
parts of being an American citizen. And it's our Bill of Rights that
guarantees our opportunity to grouse and grumble about things we
don't like.
Thank you, James Madison, for writing these beautiful, precious
10 amendments. They have protected us well for 230 years. Our
Bill of Rights is just fine. It certainly does not need some dubious
sanctuary here in Collier County, Florida.
July 13, 2021
Page 172
And how do I know this? Because each of you commissioners
has already taken the oath which requires you to support the Bill of
Rights. You and every one of our elected officials are already in the
business of making sure our freedoms are protected. Everyone in
this room already counts on you for that.
I ask that you vote against this unusual proposed ordinance and
get back to those important issues facing the county that Mr. Barron
Gift Collier established almost 100 years ago.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online will be Deborah
Cruise. She'll be followed by Robert Laher, and then online, Tamra
Mitchell.
Ms. Cruise, you should be prompted to unmute yourself, and
there you are. You have three minutes, ma'am.
MS. CRUISE: Thank you. I'm Deborah Cruise. I am a
citizen and a resident of Collier County.
I truly believe in our constitutional rights, including those
specifically addressed in the Bill of Rights. I am opposed to this
proposed ordinance and ask that you vote against adopting it. The
ordinance does not preserve our patriotic rights. It's an
unconstitutional attempt to sidestep the overarching authority of the
federal government based on a local opinion of an individual who is
not professionally trained and educated in constitutional law. If
enacted, undoubtedly, this ordinance will result in arbitrary and
capricious decisions and expensive lawsuits.
The proper and legal route for reviewing the constitutionality of
federal laws is through the courts, not implementing decisions based
on a local opinion.
Commissioners, you have an obligation to vote no on this
July 13, 2021
Page 173
proposed ordinance because you have sworn to uphold and defend
the laws of the United States regardless of who the president of the
United States is.
Thank you so much for listening.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Robert Laher here in
person. He'll be followed by Enid Weygandt online, and then Rob
Tolp.
MR. LAHER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Thanks for
letting us speak. My name is Robert Laher. I've been visiting
Naples since 1984 and lived here for 20 years. I'll never forget
coming here many years ago in the middle of the winter and going,
how did it get so green here in the middle of the winter?
I practiced law in the state federal courts for 27 years. The
definition of an unlawful act in this ordinance has no ascertainable
standard for what is unlawful. It's so poorly drafted that you will all
be subjected to judicial review. And does it matter if an ordinance is
poorly drafted if it doesn't have ascertainable standards that people
can understand if they're committing a crime or not? Does it matter?
Let me quote Federal Judge Robert Hinkle just a few days ago in
the federal court who brought the attorneys bringing this kind of
language before him, and you know what he said? I won't -- quote, I
won't put you on the spot and ask you if you've ever dealt with a
statute that was more poorly drafted.
About five years ago or 10, it was Moraya Bay, I was here, and
they wanted to shut off the beach, and the County Attorney at that
time had a little chat with me and said, you know, if Moraya Bay
holds in there, we're going to be the poster child for are we going to
allow this on the beach, and we're going to spend hundreds of
thousands of dollars in attorney's fees. Who's going to pay the fees
in this case?
Now, there's a question that's been raised about your personal
July 13, 2021
Page 174
liability. I don't know if you're going to be personally liable or not,
but you know what, you're going to have gosh darn attorney to
defend yourselves. And maybe there will be funds for all of this but
maybe not.
The second point I have, do we want Collier County, our
paradise, to go from having this wonderful reputation that people
from all over the country want to come to to becoming a poster child
for what this ordinance stands for?
The economic repercussions, people -- we're going to be
saying -- I'm asking my -- people from Colorado are saying to me,
what are you doing down there? People that visit all the time.
People don't want to come to a battle zone, and that's what we're
going to be.
So I encourage you, for our county, for the county we love, to
say, no, we're not going to put this in the hands of the Sheriff to
decide who to enforce. And then one of the County Commissioners
said, well, no one's contacted the Attorney General to determine what
the standard is for -- this is wrong in so many ways, and I hope --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: His three minutes are up.
MR. LAHER: -- you vote against it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, your next speaker online is Enid
Weygandt. She'll be followed by Rob Tolp, and then online, Judi
Palay.
All right. Ms. Weygandt, I hope I'm saying that right. You're
being prompted to unmute yourself. If you'll do so at this time.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. I'm keeping an eye on her.
She is still muted at this moment. I suggest we move to Rob Tolp
here in the room, and then we'll try to get Enid after that. And also
July 13, 2021
Page 175
online, Judi Palay, please stand by.
Mr. Tolp.
MR. TOLP: Thank you.
A Florida native from Lee County. My grandparents are both
immigrants to this country. One of them from Hungary who was
born two weeks after his mother came over fleeing communism from
Hungary, and then he met my grandmother in Panama in the Panama
Canal while serving World War II.
My grandmother's brother served the former president of
Panama prior to the overtaking of socialist dictator Manuel Noriega.
When Manuel Noriega took over Panama, the very first thing he did
is he sent his goon squads out to go execute every single individual
who had been loyal to the previous president. That was -- one of
those people was my grandmother's brother. He had to flee to Peru
in order to be able to save his own life.
Our system of government is a system of dual federalism, and
some of the statements that have been made here prior to this -- to me
getting up here have shown an egregious ignorance -- and I don't
mean that in negative terms. Just being unknowledgeable about our
system of government, which is dual federalism. Dual federalism
has checks and balances not just between the individual branches of
government but also checks and balances between our layer of
government and the state government.
It is the responsibility of our legislators and our executive
branch, i.e., our sheriff, and our judicial branch locally, to keep the
other three branches of government at the state level in check. Our
government is not supposed to have an incestuous relationship with
the other levels of government. They are supposed to actually be
keeping each other's power in check, not colluding together with one
another against the rights of the people.
The prohibitive language of the Bill of Rights itself should teach
July 13, 2021
Page 176
us a clear lesson. Shall not be infringed. Let's do some English
grammar here. That is in the imperative mood. In other words, it's
not just a suggestion to the federal government or to the state
government in our state's equivalent to the Bill of Rights. It's not
just a suggestion. If you would like to not violate the rights of our
people, then that's okay. That would be nice.
No, it's in a position as if a parent was giving a command or an
officer was giving a command to a lower person within the military.
It is not an option for our government to decide whether they want to
obey it or not obey it. It is something that they must do according to
the Constitution, and it is unlawful and illegal if they do.
This ordinance does not violate the Bill of Rights, as some have
said. It, in fact, upholds it. And the fact that it is saying so means
that if a person who holds on the positions of our commissioners was
to be -- had suit brought against him, they also have the same rights
and are afforded due process of law. Innocent until proven guilty.
That is on its face. So any kind of argument to this contrary to that
is disingenuous.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online in Enid Weyghandt.
And we're prompting her again. If she does not pick up this time, we
will move on.
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: I do not see Enid picking up. Let's try online,
Judi Palay. I've asked the Zoom folks to have her ready. Judi
Palay, you should be prompted to unmute at this time. Ms. Palay?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Wow. Okay. Let's go back to the room here
to Frank Cummings. And after Frank Cummings, let's go back
July 13, 2021
Page 177
online and try Tamra Mitchell, and then back in the room for Joe
Gonzales.
MS. PALAY: Excuse me. This is Judi Palay.
MR. MILLER: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Cummings, if you'll
wait right here.
Ms. Palay, you'll have three minutes.
MS. PALAY: Thank you. There's a pause between when you
push unmute and when we can mute, just so you know.
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am.
MS. PALAY: There are real needs in our community.
Creating an unnecessary issue is not what we need, especially when
this is clearly a costly court issue. It screams government in
religion.
Let's set our immediate priorities: Feeding our population,
creating workforce housing, cleaning our waters, working on our
infrastructure, paying our teachers and others a living wage. We
have traffic issues that are betting worse. These are critical issues
that require everyone's immediate attention.
Please, vote no on this. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker will be Frank Cummings.
We'll follow him up on online with Tamra Mitchell, and then back in
the room to Joe Gonzales.
MR. CUMMINGS: Good afternoon, Madam Commissioner.
Good afternoon, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good afternoon.
MR. CUMMINGS: My name is Frank Cummings, and I live in
Golden Gate Estates with my wife, Norma. We have lived in the
Estates for more than 10 years now, and we love it.
We have been coming to Florida for over 20 years. We came to
Florida because the tax rate is lower than where we lived before, and
we were looking for warmer weather. The weather has been great
July 13, 2021
Page 178
except for some hurricanes, but now we are Floridians because we
survived Irma in 2017.
But we come from a big city with its own problems, and I have
sat through a number of meetings. Never have I thought I would sit
and listen to such balderdash.
I served in the United States Navy and served to uphold our
constitution, and I did it with honor. But this ordinance you are
considering, if passed, you can be assured our taxes will go up, our
economy will no longer be well thought of, and consider the
far-reaching effects. I am not a constitutional lawyer, but if this
ordinance you are considering is passed, you can be assured your
budget will be in the hands of many lawyers, and we will all pay.
Vote no for this proposal, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you
for your time in giving this process.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online will be Tamra
Mitchell. We'll follow Tamra up in the room with Joe Gonzales, and
then we'll go back online and try Enid Weygandt for one final time
before we move on.
All right. Ms. Mitchell, you should be prompted to unmute
yourself. I see your hand raised. If you'll unmute. There you are,
Ms. Mitchell. You have three minutes. Please begin.
MS. MITCHELL: Thank you. My name is Tamra Mitchell,
and I am a resident of Collier County for about 12 years now. I love
it there.
I'm voicing my objection to the proposed ordinance. I
understand people's concerns about the federal government taking too
much liberty with your rights, that sort of thing; I do understand that.
But the way that this is being proposed is not going to be an effective
way to achieve your goals.
First of all, the statute -- or the proposed ordinance is very
July 13, 2021
Page 179
poorly written. I'm a retired attorney. I see nothing but problems
with the proposed ordinance, and it's going to be challenged in court,
which is going to ultimately cost all of us, the taxpayers, a lot of
money, and for no reason.
My second point is that this is really unnecessary. If you have
an objection to the way the federal government is treating you, you
have a remedy now and have had for years. All you have to do is
challenge the proposed -- or the problem -- the problem that you see
in federal court, and that remedy's available now.
The legal theory that this whole proposed ordinance is based
upon is called nullification, and that means that a state has the right to
nullify federal laws that it deems to be unconstitutional. That has
never been upheld in federal court. The federal court has based its
decisions on the Supremacy Clause in the Constitution which clearly
says that federal law is superior or supreme over state law, and also
Article 3, which provides that the judiciary has the final say in
interpreting the Constitution.
So, in summary, this ordinance is unnecessary. I look at it as a
solution in search of a problem.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker -- we're going to try -- well,
we've got Joe Gonzales here in the room, and then we will try Enid
Weygandt one more time. If she is not there, then we will move on
to Beth Stein, and then in the room with David Goldstein.
MR. GONZALES: Good afternoon, and thank you. Joe
Gonzales, and I support the Bill of Rights ordinance.
Here we are about one year later, and our conspiracy theories are
playing out. We said masks and lockdowns, which are
unconstitutional violations, would lead to forced vaccinations,
constant surveillance, and loss of rights.
According to the White House press secretary, Biden is now
July 13, 2021
Page 180
sending his strike force goons door to door to track and coerce, and
they are working with local officials, which is bypassing the states.
Some of us know that these door-to-door efforts are additional
back doors to other civil liberty violations like freedom of speech,
freedom of religion, right to privacy, and our Second Amendment
right to defend ourselves, all in their effort to usher in a new-world
order and totalitarian regime under corporatism and technocracy.
Our local sheriff and you are our first line of defense against an
overreaching government. You're either with us or you're against us.
Enemies are foreign or domestic. Government gets its power
from the people and the Constitution. It limits authority; it does not
expand it.
You have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution and be
defenders of liberty first and foremost. We are asking you to not
take the grants which are in violation of our rights. The fight starts
here in this room.
I know Mr. LoCastro has probably served and fought for this
country; however, it doesn't matter if you do not fight here where it
counts, where the domestic enemy is now. This fight has to be toe to
toe, punch for punch against the Marxists and communists that have
taken over and infiltrated local governments, schools, and hospitals
and corporations. All the millions of soldiers' lives will have been
sacrificed for nothing but corporate interests.
So why do many of us believe this is necessary today? Because
we're afraid. We're afraid that we have lost our rights to corporate
and tyrannical interests. Within the last year we saw cities burning
down, looters and rioters run free, our federal government was
overthrown by an unprecedented and illegal voting. While they
overthrew our government and cry for equal outcomes versus what
this country was founded on, which is equal opportunity. Those who
have shown that they want to overturn the Constitution and our
July 13, 2021
Page 181
system and erase our history, burn our flag, and indoctrinate our
children are not called extremists or radicals. Instead, they want to
label those of us who love our country, appreciate our constitution,
love God and the opportunity this country has given us are Christians,
and we appreciate our Second Amendment. We're now labeled as
extremists. What's up is down and what's down is up. Patriots will
do what patriots should do. We have to take control of our country
and our state and our county. I would ask Sheriff Rambosk and all
of you to first and foremost be defenders of liberty and our first line
of defense as you pledged.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online will be Enid
Weygandt one more time. She's being prompted to unmute, and
that's not happening, so that's going to be my final call for Enid
Weygandt.
We're going to go online to Beth Stein. Ms. Stein, you should
be prompted to unmute at this time. After Ms. Stein, we'll go here in
the room to David Goldstein.
Ms. Stein, can you please unmute?
Mr. Goldstein, please come up.
And let's stand by to go to John Chandler online after
Mr. Goldstein.
Mr. Chandler, if you'll stand by.
Mr. Goldstein.
MR. GOLDSTEIN: Thank you.
My name is David Goldstein, and I've been a Collier County
resident for over 20 years. I am a retired attorney who is admitted in
New York and New Jersey. And while I'm addressing my remarks
to the entire Board of County Commissioners, I am particularly
concerned with those commissioners who are members of the Bar.
July 13, 2021
Page 182
Each of you has taken at least one course in constitutional law
where you should have learned about the constitutional's federal
structure and the interaction between state and federal powers.
Nothing in this federal/state structure empowers a county to interpret
either federal or state law.
For you to support an ordinance which claims to give Collier
County the authority to supersede federal law is either arrogance or
ignorance or some combination thereof, and each of you can decide
which applies to you.
Each of you knows in your heart of hearts that this so-called Bill
of Rights Sanctuary Ordinance is unconstitutional on its face and will
be stricken by the first court that hears a case which challenges it. I
remind you that a civil war was fought when several states
challenged federal authority, and you know how that turned out.
Please do not make Collier County a laughingstock by passing
this ordinance. Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online will be John
Chandler. Mr. Chandler, you're being prompted to unmute yourself,
if you will do so. And he'll be followed in the room by David
Silverberg. I still don't see Mr. Chandler.
Mr. Silverberg, if you will come up. Mr. Silverberg's been
ceded additional time. Let me run this out real quick. Jennifer
Walker.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Is she here?
MR. MILLER: Oh, you know what? I think she left.
MR. CHANDLER: Hello?
MR. MILLER: Okay. Is that Mr. Chandler? John Chandler?
Okay. I thought we had him.
Mr. Silverberg was ceded time from Jennifer Walker and Myra
Williams and Van Williams, but I just realized they ceded -- are you
July 13, 2021
Page 183
here? The Williamses are here. Ms. Walker?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: I think she had to leave. So we're going to go
nine minutes here for Mr. Silverberg, and when that's done,
Mr. Chandler, stand by, and we'll come to you right after that.
MR. SILVERBERG: Okay. Thank you very much. My
name is David Silverberg. I'm a resident of Collier County, District
2.
I'm here today to urge you to reject this absurd, unconstitutional,
and completely unnecessary ordinance. This is, frankly, ridiculous
on its face. There is simply no need for a separate Collier County
sanctuary for the Bill of Rights because the United States of America
is the sanctuary for the Bill of Rights. Our law is uniform, it's
superseding, and it's upheld.
And this ordinance, this proposed ordinance, has so many
problems between the principle and the practical that it's as full of
holes as a piece of Swiss cheese. I mean, there are logic loops.
You're going to challenge federal law in what court once you've
denied federal jurisdiction? There's so many things that simply don't
make sense.
In addition, talking very pragmatically, your lawyer has talked
about the fact that it opens you all up to liability. I believe it opens
up our sheriffs and the Sheriff's deputies also to liability. If they try
to assert federal law, they're liable to be sued. There's all sorts of
questions about, you know, federal investigations that might be going
on in this county that might be disrupted or hindered.
There's also -- you know, when we have an Irma or an Elsa or a
Wilma hurricane, if we remove ourselves from federal law, you're not
going to get the assistance and support and the help that you need
from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and this can run
into many millions of dollars, as you all well know. You cannot take
July 13, 2021
Page 184
yourself out of the jurisdiction of federal law.
Now, I, like everyone else, am very concerned about the
Constitution and upholding the Bill of Rights. I mean, there is real
concern. We've had an insurrection. There is a need -- there is a
need to support -- there is a need to support the Constitution. This is
easily done in this county.
Now, on all your desks you have a draft text of a resolution that
reaffirms Collier County's allegiance to the Constitution and the Bill
of Rights. I urge you to pass that resolution. That's something you
can do, it's something within your jurisdiction, and it's something that
I think every resident of Collier County can support. We -- and this,
I think, will address everybody's problems and concerns with
possible violations of the Bill of Rights. We can do that here.
The United States of America has faced and overcome rebellion,
nullification, succession, sedition, and insurrection, and it has
defeated them all. Collier County does not need to join this sad
parade of bad ideas and failed notions and absurd plots and make
itself not only a laughingstock of the country, but take itself out of the
rule of law, which is what this ordinance is proposing to do.
So, in summation, defeat this ordinance. This should be
rejected, and I will hope that it will be rejected unanimously, and I
urge you to pass a resolution reaffirming our allegiance to the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker -- we're going to go back
online to John Chandler. Mr. Chandler, we're ready for you, if you'll
unmute. Then we'll come in the room for Rocky Scofield, and then
we will try Beth Stein online again.
Mr. Chandler, I see you're there. You have three minutes, sir.
Please begin.
July 13, 2021
Page 185
MR. CHANDLER: Okay. I'm going to save everybody a lot
of time because the previous speaker just gave an excellent summary
of the problems with this ordinance. It definitely needs to be voted
down. I'm confident that the wisdom of our commissioners will
prevail. This ordinance will not fly.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker will be Rocky
Scofield -- your next speaker is Rocky Scofield. We'll follow him
by trying Beth Stein again online, and then we'll come back in the
room for Victoria Redstall.
Mr. Scofield, you have three minutes, sir.
MR. SCOFIELD: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good afternoon.
MR. SCOFIELD: It's pretty amazing. I hear a lot of people
here in this room saying that our county government, basically you're
subservient to the federal government, there's nothing you can do
about it, what you're going to do here is unlawful.
Has anybody seen what's gone on in the federal government?
That's why we're here. That's exactly where we're here. This
country is in peril. It's most divided, I think, since the Civil War.
The forces of Marxism and communism are affecting everything in
this country, all supported by the Democrat party.
It's unbelieve that the FBI, the CIA, the DOJ, the NSA, the IRS,
and the Department of Homeland Security, they've been weaponized
by the federal government against the people.
The First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments are
being shredded. There's rioting, there's looting, burning buildings,
there's murdering police, and anarchy in a lot of major cities in this
country. And what is being done? Nothing. Nothing to the
criminals. What is the government doing? They're going after
law-abiding citizens. This is where they're focusing their efforts.
July 13, 2021
Page 186
The FBI can kick your door down at 4:00 a.m., arrest you, take
you to jail for speaking out against this government. Hundreds of
people are being held in Washington, D.C., right now since
January 6th just for being in Washington, D.C. They're being held
without bail, without indictments, and a lot of those people are in
solitary confinement. That is communism.
Major corporations are conspiring with the government to
censure, cancel, and spy on people. The root of that is fascism.
Don't get hung up on a few words in this ordinance and
perceive, you know, what leads to unintended consequences.
Everything you do here has unintended consequences. I can assure
you that Democrats in D.C. and major cities across this city don't
give a hoot about unintended consequences. You can see it by what
they're doing every day.
The Sheriff and his attorney have looked this bill over many
times. They're in support of it. They get lawsuits all the time, like
you guys do. You know, it's just -- it's part of the -- part of the deal
that you have.
You know, I'm really sickened that -- I have a lot of
grandchildren, and I'm pretty sickened by the fact that they may grow
up in a country devoid of their God-given liberties and freedom.
My sons asks me all the time what we can do. Well, what we
can do is here today. It starts here with this ordinance. It's time to
give the people of this county a win, to give us hope, and say not on
my watch.
We're fortunate to live in Florida. We have a governor that has
our backs. We're very fortunate to live in Collier County where the
Sheriff has our backs. We're here today to find out if you guys have
our backs. So if you cannot -- if you find yourselves -- you cannot
vote for this ordinance, I would say to you, you may want to change
your party affiliation and be transparent with the voters.
July 13, 2021
Page 187
Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: We're going to go back online and try Beth
Stein again. I'll let my Zoom pilot know, if Beth doesn't unmute,
we're going to go on to, online, Beverly Hiltabidle. In either case,
the next speaker in the room will be Victoria Redstall.
Ms. Stein, you're being prompted to unmute yourself. This is
your second opportunity. I'll give her just a minute here. I see
nothing happening.
Lisa, let's move on and try Beverly Hiltabidle online.
Beverly, you're being prompted to unmute yourself, if you'll do
so at this time. Beverly, you have three minutes. Please begin.
MS. HILTABIDLE: Hi. My name is Bev Hiltabidle. Thank
you for allowing us all this opportunity.
I've been a voting resident of Collier County for 41 of the 48
past years. Throughout that time, I worked continuously as an
educator in Collier County Public Schools and as a program
coordinator executive director of The Learning Connection until my
retirement in 2018.
I'm here to vehemently oppose this ordinance, not as a person
affiliated with any party, but as an extremely concerned citizen.
This ordinance is sending the wrong message to everyone,
particularly our children, who are learning in school and from their
parents that being a good citizen means following the law whether
you agree with it or not, and that there are vehicles defined by our
Constitution in place for amending or abolishing a law. Passing an
ordinance at the county level is not one of these vehicles.
According to a retired judge with whom I consulted regarding
this issue, only the United States court can determine the legality of a
federal law or action, not a person defying the law, not law
enforcement officers who are sworn to do exactly that, enforce the
July 13, 2021
Page 188
law, and not county officials who have no authority to change a
federal law or the enforcement thereof.
This ordinance will ultimately spawn numerous laws which I
and those consulted believe will never be ruled in favor of the
ordinance.
County funds for these litigations are going to come from
where? I hope not from supporting workforce housing, which is
sorely needed. I hope not from disaster relief and cleanup. I hope
not from infrastructure projects. I hope not from water-quality
projects.
To summarize, a county does not have the authority to
determine that a federal law is unlawful. It's for the United States
federal courts to decide.
If passed, this ordinance will never hold up in court, I believe,
and it will cost the county and, therefore, the people of Collier
County an extreme amount of money each time it's litigated.
Commissioners, I believe if you vote no on this ordinance, you
are not violating your oath of office. In fact, you are acknowledging
and upholding the Constitution of the United States and your oath by
understanding the separation of the power stated clearly in our United
States Constitution; therefore, I implore each of you to vote no on the
passage of this proposed ordinance.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker in the room will be Victoria
Redstall. We'll follow her up online with Bob Erbstein, and after
that we'll come back in the room to Marlene A. -- and I'm sorry,
Marlene, I'm going to go with Gargoza. I hope that's -- pardon me?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Gargan.
MR. MILLER: Gargan. Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Redstall, you have three minutes, ma'am.
MS. REDSTALL: My experience is with the First
Amendment, and I quote, the part of it is Congress shall make no law
July 13, 2021
Page 189
abridging the freedom of speech, and this has been completely
trampled on regarding censorship of us conservatives.
I think Collier County, we should make an example of this
ordinance and vote it yes because we would be an example for the
rest of the country, all the counties and all the cities that have been
burning down and all the murders that are happening and the thefts
that are happening because there is just no law and order, and nobody
is following the Constitution.
If -- Collier County, we can make an example of that and stop
censoring us conservatives. This is -- big tech has got the Section
230, which is the most dangerous thing. It needs to be abolished,
eliminated. That goes against our First Amendment. I've not only
been censored, I've been defamed, because when you are considered
a public figure, due to my careers on camera -- you now are all public
figures because you're commissioners. When you're public figures,
they can not only censor you, they can slander you, and then you
can't defend yourself from the slander even though the slander is
made up and all lies. That is my personal experience, and I've lost
jobs because of it.
So my point is, please, let's just sign this in effect. We can see
in the room the people that do not want this ordinance, they are still
wearing masks. They seem to want to not follow -- they want to
follow the orders of something that's against our constitution and
mask up and go against it. It looks like they've all just rolled out of
bed. But us conservatives, we're not respected, it seems.
So, anyway, my point to you is -- I would like to give one of the
commissioners that I think has actually never read the Constitution,
I'd like to give him a copy, if I could do that, please.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Could you please give that to me.
(Applause.)
MS. REDSTALL: Even better. I was giving it to him.
July 13, 2021
Page 190
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, yeah. But direct all these
things through the Chair, please. Thank you.
MS. REDSTALL: I should have done that. That's all I wanted
to say.
So thank you. Let's vote this a yes with everybody, because
you've already voted on it. You've already sworn when you sworn
by your oath to be commissioners. So I beg of you to please vote
this in. Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: All right. Your next speaker will be online.
We're going to go with Bob Erbsten.
Bob, you're being prompted to unmute yourself, if you'll do so.
And then we'll follow Bop up with Marlene Gargan here in the
room.
And, Bob, you have three minutes.
MR. ERBSTEIN: Thank you. Thank you very much.
I agree with many of the speakers who were speaking against
this ordinance. I mean, at the end of the day, we fought a civil war
to ensure the role of the federal government. It seems that this effort
is being pushed by a bunch of political extremists who don't believe
that the government is able to handle the responsibilities it has to its
people, but it does.
I mean, if you take, for example, all the stuff about the mask and
the responsibility to -- that's an abuse of power. In 1918 the
Supreme Court had determined that it was lawful for the government
in the case of a medical emergency to require people to wear masks.
Unlike today, in 1918, the U.S. represented 1.25 percent of the
world's deaths for a pandemic.
