Loading...
CCPC Minutes 11/02/2023November 2, 2023 Page 1 of 48 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida November 2, 2023 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, 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: Edwin Fryer, Chairman Joe Schmitt, Vice Chair Robert L. Klucik, Jr. (attending remotely) Paul Shea Randy Sparrazza Chuck Schumacher Amy Lockhart, Collier County School Board Representative ABSENT: Christopher T. Vernon ALSO PRESENT: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Director Kathleen Eastley, Planner III Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney November 2, 2023 Page 2 of 48 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. BOSI: Chair, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Mr. Bosi. Good morning, everyone. I'm glad to see that we managed to squeeze in everyone who wanted to be in attendance at this meeting, and I love all your red shirts, too. Thanks for being here. Everyone please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: I forgot one little technicality, and that was I hereby call to order this meeting of November 2, 2023, of the Collier County Planning Commission. Before we call on the secretary to call the roll, I'm informed that we have a commissioner who would like to ask that he be permitted to participate electronically. Commissioner Klucik, are you there, sir? COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would. Unfortunately, I had some -- once again, had some things come up that just can't be delayed for a client. So I apologize. I can be here remotely, though. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you very much. Understood. And I'll entertain a motion to permit his participation. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Make a motion to allow for his participation. I can't even talk this morning. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: (No verbal response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Welcome to your participation, Commissioner Klucik. And with that, I'll ask the secretary to please call the roll. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Chairman Fryer? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Vice Chair Schmitt? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Secretary Shea is here. Christopher Vernon? (No response.) COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Vernon is not coming. Commissioner Klucik is on Zoom. Commissioner Sparrazza? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Schumacher? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Ms. Lockhart? MS. LOCKHART: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: We have a quorum, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. November 2, 2023 Page 3 of 48 And just to complete the record, Commissioner Vernon's absence is excused. We are very liberal with that policy anyway, but especially so for individual commissioners who work in the working world. And we think it's good diversity, if you will, to have representatives who are still employed professionally engaged in the community along with the rest of us, like myself, who is retired, though it doesn't feel that way. So we're glad that we have working folks up here, and we're always very liberal in handling those excused absences or the participation by phone when necessary to accommodate their day job -- their other job. So thank you. Addenda to the agenda, Mr. Bellow. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: He's not here. MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director. Mr. Bellows has the day off. He -- as the zoning manager, he -- his world really doesn't touch the AUIR/CIE. So we have Kathy Eastley, the primary principal project manager for the AUIR. She did a great job. This is her first year involved in it, and she's taken Ray's place, so to speak. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Today, yeah. Well, that's great. And, Ms. Eastley, certainly, I would never compare you in looks to Ray Bellows. I just hadn't looked over there. So my earnest apologies, and warm welcome. MS. EASTLEY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Let's see. Planning Commission absences. Our next meeting is on November 16, 2023. Does anyone know if he or she will not be available? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It looks like I will not be available for that meeting. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. So then -- anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right, good. So then our meeting after that is actually two sessions, and it's going to be December 7, Pearl Harbor Day, if you will, and this meeting will start at 3 p.m. for the daytime agenda item or items, and then we'll reconvene at 5:05 p.m. for the items that have to be heard in the evening. Does anyone know whether he or she is unable to attend those meetings? COMMISSIONER SHEA: I will be unable to attend those meetings. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. It looks like we'll have a quorum in both cases, nonetheless, so that is a good thing. Thank you. And just a reminder that there will be no second December meeting. The December 21 meeting has been canceled due to the holidays. Approval of the minutes: We have none in front of us today for action. BCC report/recaps, Mr. Bosi. MR. BOSI: On the October 26th BCC meeting, the Board of County Commissioners did approve the Ascend project, the GMP amendment as well as the PUD, for the affordable housing across from Island Walk, as well as, on the summary agenda, the GMP and PUD for the Lutgert storage facility near The Haven. That was also approved on summary agenda. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mike, a question on the -- on the airport authority. Did they continue to oppose that proposal, do you recall? On the Board, it was a 4-1 vote, as I recall. But was -- did the matters that we worked out here carry over, or was there still continued opposition? MR. BOSI: The applicant and airport authority came to a mutual agreement upon the language within the aviation [sic] easement. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. BOSI: But they did request that it be placed on the regular agenda for the Board's -- for the upcoming, the 12 -- or the 11/14 BCC hearing. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'm just not real comfortable with that because of the fact that we spent a lot of time working with them to come to a consensus on what was represented to us, I believe, as being November 2, 2023 Page 4 of 48 the only contested issue, and then to have the airport authority say, well, we want to keep the thing open as if -- as if there were others that weren't put forth to us, which appears to be the case, I think is not entirely cricket from one government agency to another, and I don't -- I take somewhat umbrage of that. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I also understand -- and, again, it was reading articles -- that the airport authority, though, of course, it's not our involvement, because it's the City of Naples, but they're looking at a study to relocate the airport. I mean, is there any realm of possibility, feasibility that there is even a location, unless we go all the way to the Dade County/Collier County line, of any location for an airport, other than we have three other airports in this county, Immokalee, Marco Island, and what's the one -- MR. BOSI: Everglades? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: City -- down off 41? MR. BOSI: Everglades? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Everglades City, thank you. MR. BOSI: And I haven't spoken with Transportation staff, which the airports are underneath. I don't believe that they have any -- spent any time contemplating that relocation. I'm sure they will be involved with some of the -- some of the consultant work that's -- and research that's going to be associated with this study. But, you know, I think anything's possible, but I would -- just my own -- my own assessment, it would be extremely hard to relocate the airport in terms of another location just because of the sensitivity that airports bring in relationship to a land use. I think airports -- airports and landfills are two of the hardest things to sit in terms of a land-use arrangement. So I'm not sure all of the political issues that rose to arrive upon the City of Naples commissioning the study, but we will participate in any way that they ask us to participate. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, when you look at the Rural Land Stewardship and you look at the Future Land Use Map, it's pretty clear. I think we can probably advise, for free, rather than them spending $5 million, and I can do the study in about three and a half minutes. No, there's no place feasible. Thank you. Send me the check. MR. BOSI: And we agree. It's most certainly going to be -- it's an uphill -- it's an uphill climb. CHAIRMAN FRYER: You're absolutely right, of course, and there's a lot more background that I won't -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm sure the city is -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: But it's purely political, and it has to do with one of the HOAs, just one of the HOAs making the loudest noise. That's all I'll say. Okay. Let's see. We don't have anything else on the BCC report, or do we? MR. BOSI: No, that's it for the BCC report. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Chair, if I may, just a question. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes, please go ahead. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: During the County Commissioners meeting, there was discussion for -- is that Lakewood? Or down off of 41 and towards -- MR. BOSI: I think -- the Riviera Golf? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Where they're talking about that was going to go to a HEX, and the commissioners were talking about sending that either back to here, or is it going to them only? MR. BOSI: No. That related to a future conditional use that will be before the Planning Commission and then ultimately the Board of County Commissioners. It's called STARability, related to a conditional use within the Lakewood golf course. That petition is still in the staff review, and the applicant has indicated that they are making some significant revisions to the application. It's going to have to have another neighborhood information meeting, so you're at least six months away from that coming to you. That was requested by Commissioner Kowal to not go the single route to the HEX. Because of the heightened public interest, that was directed to go to the Planning Commission and to the Board of November 2, 2023 Page 5 of 48 County Commissioners. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Okay. MR. BOSI: What they decided upon was -- the representative of the Lakewood community, Mr. Tony Pires, had submitted an official interpretation asking me what constitutes a neighborhood fitness community center, and within that submittal, he had indicated that it was a very narrow focus in terms of reach that that neighborhood fitness community center could have. My interpretation was a little more broadly in terms of the reach -- the market area that could be served by a community center. He has -- he has appealed that. So instead of taking that to the HEX, the Board of County Commissioners said, take that directly to the Board of County Commissioners to hear the arguments. Tony's perspective is he wants to -- he wants to challenge the STARability project, that it doesn't fit the criteria of a neighborhood fitness community center. Staff's interpretation, like I said, is a little bit more broad. We feel that the conditional-use process will evaluate the compatibility and the appropriateness of that facility in relationship to where it's being proposed. So the Board will provide an ultimate decision on that appeal of the OI. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And it will pause along the way to be heard by the Planning Commission as well? MR. BOSI: Well, that -- the OI doesn't -- the OI and the appeal of the OI will have no -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, the official interpretation -- MR. BOSI: It won't come to the Planning Commission, but after -- once the STARability project has its second neighborhood information meeting, you know, has satisfied staff review, the next stop from that will be the Planning Commission, you'll make a recommendation, and then the Board of County Commissioners will ultimately make that decision upon that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Okay. Chairman's report: None today. Consent agenda: None today. ***That takes us to our first and only public hearing, advertised. It is PL20230013268, the AUIR and CIE for 2023. Mr. Bosi. MR. BOSI: Thank you. Chair, Planning Commission, like I said, we have a presentation. I'm going to give an overview of just the overall AUIR/CIE and its purpose. As you can see by the seats, the general public for -- you know, does not have a strong interest/role within this, but I think the general public does appreciate what the AUIR and CIE represents. It represents maintaining of the levels of service that we've identified for infrastructure and service providers through the general purpose county government. But I'll get to my PowerPoint presentation, and we'll go over that. Again, Mike Bosi, Zoning and Planning director. AUIR/CIE. In the planning world, we are famous for our acronyms, and this is another one of those acronyms. AUIR is the Annual Update and Inventory Report. It's a one-year snapshot in time of the projected needs and the required capital improvements for the next five years based upon our projected population increases against the BCC adopted levels of service. It should be noted that this snapshot changes as the demand equation changes and evolves. One of the things about the AUIR/CIE, it's an annual process. There are no real surprises when we come to you every year. It's a continuation of the program that we had put forward in the prior year, which builds upon the other prior year. The long and short of the AUIR is how much expected population do we -- do we expect over the next five years, and what are the necessary infrastructure expansions to be able to handle the additional demands that that population will put upon our infrastructure and also our individual service providers. And the thought behind this and why we perform this -- and as a sidenote, Collier County is the only county -- and it has been for 15 years that I've been involved in the AUIR. We're the only one who really gets to this type of level of specificity. We're the only one who performs the Annual Update and November 2, 2023 Page 6 of 48 Inventory Report. Most other jurisdictions, cities or counties, they'll perform updates to the CIE, but not -- and the CIE really covers your concurrency management infrastructure providers. The AUIR also covers a category, Category B, which is law enforcement, which is jails, which is government space, which is EMS, libraries, portions that really don't get addressed within your Capital Improvement Element, but we maintain -- we include them in the AUIR to make sure that we are maintaining the adopted levels of service that we have. And also, we have a Category C, which is coastal management. So we have a unique process that we've developed, and we utilize it, like we said, to continue to make sure that we can administer our Concurrency Management System but make sure we also maintain the expectations of our community in terms of how they experience our infrastructure and our facilities. There's three categories. A, which is the concurrency facilities: Road, drainage, potable water, wastewater, solid waste, parks and recreation, and schools; and they're all tied to the Capital Improvement Element. The only components that are required by statute currently would be potable water, wastewater, solid waste, and drainage. Those -- the other, roads, parks and recreation, and schools, those are -- the county has chosen to maintain those as part of the Concurrency Management System by individual board decision to maintain those within the Category A. Our Category B are jails, law enforcement, libraries, EMS, and government buildings, as I noted, and the Category C has your beach and inlets. So concurrency. What is concurrency? I kind of hit upon this. It's facilities and services necessary to maintain the adopted levels-of-service standards that are available when the impacts of development occur, which are contained within the CIE policies in the Land Development Code. So when a land-use petition comes before you and they're proposing 400 units within a segment on Airport Road, our chairman goes back, looks at the prior AUIR, looks at the road segments, looks at the volume capacity that's associated with them, and oftentimes you'll ask questions in terms of roadway capacity. Is there enough to satisfy the additional demands that that project's going to be providing for? So it plays a critical role within the approval process that the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners are asked to do related to land-use petitions to ensure that there's adequate projects in the pipeline or there's adequate capacity within the system to be able to handle those additional demands that are associated with that individual request. The CIE, it's driven by population, as I've said. Our year-round population, it's provided by the University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research -- another acronym, it's BEBR -- and we utilize the medium-range projections. But we also know January, February, and March we've got a seasonal population, and that seasonal population places additional demands upon that infrastructure, and we have to have the capacity to be able to handle that additional demand. Our seasonal population is a 20 percent increase over our permanent population. That's based upon traffic counts, that's based upon wastewater and potable water usage, solid waste disposal rates. So there's science that we've utilized to confirm that that is the appropriate number that we have to utilize from a seasonal point of view. And then the question is, how much do you build? And I always use libraries as the example, because they are -- it's pretty straightforward. It's new population times your level-of-service standard, and that equals your Capital Improvement program. So for this next five years, we expect 28,338 people. We have an adopted level-of-service standard. It's .33 square feet per person. So the math is simple. You take your 28,388, and you multiple it by .33, and to maintain the system -- the concurrency -- or the system for libraries and the adopted level of service, we'd need to build 9,352 square feet additionally to be able to handle the new demands that are coming in. COMMISSIONER SHEA: What if you have existing capacity? Why are you just doing the addition if you don't have -- you could have enough capacity? MR. BOSI: Well, that's just the first part of your question. That's how much you need. So then you would -- and each one of your -- each one of your summary pages will say, what's the required November 2, 2023 Page 7 of 48 capacity and what's the existing capacity? If you've got existing capacity that exceeds your required capacity, no projects are needed to satisfy a deficiency, because you've got a surplus. And it's funny you pointed that out. We built the south library sometime around 2005/2006. We've had capacity since we've constructed that library. It put us way over our required capacity, so we haven't proposed a new library in over a decade and a half because of that additional capacity. But that's simply to show how -- the trigger of how much you need to be able to satisfy, and then that's compared against what is our existing square footage or our existing quantity of that infrastructure provided. And, please, feel free to ask questions at any time. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. I'm going to say this, though. Certainly the Planning Commission can ask questions whenever they feel the need or desire to, but I think we might be more efficient if we go section by section. For instance, the subject of the libraries is something that I expect Commissioner Shea has more to say about, and I have some things to say about it. I'm sorry that Commissioner Vernon isn't here, because he also had expressed concerns. But I'm going to save those specific comments until we get to the section on libraries. Having said that, Planning Commissioners, I mean, you can ask whenever. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thank you. Mr. Bosi, I looked through the report. I admit I may have missed it. But can you give me a little bit of background on BEBR and how accurate they have been in the past? We use them, it seems -- and, Board, please assist me. We use them for basically everything that this program's discussing. And I kind of looked back. I only saw information on the 2010 census and the 2020 census, but that's a 10-year gap. Have -- has their rate of accuracy been within a tolerable range? MR. BOSI: And that is the demographic population projection source that the state identifies for each county and jurisdiction. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Correct. MR. BOSI: And here's how it traditionally works. The further you get out from the census year, the more degrees of deviation that you're going to have within the estimations and the population. They do a really good job: Building permits issued, electrical hookup. They really get into some real quantifiable means to be able to project moving into the future, but as we know, it's a regression analysis that you try to project moving forward. So there's a lot of other variables that have to be brought into it. The decennial census provides a kind of checkup and just a reset, and the further you get from the 2010, the 2020 census, the more deviation you're probably going to get in terms of their projections. But we find when we're in these first three or four years in proximity to the census, we find that the population projections normally will provide a degree of accuracy that we are confident in. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: That you're comfortable with, okay. MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: And, for example, in a simple term, if we looked at 2012 -- if in 2012 we looked back at what 2010's actual numbers were, were they close to what BEBR predicted? MR. BOSI: And I'll give you -- I'll raise you a decade. We'll go to 2022. In 2022, we looked back when the census numbers really -- because it was about a year and a half, two years before the -- when the census is provided and published towards when it really becomes true to -- there's a trueing up of the numbers. We found that we were a bit ahead of ourselves -- BEBR was a bit ahead of themselves as to what they were expecting our population to be. It was about a 10,000-person difference between what we expected -- what we said was here in 2020, and then 2022 looked back and said, no, it was -- we're going to take about 10,000 persons away because we were -- we overestimated what that population would be. