BCC Minutes 03/12/2024March 12, 2024
Page 1
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, March 12, 2024
LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following Board members present:
Chairman: Chris Hall
Rick LoCastro
Dan Kowal
William L. McDaniel, Jr.
Burt L. Saunders
ALSO PRESENT:
Amy Patterson, County Manager
Daniel Rodriguez, Deputy County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal K. Kinzel, Clerk
Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
March 12, 2024
9:00 AM
Commissioner Chris Hall, District 2; – Chair
Commissioner Burt Saunders, District 3; – Vice Chair
Commissioner Rick LoCastro, District 1
Commissioner Dan Kowal, District 4; – CRAB Co-Chair
Commissioner William L. McDaniel, Jr., District 5; – CRAB Co-Chair
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE
ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO
THREE MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIR.
ADDITIONAL MINUTES MAY BE CEDED TO AN IN-PERSON SPEAKER
BY OTHER REGISTERED SPEAKERS WHO MUST BE PRESENT AT THE
TIME THE SPEAKER IS HEARD. NO PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE
HEARD FOR PROCLAMATIONS, PRESENTATIONS AND PUBLIC
PETITIONS. SPEAKERS ON PRESENTATIONS ARE LIMITED TO 10
MINUTES, UNLESS EXTENDED BY THE CHAIR. ALL PERSONS WISHING
TO SPEAK ON A CONSENT ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO THE
BOARD’S APPROVAL OF THE DAY’S CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH IS
HEARD AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING FOLLOWING THE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
Page 2
March 12, 2024
ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON PUBLIC PETITION
MUST SUBMIT THE REQUEST IN WRITING TO THE COUNTY MANAGER
AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING. THE
REQUEST SHALL PROVIDE DETAILED INFORMATION AS TO THE
NATURE OF THE PETITION. THE PUBLIC PETITION MAY NOT
INVOLVE A MATTER ON A FUTURE BOARD AGENDA AND MUST
CONCERN A MATTER IN WHICH THE BOARD CAN TAKE ACTION.
PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO A SINGLE PRESENTER, WITH A
MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES, UNLESS EXTENDED BY THE
CHAIR. SHOULD THE PETITION BE GRANTED, THE ITEM WILL BE
PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON GENERAL TOPICS
NOT ON THIS AGENDA OR A FUTURE AGENDA MUST REGISTER TO
SPEAK PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF THE AGENDA
BEING CALLED BY THE CHAIR. SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO
THREE MINUTES, AND NO ADDITIONAL MINUTES MAY BE CEDED TO
THE SPEAKER. AT THE CHAIR’S DISCRETION, THE NUMBER OF
PUBLIC SPEAKERS MAY BE LIMITED TO 5 FOR THAT MEETING.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE
BASED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION LOCATED AT 3335 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380;
Page 3
March 12, 2024
ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE
AVAILABLE IN THE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M
1.INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A.Invocation and Pledge by Scottlyn Hall, Daisy Hall, Sunee Hall, Shepherd
Hall, and Miles Hall.
2.AGENDA AND MINUTES
A.Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (ex
parte disclosure provided by commission members for consent agenda.)
3.AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS
A.EMPLOYEE
B.ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS
C.RETIREES
1)Recognize Nolan Sapp for his 46 years of dedicated public safety
service upon retirement.
D.EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
4.PROCLAMATIONS
A.Proclamation designating March 12, 2024, as Gentle'men Against Domestic
Violence Day in Collier County. To be accepted by Sheriff Kevin Rambosk
and other distinguished guests.
B.Proclamation designating March 10 - 16, 2024, as Sunshine Week in Collier
County. To be accepted by Crystal K. Kinzel, Clerk of the Circuit Court
and Comptroller.
5.PRESENTATIONS
Page 4
March 12, 2024
A.Artist of the month
B.Presentation of the Collier County Business of the Quarter for March 2024
to True Fashionistas. The award will be accepted by Jennifer Johnson,
Owner, along with Kristina Park, CEO, and Bethany Sawyer, Vice President
of Membership and Investors, the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce.
6.PUBLIC PETITIONS
7.PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT
OR FUTURE AGENDA
8.BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
9.ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
10.BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A.This item to be heard at 9:30 AM. Recommendation to submit a
Community Project Funding application to Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart
for $6 million to construct a Collier County Veterans Services Center and
Museum at the previously proposed location for a Collier County Public
Schools Career and Technical Training Center adjacent to the planned
Golden Gate Parkway entrance to the State Veterans Nursing Home and
Adult Day Health Care campus. (District 3)
B.Recommendation to nominate and appoint five members to the County
Government Productivity Committee. (All Districts)
11.COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A.This item to be heard at 10:30 AM. Recommendation to review a proposed
amendment to Ordinance 2002-63, which established the Conservation
Collier Program, which will be advertised for a future Board meeting. (Jaime
Cook, Director, Development Review Division, Growth Management
Community Development) (All Districts)
B.This item to be heard at 1 PM. Recommendation to accept the after-action
report for the 2024 Florida legislative session and provide guidance as
preliminary planning begins for the next legislative cycle. (Bridget
Page 5
March 12, 2024
Corcoran, Legislative Affairs Coordinator) (All Districts)
C. Recommendation to accept a project update on the Collier County
Behavioral Health Center and proceed with the design for 87 total beds (45
CSU, 30 adult Medicare/Acute and 12 ESAC) with an estimated
construction cost of $49.9 million. (Project No. 50239) (Ed Finn, Deputy
County Manager) (All Districts)
D. Recommendation to Adopt the FY 2025 Budget Policy, and adopt a
Resolution establishing a deadline of May 1, 2024, for budget submittals by
the Supervisor of Elections, the Sheriff’s Office, and the Clerk. (Christopher
Johnson, Director of Corporate Financial and Management Services) (All
Districts)
E. Recommendation to approve the purchase of Property, Terrorism,
Watercraft Hull and Boiler & Machinery Insurance effective April 1, 2024,
in the estimated amount of $11,615,027. (Michael K. Quigley, Division
Director, Risk Management) (All Districts)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA BY INDIVIDUALS NOT
ALREADY HEARD DURING PREVIOUS PUBLIC COMMENTS IN
THIS MEETING
B. STAFF PROJECT UPDATES
C. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
Page 6
March 12, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Consent Agenda - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the board, that item(s) will
be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the sewer utility
facilities for Naples Botanical Garden Horticultural Complex,
PL20230015483. (District 4)
2) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a
Performance Bond in the amount of $123,880, which was posted as a
guaranty for Excavation Permit Number PL20230002528 for work
associated with Imperial Golf Club – Golf Course Renovation.
(District 2)
3) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a
Performance Bond in the amount of $163,840, which was posted as a
guaranty for Excavation Permit Number PL20210002249 for work
associated with Esplanade by the Islands Amenity Campus. (District
1)
4) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a
Performance Bond in the amount of $26,280, which was posted as a
guaranty for Excavation Permit Number PL20220001584 for work
associated with Winchester. (District 5)
5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer utility facilities for Pelican Marsh Golf Club – Golf Teaching
Facility, PL20230018213. (District 2)
6) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the
potable water and sewer facilities and appurtenant utility easements
for Magnolia Pond Residences Phase 1, PL20230014175. (District 3)
7) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
Page 7
March 12, 2024
sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the
potable water and sewer facilities and appurtenant utility easement for
Youth Haven Intake Cottage, PL20230011349. (District 1)
8) Recommendation to approve final acceptance and accept the
conveyance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities for
Esplanade by the Islands - Phase 2C, PL20230008069. (District 1)
9) Recommendation to approve final acceptance and accept the
conveyance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities for
Esplanade by the Islands Lucerna Street, PL20230008065. (District 1)
10) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
an amendment to an Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement
for the Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc., development
within the Tree Farm Planned Unit Development to make an
insubstantial change to the legal description. (District 5)
11) This item requires that ex-parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Arthrex Commerce Park -
Phase 2 (Application Number PL20230008595), approval of the
standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement, and
approval of the performance security in the amount of $1,613,841.85.
(District 5)
12) This item requires that Commission members provide ex-parte
disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants
are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for
recording the amended final plat of Groves at Orange Blossom, Phase
3A, approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement, and approval of the performance security in the amount of
$72,483.95. (PL20230011875) (District 5)
13) Recommendation to authorize the Office of the County Attorney to
initiate foreclosure proceedings pursuant to Section 162.09, Florida
Statutes, in relation to $578,223.90 in accruing code enforcement liens
for ongoing violations at 523 Eustis Ave., Immokalee, Florida 34142,
arising from the Office of the Special Magistrate entitled, Board of
Page 8
March 12, 2024
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, vs. Katrix, LLC.
(District 5)
14) Recommendation to direct staff to advertise and bring back an
Ordinance amending the Land Development Code to update the
regulations relating to the removal of prohibited exotic vegetation.
(All Districts)
15) Recommendation to approve the Conservation Collier McIlvane
Marsh Preserve Final Management Plan under the Conservation
Collier Program. (All Districts)
B. TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to sign
Amendment 3 to the Transportation Investments Generating
Economic Recovery (TIGER) IX - Immokalee Complete Streets Grant
Agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation/Federal
Highway Administration Grant Award #693JJ32040007 updating the
grant milestones and extending the project completion date to the
agreement. (Companion to Item #16B2) (District 5)
2) Recommendation to approve Change Order No. 1, adding two
hundred thirty-seven (237) days under Agreement No. 20-7811 with
Quality Enterprises USA, Inc., for the “Design-Build of the
Immokalee Area Improvements – Tiger Grant” project, and authorize
the Chairman to sign the attached Change Order. (Project No. 33563)
(Companion to Item #16B1) (District 5)
3) Recommendation to establish a policy and authorize the Chair to
execute Easement Use Agreements for certain existing minor
encroachments discovered as part of the 16th ST NE Bridge (Project
No. 60212). (District 5)
4) Recommendation to approve the selection committee’s ranking and
authorize staff to begin contract negotiations with the top-ranked firm,
Hardesty & Hanover Construction Services, LLC, concerning Request
for Professional Services (“RPS”) No. 23-8196, “CEI Services for
16th Street NE Bridge,” so that staff can bring a proposed agreement
back for the Board’s consideration at a future meeting. (Project No.
Page 9
March 12, 2024
60212).
5) Recommendation to approve a First Amendment to Agreement No.
18-7379, “Forest Lakes MSTU Landscape Maintenance,” with
Ground Zero Landscaping Services, Inc., to extend the agreement’s
termination date for an additional 180-day period through and
including September 18, 2024. (District 4)
6) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
amendment to its Landscape Maintenance Agreement with Marbella
Lakes Owners Association, Inc., for additional landscape and
irrigation improvements within Marbella Lakes Drive, Whippoorwill
Lane, and Livingston Road public rights-of way. (District 4)
7) Recommendation to authorize electronic submission by staff of a
Small County Outreach Program for Rural Areas of Opportunities
application with the Florida Department of Transportation to fund the
construction of a paved shoulder to improve safety on a segment of
Immokalee Road (CR 846E) in the amount of $999,855.21. (District
5)
8) Recommendation to authorize a Budget Amendment to recognize
revenue and transfer funding for projects within the Transportation
Supported Gas Tax Fund (3083) and Transportation & CDES Capital
Fund (3081) in the amount of $230,253.23. (Project Nos. 60085,
60066, 60088, 69331, 69333, 69336, and 69340) (All Districts)
9) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
Supplemental Agreement to the Local Agency Program (LAP)
Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to
increase the grant award from $983,670 to $1,984,140.56 for the
construction of five-foot bike lanes on Green Blvd; to adopt the
accompanying resolution formally approving and authorizing the
chairman to execute same on behalf of the Board of County
Commissioners; and to authorize the necessary budget amendments,
FPN 438093-2-58-01. (Project No. 33849. Fund 1841). (District 3)
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to terminate for convenience Construction
Page 10
March 12, 2024
Agreement No. 22-7953 with Douglas N. Higgins, Inc., pertaining to
the “NCWRF Operations Building HVAC Maintenance” project.
(Project No. 50196.2) (District 2)
2) Recommendation to approve administratively approved Change Order
No. 3, providing for a time extension of 30 days under Construction
Agreement No. 23-8058, with Accurate Drilling Systems, Inc., for the
“Golden Gate City Transmission Water Main Improvements – Phase
1A – Golf Course” project, and authorize the Chairman to sign the
attached Change Order. (Project No. 70253) (District 3)
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-
officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer
District, award Invitation to Bid (“ITB”) No. 23-8187, “Public
Utilities 33 Lift Station Panels Replacement,” to Powerserve
Technologies, Inc., in the amount of $3,112,404.29, approve an
Owner’s Allowance of $155,000, authorize the Chairman to sign the
attached Agreement and approve the necessary Budget Amendment.
(Project No. 50280.6.4) (District 2)
4) Recommendation to approve Change Order No. 2, providing for a
time extension of 4 days under Construction Agreement No. 22-7981,
with OneSource Construction Company & Builders, Inc., for the
“North County Regional Water Treatment Plant (NCRWTP) Storage
Building” project, and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached
Change Order. (Project No. 70136) (All Districts)
5) Recommendation to approve Cityworks License and Maintenance
Agreement, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 13-6064
(#C156213), with Azteca Systems, LLC, to renew the Agreement for
one additional year, approve an expenditure in the amount of
$111,228.00 for the renewal year, and authorize the Chairman to sign
the attached Amendment. (All Districts)
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
Impact Fee Deferral Agreement in the amount of $281,589.12 with
Casa Amigo EHT, LLC, for twenty-four (24) Multi-Family
Affordable Housing Rental Housing Units. (Companion to Item
Page 11
March 12, 2024
#16F1) (All Districts)
2) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign
eleven (11) mortgage satisfactions for the State Housing Initiatives
Partnership loan program in the amount of $122,941.49 and authorize
the associated Budget Amendment. (SHIP Grant Fund 1053) (All
Districts)
3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign one
(1) release of lien for an Affordable Housing Density Bonus
agreement for a unit that is no longer subject to the terms of the
agreement. (All Districts)
4) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
Landlord Payment Agreement between Collier County and Clark
Court Bungalows LLC, allowing the Community and Human Services
Division (CHS) to administer the Rapid Re-Housing and
Homelessness Prevention Program through the Emergency Solutions
and Rapid Unsheltered Survivor Housing Grant Programs. (All
Districts)
5) Recommendation to approve an Extension of Loan Agreement with
the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthropology allowing the Collier County Museums and the Marco
Island Historical Society to continue to exhibit fourteen (14) artifacts
from the 1896 Pepper-Hearst Archaeological Expedition to display at
the Marco Island Historical Museum. (District 1)
6) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign three
(3) Releases of Lien for full payment in the amount of $57,427.98
pursuant to the Agreement for Deferral of 100% of Collier County
Impact Fees for Owner occupied Affordable Housing Dwellings. (All
Districts)
7) Recommendation to accept a donation of goods from The Benny
Fund, an Ohio non-profit corporation, for the purpose of providing
fenced astroturf play yards at the Domestic Animal Services Shelter of
an approximate value of $58,155. (All Districts)
E. CORPORATE BUSINESS OPERATIONS
Page 12
March 12, 2024
1) Recommendation to approve the First Amendment to Agreement No.
18-7287, “Enterprise Asset Management Consulting Services,” with
EMA, Inc., Gray Matter Systems, LLC, and Stantec Consulting
Services Inc., extending those agreements for one year under the same
pricing, terms and conditions of the Agreement. (All Districts)
2) Recommendation to approve an Assumption Agreement assigning all
rights, duties, benefits, and obligations to RVi Planning + Landscape
Architecture, Inc., concerning Agreement No. 18-7432-LA,
“Professional Services Library - Landscape Architecture Category.”
(All Districts)
3) Recommendation to approve an Assumption Agreement assigning all
rights, duties, benefits, and obligations to Grace Herbert Curtis
Architects, LLC, concerning Agreement No. 18-7432-AR
“Professional Services Library Architectural Study, Planning and
Design Category”. (All Districts)
4) Recommendation to approve an Assumption Agreement assigning all
rights, duties, benefits, and obligations to Stantec Consulting Services,
Inc., concerning Agreement No. 22-7973 “Independent Design Peer
Review Services for Transportation Engineering Projects”. (All
Districts)
5) Recommendation to authorize expenditures for a single source
provider for broadband internet services with Orlando Telephone
Company, Inc., d/b/a Summit Broadband, with projected annual costs
of not to exceed $100,000 per fiscal year for a five-year period, and to
ratify the approval of attached Master Service Agreement No. 22-021-
NS. (All Districts)
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to approve a reimbursement in the amount of
$281,589.12 to Casa Amigos EHT, LLC, for impact fees paid on
Building Permit Number PRBD20201252841 and proposed to be
deferred through an Impact Fee Deferral Agreement for a multi-
family affordable housing rental project. (Companion to Item #16D1)
(District 5)
Page 13
March 12, 2024
2) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (“ITB”) No. 23-8107S,
“Purchase and Delivery of Plant Material for Pelican Bay Services -
Supplemental,” to Hannula Landscaping and Irrigation, Inc., and
SiteOne Landscape Supply, LLC, as Primary and Secondary vendors.
(All Districts)
3) Recommendation to approve a quotation in the amount of $440,220
and authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order for a Request For
Quotation, under Multi-Contractor Award Agreement No. 19-7525, to
Capital Contractors, LLC, for repairs to five historic structures at the
Collier Museum at the Government Center. (Project No. 50510)
(District 1)
4) Recommendation to authorize the Chairperson to execute nineteen
(19) Deed Certificates for purchased burial rights at Lake Trafford
Memorial Gardens Cemetery and authorize the County Manager or
designee to take all actions necessary to record the Deed Certificates
with the Clerk of the Court’s Recording Department. (District 5)
5) Recommendation to approve the Tourism Development Tax
Promotion funds to support the upcoming April 2024 Sports Tourism
Event, Naples Spring Shootout, paying up to $3,000 to Kickoff
Soccer, and make a finding that these expenditures promote tourism.
(All Districts)
6) This Item Continued from the February 13, 2024, BCC Meeting.
Recommendation to award Fixed Fee Professional Service Agreement
to Digitech Computer, LLC, under Request for Proposal (RFP) 23-
8098 EMS Billing Services and authorize the Chairman to sign the
attached agreement. (All Districts)
7) Recommendation to award Construction Invitation to Bid (“ITB”) No.
23-8182, the “Caxambas Park and Boat Rehabilitation Project” to
Kelly Brothers, Inc., in the amount of $2,735,926.67, authorize the
Chairman to sign the attached Agreement, and approve the necessary
Budget Amendment. (Project No. 50280). (District 1)
8) Recommendation to donate two (2) surplus vehicles to Everglades
City and authorize the Procurement Director, as designee for the
County Manager, to sign for the transfer of the vehicle titles, pursuant
Page 14
March 12, 2024
to Florida Statute Chapter 274.05. (All Districts)
9) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions, or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget. (The Budget
Amendments in the attached Resolution have been reviewed and
approved by the Board of County Commissioners via separate
Executive Summaries.) (All Districts)
10) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a
Settlement Agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) in the amount of $5,000 based on the Notice of Proposed Civil
Penalty issued to Collier County Helicopter Operations regarding an
alleged violation of FAA regulations. (All Districts)
11) Recommendation to award Request for Proposal ("RFP") No. 23-8133
for Agenda Management Software to CivicPlus, LLC, and approve
the related attached Agreement with Civic Plus, as well as approving
Amendment Two, with Granicus, LLC pertaining to Agreement No.
15-6431, BCC Agenda Software Replacement (extending the existing
services thereunder for an additional six months). (All Districts)
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Proclamation designating March 18 - 22, 2024, as Government
Finance Professionals Week in Collier County. To be mailed to
Derek Johnssen, Clerk of the Court Director of Finance and
Accounting; and Chris Johnson, Director of Corporate Financial and
Management Services.
2) Proclamation designating March 16, 2024, as Save the Florida Panther
Day in Collier County. To be mailed to Erin Myers, Refuge Manager,
Florida Panther and Ten Thousand Islands National Wildlife Refuge.
3) Proclamation designating March 2024 as National Athletic Training
Month. The proclamation will be mailed to the Athletic Trainers'
Association of Florida, New Port Richey, Florida.
Page 15
March 12, 2024
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous Correspondence March 12, 2024 (All Districts)
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To record in the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners, the
check number (or other payment method), amount, payee, and
purpose for which the referenced disbursements in the amount of
$50,833,110.42 were drawn for the periods between February 15,
2024 and February 28, 2024 pursuant to Florida Statute 136.06. (All
Districts)
2) Request that the Board approve and determine valid public purpose
for invoices payable and purchasing card transactions as of March 6,
2024. (All Districts)
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to appoint two members to the Bayshore
Beautification Advisory Committee. (All Districts)
2) Recommendation to appoint Mr. Richard Annis as a member to the
Housing Finance Authority. (All Districts)
3) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $117,100 plus $27,598 in statutory attorney fees,
apportionment fees, expert fees and costs for the taking of Parcel
1114FEE required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project
No. 60168. (All Districts)
4) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a
Second Amendment to Retention Agreement for specialized FEMA
legal services on an “as needed” basis with the law firm of Baker,
Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, P.C. (All Districts)
L. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Summary Agenda - This section is for advertised public hearings and must
Page 16
March 12, 2024
meet the following criteria: 1) A recommendation for approval from staff; 2)
Unanimous recommendation for approval by the Collier County Planning
Commission or other authorizing agencies of all members present and voting;
3) No written or oral objections to the item received by staff, the Collier
County Planning Commission, other authorizing agencies or the board, prior
to the commencement of the BCC meeting on which the items are scheduled to
be heard; and 4) No individuals are registered to speak in opposition to the
item. For those items which are quasi-judicial in nature, all participants must
be sworn in.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. This item requires ex parte disclosure be provided by the Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve a rezoning
ordinance for the NBC RV Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development, a portion
of which remains in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Receiving Lands
Zoning Overlay, to allow up to 356,000 square feet of commercial and
industrial uses and 75 Travel-Trailer-Recreational Vehicle campground units
on property located 450± feet northeast of the intersection of Basik Drive
and Tamiami Trail East, 5 miles east of Collier Boulevard in Section 18,
Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of
34± acres; and by providing an effective date. (Companion to Item #17B)
(District 1)
B. Recommendation to approve an ordinance amending the Future Land Use
Element and Future Land Use Map and map series of the Growth
Management Plan to create the East Tamiami Trail Mixed Use Subdistrict,
to allow up to 356,000 square feet of gross floor area of heavy commercial
and industrial uses, and up to 75 travel trailer-recreational vehicle
campground units. The subject property is located 450± feet northeast of the
intersection of Basik Drive and Tamiami Trail East, 5 miles east of Collier
Boulevard, in section 18, township 51 south, range 27 east, Collier County,
Florida, consisting of 33.523± acres. (Companion to Item #17A) (District 1)
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD’S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER’S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
March 12, 2024
Page 2
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to
the commissioner meeting. And we have a big day today. A lot
of -- lots of things to talk about. So I just want to remind you, as we
get started, please silence that cell phone because inevitably
somebody will have that going off, and I'll be more interested in your
ringtone than I will thinking about what I've got to do next.