In today's environment, we've represented 15 percent of today's
deaths because of all the silliness which has occurred in terms of
people unwilling to accept the responsibility towards their neighbors
July 13, 2021
Page 191
and cover their faces and prevent the spread of the COVID virus.
Thank you for your time, and I would implore you to vote
against this silly ordinance. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: All right. Ms. -- we're going to go -- Ms.
Gargan was actually ceding time, so we're going to call Pat Forkan,
who is being ceded three additional minutes from Ms. Gargan. That
will be a total of six minutes. And we're going to follow her up
online with Cynthia Marino Clark, and then back here in the room
with Janet Hoffman.
Ms. Forkan, you have six minutes.
MS. FORKAN: Thank you. Actually, I'd like to clear up for
the lady in the flag over there that --
MS. REDSTALL: It's a dress.
MS. FORKAN: -- I'm wearing a mask because of all of you
who will not get vaccinated.
(Applause.)
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Damn right we won't.
MS. FORKAN: All right. Let's get down to brass tacks here.
Why are we here? We are here because a number of people are very
unhappy about the presidential election didn't go the way they
wanted, and they won't even accept the fact that Biden won.
We are here because the federal government -- I have yet to hear
what horrendous things the federal government is doing to
everybody. But I don't know what those are.
I would like to mention in the -- whereas a particular concern in
this ordinance, edicts being promulgated by the federal government
in the form of executive orders. Where were all of you when Trump
was writing executive orders constantly and making a lot -- and
making a lot of the places like state department or EPA and the others
devoid of normal -- scientific and normal procedures? None of you
were here then. Apparently those executive orders didn't bother you.
July 13, 2021
Page 192
I also want to know -- the next thing is, the balance between the
national government and the state and local. I actually -- I'm
actually a globalist, and I know a lot of you --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Excuse me.
MS. FORKAN: -- would think that's worse --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Excuse me. Excuse me. You need
to direct your remarks to the Chair.
MS. FORKAN: Okay. I'm sorry. But there's been so much
activity in the -- in the back -- in the back rooms there.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. Would you stop
the clock?
MS. FORKAN: I worked a lot --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Hang on a sec. Roll the
clock back a few seconds.
MR. MILLER: I have, sir. We're good.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I want to ask the audience,
we said we want to have some decorum. We asked you not to call
out and be rude to speakers. No one's -- so, please, just let this
young lady finish her comments. If you don't agree with her, that's
fine, but stop -- please stop interrupting and clapping while she's
speaking. When she's finished --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And in fairness to those -- I know
that our speaker addressed you, and I've asked her now to address the
Chair, so...
MR. MILLER: And if I might, one more time, please silence
your cell phones.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So silence your cellphones,
everyone. And you may continue.
MS. FORKAN: Thank you very much.
I've done a lot of work with legislators, local, federal, and
international, and I've worked a lot on developing treaties that people
July 13, 2021
Page 193
have to give and have to take. And there is no perfect answer in any
situation. But we do try to meet in the middle, which I know many
people find now appalling, that compromising is an appalling
situation, but it's the only way this government can work.
And I think that many of the speakers who have suggested
things like the Democrats are Marxist or communists or whatever,
that is insanely stupid.
And so I really hope that some of you get off of this conspiracy
business and get down to real business.
I wanted to mention something about executive orders. I just
read some of the executive orders that you're so upset about with
President Biden. He wants to make it easier for generic drugmakers
and Canadian providers to compete with U.S. pharmaceutical
companies. I know a lot of people who would like to have cheaper
pharmaceuticals.
He wants to allow Americans to buy hearing aids without
prescriptions, which Donald Trump put in place. But I wear hearing
aids, and I sure would like to have a cheaper hearing aid.
Require hospitals to be more transparent about billing. There's
something we've all faced with. Why am I getting billed for this? I
didn't even know it was something I was supposed to be billed for.
Force airlines -- these are really awful things, aren't they, that
Biden has put into an executive order.
Force airlines to refund money when they lose bags or when the
flight WiFi doesn't function. Hey, there's a major problem.
So I'm just saying that there's so many things that people are
upset about that are really not there. And somebody stole my line.
It's a -- it's an ordinance in search of a problem. There really isn't
this kind of nonsense. And I think that everybody who is so worked
up about their freedom has to stop and think, we live in a place where
people are risking their lives to come here. Do we really have to
July 13, 2021
Page 194
have such a crazy bunch of things that go on to say that people are
communists or this or the other?
It really doesn't make any sense to me. I can't get myself to
really understand what this -- this thing would -- would do.
So one of the things that I asked, well, if I went into a theater
and yelled fire and there was no fire, does that mean you have to
defend me? What -- how does that work? Who decides what the
thing is that the individual does that says I don't like it.
I, for one, have worn a mask from the beginning. I had to work
very hard to find a vaccination initially. And I remember my parents
saying to me, you know, we were so grateful when you were a little
girl that we could get you a polio shot. It was -- people would line
up to get polio shots. There are so many people in this world that
would give their right arm to get a vaccination. Just go ask people in
India or Haiti, for that matter.
So I really think that the whole idea of not wearing a mask, not
getting a vaccination is not being free. It's being ridiculous. So I
don't know what to call it, even. So I just say I'm done. Thank you
very much for your time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. FORKAN: And I hope everybody votes against this.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online is Cynthia
Marino-Clark. She will be followed here in the room by Janet
Hoffman, and then we'll go back online to Cynthia Odierna.
Ms. Clark, I see you're unmuted -- Marino-Clark, that is. You
have three minutes. Please begin.
MS. MARINO-CLARK: Thank you. I'm asking that the
Commissioners reject this ordinance. The Bill of Rights already
applies to all of us as it exists. Federal laws are put into place to
protect our rights. It is illegal for states and localities to prevent or
July 13, 2021
Page 195
impede federal agents from enforcing federal laws they are tasked
with enforcing. This ordinance is an attempt to bypass the legal
system and make the sheriff's department and local government our
judge and juror.
This ordinance promotes lawlessness by allowing local
governments and sheriff's departments to arbitrarily decide which
laws to follow, when to follow them, and which groups of citizens
they choose to prosecute just for following federal laws. This will
lead to abuse of power.
Our constitution gives our judicial branch the right to make
constitutional determinations. Our judicial system is already in
place to interpret law. Article 3, Section 2, gives the judicial branch
of government the right to settle controversies between a state or the
citizens thereof, the foreign state citizens, or subjects.
Sheriff's Office and local governments must follow federal law
and are not qualified to make constitutional determinations. Federal
laws are put into place to prevent unfair application of the law.
There may be many unforeseen consequences if this ordinance is
passed. This will lead to infringement of our constitutional rights
when local governments and Sheriff's Office arbitrarily choose not to
follow our federal laws.
Officers and citizens who follow federal law will be prosecuted.
What happens when the local government and Sheriff's Office are not
in agreement with certain groups or political organizations? Though
they follow the same law, will these groups of people be prosecuted
by the Sheriff or local government while people they like are not?
When elected officials change and sheriff's employees change,
then does that also change which federal laws they will then choose
to arbitrarily follow and what they deem as constitutional? This
leads to complete anarchy.
Passing the ordinance may lead some residents of this county to
July 13, 2021
Page 196
perform treasonous acts upon our government. Some residents of
this county were involved in the January 6th, 2021, insurrection that
beat up our D.C. officers in an attempt to overthrow our government,
overthrow our fair and free elections, and murder our elected
officials.
Is passing this ordinance an attempt to help them avoid
prosecution for their treasonous acts? Will it encourage them to
perform more acts of insurrections if they're not subject to federal law
and prosecution?
Passing this ordinance could also reduce tourism to this area if
people are afraid that local government and sheriff's department will
not follow federal law. And then, who will pay for the inevitable
cost when this is taken to court? Will our taxes increase to pay for
this power grab of our local government and Sheriff's Office?
I respectfully ask that you do not pass this ordinance. It is not
necessary.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker here in the room is Janet
Hoffman. We'll follow her up online with Cynthia Odierna and then
back in the room with Scott Sherman.
Ms. Hoffman?
MS. HOFFMAN: Thank you very much for providing me the
opportunity to speak on behalf of the League of Women Voters of
Collier County. I am Janet Hoffman. I am a 41-year resident of
Collier County, and I am a current co-president of the local League.
The League is a nonpartisan organization encouraging informed
and active participation in the government for over 100 years.
We fully believe in the individual liberties established in the Bill
of Rights, but we do not support this proposed ordinance. This
ordinance does not affirm our county support for the Bill of Rights;
rather it suggests that Collier officials may pick and choose which
July 13, 2021
Page 197
federal measures they wish to follow.
There are many questions that have already been asked such as,
who will determine this; what procedures will be used? It is not the
job, with my due respect, for the County Commission or the Sheriff's
Department to decide what is unconstitutional. The federal courts
decide this alone.
The League of Women Voters believes that efficient
government requires the clear assignment of responsibility and
coordination among the different agencies and levels of government.
The Constitution, its amendments, and our federal laws are the
law of the land. This was well settled by our forefathers in Marbury
versus Madison. It has been well settled in case after case that the
Supreme Court has the final authority to interpret the Constitution.
If we were to allow the state or local governments to cherry-pick
which laws they wish to obey, we will create chaos. Our county
could be drawn into prolonged and costly litigation.
The ordinance could have a negative impact on our commerce.
Businesses need reliable and consistently applied laws which this
ordinance will not create. We need to affirm that we stand for the
laws of the United States of America. It is essential -- essential that
we improve or repair our government, not disregard it. We love this
country. We cherish the freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights,
and we respectfully urge you to vote no on the Bill of Rights
Sanctuary Ordinance.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online is Cynthia Odierna.
She'll be followed here in the room by Scott Sherman, and then
online by Cynthia Reece.
Ms. Odierna, you're unmuted. You have three minutes. Please
July 13, 2021
Page 198
begin.
MS. ODIERNA: Thank you.
Shouldn't our Naples commissioners be working on expanding
public transportation, ensuring public health/safety post COVID, and
working for public good and the fiscal health of our town instead of
looking for ways of bending the law for those who want to
delegitimize our elected government? I feel as if you are
looking -- going out of your way to create pandemonium.
If -- excuse me. I trust and intend to adhere to the mandates of
the federal government, but will these constitutional interpretation
decisions be permitted to be made on the spot, or will these court
proceedings change -- will there be court proceedings to change the
law on the books? In fact, the officer who represented Sheriff
Rambosk today said that -- that the case file would be prepared and
then go to the state for the final decision. But -- so you're going to
make a case here, and then it's going to go to the state anyway? Isn't
that circumventing and causing a lot of extra money and time and
confusion?
And if so, will this amended constitutional language be
published in time for citizens to change their practices? If updates
are to be published, where and how will that be? On a leader board
at a drive-in movie screen? Where's the transparency?
How can we ensure that people in groups with special interests
operating outside of safety and equity don't push this new agenda? I
think I know where it's coming from, in fact, and I think it's coming
from the state, from our local governments in the state.
Is it already quite a -- it's already quite a challenge with the likes
of ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Commission, proven
to actually write the language of laws for the politicians they pay.
That's where the corporations come in with their corruption, and
we've been fighting that for many, many years already.
July 13, 2021
Page 199
This is a recipe for confusion and arbitrary favoritism. This
is -- this is clearly a local power grab with the attempt at flouting the
laws that are on the books already and a challenge to our democracy.
One of the last speakers said -- started to talk in such a way that
it reminded me -- put all together, and he was trying to say make
America Mayberry again. Well, in the times of Mayberry, he may
have had warm, fuzzy feelings like I did when I used to watch Andy
of Mayberry in the '60s, but you know what? My people -- my
brothers and sisters of color weren't having such a good time. That's
when, also, I believe the song Strange Fruit came out, if you know
my reference.
Now, Rambosk subscribes wholeheartedly to enforcing 287(g).
He's really hot to trot with that state legislation, but now he wants to
flout federal laws that he doesn't like.
Why don't we take care of the people who -- the insurrectionists
and those who opened the doors for them and including the inciter in
chief and his minions. That's what we need to be worried about.
And I really am worried. I'm worried for my safety, and I'm worried
for the fairness when I'm going to -- I don't want to be languishing in
jail for just doing what I think is on the books according to the law
and what I'm allowed to do only to find out that a couple of sheriffs
have differences of opinion with that, and I'm going to -- I'm going to
lose time at my job and lose my reputation languishing in jail while
the Supreme Court is suspending our taxpayer money.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I didn't hear it. I'm sorry.
Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm sorry, but your time is
up. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker in the room is Scott
Sherman. He'll be followed online by Cynthia Reece, and then back
here in the room by Drew Clark.
MR. SHERMAN: Commissioners, thank you very much for
July 13, 2021
Page 200
listening to me today, and do truly ask that you listen to me.
I had prepared a speech, as usual, and I got up here -- and I'm
not going to say what I was going to say. In reality, you know God
gave us our rights. You guys don't -- we're not going to beg you for
rights. God gave them to me.
I never wore a mask. I wore one to go in the county -- the CCP
school board. I had to wear one once. I didn't do it. I don't care.
You don't tell me what I can and cannot do. As long as I'm not
hurting anyone else, it doesn't matter.
Health responsibility is an individual responsibility. If you are
worried about your health, then exercise and eat right, and you have a
God-given immunity system that should work for you.
Anyway, we have a bigger problem here. I'm looking at what
was going on here today. We have a broken county. We have a
broken country. We have an illegitimate president that cheated to
get in place -- that's been proven. Look at the evidence -- and we are
just -- you guys are tasked with helping us fix a broken county.
Clearly what we have. I hope you can do it. I hope you're up to the
task. I hope we can come together as citizens and work together.
I have a lot of people who have spoken today that are friends of
mine that have spoken against this. I'm actually for this ordinance
because I want to test you guys. I wanted to see if you guys would,
you know, step up and say, yes, we support the Bill of Rights,
because it didn't feel that way.
I felt like I was in an Orwellian nightmare when I was in here
last time, you know, pushing the mask and pushing the mandates and
all that. That's scary. And the CCP school board is even worse. I
mean, they wouldn't even let me sit next to my wife. These rules are
asinine, and we need to stop.
Government should be here to help us with the infrastructure.
There were some beautiful things going on today. It was such a
July 13, 2021
Page 201
gorgeous meeting this morning. I loved, you know, hearing about
the rural lands and all that. That's what you guys are supposed to be
doing. I appreciate -- you guys work hard. And anytime you do a
little thing and you screw up in your position, we're going to jump on
you. I'm sorry. It's just human nature to say, oh, you're not thinking
the way I do.
So, you know, God bless all of you. I'd like to say a prayer for
you. Dear God, please bless these commissioners. Do the right
thing. We really want this county healed. We really want to bring
Jesus into the world better than we had before. And I ask this in
Jesus' name. Amen.
So thank you for what you do. And, you know, let your
conscience guide you on this but, in reality, we've got bigger fish to
fry then whether the Bill of Rights or the -- we've got a broken
county.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online will be Cynthia
Reece. She'll be followed in the room by Drew Clark and then back
online to David Millstein.
Ms. Reece, you're being prompted to unmute yourself, if you'll
do so at this time. While I'm waiting on that, Mr. Clark, if you can
come to one of the podiums.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He already spoke.
MR. MILLER: All right. Then let's try Chantal Sherer.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: She left.
MR. MILLER: She left.
Then let's try Victoria King. Ms. King.
Daija Hinajosa. She is here. Of course I got it right. And
then we'll try David Millstein online after this.
MS. HINAJOSA: Good afternoon, Commissioners. First I
want to say that I think it's absolutely ludicrous that people think the
July 13, 2021
Page 202
Bill of Rights ordinance is unconstitutional yet are totally in support
of ostracizing citizens based on vaccination status or the forced use of
masking. It's absolutely ludicrous.
I'm obviously here today to speak in support of this Bill of
Rights ordinance for many reasons. You know, I always say, had we
followed South Dakota, we wouldn't be in this mess right now.
South Dakota never shut down, and they never deemed who was
essential and who was not.
The United States Constitution does not exist to grant us rights.
These are inherent within us. Rather it exists to frame a limited
government so that these natural rights can be exercised freely.
By adopting this Bill of Rights ordinance, we are declaring that
the government in Collier County understands their boundaries and
supports citizens' free exercise of their natural rights. This is a
reminder that this ordinance umbrellas every single resident of
Collier County from private citizens to elected representatives. We
not only support our federal and state constitution, we support the
spirit of these documents.
We must recognize that we are free people that lend you consent
to govern. After a year of facing unconstitutional charades such as
mandates, lockdowns, and being labeled as essential or nonessential,
and now people are subject to door-to-door vaccination by the federal
administration.
It is not only appropriate to declare Collier County a Bill of
Rights Sanctuary, but it is imperative. Our Constitutional republic is
riding on thin ice. Every one who has fled communism warns us of
the dangers that we face. We must show the nation that Collier
County supports protecting citizens' rights and will ensure that we act
in good faith and conduct ourselves within the bounds of the law.
There should not be any reason why any law-abiding citizen or
government body would oppose this ordinance unless said individual,
July 13, 2021
Page 203
individuals, or body plan to violate these rights now or in the future.
Commissioners, if you want to show the nation and these
residents that you support the exercise of free rights, you will vote
yes on this ordinance.
And I'll leave you with the quote from Albert Einstein. The
strength of the Constitution lies entirely in the determination of each
citizen to defend it. One -- only if every single citizen feels duty
bound to do his share in this defense are the constitutional rights
secure.
Thank you very much and have a great day.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online will be David
Billstein, and then followed here in the room by Beth Sherman, and
then we'll go back online to Deborah Cruise.
Mr. Millstein -- and I hope I'm saying that right -- you are
unmuted. You have three minutes, sir. Please begin.
MR. MILLSTEIN: Thank you so much.
And I wish I could have been there in person. I actually tried to
show up this morning, but I've been having some low-back issues,
and it was very difficult.
I am an attorney. I practiced civil rights and constitutional law
for 50 years. I taught it at law school, and I am currently the chair of
the Collier County ACLU Legal Committee.
I know a lot about this stuff, and as I've been listening to the
various people speak and hearing what the County Attorney had to
say, I thought to myself, what would it be like if I had been the
County Attorney and the Board of County Commissioners had come
to me and said, look at this ordinance. What do you think?
Well, I would have started to chuckle as I read through the first
paragraph or two. Then I would have become completely hysterical
when I got to the anti-commandeering part, and I would realize that
July 13, 2021
Page 204
this was an ordinance proposed by somebody who doesn't really
understand constitutional law.
There is this thing called the Supremacy Clause. The county
does not have the legal authority to nullify federal law. It can be
challenged in court, yeah, but it can't be -- you can't pass an
ordinance declaring that you're going to ignore federal law. I mean,
if you want to make this a Bill of Rights Sanctuary City, why don't
we make it -- I'll tell you what. Why don't we make it an income tax
sanctuary county as well. You could pass an ordinance saying, well,
we're not going to pay any attention to the Internal Revenue Code. It
would be the same thing.
So I would say to you all, you know, you don't want to pass this.
You're going to get yourselves into big trouble. You're going to get
sued right away. You're going to lose a great deal of incompentries
[sic], and you'll look -- you're going to look pretty foolish.
It is so unconstitutional in so many different ways that one
hardly knows where to begin. I would then say, come on, let's go
out and have a beer and we'll laugh about this, and that would be the
end of it.
So I hope that you will recognize that as County Commissioners
you do not have the authority to nullify federal law. And if you
make an effort to do so, I think that you're going to find yourselves in
trouble.
I appreciate the opportunity to speak. Thank you all very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker will be here in the room.
Beth Sherman. Ms. Sherman's been ceded an additional three
minutes from Marge Heinzel, and she is here. So she will have six
minutes. And then after that we're going to go online to Deborah
Cruise, and then back here in the room to Dan Cook.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: After that, we are going to take our
break.
July 13, 2021
Page 205
MR. MILLER: Oh, I'm sorry. We'll go after this speaker here,
after Ms. Sherman. Okay. So everyone else please stand by.
Ms. Sherman.
MS. SHERMAN: Thank you.
It's very shocking that I'm sitting in this room hearing so many
people who are against supporting the Bill of Rights. I don't
understand why people don't already understand that our sheriff, a
constitutional sheriff, already has the right to do all these things.
This is just icing on the cake here.
We're living in times where we need this ordinance, which is
absolutely crazy, but that is where we are. I am here to tell you why
it's needed, because we're living in a time of deceit and tyranny. A
lot of that tyranny is happening locally.
At the last meeting I spoke and gave the number of deaths and
adverse reactions to the coronavirus shot and asked that the people
receiving the shot be informed verbally of the reactions so that they
can make informed consent.
I have not heard an update from any of you on whether you have
looked into this data or not or have asked for people to do this. I am
also here to state on the record that NCH should no longer be allowed
to provide medical data or advice to this community. They have
been and are still currently suppressing lifesaving COVID treatments
like hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin. These drugs have been
FDA approved, studied, and proven safe for many years, and our very
own Dr. Fauci studied HCQ years ago and wrote a paper on how it is
a good preventative and cure for SARS COVID. It is absolutely
criminal that this health organization will not allow their doctors to
use their own discernment and prescribe this to their patients.
Patients in Collier and across the USA are having to make
appointments with America's Frontline Doctors to be seen virtually,
prescribe these lifesaving drugs, and then they're having to mail them
July 13, 2021
Page 206
to them. These drugs could have saved thousands of lives. The fact
that we are allowing this to go on in our community is sickening and
must be stopped.
While I was in this room somebody came up to me and they
informed me that NCH is not allowing people who need surgeries to
get those surgeries if they're not willing to get the vaccine, which, I
think, is disgusting, to say the least, especially when they're not even
requiring it of their own employees.
Let me remind all of you that this vaccine is only approved
under an emergency-use authorization. The reason HCQ was
suppressed is because it is a preventative ante-cure. They could
have never gotten this emergency approval if this came out.
Every aspect of our lives is being censured. The news won't
report on, which is truth very clear, because people in this room are
calling some of us insurrectionists. Let me tell you that there is
plenty of evidence that the FBI actually planned that as a false flag,
and it will come out because the truth always, always comes out.
As of yesterday, our illegitimate president -- who, by the way,
cheated in the election. That's a fact. Keep your eyes on Maricopa
County, because some of you are going to have to buckle up pretty
soon to learn what's been going on -- he said that he will censor our
online messages and our text messages -- our text messages to limit
the message being spread about vaccine safety. If it was so safe, do
you think they would need to do this? If it was so safe, do you think
they would need to go door to door to convince people to take it? I
personally don't.
We cannot allow medical tyranny to go unchecked.
Mr. Solis up here has stated for the record multiple times that he
believes in mandatory vaccines.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I have never --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Excuse me. Please --
July 13, 2021
Page 207
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I have never ever said that.
MS. SHERMAN: Well, when I come up next month --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I have never said that.
MS. SHERMAN: -- I will pull that from the records --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: You need to retract that, because I
have never said that.
MS. SHERMAN: I will not retract because I was here twice
when you said it, and I will come back and confirm it --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I have never --
MS. SHERMAN: -- with the paperwork of the minutes from
this county.
(Simultaneous crosstalk.)
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'm only willing to --
MS. SHERMAN: Moving forward, he does not deserve to sit
up there and represent the people. Forcing --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'm sorry.
MS. SHERMAN: -- people to take an experimental shot is a
crime against humanity, and it is not a lie. If you allow the federal
government to send anyone door to door in this county to check on
their vaccine status, you are not only complicit but responsible.
This is not a joke. It's not a conspiracy. If you are not awake
to these truths, I suggest you take my words and look them up and do
some research. Lives are at stake, and you are personally
responsible as leaders in this community.
I end with this quote from Martin Luther King, Jr. The day we
see the truth and cease to speak it is the day we begin to die.
If you vote no today, we the people kindly ask that you resign so
that a true leader can fill your seat. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And we are going to break for one
hour for dinner, but before we do that, my colleague to my left,
July 13, 2021
Page 208
Commissioner Saunders, would like to speak.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. I've sat here
through every meeting that this commission has had for the last
four-and-a-half years, and I just want to say for the record I never
heard Andy Solis say anything about mandatory vaccinations.
MS. SHERMAN: I will bring those minutes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: If you have the minutes, I'd
love to see those.
MS. SHERMAN: I will bring them.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: But I want to say for the
record, I've never heard that from anybody on this board.
MS. SHERMAN: You also said last week, for the record, that
Penny Taylor didn't say she was going to have us removed from the
room, and she did, and I'll bring those minutes as well.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Bring those minutes, too.
But right now I'm talking about Commissioner Solis and the
requirement to have vaccinations. Those comments never happened.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think now is a very good time to
bring some statistics that were brought to the Fallen Officers event at
Sugden Park last week, and I was there. The mayor of Fort Myers
brought these statistics. One hundred fifty-eight officers died over
last year; 73 of those officers died from COVID nationally. Anyone
who thinks that COVID is a hoax need to go talk to the families of
those officers. Thank you.
(Applause.)
(A dinner recess was had from 5:01 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.)
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a
live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
We just got a tally from Mr. Miller that we have 45 more people
to speak. So I think we need to -- online and -- certainly online and
July 13, 2021
Page 209
in person.
So, yes, Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Before we get to the
speakers, I just wanted to make one statement for the record just to
clarify. There was a statement made by a speaker that NCH is
refusing services to folks that have not been vaccinated. I spoke
to -- or got a message from NCH. That is absolutely false. NCH is
not refusing service to people if they've been vaccinated or if they've
not been vaccinated. And I just want to say that for the record,
because a lot of people listen to these meetings, and I didn't want that
wrong information out there.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you for doing that. That's
important to know. We need to keep everything accurate.
All right. So, Mr. Miller, I will turn this over to you.
MR. MILLER: Yes. Actually, someone who had been -- we
were told was not here actually was here. Chantal Sherer. We're
going to start with her here in the room. Then we're going to go
online to Deborah Cruise, and then back in the room to Dan Cook.
MS. SHERER: Hello, everybody. As usual, I'm not prepared.
Everything's off the cuff.
I was really stunned to see the opposition today, as many as
there were. So whoever did the recruiting, good job.
Now, I first of all, I know you guys have heard this, but I was
born and raised in Ethiopia, and I saw my birth country turn into
communism. It's the ugliest thing ever. And to see people die in
front of you, hangings in front of me as a child, if you think we're
immune to that, we're not. Once you let the federal government into
our state of Florida -- they shouldn't be let in anyway because it is out
of their jurisdiction. But once we start happening with the federal
governmental taking a little bit of control here and there, oop, all of a
sudden we're going to have marshal law. Oops, guess what? We're
July 13, 2021
Page 210
going to be under, you know, curfew. All that, it will happen. I've
seen it.