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: So the final answer, I believe, it sounds like the county is very comfortable continuing to use BEBR plus or minus X percent. It's not like, oh, my gosh, they've November 2, 2023 Page 8 of 48 been 50 percent off for these last X years; we should find a different way. MR. BOSI: No, and there was a time when I first started this in 2006/2007. We didn't utilize the BEBR medium population. We used the BEBR high population. We were a much -- we were a more rapidly growing community than what we currently are as we start to mature. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Yeah. MR. BOSI: And as you see -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: It does steady out. MR. BOSI: You look at the urban area. The urban area, there's no 150, 250 green space, non-environmentally sensitive parcels of land just sitting out there. So the growth that we are projecting are going to be associated with the towns and villages of the RLSA. Some towns and -- or some villages associated with the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District. And if you look at the buildout rates of those communities, they tend to be a little bit slower than what our urban community -- our urban community's buildout rates are. So I think that the switch that they did declare that we, you know, switch to the medium rate is appropriate. And here's the -- I guess the final thing I would say related to the accuracy. It's not like we do this every five years or every 10 years, and we look back and say, oh, gosh, we were so far off. We do it every year. So every year it allows kind of another opportunity to true up a little bit. So because it's an annual thing -- and like I said, there's really no surprises within the AUIR/CIE. There's -- most of the time -- and this is how our Capital Improvement programming works. Our Transportation has a 2045 Long-Range Transportation Plan. They identified all the facilities that would be needed and could be funded. We have got long-range master plans for our facilities department. We've got long-range master plan for almost every one -- all our infrastructure providers. We identify projects within our long-range plan. And then as those out-years become closer, they start -- they come into our CIE. Our CIE is made of two separate planning periods. Our 6- to 10-, those are projects that are needed, but they're not quite -- you know, they're not -- they're not ready for prime time, so to speak. They're out there in that 6- to 10-year, but we put them. And then they graduate to the first five years, and that's the next five years, the current period, the category -- or Exhibit A, we call it, within the CIE, and that's the -- that's the projects that we know we need within these next five years. And then there's -- another subset of that five-year period is in your first two years. Those are the projects that we really have to identify where the funding source is going to be, because those projects are almost -- are ready to be let, meaning that they're ready to initiate the construction phase. So it's an elongated process. So there's no real -- there's no real surprises, and there's plenty of opportunities for trueing up and making sure that the projects that are being proposed are projects that are truly needed and they're focused within the right geographic area and they're providing the necessary relief so we can move forward with the additional development requests that we are constantly asked to do. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thank you very much. I appreciate your time on that. MR. BOSI: And it was a perfect segue. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: I knew. MR. BOSI: So -- and thank you, Commissioner Sparrazza. It gives me the opportunity. So this is the last seven years of the AUIR. It started in 2017. And if you look, 2017, our annual population growth and percentage-wise it was -- you know, we're just under 2 percent, and we're hanging at that for about four years. We were between 1.97 and 1.9. And then right after the decennial census, we started to see BEBR's projections for the county to start to throttle back a bit, and we dropped from 1.9 to 1.77, and then in 2022 we dropped to 1.51, and then in 2023, we dropped to 1.42. Now, I will admit, the laws of large numbers starts to kick in when you're going -- when you're at -- when you're a 20,000-person county, like we were in the '40s, you know, adding 8,000 people is a huge percentage increase. When you're at 400,000, 405,000 permanent population, it starts to -- it starts to change with that percentage. But with all that being said, the number of persons that we're seeing compared to -- from 2017 to 2023. In 2023 we're expecting 28 -- like I said, 28,533 people. November 2, 2023 Page 9 of 48 If we would look back at the 2017 AUIR, that five-year period, it was actually a projection of about 40- to 42,000 people. So not only are -- you know, our annual percentages are declining, but the real people that are coming, the number of people, has been drawn back a bit. And I think most people in this town would probably be surprised at that statement, but that's the reality, and I think it has a lot to do with the changing nature and the placement of where that development is being focused upon, meaning the eastern portion of the county. But I also think issues of affordability and insurability are things that -- I think everyone on this commission would understand and would agree that those are great concerns to the long-term viability of what our populations and what our populations eventually will be. But it's not just population. It's a key metric in the level-of-service standards for most facilities, but there's exceptions. Roads and bridges, great example. They use traffic counts collected multiple times a year, plus a trip bank to reserve capacity. So it's not just population that dictates, but it's the Concurrency Management System in addition to the traffic that counts that influence where the proposals and where the demand is expected to be. Wastewater and water, they use historical demand usage, plus population projection, plus additional capacity for the reserves. The Board of County Commissioners, especially within the utility system, asks us to be more conservative to make sure that that facility is available when needed. If you're -- good example -- and I don't want to pick on parks, but let's use parks. You've got acreage per capita. If you go to Veterans Memorial and your kid wants to swing on the swing and he has to wait five minutes for the swing because it's occupied, you know, that's one thing, but if your kid has to go to the bathroom and that capacity is not -- not available within the system, that's another thing. So that's one of the reasons why we're a little bit more conservative when it comes to wastewater and potable water. We always want to make sure that when you open up the tap, that that water's going to be able to flow and that when you kind of hit the -- hit the other side, that it's going away as well without any issues. Because in about 2000/2001, we had -- we had some issues with wastewater capacity, and that has influenced the Board of County Commissioners in terms of being a little bit more conservative in that area. Stormwater, it's based its studies in water management -- water management master plans that set the baselines. Solid waste is landfill disposal capacity. I'll give the accolades right now, and I always do this, and you guys are probably tired of hearing this, but one of the things people always say about what does local government do for you -- and I think local government does a lot for its citizens. But Solid Waste is one of those good-news items that I like to trumpet in terms of, you know, patting ourselves on the back. When I started in 2006/2007, the expected capacity of the landfill was at 2017. And if you look to our AUIR, it's at 2060, 2062 that we expect that useful life. So that gives us a lot of time to be able to plan and prepare for what the next step and the next evolution of solid waste disposal can be. And there's a little bit of -- I don't want to say hope, but there's an expectation that technology and technology advances are going to continue to allow us to push that useful life further and further. But that's one of the things that, you know, was a good-news story, because one of the other aspects is, I remember sitting in a meeting with Former County Commissioner [sic] Jim Mudd and a number of representatives from the eastern property owners, the Rural Lands Stewardship Area large landowners, and their greatest concern, one of their biggest issues was, where is this next landfill going to be? Because we were looking at it, you know. And we really didn't have answers for that. It's kind of like sitting [sic] of an airport, like I said. Sitting of a new landfill, that's difficult to do. But through the work that Solid Waste has done with their waste management partners, we've been able to extend that out, like I said, an additional 50 years and, hopefully, over that 50 years we'll find some additional technologies to help extend that moving further. And then, finally, adopted master plans and sustainability standards is what drives our coastal zone, which is our Category C, which is a unique commodity that sits out by itself. And this is one the last slides that I have, and this is related to the concurrency management proposal expenditures. As you can see, we've got a pretty aggressive schedule over the next five years, November 2, 2023 Page 10 of 48 not even including schools, which has -- has their own funding and their own program, but it is part of our Concurrency Management System. We have over $2 billion worth of capacity improvements scheduled for the next five years to handle the additional capacities. But if you look on the right-hand side, one of the things that we will -- we're going to have to tackle one way or another is there's about 500 -- 500 million that we have identified, but we haven't identified a funding source. So that will be something that we will have to continue to work on as a -- as a county government as a whole with the Board of County Commissioners to try to find the additional revenue to fill those gaps. What I can tell you, that that deficit is associated with projects that are in years 3, 4, and 5, so they're not the ones that we are letting out of the barn, so to speak. Those ones are the ones that we have dedicated funding to. It's the latter years of the next five years that we'll have to find additional revenue sources to be able to satisfy the projects to be able to main the levels of service that we have. And that is the end of my overview presentation. And I think the Chair had mentioned or had indicated that we traditionally go -- we'll go section by section just following the order of the AUIR, and I know -- I know Transportation and Stormwater and Utilities are here and ready to take over for me. But any questions that you may have on just the overview portion of the AUIR, or do you want to just jump into the sections? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Before I call on Commissioner Shea, the one thing that I have as a general overview, when the time comes for us, I believe, to vote to recommend approval, I'm going to ask that we attach a condition or at least some language that urges the Board of County Commissioners to make it a very high priority to find the funding for the funding shortfalls, because I don't -- I mean, we're -- at the end of each of these sections, it says what staff is asking the Planning Commission to do is to recommend this for approval. And I'm fine with that, because I think you guys have done a terrific job, but at some point we've got to -- I mean, we're, what, a half a billion dollars short on a five-year basis, and I think it behooves us to be sure that when we sign off, that we make the Board of County Commissioners aware of the fact that we were keenly aware of this and calling for some kind of a solution. And with that, I'll call on Commissioner Shea and then the Vice Chairman. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yeah, that's kind of like a 25 percent shortfall. My comment is I just wanted to thank you for the summary. Usually we get all these individual reports, and we have a piece of paper on the side that we're trying to add them up and see how the overall -- next year it could use probably a little more overview of the whole program. But thank you for doing that, because we haven't seen that in the past. MR. BOSI: I will -- and I will defer that accolade onto Kathy, who, like I said, she's for sure taken over, but she's done a great job and has brought some individual improvements to the process that we're very pleased with. And so we'll accept it, but we'll accept it on behalf of Kathy. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And I second that observation of Ms. Eastley's work. Vice Chairman. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I just have a comment on, I believe, one of the issues that -- and I'm going to discuss for Stormwater, because I believe -- even though it's a huge amount of money, I believe it's an overstatement of the need. And why do I say that? Because this county, and most of the growth in this county for the last 25 years, probably even 30 years, has been controlled through -- through development of communities that require permitting through the South Florida Water Management District, and they had to deal with stormwater runoff, stormwater retention through the -- or through the permitting process. Those shortfalls are in areas that are older communities that have done nothing in regards to solving their problem, and somehow that onus is on the entire county now to solve what I would call local -- localized problems for lack of stormwater services in the older communities. So you're asking every taxpayer in the county to basically pay for what wasn't done in some of these older communities. I think the shortfall there should be made up by either MSTBU or other type of service -- taxing November 2, 2023 Page 11 of 48 authorities to focus strictly on those communities. And I've spoke about this before to the Board of County Commissioners. Because the -- like I said, most of the county that has developed through the PUDs that go through the permitting process -- even straight zoning that go through the permitting process through the state require stormwater management. That's an issue that's politically charged for our Board of County Commissioners. Are they going to have the entire -- because at one time we talked about a stormwater tax or a stormwater -- what was it? Proposed a couple years ago. There was a stormwater -- MR. BOSI: Was it a stormwater impact fee? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No. It was a stormwater -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Surtax? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It was a stormwater tax that was going to be paid -- that was going to be added to the county, and our wonderful County Manager is going to come up and tell us about that. MR. BOSI: Well, I was going to say one of the benefits -- and I think what you've -- your indication of where you're going to go in terms of a stormwater review, luckily one of the attendants of the public is our County Manager, who stormwater is very near and dear to her heart. So I think she may have some -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Look over your shoulder. She's right behind you. MR. BOSI: I felt her coming up. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No. So in that regard -- and I guess -- it may not be overstated. It is a requirement. The real issue is, does everybody pay for what was not done 40 and 50 years ago versus do we focus solely on those communities and figure out how do we raise revenue to solve the problems in those communities that didn't require permitting through the South Florida Water Management District and stormwater requirements? Now, that said, there may be other things that -- and improvements that would be certainly beneficial countywide, and I don't debate that. So that would be something that, yes, that we -- all the taxpayers ought to be paying for that. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Can I follow up on that? That is a question for you. In there was a package on responsibility, which canals, which areas. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: And there was a huge group of green called "other," and I was going to ask what other is, and I think you just answered it for me. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: They were older communities. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But the community has the responsibility to maintain it? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's the debate. I'm not a -- I'm not an elected politician -- so it's a policy issue for our board. COMMISSIONER SHEA: That's the "other," though, on that? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's the "other." I don't -- Amy may be able to -- that was Amy's -- before she was the -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- appointed County Manager, she got to wrestle with all these issues. MS. PATTERSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: County Manager, before you start -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN FRYER: -- Commissioner Klucik wants to be heard. Go ahead, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes. Just -- I'm very curious to -- you know, to just have our memories refreshed about that. There was going to be a tax increase is what I recall regarding stormwater, and then somehow November 2, 2023 Page 12 of 48 that got deviated or postponed or canceled, whatever. And I am curious about, you know, just a refresher and what was proposed and then why it went away and, you know, what the plan at the time was, and then now what are we faced with because we delayed that or -- we didn't, but the county commissioners delayed or decided to deviate from that revenue source. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Manager Patterson. MS. PATTERSON: Yes. Amy Patterson, County Manager, for the record. So what we're talking about is the stormwater utility concept. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's what it was. MS. PATTERSON: So it's an idea that has been floated a few times in the past and unsuccessfully each time. The idea being that it is a statutory assessment, and it looks at the runoff that is specific to individual properties and basically develops a methodology to assess for the cost of that runoff. So post Hurricane Irma, there was real interest in development of the stormwater utility. It made its way all the way to the vote of the Board of County Commissioners when they elected not to move forward with it. In part, because of heavy opposition by Golden Gate Estates. There were some issues with the calculations for impervious surface in Golden Gate Estates that just couldn't be overcome. What makes the stormwater utility an ideal instrument in a perfect world is that, again, it ties the demand to, then, a fee that's collected. So it's very specific. There's a statutory methodology that has to be followed in order to be able to impose it. It is a special assessment, so a below-the-line. Not a tax, but a fee. I know, Commissioner McDaniel, if you're watching, I'm sorry, but it is a fee by statute. And so part of that, and what we were dealing with with the private communities, as Commissioner Schmitt is referring to, is the newer communities do manage and maintain their own stormwater systems. And so in this mechanism was -- or in this instrument was a mechanism to be able to address that to say that there was a credit, essentially, to those communities because it wasn't on the county to maintain them and, therefore, you weren't paying, they weren't paying, at the same rate as somebody that may be in an older community or where the maintenance responsibility was solely on the county. So that's a difference between something like Lely Resort and Golden Gate City. The numbers represented in the AUIR are a variety of projects throughout the county in older areas but also in our backbone system. So those are things like updates to our water control structures which benefits everybody in the way we control water, but also things like projects in Golden Gate City, which would be a complete rehabilitation of the stormwater system in an aging community. The infrastructure there is better than 50 years old and is literally crumbling in the ground. The other issue in Golden Gate City is they're on septic, so that's a multi-pronged issue and the subject of a very large master plan. Isles of Capri is another example that is in desperate need of stormwater updates, but they are also on septic. So these will become partnership projects with either our own public utilities or with the utility responsible for those areas; City of Naples, City of Marco Island. We have the same thing going on down in what we call the West Goodlette area. Partnership projects, removing septic systems and placing people on sanitary sewer by the City of Naples, but necessary stormwater upgrades for those folks who are -- in that case a really interesting situation is they're in the City of Naples Water/Sewer District, but they're actually residents of the unincorporated Collier County, so stormwater is our responsibility. And so those types of projects are what you see in the AUIR. Is there a better way to fund stormwater? Perhaps. And will we be revisiting the stormwater utility in the future? Again, perhaps, with an idea that we position it a little bit differently than the complicated way we went about it the first time, but also, again, as an attempt to really place that cost where those who benefit pay and those who are managing their own water don't, except they'll continue to pay property taxes. It's also a diversification of our property taxes, which -- property tax revenue, which are going to fund the stormwater programs both on the capital side of the house and on the maintenance side of the house. This also becomes a bondable instrument, should we head that way, which provides a sustainable November 2, 2023 Page 13 of 48 funding source. Last thing I'll say, one thing that has created part of this issue with stormwater is that during the recession, it was one of the areas that was most heavily hit in the reductions in their budgets, and it's very hard and takes a long time to recover from that, the inadequate funding. And when you're choosing between one health/safety and another, something has to give. There's only so much money to go around. But stormwater is still climbing back out of that position that they were in when there wasn't enough money to do projects, and we got further behind on maintenance. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Vice Chairman. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Great summary. I remember well. And you hit the nail right on the head, because combined with stormwater runoff is the other issue most people in this county don't want to talk about, and that is getting off of septic and putting most of those older communities -- get them off septic and onto water/sewer, which is a -- it's the third rail in this county when we talk about the cost and the impact fees. And without getting into great detail -- and you and I both know the history of that, and so do the rest of the staff on the cost. Especially Golden -- or the Estates; it was enormous what would be paid. And the issue becomes, do we, as an entire community, pay for it, or is it just to the people who are impacted and they pay. And, you know, we're talking 10-, $15,000 per home. And like that, the same thing when you look at -- and does the staff look at those communities that have CDDs? They're their own taxing authority. And we have many communities in this -- in this county that are CDDs that raise revenue to pay for those services: Roads, sidewalks, water/sewer -- not water/sewer but stormwater that are paid for in those CDDs by the people who live within that community. They pay for that -- that service that's provided. We have a lot of areas that -- the older areas in this county that don't have any type of taxing authority to raise that kind of money to fix some of the things that need to be done. North Naples is another great area. MS. PATTERSON: Naples Park. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Naples Park. MS. PATTERSON: Yes, twenty streets in Naples Park are underway in a massive capital project dealing with water, wastewater, and stormwater combined. Same thing happened off of Vanderbilt and the finger streets. They are all under county maintenance, county responsibility; stormwater, roads. So they're different than a lot of the gated communities where that goes on internally. That does come back to the county for our responsibility and our ongoing maintenance. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And then for our board's edification, what was that, Amy, maybe 18 years ago the Dover-Kohl study for Naples Park -- MS. PATTERSON: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- where the county did propose to create some kind of a local taxing for the homeowners in that area for beautification, and there was going to be some money from the county as well, but it was overwhelming opposed by the community. And it was another area that we backed off. And here we are 20 years later still trying to deal with the same problem, homes that are still on septic, and stormwater. And I know the City of Naples is running through the same problems. So that's -- those are all policy decisions. Those are above our pay grade, I guess, is what I want to say. But they're all on your shoulder, by the way. MS. PATTERSON: They are policy decisions, but -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: In case you didn't know. MS. PATTERSON: Yeah. I think this is going to be an ongoing conversation as we look at -- we're at the end of the round of funding provided by the Board; $16 million provided to the stormwater capital program to really start to tackle some of these big projects. We're going to be closing that funding out this year, and that's going to open this conversation of what the future of stormwater is. Is it the stormwater utility? Is it an MSTU/MSBU, something like that? Something more sustainable perhaps than what we're doing. And, again, remember that behind all of this -- and we talk about capital -- is a tremendous November 2, 2023 Page 14 of 48 maintenance load. And there are a lot of the backbone portions of the stormwater system that are still our maintenance responsibility separate than the Water Management District, and that benefits everybody. So we have to look at each of these components separately, because every drop of water in this county ends up moving its way towards the Gulf of Mexico, and so that water-quality element and how we effectively manage that stormwater is a benefit to everybody that lives here. We just are trying to figure out how to rightsize that. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MS. PATTERSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Manager. I have a question, if I may. MS. PATTERSON: Of course. CHAIRMAN FRYER: This relates to persons per household -- MS. PATTERSON: Ah. CHAIRMAN FRYER: -- which is a subject that you and I have had, well, from my perspective, very informative conversations about over the years, and I certainly acknowledge your level of excellence and expertise. You come to your current job with a huge background in knowing how all of that works, and I learned a great deal about all that from you and also Mike Bosi and Jamie French and others. In the -- in the staff report, on Page 5 of it, there's a term used "persons per total dwelling unit," and that number that is offered here is 1.645. And the -- I am enthusiastic about this, and I want to find out where we are on an evolutionary process. Back when we were talking about the villages, it seemed to me as though Growth Management Plan amendments that were being sponsored by large residential developments wanted to show high occupancy and -- no, I've got that wrong. Vice versa -- low occupancy, and commercial GMPAs wanted to show higher occupancy to show the demand for the services. And it seemed to me as though it would be worthwhile if we could all agree upon using one number whether it's an advocate for commercial or advocate for residential. And the BEBR number is around 2.4, something like that. And I have learned from you, County Manager, and from Mr. Bosi and others, that that BEBR number doesn't take account of certain -- certain factors that need to be addressed, such as vacancy rates and the like. So -- and, of course, those factors do need to be addressed both by the applicants for residential and those for commercial. With this 1.645 -- I guess I'm coming to my question here -- does this indicate that we're maybe getting closer to a point where we can move away from the 2017 EMS numbers without embracing BEBR, which is too high? MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. So first of all, the benefit of the 2020 census, but the other exciting thing is is that every one of our impact fees is currently under study. So we are going to have the opportunity not only to look at the 2020 census as well as all new and refreshed data, but we're going to have a whole new set of impact fee studies coming forward that will let us have a look at how they compare to this as well as, in fact, how they compare to that 2016 EMS study, and we'll see just how far apart we are. There have been a lot of changes at the legislative level that have driven other changes to the way that we approach the impact fees. We'll be excited to share that with you in the, probably, upcoming months and how that relates to these persons per household or persons per dwelling unit numbers. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. And, also, thank you for oversight of the entire staff effort to pull this AUIR/CIE together. It's always -- it's an admirable effort. It's very useful. To my way of thinking, it's most of the county's business operations. It gives us a chance to look at and react to. So thank you very much. MS. PATTERSON: Thank you so much. I probably will be back for EMS, if you-all are going to have specific questions on EMS. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, good. Perfect. Thank you so much. Good. All right. Commissioner Schumacher. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Ms. Patterson, I just had a question. Going back to November 2, 2023 Page 15 of 48 stormwater, two questions. The older communities, is it a question of responsibility where they're saying "it's not our responsibility" and the county's saying, "well, it's yours because it's your utility," or is it just a non-maintained item within that community that's now at a point where it needs to be revitalized? MS. PATTERSON: Generally not -- generally, it is county maintenance responsibility, so there's not -- there's not a question of the homeowners not doing what they're supposed to do. Now, we have had some isolated cases in older HOAs and things where they've needed help with some aging infrastructure and, of course, we stand ready to go in and provide that technical assistance. While the responsibility is on them, we do have teams that go out and assist. But areas that we're speaking about are ones that don't have a formal HOA. They don't have -- they're not private roads or private stormwater systems. They're actually under the maintenance responsibility of the county. And they're all over the place. Neighborhoods up and down Goodlette Road, for example; generally speaking, non-gated communities. And it's just a matter of prioritization and really getting our arms around what a maintenance schedule looks like. And Golden Gate Estates; huge maintenance responsibility in Golden Gate Estates for a network of swales. When we were doing the analysis for the stormwater utility, looking at our ability to be able to maintain those swales, the average -- or the best practice is maintaining a swale about every 12 years. Our calculation showed that we were being able to maintain the swales about every 50 years. So if I saw you today, I wouldn't see you again probably while I was alive. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: No, I understand because I live on one of those streets. MS. PATTERSON: Ah, yes. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I know the idea behind Golden Gate Estates is obviously we can't clear more than 40 percent. You're supposed to retain your own stormwater. So on that impervious tax, is that just based off what the footprint of your house and patio was; whatever is a solid surface that can't absorb the water and then is watershedding off is where that tax would come in? MS. PATTERSON: Yes. So the stormwater utility attempted to capture all of the impervious area. But one of the things that threw it off in Golden Gate Estates, in some of the other areas, Logan, Livingston, people have very long driveways. They have gravel driveways, and some of those -- there are different opinions about whether they should be included into the impervious calculations. And so what you had was, if you looked at the stormwater utility fee, generally, for a single-family home, you were looking at a number that was under $100 a year if you, you know, lived in a community, but when you got out to Golden Gate Estates, some of those numbers were $1,000, $2,000 because of these long driveways or parking areas or other areas that were viewed as impervious. Now, we had developed a solution for that to be able to discount out a lot of the unpaved surface, the compacted gravel driveways, but by that time people were pretty upset, and the Board put a stop on it and looked at different ways to fund stormwater. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Has there ever been thought of just putting it on that homeowner to maintain that swale and saying, you know, your swale's obviously overgrown, you laid sod where you weren't supposed to, you know, you need to correct this, instead of putting on the county's shoulders to go in and, lot by lot, basically, correct these swales? MS. PATTERSON: It is in the county's right-of-way, which is the first thing. And, frankly, the folks that live in these areas do us a huge service by keeping -- generally speaking, keeping their swales free of debris and other things and mowing them for us a lot of the time. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: My son does that. MS. PATTERSON: Right. But it also -- remember, too, is that those swales are all integrated with each other, and so elevations and all of that become important to make sure that the water can flow the way that it needs to, starting at a top of a street and making its way down to its point of discharge. So while somebody might be trying to do the right thing by maintaining their swale, it really is an integrated system and continues to be the maintenance responsibility of the county. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Thank you. MS. PATTERSON: You're welcome. November 2, 2023 Page 16 of 48 CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, County Manager. MS. PATTERSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Bosi, do you have some more introductory comments? MR. BOSI: No more introductory comments. I just wanted to thank Joe for bringing up that subject. Like I said, it brings me back a bit. There used to be a time when the AUIR was co-piloted by myself and Ms. Patterson, as the impact fee manager. And I always thought that I was a lot better when she was at my side. But as you can see, there was a higher calling for her, and I'm still here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. BOSI: So, no. So with that, I think we could transition to transportation, if it's the pleasure of the Board. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, what I'd like to do, if I may, is to go through section by section, the first one being the staff report, and some of the -- some of the comments have already been made. I'll try not to duplicate what I've heard. And in some cases, they are clarifications matters that I received in my regular meeting with staff on Tuesday but I just want to make a public record of if anyone else had questions about that. So, Mr. Bosi. MR. BOSI: Ms. Patterson just asked me if I could request -- could we have a slight abbreviation [sic] of the order? The Sheriff's Office representative is here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Absolutely. MR. BOSI: After the staff report, could we maybe start off with Sheriff, and then we can go back to the -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, we can go right to Sheriff now. I mean -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Sure. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. Without objection, let's hear from the Sheriff right now. If they're ready. Good morning, sir. MS. WILLIAMS: Good morning. For the record, I'm Sean Williams, Central Services director for the Sheriff's Office. Unfortunately, I'm not as well diverse -- or well versed as Mr. Bosi, but we have a couple of topics to cover for you. I'll hit the high points on jails and law enforcement. Our responsibility as part of your process is to give you the narrative on what our needs are. So for Corrections, we provide you with the needs. Currently, we believe our needs for Corrections is we need a mental health and medical facility in our Naples Jail Center, the county's Naples Jail Center. We also need, I believe, some offices in that space. The trend in population in jails has not been trending where it needed to be originally. We believe that is due to several aspects. We have Chief Middlebrook and Director Bouza with us that could speak to some of that. But the mental health piece has become a growing trend in the jails, so we believe that's something we need to target. That's been something we've been looking at for several years and we've been unable to get some traction on. But as Ms. Patterson indicated, we are looking at the impact fees. We've been working with her staff to amend -- and we -- I think once that's done, we're going to be looking at the level of service after that, I believe, and I'd have to defer to them to speak to that. MR. BOSI: And just for the benefit of the Planning Commission, what I put on was the jail section does have a bed utilization rate that was provided by the Sheriff's Office, and you can see from 2020, 2021, and 2022. On average, in 2020, was 628 beds; in 2021, it was 668; and then in 2022 was 702. And, remember, the capacity for the -- for the system is at -- right at -- it's right about 13 -- 1,300 beds. And the only improvement that we would have scheduled right now is in the sixth year, and that's the Immokalee jail bed expansion. It's a predesigned 64-bed expansion that could be accommodated within the Immokalee -- within the Immokalee jail system. November 2, 2023 Page 17 of 48 CHAIRMAN FRYER: So the level-of-service standard is 2.79 beds per thousand population? MS. WILLIAMS: That, I believe, is right. CHAIRMAN FRYER: That's got a self-updating mechanism in it because, as the population grows, the need for beds grows, and I imagine that in your projection going out five years, you anticipated that the population's going to continue to grow. MS. WILLIAMS: That was the indication, I believe, prior to my taking over this. But we have not been trending that way for -- again, for various reasons. I think, good law enforcement practices changing and the needs within the jail. Again, mental health has become a bigger need. About 10 years ago, we had some changes in how we dealt with inmates. We were transferring them to state or federal facilities, getting them out of the county, as well as some court practices that I think Chief Middlebrook or Director Bouza could speak to if you needed them to. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. But you're showing a five-year deficit of 12 million. And so I assume that's on the back end. You're good to go for a couple of years, but then toward the end of the five-year period, you're going to need to find some money. MS. WILLIAMS: I would have to defer that to Mr. Bosi. MR. BOSI: And let me -- and that's the level-of-service standard, and that's the discrepancy. The utilization rate is a little over half of what our capacity is. So we have more available beds than what our -- what our needs are shown in actuality usage. But our level-of-service standard has a demand for a much higher level of beds than what we're utilizing. So this would be one of the areas where the Planning Commission could look at the level of service, and if you would request of staff to say, moving forward to next year, could you do some analysis work with the Sheriff's Office to see if there would be a potential and a comfortability with maybe reducing that level of service to provide for a more accurate -- in terms of the overall needs toward what's available capacity. Now, I will say that there's always been some caution from the Sheriff's Office related to the ICE program, and I could -- I guess I could turn it over, but I know that it's a federal program for how we move illegals through the systems. And if that program would ever go away, I know that there will always be a concern that could have a dramatic impact upon our beds and beds availability. MS. WILLIAMS: That, and if populations grow again, crime trends could increase. But I don't want to go away from the narrative that we provide that mental health and medical facility, that renovation within our Naples Jail Center is something we need to focus on for our facility needs for our current facilities. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Before we get back to that, County Manager, did you want to be heard on this, ma'am? MS. PATTERSON: Thank you, again. Amy Patterson, for the record. Building on that conversation, remember, too, that we're in the process of working through the design for the central receiving facility for David Lawrence. And I would suggest that this is going to enter into this conversation about the utilization of the jail and how it interplays when we are using that central receiving facility properly once it's constructed versus using the jail as our central receiving facility. There are a lot of different things that -- and we've been in conversation with the Sheriff's Office. There's a lot of different things that we need to look at in the jail in the configuration of those spaces, how they're utilized, how those inmates are separated. So I just want you to know those are ongoing conversations -- MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. MS. PATTERSON: -- working closely with the Sheriff's Office and definitely taking into consideration that we have a level of service that may appear to provide capacity, but I think we're going to need to evaluate these things all together so that we can really get a handle on what that need is. And if at that time we need to have a conversation about level of service and beds per thousand population, that may be the appropriate time. We just -- we need to -- we need to really embrace this moving forward with the central receiving facility and then see how these intersect. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Thank you for bringing that up. I was also going to ask November 2, 2023 Page 18 of 48 about it. With respect to David Lawrence and St. Matthews, I'm reminded, and I know probably everyone in this room has heard Sheriff Rambosk say, that the largest mental health facility in the county has been the Naples Jail, which is an unfortunate reality. And it's also, I think, too soon to say that David Lawrence and St. Matthew's are relieving some of that stress. But can you give us an idea when in the future we might actually see some improvements in jail population, for instance? MS. WILLIAMS: I cannot speak to that. I have to defer to Chief Middlebrook or -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Well, if that would be appropriate, thank you. CHIEF MIDDLEBROOK: Good morning. Chief Mark Middlebrook, Collier County Sheriff's Office. There's many factors that go into the number of beds available, the cost associated. For instance, if we have a male juvenile, they have to be housed away from adults. That would take up one 32-bed housing area. If we have a male juvenile and a female juvenile, they can't be housed together, so now we take up two 32-bed housing areas. We have to staff that. So we have fixed numbers as far as staffing costs. So that all has to be taken into consideration as far as bed space. The 287(g) ICE program that we currently have here has cut our population in half. If that went away, within 12 to 18 months, we'd be at max capacity. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Interesting. CHIEF MIDDLEBROOK: We would not be able to house the number of people appropriately that we would have. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions either on jails or law enforcement? MR. BOSI: And, Chair, just to remind you, from the law enforcement perspective, we do have a program -- and this was provided from the Sheriff's Office -- the need for the forensic and evidence facility, the District 1 substation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. MR. BOSI: The training facility, as well as the District 5 substation and an Estates substation, we are identifying those, and the one that we do have coming online in the first five years is the forensic science facility, the District 1 substation, and the District 5 substation. So they're -- we're trying to get to those individual areas of need, but we know that there is -- there is an allocation of revenue that constrains us from attacking that a little bit more aggressively. But we do know, and we're working with the Sheriff's Office to see if we can accelerate any of these projects. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. And I just -- it was clarified for me in our meeting on Tuesday that in furtherance of streamlining and reducing the number of words contained in this report, some things were removed without that to be indicating that the projects were removed or downscaled. And so that forensic evidence building, in last year's staff report, was referred to as a $33 million exercise, and I assume that it's still -- and it hasn't been cut back any. MR. BOSI: No, it has actually been expanded. It was 90,000-square-foot facility, as we were proposing last year. It's been increased to 114,000. So that has -- that's the relationship to the overall cost, but the size has increased as well. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Vice Chairman. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I just want to make sure we understand, and for the Sheriff's Office, our concern as the zoning board is to make sure that when we approve a project -- MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- that it doesn't put a burden on you and exceed the level-of-service capability, and that's our greatest concern. MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All other data is extremely interesting, but our concern is that we don't want to approve something that then all of a sudden puts you in a bind because you can no longer meet the level-of-service requirements. November 2, 2023 Page 19 of 48 And every time we review a staff report, every one of these issues is covered in regards to level of service. But from that standpoint, I look at this as we are maintaining the level of service that's adequate. Your needs, of course, for funding are issues that go to -- of course, to the Sheriff and to the discussions with the Board of County Commissioners as far as funding. MS. WILLIAMS: Correct. We've been working with Manager Patterson over the last year and having some great conversations about some of these projects, so that is moving forward in a positive way. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But I think the standpoint of our concern, the District 1 substation, as growth moves where it is now and that -- especially as it goes east, that the capabilities are there. The funding issue, we can stress from the standpoint of zoning. MS. WILLIAMS: Sure. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But to make sure the level of service is there to provide what's needed for the community as it moves eastward now where it's going to go in this county, and that's down 41 and east. MS. WILLIAMS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Let's see. Commissioner Schumacher. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Just a question for Sheriff's Office. MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: So on your staffing side, are you having -- with the number of beds decreasing per that report, staffing is acceptable within the jail, or are you finding a shortfall there, even with less beds being occupied? CHIEF MIDDLEBROOK: Chief Middlebrook again. We are sufficiently staffed. We have a robust HR program, recruitment, retention. Through the efforts of the manager and the commissioners, we are well funded. So we aren't having a staffing issue at all. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: And that kind of leads into this: So also with your road deputies, you're not having a staffing issue, especially with the growth we're kind of seeing out in that Golden Gate Estates. Would that be, like, District 2, I believe, or -- CHIEF MIDDLEBROOK: We are more than capable of handling the calls for service with our current staffing levels. It's always -- it's always an effort to continue to recruit quality individuals to come work for us. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: No. I know the deputies in my district are great, because I talk to them a lot when I see them at the 7-Eleven, but -- CHIEF MIDDLEBROOK: Always good to hear. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: -- in your other districts, you're not seeing any type of shortfall? Is there any other needed substations outside of the ones that were identified that you're looking at saying, this would a good area, given this growth, to have -- CHIEF MIDDLEBROOK: There are discussions about substations or sub substations as we go east. We continuously -- and this happens monthly -- review our calls for service, where the need is and what our staffing quantities are in those areas. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Perfect. Thank you, Chief. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So I guess, in summary, what I'm hearing is, we shouldn't be worried about the deficit right now. There's a lot of moving parts that -- trying to attack that, and we shouldn't be worried about it at this level this year? MR. BOSI: I would agree with that assessment, and I think the Sheriff's Office does a great job of, you know, reducing that jail population. As I showed by that individual chart, it has steadily declined. November 2, 2023 Page 20 of 48 But through coordination and conversation with all the different moving parts and the individuals, the factors -- so we will bring -- we'll bring that to a head and have future discussions with you. But the capacity is there for the next 12 -- the next 12 months before you see the 2024 AUIR. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Vice Chairman Schmitt? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. Since I've got the microphone, I want to publicly thank the Sheriff's Office, because I just returned from Los Angeles yesterday. I was out there. What a disaster. I mean, homeless areas, abandoned -- well, they're not abandoned, but campers on the side of the road where people are living. The people in this county will give you everything you need to prevent that from happening here. And if it -- if you don't get that, I would hope that you're standing on the desk of the County Manager, Amy, and the commissioners because, it's just -- it was just a disaster. MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you. And the Sheriff's Office focuses on the community. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The tents and other things. And once that starts, it just -- MS. WILLIAMS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's like a feeding frenzy. It's just camp after camp after camp. And, anyways, it was not fun out there. So thank you for making sure that doesn't happen here, and that's what the citizens want -- MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- that it doesn't happen here. MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you. And the Sheriff thank you as well. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Let's see. No one signaling at this time, so I'm going to ask a question. Now over on law enforcement facilities. MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: The LOSS is, excuse me, 0.9089 per capita, and that's square feet. Just, if you wouldn't mind telling me how that was calculated. MS. WILLIAMS: I'd have to defer to Mr. Bosi on that, sir. MR. BOSI: That is a level-of-service standard that we've had some modifications to in the past over the past four to five years. It was -- used to be officers per thousand. We've tied it now to officers, you know, per square foot, because what we provide for the Sheriff's Office is building and building capacity. So it's a more direct tie to the capital improvement programs that you are seeing. So that's been a -- that's been an evolving level-of-service standard. I think we've arrived upon the level-of-service square foot per capita for the last four years and that we think it serves it well, because it's directly tied to the capital that's associated with the programs that are contained within the AUIR. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. The Sheriff's Office has a facility in the 2300 block of Horseshoe. MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And this is -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: There's a forensic lab there. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. This facility, according to the material that I'm reading, has become a very dated and cramped facility. So I can see why you need a new facility for that. My question is, is, what's going to happen to that Horseshoe facility? MS. WILLIAMS: That's -- I would have to defer to the county's side on that, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. BOSI: And -- I was going to say, that's a facility management question, and I was looking back to see if Ed Finn or John McCormick -- I'm not sure if there's been -- I'm not sure what the level of discussion that's been -- MS. PATTERSON: The conversations are still ongoing about the use of that property once we have the forensic building completed and are able to relocate the Sheriff's operations. Potentially remaining in the county's inventory for relocation of staff out of the other leased space. The building does need some renovations; however, it's a good location close to both our transportation and our November 2, 2023 Page 21 of 48 community development campuses, and they are often space challenged. I do have a whole section in leased space right around the corner where we call West Horseshoe, stormwater, transportation planning, coastal zone are all there as well. So we'll look to potentially re-home somebody into that building as a county asset. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Sounds good. Thank you. I don't think I have -- oh, here's a question. The Collier County Sheriff's Office patrol district boundaries, I don't see District 7. Is there a District 7? MS. WILLIAMS: Not any longer, sir. District 7 became District 5 when we kind of restructured -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh. MS. WILLIAMS: -- District 3, and District 5 now moved further west, and that district lives in a leased space, so that's why it's on the AUIR for future county-owned space. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. What about District 6? MS. WILLIAMS: Oh, that used to be Marco years ago. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, okay. MS. WILLIAMS: That no longer exists. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Now they police themselves? MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Got it. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have for law enforcement or jails. Does anyone else have anything for the Sheriff's Office? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, thank you very much, sir, for being here. MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you for your time. Thank you, everyone. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Shall we loop back now to staff report? I think most of my questions have already been answered, and the records that I want to make have been made. Let me just be sure. The numbers in the staff report show that there's more construction going on despite the slower rate of increase in growth. And as Mr. Bosi and his colleague explained to me on Tuesday, this is not being built for the present, but it is in anticipation of an inevitable increase in growth. So we're just trying to keep up with things. MR. BOSI: And as we discussed, what Commissioner Fryer was referring to is the average -- the 28,000 people we expected over the five years, but the population increase we have from a year-to-year basis is about -- you know, about 5,800 people. That would translate to about 3,000 individual dwelling units needed to -- assuming that they all moved into a new dwelling unit. But the amount of COs that have been issued for multifamily and single-family dwelling units exceeds that number, so there's a surplus being provided for. That's a positive thing. As we've described on almost every one of our petitions that have affordable housing, there's a tremendous imbalance between demand and supply, and that's a response from the private development community. So the more units that we can put out of the -- we can grow out of the ground, make available, can have a positive effect upon that supply and demand imbalance and has, hopefully, a positive effect upon, you know, the prices that could be commanded from a rental standpoint and the overall cost of homeownership. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. My next question has to do with schools. And this, I think, was another example of streamlining; some language was taken out from the previous year. But I just wanted to make a record of it in case anyone else noticed it. But there was a reference last year to quote, as well as a future school addition in Fiscal Year '25/'26. That was deleted. But it's my understanding that the project wasn't deleted. It's just -- it's no longer in the narrative, but that's still going forward. November 2, 2023 Page 22 of 48 MS. LOCKHART: We have actually two schools in our five-year plan, two elementary schools. We had an addition at Immokalee High School, and we also had plans for an addition at Palmetto Ridge High School. That will bring us to meeting our level of service within the next five years, so we're good. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. I don't have anything further on the staff report. I'm ready to go to roads and bridges unless someone else -- if not, let's turn to roads and bridges. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Do we want to take our break now before we -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, good idea. Thank you, Vice Chairman. We will be in recess for 10 minutes until 10:34, please. (A brief recess was had from 10:24 a.m. to 10:34 a.m.) MR. BOSI: Chair, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Mr. Bosi. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: I'm here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Noted. Commissioner Schumacher, I noticed some kind of flashing on your device. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: It's my dummy light on my phone when it rings. It flashing. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, okay. That's what it was. All right. I was hoping that it wasn't a timer that connected to something that might hurt me. Okay. Thank you. All right. Roads and bridges. Did you want to say anything further on this, or we can go right to -- oh, would you -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Lorraine is here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. May we hear from you? Do you want to say anything? MS. LANTZ: Sure. I do have a presentation if you'd like it, or if you wanted to ask questions. I did recognize -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Tell us your name, and then -- MS. LANTZ: Oh, I apologize. Lorraine Lantz, Transportation Planning. Transportation Planning manager. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Why don't we start with, like, hitting the very highest points, and then we'll see if we can flesh out any questions rather than going through the whole presentation; is that possible? MS. LANTZ: Sure. CHAIRMAN FRYER: That would be great. Please do that. MS. LANTZ: Okay. So the high points -- and I will just -- I'll skip through and just show you some of the high points of our plan, because I did receive some questions regarding some of the projects that we are specifically working on. Our level-of-service requirements are D or E for our roads. We are currently moving towards projects to alleviate those deficiencies. Some of the -- or some of the deficiencies as you noticed in some of our attachments are in the eastern area of Collier County. And so to alleviate that, we have several bridge projects that are moving forward. These were funded through surtax referendum, and there are five moving forward. They are all working on their own design and project specifics. But they're from Wilson Boulevard South, 10th Avenue Southeast, 67th -- or 62nd, 13th, and 47th. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Could you say a word about how the bridges will help us in relation to getting over canals? MS. LANTZ: So these bridges were a part of a 2008 study for the east of Collier County -- East of Collier Boulevard Horizon Study to look at efficiencies and interconnections for the area, for fire, EMS, first responders. And these were the recommended projects that moved forward. So these are not to connect cul-de-sacs. These are to connect roads over canals for additional access so that someone November 2, 2023 Page 23 of 48 who's there is not trapped by only getting into their homes one way. They can have a different -- an additional option. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. I will -- and no one's signaling, so I'm going to make a comment or two here, if I can. I think -- I think this county does as much as it possibly can to facilitate the improvement of roads and villages [sic] given the obvious financial limitations that we have and also given the various laws that get changed in Tallahassee, which complicates it somewhat, in particularly how we look at deficiencies and what we can do, when we can do it, and what we can't do when deficiencies are on the horizon. And in those terms, our level-of-service standard, as was mentioned, is either D or E, pretty much, and that's a pretty low bar, which is unfortunate. But given our financing and the other constraints that I mentioned, it's really the best we can do. At some point in the future, maybe we need to strive for somehow doing more or doing better, but it's going to take more money, and that's where the rubber meets the road. Also, I notice the work program for '24-'28 is 742 -- 742 million and some change. Last year it was 538-. So, I mean, again, that's -- that's trending well for us. Unfortunately, on the backside, it makes it more, you know, challenging for us to say, well, now where is this extra money coming from? But I'm glad that at least we're planning to spend more on our roads and bridges because, indeed, that's going to be necessary. And as I mentioned earlier, when we make our recommendation, and assuming it's to approve, I'm hopeful that we can add a tagline to our vote that indicates the importance of forward planning because, while in the near-term years we're going to do okay, when you get out to years 4 and 5 and then beyond, if you look at the 10-year, it's going to get to be a real challenge, and it takes some serious forward planning now so that we're not surprised and caught back on our heels. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes. Go ahead, Mr. Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Just when there's a chance, I'd like to ask some questions. CHAIRMAN FRYER: This would be a good time, sir. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. So if you could help me out, just to -- Packet Page 16 and Packet Page 141, are those the same? It's 9A1B and 9A1C. I think they're the same chart. It's the '24-'28 plan. Is there any difference between them? I'm just asking because I don't want to miss something. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Let's get staff to respond to that. MR. BOSI: Yes. Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director. Yes, they are the -- earlier in the report is from the Transportation section. That's their program of five-year improvements, and then on the back side is the CIE submittal, which is a mimic of those plan -- five-year projects within the five-year plan, but they are codified within the CIE proposal amendment, which is the first five years, which is associated with the Exhibit A of the CIE. So, yes, they are. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. And then how does that relate to Page 41, which is Attachment D, the work program? It seems like it's virtually the same thing but shown a different way as far as the work that's planned. MR. BOSI: They are. They are. D is a little more -- a little more specificity in terms of the work plan as to some of the underlying components of why they're being proposed, but they're essentially the same projects. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And then can you explain for me what A versus C is in the schedule notes where the -- it's the -- and, particularly, I'm looking at 60144, which is the widening of Oil Well between Everglades and Oil Well Grade Road. And I'm just trying to understand the distinction. There's -- so what does the A on that line stand for? MS. LANTZ: Sorry. I wasn't -- November 2, 2023 Page 24 of 48 COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Line 60144, 60144, it's Oil Well being widened from between Everglades and Oil Well Grade Road. MS. LANTZ: So we have -- the A in our -- oh, sorry. Lorraine Lantz, Transportation Planning. The A is an annotated advanced construction. So this is where we put money aside where we know the construction is coming, and we save money for that project in advance. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. So -- great, great. Okay. That's what I was hoping. And then C is the -- MS. LANTZ: For actual construction. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Construction. Okay. So the 4,900 -- 4.9 million, I guess, is getting -- doing -- spending the money to get ready to do what you're going to do in Fiscal Year '27? Is that -- or are you actually doing improvements in that 4.9 million? MS. LANTZ: The 4.9 is for the advanced construction, so it's putting it into the savings account. In Fiscal Year '27, it's to start construction, so that's the beginning of the procurement phase and to start the construction. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. So there's $4.9 million in expenditures and getting ready in 2024 for what you're going to do in 2027, or putting the money aside? MS. LANTZ: It's to put the money aside to basically hold it so that we have the money in place when we want to move forward with the construction. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Got it. Okay. And then if I can go to -- gosh, it's -- Attachment C shows the -- it's in red. It shows the traffic volumes for 2022. Is that -- is that -- that's showing the increases or decreases in traffic for Calendar Year 2022, Packet Page 40? MS. LANTZ: Yes. So the Attachment C is to show the increases. The increases are in red. The decreases are in green, and then those that are basic -- stayed relatively the same are in black. So the wider or the thicker the line, the more of an increase. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. And what would you attribute -- so on Randall Road -- Randall Boulevard you've got 20 percent decrease between Everglades and DeSoto. What -- you know, are you -- you know, can you opine as to what it is that caused that decrease? MS. LANTZ: So it's year over year, so we're looking at the same times that we took traffic counts for the prior AUIR. This particular segment, there could have been additional -- people are distributing. They're moving forward with other areas or other access points, maybe using Oil Well, maybe going out Oil Well to 29. That seemed to have increased. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And some of that might have been -- am I right, some of that could have been because there was some congestion there because the improvements were causing traffic to go in a different direction? Is that sometimes what could cause a decrease in traffic? MS. LANTZ: Yes. So obviously people look at what works best for them, and they may find a more efficient way to get to their destination. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Great. And then one last question -- I really appreciate you indulging me. These are very particularized questions to the community that always asks me a ton of questions out in Ave Maria. So then I look at Attachment H1 at -- I'm not sure what packet page that is. I think it might be Packet Page 50. I'm not sure. But it's another map, and it has orange and black and yellow lines. Do you know which one I'm talking about? Attachment H1, projected Collier County deficiency roads. MS. LANTZ: Yes, I have it. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. So on that, if you can help me, so the black -- if you're looking at the legend, does it go from biggest concern down to lower concern as you go black, red, orange, yellow? MS. LANTZ: Yes. So the black tends to be the projects that were deficient in prior years, and they're remaining deficient. So we are -- and then those are the ones in which we are actively working towards our program to alleviate that deficiency. November 2, 2023 Page 25 of 48 COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. And so what I highlighted earlier with that one budget line item for Oil Well between Everglades and DeSoto, that project is part of that black line that goes Oil Well, Everglades, Vanderbilt. That's all a capacity enhancement project kind of together is designed to take the burden off the -- those -- the congestion there? That's what that one big black line is? It's all the improvements that are slated that are already in the pipeline and they're on our chart; is that correct? MS. LANTZ: Yes. Those projects on Oil Well are moving forward through our work program. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. And has anything changed? It seems like those have already been in the pipeline. Has that pretty much remained, you know, the same plan that they've had for the last couple years? MS. LANTZ: So the Oil Well Road project, specifically in that area, was a component of the Ave Maria development. And as soon as certain -- they had to pay impact fees. And as those impact fees were collected, we were moving forward with the design -- well, with analysis, design, and construction. We're still collecting those impact fees. They're not at -- I believe they had to be at a $20 million mark before we would start construction. We are now anticipating when they will reach that $20 million mark, and that's why we're moving forward with programming the construction of that project. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. And when you say '27, are we talking the beginning of '27 or the end of '27, or you don't really know? MS. LANTZ: So our fiscal year starts in October, so that's what this is demonstrating, the fiscal year. The actual project might not start at the beginning of the fiscal year, but we're anticipating it to start during that fiscal year. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Right, which means -- and the fiscal year would end in September of '27. So by the end of '27, we certainly should all be seeing the progress there starting? MS. LANTZ: You might not see a bulldozer on the road. There might be more internal where we have to hire the consultant, make sure the contracts are in order. But, yes, that's the intent is for it to anticipate start. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. Thank you so much. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Commissioner. Anybody have anything further on roads and bridges? COMMISSIONER SHEA: I have. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go right ahead. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Trinity did a presentation last night that -- I thought was very helpful in terms of some of the -- like, 75 intersections, the plans for the flyovers, the diverging diamonds. It was pretty brief. But this is so high level. I don't know if the average one of us can put our -- really understand it. I don't know, is that part of the presentation you had similar to what she did last night? MS. LANTZ: I don't know specifically what she presented last night. I did have a presentation of the projects that we were moving forward with. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Because you're not talking about the state-funded projects, which are some of our more difficult areas, like the intersections of Immokalee and 75, Pine Ridge and 75, and there's some big plans in those areas in the next five years, and I'm guessing we don't see them in here because they're not our projects; they're the state's. But they're hugely impactful to our transportation. MS. LANTZ: So the correct answer is those are the FDOT projects. A lot were the Moving Florida Forward projects that I believe she may have presented. I did not include those in my presentation. But Moving Florida Forward did fund I-75 at Pine Ridge as a diverging diamond interchange. They also funded State Road 29 out in the Immokalee area for 29 to 82, as well as the New Market Road, what was originally called the Loop Road. That -- those two segments. That was Moving Florida Forward. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Schumacher. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Good morning. A couple questions. So looking at Attachment H1, when we look at Vanderbilt, especially from Logan to Airport-Pulling, those -- remaining November 2, 2023 Page 26 of 48 capacity is 226 from Airport to Livingston, and then 204 from Livingston to Logan. Those obviously did not take into account the Ascend Naples project which had a trip count of an additional 100 cars or 106 cars, I believe. So that would obviously reduce the capacity on those numbers there, correct? MS. LANTZ: So our AUIR takes the numbers into account that are the -- we take traffic counts, specific traffic counts at four points a year, as well as anything that's come in for a Site Development Plan and that has been banked, those trips. I'm sorry. Attachment H is now on your screen. Sorry about that. So those -- that's what's taken into consideration. If they have come in for their site -- their zoning and approvals but have not come in with a Site Development Plan, those trips are at trip cap, and they have a development order where they can move forward to a Site Development Plan and development review, but we do not necessarily show those as a -- as a banked trip on the system until they come in for an approved Site Development Plan. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Thank you. The Oil Well connection to Vanderbilt, are those -- does that include -- does the trip cap include that expansion as well, or is that something that isn't taken into account until the road's actually completed? MS. LANTZ: So the -- I'm not sure I understand your question exactly. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Like, you have 204 remaining for capacity for Livingston to Logan on Vanderbilt. Does that include the completion of the Oil Well connection to Vanderbilt? Is that traffic counted in the capacity? MS. LANTZ: So the traffic count is the actual counts. So what's out there today, not Vanderbilt Beach Road extension that we anticipate is coming in. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Okay. MS. LANTZ: And what that traffic would be anticipated, we don't -- COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: You don't know until you do a count after it's done. MS. LANTZ: Correct. It's actuals. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: All right. On each one where these areas are -- an enhancement project is scheduled, how do you do a capacity expansion on that? MS. LANTZ: So some projects are -- we're widening the road. So some facilities are being widened. Some facilities are -- it might be easier if I go through, but which -- COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Like, for example, that -- obviously, the Oil Well is in black to Vanderbilt, the Vanderbilt Road extension, so that's obviously under schedule. If you look at existing deficiencies that I had kind of talked about from that Airport to Logan, if you've projected a deficiency -- I'm sorry; correct myself. How would you expand that road that's already built out? It's obvious that we're approaching capacity on that road if you take into account the Ascend that's already been complete is now going to go in for a Site Development Plan shortly, and there's another apartment complex that's going to push another 100 vehicles per their traffic count onto that road. So we're now above capacity, I guess, with those communities with the 200 -- 226 remaining. MS. LANTZ: So what we're going to -- we are -- in that specific area, I believe you're in a TCMA or TCEA area so that we understand that they may go over capacity, and there's additional activities that we can do, we're going to recommend. We acknowledge the deficiency, and we will continue to monitor and assess it; however, we would look for other strategies of transportation demand management such as carpooling, using the bus transit. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Because there is no bus transit on that road now, correct? MS. LANTZ: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Vanderbilt. Okay. That's all I have. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. No one else is signaling. I've got just a couple of questions. No, disregard that; I don't. I have questions coming up in November 2, 2023 Page 27 of 48 stormwater. Anything further on roads and bridges? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, then we will turn to stormwater. Are there questions remaining on this? We've already talked about it a little bit, but -- I think I'll start off with a question. I looked at the Attachment C of the 2022 AUIR, and it referenced a Table 2, which was captioned "current canal system inventory," and that table is not included in the 2023 AUIR. So my question is: Why not? MR. ROMAN: For the record, Dan Roman, stormwater project manager, supervisor. The one that you are referring to is the major structures. CHAIRMAN FRYER: It was called "current canal system inventory," Table 2, and so that's not a part of the 2023 AUIR. MR. ROMAN: So this is the current system inventory for the major stormwater that we have. Maybe it was mislabeled, and probably this is the one that previously was referred to when the question was who maintains it "by others." CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. ROMAN: So the majority of -- when it says "by others" is FDOT, Alligator Alley, 41, and private stormwater systems. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. So the material that was in Table 2 is now reflected in a different image, and that was part of our material, I take it? MR. ROMAN: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. What about -- same question with respect to Table 4, and that was -- last year was labeled "current control structure inventory," and that table is also gone. MR. ROMAN: This is Figure 2. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Say again. MR. ROMAN: It's Figure 2, stormwater control structures. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, it's called Figure 2 rather than Table 4. MR. ROMAN: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. Thank you. Then the recommended revenues for '24 through '28 are 37 million, 637. Now, that number was 84 million last year. Could you -- could you comment on why the reduction? MR. ROMAN: Some projects move further away, and given that stormwater is not an enterprise fund, we have to just basically plan with a budget that it's given to us from the General Fund. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Anyone else have comments on this section, stormwater? If not, it would seem that we are concluded with that. Oh, go ahead, Vice Chairman. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Are you responsible or can you give me a status, what's going on with the project that was started several years ago for the restoring of the Belle Meade flowway? There were monies that the county received. I think it was part of the settlement in the gulf for the oil spill, and there was some -- there was a project for restoration of flow through the Belle Meade and then down. MR. ROMAN: Yeah, it's called the Restore project. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. ROMAN: So the county was moving forward with a selection committee to award that design, but now we're just reevaluating the scope as there has been a lot of development in that area. We just need to go back to the study and reevaluate the scope to make sure that what we're proposing, it's in accordance with the current development in that area. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. And then there was -- there's work that's already being done by South Florida Water Management District over restoration of the flowways, and that's going out the East Trail. There was additional pipes and other activity being sponsored, of course, by the Water Management District. I would hope that's being integrated with your plans and the work that's being done in that part of the county. November 2, 2023 Page 28 of 48 MR. ROMAN: The Picayune project that they have, it's not part of the restore. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, I understand that. But it is still some work that the district is doing. MR. ROMAN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That -- MR. ROMAN: But what I'm referring to is the water that we're planning on capturing -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. ROMAN: -- is not going to be basically the -- on the area of the Picayune Strand because they have certain capacity. They have some habitats there that are sensitive. So we are not planning on -- the water that's going to go from -- go down from Restore is not going to be part of that Picayune. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. I mean, I just look at that as another source of revenue that's still available to the county. I don't know, Amy, were you going to talk about that? I saw you get up. Captured you again. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Stay close. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You're not going back to the office. MS. PATTERSON: Amy Patterson, again, for the record. No, I was just going to provide you clarification on last year's revenue why that number was higher. It still contained a debt component, so that was that remnant of the $60 million that the Board provided in debt funding, how we were continuing to spend that down. It will be gone for this year. So that number came down because of it -- not because of the Board allocating less dollars, but rather that piece now being spent all the way. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. MS. PATTERSON: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Anything further on stormwater? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, potable water is the subject. And no one is signaling. I don't think I have any questions or comments. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I have one. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Do you? COMMISSIONER SHEA: They're not going to do a presentation? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, if you want them to. COMMISSIONER SHEA: No, I don't. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Actually, I do have a question or two here. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: My only concern is the level of service again. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. Well -- and that's pervasive. That goes through all this stuff. Yes, sir. MR. STOLTZ: Anthony Stoltz, Collier County Public Utilities Planning. The 2023 potable water and wastewater AUIR demonstrates that Collier County Water/Sewer District is in compliance with the concurrency requirements found in Florida Statutes, Section 163, the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Code, and we are here to answer any questions you may have. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Go ahead, Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So it looks like a lot of your projections are all population based, so the treatment process is still population based. But there's a lot of changes coming out, like the PFASs and things like that. Do you envision having to do any upgrade in quality that won't really increase the capacity of the facility, but it will increase the level of treatment? I didn't see any of that in there. And I guess my question is, do we have PFASs in our water? And it would be the same question for wastewater since they go together. MR. McLEAN: Yeah, very good question. COMMISSIONER SHEA: And the sludge that comes out of the treatment plant, so... MR. McLEAN: Matt McLean, division director for Engineering and Project Management. November 2, 2023 Page 29 of 48 PFAS and other chemicals are definitely hot on the topic list around within the overall industry. Currently, right now, our water systems are clean. We don't have any issues relative to that. We are looking, as we do our plant expansions, to go into membrane treatment processes at the wastewater plants, which will position us to be able to handle future PFAS regulations as they may come down the pipeline for us. So we're positioning ourselves to be prepared for that. Currently, it is not under our regulation, but it's under study to add regulations soon. COMMISSIONER SHEA: There will be regulations, but most of our water is groundwater, which shouldn't have PFASs in it. MR. McLEAN: That's correct. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So you don't have any concern with any upcoming regulations, and our level of treatment will stay probably -- you're projecting it will be similar, but you just need additional capacity as the population grows? MR. McLEAN: Treatment processes will definitely continue to change with those types of additional regulations as they come forward. That's why we are moving towards more of a membrane treatment process on the wastewater side as we do future expansion projects. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Are we finding more brackish water and saltwater intrusion so that we might have to upgrade our water plants to handle the salt? MR. McLEAN: Very interesting. Within our potable water systems, we utilize multiple different aquifer sources, freshwater sources, Tamiami aquifers, as well as brackish water sources with the Upper and Lower Hawthorn. So right now, today, we are actively utilizing brackish water within our potable treatment processes. We currently continue to be regulated by the Water Management District when it comes to water use permitting, and additional wells, as they come online, will continue to be a mix and blend of both freshwater and brackish water sources. COMMISSIONER SHEA: And long range, we're not -- we see enough capacity in the aquifers -- I know we're going to add some wells, but we see enough capacity in the aquifers, not just in our ability to pull the water out? MR. McLEAN: We do. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I have a question with respect to the table. Again, comparing last year's report to this year's. This is the eight-column table; it's on Page 56 of what I'm using. And Column 1 is labeled "Fiscal Year" and Column 8 is labeled "Percent of Total Permitted Capacity." Last year, it went from 2018 to 2032, and the peak last year was in 2027, where we hit 77 percent. Then in this year, the peak has moved to 2032 where we're going to hit 87 percent, but then we're going to come way down the following year to 75 percent. Could you comment on that? MR. McLEAN: Yes. When it goes back down -- I think you're on Packet Page 79. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Could be. MR. McLEAN: The continued increases relevant to that are reflective of when we have plant expansion. So as plant expansions come online, then we have a larger percentage of total permitted capacity there. I believe that's the table that you're on. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. So it's a just timing of -- MR. McLEAN: Timing of plant expansions and when they come online. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. Excuse me, how does the county assess the presence and adequacy of untapped aquifers? I mean, is that a science? Divining rod perhaps or -- MR. McLEAN: It is. It's a science, and we have experts in the -- in the industry that we hire as consultants to continue to work through the geotechnical aquifer availability of water sources, and it's highly regulated by the Water Management District through water use permitting. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. And I'm ready to move on to wastewater. Anyone else have anything on potable water? November 2, 2023 Page 30 of 48 (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, wastewater. Let's say what I have here. This may be a County Manager question. It first comes to my attention here, but it is in other materials. I simply had not observed in previous years how much debt we had, either bonded indebtedness, commercial paper, and the like. Not that there's anything wrong with that. It's just that I hadn't -- I wasn't aware of what a significant part of our budget that played. I would like for someone to comment on the prospects of continued reliance on debit, particularly as interest rates are going up. MR. BELLONE: For the record, Joe Bellone. I'm the utilities finance director. We, as an enterprise fund, have two very limited income sources. They're either user fees or impact fees. We do have some existing user fee debt service covered by user fee rates, and we've got some leftover expansion, which are covered by impact fees. We do those rate studies regularly every three years because we're responsible for ensuring that we have adequate funding to do that. We are going to rely on additional debt for these expansions that are in the program. Timing of those, again, will depend on the demand but we, as a utility, don't walk alone. We usually work together very closely with the Finance Committee, the county's financial advisors, to develop debt strategies for the utility to ensure that we get the best rates that we can. We are AAA rated, so that does ensure that we have -- we are borrowing at the lowest rates possible. General Fund is as well, but the utility is AAA rated. So, yes, we will rely on that, and we will look at -- we will rely on all of our financial professionals within the county and externally that we use to assemble the best packages that we can. CHAIRMAN FRYER: There's nothing at all wrong with using debt to finance operations. In fact, it's very wise, particularly when rates are low. I guess my question, I'm hopeful that now rates are rising and, again, with our very high credit rating, do we have some nice rates locked in? MR. BELLONE: We have refunded several of our previous bonds. And, again, thanks to the support from the Finance Committee and our external county's financial consultants, we have refinanced several bonds at more favorable rates. We continue to review those constantly to ensure that we're not -- we're not paying more than we need to be paying. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. BELLONE: Sure. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. BELLONE: Sure. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Let's see. Anyone else have any questions on wastewater before we move to solid waste? If not, solid waste it is. And I was interested to learn about how solid waste disposition can now occur in ways to take it above ground level to form berms or hills in this otherwise flat part of the world. But maybe a word or two about the aesthetics of that would be -- because it sounds like it's a great way to increase our capacity, and our capacity is well within what we would want. But are we going to see more hills and berms and -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Same ones, just higher. CHAIRMAN FRYER: The same ones, just higher? Could you say a word or two about that? MS. HODGSON: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, Kari Hodgson, your director for Solid Waste. As Mike has alluded to, with the success of county planning, that being able to expand your existing assets and infrastructure to maximum the benefits to the county residents, the landfill is a great example where, in 2011, the permitted elevation of the landfill was around 108 elevation above ground, and the Board of County Commissioners approved the landfill to apply for a permit to raise that elevation which is, in turn, what gave it an additional 20, 30 years of capacity. Landfills are a very sophisticated engineered design like any other utility and has liner systems in place as well as 4-1 slopes that are then maintained with grass, so they look like hills, essentially, with benches on them for stormwater control. They have all the assets that must be controlled with any other November 2, 2023 Page 31 of 48 type of building construction. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Are any of them designed to be, like, plateaus where you could -- you could build improvements on top of them? MS. HODGSON: Absolutely. There are a few landfills in Florida specifically that have assets that have been built on top of them. More recently, Orange County is looking to put a surfing facility on top of an old landfill. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just -- we built a golf course on West Palm on top of the landfill. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Interesting. Okay. Anybody else have questions on the subject of solid waste? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, we're moving right along, everyone. MS. HODGSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. The next subject is Collier Schools Capital Improvement Element. I must admit, I don't dig as deeply into this as I do the other because, I mean, well, we've got Amy here. And as the expert, and I -- and I'm confident that if we're short-changing the school in any way, that she would -- she'd let us know immediately; is that fair, Ms. Lockhart? MS. LOCKHART: That's fair, and it's covered in the packet, our capital improvements that we plan on putting in place in the next five years. As I had said before, two elementary schools are within our five-year plan, and across the district we meet our level of service at each of our schools. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Vice Chairman Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I just want to point out, oftentimes we have the public come in. If it's not the environment that they talk about, it's the impact on schools. I trust that the county -- the school board, which, of course, is a separate constitutional entity, and I commend the school board, as they always had done in past years, the county staff, coordinating with the school board staff, to ensure that the capacity was there. And if it wasn't there, we, again, need to know that from a voting standpoint that we don't approve projects that exceed the capacity. And I think we're -- we're well on track for making sure that there's desks available. Now, with that said, do you also impact -- or do you also analyze the charter schools and all the other types of programs that are taking place as well? Because, again, that's -- usually the mantra we hear is the impact in schools and overloading of the schools, but it's not happening? MS. LOCKHART: It's not happening. There are a few schools -- and that's why we're going to be building new elementary schools -- that have some overcrowding issues, namely the Estates and Laurel Oak Elementary School. Corkscrew Elementary is also getting close. So we monitor all of that. The charter schools, to answer your question, we do not -- have not expended capital funds on charter schools. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Correct. MS. LOCKHART: That is not part of the capital plan. There is a flow-through now of capital dollars that's available now to charter schools, but that just flows through the district to the charter schools themselves. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. But you do monitor schools -- MS. LOCKHART: We do monitor -- we do monitor their enrollment. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Population, enrollment. MS. LOCKHART: Yes, we do. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Good. Thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Are we ready to move on to Parks and Recreation? It seems like we are. MS. EDWARDS: Good morning, Olema Edwards, Parks and Recreation director. With our AUIR, the most notable changes that we have is that we're going to have a deficit in our community parkland resources by Fiscal Year 5. To correct this issue, we are currently in negotiations November 2, 2023 Page 32 of 48 with the Williams Farm property to try to acquire land. We are good for our regional parkland acquisition. We're fine. We don't have any deficits, but I'm here to answer any other questions that you may have. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. You've got a surplus, right? MS. EDWARDS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, that's a nice position to be in, I must say. MS. EDWARDS: Only for regional parks right now. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, yeah. MS. EDWARDS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go ahead, Vice Chair. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The Golden Gate Golf Course, will that now fall under Parks and Rec? Will that be managed -- I don't mean daily operations, but will that become a public facility? Is that the plan for that? MS. EDWARDS: Currently, they have -- currently, there are different uses for the golf course. We're using it right now as a passive park. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Right. MS. EDWARDS: We do have it, but I think they are planning on building a veterans nursing home on top of this land and stuff, so it would be divided out as it goes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But the remaining 14 holes or whatever, will that now be managed under the Collier County Parks? MS. EDWARDS: As of right now, yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Are there -- I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But, I mean -- MS. EDWARDS: Going forward -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Are you budgeting forward? Because, you know, to run a golf course -- MS. EDWARDS: Right. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- it's a million, a million and a half dollars a year, and that's on the cheap. Maintenance, you know -- MS. EDWARDS: I'm going to defer to -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- treatment, all the other things associated with it. So I just want to make sure that these numbers are taken into account, the potential impact of bringing that on board. MS. WILLIAMS: Yeah. And actually, the County Manager is standing behind me. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Say your name for us, please. MS. WILLIAMS: For the record, Tanya Williams, Public Services Department Head. Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MS. WILLIAMS: County Manager is standing behind me, and she can talk more specifically about the Golden Gate Golf Course facility because it will turn into a multiuse facility. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yep. MS. WILLIAMS: Parks will maintain a certain portion of that, but I'll let her explain how that's going to be sectioned out. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. MS. PATTERSON: Hello. Amy Patterson, again, for the record. When we finalize plans for the portion of this property that will remain as a golf course, there have been a couple of different schools of thought. Originally, you may recall that there was a proposal for a BigShots facility similar to a Topgolf. That was also going to include them operating the 12-hole golf course built by the county. Since BigShots has left and we've reconfigured the placement of various buildings on the November 2, 2023 Page 33 of 48 property, we're now openly exploring how we're going to place the 9- to 12-hole golf course on the property with the move of the veterans nursing home. It is not the intent of the county to run the golf course ourselves. There will be an operator that will do that. It's wholly outside our wheelhouse to operate a golf course, but it will remain as part of the Parks' inventory. So we'll own it, and we will hire someone to operate it. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All right. Question answered. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. Commissioner Schumacher. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Good morning. I'm trying to see, is there any indication of improvements to current parks in this report that's filed? MS. EDWARDS: No, sir, not right now. No, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: No? Is there any improvements planned for Veterans Community Park? MS. EDWARDS: We do have some improvements. It's minor. But not anything major as capital-related projects. We're looking at lighting right now, but that's about it. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: That's about it? There's no talk for baseball fields being redone or -- MS. EDWARDS: No. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: That's been an ongoing conversation for a decade. That I can tell you. And I apologize. I don't want to sound gruff here, but, frankly, my point of view is if you carry "veterans" on the name of a park, it should probably be the best-looking park in the county. MS. EDWARDS: Understood. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: And, quite frankly, the only thing that's "best looking" over there is the pickleball courts. MS. EDWARDS: I understand. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: The rest of the park is -- the fences have fallen down. We had fences that were falling off dugouts that had to be replaced. We've had a number of challenges out there at that field. The stormwater does not drain, and it's something as simple as the crushed PVC pipes on the west end of it that have fallen in, which caused it to flood out, and then we just recently had a four-day irrigation leak that has now resulted in, like, 200 or 300 feet of asphalt being ripped out that's wide open and getting fixed right now. MS. EDWARDS: Right. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: So -- MS. EDWARDS: Well, going forward, we will do what we can. We have a lot of life/health/safety issues at all of our parks that we're taking, so we are prioritizing what we can do, as I said, right now. Currently, we're working on lights for Veterans, but I will take your comments and note it, and we will work on a plan to get that corrected. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. No one else is signaling at this point, so I think we're ready to move on. Thank you so much. MS. EDWARDS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I believe the next subject area is going to be Category A facilities under the CIE, and I think most of this is in the nature of summarizing what we've already seen. Mr. Bosi, did you want to tee it off? MR. BOSI: No. I was just going to say, what you have within your CIE is you've got your Exhibit A and your Exhibit H. Exhibit A are your five-year plans, which are all summarized within your sections within the -- within the Category A components of the AUIR, and then H is your 6 through 10. Those are the future projects that are anticipated from each of your Concurrency Management Systems. But there are -- there are subjects that you guys have been discussing previously. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Sure. I have a question. This is on Exhibit A under roads and bridges. There is a -- on the revenue side we show three line items that begin with the word "transfer." Could you November 2, 2023 Page 34 of 48 tell me where those are transfers from? MR. BOSI: I'd have to turn to Transportation Planning for that. But is this the Attachment A you're referring to? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Exhibit A, then the first one, which is roads and bridges, yeah. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Packet Page 140. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah, thank you, because my pages don't jibe. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: From your IRA, I think. CHAIRMAN FRYER: What? Oh. Thanks. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: There's no "from." There's only "to." MS. LANTZ: Lorraine Lantz, Transportation Planning. While Mike is getting it up, I believe there was a transfer from 112, which was some landscaping that was transferred into a road project, as well as there was some transfer to be consistent with budget guidance. And so that was previously known, I believe, as a different fund. It was maybe 310 fund, and now it's moved into a different fund number, and so that was the transfer. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Okay. Then there -- about two or three lines down there's a line that says "unfunded needs," 295 million. No, that's not what I want to talk about. I want to talk about the line immediately above that that says carryforward, 313 to 310, impact fees. Could you explain the carryforward? I didn't realize that we sometimes ended up with more impact fees than we needed. MS. LANTZ: So I believe that some of that carryforward funding is -- I'm sorry -- 55 million. All right. So it's funding that we had started to collect and, moving forward, so that when we get to actually doing the project, the funding is available -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh. MS. LANTZ: -- to be spent. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh. So, I mean, you've got it banked, so to speak. MS. LANTZ: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. No one else is signaling at this time. And -- oh, I know. Exhibit A, again, this is under roads and bridge projects, and this is the project-by-project number. You know, 60,212, numbers like that. My request for next year would be that you also include the segment number that ties back to Attachment F. MS. LANTZ: On this graphic or -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. I'm looking at the Exhibit A collector roads and bridges projects, and it lists the projects and their amounts to be expended up to Fiscal Year 2028, and it appears that these addresses are going to also be occupying space on segments, and it would just be nice for me, because I try to follow the segments from the standpoint of what's aiming toward deficiency, if we could see a segment number as well next year. MR. BOSI: And we can attempt to do that. This is a CIE. The CIE has a specific format the state would like -- that we present to the state. We tied that -- we tie those projects back within the component of the transportation section in a more visual and connected way. Within the CIE, we don't have that level of specificity. We can look into it to try to see in terms of the segments that are going to be impacted. But for what the state wants to see, the state wants to just see, what are your capital projects, where are the funding sources, and then what are the revenue sources associated with that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. I understand, then, why we're where we are. And if it is too much work that would need to be put in to do that, then don't do it. But it would just be helpful for those of us who follow these segments and know numbers by heart like, well, 44, would be interested to be able to match them up with these projects. But, you know, if you can, do; if you can't, I get it. Let's see. Does anybody have anything on the CIA schedule -- CIE Schedule A numbers? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, then, let's see. I think we've already talked sufficiently about jail and correctional and law enforcement, and libraries, also, I think we've talked -- unless anybody wants to say something more about libraries. November 2, 2023 Page 35 of 48 MR. BOSI: And, Chair, on the screen, I've got the summary page up. There are no proposed -- we have sufficient inventory to satisfy the additional demand that's provided with some surplus of 4,358 square feet associated with that. So there are no improved programs. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Good, good. And I think -- I expect that the time will come when we'll be able to subtract some square feet from what is needed for libraries, thanks to technology and the kinds of things that are being checked out of the library and how they're being checked out. MR. BOSI: And that's an ongoing conversation the library staff is having with the Board of County Commissioners in terms of the changing utilization of the library space and the value that's associated with it in terms of where we see the library utilization for the general public purpose of going in relationship to the content, the amount that we have for the physical books to the electronic books that are more and more popular. So it's a constantly evolving process, and it's one of the things that we're going to continue to talk with the Board of County Commissioners and the Planning Commission about that, our level of service for libraries and how they're utilized on a changing basis. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. My next subject is EMS, and I believe the County Manager will lead us through this. And I have a few questions, although so many of them are really age-old questions and age-old problems. County Manager. MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, Amy Patterson, again, for the record. If we want to start with your questions, that may lead into -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. MS. PATTERSON: -- more insight on some things that are changing in EMS. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Good. Good. I have a few. And no one else is signaling, so I'll lead with mine. MS. PATTERSON: Sure. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And, again, a lot of these questions there is no good answer to because, like everything else, it depends upon the availability of funds and money. And as everyone knows, EMS has historically needed to borrow from the general operating accounts in order to provide the services at the desired levels, and that's just a conscious decision that's been made by the Board of County Commissioners, and it is what it has to be. Looking at the number of units that -- well, I guess my first question has to do with the number of 16,400 population, one medic unit per, and that number's been around for a long time. Is that still a good number? MS. PATTERSON: So that number will be revisited again as the impact fee studies come forward. EMS has suffered with three distinct levels of service, which is really an interesting situation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. MS. PATTERSON: One is their actual level of service that we can use for the AUIR because we're allowed to count the stations that are leased as well as the stations that we own, because they do factor into those response times. The second is that number you're referring to, which is the level of service driven by the stations we own and under which we assess our impact fees. And then, of course, we have a response time level of service, making this one of the most complicated AUIRs to deal with, trying to juggle all of those things for their various purposes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Understood. I noticed in here that, whereas, in previous years we've either gone to owned or leased, and now we're looking at co-owned which I think makes more sense to me because of the value of real estate. I think that's a good position to be in. Is that why we're doing it? MS. PATTERSON: There's a number of reasons why, and there's actually a little bit more information on this. You-all may know that we recently hired an executive director of public safety who has an extensive background in fire rescue. He is now the lead in both emergency management and EMS as well as the liaison to the fire districts and the Sheriff, and he brings with him insight that I think is really November 2, 2023 Page 36 of 48 going to help us as we move forward in this process, and I think you'll be pleased. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Good. MS. PATTERSON: But the collocation does help both us and the fire districts because the lease arrangements only benefit one. If they own it and we're there -- unless we can get a long-term lease, it creates all kinds of complexity. So this collocation idea is one we're really running with, but we are working on an idea that, essentially, we all commit that we're all going together where we go. So if North Collier is building a station, EMS is going to be there. If EMS is building a station, the fire district of where that station is, that fire district is going to be there, and this is going to be a standing agreement amongst us, number one, to be more efficient and, number two, to cut down on some of the complexity of this leasing, collocating, co-owning. It's been quite difficult to deal with, so I feel like that conversation is very positive and is going to lead to allowing us to put medic units in places where we traditionally have not had them but there is actually space for them. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Good. I'm very glad to hear that. I remember, and others may as well, the tension that was produced as a result of the proposed moving of Engine House 40, which is North Collier, and that -- you know, what does that do about the ambulance? Because the ambulance runs a lot into the City of Naples. And so those of us who live in the City of Naples were wondering, well, are we going to lose access to that ambulance? But, fortunately, they're staying at their current location. Are they going to open another engine house where they had proposed to move 40? MS. PATTERSON: I am not sure. I know that the places that we're working with North Collier are out in the eastern part of the -- of the county. Actually, near one of our other locations on DeSoto, there's another station planned out there closer to the villages where we will also plan to collocate. And recently, with the approval of a land-use petition, North Collier has property on 41 near old -- not near Old 41. That's where our location is, but on the northern portions of 41 where they plan another station where our plans are to collocate there as well. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, okay. So, I mean, North Collier has Engine House 43 up there, I believe -- MS. PATTERSON: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: -- which is almost to Bonita Beach, and so we would be putting another collocated engine house/EMS house in that? MS. PATTERSON: On 41, they have a piece of property that was part of that -- part of that land use. Cocohatchee. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. Yeah. COMMISSIONER SHEA: (Unintelligible.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, no, I don't think so. I think that's something different. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: No, I believe it's land that the developer donated. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Donated it to them. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Somehow I thought that was -- that was east of there, but -- so this is -- this is land that was donated by the developer? MS. PATTERSON: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Donated or sold? MS. PATTERSON: Donated. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Then I'm confusing multiple projects. Thank you. I got it now. So we're at 26 ambulances. We need to get to 31 in five years, and it's going to be quite a challenge. Are there any federal grants or state grants available out there that we can -- MS. PATTERSON: Yes. So we are actually working on Station 74, which appears in this document. That is the DeSoto station. That is a -- it's a three-part collocation with Greater Naples and North potentially putting an apparatus there. We are pursuing a legislative appropriation for that project. It is a very large and expensive station. I will continue to pursue grants where appropriate to be able to stand these up. But, again, with November 2, 2023 Page 37 of 48 the relationship with the fire districts, we view that here in the near future that we're going to have the ability to place some more medics units in places where we don't currently have them. There are a number of fire stations that have place for us where we may be able to put an additional ambulance. The big challenge here is the hiring of people. Last year, we granted 24, 26 positions to EMS to be able to start to stand up additional ambulances and fill some of those funding shortfalls that they had, and hiring folks has been a bit of a challenge. So we've been working on different ways to incentivize hiring to bring people on. And so they have some vacant positions that we're looking to fill. As we fill those positions, it's going to give us the ability to stand up more trucks. So even without having to build stations, the ability to get more ambulances out into these areas, particularly those that are growing and are challenged and do cause difficulties with the movement of our trucks throughout the county when we get really busy, will be very, very, very helpful and, again, the fire districts have been very receptive in these conversations of allowing us space and to stand those units. Our dream, of course, is to stand up some seasonal units and potentially to look at a future BLS truck. So there's a lot in work here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, really? BLS trucks. MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. Yep. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Interesting. So is there any -- well, is -- by way of background, Collier Boulevard is a dividing line, I think, between our 8-minute and our 12-minute response time goals. Is there -- is there any possibility that we could be able to populate the eastern part of Collier County sufficiently to get that response time down? MS. PATTERSON: Yes. And our new chief feels very strongly about that dividing line being a geographic boundary and not truly one that's driven by population. Immokalee is densely populated, but they have a 12-minute response time. So, yes, that is, I would say, in his -- in his top five of priorities is looking at how we handle that and to deal with the growth in the east and the impact that it has had on our units and our need to move units around this county. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Remind me, do the Sheriff's deputies have AEDs in their cars? MS. PATTERSON: I believe they do, but I would not want to speak for the Sheriff. I can find out for you for sure. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Commissioner Sparrazza. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thank you. Quick question, if I understood this correctly. Collocation is relatively new, and you're moving forward with that at all locations, or you're trying to? MS. PATTERSON: Collocation itself isn't new. It's the way that we approach it from the financial side of the house that has evolved. We have traditionally had ambulances at fire stations. A lot of times they were owned by the fire districts, and we were there through a rental agreement or a lease agreement. Now, that creates all sorts of difficulties for us on the level of service side of the house when it comes to impact fees. We could talk about this for hours, and, believe me, you probably -- you don't want to. So we had moved to a collocation model where we were in co-ownership or in long-term leases. What we're trying to do is continue on with that collocation but try to simplify this down and basically come to agreements that we're all going to be together wherever we're going, and we try to come to unified lease terms and/or if we build a station, we make space for fire; fire builds a station, they make space for us, eliminating this need for all of these complicated arrangements. It gets us to the same place for the purposes of response times and levels of service, but it cuts out a lot of the bureaucracy involved in all of these arrangements that have evolved over time. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: And that was leading me to my second question, because just driving around the beautiful county, you see, usually, fire truck or two, and an EMS together. And I -- when you started to refer to collocation, you're really talking about the financial business end of it, not physically, because they're already, many times, physically together. It's whether the ambulance is leasing back from the county or the county's leasing -- okay. Very good. November 2, 2023 Page 38 of 48 MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thank you. MS. PATTERSON: Now, the conversation about how we move forward in different types of partnerships -- because, yes, to your point, you see a fire truck. You may see a squad. You see an ambulance, and then we talk about how they respond out together. All of these are conversations that are ongoing on how we deliver the best and most efficient service to the residents of Collier County together. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN FRYER: On serious calls, breathing problems, cardiac problems, and others, the dispatcher will send not only an ambulance but also a fire suppression vehicle, and those are almost all, if -- well, maybe not Immokalee, but almost all ALS equipped. And so when we count our 12-minute response time, for instance, to the rural area, the parts of the county to the east, that's the first ALS unit to respond. They can defibrillate, they can start IVs, and do other thing. They can't transport, but they can do all the other things. And fire trucks are always -- almost always going to get there before the ambulances, are they not? MS. PATTERSON: There's a lot of -- we're heavily saturated with ALS units, particularly in the urban area, with those ALS capabilities, so, yes, and they do stop the clock. And part of this conversation is, number one, getting more medical units but also is the inner workings of how we work with each other to deliver that service without what can appear to be redundancy or not the most efficient use of the taxpayers' resources. So -- and that -- that help from the fire districts, when used properly, lessens the stress placed on us having to move medic units around the county when we get really busy. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Understood. I guess two or three days ago Marvin Easton published a third letter -- opinion letter to the editor in the Naples Daily News, and I think together -- and he's a very well-respected international consultant who has been involved in working on various committees and commissions over the years to look at quality of fire service and EMS service. And he -- he is -- well, first off to say, fortunately, there have been a number of mergers recently, and so that's a good thing. You know, various departments that used to exist have consolidated down to either five or six. I'm not sure the exact number. But he's calling for even more. And it's -- you know, from my perspective, which is just as a reader of the newspaper, it seems to me that that's a good idea. I was wondering what the county's position is on it. MS. PATTERSON: We're open to all conversations about how we better cooperate. We have been having regular meetings with the fire districts, with the cities because they have their fire folks as well, even with the Sheriff on how we plan, how we work together, how we work together differently. Consolidation, which is a word that causes people to have a bit of anxiety, does not have to be a bad thing. It definitely isn't a bad thing. So we like now to use the term "enhanced cooperation," and we're moving those conversations along in how we're looking at how we respond to calls, again, how we're locating together and all of those ways that we can perform more efficiently. So stay tuned for those conversations. I feel like they're really positive steps that are happening, and I think we'll have good news to deliver to you as we move through this process. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And there's been good news also developing with respect to what technology can bring to the party. And the Sheriff's Office dispatches all the fire districts, fire departments, and EMS. And so not only do they have their computer-aided databases that show where the closest units are, closest appropriate unit, but they also have the capability to dispatch under what's called automatic mutual aid. And just as -- it's automatic. If you -- if you have a medical call, for instance, in the City of Naples, and the two Naples EMS vehicles are -- well, if the Naples -- if they're out fighting a fire, another fire suppression apparatus will come in along with the Naples-based EMS, and that will be automatic. So you get the closest available unit even if they're not consolidated, which is the good side of the story. The not so good side of the story is sometimes it results in disparities between what taxpayers are paying in millage. Some areas, some districts consume more benefits from mutual aid than they give back, and that's November 2, 2023 Page 39 of 48 the kind of thing that perhaps could be -- could be better achieved in the event of consolidation. But having said that, I know it's highly political, and there are all sorts of variables involved. But I wanted to bring it out because it's something I think that's important for us to think about. MS. PATTERSON: Absolutely. And we will be meeting with Mr. Easton again coming up here soon to talk about some of those things that, you know, he's been asking questions about -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Good. MS. PATTERSON: -- and can give him an update on our progress together. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Good, good, good. Thank you. Thank you, County Manager. I don't have anything further on EMS. Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Thank you, ma'am. MS. PATTERSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Let's see. I go to county government buildings, and I don't think I've got really much of anything on this to say that hasn't already been said, because a lot of this is just recapitulation. So no one is signaling on that, which takes us to Coastal Zone Management. And, again -- oh, I do have a question about this. You know, in light of Ian -- did you want to make a prefatory comment? MR. BOSI: No. But if -- any questions, we have Andy Miller here, who is the manager, so -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Good. All right. Ian, just like Irma previous to it, was a big drawdown of our reserves, correct? MR. MILLER: Correct. And, for the record, it's Andy Miller with Coastal Zone Management. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. And so having drawn down those reserves, we need to replenish them before the next one hits. And, I mean, these forecasts are built on five-year projections. And, you know, we may or may not have enough for this year or next year but eventually, as is in the case of almost all these other resources that we have, by the time we get to year four and year five, we need to -- we need to be having some new money found. We don't want to lower our LOSS. I mean, I don't. I think it would be a terrible black mark on the county if we had to do that, and I don't think anybody wants to. But either you do that or you raise funds somehow. So having said that, sir, do you want to comment on my comment? MR. MILLER: Yes. And, you know, we work with a fairly healthy reserve, but it did take a hit last year from Hurricane Ian and, specifically, we did a lot of good work, and we spent the county's money, but the good news is, I think we're looking at some reimbursements from the State of Florida and some reimbursement from FEMA to offset some of those expenditures. We've got some pretty promising grants either in process or in the bag from FDEP to the tune of $10 million, and FEMA has given us a preliminary obligation of $8 million, so we're already up to 18 million out of that 20-plus million that we spent. So that will go right back into reserves and pump us up for the short term. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Have we recovered everything from FEMA or any other sources that we had expected to get from -- first I'll ask you about Irma. MR. MILLER: From Irma, I can't really answer that, although I know we did have some difficulties because of the timing that we completed the work, and so I think we're going to have a lot better results from what we accomplished with our grants folks and Ian. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. So there's more money coming in on Irma, and you feel like you're on top of the issue? MR. MILLER: That's correct. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Then on Ian, I imagine there's been a smaller percentage of our total recovery at this point, am I correct? MR. MILLER: And I think I want to reverse what I just -- what I just said was that we had some issues with getting grant reimbursement from Irma related to the timing of the work that we accomplished and the requirements from FEMA and the like. Ian is a totally different story. We reacted immediately and work very closely with FEMA. November 2, 2023 Page 40 of 48 And so, like I said, we're looking at grant reimbursements somewhere in the neighborhood of $10 million from the state that are already pretty much a done deal, and then FEMA has indicated that they are obligating $8 million for our emergency berm work as well, and so we're doing a lot better job with Ian than Irma. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Could you speak briefly about -- and the vice chairman may want to weigh in on this as well -- but the interplay between the FEMA money and the hurricanes and the study group that he is a member of looking at how to harden our coastline. MR. MILLER: What I can tell you is that FEMA will not be in the mix as far as what Army Corps -- they're two totally -- as a matter of fact, when you bring on an Army Corps project and get obligated, authorized, FEMA is pretty much out of the picture. It's totally Army Corps that comes to the rescue on those. Up until that point, up until we actually construct, if we do, our resiliency project, FEMA will still be in the mix. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Did you want to say anything more about that? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, he's correct. FEMA responds to the disaster. And if it's declared a federal disaster, typically the Army Corps of Engineers is the entity that FEMA turns to to do the assessments and to respond. And Public Law 84-99, Public Law 93-288, the federal response act, or whatever it's called today, the federal response plan, and it has all the categories, FEMA controls those various response categories, one of which you referred to, the Army Corps of Engineers, is typically shore protection and debris cleanup and all the other type of things. FEMA is the overarching manager, but the -- is not involved in any way in the core study, the feasibility study, that's going on right now. FEMA's not involved. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. That's all I have on Coastal Zone Management, and that actually brings us to the end of this exercise. Oh, Commissioner Schumacher. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Mr. Miller, if I could ask you a question, please. On the Fiscal Year '24, it's showing beach renourishment at 3.8 for Parkshore and 100,000 for Clam Pass. Is there -- is that just because it's a smaller section from Seagate to the top of Clam Pass there? Is that why there's only 100,000 budgeted for it? MR. MILLER: That's correct. I think Parkshore is in the order of maybe two miles, and Clam Pass is maybe a thousand feet, something like that. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: And when are those scheduled to occur? MR. MILLER: They're not scheduled because -- as a matter of fact, the sand that we lost from Irma was primarily the dunes, and so the sand that was the beach proper wound up offshore. And so we did annual monitoring this year, which is basically a survey effort. And the monitoring came in that says you really don't need -- especially with the 400,000 tons of sand we just put on the beach for the berm, we don't necessarily need to do these renourishment projects. So we've got them in our budget. We'll revisit the beaches in January and have our surveys done then. And if the engineering consultant tells us that, hey, you've got a hot spot in Parkshore or otherwise, they'll recommend a renourishment project, and we'll do that. But the funding is available. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Has there been any conversation on increasing the size of that berm height-wise? And let me skip to the end. Naples Cay, we had $60,000 in damage from Idalia. I was there for the surge. It was a 4-foot surge on top of a king tide, and it came over top of that dune and submerged our entry road with about 2 to 3 feet of water, and then it about took out our FPL box, too, but there was just zero protection there. So is there any conversation of reanalyzing those areas to say, hey, maybe we should bump this up a little bit and make it a little higher for this section here? MR. MILLER: Well, I think the conversations that are headed in that direction are more associated with the CSRM project. They're talking about -- they were talking about it in the previous effort of having berms in the neighborhood of Elevation 12. Ours that we just put in are Elevation 6, so that's a huge difference. The issue is, as you raise the berm, you're either robbing from the beach or you're going to need November 2, 2023 Page 41 of 48 to widen the beach out into the gulf to retain that design standard that we have; that is 100 feet in some places and 85 in others. And as you widen into the gulf, you widen towards the offshore hard bottom, nearshore hard bottom. And so we're kind of -- we have these design constraints that limit -- limit us to some extent on how wide and how high we can make the beaches. There's probably opportunities to do what you just -- what you just mentioned by making the dunes higher, making the beaches wider, impacting the hard bottom, and then mitigating for the impacts to the hard bottom, so that's kind of the ongoing discussion. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Okay. Thank you, sir. MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Vice Chairman. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. Just to clarify, we do not have any federally authorized projects for beach renourishment in Collier County. All of the beach renourishment and shore protection are county projects. There's nothing that has gone through any type of federal type of authorization or appropriation. That's what the study is, of course, looking at and whether there's going to be any type of improvements through the feasibility study that's ongoing. But the monies certainly that -- the monies are not federal dollars. They come from either the General Fund or tourist taxes or wherever the county raises the revenue to do the shore protection projects. MR. MILLER: Yes. They're tourist development -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: When I mentioned FEMA and I mentioned the Army Corps of Engineers, if there's a federal disaster and there are disaster dollars to solve one particular issue, there are opportunities to have federal money do specific things. But, typically, it does not happen unless it's a federal project, and that's under Public Law 84-99, which is the coastal management type aspects of where they can have emergency dollars come in and repair dunes and types of things. But we don't have any of that in Collier County, and that's a choice that the county has made for years not to -- not to use federal dollars. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I appreciate the clarification. The issue that I've seen is when you look at the Army Corps of Engineers plan, it stops at Seagate and doesn't go to Clam Pass which, therefore, cuts all of Naples Cay out. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. But that, again, is a -- that is a decision of the local sponsor. The local sponsor being -- the local nonfederal sponsor is the county. And if the county wants to look at things beyond what is being proposed, that is the -- that has to come from the -- that has to come from the county as the nonfederal support. Jamie. MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Commissioner. For the record, Jamie French, the -- I'm the department head for Growth Management/Community Development. The relevancy study currently underway with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is within my purview under our resiliency group under Chris Mason. We spoke yesterday with the Naples City Council about this. That study will go all the way just south of the Gordon River. So, Commissioner Schumacher, it is inclusive. So the study, perhaps, that you're mentioning is the study that was never completed, but that is not this study, so that we're clear. This is a study that currently -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. FRENCH: This goes beyond Gordon River, sir, so that's going to be beyond -- well beyond Clam Pass, 8th Street, all of those others. So it is inclusive of that -- COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: You're thinking of south. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah, you're talking about north. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: You're south. I'm next to Pelican Bay. MR. FRENCH: I know exactly where you are, and it goes all the way up the coastline. So what November 2, 2023 Page 42 of 48 I'm saying is that it is a much more comprehensive area that will cover the coastline of Collier County, and that study, we will not make comment on that study because we have nothing to comment on. We are currently within that study period. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has not produced anything yet, and once they produce their report, at that point -- and we're so appreciative of Commissioner Schmitt being on that committee. But we have monthly calls with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and that is available to the public. There are members from the City of Naples as well as City of Marco on those calls. And there are also -- we have biweekly calls, so every two weeks, and the Naples as well as Marco Island staff are on that call. So they do have an ongoing every-two-week staff call with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and then we have a monthly open-to-the-public call, and all of that information is published by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Just to clarify again, the study will study whatever the county would like the Corps to study, but they have to stay within the statutory requirements of the $3 million, 2.98 or whatever it is. MR. FRENCH: It's a 3 by 3 by 3. They have three years, and they have $3 million to spend, and they have made it exceedingly clear that Congress has not expanded their time or their dollars. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: They have a funding limit requirement, but they'll study whatever the local sponsor would like to study, and that's -- apparently, right now, the movement, predominant pressure, I believe, that the Corps is getting from the number of people who participate in the conference calls is for nonstructural alternatives. MR. FRENCH: Higher, wider beaches. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Resiliency and other type of nonstructural alternatives, so that's the direction that the Corps will move, and that's based not on the committee. We advised the Board -- we were -- the committee was formed to advise the Board, but the Board -- in essence, the county staff, but the Board is the -- for all intent and purposes, is the nonfederal -- entity that's deemed the nonfederal sponsor, and that's who the Corps will take direction from. MR. FRENCH: You are absolutely correct, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And if the county doesn't become the nonfederal sponsor, the Corps could look to another taxing authority, whether that's Marco Island, the City of Naples. And that's -- that's what the study does. I can get into great detail about the study, the process, and whatever else, but from that standpoint -- and we're looking at, right now, Jamie, 2025? MR. FRENCH: We anticipate -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Final report? MR. FRENCH: We anticipate their preliminary report probably around April or May of next year, and at that point that will give us something to work off of. But understand that this is beyond just local citizens that have been here a lifetime, let's say. But these are -- we've got a number of skilled contractors as well as engineers, from Ken Humiston to Josh Maxwell who came from Turrell Hall who's now with another firm. These -- the representation that exists on this advisory committee is exceptionally strong, and they're very tied to this community, and certainly not to lean on Joe or to lean on Ken Humiston, but there's no one that knows these studies better than those two, no doubt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. And the -- understand -- again, for the Board's edification, for us, the study is just that, a study, then it has to go through -- it goes through the final -- it goes through what they call the chief's report, chief of engineers, and it goes through the budgetary process if it's -- if the local sponsor agrees to sign the agreement to become the local contributing nonfederal sponsor. Then, if the project is, quote, finally approved as a congressionally authorized project, the next hurdle, of course, is the funding for it, authorization and appropriation. Appropriation is entirely different. At any given time, there might be 800 to 1,000 authorized projects on the books that are not funded. So it could be an authorized project but never funded because there's dollars that -- there's other projects that compete. And in reality, when you look at the state of Florida, the monies that are coming into Florida, when you look at the dollars, and the money that is being spent either in Lake O or on Everglades November 2, 2023 Page 43 of 48 restoration, that's a huge amount of federal dollars that comes into -- or comes into the state of Florida. I have to say, this would probably not be up there in the competing category against other requirements. So there's -- I hate to be a -- kind of pour cold water, but the fact is, the study will be the study, but the difficulty will then be getting the dollars appropriated, and that could be years away. MR. FRENCH: Well -- and thank you for that, Joe. Part and parcel to that is that we're also -- we're also participating in the state resiliency program where we're looking at the vulnerability of our coastline and those that would be inclusive of stormwater elements and those areas -- and so that the county recently recognized a $50,000 grant to go towards a study. And we've contracted, I believe, with Wood Engineering, which is very familiar with the state of Florida. In fact, they do most of the modeling around the state of Florida and work closely with the state. So we are working with our chief resiliency officer for the state of Florida, his staff, on looking at that as well. Clearly, it might be a capital element that we would recognize in the future hearings of AUIRs, but at this point we are simply measuring now. So we are well underway. We are very versed. As many of you know, our group is also responsible -- we are not first responders, but the community, as it was put recently when I visited the Florida Legislation, think about it like an iceberg. There's still -- what you see is the storm, the water, the damage. What you don't see underneath of the water is the rest of the iceberg, and that's the recovery portion, and it's monumental. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I'm still in it, trust me. MR. FRENCH: And I would tell you that the best and worst day in my career is when Joe hired me, right? So I had no idea what I was getting into, but I could tell you that Hurricane Irma took us better than four -- better than five years, and on the day we issued our last roofing final, along comes Ian. So these are not quick fixes, the recovery piece, the assessment piece, the habitability piece of these communities. We're very highly trained and skilled in that area. We can always improve. Clearly, we're not infallible, but I would tell you that we take this vulnerability piece -- because that helps us as well on getting our community stood back up from both a socioeconomic portion but also just structural safety of our community. We get it. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Thank you, Mr. French. I'll ask you after the meeting. I've just got a couple other things. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Vice Chairman? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Jamie, I have one other question; different subject, different issue. And I saw the numbers of the certificates of occupancy, the COs issued by year. Is the trend line, from our standpoint, the zoning, the things that we have approved -- and I know when we think about what we have approved over the last 18 to 20 months along Collier County -- or along Collier Boulevard and other areas in the east. My question is, where are we on a standpoint of -- is it going up, is it steady, or going down on building permits and certificates of occupancy? MR. FRENCH: So it's kind of a -- it's a two-part answer. So you've got to consider the COVID factor. There was a great migration where we saw across the nation in 2019 and '20, for the first time in the history of Collier County, what we saw is we saw some areas, such as California, outpacing Wisconsin and New York, and that's -- you know, go west, young man, where they were coming back home. At the end of the day, we've seen that start to balance back out. So year over year, we're about 13 to 14 percent down in transaction value and about 10 percent less in revenue dollars. Now, I refer back to revenue dollars because we're -- I like to brag about it, so I'm going to do it again. We're the only group in the entire county that has actually not only kept our fees, but we've reduced our fees in eight years. And I know that the County Manager is shaking her head saying, oh, gosh, what are you doing? But at the end of the day, we pride our -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: She's running out. MR. FRENCH: Yep. We pride ourselves on not just being able to provide good service, but efficient service. It could always be better. But when we look at that, if we go back pre-COVID, we are on that same growth pattern. And November 2, 2023 Page 44 of 48 so when we see these Site Development Plans, we see the entitlements come forward for consideration, we know that we are 12 to 18 months out before we actually break ground and start to go vertical. So we are well positioned both financially as an organization, as an enterprise organization, to have a level of stability within our staff to support new growth as it comes in, but hopefully we don't go through what we saw in 2009/2010, but we're not there. We track commodity markets. We recognize everything from concrete to lumber on what that market's doing so that we can better forecast not only the skill of employee that we need but also what additional buildings we would need to house them as well as how we're going to be able to provide that level of service. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Good. Thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Did you want to say something, Mr. Bosi? MR. BOSI: (Shakes head.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. We're at the end of the line here. I want to say just a couple of things and then ask for a vote. And what I'd like to say is to extend a word of extreme thanks and confidence in the job that staff did, and by that I mean the County Manager and her office, the Growth Management office, Jamie French, Mike Bosi, Ms. Eastley, Ms. Cook -- MR. FRENCH: All her. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Jaime Cook, okay. Everyone did a terrific job on this, and we're all constrained by finances, you know, but that's a serious issue, and we've got to confront it. My sense of things is that we're going to be okay for the next couple of years, but when we get out more toward Year 5, by then we need to have some solutions in place other than lowering our level-of-service standard, which we don't want to do. So at this point I would entertain a motion. And before anyone makes one, think about whether -- whether in our motion we want to simply recommend it for approval and send it to the Board of County Commissioners or add a reference to our concern about the later years and the five-year plan, or is that simply a statement of the obvious? And if it is, it might not be necessary. So with that, unless anybody else has concluding remarks, I'd entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, I'll just -- on the discussion on your point, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah, go ahead. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It sort of is a statement of the obvious, because every year we do the AUIR. It is -- as Mike just said, it's a capture, it's a snapshot. But if you go back every year for the last maybe 15 years, that's always been an issue. And, of course, our board, our Board of County Commissioners, they have the tough challenge of remaining millage neutral and whether tax value of property goes up or down, but at some point, yeah, they may have to decide to raise the millage rate, which is very unpopular. But I guess we could point something out that, yeah, the out-years don't look very healthy, but I have to say two years from now it's going to be the same thing. And I think we'll be -- we'll be healthy. So I don't know, maybe it is a statement of the obvious. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Probably a question for Mike. I always get astounded by the size of the unfunded revenue that's required. Is this normal at the 25 percent level? If you went back over every year we've done this for the last few years, is it normally that high a percentage of our capital budget over five years that we don't know where we're going to get our money from? It seemed awful high. I don't remember it being this high, but I don't have a great memory. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And then to add to that, Paul, the worst thing, as you and I know from our engineering background, is deferred maintenance. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You just keep on pushing it. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Very scary. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And you keep on pushing. And the more you push -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Huge capital expense. November 2, 2023 Page 45 of 48 COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- the worse it gets, yes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: County Manager, did you want to say a word? MR. BOSI: What I just put on the screen, Ms. Eastley put together a comparison of the '21, '22, and '23 AUIR in relationship to the overall expenditure in relationship to the unfunded needs. And they really sit within transportation and stormwater, for the most part. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. BOSI: And if you look at the percentage of that unfunded needs to overall expenditures, it's maybe a little bit percentage higher but not a tremendous deviation from what we had before. I think we traditionally have, with both of those areas, trouble within the Years 4 and 5, the out-years of identifying those revenue sources. So it's not a huge departure from where we were the prior year or for 2021 in that matter, but it's just a consistent -- we're always trying to struggle to find the necessary funds for the entire five-year program. It's the Years 1 through 3 that we're confident that we have the identified funds to be able to tell -- at least have those projects, you know, move to completion. COMMISSIONER SHEA: That's pretty -- I don't know if I agree with your assessment. I think the percentage is a lot bigger when you do them with the numbers. But I think we should make a statement, because it worries me how much of it -- I think the percentage of unfunded is growing, and it's a bigger challenge. And I realize a lot of it is in the next two or three years, but we're looking out five years, and that number, to me -- and I think if you do the percentages, it's a lot more growth than you think of the unfunded versus the total expenditure. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Sparrazza. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'm sorry, County Manager, did you want to speak first? MS. PATTERSON: If I may just for a moment. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Of course. MS. PATTERSON: I don't disagree with you, and I think you have two things going on here. One is that we have experienced over the last couple of years these absolutely astronomical increases in cost. So that is a factor here because, obviously, we want this document to represent -- we don't have a crystal ball, but we want to represent the truest picture we have right now. So a project that cost $5 million a few years ago may cost 7 or $10 million now. It's just the reality of our situation. But the second thing is is we made a commitment to the Board of County Commissioners that we would show them the full picture of what's going on and not to scare anybody but, really, so that they can make good decisions on how we fund things and what our priorities are and so showing the magnitude of these needs, reasonably. There are a lot more needs in stormwater, but there's no point in showing a work plan that can never be accomplished. So this is an attempt to balance and have some reasonableness to the needs as well as what's a reasonable program and then, therefore, the shortfall. So, you know, we had years where we were only producing a balanced AUIR. And if that meant that there was $5 million in stormwater, there's $5 million in stormwater. That was always showed. There were years that we were mandated to have a financially feasible AUIR, and that's all you would show was a program that would balance with the revenue, and that started to change, and now we're really trying to show the Board the magnitude of the need, particularly as, you know, two things happen. As we grow and -- unique to stormwater probably than any other category in here is -- other than utilities is as we age. So as that aging infrastructure continues to head towards the end of its useful life or surpass it, we have a lot of needs out there for the community. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Sparrazza. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thank you, sir. Going along with what you started, I believe most of the Board here is on that same topic of what do we say or ask or put in our recommendation to the Board? Could we be as bold to ask or suggest that the Board, in nine months, whatever time frame is appropriate, has a first draft of a plan for a five-year program to increase those revenues and not to just allow them to say, yes, we have to work on it? November 2, 2023 Page 46 of 48 Unfortunately, it ends up being kicking the can down the road. Maybe they'll start on it next year. Is there a way we could reasonably ask them, can you put a timetable together on your first proposal or a draft or ideas? CHAIRMAN FRYER: That's a good point. I'm just -- I'm not sure politically whether -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: I recognize that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: -- whether that -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: I'm amongst friends here, so I can say that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I don't even know if that's within our -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. Well, it may or may not be, and here's the County Manager. What do you recommend that we do? MS. PATTERSON: So back to our conversation about the stormwater utility, it may be something as simple as supporting the Board's exploration of -- exploration of viable options to fund some of these shortfalls that are outside of the traditional funding source, which is ad valorem and impact fees. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: That sounds much more politically correct than what I was suggesting. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. So we're recommending exploration and that, I think, is the -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: And expressing concern. MS. PATTERSON: The magnitude of the need is large, and we need viable options to sustainably fund these types of programs. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So if we don't need them, then somebody's into a big contest as prioritizing where you're going to spend the lesser amount of capital dollars, and we -- MS. PATTERSON: That was the -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: What we're looking at here could be a plan that never gets implemented because it's -- as Joe says, it's not funded. It's appropriated, but not -- approved but not appropriated. MS. PATTERSON: The Board's direction in our budget process was to turn over every rock and challenge everything that we have known about budgeting, which would include the capital program, to look at the budget going into FY '24. I would suggest that this is one of those things. We've assumed a certain way of doing things. And while it's changed a little bit, exploration of the traditional ways of funding capital improvements may need a refresh. And it may be that it comes back to say we still are comfortable with largely using gas tax, impact fees, and property taxes to fund the bulk of our capital program, or it may say we liked the use of the surtax, for example, which is sunsetting here in December, or we would like you to look at a stormwater utility again. Just exploring those things doesn't commit us to having to do them but simply says these are the options that you have at your disposal. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Is there an opportunity for us to, when we ask for the explanation -- exploration to begin to put a timetable on it? CHAIRMAN FRYER: That, I think, might be pushing it. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yeah, that might be. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Timetables are for the Board to -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: We're volunteers. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Or ask -- no, ask them if they can come up -- I'm just afraid -- maybe I'm off -- I'm afraid that, yep, we're going to do that, and next year we'll start looking at -- and it just never happens, and before we know it, the five years are here. You need the money for the stormwater program, and all of a sudden we get a 30 percent increase in our taxes. That's all. I'll leave it at that. Thank you, Paul, for -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Schumacher. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I was just going to call -- I was going to call for a motion -- November 2, 2023 Page 47 of 48 CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go right ahead. Make a motion. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: -- to approve with a note for the Board of Collier County Commissioners to explore viable options for funding of future projects that indicate shortfall. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well said. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Does that sound right? CHAIRMAN FRYER: It does to me. MS. PATTERSON: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I second. Does that sound right to the County Manager? MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. And if you really wanted to put a time frame on it without a time frame, you most certainly would want to see this in advance of next year's AUIR because that number could be larger next year than it is this year. So, I mean, it does -- we're going to be doing this as part of the budget, so that should, I hope, provide you some assurance that this will be -- the capital program will be a focal point of the '24 budget, and the shortfalls will be explored at that time. CHAIRMAN FRYER: That sounds good. Further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: It's been moved and seconded that we approve the AUIR and the CIE with the exploration suggestion also added to our motion, and county staff will write that in a diplomatic yet -- try to communicate the sense of urgency on our part. All those in favor of that motion, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: It passes -- Commissioner Klucik, are you on with us? COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. It passes unanimously. And -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Comment. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah, please go ahead. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I personally want to thank Amy for spending her morning with us. I know your time is valuable, and your input was tremendous today. So I really thank you for taking the time to talk to us poor souls up here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah, I agree. Thank you so much, County Manager. MS. PATTERSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Now we'll go to old business, of which there is presumably none. That being the case, new business. Once again, I doubt there is any. Is there anyone in the room who would like to be heard on a matter that was not on our agenda today, please raise your hand. (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Seeing none, without objection, we're adjourned. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thank you. November 2, 2023 Page 48 of 48 ******* There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:21 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION __________________________________________ EDWIN FRYER, CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on ____________, as presented __________ or as corrected _________. TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS COURT REPORTING BY TERRI L. LEWIS, RPR, FPR-C, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. ✔12/7/23