So with that, let's go with the Pledge and the prayer.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, we have special guests
today for our invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. We have
Scottlynn Hall, Daisy Hall, Sunee Hall, Shepherd Hall, and Miles
Hall here to join us.
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE BY SCOTTLYN HALL, DAISY
HALL, SUNEE HALL, SHEPHERD HALL, AND MILES HALL –
INVOCATION GIVEN
SCOTTLYN HALL: I'm praying for Commissioner Big
Daddy. Lord, I pray for Commissioner Big Daddy, that he will
choose the right decisions in Naples; that he thinks -- when he thinks
of his ideas, they will come out bright, and he'll do everything great
in Naples.
DAISY HALL: I'm praying for Commissioner LoCastro. I
thank you that you put peace in his mind, Lord, and that you put
angels around him in this year, and I pray for -- that you give him the
right decisions to make. In Jesus' name, amen.
SUNEE HALL: I'm praying for Commissioner McDaniel.
And, Dear God, I hope that he has the right decisions and knows
March 12, 2024
Page 3
what he's doing and keeps on being a great commissioner. In Jesus'
name, amen.
SHEPHERD HALL: I'm praying for Commissioner Saunders,
and I pray that he has wisdom to lead the county and that he is a
really good commissioner and that he chooses right choices. In
Jesus' name, amen.
MILES HALL: I am praying for Commissioner Kowal. I
hope he has a good life and a good day, and I hope he bes a good
commissioner. In Jesus' name.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: Good job.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Just so you know, we call
Commissioner Hall "Big Daddy" as well. I just want to get that out
there. It's on his bio. And he makes us do that, actually.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Call me Commissioner, call me Chris,
call me Big Daddy, just don't call me late for supper.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, agenda changes for
March 12th, 2024.
We do have an add-on item, 16H4. This is a proclamation
designating March 21st through 31st, 2024, as the 48th anniversary of
the Collier County Fair. The proclamation will be mailed to Rhonda
Ward, Collier Fair manager, and this is added to the agenda item at
Commissioner McDaniel's request.
We are moving Item 3C1 to the March 26th, 2024, BCC
meeting. This is recognizing Noland Sapp for his 46 years of
dedicated public-safety service upon retirement. It turns out Chief
Sapp went to Disney World.
Move Item 17A to 9A. This item requires the commissioner
members to provide ex parte disclosure should a hearing be held on
this time. This is a recommendation to approve a rezoning
March 12, 2024
Page 4
ordinance for the NBC RV Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development, a
portion of which remains in the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District
Receiving Lands Zoning Overlay, to allow up to 356,000 square feet
of commercial and industrial uses and 75 travel trailer/recreational
vehicle campground units on property located 450 plus/minus feet
northeast of the intersection of Basik Drive and Tamiami Trail East,
five miles east of Collier Boulevard in Section 18, Township 51
South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 34
plus/minus acres, and providing an effective date.
Its companion item, 17B, is also being moved to the regular
agenda to become Item 9B. This is a recommendation to approve an
ordinance amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land
Use Map and map series of the Growth Management Plan to create
the East Tamiami Trail Mixed-Use Subdistrict to allow up to 356,000
square feet of gross floor area of heavy commercial and industrial
uses and up to 75 travel trailer/recreational vehicle campground units.
Again, the subject property is located 450 feet plus/minus
northeast of the intersection of Basik Drive and Tamiami Trail East,
five miles east of Collier Boulevard, in Section 18, Township 51
South, Range 27 East. Both of these items are being moved to the
regular agenda at Commissioner LoCastro's request.
Next, move Item 16A14 to 11F. This is a recommendation to
direct staff to advertise and bring back an ordinance amending the
Land Development Code to update the regulations relating to the
removal of prohibited exotic vegetation, and this is being moved to
the regular agenda by Commissioner LoCastro, Kowal, and Hall's
separate requests.
Move Item 16F7 to 11G. This is a recommendation to award
Construction Invitation to Bid No. 23-8182, the Caxambas Park and
Boat Rehabilitation Project, to Kelly Brothers, Inc., in the amount of
$2,735,926.67, authorize the Chairman to sign the attached
March 12, 2024
Page 5
agreement, and approve the necessary budget amendment. This is
being moved at the separate requests of Commissioner LoCastro and
Commissioner Kowal.
A couple of agenda notes: Item 16B7 should be corrected to
read as follows: A recommendation to authorize electronic
submission by the County Manager or designee of a small county
outreach program for Rural Areas of Opportunity application with the
Florida Department of Transportation to fund the construction of a
paved shoulder to improve safety on a segment of Immokalee Road
in the amount of $999,855.21.
We'll cover this for Item 17A when it is on the regular agenda,
but there is an Attachment A, the revised ordinance for hours of
operation. There's amended text. We'll address that when we get to
that item, as it is on the regular agenda now.
We do have a series of time-certain items, first of which is Item
10A to be heard at 9:30 a.m. This is a recommendation to submit a
community project funding application to Congressman Mario
Diaz-Balart for $6 million to construct a Collier County veterans
services center and museum.
The next is Item 11A to be heard at 10:30 a.m. to review a
proposed ordinance amendment to Ordinance 2002-63 which
established the Conservation Collier program.
Item 11B to be heard at 1 p.m., which is the after-action report
for the 2024 legislative session.
And, Item 11C, to be heard no sooner that 1:30 p.m., which is a
recommendation to accept a project update on the Collier County
Behavioral Health Center and proceed with the design for 87 total
beds.
We have court reporter breaks scheduled for 10:30 and 2:50.
And with that, County Attorney, any other changes?
MR. KLATZKOW: No changes, ma'am.
March 12, 2024
Page 6
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, changes or ex parte on the consent
agenda, as the item on summary is being moved to regular.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Kowal, any changes and
ex parte?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I have no changes, and I have no
ex parte.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, I have no
changes and no ex parte as well.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Same for me; no changes, ex
parte.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Two -- I have two things.
Number 1, thank you for the accommodation for the Collier County
Fair that starts next week. That's a wonderful event. If you haven't
ever attended, please go. It's -- it supports our 4H. It's everything
about what we do here in Collier County.
And then on 16A12, I do have e-mails and phone calls.
CHAIRMAN HALL: And I have no changes and no ex parte.
MS. PATTERSON: If we could get a motion to accept the
agenda as amended.
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND
SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EX PARTE
DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR
CONSENT AGENDA - MOTION TO APPROVE BY
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO - APPROVED AND/OR
March 12, 2024
Page 7
ADOPTED W/CHANGES
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. A motion and second. All
approved, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: It passes.
SEE REVERSE SIDE
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
March 12, 2024
Add-on Item 16H4: Proclamation designating March 21 – 31, 2024, as the 48th Anniversary of the Collier Fair.
The proclamation will be mailed to Rhonda Ward, Collier Fair Manager. (Commissioner McDaniel’s Request)
Move Item 3C1 to the March 26, 2024, BCC Meeting: Recognizing Nolan Sapp for his 46 years of dedicated
public safety service upon retirement. (Staff Request)
Move Item 17A to 9A: This item requires the Commission members to provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a
hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve a rezoning
ordinance for the NBC RV Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development, a portion of which remains in the Rural Fringe
Mixed Use District-Receiving Lands Zoning Overlay, to allow up to 356,000 square feet of commercial and
industrial uses and 75 Travel-Trailer-Recreational Vehicle campground units on property located 450± feet
northeast of the intersection of Basik Drive and Tamiami Trail East, 5 miles east of Collier Boulevard in Section
18, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 34± acres; and by providing an
effective date. (Companion to Item 17B) (Commissioner LoCastro’s Request)
Move Item 17B to 9B: Recommendation to approve an ordinance amending the Future Land Use Element and
Future Land Use Map and map series of the Growth Management Plan to create the East Tamiami Trail Mixed Use
Subdistrict, to allow up to 356,000 square feet of gross floor area of heavy commercial and industrial uses, and up
to 75 travel trailer-recreational vehicle campground units. The subject property is located 450± feet northeast of the
intersection of Basik Drive and Tamiami Trail East, 5 miles east of Collier Boulevard, in section 18, township 51
south, range 27 east, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 33.523± acres. (Companion to Item 17A)
(Commissioner LoCastro’s Request)
Move Item 16A14 to 11F: Recommendation to direct staff to advertise and bring back an Ordinance amending the
Land Development Code to update the regulations relating to the removal of prohibited exotic vegetation. (By
separate requests of Commissioners LoCastro, Kowal, and Hall)
Move Item 16F7 to 11G: Recommendation to award Construction Invitation to Bid (“ITB”) No. 23-8182, the
“Caxambas Park and Boat Rehabilitation Project” to Kelly Brothers, Inc., in the amount of $2,735,926.67,
authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Agreement, and approve the necessary Budget Amendment. (Project
No. 50280). (By separate requests of Commissioners LoCastro and Kowal)
Notes:
Item 16B7 should be corrected to read as follows: Recommendation to authorize electronic submission by staff
the County Manager or designee of a Small County Outreach Program for Rural Areas of Opportunities application
with the Florida Department of Transportation to fund the construction of a paved shoulder to improve safety on a
segment of Immokalee Road (CR 846E) in the amount of $999,855.21.
Item 17A, Attachment A – Revised Ordinance, Exhibit F, under “VI. HOURS OF OPERATION” the following
language should be added:
“B. Every 5 years from the date of adoption of the Ordinance, staff will provide a report to the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners on the hours of operation for loading and crushing of concrete, the
impacts to owners and whether any complaints have been made to the County. Upon a finding of public
purpose, the Board reserves the right to modify the hours of operation to 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. at such meeting
without an advertised hearing.”
TIME CERTAIN ITEMS:
Item 10A to be heard 9:30 AM: Recommendation to submit a Community Project Funding application to
Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart for $6 million to construct a Collier County Veterans Services Center and
Museum.
Item 11A to be heard at 10:30 AM: Recommendation to review a proposed amendment to Ordinance 2002-63,
which established the Conservation Collier Program, which will be advertised for a future Board meeting.
Item 11B to be heard at 1 PM: After-action report for the 2024 Florida legislative session.
Item 11C to be heard no sooner than 1:30 PM: Recommendation to accept a project update on the Collier
County Behavioral Health Center and proceed with the design for 87 total beds.
3/12/2024 3:53 PM
March 12, 2024
Page 8
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 12, 2024, AS
GENTLE'MEN AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE DAY IN
COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY SHERIFF KEVIN
RAMBOSK AND OTHER DISTINGUISHED GUESTS – MOTION
TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED
BY COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS – ADOPTED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us straight to
proclamations, Item 4A. Item 4A is a proclamation designating
March 12th, 2024, as Gentle'men Against Domestic Violence Day in
Collier County. To be accepted by Sheriff Kevin Rambosk and
other distinguished guests.
Congratulations.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: Photogenic bunch.
(Applause.)
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Good morning, Chairman and Board.
Kevin Rambosk, Collier County Sheriff, as well as member of the
shelter's board of directors and a member of Gentle'men Against
Domestic Violence.
Thank you for recognizing this day and this effort. You know,
this group was established in 2008 and has been growing each and
every year, and it really calls on all of us as gentlemen to stand as
partners with women to stop domestic violence and human
trafficking in Collier County. So we thank you for that.
With me today are Founding Fathers Bob Connors, John
Gordon, Jim Jessee, who were up here and recognized. We have
other of our leaders, Ron Ciesla, Colin Estrem, and Corey Lazar who
put an extreme amount of time and effort into not only creating the
March 12, 2024
Page 9
program but making it work year to year.
Last year, unfortunately, we had 1,600
domestic-violence-related calls to 911. We have to do everything
we can to continue to stop that. And, you know, it's not limited to
any one neighborhood. It is throughout the county, and it costs us an
estimated $30 million in impacts.
So we're asking for all gentlemen in Collier County to stand
with us and become a part of the solution to stopping domestic
violence. And you might have seen in today's Naples Daily News
there are 350-plus committed gentlemen throughout the county that
have made that commitment and also did an awareness campaign last
week that involved 60 people to go throughout the community and let
potential victims know of the resources available to them through
Collier County and by the shelter.
So I'd like to thank all of those members, all those that are with
us today that created the program that make it work, and all those
throughout the county that help us to stop domestic violence each and
every day.
Thank you very much, everybody.
(Applause.)
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 10 - 16, 2024, AS
SUNSHINE WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND
COMPTROLLER - MOTION TO APPROVE BY
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS – ADOPTED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, Item 4B is a proclamation
March 12, 2024
Page 10
designating March 10th through the 16th, 2024, as Sunshine Week in
Collier County. To be accepted by Crystal Kinzel, Clerk of the
Circuit Court and Comptroller, and members of the Finance and
Board Minutes and Records. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner, just a quick note. Crystal
Kinzel. I brought up some of the staff because many in the public
may not realize your Board Minutes and Records, they take care of
your information up on our third floor -- fourth floor, and so they do
that every day for the public's benefit, and so we want to celebrate
them as individuals serving you guys. Thanks.
(Applause.)
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, if we could get a motion
to accept the proclamations.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So moved.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. A motion and second. All in
favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
MS. PATTERSON: That brings us to Item 5.
Item #5B
PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS OF
THE QUARTER FOR MARCH 2024 TO TRUE FASHIONISTAS.
THE AWARD WILL BE ACCEPTED BY JENNIFER JOHNSON,
March 12, 2024
Page 11
OWNER, ALONG WITH KRISTINA PARK, CEO, AND
BETHANY SAWYER, VICE PRESIDENT OF MEMBERSHIP
AND INVESTORS, THE GREATER NAPLES CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE – PRESENTED
MS. PATTERSON: Item 5B is a presentation of the Collier
County Business of the Quarter for March 2024 to True Fashionistas.
The award will be accepted by Jennifer Johnson, owner, along with
Brad Johnson and Kristina Park, CEO, and Bethany Sawyer, vice
president of membership and investors, Greater Naples Chamber of
Commerce.
Congratulations.
MS. JOHNSON: Thank you, Commissioners.
And to the Greater Naples Chamber, it is an honor to be the
Business of the Quarter.
So I'm Jennifer Johnson. My husband Brad and I started True
Fashionistas 13 years ago. We are off of Airport and Vanderbilt in
North Naples. And we started out 13 years ago with an
1,800-square-foot store, and we grew that to the point of becoming
the largest lifestyle resale store in the state of Florida. We have
13,000 square feet in the same plaza that we started in, and we have
between 45 and 50 employees. And we sell online as well as in our
store, and it is a great honor to have started here in Collier County
and grown our business with our community here in Collier County.
So thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. PATTERSON: That brings us to Item 7, public comments
on general topics not on the current or future agenda.
MR. MILLER: We have three registered speakers this
morning. Your first speaker is Richard Schroeder. He'll be
March 12, 2024
Page 12
followed by Mary Davies Pitsy. No, she does not want to speak.
I'm sorry.
So Mr. Schroeder will be followed by Dr. J.B. Holmes.
DR. SCHROEDER: Richard Schroeder, Naples resident,
retired physician.
I want to speak just a little bit today about health risks of
wireless radiation technology. And I may be a little out of my lane
to be talking about wireless communications, so just consider this a
mutual learning experience.
But the fact is, there's been mounting evidence for decades that
we humans in the plant and animal kingdom we depend on for our
continued survival are at considerable risk from manmade radiation
of many kinds. We're bathed in an electromagnetic smog 24/7 as a
result of all the electronic goodies that we have adopted.
With wired communication, like Ethernet communication for
our computers or old-fashioned phone lines, so to speak, information
is transmitted via the wires, and the electromagnetic fields and
radiation are unintentional. They're not desired. Proper engineering
can reduce these unwanted fields and radiation to a minimum.
By contrast with wireless communication, the radiation is the
product that actually does the job of transmitting the information.
Wireless means radiation. We already know the dangers of
radiation. I mean, picture your -- picture your radiologist
scampering behind the screen when they snap your X-ray or the
dental technician and so forth. The problem is, the ability to use
wireless devices everywhere on earth means that every square meter
of the earth must be eradiated at all times.
Our mobile phones operate in what's called a microwave
spectrum with the result that the entire planet is now swimming in a
sea of microwave radiation that's millions to, perhaps, even billions
of times stronger than the radiation from the sun and the stars from
March 12, 2024
Page 13
which life evolved.
And life is based not only on chemistry, the way we think of it
as being in our cells and so forth, but more fundamentally on
electricity, the unimpeded flow of electrons is essential to the
functioning or our nerves, our metabolism, and even our heartbeat.
Interference with these electric currents can therefore cause
neurologic diseases, heart disease, metabolic diseases such as
diabetes, cancer, and damage to germ cells that result in infertility.
Maybe even more importantly, organisms that we depend on in
our food chain that have a very high metabolism, such as bees and
other insects, are being wiped out. Thousands and thousands of
studies document the devastating effects of wireless radiation on
mammals, birds, insects, amphibians in forests.
The finding that only a single two-hour exposure to a mobile
phone during their lifetime, even when the power of the phone was
reduced 100-fold caused permanent damage in young rats makes it
likely that we are raising and perhaps have already raised a
generation of children with brain damage, and there's a ton more
evidence of cell phone risk from the government itself we don't have
time to get into.
There's no question that cell phones are not safe at any power
level at any distance from the head or for any duration, but what do
we do? Well, one thing we need to do is understand a bit more
about the telecom industry. Just suffice it to say for now that the
guidelines that are used for safety in this industry are very industry
friendly and not based on science.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thank you.
DR. SCHROEDER: So we'll talk more about that at a later
date. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next and final speaker for Item 7 is
March 12, 2024
Page 14
Dr. J.B. Holmes.
DR. HOLMES: Commissioners, Chairman Hall, my name is
Holmes, Dr. J.B. Holmes. Thank you for having me speak today, or
allowing me to speak.
One, I would like to invite again -- or reinforce my invitation to
all of you to attend the Vietnam Veterans Day recognition at Golden
Gate VFW Post 7721 on Friday, March 29, 1800 hours. I'll leave
that up to Commissioner LoCastro to translate the time for the
civilians.
But what I'd like to do is briefly, again, discuss the VA nursing
home property, that legislation has been passed in the state
legislature. Last Friday it was voted on just after noon. And the
language provided to me from that bill by Senator Passidomo's office
is the department is authorized to submit an application for federal
funds to construct a new veterans home and adult day health care
center in Collier County. The source of the state funds is based on a
memorandum of agreement between the department and the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners to commit the necessary
funds to be used as matching funds towards the construction and
development costs of the new veterans nursing home and adult
daycare center.
So it's gotten that far. It goes to the governor now for signature.
Commissioner Saunders has spent, what, about a thousand years up
in Tallahassee, Commissioner. So you know how that process goes,
and I ask that you would keep us well informed of the process and
progress on that.
Then I'd like to also speak -- and I know it's coming up later in
the program -- on the recommendation to submit a Collier County
project funding application to Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart for
$6 million to construct a Collier County veterans service center and
museum at the previously proposed location for a Collier County
March 12, 2024
Page 15
Public Schools career and tech center adjacent to the planned Golden
Gate Parkway entrance to the state veterans nursing home and adult
day health care campus.
So I want to say that, one, we support that and -- we vigorously
support -- we vigorously support that. The veterans community will
support that, and I ask that the County Commissioners please support
that $6 million proposal.
And I understand there's $6 million set aside for development of
the golf course already at this time. I ask that that $6 million stay
there, because I understand if that is pulled, Arthrex may pull their
$20 million set aside for the golf course. So to leave that and
vigorously, vigorously pursue the $6 million from Congressman
Diaz-Balart, and I promise you the Collier County veterans will
vigorously support you. Just advise me on what you would like us
to do to support that proposal.
Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #10B
RESOLUTION 2024-41: NOMINATE AND APPOINT FIVE
MEMBERS TO THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT PRODUCTIVITY
COMMITTEE. (ALL DISTRICTS) - MOTION TO REAPPOINT
JAMES CALAMARI, GERALD GODSHAW, MELANIE MILLER,
JOHN SYMON AND APPOINT BRUCE HAMMELS BY
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL – ADOPTED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, we have about six
minutes until we start our 9:30 time-certain. We could take Item
10B, which is a recommendation to nominate and appoint five
members to the county government Productivity Committee. I think
March 12, 2024
Page 16
we can take care of that one.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Great, yes.
MS. PATTERSON: Anybody -- want to start with that, County
Attorney, and guidance for the Board before we get started on the
nominations?
MR. KLATZKOW: Multiple approaches to this. One
approach that's been used in the past is since we five vacancies, each
commissioner, by district number, would nominate somebody to the
Productivity Committee. So we'd start with District 1.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I may have a recommendation. If -- we
have recommendation from staff for all five of these positions.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I don't think we had any
objections.
CHAIRMAN HALL: If there's no objections.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, may I make a
comment before we begin that process?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Because I sit with that
committee every month when they meet, and they've got
subcommittees, and they work very hard. It's a really good group.
There are five openings, but there are five members of that
committee that are reapplying for re-appointment. And I know the
general policy has been, or at least there's been some interest in,
rotating these types of memberships. But I would ask that the Board
consider the re-appointment of these five.
Again, I work with them. I know how hard they work, and they
dig into this budgeting process and our expenditures, and I think
maintaining that group would be most effective. So that would be
my recommendation, Mr. Chairman and members of the Board.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I just -- Bruce
March 12, 2024
Page 17
Hammels is a very involved individual in the community from
Eastern Collier County. He's semiretired, if not completely retired,
and I would really like to see him take a position on there.
And, Commissioner Saunders, your comment with regard to the
re-appointment, there's four with dots that are re-appointees, and then
a fifth, necessarily, one that's open.
So if -- I'd be happy with the re-appointment of those that are
reapplying and adding Bruce as the fifth and simply -- because he's
the only one from District 5.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I thought there were five but,
you're right, there are four that are reapplying.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Did you get that, that he said
I was right? I just wanted to make sure that that made the record.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah, but just for the record,
I'm trying to get his vote on the other four, so I had to say he's right.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. I got you. So Mr. Hammels
is who you would like to see on there?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I would.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Neil Schmidt had approached me and
had great interest in doing this but, in all fairness, three out of those
four are District 2 representatives, so I'm good with that. I'm good
with that. I think he'll understand that as well.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So with that -- do you want
to make the motion, or do you want me to?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Well, I still have my -- I'm lit up.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I know -- give me a chance, all
right.