As far as Cuba, I don't know what happened, what age you were
when you left, but your family -- I mean, it must have made an
impression on you. So understand your opening statement. Are
you for or against it?
I'm against communism, I'm against what it does, and I am for
the 2A, because that is a protection we do not have. We need to start
somewhere, and there is no better place than Naples, Florida, to put
our name on the map that we will protect our people because our
county commissioners will protect us.
Right now we're waffling. Should we? Shouldn't we? What
if? What if that? By that time, it's going to be way too late, way
too late. You need to make a decision. You make a decision now
because our safety is in your hands. Our governments and
everything that could hurt us is in your hands.
That's all I have to say.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: All right. We're going to go online. A slight
switch here. Dr. Maloni, I think, if I'm reading this typed in here
correctly. Then we'll go in the room to Dan Cook, and then back
online to Jeff Zalasky.
Let's see, it looks like Marcis Maloni, if I'm reading this right.
You're being prompted to unmute yourself at this time. You have
three minutes. Please begin. Hold on just a minute. I'm not
hearing them. Let me see if someone muted the computer here.
No. Okay. We are not muted, but I am not really hearing them.
They're unmuted but we're not hearing them. There's some sort of
technical issue.
Let's go to Dan Cook here in the room, and we'll see if we can
mute Dr. Maloni and get that sorted out. He's been ceded additional
July 13, 2021
Page 211
time from Richard Schroeder, who I just spoke to, so I know he's
here. So Dan will have six minutes. And then we'll try to go back
online to Dr. Maloni after that, Mr. Cook.
MR. COOK: All right. Thank you. Thank you, everybody,
for your patience today. I know it's been a long one for all of us.
Madam Chair, I'd like to state for the record that there is a
difference between those who died of COVID versus those who died
with COVID. And I think that was one point of contention with the
mask debates last year.
Regardless, I'd like everyone to recall that those -- that Benjamin
Franklin said those that trade their liberties for security deserves
neither.
I'd also like to state for the record and let the record show that
back in February I raised concerns about a state statute that provides
for a forced vaccination in a very extreme example, and that
Commissioner Saunders did state that mandatory vaccinations would
not take place in Collier County. So I wanted to thank the
commissioner for stating that on the record, and I'll go ahead and
move on with the rest of my comments.
So from my perspective, nothing in this ordinance denies the
rights of due process. Nothing in this ordinance denies your Fourth
Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
I'm glad to see that people from both sides of the aisle are here
speaking for their passions, speaking to each of our perception on
what the Bill of Rights means, but I'm a little puzzled by some of the
arguments that the other side is making. And I'll just state here
clearly, for the record, that I am for this ordinance.
So I'm kind of surprised and puzzled by some of the comments
that I hear from the other side saying that this ordinance is divisive.
And so to that, I think the unifying message here could be freedom.
The rights pertained in the Bill of Rights are all of ours. Whether
July 13, 2021
Page 212
you're a commissioner, whether you're a sheriff's deputy, whether
you're a citizen, they apply to all of us equally.
So I think that this could be -- should be a unifying discussion
that we're having rather than a divisive one. I maybe
would -- maybe would assume that maybe the divisiveness might
become -- might be coming from those who are perceiving it as
divisive.
I'd also like to speak to the notion that this ordinance has many
holes. I think one speaker said that this has as many holes as a slice
of Swiss cheese, but remember that that hasn't stopped the Board
from passing ordinances in the past.
If you recall the mask mandate actually had several holes or
exemptions, and I made sure that those on my side were clear of
those holes within it.
To the concern that the excessive legal fees and attorney fees
that might take place if this ordinance is passed, I would ask, is the
County Attorney not already on retainer? I'm not sure if you would
have to pay for additional attorneys if excessive litigation comes
through on this.
To the claim that the Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of
determining constitutionality, I would note that the Fifth Amendment
says that a grand jury must receive an -- or must make an indictment
on someone and that just like Colonel Jim Bloom said, there is a
process of, you know, bringing such a suit under this ordinance; that
nobody's due process is going to be violated by the passage of this
ordinance.
We still have the right to a trial. You have the right for the
judge or the jury to make the determination on the constitutionality or
on the merit of the suit or on the guilt or innocence of somebody who
is on the other end of the suit. So I think a lot of the objections to
this Bill of Rights Ordinance, the answers are contained within the
July 13, 2021
Page 213
Bill of Rights itself.
So I'd also say that this is not about politics. This is about
government abiding by the constraints entailed by the Constitution
and the Bill of Rights. The rights of free speech, privacy, bearing
arms, and due process are rights afforded to all Americans. Anyone
accused of being in violation of this ordinance does still have the
rights of due process.
If this -- if this ordinance does create a flood of litigation of
meritless suits costing taxpayer money, that is a fair question, and I
think that the -- that, as Colonel Jim Bloom said, the arguments are
going to go to the State Attorney, and they're going to make that
determination. It's not going to be a free-for-all of the Sheriff just,
you know, making decisions on his own. There is the judicial
process still entailed.
So I would suggest, then, that if you're going to consider voting
for this, keep in mind that the judicial branch of government is not
cut out because of this ordinance. I think that this ordinance more
clearly paves the way for us as citizens to go to the judicial side to
find remedy for our grievances.
And so I hope that -- in the future moving forward, I hope that
this ordinance will pass, and I hope that excessive litigation is not the
case. I think that the State's Attorneys Office's -- or the State
Attorney, him or herself, would be the buffer not allowing excessive
litigation to happen.
So in closing, I would ask the commissioners for a yes vote on
this ordinance. I'd ask you to not water it down with a resolution. I
think the proponents of this resolution [sic] feel that a resolution is
akin to talking about it but not being about it. I think the ordinance
kind of puts -- you know, makes you put your money where your
mouth is.
So in closing, I'll just ask you to vote for this up or down, and
July 13, 2021
Page 214
it's your choice if you want to be the hero in this situation and stand
up for our rights or if you're going to choose on the other side.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker -- we're going to go to
Dr. Joseph Doyle online, and we'll follow that up with Ray Nord here
in the room, and then after that back online to Jeff Zalasky.
Dr. Doyle, you're being -- and there you are. Dr. Doyle, you
have three minutes.
DR. DOYLE: Yes. Good evening. Thank you. Good
evening, Commissioners. Dr. Joseph Doyle.
And as I've listened to my fellow Americans, the problem that
we have is that we Americans suffer from a normalcy bias, and we
disbelieve or minimize threat warnings. For instance, those of us
who are under 45 never experienced the inflation and stagflation of
the 1970s. They've always had 1 or 2 percent inflation. In fact,
many of us who did experience that, we haven't seen it in 40 years.
We don't think it could happen. Well, guess what? It's happening
right now.
Well, the same is true for this country. After 1871, the
government got bigger and bigger. We never experienced the
limited government that the founders wanted in the Constitution.
I also -- it's quite revealing that many people don't really truly
understand the power and the authority of the Sheriff. This
ordinance will reinforce the Sheriff's constitutional duty, and he is the
highest authority in the county, even more than the President of the
United States and the Governor.
The Sheriff in Hillsborough County where Tampa's located, I'm
sure, would love to have this ordinance so he can tell those Capitol
police that Nancy Pelosi's sending down to set up an office to get the
hell out of his county. Then they can settle it in court.
July 13, 2021
Page 215
But the Sheriff needs this document to reinforce his position and
his authority. We can tell all the alphabet agencies to get out and
stop harassing his citizens of Collier County if he so sees it that way.
Of course, it would be in consultation, in many cases, with the State
Attorney.
So for 150 years the federal government has engaged in mission
creep. It has overreached and usurped our God-given rights. It's
like being the frog in the water where the heat goes up a little bit, a
little bit, a little bit until it's boiling. Well, we are starting to boil in
this country. We need you as the commissioners to put us back on
the tracks to being a Constitutional republic, and we will do it one
county at a time. Let's start with Collier County.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Ray Nord here in the
room, and he'll be followed by Jeff Zalasky online, and then Connie
Tavalaro here in the room.
Mr. Nord?
MR. NORD: Good afternoon, Madam Chair and
Commissioners. I'm happy to be here and pleased to have an
opportunity to speak to you. You've all heard from me at least once
via e-mail on my arguments against this. And I'm here to implore
you to vote against this proposal.
I have to admit that when I first saw this proposal, the flashes of
January 6th came across my mind, and I said uh-oh, uh-oh, here we
are. This is another insurrection in the forming, but that's not why
I'm here.
You heard all the arguments about constitutionality, whether or
not this is needed and all. I have a very simple approach to this
thing. And I'm a businessman. I spent my entire career in business.
And this morning I had an opportunity to meet with
Collier -- head of the Collier council -- no, not the council?
July 13, 2021
Page 216
The -- what am I thinking of? The Chamber of Commerce, excuse
me, the Chamber of Commerce, and I was very interested in what he
had to say. And he waxed eloquent on the idea of our need to keep
bringing capital and human resource potential to Collier County.
And he went on at quite a length to describe the efforts of the county
to do that.
When he was all done, I asked him one question. I said, where
do you stand on this issue of the sanctuary county?
And he said, we don't have a position.
And I said, I'm sorry, but you have spoken at length about what
you're doing to try to encourage the talent of people, the flow of
capital to this county and why it's necessary for us to continue
growth, and you don't have a position on this?
He said no.
I said, well, let me tell you. I come out of the business world,
and in the business world, we have opportunities to do things. And
I'm sure many of you have been in business. But when we have an
opportunity to grow our business, we look for places to expand.
And when we look for places to expand, we have the world to
expand. We might go to India. We might go to South Carolina.
We might go places.
We go because they have a talented workforce. We go because
they're friendly to us. And we don't go -- we stay away from places
that are hostile to business or that are not supportive of business.
So we have choice -- free choice to do this wherefore we want
to. And I will tell you that if I were still back in that position where
I was deciding where to go, I wouldn't go to a county or a city or a
state that is filled -- is fighting all these partisan wars. I don't have
to. Why would I get myself embroiled in that?
There are plenty of places to go and plenty of places that would
try to attract my talent, my people's talent, and our money and our
July 13, 2021
Page 217
plants and our equipment and our know-how. They're not going to
go to a place that is hostile to that. That is not supported.
And one of the reasons is that we don't know what they're going
to do next. I lived through a time when we had what was called a
unitary tax system, and California started this. We had a huge
investment in California. In fact, you could lay the whole Silicon
Valley at our feet, because we started that. And as soon as they
passed unitary tax, which meant they could tax our worldwide
revenues, we said, we're out of here.
We had a big complex over in Florida, over in Boca Raton, a
laboratory and a plant and a whole bunch of employees, very
high-level employees, and as soon as they passed the unitary tax, we
closed it down. We sold the buildings and left.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you, sir. Your time it up.
Thank you.
MR. NORD: I'm sorry. I ask -- could I just make one more
thing? I don't understand what this is supposed to do. I really don't
understand what problem's being solved. The only thing I've heard
here is masks.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. NORD: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker -- we're going to go back.
We think -- we hope we have sorted out online with Dr. Maloni. So
we're going to try them next, then come here in the room to Connie
Tavalaro, excuse me, and then we will go to Jeff Zalasky online.
Dr. Maloni, are you with us?
DR. MALONI: I am with you. Can you hear me?
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. You have three minutes.
DR. MALONI: Okay. What I'm going to ask about is, what
about hurricane season? It's supposed to be one of the worst
hurricane seasons this year. Who's going to pay for the cleanup if
July 13, 2021
Page 218
we don't have any federal money coming in?
It reminds me a little of what's going on in Surfside, Florida,
where my daughter lives. When the condo went down, they -- a lot
of finger pointing, a lot of people responsible. I wonder if the
County Commissioners are going to be responsible for the cleanup
for the hurricane season when there's no federal money allotted to us.
I would be very surprised if Penny Taylor supports this. She usually
is pretty astute in these matters and considers things and thinks it
over. We know no matter what the previous gentlemen said that it's
going to cost your constituents, all of your constituents, a lot of
money and lawsuits defending this ordinance.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Connie Tavalaro. She
will be followed online by Jeff Zalasky and then here in the room,
Alexander Sulecki.
MS. TAVALARO: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
My name is Connie Tavalaro. I'm a resident of Collier County
District 2, and I'm here to ask that you not approve this ordinance.
After doing a little bit of research, I found this ordinance is
being introduced in quite a few studies and counties around the
country. I've looked at the forms at these various counties, and this
appears to be a boilerplate type of form wherein you just insert the
name, the county, and which particular amendment or all that you
want to discuss.
Collier County does have tangible issues to deal with: Clean
water, education integrity, affordable housing, and essential workers.
And after doing some more research, I find that this board has been
addressing all of those issues, and I do appreciate your service.
I have no doubt that the Sheriff will continue to protect the
citizens of Collier County from lawlessness without this ordinance.
July 13, 2021
Page 219
I'm sure Representative Daniel -- Donalds, I'm sorry, will continue to
represent all of the concerns and issues from all of his constituents in
Washington without this ordinance. This ordinance is ambiguous at
best, and it is a recipe for litigation at worst.
Again, I ask that you not approve this ordinance. And I would
like to quote Nancy Reagan, "Just say no." Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online will be Jeff Zalasky,
and then here in the room, Alexander Sulecki, and then back online
for Joni Zalasky.
Mr. Zalasky, I see that you're unmuted. You have three
minutes, sir.
MR. ZALASKY: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Go ahead, sir.
MR. ZALASKY: Okay. Madam Chair, Collier County
Commissioners, and those in attendance this evening, my name is
Jeff Zalasky. I am chair of the Jewish Community Relations
Council of the Jewish Federation of Greater Naples. More than
2,500 members are in our organization. Part of our mission is to
cooperate with existing Jewish and non-Jewish organizations and
religious institutions and join with them in supporting and sustaining
constructive causes.
I'm here today to strongly and vigorously oppose this ordinance.
Our opposition is not born out of political ideology. It is based upon
the uncertainty and confusion this ordinance would cause and that the
ordinance on its face is not legally enforceable and, finally, that it
would tie up county resources, including county tax dollars in
countless, fruitless lawsuits.
I'll address the uncertainty and confusion this ordinance would
cause first. I'll start with Section 2 of the findings which appears
right before Section 3, which states Collier County has the right to be
July 13, 2021
Page 220
free from the commanding hand of the federal government and has
the right to refuse to cooperate with federal government officials in
response to unconstitutional federal government measures. Where is
the authority for this? Who decides what is unconstitutional federal
government measures? Who decides whether an action or act
restricts, impedes, or impinges on an individual's constitutional
rights? The answers to these questions are not spelled out in this
ordinance, no guidance is given as to what this part of the ordinance
means.
Everyone who spoke about this specific issue today stated the
counties -- County Attorney's Office will have the responsibility to
interpret and enforce this ordinance, but the legal pitfalls and
implications of the ordinance are clearly recognized by the County
Attorney who spoke at the very beginning of this meeting,
notwithstanding the lack of definition, guidance, and interpretation.
Everyone agrees his office will have the responsibility to interpret
and enforce this ordinance.
I urge you to listen and heed to the legal opinion of every single
lawyer that has spoken to you today, many of whom -- some of
whom are constitutional law experts. Every single one of them,
other than the attorney who helped draft the ordinance, told you that
the ordinance is unconstitutional and will be overturned by the courts
when it inevitably will be challenged.
There's one -- in addition to this, there's one section that nobody
has talked about out of all the speakers that have presented to you
today, and that's Section 5, the penalty section. In addition -- with
respect to that, in addition, and not notwithstanding what has already
been asserted by many today, the interpretation and enforcement of
this ordinance is not -- I repeat, not just left to the County Attorney's
Office. Nobody has talked about Section 5, the penalties provision
which states anyone within the jurisdiction of Collier County,
July 13, 2021
Page 221
Florida, that is accused -- and I say that again, accused, not in
violation but accused of being in violation of the ordinance may be
sued in Circuit Court for injunctive-relief damages and attorney's
fees. That is a remedy that is not administered by the County
Attorney's Office.
I am a retired litigation attorney in a law firm that handled
significant numbers of civil rights litigation cases, so I'm very
familiar with them. This provision of this ordinance gives anyone
the right to sue anyone for damages including attorney's fees whether
that claim has merit or not. Similar laws in civil rights cases
generates lawsuits because attorney's fees can be obtained even if the
case has little or no merit.
I'd like to switch gears to a constitutional legal --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. Your time
is up. I'm sorry.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker here in the room is
Alexandra Sulecki. She'll be followed online by Laraine Deutsche,
and then here in the room, Kimberly Miller.
MS. SULECKI: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is
Alexandra Sulecki. I've been a Collier County resident, voter, and
taxpayer in Commission District 4 for 41 years, and I'm standing here
in support of this ordinance.
You know, we almost didn't have a Bill of Rights. Alexandra
Hamilton in Federalist No. 84 opposed a Bill of Rights. His core
argument against it was that the federal government would only be
able to act where its power had been clearly enumerated in the
Constitution and, therefore, a Bill of Rights was not necessary.
Brutus, an anonymous anti-federalist author, writing in a series
of 16 essays published in the New York Journal from October 1787
through April 1788, argued otherwise. This author is thought by
most scholars to have been Robert Yates, a New York judge, delegate
July 13, 2021
Page 222
to the Federal Convention.
Brutus's rebuttal was, but rulers have the same propensities as
other men. They are as likely to use the power with which they are
vested for private purposes and to the injury and oppression of those
over whom they are placed. It is, therefore, proper that bounds shall
be set to their authority. And further, those who have governed have
been found in all ages to ever actively enlarge their power and
abridge the public liberty.
Brutus, therefore, rejected Hamilton's argument and argued that
citizens needed a Bill of Rights. Given how far the federal
government has exceeded its constitutionally enumerated powers
today, despite the Bill of Rights, we should appreciate Brutus's
argument and that he won the debate over it.
I think many of our founders felt the same way: Rulers were
not to be implicitly trusted. They needed boundaries.
Of the 3,144 counties in the United States, 61.39 percent or
1,930 of them have enacted some form of sanctuary resolution or
ordinance, mostly for the Second Amendment, but many also include
the full Bill of Rights. So a large number of Americans seem to
believe we need this reaffirmed at the local level.
And I'm not standing here by myself tonight. At the last
meeting I brought 231 petitions from other Collier residents, and
others brought petitions for approximately 780 others. If you add
that -- those numbers and here people who have spoken today, that's
well over 1,000 people speaking to you right here.
And with all due respect, we're not here in supplication begging
for favors. We are here as we the people, we who put you in your
representative seats, advising you of what we expect you to do as our
representatives, which is to sign this ordinance. And if I have to go
to the federal government to protect my rights from the federal
government, I'm going to be out of luck.
July 13, 2021
Page 223
Thank you for your time.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Just before you leave.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Alex.
MR. MILLER: Ma'am.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: You've got 700 and some
odd petitions and you had another 300. What does the petition say,
just for the record?
MS. SULECKI: The petition says: Whereas, the Bill of
Rights are enshrined and secured by both the U.S. and Florida State
Constitutions, the law of the land, in parentheses, it's impossible for a
law, rulemaking, or legislation, federal, state, or local, in parentheses,
which violates the Constitution to be valid or lawful.
Whereby, these citizens of Collier County demand that this body
understands these constraints to implement any such changes,
therefore to codify this understanding, we the -- excuse me -- we the
undersigned petition to protect the rights of citizens of Collier County
Florida's Bill of Rights via this Bill of Rights Sanctuary County
Ordinance.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online is going to be Laraine
Deutsche. She'll be followed here in the room by Kimberly Miller,
and then back online for Larry Israelite.
Ms. Deutsche, I see you're there. You have three minutes.
MS. DEUTSCHE: Yes, hi. I'm from Naples, Commissioners.
Does Collier County accept FEMA and hurricane aid after the
disasters? Does it have FAA and Naples Airport? Do federal
dollars for infrastructure and other needs come to Collier County?
Why do you accept federal money and want to reject our
government?
I am deeply concerned about the above-proposed ordinance. It
July 13, 2021
Page 224
is purported to be a nonpolitical Bill of Rights, but clearly this is just
not true. It's 100 percent right-wing agenda, which does not
represent all the people of Collier County or the state of Florida. It
appears to be a way for violating federal laws because you just don't
like them with the excuse that you feel they are unconstitutional.
Does this now give me the right to drive my cars as fast as I can
without getting a ticket?
To take just one of the issues, for example, gun rights, what are
my rights or the rights of 60 percent of the USA to live a life without
the threat being shot by a gun, without the threat of being murdered?
Why are our rights not important? Why does a person have more of
a right to own a gun, especially automatic rifles, than I have a right to
live in a country without the threat of being killed by a gun? Where
are my rights being heard and acted upon? Will my rights be
represented in your Bill of Rights? I thought we have a Supreme
Court and federal courts to handle matters that are considered to be
unconstitutional. It sounds to me like Collier County wants to
secede from the union.
Please note that I am 100 percent opposed to this insane
proposal. Please put an end to this paranoia and insanity now.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker here in the room is
Kimberly Miller. She'll be followed online by Larry Israelite -- I
hope I'm saying that right -- and then back here in the room by Sarah
Ridgway.
Ms. Miller.
MS. MILLER: Good evening.
I first want to say 2020 was -- to me, if I can say one word to
define it would be disruption. And in order to learn, you have to
have change. And I look at this ordinance as it's change. And I
feel -- I've been a Collier County resident for 23 years. I'm confident
July 13, 2021
Page 225
in our law. I'm confident in our police department. I'm confident in
all of you all to make this a safe place to live in.
So I -- you know, that's all I could really speak to that because
I'm going to go towards the science, since that's my expertise.
I'm pro science. I'm pro safety, a doctor of pharmacy with a
consultant license, member of the American Frontline Doctor
Pharmacy Group, a mother of two, and a pharmacist that likes all data
to be in before I make a conclusion.
All data is not in on these vaccines until 2022, for one, and 2023
for another, still ahead of normal regulation schedule; however, our
government, employers, airlines, and schools and other entities have
the right to mandate the use of an experimental product with limited
safety data and still in an ongoing critical trial now with talk of going
door to door with vaccinations? That makes zero sense, especially
when there are science-based effective treatments available, including
governmental approved monoclonal antibodies for our elderly and
multifaceted highly targeted multidrug treatment of early ambulatory
high-risk COVID-19 infections like hydroxychloroquine and
Ivermectin.
Let's switch that door-to-door regimen to Vitamin D3, zinc,
acetylcysteine, quercetin, zinc, melatonin, elderberry. In my
opinion, the vaccines, when used to diagnose, prevent, or treat
COVID-19 infection, do not outweigh the risks of these experimental
agents. This is particularly so for our children for whom COVID-19
presents zero risk of fatality statistically. Use movement, proper
nutrition, medication if necessary, supplements when necessary,
being active in our community.
We now know that COVID-19 fatality rate is far below that
originally anticipated 0.2 percent globally and 0.3 percent for persons
under the age of 70. According to the CDC, 95 percent of
COVID-19 deaths involves at least four additional comorbidities.
July 13, 2021
Page 226
Again, reiterating preventative care and the importance of the MD
Hippocratic oath, I will prevent disease whenever I can, for
prevention is the preferrable cure.
So why is -- why are we talking vaccines a year and a half later
that there is no public -- when there is no public health emergency,
vaccines that have failed to meet the conditions of authorization
mandated by the U.S. Code 360? Healthcare professionals
administering the vaccines and the vaccine subjects alike are being
deprived of basic information regarding the nature and limitations of
the emergency youth authorizations, the known risks of the vaccines
and the extent to which are unknown, available alternative products
and their risks and benefits and right to refuse the vaccines.
Not only is this information not being presented, it is being
actively suppressed. In my opinion, that crosses an ethical and
compliance line called the common rule; 45 Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 46 of the Department of Health and Human
Services Rule, the Department of Veteran Affairs, 38 Code of Federal
Regulations, and 16 other federal departments and agency codes.
Just ask our men and women of service if they have ever had
informed consent before any vaccination or medication they took, or
where they compelled to just do it? Compelled to just do it with no
preemptive testing, genetic markers ran, inflammation markers ran,
coagulation labs ran, chest scans done. Absolutely unethical.
It should remain our informed choice to decide whether or not to
take a vaccine after being fully examined, labs drawn, health
assessed, and informed about the risks and benefits for our individual
self. This should be offered to every human being, every American.
Vaccine mandate door to door will only lead to undocumented
adverse events, in my opinion, and long-hauler syndrome.
It is not okay to isolate humans. It is not okay to have children
away from their grandparents. It is not okay to be omitted from the
July 13, 2021
Page 227
hospital when a loved one is dying. It is not okay to be away from
your own children.
I love Florida and I love Collier County. Let's make this the
best place to live. Let's be the leader of a positive change and vote
yes to this Bill of Rights Ordinance.
Thank you very much for your time.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Larry Israelite online.
He'll be followed by Sarah Ridgway here in the room, and then
H. Mogil online.
Let's see. Mr. Israelite, I hope I'm saying that right. You have
three minutes, sir.
MR. ISREALITE: You've done an excellent job with my
name, thank you.
I've been on the phone -- I've been on this meeting now since
9:00 because I didn't realize that this part of the meeting didn't start
until 2:00. I've listened to four hours or more of discussion about
this issue.
I've changed what I was going to say about six times, so I'll just
say this: I'm against this ordinance. It doesn't make any sense
legally according to the lawyers who've spoken, but it's also a
smokescreen for other issues.
This is not a -- it's not about us becoming like Cuba. It's
ludicrous to compare what's happening here to what's happening in
Cuba. Irrelevant.
It's not about someone trying to take away your guns, all right,
which, honestly, we're not really trying to do. So that's another
smokescreen.
What it is about is a blue police -- a blue piece of cloth that was
intended to keep you safe and to keep the people around you safe.
And I'm pretty certain that the more than 600,000 people who died in
July 13, 2021
Page 228
this country from COVID would have appreciated masks being worn
more by the people around them.
The rate of COVID infection in Collier County is almost
300 percent more than it was one month ago, so it's still an issue.
But people now, rather than wear masks, they want to litigate an
election that's over, they want to politicize an issue that was medical,
and that's what led to this ordinance being introduced. And it's not
something that should be passed. It's not something we need, and it's
going to create untold other problems that will be costly, time
consuming, and pretty depressing if we have to deal with all of them.
Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker here in the room is Sarah
Ridgway. She'll be followed online by H. Mogil, and then back here
in the room with Diane C.
MS. RIDGWAY: Good evening, Commissioners. I am Sarah
Ridgway. I have lived in Collier County since 1974. I'm currently
in Commissioner Solis' district.
I have an opposition to this proposed ordinance to proclaim
Collier County as sanctuary for the Bill of Rights. I don't even know
what it means to be free from the commanding hand of the federal
government. What kind of federal government measures are being
addressed here? Acts of Congress? Executive orders? Things that
are just recommendations from a federal agency? And who in
Collier County gets to decide that something is unconstitutional?
This all emanates from all the combustion over masks and
school or church closings and now vaccines. Personally, I cannot
understand how anyone can think that public health is not a concern
of the federal government or that recommendations from the CDC or
NIH, which are not even laws, are an unacceptable infringement of
human rights in a country where over 600,000 people have died of
COVID-19.
July 13, 2021
Page 229
Those recommendations were taken up in very different ways in
different states, and there has been litigation all the way up to the
Supreme Court. That is completely fine. But this proposed
ordinance seems to suggest that there will be some sort of preemptive
determination of constitutionality on the local level and that the
county could selectively refuse to enforce anything, whether a
recommendation or an actual enacted law, that somebody here
decided was a violation of their individual rights.
That's dangerous at a time when people are quick to proclaim
anything unconstitutional when it comes from the political party they
oppose.
My family has been running a restaurant here in Collier County
in Naples for almost 50 years. It will be 50 years this fall.
Managing their business through COVID with all of the conflicting
recommendations, whether they were federal, state, or local, has been
an absolute minefield for them. But they managed to reopen after
the mandatory closing, they have kept their staff employed, and they
have kept their patrons safe.
They had -- have had absolutely zero objection to wearing
masks for -- from the owner on down to staff and to request
customers to do the same.
If this passes and COVID or the next pandemic strike again, are
they going to face investigation and potentially arrest for simply
trying to stay alive because someone thinks their mask request is
unconstitutional? They will incur legal fees for that, never mind the
county and what you-all will have to pay as well.
There's so many things that this county needs to address in terms
of water, infrastructure, everything, and you-all are doing brilliantly
at that, and I wish you would stick to that. And I really hope you
will reject this. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
July 13, 2021
Page 230
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online is H. Mogil, and he'll
be followed in the room by Diane C., and then back online to Pat
Roberts.
Let's see. H. Mogil -- oh, you are unmuted. You have three
minutes.
MR. MOGIL: Good evening. My name is H. Michael -- Mike
Mogil, and my wife and I have been Collier residents for some 16
years. And today I'd like to talk briefly about my support for the
Collier County Bill of Rights Ordinance.
I'm going to sound a bit like a boy scout, but we must be
prepared. Washington, D.C. -- and I use that term
inclusively -- seems intent on getting into all aspects of our existence
far beyond what that are legally entitled to. If there ever was a time
to reaffirm that this country and our county were founded because
people wanted to be free, now is that time.
I believe that it is imperative that we in Collier County set the
tone statewide and nationwide on pushing for our local rights and that
we serve as a brilliant beacon for others.
This ordinance is not about creating a wild, wild west but rather
trying to stop the extreme leftist, or maybe at a later time extreme
rightist, federal government from becoming a dictatorship and
crushing all of our rights. Will the federal -- will the law require
judicial review and tweaking? Absolutely. But to wait until there is
a perfect law -- and I don't believe there is such a thing -- will ensure
that localities will never be able to stop an out-of-control federal
government.
Mr. Israel [sic] just noted that this isn't about becoming like
Cuba. I strongly disagree. Just look at how Venezuela transformed
from a wealthy and free country to the exact opposite in 10 years
following the same path we are on right now.
I also see Washington, D.C., as being derelict in its duties while
July 13, 2021
Page 231
it takes on duties it shouldn't have, but that's another matter.
Once this ordinance is approved -- and I hope that it will be -- I
would urge the Board of Collier County Commissioners to include a
link to the Bill of Rights at the county website and even make a push
for showcasing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights across all
segments of county government.
You all know that I'm big in education -- I'm sorry. I mean
learning, and that learning should and must extend to schools. For
example, how about a Bill of Rights day?
One of the early speakers talked about fear as driving the gun
lobby, yet others, including those in power in Washington at this
time, have continually used fear to attack U.S. citizens: COVID,
language, racism, conspiracies, voter suppression. Should I go on?
So I thank you for putting this ordinance forward for discussion
and listening as part of true citizenship. We are exercising this right
here as has been pointed out many times today.
I hope this ordinance passes with a resounding 5-0 majority to
send a strong message to everybody that the Bill of Rights matters.
Thank you for publicizing this meeting and allowing all of us to
speak.
And in closing, it's an historic moment. I didn't use my full
three minutes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Yes, you did.
MR. MOGIL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Just so you know, the bell went off.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker in the room is Diane C.
She will be followed online by -- let's see -- Patricia Howard, and
then here in the room by Anthony Rausch.
MS. C: Can I combine my time and her time?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. What's her name?
MS. SOUZA: Mayra Souza.
July 13, 2021
Page 232
MR. MILLER: Yes. We'll do it. So you will have six
minutes.
MS. C: Okay, perfect. Hello.
I am not a lawyer. I'm actually, like, trembling. I have
anxiety. I just live here. I'm from Naples. Actually, my whole
family -- I don't know where we're, like, coming up with all these
other constitutions that we're comparing ours to. I just want to stick
to the United States Constitution.
And I would like to urge you all to vote no. As a citizen, I'm
kind of confused. Like, we already have a Bill of Rights and back
three generations when my grandparents were also living here, they
also had a Bill of Rights.
So, again, I don't understand why we need a sanctuary. And
then I will give the rest of the time to you.
MS. SOUZA: My name's Mayra Souza. I'm a resident of
Collier County District 3.
The people that came before me already made many of these
points about constitutionality, but I want to stress how precarious the
situation really is, how precarious it could get.
Today a representative from the Sheriff's Office said that the
State's Attorney Office will have the responsibility, but apparently
the State's -- the State's Attorney Office doesn't even know they're
about to have this responsibility. So, like, that should stop this
clown show right now.
Actually, that would be -- so determining constitutionality
shouldn't be so trivial, and according to the Constitution, it's not.
You can bring an unconstitutional law to federal court now. You
don't need an ordinance to do that.
This ordinance is divisive because the principle that this
ordinance is trying to evoke is nullification, a theory that John C.
Calhoun used to secede from the Union. Is that the goal here? Is
July 13, 2021
Page 233
Collier County trying to secede from the Union? Because if that's
true, I hope that people are ready to give up their Social Security
checks, their Medicare. All of that is federal law. So all of that is
going to go -- your PPP loans, if people such -- if the federal
government is so bad, why is -- why did Oakes Farms take a
$3 million PPP loan? That's -- that's really interesting to me. I
thought -- I thought that that was socialism.
Nullification has been repeatedly rejected by the courts, and this
ordinance -- if an ordinance goes into effect, it wouldn't stand under
the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. Under that clause, a
Supreme Court has decided that federal law is superior to state law,
and the federal judiciary is the final power to interpret the
Constitution. The power to make decisions about constitutionality
of federal law lies solely with the federal courts, not the states, and
the states do not have the power to nullify federal law.
Just because a county has passed ordinances that aren't properly
written in the past does not mean that they should right now, and
that's a ridiculous argument to make.
I urge you to vote no against this ordinance to avoid a
constitutional crisis in Collier County. I love my country. I'm
proud to be an American. I don't want to -- I want to follow the law.
I don't want to secede from the Union. That's about as un-American
as you can get. We fought an entire war about it.
The people who brought this ordinance say that CDC COVID
guidelines were unconstitutional. They bring up the founders as if
they wouldn't agree with such laws, but George Washington
quarantined his men during a smallpox outbreak in Boston, okay.
So, obviously, maybe people need to be reacquainted with history
before they start trying to figure out what the founders really meant.
If the opposition wants to found -- again, if the opposition wants
to flout federal law, I hope that they're ready to give up federal
July 13, 2021
Page 234
protections, too. I urge you to vote no.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online is Phyllis George and
will be followed here in the room by Anthony Rausch, and then back
online, Richard Zelinka.
Phyllis George, Ms. George, you're being prompted to unmute
yourself, if you'll do so. You have three minutes, ma'am. Please
begin.
MS. GEORGE: My name is Phyllis George. I live in Sterling
Oaks in the North Naples area. I'm speaking in opposition to the Bill
of Rights Sanctuary County measure proposed for Collier County.
The proposed measure appears to support the idea that anybody
can flout any federal law anytime they decide they don't like it. This
is not a stance a local government should be encouraging.
This is the United States, not individual autonomous realms that
could be in opposition to adjacent jurisdictions. This sounds like the
prequel to secession.
Others have already spoken about the local issues of
transportation, environmental safety, especially water resources, lack
of affordable housing, developmental planning that threatens our
quality of life and our tax structure, and wildlife protections. These
are urgently in need of our and your attention.
The kind of anarchy this proposal seems to endorse is
frightening to contemplate. It's hard to believe our elected officials
would consider such a measure. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Anthony Rausch. I do
not see Anthony coming forward. Let's go through to the next one.
Darlene Izzo? All right. Kathy Mayo?
MS. MAYO: Yeah.
MR. MILLER: And we'll follow Kathy online with Richard
Zelinka, and then here in the room, Diane Preston Moore.
July 13, 2021
Page 235
Ms. Mayo, you have three minutes.
MS. MAYO: Hi. My name is Kathy Mayo.
I, too, have gathered about 1,000 signatures in support of this
Bill of Rights. And in speaking with many, many -- at least these
thousand people in Collier County, they want this to be passed. And
I've said this before, I'm a proud mom of a U.S. Army sergeant
stationed overseas who, along with Commissioner LoCastro and the
other 1 percent elite U.S. citizens are risking their lives fighting for
our freedom. These freedoms were God given, and it's also
guaranteed through our Constitution and Bill of Rights, which is why
we are here.
The Bill of Rights and the Constitution is supposed to provide
common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the
blessings of liberty. Our current federal government is doing
everything in their power to prevent us having these freedoms and
liberties and taking them away. The overreach is becoming
overwhelming, especially free speech and censorship, which is
guaranteed in our First Amendment.
George Orwell's 1984 is coming true right before our very eyes.
Big Brother is watching you; Google searches, knowing everyone's
persuasions now tailors responses to searches to change conservative
views. The plan-demic, deliberately brought here by China, halted
many of our rights, and they are being taken away every single day.
As previously stated, the federal government is going to begin
door to door to try to convince us to take an unproven, experimental,
gene-altering, dangerous shot that's not FDA approved. And more
people are dying of the shot than COVID. Look at the VAER, the
VAERs website. You'll see the statistics.
But the propaganda and disinformation spread by the fake news
media has convinced and brainwashed so many people to thinking
that it's safe. They've infiltrated every institution, including the
July 13, 2021
Page 236
media, our primary and high institutions, Wall Street, big corp, big
tech, and now our military.
Someone asked earlier, why now? Why are we doing this now?
Well, this is why now we need you to help protect us. The Second
Amendment -- we have the right to bear arms. The criminals will
always have guns no matter what. We have a right to protect
ourselves.
California, New Jersey, and so many sanctuary cities and states
protect illegal aliens, but we can't be a sanctuary county for our rights
to protect us?
Well, I've got 30 seconds left, so I'm just going to go to my
conclusion. So I just don't understand why we even needed to do
this, but this is where you are at this point. We can't trust our CDC,
NIA, DOJ, CIA, FBI, and even the Supreme Court, especially when
they try to pack it.
The conservatives -- this is nonsense about the conservatives
causing the January 6th insurrection. We know that that was
planned by BLM, Antifa, and a lot of top Democrats. Our country is
in deep, deep trouble. The revolution is coming. I beg you to pass
this to make Naples a beacon of light just like our great governor
made Florida the best state in the country.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online is Richard Zelinka.
He'll be followed by Diane Preston Moore, and then online by Sharon
Harris-Ewing.
Mr. Zelinka, I see you're there. You have three minutes, sir.
MR. ZELINKA: Thank you.
I've been an attorney licensed to practice in multiple
jurisdictions in federal courts for over 40 years. Few things in
constitutional law are any clearer than the fact that any effort by state
July 13, 2021
Page 237
or local authorities to nullify federal laws other than through
recognized legal process are grossly unconstitutional, yet that is
precisely what this ordinance attempts to do. It is a blatantly
unlawful attempt to vest in county officials and the State Attorney
and Sheriff the power granted exclusively to the federal courts and,
ultimately, to the Supreme Court to interpret the U.S. Constitution.
The citizens of Collier County did not elect their county
commissioners or the Sheriff to interpret the Constitution of the
United States or to decide, even preliminarily, whether a federal law,
rule, or regulation restricts, impedes, or impinges upon an
individual's constitutional rights.
If a commissioner or the Sheriff wants to exercise this power
and make those decisions, then he or she needs to secure a position
on the federal bench. If any person in Collier County wants to
challenge the constitutionality of a federal law and that person has
standing, then that person must seek redress through the courts
through the normal process. That is our system.
Not only would this ordinance turn Collier into a place where
the county sheriff decides if laws are to be enforced based on his
personal views of their constitutionality, it would subject officials and
employees of the county to prosecution for cooperating with federal
officials in the enforcement of any federal civil rights, drug
trafficking, customs, or environmental law that the Sheriff is
persuaded unreasonably restricts an individual's constitutional rights.
Persuaded by whom? A golf buddy? A complainant? Someone
he spoke to at the gun range? Something he read on Facebook?
Who knows? And there's no answer.
This is the very antithesis of the rule of law which is the
cornerstone of our democracy and our federal republic. It is right
out of a banana republic.
And it's fairly ironic to hear people talking about communism
July 13, 2021
Page 238
when they want to vest in a law enforcement official a decision
reserved to the highest courts in the land.
The proponents of this ordinance are unhappy that their
idiosyncratic views on federalism and the Constitution are not shared
by a majority of Americans or legislators or even by one of the most
conservative of Supreme Courts. They're frustrated with the
democratic process for seeking change at the federal level. They are
clearly unhappy with the outcome of the election, which seems to be
a prime motivation for many speakers who have made no secret of
the fact that for them this ordinance is really all about thwarting
Democrats and efforts to end the pandemic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you -- thank you very much,
sir. You're out of time. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker here in the room is Diane
Preston Moore. She'll be followed online by Sharon Harris-Ewing
and then back here in the room by Stephanie Henderson.
MS. PRESTON MOORE: Good evening, Commissioners.
I'm Diane Preston Moore, and I am the vice president of the League
of Women Voters of Collier County.
The League believes in the Constitution and in the individual
liberties established in it and in the Bill of Rights. These documents
are the bedrock of our democracy.
If the Bill of Rights Sanctuary Ordinance simply affirmed the
Bill of Rights, we wouldn't be here today. But, instead, the
ordinance constricts the Constitution, and the League can't support it.
We are concerned about the ordinance's effect on local officials.
It requires an official in executing her duties to disregard the laws of
the United States if she thinks those laws are unconstitutional, yet it
doesn't say who decides unconstitutionality, nor does it provide the
procedures for making that decision. And if that official follows
federal law, she risks financial penalties and even jail time.
July 13, 2021
Page 239
This ordinance will prevent good people from running for local
office in Collier County. What person would seek a public office if
they risk being fined or imprisoned for following the valid laws of the
United States?
The ordinance suggests that local officials make the decision
whether the Bill of Rights is being infringed. That is not an issue for
local officials to decide. Our forefathers, after much debate, settled
that the Supreme Court is the arbitrator of the Constitution and that
only the federal courts have the power to interpret its provisions. If
local governments were free to decide what acts were
unconstitutional, the result would be absurd. There would be
hundreds of different interpretations of the Constitution.
We are concerned that it requires our county to ignore federal
law. Refusing to follow federal law is called nullification. The
Supreme Court has repeatedly said that states cannot interpret the
Constitution and they cannot nullify federal law. Ignoring federal
law will sow chaos and uncertainty, and it will undermine our
democracy.
The League of Women Voters supports good governance, and
we care deeply about the Constitution. We believe that you, as
County Commissioners, ran for office because you care about good
governance and the Constitution. This ordinance will have
unintended consequences that undermine the Constitution, and that is
why we respectfully ask that you vote no on the Bill of Rights
Sanctuary Ordinance.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker online is Sharon Harris
Ewing. She'll be followed by Stephanie Henderson, and then Alfred
Gal.
July 13, 2021
Page 240
Ms. Ewing, I see you're there. You have three minutes, ma'am.
MS. HARRIS EWING: Thank you. My name is Sharon
Harris Ewing, and I am a resident of Collier County for the past five
years.
I am urging you as strongly as I can to defeat and end all
consideration of the proposed ordinance to make Collier County a
Bill of Rights Sanctuary County. Frankly, that such an ordinance is
even on the agenda is a major embarrassment to this community. I
believe it represents the strongly held opinions of a small but loud
minority of people among us.
The assumption underlying this proposal is that there are
governance problems that cannot be fixed through the constitutions
and systems in place. That is simply false. If there are legitimate
cases of federal overreach, a fact I would dispute, there are legal
ways to challenge them through the court system. To allow an
individual to violate federal law anytime said individual or Collier
County officials disagree with the law and thereby deem it
unconstitutional is a significant step on the path to anarchy.
It is the court system that decides upon constitutionality of laws,
not individuals, not Collier County, and not the (indiscernible).
People who purport to be strict interpreters of the Constitution
are actually rejecting the safeguards that are in place, like the
separation of powers and the system of checks and balances in order
to give themselves the power to nullify federal legislation with which
they disagree.
Passage of this ordinance would suggest to the rest of the
country that Collier County is run by extremists who do not trust the
federal government or the systems in place to challenge federal laws.
They want to take the law into their own hands.
I am confident of that this approach will be subjected to legal
challenges immediately at significant cost to county taxpayers.
July 13, 2021
Page 241
More importantly, it will send a message that Collier County is not a
thoughtful, law-abiding, sophisticated community that welcomes a
diversity of people and perspectives. It would say that we are not
the kind of community that actually welcomes the diverse tourists we
depend upon. To be blunt, our reputation will be tarnished, and that
will affect revenue.
Please listen to the majority of thoughtful people in this
community who oppose this proposal and defeat it. Thank you for
your time.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, Ms. Harris Ewing was your last
registered online speaker. So we have 14 slips left here in the room.
Next up is Stephanie Henderson. I don't see her.
Alfred Gal, I think, is this gentleman here, and he'll be followed
by -- I'm sorry for this -- Barbara -- I really can't read this.
MS. GOLDENZIEL: Goldenziel.
MR. MILLER: No. This begins with a C, it looks like.
Anyhow, we'll sort that out.
Mr. Gal, you have three minutes.
MR. GAL: Thank you. My name is Al Gal. I've lived in
Collier County for 23 years. My two kids were born here, and my
youngest is going to FGCU in the fall.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Congratulations.
MR. GAL: Thank you. The county's been run wonderfully up
until this time.
I'm asking you to vote against the passage of this ordinance, and
specifically I'd like to speak up for the staff and employees of Collier
County, as they are the ones that will bear the burden of this
ordinance if passed.
And I'd like to go off script. My father fought in the Hungary
Revolution in 1956, and there's a statute out front celebrating that
day. He shot two Solia [sic] officers. He was shot. He made his
July 13, 2021
Page 242
way to Austria, and then made his way to this country. So I
personally and fully understand that people bleed and fight to come
to this country and to live in a country where we have the Bill of
Rights and a Constitution.
But the problem is that this ordinance that you're being asked to
pass is not symbolic. It has real world implications for real world
people. Section 4 of the ordinance provides that no agent,
department, employee, or official of Collier County, while acting in
their official capacity, shall knowingly participate in enforcement of
an unlawful act or use county funds in the enforcement of that
unlawful act; therefore, this ordinance doesn't apply to me. It doesn't
apply to a private citizen. It doesn't apply to a private business. It
doesn't apply to federal employees who are enforcing federal laws.
It doesn't apply to state employees who are enforcing state or federal
laws.
The only class of persons that this ordinance subjects its burdens
to is you, your staff, employees, Collier County deputies, in my
opinion. And you're not the enemy and our deputies are not the
enemy and your staff is not the enemy and Collier County employees
are not the enemy.
Section 5 of the act then allows anyone within the jurisdiction of
this county to sue a county employee who is accused of being in
violation of the ordinance. People already have a right to sue an
official if they feel their constitutional rights are being violated. The
kicker is that this ordinance attempts to take away the qualified
immunity defense that is afforded all other employees.
Ironically, the George Floyd Justice Policy Act was just passed
in Washington, D.C., which attempts also to strip police officers of
their qualified immunity, and Representative Donalds voted against
this bill.
This ordinance is not well thought out. There's a program in
July 13, 2021
Page 243
Collier County 287(g) program. Looks like I'm out of time, so...
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You can finish.
MR. GAL: Okay. The Sheriff's Office has the right to detain
legal aliens as well as legal immigrants who have criminal records.
Illegal and legal immigrants are afforded the protections in the
Constitution's Bill of Rights. It's not just the citizens.
I'm not saying the suit would be successful, but you're allowing
an individual in the county to file a lawsuit, claim that their
constitutional rights have been impinged, sue a county employee,
possibly sue a county deputy, and in doing so have taken that
employee's right to claim qualified immunity as right [sic] as having
to defend himself in court.
Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: All right. Let's try Barbara from Sea Grove
Lane. Is there a Barbara from Sea Grove Lane here? Okay.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We'll go to Angela Cisneros. She
will be followed by Gene Goldenziel, and then Bruce Beardsley.
MS. CISNEROS: Good afternoon, Madam Chair,
Commissioners. Thank you for your time.
For the record, my name is Angela Cisneros. I was born and
raised in Naples. I'm a young professional in the legal field, and I'm
a property owner.
I urge you to table this Bill of Rights Sanctuary Ordinance and
reintroduce it as a resolution instead. There is a difference between
an ordinance and a resolution. An ordinance is enforceable. A
resolution is a declaration. If you all want to reaffirm our
commitment to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, this ought to
be presented and voted on as a resolution.
I know that you all know the difference between an ordinance
July 13, 2021
Page 244
and a resolution, and so I question why the Sheriff, the congressman
for District 19, in coordination with right-wing activists, why are they
pushing for this ordinance? Why an ordinance? Why not a
resolution? Who will deem what is constitutional and what is not
constitutional? Who will be protected, and who will not be
protected?
Commissioner LoCastro stated in a response e-mail to me that
similar ordinances have been passed all over. What other counties
and other states pass or do not pass is not our business. This is
Collier County, Florida.
I do know that the Second Amendment sanctuaries have been
passed in neighboring counties in the state of Florida as resolutions,
not ordinances. Why is that? Voting yes on this ordinance is a
huge mistake that will open up the door to costly litigation when
someone claims someone else is overstepping on their rights when, in
fact, the opposite may be true. Voting yes on this ordinance will
create more chaos in an already chaotic environment where some still
believe the presidential election was stolen. Are we going to be
sanctuary for extremists now?
Please vote no. Thank you kindly for considering my concerns.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Gene Goldenziel. He's
been ceded three additional minutes from Barbara Goldenziel who I
believe is -- yes, I see here hand, for six minutes, and Mr. Goldenziel
will be followed by Bruce Beardsley and then Cynthia Cromwell.
Mr. Goldenziel.
MR. GOLDENZIEL: Commissioners, it's a pleasure to be here.
I'm very concerned about this ordinance. I'm very concerned
for you as commissioners. Why would anyone want to pass an
ordinance that your solicitor tells you you will be individually liable
and will have unintended consequences?
July 13, 2021
Page 245
I've practiced law for 40 years. I've never seen people in your
position vote for anything that their solicitor told them is going to
have those type of consequences on each and every you [sic], the
taxpayers, the county employees.
The problem I have with this ordinance from a legal point of
view are two things. I'm not going to lecture you on the Supremacy
Clause. I'll do it in a sentence. If you pass an ordinance
inconsistent with federal laws, that is unconstitutional and is against
the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Secondly, if you
pass a vague ordinance where people don't know whether the law is
being obeyed or disobeyed, that's a violation of the 14th Amendment.
So, per se, you're passing an unconstitutional law.
What bothers me is this law passed in various places over the
country is not a law that's homegrown in Florida. After Sandy
Hook, the gun industry was horrified by the public's outrage because
20 children were murdered. They funded organizations, and they
gave them catchy names such as Gun Owners of America,
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, and they
started again the hysteria that someone wants to take your guns away.
Then when it got to Ohio -- this started in Texas -- Ohio made
the ordinance broader that you could bring this type of action against
any violation of the Bill of Rights.
I believe in our Constitution. I believe in your oath and the
Sheriff's oath to follow the Constitution of the United States.
I think this ordinance, although very well believed in, very well
supported by some of your constituents, would cause nothing but
anarchy and discontent.
I listened to this one older gentleman who stated as running a
big business. You pick where you want to do business. You don't
necessarily pick this gem of a community if you have an environment
which is hostile to the simple rule of law.
July 13, 2021
Page 246
Now, you do not have one legal opinion telling you to vote
because this law's constitutional. I give you this proposal: Don't
vote on it today. Table it. Give it to -- you have excellent law
schools in Florida, the University of Florida or the University of
Miami. I challenge you, get one tenured active constitutional law
professor to tell you this ordinance is not void for vagueness,
violation of those two sections of the Constitution which you are
sworn to defend.
I ask you to do the right thing. Table it or vote no. Thank you
for your time.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Bruce Beardsley. Bruce
Beardsley.
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Cynthia Cromwell? Cynthia Cromwell?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Mick Moore? Mr. Moore will be followed by
Alvina Quatano -- Quatrano, excuse me.
MR. MOORE: Good evening. My name is Mick Moore, and
I'm a local attorney and business owner. I've grown up in Collier
County, went to Naples Park, Pine Ridge, Barron Collier, and now
I'm working and raising my family in Collier County.
And while I certainly support the Constitution and the Bill of
Rights, I'm opposed to the adoption of this ordinance. Don't be
fooled into thinking that the adoption of this ordinance would be
support for the Constitution, because it is not. It's actually the
opposite because it allows county officials to nullify and ignore
federal laws if they deem this be unconstitutional.
As many others have said, this is totally contrary to the
Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution which provides that the
Supreme Court has the final say on whether something is
July 13, 2021
Page 247
constitutional or not.