No, you brought up the same point I saw. When I did my
research, I found out there was only four that reapplied. But my
other question was that we actually had six at-large. Are we
March 12, 2024
Page 18
reducing the number now? Because now we only have five at-large.
Because that's all we're speaking about is the at-large positions, not
the district representatives.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think only five of those
seats expired.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: No. I got the list right here,
2024, unless they go by months, but -- or they go by the year?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, just -- that's what we have.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I was just reading the
executive summary. It says five at-large seats had expired, but that
must be incorrect.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Unless this is incorrect. I don't
know. But regardless, so we have one open if we don't reelect the
three -- the four that reapplied. So we have an open seat. And it
seems like we've got a lot of representation from District 2 already
between the two that already reapplied.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And, quite frankly, I was
looking just at the amount of work that we do and the quality of their
work, not the district that they reside in.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Right. And Neil Schmidt, well, he was
recommended by the committee, but I'm good to go with
Commissioner McDaniel. So that would be the only -- that would be
the only change to the recommendation.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So that would be Bruce?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Bruce Hammels.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: All right. Well, I just needed
clarity because, like I said, I saw on the list that we had six, and I
didn't --
MR. KLATZKOW: You do have six, but the sixth member's
term is not expired yet.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Okay. Because they had the
March 12, 2024
Page 19
same dates on my list. That's why I was wondering. I stand
corrected. So we only have one, then, open if we elect the other
four.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So the motion would be to
appoint the four that are up for re-appointment and appoint Bruce
Hammels as the fifth vacancy.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll make that motion, unless
you want to, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Motion by Commissioner Saunders,
second by Commissioner McDaniel. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right.
Item #10A
SUBMIT A COMMUNITY PROJECT FUNDING APPLICATION
TO CONGRESSMAN MARIO DIAZ-BALART FOR $6 MILLION
TO CONSTRUCT A COLLIER COUNTY VETERANS SERVICES
CENTER AND MUSEUM AT THE PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED
LOCATION FOR A COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
CAREER AND TECHNICAL TRAINING CENTER ADJACENT
TO THE PLANNED GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY ENTRANCE
TO THE STATE VETERANS NURSING HOME AND ADULT
March 12, 2024
Page 20
DAY HEALTH CARE CAMPUS. (DISTRICT 3) - MOTION TO
APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER HALL – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, right on time. That
brings us to our 9:30 time-certain, Item 10A. This is a
recommendation to submit a community project funding application
to Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart for $6 million to construct a
Collier County veterans services center and museum at the previously
proposed location for a Collier County Public Schools career and
technical training center adjacent to the planned Golden Gate
Parkway entrance to the state veterans nursing home and adult
daycare campus. This item is brought to the agenda by
Commissioner Saunders.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
We've all talked about how important our veteran community is
here in Collier County. I mentioned once before that Governor
DeSantis had said that he wanted to make Florida the most
veteran-friendly state in the country, and I've said many times I want
to make Collier County -- I know the Board wants to make Collier
County the most veteran-friendly county in the state, and this is part
of that puzzle.
We have the veterans nursing home with the adult day health
care, and as J.B. Holmes had pointed out a few moments ago, we've
got funding for that from the state, we've got the language we needed
from the state, and that project is moving along very nicely. And I
think this is just another part of that campus concept that we've been
talking about where we have all of the veterans offices, all the
veterans service offices in one location.
This building that we're talking about this morning could
March 12, 2024
Page 21
serve -- would serve a multiple purpose. It's not just a military
museum. That's not even really the main function. The main
function of this building would be to provide space for all of the
veterans service offices here in the county in one location so that
veterans, members of the military that are here, can, at one location,
meet with all of the people that they may need to meet with for their
various needs.
The upstairs portion of this building has already been designed
for offices and for meeting space, which would be perfect for that.
So we can move all of our veterans services there and also provide
space for other veterans organizations.
One of the things that came up was, how did this building even
become part of the concept? And I guess it was probably -- probably
eight months ago David Hines approached me and said this would be
a wonderful location for a military museum.
And I said, well, I can't disagree with you, but the building's
already, really, committed to the school district. And as I advised
the Board a few weeks ago, the school district changed their mind;
decided not to occupy that space.
I contacted David Hines and said, good news, the building's
available. I'm going to put this on the agenda and ask the Board to
consider moving forward with this concept of a veterans services
center and military museum.
In addition to that, Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart happens to
be a good friend. He and I served together in the Florida Senate.
And I brought this subject up with him, and he thought this would be
a wonderful idea as part of the campus that we're designing for our
veteran community and suggested that we do what used to be an
earmark application. It's a community services type of an
application for federal funding.
We had estimated that the cost to reconfigure and construct this
March 12, 2024
Page 22
building, remodel this building, would be about $6 million. That
was an estimate that was developed when the school board was
looking at this building.
And so the request would be, this morning, that the Board
authorize our staff to apply for community project funding from the
federal government for a military museum but, more importantly, for
a veterans service center to be located at that -- at that location.
So, Mr. Chairman, that's the request. And I know there are
several people that are interested in speaking on this topic.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Public speakers.
MR. MILLER: I actually only have one registered speaker.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Let's do that.
MR. MILLER: Lois Bolin.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: As she's coming up to the
podium, I'd like to recognize that the members of the board of
directors of the museum are in the back there. And I don't know if
Mr. Hines would like to come up at some point. I think I'd like to
ask him a couple questions about this as well. So, Mr. Chairman,
with your permission, I would like to have a couple other speakers
that I'd like to ask a couple questions of.
CHAIRMAN HALL: No worries at all.
MS. BOLIN: Grandpa, what's for supper? That's from Hee
Haw, in case you youngins don't remember that.
I'm here to speak in favor of --
MR. MILLER: Your name.
MS. BOLIN: What? Oh, I'm sorry, Lois Bolin. Dan Kowal's
my County Commissioner. 5009 -- do I need to give my address? I
don't have to do that, right? Okay.
So why am I dressed the way I'm dressed? On March the 21st
is the official Rosie the Riveter Day, and we know how important
Rosie the Riveter was to winning World War II.
March 12, 2024
Page 23
I'm here to support this because I can't tell you how excited I am
that there's a possibility that we could get all the veterans' needs in
one area, because it is so hard for them to travel around to all these
various locations. And, as importantly, I'm thrilled about the
assisted living -- I'm not sure if I'm saying the right name -- and I'm
equally excited about having the military museum there, because a lot
of people over the years have given a lot of archives. And it's just a
perfect -- it's just a perfect storm, so to speak. It probably will be a
storm. Some people aren't going to be happy about it, and why I
don't know. But if you really study the value -- what role Florida
played -- the role that Florida played in winning World War II is
tremendous. I have some books, Troy, I'm going to give to you to
give to the commissioners. It's not a gift. It's from Tallahassee, so
there's no worry about that.
But this is so important. I mean, Collier County is rich in so
many resources, and they're rich because of the World War II
veterans and those that followed in their footsteps.
So, Commissioner Saunders, and to the rest of the
commissioners, I thank you for considering this. This would be a
tremendous asset for our veterans. And so on behalf of all the Rosie
Riveters and Rosebuds around the country, I want to thank you for
entertaining this motion, or whatever it's called. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thanks, Lois.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And, Mr. Chairman, David
Hines, I think -- I wanted to ask him just a couple quick questions.
Your current location, if you could describe where you are currently
and what your operations are.
MR. HINES: Yes, my name is David Hines, and I'm president
of the America's Military and 1st Responders Museum. We are
located at the North Road terminal at the Naples Airport.
We have had two rooms out there since 2011 but, unfortunately,
March 12, 2024
Page 24
the airport did some remodeling, and after they remodeled half of the
building out there, that -- we never got it back. And we have put
approximately 5,000 World War II artifacts in storage in 2020, and
they're still in storage.
We had one other room, 800 square feet, which we presently
have the museum now. It is packed solid. And any donations we
get, which we get two or three a week, they go into storage because
there's no place to put them.
So when Mr. Saunders contacted me about a space available, we
couldn't wait to take a look at it to see. I think it is approximately
8,000 square feet from 800 square feet. We could make a museum
setting instead of a display area now. Right now we have glass
cases. Case after case after case and everything on the walls and
stuff that -- people enjoy it, but they say, "You don't have a museum;
you have a display area," which I totally agree with them. But we
have plans on making this a first-class museum for the military and
also for the first responders in Collier County.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
And then, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask Mr. Mullins to come
up -- he's got a couple images -- because I think it's important for the
Board to know that the county had already done some preliminary
architectural and design work for the vocational educational facility,
and it just turns out that those plans are really almost perfect for
being converted into this type of a use, and I think it would be helpful
for the Board and for the public to see what this building would look
like.
MR. MULLINS: Yes, thank you, Commissioner Saunders.
For the record, John Mullins, your director of Communications,
Government and Public Affairs, and with apologies to Harvard Jolly
Architects, because I'm sure this first slide is some level of
architectural copyright infringement, this is kind of a redo of the
March 12, 2024
Page 25
facade of the veterans services center and military museum proposal.
As mentioned, this is the existing floor plan -- it has not been
modified at all -- showing how it was supposed to be designed as a
career center. The upper floor being some office space. Lower
floor being congregate meeting room space plus an open-air area for
training and different technical pursuits.
And with that, I am happy to answer any questions.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. And just one
other comment. I believe on the other end of the building, there's an
elevator, so it's already accessible.
MR. MULLINS: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So thank you.
So, Mr. Chairman, if there are no other questions, my motion is
simply for the Board to direct staff to make application for a
community project through Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart with the
idea that this would serve as a veterans service center and military
museum.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Yeah, I just wanted to make a couple comments. I think -- first
of all, I really appreciate you showing the photos because we
got -- I'm sure we all did, I certainly did, got e-mails from people that
weren't supportive of this and had all these great ideas for it but don't
even know where the building is and hadn't even seen it.
So turning this into affordable housing is, you know, not a -- you
know, an efficient use of this space, and we got some of those
suggestions, and that's fine. I mean, I appreciated feedback from a
lot of citizens.
I don't think it matters if you're a veteran or not to support this
project. I like what Dave said is, "We don't have a museum; you
know, we have a display area," and it just got shrunk by 50 percent a
March 12, 2024
Page 26
few years ago.
We talk about being a veteran-friendly, you know, town. I've
been in towns that are less veteran friendly and have amazing veteran
museums. We have no shortage of stuff on display.
So, I mean, I think most people know I'm a veteran, Dan's a
veteran, Dan Kowal. It doesn't really matter. This is a veteran and
first responder museum, and I think it's a perfect location.
It's unfortunate we lost the technical school, which would have
also been a positive but, you know, things change all the time.
Just some last-minute notes that I made here is the display
center, it's on borrowed time. So if this isn't the location, we -- then
we need to keep talking about something else. So if somebody's got
a real heartburn with this location -- but I sort of think forward as to
once that whole footprint is finished, we do have a big affordable
housing project. We have the golf project. We have the veterans'
nursing home. Then to have a veterans museum, it just seems like,
you know, we're not just plopping stuff arbitrarily, but it has some
cohesion to it that I -- you know, that I fully support.
And to those people that maybe have an issue with it, well, then,
rather than just, you know, put up your hand and saying it's a bad
idea, well, then help us with another location. You know, somebody
donate some land. Somebody tell us what we're missing.
But I think this is a great idea. Fully support moving forward
on it. If we wind up not getting some of the money from the state or
some of the other grants that we're applying for, I don't think it
should kill this project. I think we should, you know, think loud and
proud and figure out, you know, some other things.
And then, Dave, I'll challenge you in public here. Help meet us
in the middle. You know, there's a lot of people that say they love
veterans, they love coming to the display area and all this. Well, we
need funding from lots of different sources. So even if we get the
March 12, 2024
Page 27
big number, you're going to need money to move things to take stuff
out of the storage to maybe redo this inside a little bit, and there's
always something that sort of falls through the cracks.
So, you know, I would say as this starts to maybe move forward,
if it did, I would just challenge you, and I'm -- I'd be here to help you.
I know, J.B. Holmes would help and, you know, all the famous
veterans in the office. I mean, you know, we'll energize Wayne
Smith -- and you don't have to energize him. Wayne Smith's always
here, right -- to get the community to be a part of this with
philanthropy investment, and so it's not a matter of us just waiting for
Tallahassee to write us a check.
And so, you know, I certainly -- and I know all the
commissioners would be -- if they support this project, I would hope
would be instrumental in helping to drive that and advertise it and let
the community know that if this is taking shape, you know, we need
investment from all sides, not just waiting for Tallahassee to do our
homework for us. But that would be a big help.
So I fully support this project.
MR. HINES: Well, we opened up at the airport in 2011. And
any large donations that we've got since then has been going into a
building fund. We haven't spent any of it. So we do have money to
help, and we are contacting some influential people here in Naples to
make some big contributions.
And I forgot to mention, even though we're in a small
800-square-foot area, we have been advised by the airport that they
are going to remodel the other half. So that means we pack up
everything, and we move it out.
We presently have three storage hangars and three
temperature-controlled units that we are storing items in now. So if
we have to close the airport, we're out of business. And that's
coming this year. I can't get a definite answer when, but we're in the
March 12, 2024
Page 28
process of trying to clear the clutter out of the museum in preparation
for this closing of the museum.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thanks, Dave.
Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
I have to say, probably one of the first meetings I had when I
became a commissioner last year was with your organization. And,
you know, I really believe in what you guys are doing, and you really
need, you know, somewhere, because you were telling me the horror
stories of being moved around and losing square footage and the
amount of stuff you guys have in storage and what that costs you
every month to just keep them and keep them in an area that they're
not going to deteriorate or get damaged.
You know, and I was trying to look myself, and deputy -- or
assistant manager was also -- and I reached out to several different
things, and I was thinking about the train station. I don't know if I
mentioned it at one point, you know, being a possible location, but
then come to find out, I didn't even realize it, we don't even own that
property. The county maintains it as a museum, but we don't own it,
so that would probably be a hard sell, and then -- I didn't even think
about this project.
But then I have people that approached me, and probably just
like some of the other commissioners, in casual conversation in
reference to affordable housing for this building after the school
bowed out, but, you know, similar to something like the Stix project,
but then at the same time I had to, you know, let them know that
these are two different things, because Stix is a -- we changed some
things around for Stix and made it certain to only convert a hotel or
motel deeded property and use that type of LDC, that development
code for the smaller units, which I said, this doesn't apply to this
building because it was never a hotel or motel. So it would -- we'd
March 12, 2024
Page 29
have to actually go in and change our own rules that we did just for
Stix to basically exist in the way they are now and operating.
So, you know, I -- you know, there's probably other spots on the
property to maybe build something, but cost efficiently and the way
this building's already laid out, I would have to try to support -- I
would probably support this project moving forward or at least
attempting to find out if we're going to get -- the ability to get the
money from the federal government to move forward, so...
MR. HINES: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Just -- how much money do you have; do you remember?
MR. HINES: We probably have approximately $110,000.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. HINES: And we have been approaching several
influential people and making presentations to them hoping that they
will step up for it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I think I talked to you back in
the day when they cut you in half --
MR. HINES: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- with the location that you
currently have now.
MR. HINES: Right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I love the idea of the veterans
services center becoming right there. I mean, that flows with the
entire facility with the veterans nursing home and what we have
going on.
I have reservations with regard to the draw on our community
funds with regard to our museums at large. Just -- I'm going to say it
out loud. It's been brought up several times. At some particular
stage, we need to have a discussion about how we're managing five
March 12, 2024
Page 30
museum systems currently right now. And today is not the
discussion point. We'll have that discussion when we move into our
budget.
I'm absolutely in favor of moving this forward and having a
look-see as to the overall intention and expense in operations. Those
are -- those are the things that are going to ultimately sell me with
regard to how we're going to move this forward.
But the advent of having a central location for veterans
to -- don't have to travel everywhere, all over the county to different
locations, in combination with the museum, I think it's a wonderful
idea and a wonderful approach.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thanks, Commissioner McDaniel.
You know, I'm going to agree. I love the -- I love this concept.
Pictures -- I'm a picture guy. That helps me.
And so I know that we can -- you know, we can remodel that a
lot -- a lot less expensively than we could build it. So this is -- this
is, like, a great spot; however, with regard to what Commissioner
McDaniel said, the expense on the people -- whenever I wanted
something, if I wanted a truck, I would purchase an asset. Just say,
for simple reasons, I'd purchase a mobile home, and I'd rent the
mobile home, and the cash flow from the mobile home I would use to
purchase my truck. So when the truck was paid off, I still had the
mobile home still paying income.
So with that concept in mind, I've been -- Commissioner
Saunders, I've been notified by some people who love the idea of this
building and as it's -- you know, we're operating at a thousand square
feet now. I think there's almost 9500 square feet in here. And I'm
just going to throw this out there, but this -- they've approached me as
a place to include not only veterans services, but financial education,
counseling, career development, economical development, social
case management along with veterans services.
March 12, 2024
Page 31
So my thoughts are, if we do this, could we lease space to these
people? Because they have partner agencies who have committed
support to their cause. Could we lease space to them that would help
us with maintenance and operation?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think there's a couple
points I'd like to make. First of all, yes. There is a limited number
of veterans services offices that are going to be needed, and I think
that there's -- there would be space available for other types of
services like the financial services. I have no doubt of that. I've
been in this building. I've looked at all the design work, and I'm
very confident that there would be enough room to accommodate the
museum, certainly, and then all of the offices that we're talking about.
But for federal funding, the emphasis has to be on this is a
military -- a veterans services center. But we can configure this any
way we want to. So that's one point. So the answer to that question
is yes.
Secondly, the way we pay for our museums, we have a line item
in our tourist development tax collection for operations of museums.
I believe that's set at, I think, $2 million. That may be a number that
may have to be adjusted at some point. It hasn't -- I'm not sure when
it was last adjusted. But that's how these museums are generally
operated. They're operated out of tourist taxes as well as donations
and contributions from the community.
The other aspect of this is that there are artifacts in some other
museums like the one here on campus that could be moved there.
There are artifacts in the campus museum here that could be moved
to other museums, and the thought is for the long-range
planning -- and that's not anything for today, but just for long-range
planning, that site where we have our county museum is probably
going to be needed for other governmental buildings of some sort in
the long-term future. And so this will give us an opportunity to
March 12, 2024
Page 32
begin that process if we need to to move artifacts from this museum
to a different location.
But all of those issues that you've raised, Mr. Chairman, can be
accommodated in this building.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay. I don't know if this is the right
time to discuss this, but since we are talking about it, there's
also -- this is not a good spot for housing because it's only -- it's less
than half an acre, and you can only put, you know -- if you did want
that. But there are, next door to it, 8.3 acres that's zoned -- I think
it's community facilities. And I don't know if the golf course -- I
don't know if Arthrex is planning on using all or a portion of that.
I know that I spoke with staff this week, and they said that
that -- part of that 8.3 acres is not being targeted for housing right
now, but it's a good spot to -- you know, when I start thinking
creating cash flow or creating income for the county, instead of just
giving it all away at the taxpayers' expense, maybe we could take a
portion of that along Golden Gate Boulevard and look at some
mixed-use with some housing. I don't know if we can talk -- I don't
know if this is the right time to talk about that or not, but just -- real
briefly, just throwing it out there.
MS. PATTERSON: Sure. Commissioners, of course. So
there are -- there is that parcel you're referring to. What we're in the
process of doing now, with the configuration of the golf course, is
making sure we understand all of the stormwater needs. The Golden
Gate Golf Course currently serves and will continue to serve as a
flow-through for a huge portion of Golden Gate City on the other
side.
So making sure that as we develop the veterans nursing home,
the already slated housing, workforce housing, as well as the
configuration of the golf course, that we have adequate both dry and
wet retention as well as capacity to handle the stormwater.
March 12, 2024
Page 33
Once that's determined -- and we're getting close -- then we
would be able to talk about the uses on any other remaining property
that isn't required for the golf course or for green space, and then
absolutely appropriate conversation at that time to have about the
future of that property.
It was originally slated, potentially, to be a government services
center, and I think we're really moving in a different direction. So
that leaves it kind of up to the Board on what they see as the future
for that property.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Great. So if you could keep that in the
front -- not in the back of your mind, but in the front of your mind --
MS. PATTERSON: Of course.
CHAIRMAN HALL: -- that would be great. I'll second the
motion.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Third.
MR. HINES: And, Mr. Hall, you stated that you like pictures.
If you would contact Mr. Rodriguez, I've sent him a whole bunch of
pictures of previous displays that we have had at the museum before
we lost the space and also some upcoming thing.
You know, one good example is a 95-year-old gentleman came
in and donated a Nazi submachine gun. He wanted it for tax
purposes before he died. But, unfortunately, we had to take it to a
gunsmith and get it welded because we can't have any live weapons
in there. But things like this are very unique. And this thing's
valued at $30,000. And we have a Harley-Davidson bicycle that's
made into a carrier on the back of it to carry pigeons in. We have
some very unique items that -- some of them's on display. Some of
them's in storage. So we feel this is a time, if you approve this, that
we will make very good use out of it.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I think we're trying to.
March 12, 2024
Page 34
MR. HINES: Thanks.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So I have a motion and second. All in
favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: There you go.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Can I just add one thing?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Dave, you know, you and I
have had this conversation before, if it looks like this is starting to
move in a favorable direction, I'll just plant a little seed in your back
pocket, which you and I have talked about before. You know, these
storage units that you have -- and, you know, your exact quote to me
one time was every time somebody passes away, their spouse comes
and then drops off, you know, 80 sets of fatigues that husband had in
Vietnam. You really need to start thinning out that inventory, you
know. I mean, like I said to you, pick the 10 best things, you know.
That's what a museum does. A museum isn't a storage house
for -- it's not a thrift shop and you have some stuff in storage. You
know, we want to be able to see the Harley-Davidson bicycle, we
want to be able to see those things that truly are historical items.
But, you know, like you were telling me, one of the hangars is
filled with nothing but just old uniforms. You know, pick the 10
most historic ones and -- you know, we can't save everything,
because you'll even outgrow this space if it turns out that, you know,
this becomes -- you know, we cut a ribbon on this.
March 12, 2024
Page 35
And so, simultaneously, this is a good time to start doing a little
bit of spring cleaning. And it means making tough choices. Maybe
another museum wants some of those uniforms. Maybe some of
those uniforms could be, you know, donated to, you know, something
else or, you know, a thrift shop that would -- you know, people would
buy them or whatever, or sometimes things just need to be disposed
of that are sitting in storage and are moldy and aren't going to be used
for anything.