On multiple occasions throughout our country's history, states
have attempted similar nullification procedures, trying to nullify
federal laws they did not like by declaring them unconstitutional or
refusing to follow them. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held
that states cannot do this under the U.S. Constitution. This isn't the
first time this has been tried. This is simply another attempt to allow
nullification of federal law, and a vote for it is a vote against the
government of the United States. Instead, it's a vote for a
government of a divided states of America where every state or in
this case every county gets to say what is constitutional and
potentially ignore federal law and do what it wants.
As Daniel Webster, the great senator and orator, once said in a
debate on this very issue on the floor of Congress, quote, could
anything have been more preposterous than to make a government for
the whole union and yet leave its powers subject not to one
interpretation but to 13 or 24 interpretations, end quote.
This ordinance is even more preposterous because it subjects it
to many, many more interpretations by counties.
If Collier County believes a law is unconstitutional, it already
has a remedy, as many others have said. It can pursue a lawsuit to
have that law declared unconstitutional. That's the way our
government was designed. If we don't like federal laws as citizens,
then we should urge our elected representatives to change them.
And if our elected representatives don't like them, they should work
to change them, not seek nullification of those laws. That's how you
support the whole Constitution. That's how you support the United
States of America. Please vote no.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Alvina Quatrano.
July 13, 2021
Page 248
MS. QUATRANO: Hello.
MR. MILLER: And she'll be followed by Jim Calvin, and then
Alison Wescott.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: She's not here.
MS. QUATRANO: Thank you for allowing me to speak my
opinion tonight. And I'm really sorry that Mr. Beardsley couldn't
have been here. I was sitting next to him all day, and he's a lifelong
employee of the United States government internationally, so he was
quite fascinating. I was looking forward to hearing his comments.
I was Florida born, and my father was a USMC lieutenant. I
have lived in Naples for 13 years and worked here for 13 years.
I'm here standing to represent those who oppose this
proposition, and that's simply all I want to say is please vote no.
This proposition does not help me to feel safe. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jim Kalvin. He'll be
followed by Alison Wescott and then Neville Williams.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mr. Miller, how many do we have
left after that?
MR. MILLER: The three names I just listed are the final three
registered speakers I have.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. And we're going to hear from
them. And if not, we are going to take a break after the last speakers
just to give the court reporter her needed break.
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. Mr. Kalvin.
MR. KALVIN: Thank you very much.
I've revised my statement a half a dozen times over the last hour
because I don't want to repeat anything anybody else has said.
But I think everybody in the room can agree on this; that the
federal government's broken. It is messed up as a football bat, and I
don't see anybody making any moves to fix it.
July 13, 2021
Page 249
I've been in Naples since 1964. I've seen the federal
government take away freedoms that a lot of you don't even know
about; that it's a third-degree misdemeanor to go camping anywhere
but the KOA, and that's an overstatement. But they've shut down
our recreational areas, the federal government has. And any of the
businesses in Florida right now, any businesses in the country that are
successful are not successful because of the government; they're
successful in spite of the government.
The government overreach in permitting, government overreach
in regulation, government overreach in licensing. They're picking
winners and losers. Everybody knows that. That's not debatable.
Nobody here is trying to ask anybody to make new laws.
Nobody is flouting federal law. The Constitution is federal law.
The Bill of Rights is federal law. Trying to cut through the rhetoric
is crazy. But in Washington, D.C., nobody is in control. Does
anybody know who's writing the words on the teleprompter that the
president's reading? He's not writing them.
And when that party comes to Collier County, when that party
comes to Florida, our only redress is with our local representatives,
and that's you guys, okay.
I've been party to lawsuits where they say the remedy is to sue
the federal government. Do you got $10 million? Do you have five
years to wait for it? And if you win, guess what, they're going to
appeal it. You got another $5 million and another five years?
That's how you sue the federal government.
The game is set up, and it's rigged in favor of heavy regulation.
Both sides, Republican, Democrat, independent. Those Washington,
D.C., elites are fighting over that power like the Bumpus Hounds
over a Thanksgiving turkey, and there's nothing we can do about it,
so we need you. You're our people on the ground. You're the only
people we can talk to.
July 13, 2021
Page 250
Byron Donalds, for crying out loud, isn't allowed in the Black
Congressional Caucus because he's conservative, and that's a fact.
So what's going on in Washington, D.C., is a disgrace, and we're
coming to you to ask for some kind of redress to that.
You don't like this ordinance, come up with something, because
when that party comes to town and they come down my street
knocking on my door with their vaccine questions, the gate's locked,
and I'm not letting them in, and I'm going to expect you-all to back
me up when I say you're not allowed in my gate.
We have rights, and we expect them to be upheld. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Alison Wescott. I don't
believe she's here.
And Neville Williams?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, that is all of the speakers.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. We're going to take a
break until quarter to 8:00. So that would be almost a 20-minute
break. Then we're going to come back and deliberate.
The public comment period is now closed.
(A brief recess was had from 7:24 p.m. to 7:45 p.m.)
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a
live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
So now we are open to discuss this. And I'd ask you at this
hour to use your buttons because I'm not sure I'd see you otherwise.
You know what I'm saying. I'm not sure I'm -- so, Commissioner
Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, we've been here how many
hours? Seven -- almost seven hours.
July 13, 2021
Page 251
You know, I think this is -- it's such an emotional issue that
we're dealing with. And as I've said at the very beginning of this
whole discussion, I mean, if there is a desire for, at least this
commissioner, to reassert his oaths and to say that he supports the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights, I'll do that right now.
This -- and we've heard from a lot of people today -- is intended
to do more than that. There are fundamental issues with it. It
waives, you know -- not sovereignty immunity, which somebody
raised sovereignty immunity. It's not sovereignty immunity. It's a
statutory immunity for elected officials. I don't know how -- I mean,
as a matter of law, you know, I can't waive somebody else's rights. I
think that's a fundamental thing, because I think that's part of the
issue that we're talking about. Somebody doing away with
somebody else's rights. I mean, we cannot waive another
constitutional officer's rights to statutory immunity.
I think it will create, you know -- you know, there are situations
that I can see that there would be a federal regulation of some kind
that is valid on Day 1, is followed and then, you know, maybe later
on found to be invalid, but at the time it was -- it was enforced or
whatever, it was valid. I mean, you can't -- you can't retroactively,
you know, say that somebody's violated something that at the time
they did it it was valid. That's a problem.
There was -- I think someone said that this ordinance doesn't
waive anyone's immunity. Well, then if it doesn't waive -- if it
doesn't change immunity, then what's the point? I mean, why would
we have this? If it didn't waive someone's immunity from suit, the
1983 actions exist. That's how the violation of civil rights in this
country have been prosecuted for decades. And, you know, I don't
even know when this was enacted, but it's very -- it's been around a
long time, and there's lots of jurisprudence behind that.
You know, I was -- I was -- I understand what the Sheriff has
July 13, 2021
Page 252
said, that he would treat this as any other kind of complaint that he
got, and that the Sheriff would investigate it and then send it on to the
State Attorney's Office as a violation i.e., someone has sought to
enforce a federal law, order, rule, or regulation that unreasonably
infringes or impedes someone's constitutional rights. I mean -- then
it's going to be up to the State Attorney to make that determination as
to whether to issue a warrant. This is what the Sheriff's Office just
said.
I called Amira Fox's office to find out if there had been any
discussion with the proponents of this with her office, and there had
not been. You know, I don't know how a state attorney could
proceed to prosecute something like this where there has not been a
determination that that federal regulation is unconstitutional. I
mean, they enforce valid laws. And I wish they were here, but
they're not. And I wish, you know, the Sheriff was here as well.
So if the State Attorney's Office couldn't prosecute anything
until a court finds that a regulation that's being enforced is
unconstitutional, this would never produce anything. It's like a dog
chasing its tail, because it has to be found unconstitutional for the
State Attorney's Office to then proceed to issue an arrest warrant or to
prosecute it. So the criminal side of this thing, it makes no sense to
me whatsoever.
Somewhere in here this referenced an unlawful act as the
enforcement of a federal regulation or whatever that is found to be
unconstitutional by a court, you know, I think we'd be having a
completely different conversation, but that's not what I understand
proponents of this want.
And, I mean, this is -- this is -- it's unfortunate, I think, that this
has become a divisive issue. You know, we are a country of laws,
and we have laws that protect us that we are here to enforce. If there
is a federal regulation that comes down that myself or any of the
July 13, 2021
Page 253
other commissioners think is unconstitutional, we have the ability to
challenge that in court. That's the process. That's a process that
we've always had, and that's the process that this country's founded
on.
To try to shoehorn some new process into that, I think, is not
something that we should do. I mean, I think it flies in the face of
the Constitution that we're supposedly discussing here today. So I
would -- I'll go ahead and make a motion that we not approve this
ordinance for those reasons.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I wanted to make some
comments before we maybe vote on anything.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I want to make a few
comments, and then -- you know, we've heard from a lot of people
today. I've got some questions of the few people that are remaining.
You know, first off, I commend the folks that are here. This is
the hard-core nucleus of the group, obviously. It was great to see a
packed house in here, but I really, you know, commend and thank
you all, and the folks that have been here.
I respect all the inputs I received, and it probably was close to a
thousand e-mails, and I actually did my best to answer all of them,
you know, to the best of my ability because I think it's important that
citizens are heard. But regardless of how this vote goes today, I
think we should all be proud, especially what's going on right now in
Cuba, that we saw democracy in action in here today. This is
what -- this is what our forefathers fought for. This is what military
people that I fought next to and some of your sons and daughters are
fighting for. So nobody should leave here whether the
vote -- whether it goes your way or not feeling, you know, defeated.
People all over the world would kill for this opportunity, and some of
them are in Cuba right now.
July 13, 2021
Page 254
So I thank you, and I thank those of you that were respectful and
eloquent in your comments. You know, it was clear the folks that
really took the time to turn their three minutes into 20 minutes as far
as content, because this is an important and complicated process.
You know, one of the things I wanted to say -- and then I have
questions for a couple people in here. This is important. So we sat
here till almost 8:00 p.m. to hear from every citizen. I think we at
least get a few minutes to ask some questions that we don't feel
maybe were answered before we're asked to make an important vote.
But some spoke of the fear of unintended consequences and
liability. You know, what I've first thought of is, if we ever felt that
way, we wouldn't vote on anything. When we voted on the villages,
there was fear of lawsuits. Oh, and, by the way, there was one; there
is one. You know, when we voted -- and I wasn't up here, but when
it was voted on masks.
So, you know, I don't think any elected official can sit here and
compromise their briefs because of possible lawsuits. Yes, you don't
want to vote on something that's going to bring a tidal wave of, you
know, legal issues because it isn't worded properly or whatnot. But,
you know, I can tell you, you know, we have traffic laws right now
that bring a ton of court cases that people challenge speeding and
accidents and all that.
So, you know, that was something that a lot of people brought
up, and I would hope if you're going to be in public office, you've got
to have some courage. You can't have -- you can't back away from
your convictions because of what might happen, you know, down the
road.
But having said that, here's my Q&A. And, you know, bear
with me, because I think the answers that we all are going to hear
from these key people that are still here are critical. And I'd like to
call forward Kristina Heuser who I think, you know, is representing
July 13, 2021
Page 255
the legal side of the yes, you know, position. And I just have some
questions that I was hoping would be answered by many speakers
and maybe even yourself or whatnot, but there's a lot of content.
What is the difference -- and we know this answer, so it's a little
bit sort of more to get it on the record, but to hear your perspective
representing the yes side. This has come forward as an ordinance,
not a resolution. But one of the things that I thought had a lot of
merit tonight is there were a lot of eloquent speakers on the no side
that then were very positive that they thought a resolution was the
way to go, and that, you know, we're all -- nobody in here is not
supportive of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, but it did catch
my attention more than a couple of times that some folks that thought
the ordinance was a definite no left the window open thinking it
would do a similar thing, it would accomplish a similar task but in a
much more legally sufficient way, more eloquent way. It was put,
you know, many different ways.
So let me turn that over to you.
MS. HEUSER: Well, the way I perceived those comments
are -- is that people don't want to stand up here and say, well, I
despise the Constitution, I despise America's founding principles.
So the alternative is to abandon the ordinance, which is something
that's enforceable, it has real consequences if it's violated, and
instead, opt for a resolution, and a resolution is just merely a
statement.
So a resolution does not have the force of law, it has no effect,
it's empty, in my view, and it accomplishes nothing.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. We also heard a lot
of citizens talk about how, if we pass this, nullification and how, you
know, that would affect, you know, the Constitution, law, and all of
that. I'd like to hear your definition of why you think if this was
passed as an ordinance or even a resolution or both, why nullification
July 13, 2021
Page 256
is not appropriate or it isn't -- you know, you obviously have a
different feeling than a lot of folks that thought, you know, we were
immediately, you know, nullifying the Constitution and Bill of Rights
by doing this and all the definitions that go with nullification. I
wanted to give you the explanation.
MS. HEUSER: I appreciate that, because there have been quite
a few things said that I really would like to respond to, and that's one
of them.
So this is not nullification. This ordinance embodies the
anti-commandeering doctrine, and that's something that is
well-settled law upheld repeatedly by the Supreme Court which all
the opponents in here and up there seem to revere so highly.
They've upheld this principle many times, and many of these whereas
clauses quote and reference Supreme Court decisions upholding the
anti-commandeering doctrine, and what that is is that the federal
government does not have the right to engage state and local officials
in carrying out its policies. That's a well-established principle of
law. I'm sorry, I'm repeating myself, but I think it bears repeating
because there were a lot of comments made that this is
unconstitutional, and that's not the case.
There are many ordinances throughout the country similar to
this one. As a matter of fact, the notion of sanctuary counties came
about by people on the left who were opposed to the federal
government co-opting state and local authorities into enforcing
immigration laws, and those have been tested in the courts and
upheld. Consistently.
So, you know, I know we have a lot of people that came up here
that like to talk about what astute legal scholars they are and
how -- you know, their degrees and their professional lives. I don't
like to do that -- although, I could -- because I think it sounds
arrogant. But they're wrong and that's just -- you know, if you want
July 13, 2021
Page 257
to look up the citations, I provided them here for you so that this
question would not arise.
So please do look it up, because this is constitutionally sound,
upheld by the Supreme Court repeatedly.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I mean -- so let me follow up
with that. There are quite a few ordinances across the country that
have been passed and, like you said, they've been upheld. But, I
mean, correct me if I'm wrong. They're not really apples to apples.
You know, they're for lots of -- this one's very, very specific. You
know, it's not an ordinance for illegal aliens, which is also very
specific, and some other things. This one's very, very specific.
And a lot of your -- yeah, I wouldn't say your peers, but a lot of
people who share your job have come up here, I think almost all of
them, and have said that this ordinance would be unconstitutional
because of the subject matter. I mean, I don't think you could make
a blanket statement and say, you know, all ordinances are
constitutional. I mean, they come in different flavors. This one is
very, very specific.
Why would you say the attorneys that came up here, regardless
of their backgrounds -- and we don't know them, but it's immaterial.
I wanted to hear your comment, why would you say this as an
ordinance is not unconstitutional?
MS. HEUSER: Well, from what I understood -- and I could go
back over my copious notes, but I think their arguments were rooted
in the idea that local government has no authority to resist federal
law, and for the reason that I just stated, this anti-commandeering
doctrine upheld by the Supreme Court repeatedly, that's just not true.
Local governments -- you know, it's been quite disturbing
listening to all of the comments, because the reason why we have this
system of federalism in our country is because it was very well
understood by the founders that government closer to the people
July 13, 2021
Page 258
would be more apt to protect the people's rights. The Constitution
was drafted to put a constraint on federal power.
So for people to sit -- come up to this podium -- it's so
disturbing -- and say, well, we don't want you to protect our
constitutional rights. We just want to let the federal government do
that. We want to abide by whatever laws the federal government
promulgates. It's so disturbing and disheartening, and I wish
everyone was still here so that they could get, like, a little primer in
our founding principles. But this is something that's needed, and to
say that you don't have the authority to stand up to the federal
government is just wrong, and I think would represent an abdication
of your duties.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So my last question to get
your comment, to get your opinion, you said a resolution isn't
enforceable. It's more of just a statement and kind of soft, you
know, basically, as opposed to an ordinance, which has teeth and is
enforceable and whatnot.
But on the flip side, a lot of us heard today if we did nothing, we
have enforcement. You know, I'm playing a little bit of devil's
advocate. I'm not showing my hands or anything but, I mean, I want
to give you a chance to, you know, answer this more specifically than
what, you know, some others did.
So we do have some things at our disposal right now if we
thought that there was something that was unconstitutional that was
happening. So having said that, why do you feel this ordinance is a
requirement, it's a mandatory requirement? What's missing right
now that if we thought something was happening that was
unconstitutional, our hands would be tied or frozen? And I'm saying
that as more -- a little bit of a leading question because I want to
hear -- I want to hear, you know, an educated attorney reply from the
yes side.
July 13, 2021
Page 259
MS. HEUSER: I appreciate the question very much, and I
actually litigate in federal court routinely on constitutional questions.
That is my profession.
And it's a very slow process. It's not like I can walk in there
and walk out with an order from the Court saying, this is
unconstitutional or this entity violated your rights. It could take
years. And in the meantime, you know, if we're talking about
federal programs, let's just say, you know, to make it something more
tangible that everyone could wrap their minds around, we've heard
from the federal government that they want to ban assault rifles. So
let's say they do that and they ask the Sheriff -- and I know that this is
why -- or one of the reasons why he supports this ordinance so
vigorously, because he doesn't want to be put in the position of
enforcing unconstitutional mandates from the federal governmental.
But let's say that they -- the federal government issues an order
telling the Sheriff, you need to go to all of the residents and make
sure that they don't have any assault rifles and, if you find them, seize
them.
Well, if we go to federal court and challenge that, we might not
get a decision for a year, 18 months, and in the meantime, according
to, you know, Commissioner Solis' rationale, the Sheriff has an
obligation to carry out that order because it came from the federal
government and no court has found it unconstitutional. That's a
problem.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So that's when, in your
opinion, this -- if this ordinance was passed, it would kick in, and it
would give the Sheriff a chance to take action as he saw fit?
MS. HEUSER: Not just the Sheriff -- sorry. I didn't mean to
interrupt you.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No, but I think you know
what the rest of my question's going to be. So if we didn't have this
July 13, 2021
Page 260
ordinance, he'd fight this for two years or he couldn't fight it. He'd
actually have to go door to door. But if we had this ordinance -- and
that's why maybe he supports it so strongly -- is he wants to have it in
his hip pocket as a preparatory step so that if something did happen at
the national level directing him to collect assault rifles, boom, then he
pulls his "get out of jail free" card and says, I'm not going to do it
because we passed an ordinance in our county that says that's
unconstitutional, and so I'm going to abide by what the Collier
County Commissioners -- am I summing that up correctly? That's
why, you know, the yes side wants -- and that's why the Sheriff wants
it.
MS. HEUSER: Well, I think that it does have the effect of
giving the Sheriff cover, and like in the example that was given at the
prior meeting about the Supervisor of Elections, you know, we could
talk about many hypotheticals. It would give her cover to stand up
and say, we're going to continue to run our elections pursuant to state
law and not be dictated to by the federal government. But, more
importantly, I think, it allows individual residents of Collier County
who are aggrieved by the ordinance -- and so in my hypothetical, let's
say the Sheriff does seize somebody's gun. Now that person can go
to the local courts, state court, and seek an injunction and ask that
court to issue an order directing the Sheriff not to seize that person's
gun because that federal order violates the Constitution.
And in addition to that, they can make a complaint -- this would
be a little ironic in my hypothetical, but to the Sheriff's Office or, I
guess, directly to the State Attorney's Office seeking the imposition
of a criminal penalty pursuant to this ordinance, which we hope will
also have a deterrent effect. So this ordinance provides immediate
remedies that you just can't get from existing federal law.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I think you'll all have
questions, and that will help as well.
July 13, 2021
Page 261
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, don't go away. Don't
go away, Kristina. And I -- you know, I want to -- and I thank you
for that clarification because, you know, we all sat here today and
heard a lot of opinions from a lot of different folks. And there are a
lot of assumptions and a lot of interpretations necessarily by all of us
with regard to the ultimate ramifications of this ordinance.
What have we got going on there?
MS. HEUSER: Sorry. I was just getting -- I was listening,
though.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I just -- I just wanted to say
out loud that I heard -- I heard a lot of suppositions on both sides
for -- as Rick likes to call it -- Commissioner LoCastro likes to call it,
the yeses and the nos. There were suppositions made on both sides,
hypothetically, with regard to the potential outcomes of the passing
of this ordinance.
My understanding of the ordinance and the reason why I was in
support of it, the reason why I spent my time to work with the Sheriff
in its preparation, was to allow for that local jurisdiction to come into
play in the event that there was a federal government intrusion that
comes about. Not on a fear base, not on a fear base. You've already
heard me talk about that I walk in faith not fear. But to me, it's an
enhancement of our constitutional rights and a protection of our Bill
of Rights. It allows for a local jurisdiction to be able to make that
decision. That's the process to me. And then what was verified
when we spoke with the Sheriff even further and his lawyer in the
process of how this circumstance would transpire.
This board, I, myself -- I'm going to use myself as the example,
because Commissioner Solis doesn't like it when I point at him,
so -- I make a decision and it's determined that I violated someone's
constitutional rights. The complaint is filed with the Sheriff. The
July 13, 2021
Page 262
Sheriff does an investigation, gathers data and information, gives it to
the State Attorney's Office. The State Attorney's Office, per my
understanding, doesn't make the determination about whether or not I
have violated someone's constitutional rights. They make a
determination as to whether or not I've violated this ordinance.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Which is based on what, though?
If I can just ask that question. What would the violation of the
ordinance be based upon?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm going to allow this back and forth
because I think this is important.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think this is -- this is the legal
issue, I think.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That determination is based upon a
finding at some point that something is unconstitutional, right?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You make a representation
that I violated your constitutional right -- you don't have to get out of
the way. I'm not pointing at you. So you make that representation.
You have the right to litigate with me for getting out of bed,
Commissioner Solis, and I the same with you.
So if the State Attorney makes the determination that
your -- your allegations of my unconstitutional acts or violation of
your Bill of Rights or civil rights are in violation of this ordinance,
then they can, then, in turn prosecute me via this ordinance in a local
court and not be moved to the federal court. And correct me if I'm
wrong. That's a total novice opinion of the system.
MS. HEUSER: I think that you're both a little bit right, and I'd
like to weigh in, if I could, on this point.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You may.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you mind?
MS. HEUSER: So you're right, Commissioner McDaniel, that
July 13, 2021
Page 263
you would be charged with a violation of the ordinance, but
Commissioner Solis is right that embedded in the ordinance is this
question of whether or not the federal action that you carried out,
which is what the circumstance would be, violates or impinges,
impedes, infringes upon somebody's constitutional rights.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
MS. HEUSER: So -- and I think this -- this is something I
wanted to address, because it really represents a fundamental
misunderstanding of constitutional interpretation and the notion that
only the Supreme Court or only the federal court or even only the
courts can interpret the Constitution, and that's not true. And if I
could, I'd like to read some excerpts. I actually did a master's thesis
on the subject of judicial interpretation, and I have all these books, so
I pulled out some interesting things.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Just before she goes to another
subject -- but you didn't answer the question. So if I'm right that at
some point somebody has to make a determination that a federal
regulation or whatever is infringing upon someone's rights,
constitutional rights, where is that determination made? How -- if
there's a federal regulation that has not been found by a court of
competent jurisdiction to infringe upon people's constitutional rights,
how can the State Attorney then prosecute somebody because that
was supposedly unconstitutional? It doesn't work that way.
And what I would say is, I think you said very clearly what this
is. This is trying to cut the legal corners that we have. I've litigated
in federal court, and I've litigated in state court for years, okay.
Things go way faster in federal court than they do in state court,
number one. I don't know what federal court you've litigated in,
because the ones I've been in, fasten your seat belts, because it's
going to be over in a year no matter what. It doesn't matter how big
the case is. State court is a very long, drawn-out process.
July 13, 2021
Page 264
So litigating this matter in state court is going to draw it out
much longer. I mean, do you litigate in state court in Florida?
MS. HEUSER: Not in Florida, no.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Are you licensed in Florida?
MS. HEUSER: No.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. So, you know, this is about
cutting the legal corners. That's why we have to be careful with this.
MS. HEUSER: Well, can I respond to your initial question?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Sure.
MS. HEUSER: So going back to your statement that -- and I'm
paraphrasing -- that nobody can make a determination about the
Constitutionality until a court of competent jurisdiction makes that
determination, that's wrong.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So who is going to make that
determination; the State Attorney?
MS. HEUSER: Perhaps. In the case of this ordinance, there
are different layers of discretion that it will go through. So the
Sheriff will have the opportunity, but we heard him here today that he
would probably opt to just compile the evidence and pass it on to the
State Attorney's Office.
So, yes, the State Attorney will have the opportunity to
determine if they believe there's grounds to prosecute. So probable
cause, I guess, that a violation of the Constitution occurred. And
then, of course, like anything else, any other prosecution, it goes to
court, and the Court will ultimately make that decision.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And how does -- how does -- the
1983 action, which is how civil rights violations are prosecuted, how
does that not protect and do exactly what you just said?
MS. HEUSER: Well, 1983 is civil. So there is no criminal
element.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right.
July 13, 2021
Page 265
MS. HEUSER: So that's a distinction. Also, just the ability to
obtain immediate injunctive relief in state court. And I think that
although state courts may move slower -- I practiced in New York in
state court, and they also move slower there, but they're more user
friendly. Like, a pro se litigant can operate much more readily in
state or local court than in federal court.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And just for a point of information,
from this letter from Sheriff Rambosk's office -- and it was signed by
Sheriff Rambosk -- there is no question about the journey of this.
They figure out in there's enough -- and I'm going to be in my
nonlegal way. But they usually -- usually they try to witness it. If
they don't witness it, they collect information. And if they -- they
give it to an investigator. And then he says in this letter, it will go to
the State Attorney's Office.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's no maybe. It will go there.
So that's the path that the Sheriff has outlined on this. And then the
State Attorney's Office knows nothing about it, and they're not going
to -- they're not going to have any jurisdiction about the
constitutionality. And I'm going to turn it Commissioner Saunders,
but you could have come in a long time ago, so I'm allowing this.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm not done with my original
question, Madam Chair.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Number one. Number two,
the supposition that the State Attorney didn't know anything about it
isn't relevant because there isn't a law yet. I mean, if we pass this as
an ordinance, it becomes a law, then the State Attorney would be
made aware of it one way or the other. I mean, what the Sheriff
outlined to us in the letter of July 12th was the process that
Commissioner Solis asked about in the June -- in our last meeting.