So, you know, you and I talked about that a few times, and
your -- that storage space, I think you're paying for it, correct?
MR. HINES: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So it's, like, the money that
you have is also leaking out the back door for storage of things you
probably will never display, and that's not the business you want to
be in.
MR. HINES: As per our conversation, it's been about eight
months ago, we no longer accept any uniforms unless they're from
a --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Got plenty of them.
MR. HINES: -- four-star general. So we stopped taking
uniforms, and we are sorting through that now.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Right.
MR. HINES: Plus, you had mentioned -- I told you we had
approximately 10,000 books, and we've been giving books away free
and for donation, and we probably have given out, in a year's time,
over probably 2- or 3,000 books. And the donations have been a
source of income for us. And it's been profitable. And I thank you
for that idea, because we're moving a lot of books, and we've
contacted veterans organizations. Pass the word around.
Anybody's interested in military history, we've got the books, from
Civil War to today's complex.
March 12, 2024
Page 36
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, sir.
MR. HINES: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: County Manager.
Item #5A
ARTIST OF THE MONTH – MARINA LOUNIS – PRESENTED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, just going to jump back
briefly to Item 5A, Artist of the Month. I have the information on
our Artist of the Month.
Our artist -- let me direct your attention to the back of the room.
Our March Artist of the Month is Marina Lounis. Art enthusiasts
can immerse themselves in Ms. Lounis' latest collection titled
"Naples Beaches." Her art embodies her constant inspiration drawn
from our amazing sunshine state. She has been sharing her creations
with Floridians since 2015, bringing joy to more than 300 Florida
homes and private collections across the United States.
In addition to her gallery, she is the proud proprietor of Naples
Frame Up, the City of Naples' longest standing custom framing
establishment. Both the gallery and her store are located on 10th
Street North.
With that, we have enough time, if it pleases the Board, let's take
our two advertised public hearings that moved from the summary
agenda. We can get a court reporter break, provided that goes along,
and then we can start -- go to our 10:30 time-certain.
Item #9A
APPROVE A REZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE NBC RV
March 12, 2024
Page 37
MIXED-USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, A PORTION
OF WHICH REMAINS IN THE RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE
DISTRICT-RECEIVING LANDSZONING OVERLAY, TO
ALLOW UP TO 356,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL
AND INDUSTRIAL USES AND 75 TRAVEL-TRAILER
RECREATIONAL VEHICLE CAMPGROUND UNITS ON
PROPERTY LOCATED 450± FEET NORTHEAST OF THE
INTERSECTION OF BASIK DRIVE AND TAMIAMI TRAIL
EAST, 5 MILES EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION
18, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 34± ACRES; AND BY
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (COMPANION TO ITEM
#17B) (DISTRICT 1) - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO APRIL 9,
2024, BCC MEETING BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS – APPROVED
Item #9B
APPROVE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND
USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP
SERIES OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN TO CREATE
THE EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT, TO
ALLOW UP TO 356,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR
AREA OF HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES,
AND UP TO 75 TRAVEL TRAILER-RECREATIONAL VEHICLE
CAMPGROUND UNITS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS
LOCATED 450± FEET NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION
OF BASIK DRIVE AND TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, 5 MILES EAST
OF COLLIER BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 51
SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
CONSISTING OF 33.523± ACRES. (COMPANION TO ITEM
March 12, 2024
Page 38
#17A) (DISTRICT 1) - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO APRIL 9,
2024, BCC MEETING BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: So that would be Items 17A and 17B, now
Items 9A and 9B.
These items do require the commission members to provide ex
parte disclosure, and we will require all participants to be sworn in.
This is a recommendation to approve a rezoning ordinance for
the NBC RV Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development, a portion of
which remains in the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District Receiving
Lands Zoning Overlay, to allow 356,000 square feet of commercial
and industrial uses and 75 travel trailer/recreational vehicle
campground units on property located 450 plus/minus feet northwest
of the intersection of Basik Drive and Tamiami Trail East, five miles
east of Collier Boulevard in Section 18, Township 51 South, Range
27 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 34 plus/minus acres.
And its companion item is a recommendation to approve an
ordinance amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land
Use Map and series -- map series of the Growth Management Plan to
create East Tamiami Trail Mixed-Use Subdistrict to allow up to
356,000 square feet of gross floor area of heavy commercial and
industrial uses and up to 75 travel trailer/recreational vehicle
campground units.
Also, let me just read into the record -- and I'm sure Mr. Davies
will cover this -- but we do have an adjustment to Attachment A, the
revised ordinance, Exhibit F, under hours of operation, which is Item
6. The following language should be added: Every five -- B, every
five years from the date of adoption of the ordinance, staff will
provide a report to the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners on the hours of operation for loading and crushing of
March 12, 2024
Page 39
concrete, the impacts to owners, and whether any complaints have
been made to the county. Upon finding of public purpose, the Board
reserves the right to modify the hours of operation to 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
at such meeting without an advised hearing.
With that, we need to have participants stand up to be sworn in
by the court reporter.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MS. PATTERSON: Before we got started, ex parte from the
commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Ex parte on 9A and 9B, Commissioner
McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, I do have e-mails on this
subject matter.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I've had e-mails and
meetings.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I have no ex parte.
Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I had some e-mails on this.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I have no ex partes on this.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right, great.
MS. PATTERSON: All right. With that, we'll turn it over to
the applicant, Mr. -- the applicant's attorney, Mr. Davies.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro may have --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. Mr. Davies, let me
just make a couple of opening comments.
I pull things frequently off of the consent and summary agenda
March 12, 2024
Page 40
for different reasons. Sometimes because I'm like, hey, this thing
needs to be talked about, and I don't want it to -- you know, consent
and summary, one vote approves 50 things, and then, you know, we
often hear from citizens who read a couple of sentences and think we
sort of snuck it in type of thing, and I thought this was worthy of
discussion.
I want to make sure that -- you're at the podium here -- you're
going to separate rumor from fact. You know, Jaime Cook and I
spoke about this one quite a bit. You know, when I see the term
"rock crushing lot" in here, it's like, okay, I start to cringe, right?
We just solved that. Now we're creating another one.
But to separate rumor from fact, you know, the one on Santa
Barbara and Davis was in a very visible spot. And I've told citizens
before when they were up in arms over a rock crushing lot on Santa
Barbara and Davis, rock's being crushed all over the county. You
just don't see it because sometimes it's, you know, knee deep, you
know, off of the main road, and it's being done for a reason.
I want to hate this one a lot less; that's why I pulled it. I have a
lot of concerns about how something like this on the surface could
get approved today and sound just fine, but it can take a really nasty
turn where -- you know, as Ms. Cook and I were talking about, you
approve something, and then, you know, when nobody's looking, it
starts to morph into something else, and then all of a sudden to try to
pull it back becomes very, very difficult.
So there's a lot of things being requested in here, and I just
thought it being sort of, not hidden, but just being on the summary
agenda wasn't something that -- and it looked like maybe my
colleagues agreed. I don't know if it was just me that pulled it. I
can't remember.
But, certainly, I want to do a deeper dive, and I expect that's
why you're here. And then, you know, I invite county staff to also
March 12, 2024
Page 41
come up and explain what we're approving, what we're not
approving, and why we really should approve it or not and make any
changes.
So that's why I pulled it, because it was a more complicated type
thing than just a thumbs up, thumbs down, which normally the
summary agenda and consent agendas usually are those type of
things, paying bills, changing an ordinance of something that's
favorable to everyone. This one's got a lot of moving parts. And
it's in my district, you know, and -- anyway, so I look forward to
hearing your presentation.
MR. DAVIES: Absolutely, and certainly appreciate that,
Commissioner LoCastro.
Good morning, Commissioners. Noel Davies with the law firm
of Davies Duke on behalf of the applicant.
We do have the full presentation ready today, Commissioner
LoCastro and the Board. I'm going to run through that. My client
representatives are here as well as the full team. So I look forward
to answering your questions. And to your point, Commissioner
LoCastro, giving this project the deep dive that you're requesting, and
we're happy to do that today, so thank you for the community.
Keith Basik and Jeff Basik are here this morning, my client
representatives; Bob Mulhere and Ellen Summers, from Bowman, are
the professional planners on this project; and Norman Trebilcock is
also here today with Trebilcock Consulting Solutions.
Mr. Trebilcock is our transportation engineer.
The project site is located approximately five miles east of the
intersection of Collier Boulevard and the East Trail. Our pending
applications include a rezone to PUD with the corresponding Growth
Management Plan amendment.
The property's size is approximately 33 and a half acres. We
are proposing approximately 356,000 square feet of commercial and
March 12, 2024
Page 42
industrial uses as well as 75 travel trailer/recreational vehicle spaces.
We are currently zoned as three conventional zoning districts
today: I, or industrial zoning district; ag, agricultural zoning district;
and TTRVC, which is travel trailer/recreational vehicle zoning
district.
Our proposed PUD has three tracts. You'll see the master plan
on your screen. Tract I, is the industrial tract; Tract C is our
commercial tract; and Tract TC is an either/or tract. We would have
the option to put either more commercial there or to do the TTRVC
uses.
We've shifted the industrial uses as far north as possible. Our
industrial uses are immediately adjacent on the west to other existing
industrial uses. For example, there is a concrete batch plant right
next door. I can assure you, to your points, Commissioner LoCastro,
this is the appropriate area in the county for a project like this.
We have worked closely with our neighbors throughout the
process. We've had two neighborhood information meetings, and
we have agreed to provide our neighbors with a 10-foot-high concrete
wall all along the eastern perimeter of the property. That's going to
extend well over 2,000 linear feet. This is way beyond what your
code requires, which is only a 6-foot high fence or berm.
We've limited our industrial uses as well as our commercial
uses. We've eliminated a number of industrial uses that we are
allowed by right today based on the industrial zoning. We also
picked only a small section of the C-5 uses in your code, 28 of the
183 C-5 uses.
I do want to point out what we're not doing as much as what we
are requesting today. We do have a small concrete crushing use, but
we are not doing, to your point, Commissioner LoCastro, the type of
crushing that occurred on the Davis and Santa Barbara site. I do
want to be very clear about that and how we are different. We are
March 12, 2024
Page 43
proposing a very limited and heavily conditioned crushing operation,
which we are allowed to do by right today based on the industrial
zoning, but it's going to be limited to the three and a half acres on the
very north end of our property, and we have agreed to a number of
conditions both from staff and from the Planning Commission,
including the use of state-of-the-art water spray systems and dust
control as well as an agreement to come back every five years to have
the Board reassess our hours of operation, which we are more than
happy to do that as the condition that County Manager Patterson
referenced at the opening.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Mr. Davies --
MR. DAVIES: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- let me just ask you a quick
question. The difference in rock crushing, it's still a commercial
operation that will bring in rock from other companies that has
nothing to do with this site, and this is just going to be a -- sort of a
clearinghouse, sort of -- you know, a ground zero, if you will, for
other companies to have their rock crushed, correct?
MR. DAVIES: That's correct. Essentially, the concrete
aggregate comes to this site, and it's crushed. It's reduced in size to
some other form, like 50 --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, trust me, everybody up
here is very familiar with how to crush rock.
MR. DAVIES: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: My concern with the Santa
Barbara/Davis lot, all of our concern was, rock comes in faster than
it's being crushed. So you have small operations, and you're like, oh,
it's going to be a small -- you know, it's minimal machinery. It's not
going to be as loud. We've had NIMs. Everybody's sort of happy
with it. But then, you know as we hear, track -- and, you know, I'm
just looking into the future of what possibly could go wrong.
March 12, 2024
Page 44
You have, you know, a huge operation somewhere and -- you
know, in Fort Myers that was torn down. All those tractor trailers
with the concrete come, you know, to this site and, you know, it takes
a year and a half to crush all that rock. I mean, that's the problem we
had on Santa Barbara and Davis. And even though -- it was a visible
spot it so it made it worse, you know, having this be about a huge,
giant -- or it could turn into that operation. So I'd just -- you know,
I'd like assurances that it's not that.
And we'll to it, but I think every five years is not frequent
enough, but we'll get to that part as well. I think we should reserve
the right to analyze something. If something comes to my attention
six months into this, I should be able to raise it and say, time out, you
know, this thing's not going the way it should.
So I don't know, the five years part sounds like a nice little line
item, but I think as commissioners we can raise anything at any time,
I would hope. But we'll get to that, and I'll get clarification from the
County Manager. But those are some of my concerns as you're
starting to explain, hey, this is totally different. You know, that's
what the last guy said, on Santa Barbara and Davis, and then, of
course, it got out of control. So I want to hear more assurances.
So -- right, Commissioner McDaniel, so I hate it less, maybe?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't know if you will or
not, sir.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I mean, I know by right
you're allowed to do these things, and that's why I wanted you at the
podium so, you know, maybe citizens that don't love this realize that
there's only so much we can do as commissioners, you know, when it
comes to property rights and the law, but we also can make sure that,
you know, we're not just, you know, rubber stamping something and
then, you know, we're here six months from now, and it's some big,
giant headache that we can't pull back.
March 12, 2024
Page 45
MR. DAVIES: Absolutely. And if I may, let me make those
assurances now and answer any additional questions. Like I
mentioned, this is limited to the three and a half acres on the north
end of the site, okay.
I think it's 16 or more acres that you were dealing with at the
Davis and Santa Barbara site, right? Everyone knows how large that
was.
This is a portion of the site at the northern end, okay, north of
the East Trail. That's one item. And so you know, Commissioner, I
mean, this is something that we've worked closely with your staff on
to try to make sure that all the proper mitigations are in place.
The most important one, in my mind -- well, two, really. One is
that we're building a 10-foot wall, okay, so the eastern perimeter of
the property. This is slated to the north and west side of our project
site. The eastern property has Estates lots, and we've agreed to build
a 10-foot-high concrete wall to prevent adverse impacts on those
property owners.
We've also worked with staff on having water systems. A
water system's going to be running any time this crusher's going to
be -- going to be in use, and that's a requirement, condition of --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: How about noise? You
know -- and pardon me, Mr. Chairman. I don't mean to be chiming
in. And this will be my last thing, and then I'll --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Let him finish.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: But the wall doesn't -- so it's
an aesthetic, so I'll just --
MR. DAVIES: Yeah. And it's a long way away to actually get
to those homes, so it's been spaced appropriately. And my
understanding is that the technology of this machine is not
significantly loud, especially with the water consistently running and
then the hours-of-operation limitations that we've made as well.
March 12, 2024
Page 46
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I ask one quick
question? Put the aerial back up -- or the map back up, please.
MR. DAVIES: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's the site that's
I'm -- that's what I'm wanting to see right there.
And do we already own the auto recycling plant that's there?
There's an auto -- there's an auto recycling facility up in that area.
MR. DAVIES: That's not my client, no, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. DAVIES: I think that's one of the industrial uses that
immediately abuts the site owned by a different group.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you.
MR. DAVIES: So happy to answer additional questions about
the crushing use or about any other elements of this
projects -- project.
Your staff is recommending approval. We did have our hearing
with the Planning Commission. It was a unanimous
recommendation of approval from Planning Commission. There
were no public speakers at the Planning Commission hearing.
And with that, we request your vote of approval today but, as I
mentioned, the full team is here to answer your questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
I know we keep talking about the crusher and crusher noise, but
I think what we experience a lot is not so much the crushers. It's the
dump trucks. When they're dumping the bulk material, when the
tailgates are banging and the loud noise of the large rocks coming out
of the metal dump trucks, and that has a tendency to be the loudest
part of this process. But this 10-foot wall -- just entertain me here.
March 12, 2024
Page 47
Is it a solid wall, or what kind of material is it made out of?
MR. DAVIES: Concrete wall.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So it's a concrete wall?
MR. DAVIES: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: All right. So it will have sound
barrier to it?
MR. DAVIES: Over 2,000 linear feet, the entire eastern
perimeter.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: When I look at that aerial, I
mean, I don't see any, really, residential homes within the eyeshot of
the aerials.
MR. DAVIES: They're large -- these large lots here,
Commissioner, on the eastern perimeter between what you see as
the -- marked as the subject --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: The eastern side, to the --
MR. DAVIES: So there's a bunch of existing industrial to the
west side of us to the east side of those large ranch-style lots.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So the site you're talking about
is going to be the northeastern corner of that?
MR. DAVIES: Northwestern is where the three and a half
acres is of this blue.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: That arrow that says "subject
site."
CHAIRMAN HALL: Top left corner.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So this is next to the concrete
plant, the Cemex plant?
MR. MULHERE: Right there.
MR. DAVIES: Yes.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I thought the Cemex plant set to
the east of 41.
MR. DAVIES: North of the East Trail. West of us.
March 12, 2024
Page 48
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: All right. I understand what
you're saying.
MR. DAVIES: Right in here, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah, that's it right there. So
your furthest part, where it says "subject site," that would be east of
the Trail?
MR. DAVIES: Yeah. So the subject site's everything in blue,
okay, the full 33 and a half acres.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Would be the northeast corner of
the property.
MR. DAVIES: The proposed crushing is in here, and these are
the other industrial uses, all on the western side.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah.
MR. DAVIES: So the wall extends along the full eastern
perimeter.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Two things: I share
Commissioner LoCastro's concern about a five-year review. I'd be
happy with shortening that up on an annual -- or to an
annual -- minimally to an annual basis, and then -- and then certainly
the Board can pull anything if it becomes substantive.
One of the things to be aware of, we need to be aware of, is
those -- those that look like farm fields today are not going to be farm
fields forever. That is Lipman Farms. That's part of the -- or that's
part of the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use Development. That's
developable land that is, in fact, coming forward.
There's a structure that's being built. They call that the
northeast structure with regard to outfall from the Picayune State
Forest with water. So what is there today isn't going to be that way
forever. It's not -- it's not a remote location.
March 12, 2024
Page 49
Number two, I concur with Commissioner Kowal with regard to
the dump trucks and the in-haul of the aggregate. Stockpiling
is -- does, in fact, become an issue. Is there a limitation? And
maybe our staff can tell us this when they're coming forward. Is
there a limitation on the height of the stockpiling? That can
be -- that can become -- a 10-foot wall's nice. I know it's above
our -- above our code, but when you have an exceptionally high piece
of -- or stockpile, then you have equipment going up on it and
everything else.
MR. DAVIES: Yeah. It's not our intent, Commissioner, to
have a high stockpiling. I'm not sure what the current regulations
are or requirements on that. Certainly, we'll abide by the governing
regulations on that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Let's find out what
those are, please. Intent's all that and a bowl of cherries, but I want
to make sure that we're not walking into a trap here that we ran into.
And, again, Commissioner LoCastro spoke a lot about development
or a project that became out of hand, but I want to know what those
limitations, in fact, are.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Commissioners. For the record,
my name's Jamie French. I'm your department head for Growth
Management and Community Development.
There is no limitation on this -- on the height of this location.
And the reason why we had that conversation with Mr. Davis was
exactly what you and Commissioner Kowal said with regards to that,
that property is going to develop, and we felt like five years out, even
though our crystal ball is more like a magic eight ball with this
market, we don't know when it's going to develop. We just know
that it is part of the RLSA and trying to read the community.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Rural Fringe Mixed-Use
District.
March 12, 2024
Page 50
MR. FRENCH: I'm sorry, the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District.
Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman.
The other thing we haven't talked about -- and Mr. French or
either -- Ms. Cook can comment on it.
So it's great it's in the far northwest corner, you know. It's away
from all these houses or away from, you know, houses now, as
Commissioner McDaniel says, and that's going to change. But the
other thing we haven't talked about is traffic. So those trucks have to
go down Tamiami Trail, and then, yeah, they disappear into the
woods and crush rock and, you know, nobody hears it and no houses
there, but, you know, this is the same issue we've had in other places
where, to get there, you know, they're going down a very busy road
right now that has a lot of other things already on it and, you know, I
just don't want to -- you know, I'm just -- I know there's no
assurances, but they have to get to the site.
And, you know, a long line of trucks filled with, you know,
construction debris that are headed to this -- this site is of great
concern to me. It's not like they're taking back roads or they're sort
of sneaking their way into the lot. They're going down a main
thoroughfare that has a lot of traffic, that has a lot of -- we've had a
lot of safety issues and accidents and things there. We've been
working with FDOT to get stoplights in really critical locations to
maybe help the traffic and the safety.
So, Ms. Cook, what can you tell us about -- it's a much smaller
footprint, as Mr. Davies said, than what we had at Santa Barbara, but
still, you know, those big semis that Commissioner Kowal talked
about, before they start banging their lids all the way in the back
north here that nobody's maybe going to hear, they still have to get
there, and that's -- you know, that's adding a lot of stuff to the road of
March 12, 2024
Page 51
an industrial, you know, nature that, you know, I'd just like some
assurance that it's not going to be the Indy 500 there every day as,
you know, these trucks make their way to this site.
MS. COOK: Jaime Cook, director of Development Review.
Thank you, Commissioner.
So as this would be a legal operation, should the PUD and GMP
amendments be approved, the next step for them would be a Site
Development Plan. And as part of that process, they will have to
submit a Traffic Impact Statement to our office for review, which
would include the types of vehicles. It would look at an analysis of
both the roadway, Basik Drive, as well as Tamiami Trail. And then
if any coordination is needed with FDOT, that would be required
prior to them even being able to begin the operation.
Does that answer your question?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yes, ma'am.
MS. COOK: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALL: And they have that by right right now; is
that correct?
MR. BOSI: The -- their current designation is industrial, but I
believe it was 2021, the Board did restrict the rock crushing aspect
from an industrial to not being a permitted use but requires approval
from the Board of County Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So they have to have the approval now to
rock crush. They don't have that by right as it exists today, right?
Is that what you're saying?
MR. BOSI: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay. Thanks.
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have two points. Number
1 -- Ms. Cook, do you want to come on back -- and that has to do
with water quality. Does the water-quality testing and monitoring
March 12, 2024
Page 52
come in after the -- after the approval and during their SDP process?
MS. COOK: Yes. They will have to go through permitting
both with the county and the Water Management District as well.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And the other thing I want to
bring up to my colleagues, there are a multitude of factors that have
to do with the in-haul of aggregate from construction debris.
There is an excessive fee, a very, very high fee that's currently
being charged by our receiver at the landfill with regard to
construction debris. And I know that -- I know that precipitated a lot
of debris coming to that site at Davis and Santa Barbara.
The disparity was close to a thousand dollars a load just to dump
construction debris at our landfill facility, and that operator that was
at Santa Barbara and Davis, he was at 200, and then he went to 400
and was -- still couldn't bring it in quick enough. So that brings me
back to -- and this may be a question for the operators. I understand
what it is that you're going through.
Height limitations with regard to the stockpiling. This is a
constrained site. Do we have an opportunity to reduce that
stockpiling so that it is kept -- we keep that obstacle above the
10-foot wall?
MS. COOK: Commissioner, I would believe that that would be
part of the PUD if the Commission wished to make that. The code
doesn't have a height restriction. It has slope requirements currently.
So as long as they can meet the slope requirements within the LDC,
currently they can go as high as they want. But if you wanted to put
a height restriction on, you could -- you would be free to do so as part
of this approval process.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do they have a capacity to
store elsewhere on this site until the crushing actually transpires?
MS. COOK: I'll leave that to the applicant to answer that
question.
March 12, 2024
Page 53
MR. DAVIES: One more time, please, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I forgot what I asked.
You've got to be paying attention. I'm joking.
The question I had is the height limitation with regard to
stockpiling. Do they have the capacity to store elsewhere on the site
in order to keep the limitation, to keep the height down?
MR. DAVIES: As far as the storage --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
MR. DAVIES: -- or the stockpile? I believe so, yeah. Within
that -- within that three and a half acres that's designated for this use.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: But the entire site's 33 and a
half acres. Do they have the capacity to store elsewhere on the 33
and a half acres in order to keep the height down? Again, I'm -- we
ran into an issue with a -- with excessively high -- it was represented
to be considerably higher than it really was. But a 20-foot stockpile
is 10 foot above the wall.
MR. DAVIES: Understood. My client's confirming that
there's additional space on the 33 and a half acres for that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can we be happy with -- can
we get happy with a limitation on the height of the stockpiles?
MR. DAVIES: As far as the height, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
MR. DAVIES: If I -- I think the question is, are we willing to
limit the language in the PUD to some sort of height for the
stockpiling of the concrete; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's a proper way of saying
can you be happy with a height of the stockpiles, yes, sir.
MR. DAVIES: If I could just have a moment with my client.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. DAVIES: Thank you, sir.
We'd be agreeable to a 40-foot height limitation.
March 12, 2024
Page 54
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, that -- that doesn't say
much for your 10-foot wall.
MR. MULHERE: I guess -- for the record, Bob Mulhere.
I just want to point out a couple of things.
If we don't allow this somewhere, we're going to be seeing all
those trucks from Collier County going up to Lee County and driving
on roads throughout Collier County to get to Lee County to do this
crushing. This is an appropriate location. It's already got industrial
zoning. We do have an SDP approved to allow this.
And I understand your concern. I don't think you'll be able to
see a 40-foot stockpile with a 10-foot wall from those residences.
You're going to be looking up over a 10-foot wall. You are not
going to see that. If you're standing in your backyard looking up
over a 10-foot wall, you won't see that.
So I think with sufficient room to stockpile -- I don't think the
intent is to have these huge stockpiles, but I understand that could be
an unintended consequence. You have a -- but if we go for a Board
review, if something happens that isn't right, you can have an
opportunity to address that. I think we'll run this responsibly. We
won't have issue. But if you do have that issue, we're agreeing to the
review of the Board, albeit, when talking to the staff we had said five
years, and I understand there's probably a majority opinion that that
should be sooner than -- maybe more like every year, so...
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Sometimes when we pull
stuff off of consent or summary, then, you know, we wind up sitting
here overanalyzing it, and it's becoming a more complicated
discussion than it needs to be. But in this case, I think this one needs
to be a complicated discussion.
From everything I'm hearing now, I don't support this the way
it's written, and so I'm not saying I wouldn't be supportive of it, but I
March 12, 2024
Page 55
think, because we've raised so many changes and you-all have had to
huddle, you know, once or twice, and -- I'm not comfortable
approving this thing on the fly.
So my question to you is, is there some sort of time-sensitive
thing? You know, my motion off the top of my head would be, you
know, come back to the next commissioner meeting, and I'd like to
see something much more detailed that didn't just have you saying,
you know, yes, after you huddled and, yeah, we kind of do it and,
yeah, a 40-foot pile, you know, really can't be seen from, you know,
houses -- I mean, I like to -- I like to vote on something that's already
in writing and a sure thing, not a bunch of, yeah, we can do that, we
can do this, we can do that. And, you know, unless there's some sort
of gigantic time-sensitive issue -- which sometimes, too, that doesn't
matter to me. I mean, I want to be confident and happy and concise
with my vote.
Right now I wouldn't be. I think this -- I'd like to hear much
more analysis from the county staff and see much more detail in the
plan presented to us before it would get my vote. It doesn't mean -- I
get all the positives. And, you know, Mr. Mulhere's saying trucks,
you know, trucks are going to be going somewhere, and they're going
to be headed north.
And to Commissioner McDaniel's point, you know, we all hated
the rock-crushing lot at Santa Barbara and Davis. But the reality is,
all that stuff would have ended up in our landfill. But on the flip
side, they would have paid for it, and so there were some pluses and
minuses, you know, there, as well.
But I don't like doing these things on the fly. This is bigger
than a breadbox. This is a major thing and a major -- in a major
area. Yeah, it's tucked way back, but to get there and some of the
other issues that we're raising, I would just like to see those things in
writing, not just sort of agree to them verbally and move forward
March 12, 2024
Page 56
would be -- is my initial thought, and it's a strong one.
MR. DAVIES: And if I may respond, Mr. Chair, my client
would be agreeable to continue this matter to your next meeting or to
a meeting that you have availability per your County Manager, and
we will do that. We will work with your staff. We will also huddle
with our team and provide you that additional detail.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: That would be my -- that
would be my request and maybe even my motion, if I would, or
maybe it's not required if you're agreeing to, you know, come back.
And it's -- and, Mr. Davies, it's not that, you know, we don't sort
of get it but, you know, Commissioner Hall likes pictures. I like
pictures. And I think we both like stuff in writing, you know,
when -- because that is what comes back to bite us.
So give us the insurances -- and we might be jumping ahead. I
think, you know, if I brought Mr. Bosi or Ms. Cook to the podium,
they'd reiterate that, oh, those discussions would happen. You know,
they're not -- this isn't approved. It still has to go through, you
know, several other vetting things.
But for something this sensitive, I'd like to see all that stuff
happen ahead of time to give me confidence that I'm voting for
something to move forward that has even -- that has the most detail
possible. And I think you're going to be -- it sounds like you're
agreeable to a lot of the things that we're proposing here off the fly,
but I'd rather do it in a much more cohesive way at a future meeting,
unless there's some sort of big-time sensitive issue. And even if
there is, I -- you know, that -- an emergency on your part doesn't
constitute an emergency on my part, so -- but it sounds like there isn't
one.
So if you're agreeable to bringing it back to a future meeting, I
would ask my colleagues to support that so we can flesh this one out
a little bit more, and between that time, also, you can meet with us in
March 12, 2024
Page 57
more detail. I don't think a lot of us have had deep discussion, you
know, over this, yet we're about to vote on it, and I'm not comfortable
doing so even though I have had some discussions, you know, over it.
MR. DAVIES: Understood, agreed, and we'll absolutely do
that. Thank you, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. I've raised
some issues over -- in the past about projects in a particular district
with the district commissioner raising concerns, and I think it's
important that, since the District 1 commissioner has raised an issue
on this, that we do continue it, so I support that.
But I think it's also a good message in other projects that come
forward, that the district commissioner generally has a good handle
on what the negative impacts, positive impacts are of projects. So I
support Commissioner LoCastro in his request to continue this so we
get a little bit more information.
MR. DAVIES: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, I'll support the
continuance, but I offer a suggestion, and this -- this development,
this request isn't willy-nilly. It was on our summary judgment. It
did go through the Planning Commission. It did go through the
DSAC. It did go through all of our normal processes, and short of
the height restrictions on the stockpiling and the adjustment for time,
I don't see an enormous -- so my thought was -- and this is -- if you
want to continue it, I'm good with that, but my thought was let's
shorten the time frame up from five to one and limit the stockpiles to
40 and allow this to pass on through, because it's already -- in my
personal opinion, I reviewed it. I was -- I was basically -- I saw that
you had already pulled it by the time staff came to me, so I knew we
were going to have a discussion about it. But I reviewed everything
March 12, 2024
Page 58
that was there. And if we made those two modifications, we
could -- I think this request could go forward. But I'll stand with you
if you want to push it. I'm fine with that, too.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I'll just make a quick
comment on that. I respect all of that, but I will also add a lot of
things have gone through the review of the county over the years, and
it's gotten unanimous approval and then, you know, we sat here six
months later with 70 citizens here that were up in arms that, you
know, that it grew out of proportion.
So, you know, to me, you know, just because it's been vetted up
to this point or it got unanimous approval from the Planning
Commission doesn't rubber stamp it for me.
And I don't think we lose anything by you doing a little bit of a
deeper dive and bringing us back more detail so that we're not doing
something on the fly. I agree, yeah, maybe there's just two other
things, but I actually -- me, personally, I want the ability to talk about
this one a bit more.
Yeah, I saw it on the summary agenda and I, you know, got your
voice mail and I, you know, looked at all the attachments and
whatnot. And I just feel like we're debating it here, and it's still
something that I think should be continued.
And I'll just end it by saying, I'm not trying to kick the can or
stall this one, but in the end, you know, once it's approved, it's there.
Once -- you know, once you build the pyramids, they're there for
thousands of years. And I'm not saying this thing is overly
complicated, but I want to know for sure that it's not, and I want to
see pictures and words that are a lot more detailed than what I'm
seeing now.
MR. DAVIES: Absolutely. We will do that. Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALL: You know, I think we don't -- I don't
March 12, 2024
Page 59
think we're opposed to the project, but we had healthy conversation
today just to address those few issues. You were just kind of a
victim of the scab being a little soft from the big one. So we'll look
forward to discussion when you come back.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, before you vote, County
Attorney, if we continue this date specific to the first meeting in
April, does that work, or does it have to be readvertised?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, that works, especially now that the
Clerk has instituted her own system now, which is far better than the
Naples Daily News.
MS. PATTERSON: Does the first meeting in April work for
the applicant? Because the next agenda is heavy with already
scheduled land use.
MR. MULHERE: Absolutely. For me it does.
MR. DAVIES: It works for us.
MS. PATTERSON: So we'll schedule date -- well, upon your
vote, we'll schedule this for date certain on the first meeting in April,
April 9th, pending your vote.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So you want to move to postpone it till
April 1st [sic]?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So I don't know if we need a
motion, but I would make a motion that we postpone it to the first
meeting in April, and I really appreciate all the hard work and due
diligence not only of Mr. Davies and his staff, but our staff, and as
Commissioner Hall said, nobody's up here shooting something down,
but we want to feel a lot better about it and not sort of feel like we're
doing a few things on the fly. There might be even a few other
things we're missing so I think we'll all feel, you know, better about
it, so I appreciate your, you know, willingness to come back in April
and work this with a little bit of a deeper look --
MR. DAVIES: Absolutely.
March 12, 2024
Page 60
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- before we approve it. So
that would be my motion.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll second that,
Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. Motion and second to move it
to April 1st [sic]. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. With that, we'll see you
April 1st [sic].
And this is a good time for a court reporter break?
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. Just to be advised, we do have
50 speakers on the next item.
MR. MILLER: Over 50 now.
MS. PATTERSON: Oh, I'm sorry. Over 50 now, and we do
have our time-certain items coming up in the afternoon. So just
think about where we're going to take the lunch, where it makes
sense. But definitely court reporter break now.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. Why don't we -- Jaime [sic],
is seven or eight minutes good enough for you, or you need longer
than that?
THE COURT REPORTER: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN HALL: How about we just come back at 10 till,
10 till 11, 10:50.
(A brief recess was had from 10:38 a.m. to 10:50 a.m.)
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
March 12, 2024
Page 61
Item #11A
REVIEW A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 2002-
63, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE CONSERVATION COLLIER
PROGRAM, WHICH WILL BE ADVERTISED FOR A FUTURE
BOARD MEETING. (JAIME COOK, DIRECTOR,
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION, GROWTH
MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT) (ALL
DISTRICTS) - PLEASE NOTE THAT MULTIPLE MOTIONS
WITH VOTING RELATED TO SPECIFIC LANGUAGE
AMENDMENTS OCCURRED DURING THE DISCUSSION
OF THIS ITEM; MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENTS
W/CHANGES FOR THE NEXT MEETING BY
COMMISSIONER HALL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SAUNDERS – APPROVED
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. We have a pretty passionate
subject to talk about this morning, and we've got a lot of speakers to
speak. You know, we've got the e-mails, and I think that there could
be some miscommunication, and I want to clear that up right now.
As we get started, everybody in the room is compassionate [sic]
about Conservation Collier, including us. A lot of you don't like
what we did as a Board with the budget money, and that -- that's not
what we're talking about today.
We've always had control to do what's best -- what's the best
interest of the county with the Conservation Collier funds. We've
always had the ability to levy up to the .25 mills. It's not a .25 mill
only thing. It's up to, of which we've always funded that much.
We've always collected that much.
Each person has three minutes. We have 50-something
March 12, 2024
Page 62
speakers. And the 17th time that we hear "I voted overwhelming for
Conservation Collier," you're going to lose us. We know that.
Seventy percent of the people overwhelmingly voted this program in.
That's why it's in effect.
So if someone is saying the same thing that you want to say,
please be respectful of us. We get it. The 19th time we hear it, it's
not going to change our mind, or it's not going to convince us.
Actually, you can take that time and talk us out of anything.
We do have interest in hearing what you have to say. We're
here to talk about a change of ordinance this morning to make this
program function better, to take the limiting factors out of the ability
to purchase property for the program. We want to streamline that.
That's what we're here to talk about.
So with that, we're going to welcome your comments. Please
be respectful. If you're opposing this, I do not want to hear "boo" or
a comment or anything like that. If you're in favor of it, I don't want
to hear your "yeah, way to go" or your clap. This is a professional
meeting. Respect everybody's time and ours, please.
With that, Ms. Cook.
MS. COOK: Good morning, Commissioners. Jaime Cook,
again, for the record, director of Development Review.
So in the fall, you had requested staff -- Troy, assistance, please.
It's not moving.
Okay. In the fall you had directed staff to come back and look
at the ordinance to -- mostly to expedite the acquisition process. In
January, we presented some recommendations to you for
consideration and also asked for your feedback. And since that time,
there's been some additional considerations both by staff and by the
County Attorney's Office that have been included into the revised
language changes. That revised language was presented to the
CCLAC last week at their monthly meeting, and today we are
March 12, 2024
Page 63
presenting those to you with a request to advertise these changes for
formal adoption at your next board meeting.
So the major ordinance changes -- and some of these were
previously discussed. But, again, as we made some changes, I
wanted to go back through them and make sure that you had full
visibility on what staff was requesting to be changed -- were the
funding of the Conservation Collier program, the properties that are
eligible for acquisition and maintenance, the nomination proposal
process, as well as procedures for selection and purchase.
And, again, these are the major changes. There's some minor
tweaks in there, but we won't cover those because there's not too
much issue with those.
So the first section that staff is proposing to amend is the
funding of the Conservation Collier program.
And with this change, the Board would be codifying that each
year, through Fiscal Year '31, which is when the program is currently
scheduled to sunset, that the Board will set the millage rate for the
Conservation Collier Program not to exceed the .25 mills and set the
percentage split between both the acquisition and the Maintenance
Fund for each fiscal year.
The reason that staff is requesting this change -- previously it
was 75 percent to acquisition, 25 percent to maintenance. But as
we've seen over the -- over the years, the cost of maintenance
operations have increased or fluctuated, even. The changes in
interest rates that that Maintenance Fund is accruing have changed
over time. So we feel that it's best to have a conversation with you
each year at the budget, talk about what those interest rates are, talk
about what those maintenance needs are, and adjust the funds as
needed for the upcoming year.
Traditionally, with the Maintenance Fund, the interest that is
received from the fund is what has paid for all the maintenance
March 12, 2024
Page 64
activities. And so we haven't had to burn into the principal of the
fund. And staff, again, would like to keep having those
conversations with you so that what we are paying for maintenance
and management activities each year is being drawn from the interest,
not the principal.
Properties eligible for acquisition and maintenance, one of the
things that you had directed us to do was look at alternative ways to
acquire properties, both through the TDR program and the Rural
Fringe Mixed-Use District as well as conservation easements. And
as I mentioned to you in January, staff did have some concerns with
how a conservation easement program would work. So we did come
up with some suggestions of language that staff would recommend
incorporating.
Again, the property will retain the development rights, so if a
landowner wishes to put a portion of their property into a
conservation easement to Conservation Collier, they would still have
the right to develop on the other portion of their property that they are
not proposing for the easement, but that the easement would be
maintained by the property owner. Similar to other conservation
easements all over Collier County, they are dedicated to the county
but without responsibility for maintenance. We don't maintain them,
so they are not coming out of Conservation Collier funds or general
maintenance -- General Fund monies to maintain conservation
easements.
And the third part is that the conservation easement shall not be
vacated nor receive an easement-use agreement. If we're buying
property, we wouldn't want to see it vacated but, additionally -- the
county has a process that if a structure needs to be built, for whatever
reason, or it was built mistakenly into a drainage easement or
right-of-way easement, the county has an easement-use agreement
process that can -- depending on the structure, can either be approved
March 12, 2024
Page 65
administratively or by yourselves to allow that structure to remain in
the easement given that if the county ever needed to go in and
remove it for any reason, we would have the right to do so. We
would not want to see structures being built in the preserves that don't
already meet structures that are allowed by code to include, like,
viewing platforms, walkways, open-air shelters, things like that that
are already allowed in preserves.
As far as the TDR program in the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use
District, the purchasing policy that currently exists already allows for
owners to sell their TDR credits prior to conveying the property or
selling the property to Conservation Collier. So staff would
recommend that that policy just be retained and followed; that if a
property owner wanted to -- wanted to take their TDRs and be able to
sell them, they would already be able to do so.
The next policy that was added in this section was that the Board
may sell Conservation Collier lands provided that the proceeds of the
sale are put back into the Conservation Collier Program and can be
used for additional purchases of land or maintenance activities.
Staff doesn't have an opinion on this additional language either
way because there's already language in the ordinance that would
allow for this. So this is, I think, just making it more explicitly clear
that it's already an allowed activity by the Board.
In the nomination of acquisition proposals section of the
ordinance, staff is -- in an effort to expedite the acquisition process
and review by the Board, staff would like to basically not have the
very large cycles that we had before where you were looking at 20 or
30 properties and trying to evaluate which ones you would want staff
to acquire. So we'd like to bring these to you as they are -- as the
applications are received. We may get two or three a month. We
may get five or six a month, but that would speed up the acquisition
process rather than waiting five or six months to have a full list.
March 12, 2024
Page 66
Staff also updated the criteria for property selection to include
some critical habitats that -- of lands in Collier County that staff is
looking to acquire as well as properties that are larger than 20 acres
and properties that are within the target protection mailing areas that
you approve as part of those cycles each year.
Properties that would -- because we are changing some of the
criteria, we're adding several criteria, so we are recommending that
the procedures for selection be updated, that instead of meeting two
of the criteria, it would meet three of the criteria and be -- to be
considered by the CCLAC for review and potentially being
forwarded to you for consideration, and that six out of the nine
criteria -- if a property met six out of the nine criteria, it would forego
the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee and
come straight to you for consideration to expedite the review.
Now, CCLAC, both during their January meeting as well as the
March meeting, did not support this language because they felt that
by going to CCLAC, it provided greater transparency as well as
greater public input. Residents would have the opportunity to speak
on the parcel. And if there were any other considerations or
concerns about the property, those could be discussed at CCLAC
rather than in front of you.
The next one is the procedures for selection and purchase.
Currently, the way the program operates is that once you have
approved for staff to move forward with appraisals and looking to
acquire a property, the purchase agreement -- after we've gone
through the appraisal process and we've made an offer, if it's
accepted, it currently goes to CCLAC and then to you for final
approval. So staff is recommending that we bypass CCLAC for the
purchase agreements, once they have been approved by the property
owner, and it comes straight to you. CCLAC did not have any
concerns with this change.
March 12, 2024
Page 67
Some additional CCLAC recommendations were to add "in
perpetuity" to the definition of management in the definitions section.
They also requested that any voting of funding percentages allocating
money or extension of the program only be approved by a
supermajority vote. Staff didn't support this because we felt that it
would make anything in the program more difficult.
And the third thing that they asked was for a -- if properties
were to be considered to be sold, that -- a list of criteria for how a
property could be considered or some type of threshold that had to be
met for a property to be considered for sale.
Next, that if funds were transferred from one of the accounts,
they requested that language be added that those funds would be
repaid.
And, finally, to remove Stewardship Sending Areas within the
RLSA program from the list of properties that would not [sic] be
considered for acquisition.
For those of you who may be slightly unfamiliar with the RLSA
program, developers establish their development through
Stewardship Receiving Areas and set aside lands in Stewardship
Sending Areas, or SSAs, to help entitle that development.
As part of the state and federal permitting, some of these SSAs
are used as mitigation areas and have some legal management
obligations through their easement agreements. And so staff would
not recommend acquiring SSA lands unless funding for those legal
management obligations was provided to ensure that we can meet
those obligations. Additionally, the premise of the RLSA program is
that environmentally sensitive areas are set aside at no cost to the
taxpayer in order to entitle development within that area. So staff
wouldn't recommend including this because that is the premise of the
program.
So with that, staff is asking you to -- request any feedback from
March 12, 2024
Page 68
you to address any concerns you may have beyond what was
presented today, and approve us moving forward with advertising the
ordinance to bring back at your next meeting.
And with that, I'll take any questions.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I have a question for Commissioner
McDaniel just to get me clarified, because I know that you're well
versed in this.
So to remove Stewardship Sending Areas for properties that
would not be considered for acquisition, what does that mean in
Texican?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It means we don't need to
buy it twice. The lands have already been set aside in perpetuity.
The development rights have been stripped off and converted to
credits that can be utilized in other less environmentally sensitive
areas -- it's important to hear "less environmentally sensitive" -- at no
expense to the public treasury either in acquisition and/or perpetual
maintenance. So there's no reason for Conservation Collier to give
consideration to an acquisition, necessarily, unless there's
sufficient -- and we have some discussion points that we're going to
talk about -- unless there's sufficient funding set aside or contributed
with that acquisition for that ongoing maintenance, perpetual
maintenance.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So we would be purchasing something
that's already accomplished, what we would be doing in the
purchasing?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay. That clears it up for me.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There may -- now, on that
note, there may be -- and I'm not totally sure that not considering it at
all -- because there may be a piece of property that's within the RLSA
that is -- that is critical to flowways, retention, water quality, so on
March 12, 2024
Page 69
and so forth that we need to give consideration to the acquisition
thereof, as long as it comes with sufficient revenues to support its
maintenance aspect.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
My question's for staff. I was looking at the section where we
were talking about the six out of nine, because there's nine line items.