July 13, 2021
Page 266
And I wasn't ready enough to answer that question. But this is the
process for the enforcement of all of our ordinances in Collier
County, so...
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So, I mean, every speaker
that came to the podium saying the Sheriff isn't astute enough or to
put it on the backs of the sheriffs is really immaterial because he has
said right here, none of it's on his shoulders. He would compile --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He's going to gather the
information, sign --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So he's not out there making
judgment calls. And, you know, he's answering phone calls or a
complaint or something.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: He has -- he does have to make a
judgment call because he says that they receive a complaint, prepare
a report, receive sworn statements, then it's sent to the investigator.
The investigator determines if sufficient evidence exists for the
supporting --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Cause.
MS. HEUSER: Just like with any other criminal violation, so
just --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yep.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I've got a couple questions
for you. Are you finished?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I ask mine. No, I've got
one more. Mine's not for you. It's for the County Attorney, and it
has to do -- because there were several people -- and you don't -- and
are your questions for Kristina?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I have a question for her, but
go ahead.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My question has to do with
the potential of frivolity. Is there -- is there law or statute to protect
July 13, 2021
Page 267
a defendant against frivolous lawsuits?
MR. KLATZKOW: My experience is that frivolous lawsuits
are all over the place; that courts loathe to throw out a pro se
defendant, and they go on and they go on and they go on. I had one
case that went on a good 12 years that got tossed out a dozen
different times, refiled. I had to litigate it, got it tossed out, refiled.
Runs into federal court, litigate it, gets tossed out, all right, all on an
unpermitted structure.
So to answer your question, yes, there are rules on the books for
frivolous complaints, but from a practical standpoint, courts allow a
great latitude toward a pro se defendant.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So my -- is there something
that could be added into this ordinance to help protect our community
with regard to that?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't know what you mean.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Is there something that could
be added into this that would put the onus the complainant --
MR. KLATZKOW: Sure. Prevailing party gets attorney's
fees.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And that's not in this as it's --
MR. KLATZKOW: Right now it's only the complainant that
would get the attorney's fees. If you made it prevailing party gets
attorney fees, assuming that the person complaining has any money,
by the way, yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Gotcha. Thank you, sir.
I'm done for the minute.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Just a couple comments, and
I do have a question or two for you. First of all, I think this be has
been a very good debate. I feel like I've been back in law school
now for the last six hours, and it's good having this back and forth.
July 13, 2021
Page 268
Dr. Doyle said something that I thought was very, very
problematic, and then I have a question for Kristina Heuser.
Dr. Doyle said with this ordinance, the Sheriff, who is the highest
authority in the county, with this, the Sheriff can tell the feds to get
out of the county, and that's almost a quote.
And I don't understand how this ordinance would permit the
Sheriff to tell the feds to get out of the county. They can travel to
this county. They have offices in the county. They have FBI agents
in the county. I don't believe that this would give the authority to the
Sheriff to simply say to the federal government, whether it be the FBI
or -- the CIA, I guess, wouldn't be here locally -- but federal
authorities to just get out of the county. So that's one area I want
you to address. But the other is -- and this is part of it, the
statement's been made that the Sheriff is the highest legal authority in
the county. I'll accept that. I don't know if it's necessarily
accurately, but I'll accept that. If the Sheriff is the highest authority
in the county, why does he need a lesser authority, which would be
the County Commission, to give him authority? I don't understand
that. And I'd like you to comment on that.
And the other thing I want you to comment on, if you would -- I
had asked you -- and I appreciate you sending me a letter. But I had
asked you, where has this ordinance been approved, because I know,
Commissioner LoCastro, you had thought that this had been
approved in multiple counties in the state and around the country.
And I received a letter from you, and I appreciate your openness with
this. And your letter says, I've only been able to identify two
counties in the U.S. that have enacted Bill of Rights Sanctuary
County Ordinances thus far, and those are Scott County and Cleburne
County, both Arkansas.
Now, the total population of those two counties, rural counties in
Arkansas, 37,000 people. Now, that's not -- the number of people is
July 13, 2021
Page 269
not significant, but the fact that this has not been approved anywhere
else in the country concerns me, especially if we are relying on the
fact that this has been approved in other communities. And you
made the statement, "Many ordinances similar to this one had been
upheld around the country."
MS. HEUSER: Well, could you read the rest of the e-mail?
That wasn't the entire e-mail.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No, it's not the entire e-mail.
You talk about according to an article published by Business Insider,
around 400 counties in 20 states have designated themselves as gun
rights sanctuaries. Totally different issue, so --
MS. HEUSER: No, it's the same concept. Sanctuary counties
regarding a constitutional right, except that's limited to one
constitutional right, and ours applies to many.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. In reference to gun
sanctuaries, the whole state of Florida is a gun sanctuary. We've
been preempted from doing anything with guns. That's very clear.
So those 400 counties and 20 states that have done that, that's fine,
but that has no relevance to a Bill of Rights Sanctuary County
Ordinance.
You said that the most common sanctuary designation is the one
that spurred this sanctuary movement: Immigration sanctuaries.
Again, Florida is an immigration sanctuary by Florida Statute.
So there are two counties in the country, both in rural Arkansas,
that have approved a Bill of Rights Sanctuary County Ordinance,
according to the letter that you sent me; is that incorrect?
MS. HEUSER: Well, I said I did a quick Google search, and
that's what I found, but I don't agree with your statement that the
prevalence of the Second Amendment sanctuary counties is
irrelevant, nor other sanctuaries. It's the same concept that we're
dealing with here, and all have been upheld by the courts.
July 13, 2021
Page 270
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I just want to make a
clarification. In my e-mail to citizens, you know, just explaining
about this process, I mean, I echoed and said, similar ordinance, not
this exact ordinance, but ordinances that addressed federal issues
have been passed. And I know that number's greater than two. I
mean, maybe, like you say, the specific clarification -- I appreciate
you doing that homework. But, you know, what I told citizens is
exactly what I think you all had echoed here is that similar ordinances
that challenged the federal government isn't a new thing. It's not a
new thing.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So the question then is, why
does the Sheriff need this if he is the superior authority in the county?
Why does he need an inferior authority to give him authority? I
don't understand that.
MS. HEUSER: Well, I'll answer the question as best I can,
because you're asking me to speak on somebody else's behalf and in
response to a question that I didn't ask, that was posed by somebody
else.
But the Sheriff right now doesn't have the authority to bring a
criminal charge against somebody for carrying out the will of the
federal government. That does not exist presently. This ordinance
would confer that authority on him.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: But the Sheriff, through his
assistant, indicated that all he would do is bundle up the evidence and
take it to the State Attorney to make that determination.
MS. HEUSER: Well, the State Attorney presently doesn't have
that authority either.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So this ordinance will give
the State Attorney that authority. And the reason I'm asking this is, I
find this whole thing to be very confusing as to who makes the
determination, what is the standard for the determination. A
July 13, 2021
Page 271
criminal statute -- and this is a criminal ordinance -- has to be very
clear as to what is legal and what is not legal for it to -- you can't
have a vague criminal statute. So that's why I'm asking these
questions. I think this is vague.
MS. HEUSER: I understand the concern about vagueness
because, unfortunately, the Supreme Court decisions over time have
really complicated constitutional questions beyond what I think they
need to be, in my view.
I think it will depend. I think you might be thinking about the
most extreme complicated case when, in my view, most will be very
straightforward and easy to understand, and that is getting back to the
point that I wanted to make earlier and read from some scholarly
authority on the subject that individuals, local legislators such as
yourselves, sheriffs, sheriff’s deputies, we all have the ability to
interpret the Constitution. That is the way that the framers designed
it. Why would there be a document that advices people of their
rights if the people are unable to understand what those rights are? It
defies logic.
Now, I understand that that's a prevailing view maybe in the
legal community or some -- one side of the aisle, some people's
minds, but it's not the way that our system was designed, and it
doesn't reflect a proper understanding of constitutional interpretation
and judicial authority.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I have no other questions. I
just wanted to make a quick statement, and thank you.
MS. HEUSER: Sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Let me just --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, you have another question?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No, no more questions. I
just want to make a statement. There's been a motion made, and I
July 13, 2021
Page 272
just want to just make kind of a quick statement here.
First of all, I really respect both sides of this argument. I
understand the passion, but I think the solution to the concerns that
the pro ordinance folks have is really at the ballot box. And I know
that's going to generate some cat calls, perhaps, but whether you
think the last president was a bad president or whether you think the
current president is a bad president, this country has many bad
presidents in its history, and the country survives those. It's a
simple -- simple situation where you put a new president in in four
years.
I think the solution to this concern about the overreach of the
federal government, the mission creep, as Dr. Doyle discussed it, I
think that that's really a ballot issue to be determined by the voters as
opposed to a small county commission trying to say, well, we're
going to take a position in reference to mission creep of the federal
government. I don't -- I just don't understand how this is something
that we could actually enforce.
And I'll say this to you, Commissioner LoCastro: I respect
greatly your service to the country and the sacrifices that you made
for the 24 years I believe you were in the military, and rising to the
rank of colonel. That is very impressive. And you fought to defend
the Constitution of the United States, and I admire you for that.
That's not what this is. And I know that your inclination is to vote
for this, and I'm just simply saying, this is not something that has
been voted on in other communities other than those two in Arkansas.
This is not something that you fought for, in my view, in my view as
someone who has certainly studied the Constitution, and I would ask
you to consider that as we vote on this.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, I guess it was -- I'll turn my
button off. I think we've rehashed the issue over, you know, whether
July 13, 2021
Page 273
or not this changes statutory immunities. I mean, I heard Ms. Heuser
saying that it doesn't change statutory immunities. Well, then, if it
doesn't change statutory immunities, then what does it do? Right.
I think -- again, I think this is a very emotional issue. I think
this is -- we've heard both sides of it. It's a very passionate issue.
And I understand people feel very strongly about this. I get it. I
hear it in all your voices. But it's a country of laws, and trying to
create a shortcut is, in my opinion, dangerous. So I've made my
motion.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Well, there is a motion on
the floor that failed. But would you make your motion again and see
if we've got a second.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah, my motion was to --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Could I make a suggestion --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Sure.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- just because
Commissioner McDaniel brought this item, and I think it would be
appropriate -- I understand the motion. But I think the -- it would be
appropriate for Commissioner McDaniel to take the lead as to
whether -- I mean, obviously, I think his motion's going to be to
approve it, and may very well fail, but I think Commissioner
McDaniel should have the ability to make the motion.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'll withdraw the motion.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's fine. Thank you. Motion
withdrawn.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, with the -- I would like
to make a motion for approval with the adjustment in the language as
recommended by the County Attorney about the prevailing parties. I
have a concern with regard to the frivolity of the potential lawsuits
that could come from this, and I think that's a good way to start that
process, and that's my motion.
July 13, 2021
Page 274
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's a motion on the floor. Is
there a second?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I second the motion. And,
you know, let me make some comments.
First of all, I want to just echo again, I think the success of today
was democracy in action and for the people that were respectful, I
really -- I think we all really appreciate it. It wasn't everybody, but
we had a great crowd on both sides.
One of the things I don't do as a county commissioner is I don't
keep score. It's not about putting your finger in the air and 500
people sent us e-mails and 400 people sent us, you know, no e-mails,
so then, you know, we vote for the yeses. I mean, that's not the way
it works. We look at the facts. And we've all done a big deep dive.
And maybe my second is ceremonial, okay, based on what I
think is about to happen here, but let me just -- let me just continue.
I second the motion for reasons that echo some of what I heard
in here today, but I also stress my own views after hearing from all
sides and many of my constituents as well. I'm not trying to be a
hero -- Dan Cook, I think he's long gone. I'm not trying to be a hero
or to disappoint anybody. I'm following my principles and my
duties as I see them to reaffirm the values and rights of our
Constitution and Bill of Rights. I'm not trying to be a disrupter. I'm
not against our federal government or our president, who I consider
more -- after 24 years in the Air Force -- you know, veterans that are
in here, we look at our president as also our commander in chief,
which is quite a bit different.
I'm not looking to nullify current federal law. I look at this as a
preparatory step, a safety net, if you will, should citizen rights ever be
challenged or changed. To use the example that you gave, if the
Sheriff was directed to all of a sudden gather up all the assault
weapons, but that may never happen. So that's why I look at this as
July 13, 2021
Page 275
a preparatory step. Like somebody said in our previous meeting, a
hurricane's coming. We fill sandbags. Hurricane never comes.
We take the sandbags, and we leave them in place, or we throw them
away.
Some say this county should not be hearing this issue, that it's an
embarrassment that we're even discussing it. I could not disagree
more. This was a citizen initiative that came forward. It's our right
as Americans for it to come forward. And I wonder what the people
in Cuba would say right now, because they'd kill for this opportunity
to come into a room like this and talk about the rights that they would
like to preserve.
This is not political to me. This is all about patriotism and
policy should something change at the national level.
Do I currently support the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Of
course, I do. But this is a confirmation step of what we believe, and
it -- to me, the ordinances as written, it just reaffirms citizen rights if
something changed.
I believe some today have blown this way out of proportion.
As I said, this is a preparatory step when and if citizen rights were
ever jeopardized. The Sheriff, if this was approved today, is not
storming the homes in Collier County. I don't believe anything
would change. He would take no immediate action because nothing
has changed at the federal level that put at risk the Constitution or the
Bill of Rights. That would have to be the first step, and then this
would be the -- sort of, like I said, the safety net, an option, I guess.
Like I said, some people spoke of the fear of unintended
consequences. Like I said, if we feared that, we'd never vote on
anything.
If you say this ordinance has no teeth -- and maybe my second
here, like I said, is ceremonial -- or that it has no purpose, it does to
me and to a multitude of my constituents and fellow veterans.
July 13, 2021
Page 276
Citizens are demanding we vote for or against this. I don't
know how I can not vote for it. I'm not an extremist, but if you think
I'm an extremist, I'm in really good company with Thomas Jefferson
and John Adams and all the others that were called extremists as
well. But I certainly wouldn't put myself in any of their categories.
I'm not here banging on tables saying this is a mandatory
ordinance, but I feel that as a reaffirmation of our Constitution and
Bill of Rights, especially should they be challenged or compromised,
is patriotic and supportive of our citizens.
Regardless if this vote goes your way or not, today we saw
democracy in action. A democracy I did fight for in my 24 years in
the Air Force and a democracy people who jump our fences and
swim our rivers to get would fight for. A democracy that people in
Cuba right now are trying to fight for.
I'm not a politician. I'm a public servant. I'm a proud citizen
and a proud veteran, and a reaffirmation of the Constitution and Bill
of Rights, of which I think this ordinance is, has my support.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Just real quickly. I don't
think there's anyone on this board that doesn't fully support the
Constitution, both of the United States and the State of Florida. I
don't think there's anyone on this board that has any problems stating
that they support the Bill of Rights and our form of government.
And I don't want anyone going away from this meeting thinking
that -- thinking otherwise just because they did not prevail on this
vote.
MS. HEUSER: If you don't vote in favor, you don't support it.
It's as simple as that.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I understand -- no, no.
Okay. Listen. I'm talking. We don't have comments back from
July 13, 2021
Page 277
the audience.
So I'm going to -- let me restate what I was saying, because you
made me lose my train of thought.
Again, no one on this board is opposed to or doesn't support the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights. My problem with this ordinance
and the reason I'm going to vote against it is I think that it's vague and
I think it creates expectations that are just not realistic. And I'll use
Dr. Doyle's statement about this ordinance gives the Sheriff the
ability to tell the federal government to get out of the county. I just
think that that sets up expectations that are incorrect, unrealistic.
Now, if there's a resolution expressing our support of the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights, I'll support that any day of the
week. But this ordinance, I think, creates more problems than it
solves, so I'm going to vote against it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I completely
understand, and I concur with you with regard to the support of the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights by the folks up here. I've seen
that today in the -- in the divisiveness that's been created by this
ordinance coming forward.
I agree with Commissioner LoCastro about that confirmation in
my support of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, but this is
a -- this is with consequences. Are there unintended consequences?
Potentially, absolutely. As we said, every time we make a decision
up here, there are potential for unintended consequences.
Dr. Doyle, I consider him my friend, but he certainly isn't an
expert on the Sheriff and the ultimate power that the Sheriff, in fact,
has or doesn't have and what the Sheriff can or cannot do. That's not
the basis for my decision. There were a lot of people that came and
spoke today who were impassioned, who were emotional, who made
representations that weren't correct, and I believe that's one of those
July 13, 2021
Page 278
statements that are not correct.
So that's -- that's certainly not a basis for my decision in support
for bringing this forward. I want to reiterate this was not done in a
vacuum. There was an enormous amount of time, work, and energy
put into this with the Sheriff, with the Sheriff's lawyer. He came
before us two weeks ago and spoke not only of his support, but also
that he wished to carry it to the entire state of Florida Sheriffs
Association coming up here in the end of the month and would like to
have it passed to having been supported by his local government.
So like Commissioner Solis, I think I've said enough.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, I'll just finish this. I have a
real problem when you combine this ordinance and the passing of
this ordinance or the support of this ordinance with my belief in
the -- in support of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. That
gives me a great deal of -- I think that's -- I think that's -- it's almost
like a trap, and I don't like it.
I don't like the fact that under Section 5 in the penalties it says
that anyone accused of being in violation of this ordinance. So,
Mr. John Cox, I can accuse you of something, and then I can take you
to court. You don't have to be convicted. You just have to be
accused of it. That's the wording here.
MR. COX: All right. Let's just change that word.
MS. HEUSER: Every lawsuit is. It's an allegation.
MR. COX: Let her talk.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I have a problem with the fact that
the State's Attorney -- and I'll have to depend on my
attorney -- attorneys up here -- doesn't determine constitutionality;
the federal court does, and to me this is a stated -- a stated reason for
this is to change the length of time that someone spends in -- to bring
something forward from -- from taking it out of a federal court and
making it local so there's not so much time between the time of the
July 13, 2021
Page 279
beginning of the case until the end. Ms. Heuser told me that in the
meeting that I had with her.
This may have been vetted before they brought it to us, but as I
explained to so many people in this three-week period that I met
with, it is the custom of this board that when very important issues
like this come before us that there is meetings with every
commissioner ahead of time to explain it, and the reason I voted no
before is that I was very concerned that there would be amendments
that didn't represent this ordinance. Then I found out that there was
no -- there was no movement to change it; that it had to be presented
as it was presented three weeks ago.
I feel that this ordinance is unnecessary. I do feel that
nullification -- I have to depend on the legal opinions that I've heard
throughout the day about the standard of nullification. I don't think
this is something that we need to do, and I'm afraid I'm not going to
be able to support it.
So we have a motion on the floor and a second, and the motion
is to support the ordinance as presented. All those --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: With that one little change.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: With the change for the --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Attorney's fees.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- attorney's fees. All those in favor,
say aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It fails 3-2. Now what I would like
to do is make a statement, and I'd like to do it through a resolution.
July 13, 2021
Page 280
This is a resolution, and all my colleagues have it up here as a
resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County.
Now, as our attorney told us three weeks ago, a resolution
reconfirms what you believe in. An ordinance decides -- is put
forward if there was a problem. There's not a problem with us
believing in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. We swore an
oath, and I think we take it all very seriously. So this is a
reinstatement of it.
Whereas, the Constitution of the United States of America is the
law of the land; and,
Whereas, Collier County, Florida, is part of the United States of
America and where Collier County, Florida, confirms its commitment
to equal justice under the law; and,
Whereas, Collier County, Florida, supports, upholds, and
adheres to the Constitution of the United States of America, the Bill
of Rights, and the laws of the United States.
Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the County
Commission of Collier County, Florida, reaffirms its loyalty, its
patriotism, and its allegiance to the United States Constitution, its Bill
of Rights, its amendments, and the dually constituted laws, acts,
orders, rules, and regulations of the United States of America, and
that these have force in Collier County as they do in the rest of the
United States now and in perpetuity.
And I'd like to see if I have any support to pass this resolution
this evening.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Can I just ask a question? I
mean, as the newest commissioner, how does this change from
what -- isn't there something on the books right now previous
commissioners and maybe some of you already passed, a resolution?
Is this just a reaffirmation and a newer date, basically, but very
July 13, 2021
Page 281
similar --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- verbiage?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Similarly, yes. I think it was
2012 we were --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But it was specifically about the
Second Amendment in '12, I believe, correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: It was about -- it was about the gun issue,
yes.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So this wouldn't supersede
that, right? That would still be valid because that's something totally
different, correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: That's something that actually would fall
within the four corners of this.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Of this, right? So this would
absorb that, right?
MR. KLATZKOW: This is 10 amendments. This is --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: This would absorb that
probably, right? I mean, for lack of a better term, it would absorb
the Second Amendment resolution.
MR. KLATZKOW: No. It doesn't absorb it, but it's consistent
with it. Two resolutions are consistent.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So I'd like to suggest -- I'd like to
make a motion that we as a board adopt this resolution this evening.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I mean, let me ask a question,
and it's, you know, to my colleague, Commissioner McDaniel.
Since he did a lot of the legwork on the first one, you know, I'd just
like to hear your thoughts. I mean, you know, this resolution is quite
a bit different than an ordinance. What are your thoughts?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, I have the similar
July 13, 2021
Page 282
thoughts that I had before. I mean, I'd certainly support this
ordinance -- I mean, this resolution. This is -- again, we've already
determined that resolutions are an affirmation of what we've already
said. And our colleagues have already said that they would certainly
reaffirm it without consequences, and so there is no consequences
with this.
Again, we're -- without going back into why I supported the
original ordinance that's already failed, which I hate that people
do -- I'm not going to do that. I'm going to support this -- this
resolution and go forth and persevere.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I'll support the
resolution also. I do have a question. The -- at the end of the "now
therefore" paragraph, you've got now in perpetuity. I'm not
sure -- maybe that --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: In perpetuity.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- should stay in there.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's forever, isn't it?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. But attorneys don't believe in
perpetuity.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, it's not so much that.
It's that you have laws and acts and orders that change from time to
time.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was just going to say, ask
the County Attorney what the definition of in perpetuity is.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Three votes.
MR. KLATZKOW: With respect to you guys, it's three votes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, no problems with the
way it is. I was just a little concerned about that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Sir, what do you think?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's the pleasure of the Board.
July 13, 2021
Page 283
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You're comfortable with the "in
perpetuity"?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right.
MR. KLATZKOW: Forever and ever.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Has the motion been
seconded? I think --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, it hasn't.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You did second it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. There's a motion on the floor
and a second. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Thank you,
all. You stayed with us to the very end.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Biden doesn't use the
Constitution.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So we're down under
communications, I'm assuming.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 15,
communications. Seeing the late hour, ma'am, in good conscience --
July 13, 2021
Page 284
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, no. We're not going to see you
until September, so at least we can talk about that.
MR. ISACKSON: Well, I will tell you that the Board will
meet -- we won't meet, but the staff will meet in absentia for three
meetings during the vacation. There's a resolution that governs what
I can and cannot do during the in absentia vacation process. It's
Resolution No. 2000-149. My actions will be governed by that
resolution, so -- and it's typical protocol. So we are prepared and
can deal with anything that comes up during the recess. If a meeting
needs to be -- needs to be called, we have provisions for calling a
meeting in the event that one needs to be happening, whether it's a
natural disaster pending or anything like that. So we're prepared for
it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. And our first meeting in
September is when, sir? He has to look it up. Ha.
MR. ISACKSON: I've got to look at the calendar.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don't remember.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I could tell you in two
shakes. Give me a second.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: September 8th.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: September 8th.
MR. ISACKSON: It's the second Tuesday in September.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And we've got the budget
hearing on the September --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Fourteenth.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We have a budget hearing, I
thought, before that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: September 9th is -- we have a
budget hearing.
MR. ISACKSON: Ninth and 23rd.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We have the 9th and the
July 13, 2021
Page 285
23rd, and our first actual meeting's the 14th.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay, the 9th. So 9th is budget, and
we did pass a millage rate, for everyone listening, if you're still
listening, so...
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And that budget meeting's in
the evening, 5:00 p.m.?
MR. ISACKSON: Yes, 5:05, sir.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: I just wish all of you a restful recess.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Mr. Miller, you did an outstanding job. Thank you so much
this evening.
MR. MILLER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And Terri, her fingers are
bloody.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Terri was extraordinary.
Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Nothing other than to wish
everyone a good recess.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, I just -- you know, to
just make some closing comments on this. You know, there's
disappointed people that are out there. I know I'm going to put this
in my next newsletter. But, you know, democracy won here today.
You know, you can't -- you can't throw stones at elected officials
because one vote didn't go your way.
So, regardless, we move forward. We have a lot of things to do
in this county. This is an important one. Citizens certainly have the
right to bring it back in a different way, and that's what makes
democracy great. But, you know, I was really more encouraged
today with what I heard. Maybe the vote didn't go my way, but I
July 13, 2021
Page 286
don't sit here and pout. We've got a lot to do in this county with a
two-billion-dollar budget and a lot of things that need to be done, and
these are the five people up here that are going to do it. And I have
no doubt that all of them support the Constitution and the Bill of
Rights. We might have a little different way of going about it, but
now we press on. We leave here, and it's one decision, one voice.
And that's the way democracy works.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I just want to thank our staff
for your perseverance this evening as well as the public that came
here, and we still have a couple folks that are listening.
I think it's important -- I think this break is good for our staff
gives, you some time to, you know, relax a little bit, not have to put
together a large agenda book every two weeks.
And to my colleagues, I look forward to seeing all of you
hopefully not until September, but if we need a meeting in August --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- the Manager knows how
to get ahold of us.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I want to echo the same
sentiments. Thank you, everybody, for doing what you're doing. I
can't express how happy I am with our entire management team and
all of the staff of Collier County.
And just so you know, I'm going to publicly wish my daughter a
happy 25th birthday today. That's what I've been doing. The dad
was here for her 25th birthday. And I think you have a birthday
today as well, Madam Chair.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: My granddaughter's birthday's today,
too. I won't ask you how old your daughter is.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Twenty-five.
July 13, 2021
Page 287
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: My granddaughter turned 12.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, your granddaughter
turned 12.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yep.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Kellie is 25 today.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, I do have one small thing.