If they meet the six, we're kind of foregoing the CCLAC and, it's
coming right to us to kind of streamline the process of going.
I guess my question was -- I had this question earlier of
staff -- do we take into consideration the weight of that particular line
item, the weighting of it? Because this particular -- like, say one line
item is a targeting mailing area that's a sensitive area that, you know,
we're trying to target because of the reason -- you know, or reasoning
why is because it's a sensitive area, and we feel it may fill a hole in
the doughnut, but if it's not one of the six, doesn't that carry a lot
more weight than just having six out of nine?
Are we weighting each requirement to, like, it should include
this one plus five more, or -- that's what I'm trying to get at is how do
we distinguish, you know, just pushing these forward just because
they met the six out of nine, but then they didn't meet, like, very
sensitive ones like that particular line item?
MS. COOK: So the way staff was envisioning it, it would be
six of the criteria, that it would automatically come to you.
Now, if there are certain ones that you feel are more -- more
important for us to consider, such as target mailing areas or large
tracts of land, we can certainly adjust our weighting to meet that; that
would make it more of a priority to bring forward to you sooner.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Okay. Thank you.
MS. COOK: Sure.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Because that was kind of
March 12, 2024
Page 70
concerning me because, just -- you know, just willy-nilly saying, all
right, we've got six of them, let's shove them up to the Board of
County Commissioners, and then we have to discuss it here on the
dais, and it would probably slow the process down of finding those
facts, you know. So I'd appreciate if we take a deep dive into that.
So thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to make a statement first off. And I really like what
Commissioner Hall opened up with. There's so much
misinformation on Conservation Collier with what we did previously
and didn't do, and we can debate that forever. But the one thing that
is a fact are the aggressive steps we took to make sure the program
was managed, not just watched, but it was aggressively managed
resulted in the last six months us approving more Conservation
Collier purchases of lots in this very room than had been done in
years. Years. Maybe a lot of years.
And, you know, I say that to really thank you and your staff,
Ms. Cook, because some of the direction that we took a lot of heat for
that maybe people misunderstood or they fully understood it and just
disagreed with it, the end result was, are we buying more land with
the money that is sitting in the bank that was -- at the time was very
dusty or not, and you can't dispute the fact that in this very room, in a
very short amount of time, we've purchased more Conservation
Collier lots, which is what the voters said they wanted, and it wasn't
happening. Okay. So that's just a statement.
I know we might jump all around a little bit on some of these
highlighted and crossed-off things. The one thing that I heard in
your official presentation that I'm not in favor of is skipping the
CCLAC. It's one thing to streamline a process -- and if I'm
convinced that that's what it would do, great, you know, but my
March 12, 2024
Page 71
initial dive before this meeting and then just hearing -- it's another
thing if you're artificially expediting something. And Conservation
Collier is such a sensitive project -- program, also one that we're
talking a lot of dollars and cents, taxpayer money being utilized,
things being purchased in perpetuity.
I like the idea of vetting -- we get a lot of good information from
the CCLAC, the same way we get great information from the
Planning Commission and other steps that are taken before it comes
to us. But just leaping to us with some of those steps miss- -- I
would need to know a little bit more about it.
And I saw what you said on there. Wow, if it meets six of the
nine, it just seems like a no-brainer, just bring it to the
commissioners. I still think there's an advantage to, you know, other
groups that are part of the process. And, yeah, if they unanimously
think it's a great idea, then it makes our job a little bit easier at times
because they have asked some questions we've already asked. But,
you know, sometimes there's a difference between streamlining
something and artificially expediting it, and this program is so
sensitive, I like that there's many steps. If we're going to vote to
eliminate some of those steps in certain instances, I'd just like to hear
a little bit more about why that's a smart thing to do.
So that's sort of my -- after hearing you just go through that, that
was the one nugget that jumped out at me as, eh, not in huge favor of
it. But I thank you for what you've done in a short time to
preserve -- and a lot of them in District 1. I mean, how many times
have we bought lots in District 1 over the last 10 years on Marco
Island, especially? You can count them on maybe one finger. Now
you can count them on two hands. So thank you very much.
MS. COOK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
March 12, 2024
Page 72
I'm going to ramble a little bit. I apologize to the Board and the
public for that. But I want to make a few comments that are a bit
outside of the subject of the ordinance itself, but then I want to get
into the ordinance itself.
I think there's a misconception on the part of the Board as to
what this program really is. And, you know, the idea is that we
would collect revenue for 10 years. It's a 10-year program. Well,
it's not a 10-year program. It's a perpetual program. And the idea
was that we would collect revenue, .25 mills or whatever millage rate
was set by the Board, but up to .25 mill. We would collect those
funds over a 10-year period.
We would immediately begin to spend those funds, but those
funds weren't expected to be spent in that 10-year period. Those
funds were expected to be collected and properties to be acquired,
and then if it took 15 years to buy certain properties, the funds would
be there for that.
And the reason I mention that is I want to -- I went back and got
the transcript of our September 21st, 2023, second bearing budget
hearing. And, Commissioner LoCastro, I think you may have really
highlighted this unintentionally, but I think you highlighted it. And
you pointed out that one of the things that came out tonight is in the
last two years they've spent $5 million on properties, correct?
And, of course, Commissioner McDaniel says, plus/minus, and
staff acknowledges that that's about what's been spent.
Well, that doesn't mean that in that particular year it was a
$5 million program. It just means we spent $5 million of the
30 million that had been collected and that that other money would be
available.
So, for example, in Year 11, if there was a 2,000-acre tract of
land somewhere that became available for purchase, we would have
the funds available for that.
March 12, 2024
Page 73
And so to say -- you went on to say, well, now they have
$27 million for acquisition and $10 million for maintenance. Staff,
is that correct?
And staff acknowledges that's correct.
That 27 million plus the 10 million was what was left of the
program after a substantial amount was removed for other budget
purposes.
So I mention that only to emphasize that this is not a 10-year
program. This is a perpetual program, and the idea is to collect
money during that 10-year period. But the acquisition of properties
may go way out into the future.
I'll just throw out as an example, in Lee County, there was a
purchase of a large tract of land a few years back, and they had the
foresight to have the money available for their environmental
program that had been collected over the years for that purpose -- that
purchase. So that's No. 1.
And then No. 2, I think what's got people really energizing here
is that in this ordinance -- and I think this may eliminate a lot of the
conversation -- in this ordinance, on four different pages of the
ordinance, 2, 3, 4, and 6, it says that funds can be withdrawn from
this program for any purpose, any governmental purpose.
Now, the County Attorney had opined at that budget hearing
that the Board could pull those funds out, that 53 million out for other
government purchases, and I think we need to eliminate all of these
repetitive statements in here that funds can be pulled out for any
purpose, because that is just emphasizing the fact that we really don't
have an environmental program. We just have a line item in the
budget that we can alter anytime we want to, and it says that over and
over and over again, and I think that sends the wrong message.
I think the other issue -- I think -- I think the bulk of the people
in this room are probably here to talk about how important this
March 12, 2024
Page 74
program is for the future, and that's what I'm doing right now and,
perhaps, if that's what someone wants to talk about, then perhaps they
can simply stand up and say, yeah, we agree that that is a very
important program for the future.
But I think it's absolutely critical that the Board understands that
this is not a 10-year program, and these funds are really designed for
the long-term future to buy properties on Marco Island or anywhere
into the long run.
And, Mr. Chairman, I think the other issue that perhaps Brad
Cornell is going to talk about is the issue of the easements. And I
think we should provide him, with the Board's indulgence, a little
extra time to go through the changes that the environmental
community is recommending, because I think he speaks for a lot of
the folks that are here in the room. I think if we acknowledge those
couple of things, especially the point that this is a multiyear program
and funds are set aside for long-term future, I think that might
alleviate some of the concerns of the public.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I want the record to reflect
that Commissioner Saunders and I agree with regard to the term
"Conservation Collier."
It is, in fact, perpetual. It's important for folks to understand
that the maintenance that goes on with the acquisition of any piece of
property goes on forever, and it has to be accounted for. It has to be
paid for.
I have a concern with the statements that are made that it was
always intended that the reserves that were accumulated -- the
interest off those reserves was going to pay for the maintenance.
At some stage, that reserve's going to be extinguished through
acquisitions. At some stage, if funding isn't set aside at a later date
to accommodate for the perpetual maintenance of the land holdings
March 12, 2024
Page 75
that Conservation Collier has purchased, the funds will expire.
It was a misnomer early on in Conservation Collier that a
perpetual Maintenance Fund was established because it had a burn
rate. It might have been 30 years or whatever at that particular point
in time. I think it was 750,000 when Commissioner Saunders and I
first came into office. Now it's up double that. I think we're close
to 1.5 million a year in our ongoing maintenance reserves.
And so my thoughts are, this needs to be addressed at some
stage, maybe not today, but we have to plan for the expiration of
Conservation Collier as was written with the referenda, and then a
hard look at -- a hard look at how we're going to accommodate for
those perpetual maintenance expenses that are going to travel forever.
They don't go away. Unlike the RLSA, those maintenance requisites
are put upon the landowner that extinguishes the development rights
and holds those lands in perpetuity and maintains those lands in
perpetuity.
So I think at some stage we need to have a discussion with
regard to maybe continuance for longer than the 10 years of the
Conservation Collier as a taxation, but specify for maintenance based
upon what the maintenance actually is. It certainly travels along that
as we acquire more lands, those expenses are going to rise as well.
So that consideration has to be addressed at some particular point in
time.
My two points are, I would like for the RLSA, the SSAs, to be
added back in and given consideration to acquisition. Just -- I would
like to see that. I don't think we should extinguish or not give
consideration to the purchase of an SSA if, in fact, it's determined by
our staff, by the CCLAC.
I agree with Commissioner LoCastro that having the CCLAC
review -- as long as it's not -- as long as it's not holding up the
process. We're all looking to move these things through. And I
March 12, 2024
Page 76
think if we add that into our processes for the review of those land
holdings that it won't hold it up. We're not going to hold these for
long cycles to accumulate 10, 15, 20 of them at a time. We're going
to be bringing them through as they go.
So I think adding back the SSAs into the lands that could be
accumulated or acquired, as long as there is sufficient -- justifiably
sufficient reserves to attend to the maintenance, I think that would be
a fine thing to do.
I have advocated all along that the property rights, development
rights, that travel with the ownership of a piece of property need to
enure to the benefit of Collier County. And if there is revenues that
are derived from the disposition of or the removal of those property
rights, such as the credits that can be generated via an SSA that hasn't
had the credits already removed or a piece of property within the
Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District that has the potential -- the potential
of TDRs, for those transferable development rights to enure to the
benefit of the county to be utilized back into the fund to assist with
the offset of the ongoing maintenance that's going to transpire, that is
transpiring now -- it's not going to end. That maintenance is -- has
to be accounted for at some -- at some stage.
And then last, but not certainly least, with regard to our budget
discussions last year, I found it rather distressing in my
communications with staff yesterday, there really wasn't a plan for
the replenishment of the funds that were utilized last year for other
expenses within our particular budget. And I want -- if, in fact, we
do leave the language in there that this board or a future board may
utilize those funds for something else, I want that to come with a
definitive plan for payback, not just plan on the continuance of the
taxation at the .25 mills and assume that that is -- because that's
money, necessarily, that Conservation Collier was already going to
get in the first place. We removed some of those monies last year to
March 12, 2024
Page 77
allow for accommodations in other portions of our budget. I want a
definitive plan to replace those funds and a set time frame for the
replacement of those funds.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'll try to be brief, because I
know we've got a lot of citizen speakers, and that's what we're here
for.
But just to get back to Commissioner Saunders, you know,
comments about some of the things that I said at the budget meeting,
I agree with everything you said that collecting money for
Conservation Collier is -- you know, it goes into a bank account, and
if we have property to buy, we buy it, and, if not, it sits there until
something appropriate comes up.
My frustration during the budget meetings is I think we had
significant -- I was significantly disappointed in the inefficiency of
the program; that I talked to landowners in my district who were
waiting for Conservation Collier, waiting for the appraisal, had heard
from the Conservation Collier leadership team 10 months ago and
then never heard back. Some of those properties were lost. Some
of those properties now have three-story homes on them and, you
know, all the burrowing owls were moved, all the tortoises were
moved, and it could have been -- you know, it was a piece of property
that really fit the Conservation Collier, you know, eligibility
requirements.
It doesn't mean everything that's eligible gets purchased, I mean,
but there were quite a few properties that never got considered. And
to your point, Ms. Cook, that I really appreciated is I felt even in the
short time I had been a commissioner, why at almost every meeting
aren't we voting on one tract of land, if there is one eligible? And
there were plenty, because when a list finally came to us, and it was
filled with a whole bunch of lots at that time, that, to me, was a very
March 12, 2024
Page 78
inefficient process.
And talking to some of those landowners, like I said, again, we
lost some of those lots because we were slow to move, slow to react.
You know, as you said, the improvement that the new team has made
is no longer holding onto these properties and then coming to us, you
know, twice a year for consideration.
You know, the purchase of property moves very quickly, and
just because it's filled with owls and tortoises doesn't mean somebody
who wants to put a house on it will be scared off. I mean, I see it all
the time in my district. So I like the improvements that we made,
and that was more of my point is that we had the money in the bank.
I believe we had plenty of lots for consideration. They just seemed
to -- they weren't coming here fast enough the way they are now.
Like you said, I do want to be onesie'd, twosie'd because it's a
quick vote. Yeah, this lot, here's where it sits. Yes or no? Boom,
we move onto something else, instead of, well, you've got List A,
you've got List B, you've got List C. Here's the priorities.
I mean, I think in my first year or two as a commissioner, we
voted once or twice maybe on Conservation Collier lot purchases,
and some of those lots were lost because they had been on that list for
a while with minimal contact to the landowner. And I know that
because the landowners talked to me and said, oh, I already sold it to
somebody else. You know, I wanted to do the right thing; never
heard back. And, you know, that's the part that I think that we've
improved upon.
But I agree with Commissioner Saunders, I don't want to waste
the money, and the money is sitting there for when it's needed. But I
think that we found out -- we've discovered there's plenty of lots that
are eligible for consideration, but if they don't come to us, they sit
and collect dust and sometimes disappear, and I'm really proud that
you have fixed that. So I'll just end by saying that, but...
March 12, 2024
Page 79
MS. COOK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
And I appreciate what Commissioner McDaniel said in terms of
having some definitive plan to replenish those funds. My guess is
that we haven't received that definitive plan for replenishing those
funds from staff because it would be very difficult to come up with a
plan to do that.
The only way those funds could be replenished would be to
extend the time period for putting funds into that account. So
instead of a 10-year program, if we made this a 15-year program, for
example, and collected money for an extra five years, we could
replenish what we took out. But it's going to take something like
that. It's not going to be how do we take $53 million in our current
budgeting situation and replenish those funds over the next several
years or for the remaining of the 10 years of the program.
That, I believe, would be impossible. But it would be possible
to make this a 15-year program instead of a 10-year program, and
that would help generate the money that was pulled out.
But I think -- I think with those types of changes, maybe that
will alleviate some of the concern the public has. But I will tell you,
the big concern, I believe, of this audience -- and I can't speak for
you, but I'm guessing that the big concern is making sure that the .25
mills goes into this program and stays in this program some way or
another. And if the Board is willing to continue to make that
commitment, that the funds will be replenished in some way, then I
think that that will alleviate some concern. And I also think, as I
said, taking out this repetitive language about pulling money out and
using it for any other purpose, I think that will alleviate some
concern. And then, as I said, also, having Brad Cornell go through a
couple of the issues that are troubling the environmental community,
March 12, 2024
Page 80
I think, will save us a lot of time.
So that's kind of the thing I'd like to see coming out of this
hearing, just this continued commitment to replenish those funds and
to maintain this program for long-term future, and I think that's what
we're starting to get.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And just as a point,
Commissioner Saunders, just to clarify what it was that I was talking
about, the extension of the tax certainly needs to be reviewed, but
only, in my personal opinion at this stage, to accommodate for the
ongoing maintenance. Because, again, Jaime mentioned today that it
was always perceived that the interest derived from the accumulated
funds was going to be utilized to offset that maintenance expense.
They're diminishing funds. Both the acquisition and the
Maintenance Fund are continually diminishing. As we buy more
properties, there's less money in the fund. As we spend more money
annually on the ongoing maintenance, there's less money in the fund
to accumulate interest.
And so the addressing of the continuation or not of the tax has to
come at some point in time and well in advance -- I would prefer well
in advance of the current expiration that we have today.
The replenishment of what was utilized last year to support last
year's budget by our staff could come in a myriad of ways. We've
engaged a consultant to give consideration to the priority-based
budgeting that we're currently going through, and hopefully,
hopefully, savings can be accommodated and the re-appropriation of
those monies that were utilized elsewhere in the budget last year can
begin that process.
So I just want to make it clear that we establish a repayment
plan and not just say that .25's going back in and going to
replenish -- replenish the Conservation Collier Fund.
March 12, 2024
Page 81
CHAIRMAN HALL: Let me make a comment or two about
the concerns about the commissioners being able to use that money.
You know, motive is a big thing, and rationale is another big
thing. And last year at our budget hearing -- we have this giant thing
called Collier County Government that we've taxed the people 14
years in a row increasing those taxes. So at some point in time we,
as commissioners, we had to take a look at a spot in time to stop that
ship from just expanding and expanding. We had to take some kind
of measure to take steps to shrink that government monster and to
shrink the need for that.
So the Conservation Collier funds that were available, we didn't
just look at this as a slush fund or something that was a savior fund
for our budget. That's what's been communicated back to us, and
that's not true.
Just like Commissioner McDaniel says, we implemented -- at
that point it time, it was our interest to shrink the government
monster, to shrink the spending. And so to do that, we funded our
budget with those funds because they were not usable in our case.
Now, Commissioner Saunders makes a great point. It doesn't
matter if they weren't used in the last two years or three or four or
five years. I understand that, but we took those funds to fund our
budget with the intention and the sole purpose of reducing the
expenses enough, far greater than the 53 million, so that we could not
tax the -- not tax -- not do an increase on the taxpayers who have
experienced higher-than-normal rents, higher-than-normal expenses,
you know, inflation that's out of control.
You may not appreciate those tax savings because you're well to
do, but I can tell you that we've had countless of people tell us thank
you for that.
With saying that, that was a one-time -- in my mind, that was a
one-time thing we did never to be done again, and that was my
March 12, 2024
Page 82
commitment when we did that. We wanted to fund our budget with
the intention of cutting our expenses with our -- he mentioned
ResourceX -- with our third party, that that's well in process right
now.
So it's never our intention or our motive to rob Conservation
Collier and use it as a slush fund. Commissioner, you shouldn't do
that. Monies -- monies collected should be money stayed. Yes, it
should, but at the same time, it's halfway selfish of the program to
have to have $53 million that's not usable.
This program is still subject to willing sellers. What if you had
a 100 -- what if you had a billion dollars in the bank and no willing
sellers? What good is the money?
So there is a balance in it. But I want to -- I want to let you
know here in the room that our motive was not to do that and do it
again and again and again.
When it comes to we may sell Conservation Collier lands and
replenish the program with it, let me give you a great example of that.
We're extending Veterans Memorial highway all the way from
Livingston all the way to 41. There is a small portion of
Conservation Collier land that we need to purchase to make a
retention pond. Not that we need to put C-5 commercial on. We
just need a retention pond. That's a good example of us being able
to sell Conservation Collier land for the better use of the community.
So, you know -- and with regard to Commissioner LoCastro's,
you know, bypassing the CCLAC and Commissioner Kowal's
comments about putting weights on some of the criteria, if we put
heavier weights on some, and six out of 10 -- six out of 10 [sic] of the
criteria, you're well on your way to approval, you know. And so it
could go to the CCLAC. I have no problem with that. But if it
bypasses the CCLAC and comes to me and it makes good sense to do
it, let's buy it; that's what we're here to do.
March 12, 2024
Page 83
And that was the reason why the money was in the bank
previously, because it was basically not usable, though it's usable in
the future. I understand that's a good point.
But that was our rationale. It wasn't to rob the -- rob the funds
or use it to our best interest or just because -- you know, just because
we could. That wasn't the point at all. It was a one-time
special-cause event that I hope we never look at again, because I
hope we can reduce our expenses government-wise, and we can
actually increase the money, like Commissioner LoCastro says, and
pay it back.
When it comes to the CCLAC, I value their opinion, but there's
an old adage in business that says you can have control or you can
have growth, but you can't have both, and it remains pretty true. So
there are things that I think we would benefit from the CCLAC, but
just automatic -- you know, everything that needs to go there, I'm all
for supporting six out of 10 criteria that are weighted and make good
sense to come straight to us and purchase it.
I don't want to send the wrong message like Commissioner
Saunders is talking about. We just need to say it one time. We
don't need to say it four, because it's not our intentions. It's not our
motive. So I'm good just to say it one time where we can use the
money in the best interest, if it ever happens again, because I think
you've got -- you've got voted elected officials up here who do care.
They listen to you. We -- it matters to me what you say. It matters
to me the e-mails that I get, but it also matters to me when the e-mails
that I'm receiving are not based on true information.
You know, the information that you got from Naples News or
the information you get from Next Door app or from Facebook may
not necessarily be all accurate. There's a motive in their message, so
I hope that I can clear that message -- that motive up for you this
morning.
March 12, 2024
Page 84
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, I know I'm
not the next speaker on your list --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- but you made a comment
that I think is really important to the point that I was making and I
think will satisfy a lot of folks here in the room.
You indicated that we don't need to repetitively say it, that those
funds can be taken out for any other purpose; we need to say it once.
I think if you add to that that those funds can be taken out for other
governmental purposes as determined by the Board; however, those
funds must be replenished as expeditiously as possible and -- at least
that sends a message that we intend to keep funding this program.
And I'd like for that, quite frankly, to be retroactive to that
53 million that came out, that those funds and any future funds that
are withdrawn have to be replenished as expeditiously as possible. I
think if we can make a statement like that, I think that goes a long
way to at least solving some of the -- or eliminating some of the
concerns.
So at some point, we'll talk more about that.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'd strongly agree with,
strongly. I like the way you worded that. I'll just throw that out
there.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We'll come up with some
wording, but that's something I think will help.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: But the Board, then, will
have to be very conscientious in replenishing those funds. It can't be
just a statement, well, we're going to do this and then not do it.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Along that line -- and, Commissioner
Kowal, I'll get to you. But along that line, when we adjust the
March 12, 2024
Page 85
ordinance to where we have the ability on a yearly basis to adjust the
acquisition funds and the maintenance funds, it may get to the point
near the end where we take 95 percent of the funds that are available
and put it in the Maintenance Fund because the acquisitions aren't
there, which would be -- to Commissioner McDaniel's point, there's a
burn rate on the maintenance, because that goes in forever.
So 100 years from now when we're still doing this, that money
needs to be -- that fund needs to be big enough to where the interest
on it can handle it.
And so I hope the conversation this morning is a little more
comforting than when you got here.
But with that, Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
I just -- I agree with a lot of things that were said up here. And,
Commissioner Saunders, the language that you're using, you know, I
agree with you.
But I just want to remind people that, you know, we keep
referring to this 10-year program. This is actually the second 10 of a
20-year program. It was already in effect 10 years prior. It was
voted back, I think, in 2020, so we're three years already into it, so
we've got seven left.
You know, I just think what we're doing -- I think, ultimately,
everybody in this room has -- the same goal in mind of finding
properties that fit the bill and are sensitive to the -- and important to
preserve, you know, into this program. And I think everyone up
here agrees, and we have done -- in my one year being on the Board,
I think we were pretty proficient in purchasing these properties over
this past year. And I know if you were here for the first 10 or not,
but, you know, there's always a different way. You know, you learn
from mistakes, and you learn to be more efficient at times, especially
when it comes to using money and purchasing properties, because
March 12, 2024
Page 86
even the year I was here, I believe one of the properties that we just
approved on Marco, it was just -- we approved it, we had a check in
hand ready to buy it, and they backed out the last minute because of
timing issues or -- you know, because it's been happening, because
when we get these lists, we get an A list, and we're supposed to get
another six months later, and then we're looking at these properties.
A lot of these properties aren't even available anymore.
So I think what we're doing is much more efficient, and I think
putting this language together, moving this ordinance forward to
make it more efficient is only going to achieve the goal that I think
everybody in this room is trying to achieve, is to get these properties
when they're available and be able to purchase the ones that make
sense. And I think that's ultimately what everybody wants to do.
But when it comes to the part, which I agree 100 percent with,
that we should have that flexibility to adjust the percentage because
it's -- over that 10-year period prior to this 10-year, everybody just set
this number saying, oh, it's 25 percent goes into maintenance.
Well, we know interest rates fluctuate. We're not making as
much one year as we may on the next years, and maybe we're going
to make more next year. So it makes sense for us to project that out
and say, well, maybe 35 needs to go in this year or 45, or maybe only
15 because we're -- you know, the feds have got the interest rate at
10 percent, and we're making a lot of money on what we have.
So it's good to be flexible that way, and then that will leave
more money in the purchase side. So I think having that in our
toolbox will make it more efficient also.
And I just want to set the record straight. Back when we did
the budget, you know, my mindset was that we had an emergency
fund, and when Hurricane Ian came, we had about $38 million in
there, and after cleanup -- and a lot of those properties were very
sensitive properties that were, you know, beach berm work, areas that
March 12, 2024
Page 87
were protected, you know, waterways, you know, we went out in the
forest and cleaned these things up, and part of that emergency fund
we used was that monies.
And we were down to about 100-and-some thousand dollars in
the emergency fund after the fact, but we had $40 million in the
Maintenance Fund in Conservation Collier, and we had to take -- in
that budget we had to put money back into that fund because we were
looking at another hurricane season coming up. Thank God we did
not have a hurricane this past season.
But if we would have -- and we wouldn't have thought forward
and had the ability to say, all right, well, we used a lot of this money
out of the General Fund, the Emergency Fund to fix properties more
than likely maintenance should have went to anyways out of the
Maintenance Fund, you know, we had to put money back in there.
And that's why I agreed with -- that moving some of this money
around was best for the citizens of Collier County in the long run.
Because if we got hit with another storm, we would be dependent on
the federal government and FEMA to come and clean this place up
and fix these properties.
So we did it without their help. Now we're waiting for the
checks, you know, to backfill. And I always thought that that would
have been a way to put some money back into the fund. But, you
know, that's up to staff, and if that's even possible, to -- you know, if
we ever get some more checks from FEMA from Hurricane Ian, to
take them checks and move them back since we already used the
money from the Emergency Fund to fix these properties up. So that
was one idea.
But I think, what you see here before you and us creating this
language and streamlining it, I think it meets the ultimate goal for all
of us is to get these properties, the ones that make sense, and
purchase them in a more efficient way.
March 12, 2024
Page 88
So I think I'd have to agree with the language and some of the
comments we made up here today, so I'd support that.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chair, we have 55 registered speakers.
Fifty-four of them are here. One is on Zoom. And with your
permission, I'd like to call her first. She's been in the Zoom meeting
since way early this morning.
And then to facilitate, I think what will be quicker and get to
Commissioner Saunders' wishes, I'll call Brad Cornell second.
Brad's been ceded time from 34 people, which will give him 105
minutes or, put another way, an hour and 45 minutes. He assures me
he's not going to use all of that, but that will give him all the time he
needs.
So first up, let's go to, on Zoom, Meredith Budd.
Meredith, you're being prompted to unmute yourself at this time.
Wait a minute. My Zoom person seems to be -- oh, there she is.
Meredith, you're being prompted to unmute yourself. And is
that you, Meredith, on the phone?
MS. BUDD: Can you hear me?
MR. MILLER: Yes. You have three minutes.
MS. BUDD: Are you able to hear me?
MR. MILLER: Yes.
MS. BUDD: Thank you so very much.
Good morning, Commissioners. I really appreciate the
opportunity to speak and for being able to go at this time. So, again,
thank you for that.
My name is Meredith Budd. And I am not representing any
organization today, but I have spent my career in conservation
looking for ways to have win-win: Balance economic development,
development of the county, and the needs for conservation across
Florida and in Collier County specifically. And, of course,
protecting the environment, as you all know, in turn, really does help
March 12, 2024
Page 89
our economy.
I've heard the dialogue today, and I really appreciate the
conversation you've had up on the dais about this program and your
support for the program.
Collier County has a long and proud history of conservation, and
the natural beauty that you-all, as leaders, have really helped to
preserve, it's not a surprise that people continue to flock to Collier
County. We have over a thousand people coming to Florida every
single day, and Collier County remains one of the most popular
places for people to relocate.
There are other revisions that you're discussing, and some of
them are good. And I'm -- I commend Commissioner Saunders. I
appreciate you for directing staff to work with stakeholders to take a
look at these changes. And the changes to make sure the process is
moving, seeing all the purchases that you-all have talked about today
moving forward in the process, those are good. But some changes
are, quite frankly, a bit inappropriate.
I was not yet living in Collier County or even out of schooling in
2002 and 2006 with the ballot referenda, but I know the history.
And then in 2020, I had the privilege of being an active lead in
helping spread the word about re-authorizing this popular program.
And I don't have to remind you that 77 percent of the electorate
approved spending tax dollars on conservation, the straw ballot.
And so without bond covenants, there is nothing binding you to
actually follow the will of the voters, only your promise and duty as
an elected official.
So I'm asking you today to keep that promise and reject any
proposed change in the ordinance to spend the tax money approved
by voters for conservation and any other county purpose. It's
inappropriate and directly in opposition to what your constituents
voted for.
March 12, 2024
Page 90
I know you'll hear from my colleagues today, and we've worked
with staff for many, many weeks to also urge you to consider
inserting language about repaying or replacing Conservation Collier
funds that I heard you talk about today and appreciate you speaking
to that and putting effort into replacing those funds. And putting
language in of promising to replenish, this will ensure robust funding
for the program, continued management, and, of course,
(unintelligible) need, acquisition opportunities, and also to help
reinstill faith in your constituents that you are able to keep your
promises.
Conservation Collier can be your legacy, and the decisions that
you make today on these ordinance changes determine that that's a
legacy that you'll want to be remembered for. So I really appreciate
the dialogue and appreciate your consideration of spending the
money as it was intended by the voters, replacing the money that has
been taken to spend on other things, and also moving the programs
forward in a very expeditious and effective way.
So, again, thank you for the time and the opportunity to speak.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is going to be Brad Cornell.
I'm not going to ask the next person to queue up, but I do need to call
everyone that ceded time. When you hear your name, please raise
your hand.
Anita Sargese?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: I hope I'm saying that right. Thank you.
Steven Sargese?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Linda Roth?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Sallyann Ferrero?
(Raises hand.)
March 12, 2024
Page 91
MR. MILLER: Sharon Epple?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Andrew Sillin?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Candace Forsyth?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Juliet Gross?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Augusta Rosenauer?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Thank you.
Mary Aronin?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Lori Beall?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Darryl Manning?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Wendy DeSilva?
MS. HELD: She went to the lady's room.
MR. MILLER: Pardon me?
MS. HELD: She went to the lady's room.
MR. MILLER: Okay. I'll take your word that she's still here.
Jean Held?
MS. HELD: Me.
MR. MILLER: John Forsyth. Oh, back there. Thank you.
Roberta Burglund?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Marshall Olson?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Linda Denning?
(Raises hand.)
March 12, 2024
Page 92
MR. MILLER: Jan Williams?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Sue Heckman?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Paul Bishop?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Yuki Bourdeau?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Diane Shanley?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Elizabeth [sic] Arsenault?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Martha Bantz?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Lois Kelley?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Ann Keller [sic]?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Jeanne Tucker?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Rose Burke?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Lindsey McCaskey?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Deb Angelis?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: I'm sure I butchered that.
Dianne Rhodes?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: And, Gary Bromley?
(Raises hand.)
March 12, 2024
Page 93
MR. MILLER: Wow, a record 33 people. We have the timer
maxed out at 99 minutes, Brad.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You know, just out of turn, I
want to just say how impressed I am with citizens -- you know, we've
said this before from our seats here, that, you know, get the most
eloquent speaker rather than 50 people getting three minutes.
Sometimes that's not the most powerful thing. And for all of you,
the most eloquent speaker on this topic is standing at the podium
right now. And so I really commend you-all for giving him
maximum time so that we can make the best decision possible.
That frequently happens. I think, like Troy just said, we just
broke a record. And so I'm encouraged to hear from Brad, who we
respect deeply, and Meredith as well. You know, she's very close to
this issue as well. But oftentimes citizens don't take our advice.
And they deserve their time at the podium, but it could have been
used more, you know, judiciously. And today is a perfect example
of how you-all have really come together as a group, and, you know,
nominated the top speaker.
So, Brad, don't disappoint the 33 people in the audience, or
else -- or else they will meet you out in the hall.
MR. CORNELL: Thank you, Commissioner.
Good morning, Commissioners, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the
opportunity to address you, and I appreciate my colleagues in ceding
time to me. I won't -- as Troy said, I won't use this full time.
But I do have some slides I'd like to share with you and a couple
of points I'd like to make. I appreciate very much the conversation
that you-all have had this morning. It has been encouraging and
insightful, and so I think you'll recognize some of the themes in what
I'm going to share with you as well.
And I also want to commend you on making the direction last
fall to staff, to the County Attorney, and to stakeholders, NGOs, and
March 12, 2024
Page 94
the public and your CCLAC, your advisory committee, to work on
ways to expedite and improve the process to accelerate land
acquisition, which is the point of the program, and then to manage it.
So thank you for that direction. I think we have made a lot of
progress, as Jaime Cook has outlined. We have some additional
points to make on those, but definitely great progress.
So I will -- oh, good. This worked.
I first want to offer Audubon's support, and many others here in
the room support, for the revisions that accelerate land acquisition.
And I'll just identify three important spots on there. Section 11, No.
5, is where the applications are evaluated as they are received, and
that's going to save months in the process. As you-all already
discussed, that's a really important amendment.
Section 12, No. 1, where you have updated criteria, those new
nine criteria are from staff, and they are -- I think they're wonderful.
The CCLAC has looked at those, the public has looked at those, the
NGOs, Audubon, and the Conservancy, we've all had a look at those,
and we think those are much clearer and that that clarity's going to
help speed up the evaluation process.
And then in Section 12, No. 8, the signed contracts that would
be sent to the Board directly, rather than to CCLAC, that's always
been a perfunctory meeting which delayed the provision to you for
that final decision, that's going to save a month so -- at least a month.
So that's a really good one. So we support all those changes and
hope they will move forward with the amendments when you vote on
these.
Next, I want to address the issue that you-all were addressing in
your conversation, and that is the references -- the four references
you have to deleting -- or to diverting funds. We believe that that is
unnecessary, as the budgeted authority for doing that is with the
Board of County Commissioners, as has already been confirmed by
March 12, 2024
Page 95
your County Attorney several times.
And you also have a precedent where, after Hurricane Irma, you
went to the Conservation Collier Land Management Fund to clean up
after that huge hurricane. This was before Ian. This was in 2017.
So you have a precedent of exerting your authority to use those
funds in Conservation Collier basically as an emergency reserve for
emergency purposes, and you replaced those funds, which was
important.
I also want to point out that including text in the ordinance that
says the Board has the authority to do this is unnecessary, and it
conveys the sense to the public or anyone reading the ordinance that
you don't support the program. And we know that's false, and we've
listened to your conversation today. We know that's not true.
So say what you mean in your ordinance. Don't say that you
intend to or you have the authority to divert the funds. You already
have that authority. You don't need to put it into the ordinance any
times.
Alternatively, Audubon recommends adding to one or all four of
those diversion references -- if you insist on putting those
forward -- replacement language, and you guys have already brought
that issue up. I think it's a good idea. We would support that.
Something that goes along the lines of, if we need to use this for
emergency purposes, then "provided all such diverted funds are
replaced in the respective trust funds as soon as practicable" or
something like that.
And I want to note that the land management trust fund -- this
land management function is a perpetual long-term obligation, as you
have discussed, and that the 20-year model that Conservation Collier
has used depends on that trust fund principal model that generates
interest to fund the annual management. And the fund had been up
to the point with $42 million last fall where you were generating
March 12, 2024
Page 96
about $1.2 million a year with that interest. The budget was 1.4
million. We were just $200,000 away from fully funding, with
interest, your annual obligations for management.
And I want to note that when you voted on your budget decision
in the fall, $38 million of that $53 million diversion was to come
from the land management trust fund, which was supposed to stay
there. That's not gathering dust. It's working by generating interest.
So we -- and I will also note, if I understand this correctly, that
that money has not yet been moved. It's still sitting there, and it's
still generating interest, and we would encourage you and
recommend that you do leave that there now.
So here are those spots where we recommend deleting these four
references. So it's in Section 6, Lines 153 to 155, Lines 183 to 186,
Lines 238 to 240, and Lines 278 to 280, we recommend you delete all
those. You don't need them. You already have that authority. But
if you insist on keeping them, then add some sort of language
as -- that we show in red here. "Provided all such diverted funds are
replaced in the respective trust fund" or "the named trust fund as soon
as practicable."
And your conversation was leading us all in that direction. We
appreciate that. We would like you to fully delete those references
and consider that as your primary objective in this ordinance.
Now, we have some other revisions that we'd like to highlight
for you. I'm not going to go through the details. As Jaime Cook
pointed out, too, there are several things that are just minutia, but
there's a couple substantive things that I want to address, and these
are policies that kind of fall into the area of omissions or deficiencies
or problems that you can address with these revisions, an opportunity,
if you will.
And so the first one is, on Lines 363 to 364, Section 8, No. 1,
has to do with those SSAs, the Stewardship Sending Area. There's a
March 12, 2024
Page 97
distinction when you talk about Stewardship Sending Areas. They're
not all the same. Some of them are provisional. In other words,
they haven't sent any credits -- or no credits have been used. Those
SSAs can be reversed by the landowner. They can change their
mind five years down the road and say, oh, on second thought, we're
going to undo this SSA, and we're not going to generate any credits.
We're not going to use any credits. Forget the whole thing. And
that's actually already been done.
And so those kinds of SSAs would -- could be beneficial to
make sure they don't get used for development or one house on every
five acres or roads or something like that.
So that is a reason to consider putting in the word "permanent
Stewardship Sending Areas." As soon as an SSA generates a credit,
one credit, and it's used to entitle anything, like Ave Maria or a Big
Cypress town or anything, Neal Communities project in that area,
that SSA becomes permanent. It's in perpetuity. And so
that's -- those are the SSAs that have already accomplished the
mission of Rural Lands Stewardship of protecting these resources
without public dollars. And so putting that "permanent" adjective in
there would be the way to accomplish that.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, if I might
interrupt here for just a second. Pardon me.
Just to facilitate this, I would suggest that there's a -- the
proposed change here -- I don't think anyone's going to have any
particular objection to it. I think if the Board acknowledges
that -- because when he's finished and we start talking, we're going to
have to go back and figure out what changes he's made. If this is an
acceptable change, why don't we agree to it as he's going through
these, as opposed to having him finish and then we try to come back
with what he's recommended? Is there any objection to trying to do
that that way?
March 12, 2024
Page 98
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Or let me rephrase that. Is
everybody in agreement with doing it that way?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Are you asking specifically
about the --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: It is eating his time? I mean --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: He's got another hour, so I
don't think he's worried.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Are you talking --
MR. CORNELL: I've got all day, guys.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Commissioner Saunders, are
you talking specifically about the stewardship -- the SSAs?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Just this one change right
now.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The SSAs? And that's on
Section 8, No. 1 you're talking about?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: The one he has on the
screen. If it's agreed to by the Board, let's say so, and staff will have
that -- will make a note of it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, since we're talking
about it, I wouldn't specify that it be permanent -- be a permanent
SSA. I mean, our staff gave us language -- or talked about the
potential -- I mean, you said it at the beginning when you started
talking about SSAs, they're not all the same. And there may be a
time when one that isn't permanent or is permanent, as the case may
be, should be accumulated by Conservation Collier. As long as it
comes with the sufficient reserves for the -- for the ongoing
maintenance, I wouldn't be opposed to that acquisition.
MR. CORNELL: The point that we were -- Audubon was
trying to make, and in discussion and CCLAC and staff, the
permanent Stewardship Sending Areas are the ones that have the
March 12, 2024
Page 99
dedicated -- they should have a dedicated endowment fund for
management, and they should -- that should -- if you were to buy
something like that or if the state were to buy or anybody were to buy
that for conservation, that needs to come with --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Agreed.
MR. CORNELL: -- management money. The temporary ones
also have management money, but if they undo that, then that all goes
away.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And so -- and maybe I
misunderstand the statement, but my suggestion was to add back the
opportunity on all SSAs as they come to us, we're going to look at all
of the variables that are there, but not preclude it strictly to
permanent.
MR. CORNELL: And I think your staff, Jaime Cook, pointed
out there's much less value in the permanent SSAs because they're
already protected. Now, there is one issue that you didn't talk about
yet, and I was going to bring it up on the next one because I have a
related comment on that, and that is public access. Nobody has
public access on any of these private conservation easements. And
so it could be that there would be a piece of land that has a permanent
easement on it, whether it's an SSA easement or, you know, a federal
Endangered Species Act easement or a wetlands protection easement,
anything. If it's a private easement, no one from the public can get
on there to see whatever those resources are, or if you had a trail and
this parcel interrupted it. So that would be one rationale to buying
something that had easements on it.
You start to get into some complicated issues when you look at
that ball of wax. So you see in the next recommendation we have is
in Section 8, No. 4, which is the section about conservation
easements generally and transfer of development right credits.
That's a complicated issue. Your Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District's
March 12, 2024
Page 100
TDR credits, other TDR credits and conservation easements which
come in many, many different varieties, we feel like staff has started
that process of evaluating that complex issue. We still think it's
premature to put it into this ordinance and that if you want to be
buying easements and TDR credits, there's more discussion that
needs to be had with your staff, with the public, with your
Conservation Collier advisory committee, and some of the other
advisory committees that would have an opinion about this.
So we were recommending you delete that whole section,
Section -- No. 4 in Section 8 just because the conservation easement
is complex. There's value in considering it. Like I just said, maybe
there's some public access you really want to make sure you get so
you can complete a trio or for flowway or something like that.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, on that
particular issue, I actually raised the issue of purchasing easements,
and I would agree with Mr. Cornell that perhaps we have language in
here that needs to be worked on a little bit.
If we delete this now, we can always come back and amend this
ordinance at a future date to include that. So if the Board is in
agreement, I would suggest that we delete that section for now, have
staff come back sometime in the future after it's been, perhaps,
debated and reevaluated.
MR. CORNELL: That was our recommendation.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm not interested in that.
I'm not interested in deleting that opportunity at this stage. It's not
brain surgery. Buying an easement has a value. Buying
TDR -- buying land that already has TDRs or credits on it has a
value. Those values can be attributed at the time of acquisition
whether they've been already stripped of an SSA that's already been
established in perpetuity or whether they haven't -- the credits haven't
been stripped off.
March 12, 2024
Page 101
So I don't have an interest in limiting our opportunities here. I
feel that these statements are limiting to the program and diminishing
the opportunity to buy a viable piece of property that does have
public access, that is a connection to a particular flowway that we
wish to enhance -- staff believes that it wished to be enhanced.
So, personally, I wouldn't be interested in making that
adjustment at this stage. It may be on a case-by-case basis that we
determine that the asking price inclusive of or not of the TDRs or
credits isn't a sufficient value, but we'll make those decisions as we
come along. We'll make a decision as the properties come to us with
regard to the value of a purchase of a Conservation Collier easement
and/or fee simple ownership.
I think that was one thing Commissioner Saunders suggested we
could acquire and protect, environmentally, the development of a
piece of property by buying an easement.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, we don't
always get unanimous votes. So I think, again, to help facilitate this,
I would make a motion that we delete that provision. If there's three
commissioners that support that, then we'll delete it. If there's not,
then we'll leave it in and move on. So I'll make that motion for
today and that this be reevaluated by our staff and brought back to us
at a future date.
Okay. I'm getting used to the no seconds to some of my
motions.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Well, it just goes back to, I'm not -- I'm
not interested in limiting us. We can look at everything on case by
case, but you can have control, or you can have growth. I would
much rather lean on the growth side on this area, so...
MR. CORNELL: Shall I continue?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Please.
March 12, 2024
Page 102
MR. CORNELL: Okay. Next issue is the sale. And when
you're -- Mr. Chair, you brought this up relative to the Railhead
Scrub parcel, which is in the path of the Veterans Parkway. So this
is Line 338, Section 8, No. 5, the Board may sell Conservation
Collier lands, and we're suggesting that this needs criteria. What
lands would you sell? What would you consider selling? And that
would be lands that no longer met the purpose of the program, and
that would be the criterion that we recommended in red inserting into
this to have -- you know, and all the other policies were fine with us,
but that seems like, rather than just saying we can sell land, well, why
would you sell it? Under what circumstances? And so that seemed
like a reasonable bottom-line criterion.