We're going to start the Army Corps of Engineers Feasibility
Stakeholders meeting next week, and I'd like to see if I have support
to be the appointment from this board to attend those meetings.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Unless somebody else wants
to do it, I'll make the motion, or at least nod in the affirmative yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: If you don't mind -- I'd
love -- happy for you to do it. I just want to be kept in the loop, if
you can --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yep.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- and we can do it legally, of
course.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Just know that it's -- it is in the
Sunshine. There will be a court reporter there. Terri, I don't know
if you've gotten notice of that. We are going to have the meetings
transcribed for the stakeholders. We do not anticipate too many
stakeholders meeting at the beginning because, basically, we're going
to go and make sure there's no overlap in what the community's
coming and telling us, getting it condensed, and then turning it over
to the technical task force.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I just -- I know, myself, I've
been approached by several folks that are impacted and have opinions
on this Army Corps study, enormous concern. And so it's important,
if you're going to be our designee, that we're kept in the loop.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We'll keep you in the loop.
Absolutely.
July 13, 2021
Page 288
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I've done as much as I can to
quell the rumor mill.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The most important thing the public
has to understand, we have two full years before we have to make a
decision; two full years.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And we have a decision to
make. The decision is not made.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, and the decision has not been
made.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And we have a great leadership with
our Deputy County Manager, Amy Patterson, and she'll be leading
both. She knows about it.
So -- and then as far as this meeting, I, again, am impressed
because I live in Collier County. I'm impressed with the
participation, the patience of the people here, the way they respected
everyone and each other, and it just reaffirms my faith that this is a
great county.
And, clearly, this was a civic lesson extraordinaire, and I hope
that the schools under -- you know, kind of look at this and maybe
learn from this, because this is not -- there's no -- there was no script
today, and these were passionate people on both sides voicing their
opinions, and it makes me very glad to be an American.
Thank you, everyone.
Oh, and we have one more.
MR. ISACKSON: I just want to reiterate your first regular
board meeting in September is the 14th. Your first budget hearing is
the 9th at 5:05. Your second and final budget hearing is on the 23rd
at 5:05, just to make sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We'll have a nice vacation, everyone.
Thank you very much. And until September...
July 13, 2021
Page 289
****Commissioner McDaniel moved, seconded by Commissioner
Solis and carried that the following items under the Consent and
Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted****
Item #16A1
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF MAPLE RIDGE AT AVE
MARIA PHASE 7A, (APPLICATION NUMBER PL20200002567)
APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Item #16A2
RESOLUTION 2021-141: FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF PRIVATE
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, AND
ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT DEDICATIONS, FOR THE FINAL
PLAT OF ADDISON PLACE, APPLICATION NUMBER
PL20170004121; AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND
SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES AND ACCEPT THE
CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF THE POTABLE WATER
UTILITY FACILITIES FOR THE QUAIL CREEK PLAZA,
PL20210000816
Item #16A4
July 13, 2021
Page 290
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES
FOR MOORINGS PARK AT GRANDE LAKE - PHASE THREE
(CLUBHOUSE), PL20210001194
Item #16A5
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND
SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES AND ACCEPT THE
CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF THE POTABLE WATER
UTILITY FACILITIES FOR THE INLAND VILLAGE,
PL20210000392
Item #16A6
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND
SEWER FACILITIES FOR DAVIS CROSSINGS, PL20120001771
AND PL20210000904, ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF A
PORTION OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER
FACILITIES, AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR
HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE UTILITIES
PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) IN THE AMOUNT OF
$59,162.94 TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE
DEVELOPER’S DESIGNATED AGENT
Item #16A7
RESOLUTION 2021-142: APPROVING FINAL ACCEPTANCE
OF POTABLE WATER, WASTEWATER, AND NON-POTABLE
IRRIGATION WATER FACILITIES, AND RELATED
CONVEYANCES, FOR ALL OUTSTANDING UTILITIES
PROJECTS THAT QUALIFY FOR FINAL ACCEPTANCE,
July 13, 2021
Page 291
AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF RELATED UTILITIES
PERFORMANCE SECURITIES AND AUTHORIZE THE
TRANSFER OF THE ASSOCIATED FINAL ACCEPTANCE
OBLIGATIONS CASH BOND(S) TO THE COLLIER COUNTY
PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT. (THIS IS A COMPANION
ITEM TO ITEM #17B. BOTH ITEMS MUST BE EITHER
APPROVED OR DENIED TOGETHER ON TODAY’S AGENDA)
Item #16A8
AUTHORIZING THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A
PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000 WHICH
WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT
NUMBER PL20190002540 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH
THE SHOPPES AT FIDDLER’S CREEK
Item #16A9
AUTHORIZING THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A
PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $42,820, WHICH
WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT
NUMBER PL20180001208, FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH
MAPLE RIDGE AMENITY CENTER – LAKE #6A EXPANSION
Item #16A10
AWARDING INVITATION TO BID ("ITB") NO. 21-7837
"PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF AGGREGATES" TO GRIPPO
PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE INC. AND J & Y GROUP
ENTERPRISES LLC, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN
THE AGREEMENTS
July 13, 2021
Page 292
Item #16A11
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN, WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $67,513.21 FOR PAYMENT OF
$11,857.71, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V.
ALBERT HOUSTON, SR., CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CASE NO. 2006070939 CEB NO. 2007-64, RELATING TO
PROPERTY FOLIO #25631120101, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
Item #16A12
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN, WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $62,600 FOR PAYMENT OF $700 IN
THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION TITLED BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. CHAD BARANCYK,
RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1974 COUNTESS CT,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #16A13
AFTER-THE-FACT APPROVAL OF THE SUBMITTAL OF THE
2021 REBUILDING AMERICAN INFRASTRUCTURE WITH
SUSTAINABILITY AND EQUITY (RAISE) GRANT
APPLICATION, SPONSORED BY THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FOR THE GOLDEN
GATE PARKWAY COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $31,249,450
Item #16A14
July 13, 2021
Page 293
A DEVELOPER AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR THE
ACQUISITION OF LAND AND EASEMENTS FOR ROADWAY
AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS AT THE ENTRANCES TO
GREYHAWK, REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD EXTENSION
Item #16A15
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND OLDE
FLORIDA GOLF CLUB FOR THE INSTALLATION AND
MAINTENANCE BY THE PROPERTY OWNER OF
LANDSCAPING IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG THE
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT AND
THE ACQUISITION OF LAND (PARCEL 172FEE) REQUIRED
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT
Item #16A16
A PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A
FEE INTEREST IN UNIMPROVED LAND IN IMMOKALEE
(PARCEL 121FEE) NEEDED FOR CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE ACCESS TO STORMWATER DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE EDEN GARDENS SEGMENT OF
THE IMMOKALEE STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NO. 60143 IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,700
Item #16A17
PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT TO ACQUIRE A FEE
INTEREST IN UNIMPROVED LAND ON AUTO RANCH ROAD
(PARCEL 112FEE) NEEDED FOR THE STORMWATER
July 13, 2021
Page 294
MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS AS PART OF LAKE PARK
FLOW WAY, PROJECT NO. 60246, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$144,200, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
Item #16A18
A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT TO ACQUIRE A FEE
INTEREST IN UNIMPROVED LAND ON AUTO RANCH ROAD
(PARCEL 110FEE) NEEDED FOR THE STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS AS PART OF LAKE PARK
FLOW WAY PROJECT NO. 60246 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$144,200, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
Item #16A19
WORK ORDER WITH HUMISTON & MOORE ENGINEERS TO
PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE
APPLICATION OF A MODIFICATION TO PERMIT NO.
0142538-018-JM TO ALLOW DREDGED SAND TO BE PLACED
ON DELNOR-WIGGINS STATE PARK BEACH, UNDER THE
CURRENT LIBRARY SERVICES CONTRACT #18-7432-CZ,
FOR TIME AND MATERIAL NOT TO EXCEED $36,102.00,
AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT,
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE WORK
ORDER AND MAKE A FINDING THAT THIS ITEM PROMOTES
TOURISM
Item #16A20
July 13, 2021
Page 295
THE SELECTION COMMITTEE’S RANKING OF REQUEST
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (“RPS”) NO. 21-7881, “OLD
LELY UTILITIES IMPROVEMENTS,” AND AUTHORIZE STAFF
TO BEGIN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH TOP RANKED
FIRM, JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC.
Item #16A21
STAFF TO ADVERTISE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 2019-01, THE FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
ORDINANCE, TO ALLOW THE INTERIOR PORTIONS OF
ENCLOSED AREAS BELOW ELEVATED BUILDINGS AND
STRUCTURES TO BE TEMPERATURE-CONTROLLED
Item #16A22
THE SELECTION COMMITTEE’S FINAL RANKING FOR
REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (“RPS”)
NO. 21-7857, “DESIGN-BUILD SERVICES OF GOLDEN GATE
PARKWAY OVER SANTA BARBARA CANAL BRIDGE
REPLACEMENT,” AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO BEGIN
CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP-RANKED FIRM,
THOMAS MARINE CONSTRUCTION, INC. SO THAT STAFF
CAN BRING A PROPOSED AGREEMENT BACK FOR THE
BOARD’S CONSIDERATION AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING
Item #16A23
RESOLUTION 2021-143: AMENDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE
CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WAS CREATED
BY ORDINANCE NO. 2013-57, TO CHANGE THE TIMING OF
July 13, 2021
Page 296
THE SOIL AND/OR GROUNDWATER SAMPLING RESULTS
FOR GOLF COURSE CONVERSION, BY AMENDING
CHAPTER THREE, QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEDURES WITH A
PUBLIC HEARING, MORE SPECIFICALLY SECTION K,
COMPATIBILITY DESIGN REVIEW AND CHAPTER FOUR,
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES, SECTION N, INTENT TO
CONVERT APPLICATION FOR GOLF COURSE
CONVERSIONS; AND TO INCREASE THE MAILED PUBLIC
NOTIFICATION DISTANCE REQUIREMENT FOR LAND USE
PETITIONS WITHIN THE RURAL AND URBAN GOLDEN
GATE ESTATES OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER
PLAN BY AMENDING CHAPTER EIGHT, PUBLIC NOTICE -
GENERALLY, CONTENTS, CATEGORIES OF NOTICE, AND
NOTICE RECIPIENTS, SECTION C, AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. (THIS IS A COMPANION TO ITEM #17C)
Item #16A24
AWARDING REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
(“RPS”) NO. 21-7847, “GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD DITCH
IMPROVEMENTS DESIGN SERVICES” TO WATER
RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES, INC., IN THE
TOTAL AMOUNT OF $598,817, AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO
SIGN THE AGREEMENT, AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT(S)
Item #16A25
DETERMINING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE AND
AUTHORIZE PAYMENT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $650, FOR
July 13, 2021
Page 297
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONER TO ATTEND
FLORIDA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 35TH ANNUAL
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING SUMMER SCHOOL, AN
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING SEMINAR FOR THE DATES
OF JULY 21-23, 2021
Item #16A26
MODIFICATIONS TO SUBGRANT AGREEMENT NOS. H0452,
H0459, AND H0469 WITH THE FLORIDA DIVISION OF
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT. RECOMMENDATION TO
EXTEND THE PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE FOR
AGREEMENTS NO. H0452 FREEDOM PARK PUMP STATION
AND NO. H0459 UPPER GORDON RIVER CHANNEL
IMPROVEMENTS TO NOVEMBER 30, 2022, AND EXTEND
THE PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE FOR AGREEMENT NO.
H0469, PINE RIDGE ESTATES STORMWATER
IMPROVEMENT, TO DECEMBER 31, 2021
Item #16A27
AWARDING INVITATION TO BID (“ITB”) NO. 21-7852-ST
“BRIDGE REPLACEMENT-BRIDGE PACKAGE D-1 BRIDGE-
GRANT FUNDED” TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC. IN
THE AMOUNT OF $2,664,766.70 AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT RELATED TO PROJECT
NO. 66066, “ELEVEN BRIDGE REPLACEMENTS EAST OF SR
29” AND APPROVE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16A28
July 13, 2021
Page 298
AWARDING OF INVITATION TO BID (“ITB”) NO. 21-7887
“RANDALL BLVD AT EVERGLADES BLVD INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS” TO PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE, LLC. IN
THE AMOUNT OF $1,109,001.92 AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIR TO EXECUTE THE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
AGREEMENT AND APPROVE THE BUDGET AMENDMENT
Item #16A29
RESOLUTION 2021-144: A LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM (LAP)
AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,099,296 WITH
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) TO
RECEIVE REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF
BRIDGE NO. 030138 ON IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR 846),
RELATED TO PROJECT NO. 66066, “ELEVEN BRIDGE
REPLACEMENTS EAST OF SR 29”, TO EXECUTE A
RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING THE BOARD’S ACTION,
AND TO AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT
Item #16A30
COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO COLLABORATE
WITH THE NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN, INC.,
REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF LANDSCAPING
MATERIALS ON DAVIS BOULEVARD (SR 84) FROM SANTA
BARBARA BOULEVARD TO COLLIER BOULEVARD, AND
DIRECT THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO
APPLY FOR CONSTRUCTION GRANT FUNDING
OPPORTUNITIES WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (“FDOT”)
July 13, 2021
Page 299
Item #16A31
AWARDING REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
(“RPS”) NO. 20-7818, “DESIGN SERVICES FOR UPPER
GORDON RIVER IMPROVEMENTS,” TO JOHNSON
ENGINEERING, INC., IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $1,024,166,
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT, AND
AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16A32
SUBMITTAL OF A DERELICT VESSEL REMOVAL GRANT
APPLICATION FOR $14,455 TO THE FLORIDA FISH AND
WILDLIFE COMMISSION FOR THE REMOVAL OF ONE (1)
DERELICT VESSEL FROM COLLIER COUNTY WATERWAYS
AT NO COST TO THE COUNTY AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE GRANT APPLICATION
Item #16A33
APPOINTING TRINITY SCOTT, GROWTH MANAGEMENT
DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD, TO EXECUTE THE FEDERAL
TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION’S (“FTA”) ANNUAL
CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES FOR BOARD
APPROVED GRANTS AND GRANT APPLICATIONS
THROUGH THE FTA’S TRANSIT AWARD MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM (“TRAMS”) SYSTEM, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR
TO SIGN THE DESIGNATION OF SIGNATURE AUTHORITY
FORM
Item #16A34
July 13, 2021
Page 300
AUTHORIZING THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
TO REALLOCATE FUNDS WITHIN THE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT STORMWATER CAPITAL
FUND 325 AND STORMWATER BOND FUND 327
Item #16A35
DIRECTING THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE
TO WORK WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION TO ADVANCE FPN 4258432 – I-75 (SR 93)
AT SR951 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT FROM STATE
FISCAL YEAR 24/25 TO 22/23
Item #16A36
AUTHORIZING BUDGET AMENDMENTS FOR THE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT IN THE AMOUNTS OF
$4,100,000, TO ALLOCATE INFRASTRUCTURE SURTAX
FUNDING TO 16TH STREET NE BRIDGE (PROJECT NO. 60212)
Item #16A37
THE CHAIR TO SIGN A COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH
THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT,
FLORIDA FORESTRY SERVICE, AND THE COUNTY TO
PROVIDE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PICAYUNE
STRAND RESTORATION PROJECT, WHICH IS A
COMPONENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES
RESTORATION PLAN, AND TO ENTER INTO MUTUAL
GENERAL RELEASES RESPECT TO VARIOUS AGREEMENTS
BETWEEN THE BOARD AND THE STATE WITH RESPECT TO
July 13, 2021
Page 301
ANY RIGHTS THE COUNTY MAY HAVE, IF ANY, TO PUBLIC
ACCESS WITHIN THE PICAYUNE STRAND
Item #16A38
RESOLUTION 2021-145: PETITION VAC-PL20200000761, TO
DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY AND
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE UTILITY
EASEMENT AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK
1435, PAGE 2017 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1000-FEET
EAST OF U.S. 41 AND DAVIS BOULEVARD (S.R. 858), SOUTH
OF DAVIS BOULEVARD, WITHIN LOTS 14 & 15 OF
TRIANGLE LAKE, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 38
OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
IN SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #16B1
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ACTING AS
THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD,
APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE
A LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENT GRANT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AND NICHOLAS AND ELIZABETH REID IN THE AMOUNT OF
$2,500 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2841 SHOREVIEW
DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 LOCATED WITHIN THE
BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AREA
July 13, 2021
Page 302
Item#16B2
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ACTING AS
THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD,
APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE
A SITE IMPROVEMENT GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND NICHOLAS
AND ELIZABETH REID IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,715.50 FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2841 SHOREVIEW DRIVE,
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 LOCATED WITHIN THE
BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AREA
Item #16B3
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ACTING AS
THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD,
APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE
A COMMERCIAL BUILDING IMPROVEMENT GRANT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) AND SOUTHERN
REGION DEVELOPMENT, LLC, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$30,000.00 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE
BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AREA AT 2600 DAVIS BOULEVARD
Item #16B4 – Title to read: Recommendation to approve the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle Public Art Pilot Plan (Plan) for the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area and
authorize staff to submit a proposed change to the Land Development
July 13, 2021
Page 303
Code related to murals in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle
Community Redevelopment Area (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
THE BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE PUBLIC ART PLAN
(PLAN) FOR THE BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND AUTHORIZE
STAFF TO SUBMIT A PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE RELATED TO MURALS IN THE
BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AREA
Item #16C1
RESOLUTION 2021-146: SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN FOR THE
1992, 1993, 1994, AND 1995 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND
DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS WHERE THE
COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT IN FULL
SATISFACTION OF THE LIENS. FISCAL IMPACT IS $68.50 TO
RECORD THE SATISFACTION OF LIEN
Item #16C2
ACCEPTING THE DONATION OF 2 SPINNER BOWLS AND
1 TIP CAROUSEL WITH BRACE FROM THE NORTHSIDE
KIWANIS FOUNDATION INC. AND APPROVE THE
TEMPORARY RIGHT OF ENTRY AGREEMENT WITH
PRECISION CONTRACTING SERVICES, INC. TO INSTALL
DONATED PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AT THE
IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY PARK
Item #16C3
July 13, 2021
Page 304
CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
REQUIRED BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IN CONNECTION WITH
THE RENEWAL OF AN EXISTING PERMIT TO OPERATE A
NON-HAZARDOUS CLASS 1 INJECTION WELL SYSTEM AT
COLLIER COUNTY'S SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER
TREATMENT PLANT (SCRWTP) FACILITY ON CITY GATE
DRIVE
Item #16C4
TERMINATING AGREEMENT #20-7804 JANITORIAL
SERVICES WITH CLEAN SPACE, INC. FOR CONVENIENCE,
AND ACTIVATING WITH SECONDARY VENDORS, UNITED
STATES SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC., D/B/A USSI,
AMERICAN FACILITY SERVICES, INC., AND HIGH
SOURCES, INC., AS THE PRIMARY VENDORS FOR
JANITORIAL SERVICES UNDER THE AGREEMENT
Item #16C5
SECOND AMENDMENT TO CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT
AUTHORITY LEASEHOLD AGREEMENT LAND LEASE
NORTH QUADRANT LAND FILL SITE FOR THE NAPLES
RECYCLING CENTER ON BEHALF OF THE SOLID WASTE
DIVISION
Item #16C6
A DISTRICT OFFICE LEASE AMENDMENT WITH
CONGRESSMAN MARIO DIAZ-BALART FOR CONTINUED
July 13, 2021
Page 305
USE OF COUNTY-OWNED OFFICE SPACE
Item #16C7
THE SELECTION COMMITTEE’S RANKING OF REQUEST
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (“RPS”) NO. 21-7884,
“DESIGN SERVICES FOR NEW CHILLER PLANT BUILDING
K, JAIL GENERATOR AND PLATFORM,” AUTHORIZE STAFF
TO BEGIN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP
RANKED FIRM, MATERN PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING,
INC., TO BRING A PROPOSED AGREEMENT BACK FOR THE
BOARD’S CONSIDERATION AT A FUTURE MEETING
Item #16C8
PURCHASE ORDER TO US WATER SERVICES
CORPORATION, IN THE AMOUNT OF $435,105.01, REQUEST
FOR QUOTATION #19-7622-302.25, “PUMP STATION NO.
302.25 REHABILITATION,” AND AUTHORIZE THE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT (PROJECT NO. 70145)
Item #16C9
THE COUNTY’S STANDARD FORM TEMPORARY ACCESS
EASEMENT AGREEMENT (“AGREEMENT”) WITH AN
ADDED PROVISION THAT PROVIDES AN ALLOWANCE FOR
REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES TO REVIEW THE
AGREEMENT
Item #16C10
July 13, 2021
Page 306
UPDATED LANGUAGE TO THE RIGHT-OF-ENTRY AND
PERPETUAL DRIVEWAY ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT FORM THAT IS UTILIZED FOR THE SOLID
WASTE DIVISION’S DESIGNATED DRIVEWAY PROGRAM
Item #16C11
AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE DISTRICT
SCHOOL BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA TO
FACILITATE THE STATUTORY LAND EXCHANGE OF
PROPERTY REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD EXTENSION
Item #16C12
CHANGE ORDER #1 TO PURCHASE ORDER NO. 4500209955,
“BUILDINGS C1/C2 RELIABLE UPGRADES” ISSUED UNDER
AGREEMENT NO. 19-7592, BUILDING AUTOMATION
ENERGY MANAGEMENT SERVICES, FROM JUICE
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. D/B/A PLUG SMART (“PLUG SMART”),
IN THE AMOUNT OF $98,157.75 (PROJECT NO. 50221)
Item #16C13
REALLOCATING FUNDING WITHIN THE PUBLIC UTILITIES
SEWER USER FEE CAPITAL PROJECT FUND (414)
Item #16C14
THE SELECTION COMMITTEE’S FINAL RANKING AND
AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ENTER CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS
July 13, 2021
Page 307
WITH THE TOP-RANKED FIRM, O-A-K/FLORIDA, INC. D/B/A
OWEN-AMES-KIMBALL COMPANY, RELATED TO REQUEST
FOR PROPOSAL (“RFP”) NO. 21-7883-ST “CONSTRUCTION
MANAGER AT RISK FOR MAIN CAMPUS UPGRADE (MCU)”
Item #16C15
A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH UNITED STATES SENATOR
RICK SCOTT FOR USE OF COUNTY-OWNED OFFICE SPACE
WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AT THE MAIN
GOVERNMENT CENTER
Item #16C16
AWARDING REQUEST FOR QUOTATION #2021-200
“GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT (GMD) PARKING
GARAGE REHABILITATION PROJECT,” UNDER
AGREEMENT NO. 19-7525, ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR
GENERAL CONTRACTOR SERVICES, TO EBL PARTNERS
LLC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $749,900 AND AUTHORIZE THE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT
Item #16C17
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT HAZARD
MITIGATION GRANT #H0419 AGREEMENT MODIFICATION
FOR FIFTY-THREE (53) PORTABLE GENERATORS, WITH A
25% MATCH OBLIGATION REQUIREMENT AND APPROVE
THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS (PROJECT NO.
33667)
July 13, 2021
Page 308
Item #16C18
A UTILITY EASEMENT WITHIN COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY
FOR EXISTING AND PROPOSED WASTEWATER FACILITIES
AT AN ESTIMATED COST NOT TO EXCEED $50, PROJECT
#70014.3
Item #16C19
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 19-7525,
“ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR GENERAL CONTRACTORS,”
FOR COUNTY-WIDE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SERVICES
WITH CHRIS-TEL COMPANY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA,
INC. D/B/A CHRIS TEL CONSTRUCTION, WRIGHT
CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC., CAPITAL CONTRACTORS,
LLC, COMPASS CONSTRUCTION, INC. AND EBL PARTNERS,
LLC.
Item #16C20
AN ADDENDUM TO THE ORANGE TREE INTEGRATION
AGREEMENT, AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY TO VACATE
7 +/- ACRES OF THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT PORTION
AT THE FORMER ORANGE TREE UTILITY COMPANY’S
TREATMENT PLANT PROPERTY, WHICH IS NO LONGER
REQUIRED BY THE COUNTY
Item #16C21
CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 TO AGREEMENT NO. 19-7650,
“GOLDEN GATE GOLF COURSE REDEVELOPMENT
July 13, 2021
Page 309
PLANNING AND ENGINEERING," WITH DAVIDSON
ENGINEERING, INC., AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE
CHANGE ORDER, AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO
NEGOTIATE PHASES TWO AND THREE UNDER THE
AGREEMENT, SO THAT A PROPOSED AMENDMENT MAY
BE BROUGHT BACK FOR THE BOARD’S CONSIDERATION
AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING (PROJECT NO. 80412)
Item #16D1
“AFTER-THE-FACT” CONTRACT AMENDMENT,
CORRESPONDING ATTESTATION STATEMENT WITH THE
AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA,
INC., FOR THE COMMUNITY CARE FOR THE ELDERLY
GRANT PROGRAM FOR SERVICES FOR SENIORS TO
DECREASE THE ALLOCATION AND THE SUPPORTING
BUDGET AMENDMENT
Item #16D2
AN “AFTER-THE-FACT” AMENDMENT AND AN
ATTESTATION STATEMENT WITH AREA AGENCY ON
AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., FOR THE
EMERGENCY HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM TO
AMEND CONTRACT LANGUAGE AND REPLACE
ATTACHMENTS
Item #16D3
ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING A DONATION OF $2,500
FROM THE NAPLES WOMAN’S CLUB TO SUPPORT THE
July 13, 2021
Page 310
COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY’S PEE-WEE SUMMER
READING PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT
Item #16D4
AN “AFTER-THE-FACT” FIRST AMENDMENT AND
ATTESTATION STATEMENT WITH THE AREA AGENCY ON
AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., CORONAVIRUS
CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT FUNDING UNDER
THE OLDER AMERICAN ACT GRANT PROGRAM FOR THE
COLLIER COUNTY SERVICES FOR SENIORS PROGRAM TO
REVISE ALLOCATIONS FOR SERVICES, UPDATE
CONTRACT LANGUAGE, AND AUTHORIZE THE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT. (NET FISCAL IMPACT:
$64,733.40)
Item #16D5
THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE DRUG COURT
DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM AGREEMENT
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE DAVID LAWRENCE
MENTAL HEALTH CENTER, INC., AND THE OFFICE OF
JUSTICE PROGRAMS CHECKLIST TO DETERMINE
SUBRECIPIENT OR CONTRACTOR CLASSIFICATION
Item #16D6
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRPERSON TO SIGN THE FIRST
AMENDMENT TO THE SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE COLLIER COUNTY
July 13, 2021
Page 311
SHERIFF’S OFFICE, TO INCREASE THE AWARD AMOUNT
BY $16,862
Item #16D7
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 20-041-NS WITH
COMMERCIAL ENERGY SPECIALISTS, LLC FOR THE
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SINGLE-SOURCE PURCHASE OF
BECS TECHNOLOGY CHEMICAL AND POOL FILTRATION
SYSTEM, PARTS, AND MATERIALS FOR THE SUN-N-FUN
LAGOON, INCREASE THE AUTHORIZED EXPENDITURES
UNDER THE AGREEMENT, AND PROVIDE FOR AN ANNUAL
PRICING UPDATE AND DISCOUNT TERMS
Item #16D8
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRPERSON TO SIGN THREE (3)
SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENTS BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND IMMOKALEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT ($225,000),
LEGAL AID SERVICE OF BROWARD COUNTY, INC., D/B/A
LEGAL AID SERVICE OF COLLIER COUNTY ($308,382), AND
YOUTH HAVEN, INC., ($682,000) TO ASSIST IN THE
PREVENTION, PREPARATION, AND RESPONSE TO COVID-19
UNDER THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG CV) PROGRAM
Item #16D9
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRPERSON TO SIGN TWO (2)
AGREEMENTS BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND (A)
NAPLES SENIOR CENTER AT JFCS, INC., AND (B)
July 13, 2021
Page 312
REDLANDS CHRISTIAN MIGRANT ASSOCIATION FOR
COVID-RELATED ACTIVITIES UNDER THE COLLIER
COUNTY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Item #16D10
RESOLUTION 2021-147: THE 2022-2024 URBAN COUNTY
COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF NAPLES,
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRPERSON TO SIGN THE ASSOCIATED
AGREEMENT AND RESOLUTION, AND AUTHORIZE STAFF
TO FORWARD THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION TO THE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
Item #16D11
WAIVING THE BOARD-APPROVED RENTAL FEE TO ALLOW
THE IMMOKALEE PIONEER MUSEUM AT ROBERTS RANCH
TO HOST THE FARM CITY BBQ 2021 AT NO COST TO FARM
CITY BBQ OF COLLIER COUNTY, INC.
Item #16D12
THE CHAIRPERSON TO SIGN ONE (1) MORTGAGE
SATISFACTION FOR THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP LOAN PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,200
AND AUTHORIZE THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENT
Item #16D13
FOURTH AMENDMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
July 13, 2021
Page 313
PRESTIGE HOME CENTERS, INC., TO EXTEND THE
AGREEMENT TERM AND INCREASE FUNDING IN THE
AMOUNT OF $44,170 FOR THE STATE HOUSING
INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP DEMOLITION AND/OR
REPLACEMENT OF MANUFACTURED HOUSING PROGRAM
Item #16D14
AWARDING INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #21-7894, “NW AND
SW CORNER OF BLUEBILL AVENUE AND VANDERBILT
DRIVE IRRIGATION AND LANDSCAPE,” TO HANNULA
LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF
$136,264.90, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE
AGREEMENT
Item #16D15
THE FY2020 ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND AUTHORIZE
ITS SUBMISSION TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
Item #16D16
REALLOCATION OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BEACH PARK
FACILITIES FUNDING WITHIN THE EXISTING BAREFOOT
BEACH PARKING AND ROAD PROJECT AND TO MAKE THE
FINDING THAT THE EXPENDITURES PROMOTE TOURISM
Item #16D17
July 13, 2021
Page 314
THE CHAIRPERSON TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN
TIDAL BASIN GOVERNMENT CONSULTING, LLC, ACTING
AS A REPOSITORY OF GRANT RECIPIENT INFORMATION,
AND COLLIER COUNTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DATA
SHARING BETWEEN THE STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES “OUR
FLORIDA” PROGRAM AND THE U.S. TREASURY
EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
ADMINISTERED BY COLLIER COUNTY TO ASSURE NO
DUPLICATION OF BENEFITS
Item #16E1
AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT ASSIGNING ALL RIGHTS,
DUTIES AND BENEFITS, AND OBLIGATIONS TO
COMMERCIAL ENERGY SPECIALISTS, LLC, UNDER
AGREEMENTS #20-041-NS “BECS CHEMICAL AND POOL
FILTRATION SYSTEMS” AND #18-7376 “NON-BULK
CHEMICALS, REAGENTS, AND POOL SUPPLIES”
Item #16E2
AWARDING AGREEMENT NO. 21-005-NS, “SUPPORT BY THE
HOUR AGREEMENT,” WITH SAFRAN HELICOPTER ENGINES
USA, INC., FOR HELICOPTER ENGINE MAINTENANCE AND
PARTS REPLACEMENT FOR THE RECENTLY ACQUIRED
2019 AIRBUS HELICOPTER, AND APPROVE ANNUAL
EXPENDITURES IN EXCESS OF $50,000 AS A SOLE SOURCE
Item #16E3
July 13, 2021
Page 315
RESOLUTION 2021-148: REMOVAL OF UNCOLLECTIBLE
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLES IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,015.00
FROM THE FINANCIAL RECORDS OF THE EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES DIVISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-252 AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE RESOLUTION
Item #16E4
RESOLUTION 2021-149: AUTHORIZING THE REMOVAL OF
8,023 AMBULANCE SERVICE ACCOUNTS AND THEIR
RESPECTIVE UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
BALANCES WHICH TOTAL $5,374,560.99, FROM THE
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE OF COLLIER COUNTY FUND 490
(EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES) FINDING DILIGENT
EFFORTS TO COLLECT HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND
PROVED UNSUCCESSFUL
Item #16E5
MODIFICATIONS TO THE 2021 FISCAL YEAR PAY &
CLASSIFICATION PLAN WHICH CONSISTS OF THREE NEW
CLASSIFICATIONS, THE REMOVAL OF FOUR OBSOLETE
CLASSIFICATIONS AND THREE RECLASSIFICATIONS MADE
FROM APRIL 1, 2021 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2021
Item #16E6
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE STATE-FUNDED
SUBGRANT AGREEMENT NO. A0182 ACCEPTING A GRANT
AWARD TOTALING $105,806 FROM THE FLORIDA DIVISION
July 13, 2021
Page 316
OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT FOR EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ENHANCEMENT AND
AUTHORIZE THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENT
(PROJECT NO. 33747)
Item #16E7
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE A FEDERALLY
FUNDED SUBGRANT AGREEMENT TO ACCEPT THE
ANNUAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE
GRANT G0267 (EMPG) IN THE AMOUNT OF $111,876 FOR
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLANNING, RESPONSE, AND
MITIGATION EFFORTS AND TO AUTHORIZE THE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS (PROJECT NO. 33748)
Item #16E8
AWARDING REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (“RFP”) NO. 20-7772,
“AUDIO VIDEO EQUIPMENT FOR FOUR EMS TRAINING
ROOMS,” TO UNITED DATA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT, AND
AUTHORIZE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16E9
AN ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT PREPARED BY THE
PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR DISPOSAL OF
PROPERTY AND NOTIFICATION OF REVENUE
DISBURSEMENT
Item #16E10
July 13, 2021
Page 317
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS PREPARED BY THE
PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR CHANGE ORDERS
AND OTHER CONTRACTUAL MODIFICATIONS REQUIRING
BOARD APPROVAL
Item #16E11
THE PURCHASE OF GROUP LIFE INSURANCE, ACCIDENTAL
DEATH INSURANCE, LONG TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE,
AND SHORT-TERM DISABILITY CLAIMS AND FAMILY
MEDICAL LEAVE ACT ADMINISTRATION SERVICES,
COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO AS AGREEMENT NO. 21-029-
NS, FROM THE STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY FOR A
THREE-YEAR PERIOD EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2022, IN THE
ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $808,780, AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE MASTER
AGREEMENT
Item #16E12
AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT ASSIGNING ALL RIGHTS,
DUTIES AND BENEFITS, AND OBLIGATIONS TO
UNIVERSAL CONTROLS INSTRUMENT SERVICES, INC. FOR
AGREEMENT #20-7750 “INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION,
REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT SERVICES”
Item #16F1
AWARDING REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
(“RPS”) NO. 21-7868, “IMPACT FEE STUDIES & FISCAL
July 13, 2021
Page 318
ANALYSIS,” TO TINDALE OLIVER & ASSOCIATES INC., AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT
Item #16F2
RESOLUTION 2021-150: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS
OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FY20-21 ADOPTED
BUDGET
Item #16F3
A REPORT COVERING BUDGET AMENDMENTS IMPACTING
RESERVES AND MOVING FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT UP TO
AND INCLUDING $25,000 AND $50,000, RESPECTIVELY
Item #16F4
A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DIVISION IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000,000
FROM THE INFRASTRUCTURE SALES TAX RESERVE FUND
(318) TO FUND THE COLLIER COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH
FACILITY
Item #16F5
AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF TOURIST
DEVELOPMENT TAX FUNDS FOR CLAM PASS
MAINTENANCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $357,739.80 FOR
CONSTRUCTION, ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING,
MONITORING, AND PERMITTING, AUTHORIZE THE
July 13, 2021
Page 319
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS, AND MAKE A
FINDING THAT THIS ITEM PROMOTES TOURISM
Item #16F6
THE USE OF TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX PROMOTION
FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE UPCOMING SEPTEMBER 2021
SPORTS TOURISM EVENT UP TO $3,820 AND MAKE A
FINDING THAT THIS EXPENDITURE PROMOTE TOURISM
Item #16F7
AWARDING REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) #21-7860
“TOURISM RESEARCH SERVICES” TO DOWNS & ST.
GERMAIN RESEARCH, INC.; AND MAKE A FINDING THAT
THIS ACTION PROMOTES TOURISM
Item #16F8
RESOLUTION 2021-151: FIXING SEPTEMBER 9, 2021, 5:05
P.M., IN THE THIRD FLOOR BOARD ROOM, 3299 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, AS THE DATE, TIME
AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPROVING
THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT (NON-AD VALOREM
ASSESSMENT) TO BE LEVIED AGAINST THE PROPERTIES
WITHIN THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING
AND BENEFIT UNIT FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE WATER
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, BEAUTIFICATION OF
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND MEDIAN AREAS AND
MAINTENANCE OF CONSERVATION OR PRESERVE AREAS,
MANAGEMENT OF THE DREDGING AND MAINTENANCE
July 13, 2021
Page 320
ACTIVITIES FOR CLAM PASS FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ENHANCING THE HEALTH OF THE AFFECTED MANGROVE
FOREST AND ESTABLISHMENT OF CAPITAL RESERVE
FUNDS FOR AMBIENT NOISE MANAGEMENT,
MAINTENANCE OF CONSERVATION OR PRESERVE AREAS,
INCLUDING THE RESTORATION OF THE MANGROVE
FOREST, U.S. 41 BERM, STREET SIGNAGE REPLACEMENTS
WITHIN THE MEDIAN AREAS, LANDSCAPING
IMPROVEMENTS TO U.S. 41 ENTRANCES AND BEACH
RENOURISHMENT, ALL WITHIN THE PELICAN BAY
MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT
Item #16F9
AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 20 AND ARTICLE 42 OF THE
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND THE COLLIER EMS/FIRE
BARGAINING UNIT, SOUTHWEST FLORIDA PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS AND PARAMEDICS, LOCAL 1826,
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS,
INCORPORATED
Item #16F10
DIRECTING STAFF TO DEVELOP A WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE
IMMOKALEE FOUNDATION, TO OFFSET DEVELOPMENT
COSTS ON A HOUSING SUBDIVISION FOR THE CAREER
PATHWAYS LEARNING LAB, IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000,
AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO
July 13, 2021
Page 321
EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT, AND AUTHORIZE ANY
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16G1
AFTER-THE-FACT SUBMITTAL OF THE AIRPORT
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (AIP) GRANT APPLICATION TO
THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION REQUESTING
APPROXIMATELY $1,819,841 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
THE REHABILITATION AND WIDENING OF RUNWAY 15/33
AT EVERGLADES AIRPARK WITH A TOTAL ESTIMATED
COST OF $2,022,045
Item #16I1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
July 13, 2021
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. DISTRICTS:
1) Cedar Hammock Community Development District:
Meeting Agenda 04/12/2021
Meeting Minutes 04/12/2021
2) Heritage Bay Community Development District:
Meeting Agenda 02/11/2021; 03/04/2021
Meeting Minutes 02/11/2021; 03/04/2021
3) Immokalee Water and Sewer District:
Basic Financial Statements and Supplementary Information, together
with Additional Reports — Years Ended September 30, 2020 and 2019
4) North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District:
Basic Financial Statements, together with Additional Reports — Year Ended
September 30, 2020
5) The Ouarry Community Development District:
Meeting Agenda 05/17/2021
Meeting Minutes 05/17/2021
B. OTHER:
1) Public Risk Management of Florida:
Filing of Intergovernmental Cooperative Agreement for
City of Naples Airport Authority
July 13, 2021
Page 322
Item #16J1
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING A FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, DIVISION OF ELECTIONS, 2021
ELECTION SECURITY FUNDS GRANT AWARD IN THE
AMOUNT OF $75,000
Item #16J2
THE BOARD APPROVE AND DETERMINE VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE FOR INVOICES PAYABLE AND PURCHASING
CARD TRANSACTIONS AS OF JULY 7, 2021
Item #16J3
TO RECORD IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, THE CHECK NUMBER (OR OTHER
PAYMENT METHOD), AMOUNT, PAYEE, AND PURPOSE FOR
WHICH THE REFERENCED DISBURSEMENTS WERE DRAWN
FOR THE PERIODS BETWEEN JUNE 10, 2021 AND JUNE 30,
2021 PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 136.06
Item #16J4
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $900,000 IN
REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES IN THE SHERIFF’S OFFICE
FY 2021 GENERAL FUND BUDGET
Item #16K1
RESOLUTION 2021-152: APPOINTING LARRY HOLLOWAY
July 13, 2021
Page 323
TO THE OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
Item #16K2
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE A SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT AND MUTUAL RELEASE IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED ANITA VAGNOZZI V. COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (CASE NO. 19-CA-1074), NOW
PENDING IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, FOR THE SUM OF $40,000 TO BE PAID BY THE
CONTRACTOR WITH NO EXPOSURE TO THE COUNTY
Item #16K3
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE A SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT AND MUTUAL RELEASE IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED ANNETTE RIDDLE V. COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (CASE NO. 19-CA-0743), NOW
PENDING IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, FOR THE SUM OF $10,000
Item #16K4
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIR TO SIGN AN AMENDMENT TO
RETENTION AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES WITH THE
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION LAW FIRM OF KELLEY
STIFFLER PLLC.
July 13, 2021
Page 324
Item #16K5
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$10,000.00 WITH PRO SE RESPONDENT FOR THE TAKING OF
PARCEL 1196RDUE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD EXPANSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K6
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$6,000.00 WITH PRO SE RESPONDENTS FOR THE TAKING OF
PARCEL 1180RDUE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD EXPANSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K7
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$53,400.00 WITH PRO SE RESPONDENTS FOR THE TAKING
OF PARCELS 335FEE AND 335TDRE, REQUIRED FOR
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXPANSION PROJECT NO.
60168
Item #16K8
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT
OF $77,500 PLUS $17,657 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 184FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168 AND
DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY MANAGER OR
HIS DESIGNEE TO PROCESS PAYMENT OF ADDITIONAL
July 13, 2021
Page 325
STATUTORY ATTORNEY’S FEES FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
PROCEEDINGS, IF ANY, AS AUTHORIZED BY CH. 73, FLA.
STAT.
Item #16K9
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT
OF $75,000, PLUS $17,601 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 210FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168 AND
DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY MANAGER OR
HIS DESIGNEE TO PROCESS PAYMENT OF ADDITIONAL
STATUTORY ATTORNEY’S FEES FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
PROCEEDINGS, IF ANY, AS AUTHORIZED BY CH. 73, FLA.
STAT.
Item #16K10
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$126,000, PLUS $24,612 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 186FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168, AND
DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY MANAGER OR
HIS DESIGNEE TO PROCESS PAYMENT OF ADDITIONAL
STATUTORY ATTORNEY’S FEES FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
PROCEEDINGS, IF ANY, AS AUTHORIZED BY CH. 73, FLA.
STAT.
Item #16K11
July 13, 2021
Page 326
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$120,000, PLUS $22,085 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND EXPERT FEES, FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 194FEE,
REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION
PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K12
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$69,000, PLUS $15,106 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 225FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K13
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$68,000, PLUS $15,205 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 1204FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K14
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$57,000, PLUS $13,885 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 1218FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K15
July 13, 2021
Page 327
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$70,000 PLUS STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $9,240 AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $4,900, FOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $84,140
FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 1233FEE, REQUIRED FOR
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXPANSION PROJECT NO.
60168
Item #16K16
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$60,000, PLUS $14,553 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 1215FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K17
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$57,000, PLUS $13,885 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 1212FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K18
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$204,000, PLUS $32,839 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 180FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
July 13, 2021
Page 328
Item #16K19
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$69,000 PLUS STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $8,910 AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $4,900, FOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $82,810
FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 1213FEE, REQUIRED FOR
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXPANSION PROJECT NO.
60168
Item #16K20
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT
OF $39,000, PLUS $15,589 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 1253RDUE, REQUIRED FOR
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO.
60168 AND DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY
MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO PROCESS PAYMENT OF
ADDITIONAL STATUTORY ATTORNEY’S FEES FOR
SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGS, IF ANY, AS AUTHORIZED
BY CH. 73, FLA. STAT.
Item #16K21
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$83,250, PLUS $18,682.50 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 1116FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
July 13, 2021
Page 329
Item #16K22
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$56,500, PLUS $15,725 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 185FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K23
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$75,000 PLUS $8,619.00 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND EXPERT FEES, FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 1227FEE,
REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION
PROJECT NO. 60168 AND DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE
COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO PROCESS
PAYMENT OF ADDITIONAL STATUTORY ATTORNEY’S
FEES, IF ANY, FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGS AS
AUTHORIZED BY CH. 73, FLA. STAT.
Item #16K24
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$136,000 PLUS STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $25,773 AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $5,000, FOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $166,773
FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 1184RDUE, REQUIRED FOR
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXPANSION PROJECT NO.
60168
Item #16K25
July 13, 2021
Page 330
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$61,000, PLUS $14,496 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 1119FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K26
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$134,400.00 PLUS $29,761.48 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’
FEES AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE TAKING OF
PARCELS 1235FEE AND 1237FEE, REQUIRED FOR
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO.
60168
Item #16K27
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$137,000 PLUS $32,044 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCELS 222FEE AND 224FEE, REQUIRED FOR
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO.
60168
Item #16K28 – Paragraph 11 is amended as follows: The amount of
taxes due and owing, to be disbursed to the Collier County Tax
Collector shall be $97.44 (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
A STIPULATED ORDER OF TAKING AND FINAL JUDGMENT
IN THE AMOUNT OF $75,000 PLUS $11,754.75 IN STATUTORY
ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR
July 13, 2021
Page 331
THE TAKING OF PARCEL 188FEE, REQUIRED FOR
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO.
60168
Item #16K29
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$67,000, PLUS $14,517 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 1243FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K30
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$125,000 PLUS $22,920 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCELS 1168FEE AND 1170FEE, REQUIRED
FOR VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO.
60168 AND DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY
MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO PROCESS PAYMENT OF
ADDITIONAL STATUTORY ATTORNEY’S FEES FOR
SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGS, IF ANY, AS AUTHORIZED
BY CH. 73, FLA. STAT.
Item #16K31
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$85,000 PLUS $15,875.74 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE TAKING OF
July 13, 2021
Page 332
PARCEL 1240FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K32 – Paragraph 8 is amended as follows: The amount of
taxes due and owing, to be disbursed to the Collier County Tax
Collector shall be $97.44 (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
STIPULATED ORDER OF TAKING AND STIPULATED FINAL
JUDGMENT IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $60,000 WITH PRO
SE RESPONDENT FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 217FEE,
REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION
PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K33
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$62,350 PLUS $14,273.34 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE TAKING OF
PARCEL 196FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168 AND DELEGATE
AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE
TO PROCESS PAYMENT OF ADDITIONAL STATUTORY
ATTORNEY’S FEES FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGS, IF
ANY, AS AUTHORIZED BY CH. 73, FLA. STAT.
Item #16K34
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$73,808 PLUS $16,851.33 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE TAKING OF
July 13, 2021
Page 333
PARCEL 240FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2021-153: AMENDING THE COLLIER COUNTY
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT’S UTILITIES STANDARDS
MANUAL TO IMPROVE THE UTILITY CONVEYANCE
PROCESS (THIS IS A COMPANION ITEM TO #17B)
Item #17B
ORDINANCE 2021-24: AMENDING THE COLLIER COUNTY
UTILITIES STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES ORDINANCE TO
IMPROVE THE UTILITIES CONVEYANCE PROCESS (THIS IS
A COMPANION TO ITEMS #16A7 AND #17A)
Item #17C
ORDINANCE 2021-25: AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER
04-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE
COMPREHENSIVE LAND REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
TO CLARIFY THE DENSITY CALCULATION FOR SINGLE-
FAMILY, TWO-FAMILY AND DUPLEX DWELLING UNITS ON
LEGAL NON-CONFORMING LOTS OF RECORD IN THE RMF-
6 ZONING DISTRICT, TO INCREASE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
DISTANCES FOR LAND USE PETITIONS WITHIN THE RURAL
AND URBAN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, AND TO CLARIFY
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR SOIL AND GROUNDWATER
July 13, 2021
Page 334
SAMPLING IN THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS FOR
THE CONVERSION OF GOLF COURSES, BY PROVIDING FOR:
SECTION ONE, RECITALS; SECTION TWO, FINDINGS OF
FACT; SECTION THREE, ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, MORE SPECIFICALLY
AMENDING THE FOLLOWING: CHAPTER ONE - GENERAL
PROVISIONS, INCLUDING SECTION 1.08.02 DEFINITIONS;
CHAPTER THREE - RESOURCE PROTECTION, INCLUDING
SECTION 3.08.00 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REQUIREMENTS;
CHAPTER FIVE - SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS, INCLUDING
SECTION 5.05.15 CONVERSION OF GOLF COURSES;
CHAPTER NINE - VARIATIONS FROM CODE
REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING SECTION 9.03.03 TYPES OF
NON-CONFORMITIES; CHAPTER TEN - APPLICATION,
REVIEW, AND DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES,
INCLUDING SECTION 10.03.05 REQUIRED METHODS OF
PROVIDING PUBLIC NOTICE; SECTION FOUR, CONFLICT
AND SEVERABILITY; SECTION FIVE, INCLUSION IN THE
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; AND
SECTION SIX, EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20190002818,
PL20200002505, & PL20200002512] (THIS IS A COMPANION
TO ITEM #16A23)
Item #17D
ORDINANCE 2021-26: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 02-51,
THE LAWMETKA PLAZA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
BY ADDING A THIRD ACCESS DRIVE ON WIGGINS PASS
ROAD FOR DELIVERY VEHICLES; BY MODIFYING THE
TRANSPORTATION COMMITMENT FOR TURN LANES; AND
ADDING DEVIATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE AND A
July 13, 2021
Page 335
REDUCTION TO A LANDSCAPE BUFFER; BY REVISING THE
MASTER PLAN, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF 34+/- ACRES, IS
LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WIGGINS
PASS ROAD (CR 888) AND TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH (US 41),
IN SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20190001489]
Item #17E
ORDINANCE 2021-27: REPEALING COLLIER COUNTY
ORDINANCE NO. 2018-55 WHICH CREATED THE COLLIER
COUNTY FUEL PUMP SECURITY ORDINANCE
Item #17F
RESOLUTION 2021-154: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND
SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE FY20-21 ADOPTED
BUDGET
Item #17G
RESOLUTION 2021-155: A RESOLUTION PROPOSING
AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO THE DENSITY BONUS POOL WITHIN THE
BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY AND SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE
BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, TO
July 13, 2021
Page 336
CHANGE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE USE OF THE DENSITY
BONUS POOL; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING
TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY.
[PL20210000603] (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) (COMPANION
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS, TO BE
PRESENTED WITH THIS PETITION DURING THE ADOPTION
HEARING)
Item #17H
NOTE: THIS ITEM WAS IMPROPERLY ADVERTISED BY
THE NAPLES DAILY NEWS AND WILL BE HEARD IN THE
FALL. RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-
41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR
MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM AN
AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT
FOR THE PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS BLUE CORAL
APARTMENTS RPUD, TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO
234 MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL UNITS, OF WHICH 70 WILL BE
RENT RESTRICTED AS AFFORDABLE. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
IMMOKALEE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1000 FEET WEST OF
July 13, 2021
Page 337
JULIET BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING
OF 9.35± ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(PL20190001600) (THIS IS A COMPANION TO ITEM
#PL20190001620
Item #17I
NOTE: THIS ITEM WAS IMPROPERLY ADVERTISED BY
THE NAPLES DAILY NEWS AND WILL BE HEARD IN THE
FALL. AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE
COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE
ELEMENT AND MAP SERIES BY ADDING THE IMMOKALEE
ROAD INTERCHANGE RESIDENTIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT
TO THE URBAN, MIXED USE DISTRICT TO ALLOW
DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 234 MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL
UNITS, OF WHICH 70 WILL BE RENT RESTRICTED AS
AFFORDABLE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON
THE SOUTH SIDE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY
1000 FEET WEST OF JULIET BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 30,
TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 9.35± ACRES; AND
FURTHERMORE, DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE
ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
[PL20190001620/CPSS-2020-2] (COMPANION TO ZONING
July 13, 2021
Page 338
PETITION RPUD-PL20190001600, BLUE CORAL
APARTMENTS RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT)
*****
July 13, 2021
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 8:58 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIA D TRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
PENN TAY OR, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK
'ea:ThiLlittL,. \k,ki.
:\7- Att•.�� I Chairman's
signature only.
These minutes approved by the Board on q 4 a-( ,
as presented ✓ or as correcte .
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS
COURT REPORTING BY TERRI L. LEWIS, RPR, FPR, COURT
REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 339