Lines 440 to 442 is Section 9, No. 1D. This is similar to that
SSA recommendation I had above, which is to describe the kind of
SSA, the Stewardship Sending Area, that would be excluded from
consideration, and that would be the permanent ones, the ones that
have already been protected, that the mission has been accomplished.
The next recommendation is Lines 580 to 581; that's Section 12,
No. 5. So this is a process one. We're not objecting to the
streamlining of the process as is laid out in the draft ordinance that
you've got, but what we're saying is you're missing a little piece.
How does the Active Acquisition List actually come to be? And so
this sentence that we've added here in red basically lays out the quick
way to describe the creation of the Active Acquisition List, the AAL.
It needed that one sentence that -- there was a lot of
strikethrough and underlines. It got really confusing. And as you
read it, it seemed like it was missing this one sentence, so that's why
we are recommending that, just as a process thing. Not super
substantive, but needed for the process.
So those are my substantive recommendations for you. I do
want to share a little bit of good news. So last fall you-all approved
March 12, 2024
Page 103
the purchase of four lots that were contiguous on South Barfield on
Marco Island. Those lots have something like 90 gopher tortoises on
them, a pair of burrowing owls, and a nesting pair of bald eagles.
And you may remember that right after you did that, Rosemary
Tolliver, who is Audubon Florida's -- Audubon -- eagle watch
volunteer who monitors that nest, sent pictures of little baby eagles
that had just hatched after you approved that purchase. Those eagles
now are doing what she called -- I never heard of this term. They're
branching. And, apparently, eagle chicks that branch have gotten so
big that there's not a whole lot of room left in the nest. They're not
able to fly yet, but they're walking out on the branch. And so that's
good. So this eagle's nest is now permanently protected thanks to
your purchasing and approving that purchase. So that's a little bit of
good news. And that's a picture of a bald eagle taken by my friend,
Jean Hall. It's carrying sticks for a nest, and that's on Marco Island.
Oop, sorry. There we go.
And last, I just want to thank you again for making the direction
to streamline the process and understand our criticisms of the
diversion language and the solutions to that and then some of our
detailed recommendations for improving the draft that you have in
front of you. I know you're bringing this back for voting, but this is
a really substantive conversation that you've entertained today.
Thank you for that engagement, and we would like to remain
engaged, and we will continue to participate, as everyone in the room
is very, very supportive of the program and of your leadership of it as
best we can implement this program for conservation purposes.
And to finish, I just wanted to share a picture that I took. So
Michelle Leonard and Meredith Budd and I were out walking on the
Panther Walk Preserve. This was a couple of years ago. This is in
Golden Gate Estates right off of Everglades Boulevard. And we
were walking along -- and it's a very short trail -- and all of a sudden,
March 12, 2024
Page 104
we had to stop really fast. There was a huge mama bear right in
front of -- well, I don't even know if it was a mama. I can't tell. But
it was a big black bear, and you can -- it was surprised by us, and we
were -- it's -- and we surprised it. So we retreated because that was
the smart thing to do.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Good choice.
MR. CORNELL: And then it ran off another 20 yards into the
bushes and stayed there and watched us, and that's it watching us as
we walked by very gingerly.
And so, anyway, this is what Conservation Collier is all about.
This preserve, you are now -- it's part of a multi-parcel project.
You're expanding it through the process, and we encourage you to
keep this up. Thank you very much for your consideration.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thanks, Brad.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Don't go away. Brad, Brad,
Brad, don't go -- Brad, don't go away.
MR. CORNELL: I'm here.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Will you go back to your first couple of slides with the
language. You suggested removing the language -- those, right
there.
MR. CORNELL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll -- if it pleases the Board,
I'd make a motion to accept this language. I would like to leave the
language that's in the proposed resolution to allow for flexibility of
future boards but put the suggested language here in red in each one
of those places just to specifically delineate the repayment of those
funds, and I like "as soon as practicable." I like this language in
leaving that flexibility, because it may -- inevitably will not always
be us up here. And so having this specific language added in, I'd be
happy with that language in red being added to the proposed
March 12, 2024
Page 105
ordinance changes, so I'll make that motion.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay. So if we took money from
Acquisition Fund to the Maintenance Fund, are you saying we would
have to replace that Acquisition Fund as well even though we kept it
in the program, or just if we had any other county purpose?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, that's the intent of this.
It can be transferred between the two funds. Another one talks about
moving it out of the fund eventually. What I -- I'm pleased with this
addition of language that specifies that if the money is moved, then it
is replaced as soon as practicable. I like that. That specifies that it
is to, in fact, be replaced if it's utilized for -- from one fund to another
or for other government purposes, as the case -- as Brad said, we
have the opportunity to do that now. We have the authority to do
that now, but we don't want to have to administer -- I don't want to
have to adjust the ordinance every time that that's, in fact, done. So
I'd accept that language to be added in here.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I just wanted to make sure that it was
what -- if we used the funds for any other purpose, yes, I'd say
replace it. But if we had to make an adjustment between Acquisition
Fund and Maintenance Fund in the future, and let's just say it's after
sunset, then there's no way to replace that money if we -- as long as
the money stays in the program, whether Acquisition or Maintenance,
I'd be good with that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALL: But if we borrowed from the Acquisition
Fund to put in Maintenance or borrowed from the Maintenance Fund
that was fat to buy some property, I wouldn't want to necessarily say
we had to do that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I see your point. I'm
actually looking at the end of this tax. I'm looking at the -- at the
end of the -- of the 10-year program. Conservation Collier -- this
March 12, 2024
Page 106
board's going to have to either continue on with some form of
taxation to support the ongoing maintenance, or it's going to be
consumed into our General Fund or paid for out of our General Fund.
So I didn't have -- I don't have a problem with a plan -- plans are
adjustable -- but allow for the funds to be replaced as soon as
practicable. I didn't have a problem with that language.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. I'd like to focus
on that section as well, or those four sections. I think stating it once,
I think we all agree that that's all that's necessary, but I'd like to break
it up, I think, into two sentences, and this is sort of a suggestion. "At
the direction of the Board, funds may be transferred between the two
funds," period. Funds --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: If used.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: "At the direction of the
Board, funds may be transferred between the two funds," period.
"As determined by the Board, funds may be removed in
emergency situations but shall be replenished as" practical -- "as soon
as practicable" so that it's clear that we can take the funds out but
only if there's an emergency that we determine, and that those funds
have to be back in. If we need to have that language in there, that's
what I would recommend. I think that sends a message that we're
going to be very judicious in taking funds out of the program.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yeah. And to my point -- I can sum it
up. Let me communicate a little better. "At the discretion of the
Board, funds may be transferred between the two funds," period. "If
used for any other county purpose and found to be in the best interest
of the public, then we replace the respective trust funds as soon as
practical [sic]."
So we still have the ability to transfer money between the two
funds, but if it's -- we take it out of the program for any other use,
March 12, 2024
Page 107
then we promise to pay it back.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I'm in -- I agree with
that. I'm just trying to tighten it up a little bit that we determine
there's an emergency -- now, that's -- the beauty is in the eyes of the
beholder, so we determine when there's an emergency.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And that the funds -- and I
like to use the term "shall" to make it clear that we are serious about
it. "Funds shall be replaced as soon as practicable." We're saying
the same thing, but I'm just tightening it up a little bit.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm okay with "shall."
CHAIRMAN HALL: I'm okay with "shall." Shall's King
James.
MR. CORNELL: Mr. Chair, I'm sorry. I'm not going to
interrupt. You can keep this conversation going. I just want to note
that I really do not have any control over the people who have
attended here today, and I know that not everybody's ceded their time
to me. So I just want to note that you probably have some other
perspectives out there.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes, we do; 17.
MR. CORNELL: So just --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: This is tangible here for right
now, Brad. I appreciate you sharing that.
MR. CORNELL: No, I didn't want to interrupt. I just wanted
to note that.
MR. MILLER: I should probably interject. I blew the count.
We have 27 people left.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I think I'm next.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: My light went back out again.
I just wanted to -- I just wanted to preface, the importance of the
March 12, 2024
Page 108
period, not the comma, because we learned that two weeks ago. The
comma, it definitely has a unique bearing on the way you're writing
your sentence.
No, I agree, because I don't want us to have the idea that people
think, well, traditionally, we always took 25 percent, put it in the
Maintenance Fund, 25, 25 -- over the last 13 years, that was
traditionally the number. But if we project something and we need
37 percent to go into the Maintenance Fund because interest rates are
low and we want to get to a certain point where we know we can
maintain, I don't want that to be confused with us taking money out
of one fund to the other. That's just us managing the fund and
having the ability to manage the fund. And I just want to make that
clear.
This is only if for some reason outside of what we typically
move over -- because it's only collected in the one, then we move a
percentage over. So that's always taking one out of the other. We
do that normally. So I don't want anybody to get confused that we're
taking money out; we didn't repay it. No, we're just managing the
percentage at this point.
And then, yeah, I'm fine with my colleagues up here and the
kind of language we're going at with the rest of the meeting, and
"shall."
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So would it be appropriate
for me to reiterate what that proposed language is and see if the
Board agrees?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So it will read, in one
location only, "At the direction of the Board, funds may be
transferred between the two funds," period. "In an emergency, as
determined by the Board of County Commissioners, funds can be
removed for other governmental purposes but shall be replenished" in
March 12, 2024
Page 109
the respective trust -- "shall be replenished as soon as practicable,"
and we'll have some flexibility as to where it goes.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: The word "emergency," it just
leaves it so open to so many different -- you know, like, how about
"for the betterment of the citizens of Collier County" or something
more -- more of -- because there's ultimately more -- the county's
made up of a lot more people than just the people that are concerned
about this particular fund, and you're locking it to an emergency. I
mean, who defines emergency? A brushfire? I mean, that's an
emergency out in the Estates. So we can take money, then go help
pay the firefighters and all that?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, that's why I was
saying, the beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. If the Board says
this is an emergency, it's an emergency, period. It would be our
determination. So if there's a hurricane and we need to take funds
out, if there's a brushfire, we need to take funds out, if a bridge fails
and we need to take funds out, that would be an emergency situation
that we would determine, and we would have -- and this would be a
question for the County Attorney, but I'm sure he will agree, that
whatever emergency we determine, that's going to justify removing
the funds. So we'd have tremendous flexibility, but I think it sends a
message that, you know, we can't just take it out because we want to
buy flowers for staff.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Well, I don't think that would
ever happen.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I don't think it would either,
but...
Mr. Klatzkow, am I overstating what the flexibility would be
with the Board if we used the word "emergency" in there?
MR. KLATZKOW: No. I mean, emergency would be defined
by the Board. Three votes, it's an emergency.
March 12, 2024
Page 110
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So I think -- but I think it
puts a little bit of pressure on us to have it be a legitimate emergency,
and then having the language "shall be replaced," I think, also puts a
little pressure on us as we get into the budget.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I guess my thing is saying,
like -- my example. Like I said, we have brushfires a lot out in the
Estates, and we can all agree that we have a state of emergency at a
countywide level, you know, and then we get some things burned out,
and the monies we spend on that to fight those fires, probably three of
us would agree that's an emergency. Now, we'd be taking money out
of this fund?
That's what I'm saying. I want to kind of protect it, because you
can articulate emergency in a lot of ways, and if all you need is three
votes, then, you know, then that --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I certainly would support
being more restrictive, but I don't know how you do it.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I guess that's what I'm trying to
look for, a language that says -- you know, just kind of like anything
else, you know, "the betterment of the citizens of Collier County." It
takes a lot of weight to say -- like with eminent domain or something,
to come over and take people's property for the betterment. It takes
a lot more weight to do that than it does just declare an emergency.
That's all -- I'm just trying to find the right language, I guess.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And maybe that's -- maybe
we need to put some language in here today, and we can kind of work
on that over the next several days to be more restrictive. But either
way you want to say it -- if you want to say it that way, that's fine,
and then we can massage that over the next couple of weeks as this
comes back.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I'm just throwing it out.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We're trying to accomplish
March 12, 2024
Page 111
the same thing.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah, I think so.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We're trying to make it more
restrictive but recognizing that the Board does have to have some
flexibility. That's why I was using the term "emergency," because
that just seemed to narrow it to some extent. When you say "to the
betterment of the county," that's -- I think that's --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: That's ultimately our goal.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yep. So either way for
right now, but I think we'd need to -- probably need to work on it a
little bit.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Three board members have to approve
whatever purpose it is, so that's going to make it important anyway.
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. And I agree with
saying it four times. I even mentioned that when it came before me
before. Saying it four times that it can be utilized for other purposes
was a bit repetitive. So saying it once is fine. Pick one of the
places that it says it.
I wouldn't -- I like the language that's in here now with regard to
the flexibility that the Board has to utilized the funds. If it's deemed
to be by majority vote in the public interest, whether it's buying
flowers for staff or a fire in Golden Gate Estates, I don't think having
to delineate it as an emergency is a requisite.
I think that the language that's up -- pick one of these places.
183 through 186, 153 through 155 stipulates what the intent is. I
think it's most important -- and we all talked about it at the beginning
of this, that we have language -- whether we say it four times or say it
once, we have specific language that says that the funds shall -- that's
restrictive enough -- "shall be replaced as soon as practicable,"
period, and don't make any adjustments to what's already in print and
March 12, 2024
Page 112
been advertised. Pick one place that best typifies that intent, and put
it in there, and then we're good.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I think you-all are saying
very similar things the same way. You know, we were guilty, what,
at our last meeting -- I say "guilty," but, you know, having a
three-hour meeting over a comma I thought was kind of embarrassing
when, you know, we're here to do the work of the people. I
think -- let's all try to combine the best verbiage, but we're trying to
make this more restrictive, I think -- I am, anyway, more specificity.
But, you know, in my previous life, I've sat in meetings like this
where we talked for two hours because, you know, it had the word
"small dog" and somebody wanted to change it out with the word
"puppy," and it's like we're saying the same thing.
So I think everything you all have said accomplishes the same
thing. We got off the rails a little bit, I think, where -- and I know
what Commissioner Kowal was saying, but I think that was a little
less specific than I'm happy with about just, you know, being a little
too -- I like the word "emergency." And also, too, we have to be
held to this. So it's not like this automatically rubber stamps
approval. It would come to us and, you know, if we thought
something was an emergency, and after discussion we felt like it
wasn't, then we wouldn't touch this money.
But -- and I also agree that it doesn't need to be in every
paragraph. But, you know, let's get down to brass tacks here and not
have a three-hour conversation on where a comma should go. It
does matter, but let's make some command decisions here. I mean,
we're looking at three sentences, and we shouldn't have to be here for
three hours. All the right words are in there. It's just a matter of
moving it around.
The sentences I heard that made the most sense to me is the way
March 12, 2024
Page 113
Commissioner Saunders summarized it. It just seemed like where to
put the period, the word "emergency," and, you know, I think, you
know, to sit here and debate a word or two or whatever, you know, in
the end it comes down to intention, and the intention, in my book, is
to make this more specific and, yes, more restrictive so it's a very
unique circumstance where we do anything with this money.
I think last fall it was a unique circumstance, but I think if those
words are in there -- and there -- maybe only in one paragraph, or if it
needs to be in another paragraph for more impact, okay. But
somebody summarize this paragraph and, you know, let's make some
decisive decisions here rather than wordsmithing this thing to death,
and staying very specific and restrictive which is, I think, what we're
all wanting to do with this for the betterment of this program.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I will go ahead and make a
motion on this language just to see if there's consensus here. "At the
direction of the Board, funds may be transferred between the two
funds," period. "In the event of an emergency as determined by the
Board of County Commissioners, funds may be withdrawn provided
all such diverted funds shall be replaced as soon as practicable."
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Motion and second. All in favor, say
aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And this will be in one
place.
March 12, 2024
Page 114
CHAIRMAN HALL: That's just one place.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And we can massage this a
little later on when it comes back.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Brad, what else?
MR. CORNELL: Commissioners, I've actually completed my
presentation to you, and so you may want to hear from some others in
the public before you vote too many more times.
The issue of the emergency fund, I'll just -- since that was such a
big issue in people's comments and our view of this, one of the main
objectives that our recommendations are steering towards is
the -- and this goes back to your budget hearings in the fall -- is the
relative lack of a reserve fund. And, Commissioner Kowal, you
were mentioning this as well.
The Conservation Collier Management Trust Fund has been a de
facto reserve fund for your programs, all your programs, and so
the -- I guess I would just encourage you, as you look at this language
and when you finalize it, when you vote on it in the end, March 26th,
or whenever you bring this back for the final vote, consider perhaps
how that helps achieve that so that you're doing double duty. You're
providing the management income annually for Conservation Collier
at a really robust level, one and a half million dollars a year or more,
and it's a de facto reserve fund. So that concept was what we were
driving at in saying "replenish the funds," and it's what attends [sic]
some of the comments were made. But that's -- if I can just lay that
out there.
So thank you for listening to my longer-than-usual comments
but appreciate the conversation.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Lunch.
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, we are definitely due for a court
reporter break.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes. It's a good time for lunch. I
March 12, 2024
Page 115
apologize to the other 27 but, you know what, we have a 1:30
time-certain. This is county business. It's not all about
Conservation Collier. We have a lot more to do today. So let's get
back here at 12:15.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Really?
CHAIRMAN HALL: What's that?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: We can't go back in time.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Oh, excuse me. 1:15. 1:15 be back.
(A luncheon recess was had from 12:34 p.m. to 1:15 p.m.)
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. I guess we can continue with
our public speakers. And before -- how many are still here?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: There's three of us.
MR. MILLER: I have no idea how many. I know I've had at
least three people that have pulled out.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay. So let's just remember on our
comments, three minutes, yellow light at the 2:30 -- at the 2:30 mark,
red light at the three-minute mark, and let's land the plane.
MR. MILLER: I'm going to remind you to queue up at both
podiums so we can do this as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Your first speaker is Bobbie Davenport. She'll be followed by Janet
Hoffman.
MS. DAVENPORT: Hello, and thank you for the opportunity
to speak today. Hi, Bill, over there. I'm in Bill's district.
I wanted to start by saying it was very enlightening, you know,
listening to all of you this morning. I kind of came away with a little
different view than when I came in here today.
But first of all, Bill, thank you for, you know, really fighting to
get funds replenished that were taken. We like that.
And, you know, Rick had spoken to accelerated land purchase
so, you know, that's something I had wanted to talk about, getting
March 12, 2024
Page 116
land purchased quickly. I actually know owners what had put
property up for land purchasing in the past.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Would you please share with
my colleagues what you do do, because I know what you do do.
MS. DAVENPORT: I was going to bring that up at the end,
but we'll share it now.
Okay. So I'm a well-known environmentalist in the area. I've
been involved with a lot of groups over the years. I still am, but I
really, you know, came in here. I gave a presentation to the county a
couple years ago back now and got the Gore property purchased.
That's in Bill's district. It's a 200-acre preserve out there. And, you
know, that really showed what Conservation Collier funds can do.
We got that land purchased. We've got wildlife cameras out there.
Regularly there's bears and panthers seen. It's a beautiful wildlife
crossing. It's also in the groundwater recharge area for the county.
So that's what I do. I, you know, was responsible for starting
that nature preserve and working with the county, and I really, really,
appreciated the funds being used for that. It's a wonderful thing out
there off of DeSoto.
Burt, thank you for all your comments. You know, there's
some line items that need to be looked at and changed, and really,
really appreciate that, that someone's kind of scrutinizing that and
looking at that. And, you know, we'd like to see some wording put
in there where funds will be put back.
There was also mention of a -- that I guess you-all can possibly
sell conservation lands. And, you know, I wouldn't like to see that,
that -- where lands that had been previously purchased for
conservation would be sold. I'd like to see that taken out of there.
You know, it's -- Conservation Collier's a wonderful program.
We'd like to see it go on and on and funds be always put back that are
taken and only taken for emergency use. You know, I think that's
March 12, 2024
Page 117
extremely important to have that done.
And Brad made a lot of good comments in here today about
some line items, so I wanted to kind of reiterate, you know, that I
support that.
And there was some talk about the sunsetting of the
Conservation Collier Program. So I think, you know, if that was put
back on the ballot, people would, hands down, vote for that again. I
don't think, you know, the program should ever be sunsetted. It's so
important. And, you know, as someone who lives in Rural Golden
Gate Estates, I see what the development is doing out there. So, you
know, there's no place for the wildlife to go. I regularly have bears
in my yard with cubs.
I see the red light going off.
I just wanted to say that the program's extremely important.
We need to have less development and more conservation land in
Collier County. We don't have the infrastructure for a whole lot
more development here, or the water resources. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker's Janet Hoffman.
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: I do not see Janet.
Reverend Tony Fisher will be followed by Kate -- Katie Tardif.
(Raises hand.)
REVEREND FISHER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My
name is Tony Fisher. I serve the Unitarian Universalist
Congregation of Greater Naples as its minister. Grateful
for -- always for your time and your talents towards the benefit of this
county.
I just wanted to take one minute to suggest that there are -- and
lift for the public record, my understanding that there are two moral
issues that we're facing right here. One is the issue of the expressed
will of the electorate of Collier County, twice, to create a program for
March 12, 2024
Page 118
which they wish to give their money to maintain the beautiful land
that we have, the biodiversity that we have, and that for you, for all of
us, for our future commissioners, I believe that is a moral
responsibility to lean into that and to understand clearly that mandate
for doing whatever you can to expand the program even, and extend
it beyond its current life, even if that requires another vote which, as
the previous speaker said, would likely take place.
Second, my faith tradition teaches that we are all a part of an
interdependent web of creation and that we have a responsibility, a
moral responsibility to balance our work of development with a really
strong sense of stewardship for this planet.
So from a moral perspective, we have that responsibility, all of
us, to maintain this planet and all its creatures as best we can and to
maintain the buffer zones we have here. The development here in
Collier County has gone on quite -- we've only been -- I've only been
here 10 years, and it's been incredible to see what's gone on here.
And we do not have the ability, as I understand it, to really
create buffers, to create a balance to that development unless we
really are very intentional about it.
So I believe these are two moral issues that you were charged as
well as your -- the people who sit in those seats in the future to
maintain this program, to do this important work for the people of
Collier County. There can be nothing more important than that.
Thank you so much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Katie Tardif. She'll be
followed by Michele Leonard -- Lenhard, excuse me. Katie.
MS. TARDIF: Thanks.
Good afternoon. What a morning. I had several prepared
speeches, and I am -- I am modifying as the meeting and the morning
went on.
I'm going to start by saying trust is a non-fungible mandate of
March 12, 2024
Page 119
being a public servant. And I have to express, it was a little
disturbing to see what looked like rancor amongst the guys, and
hopefully that was just creative self-expression and not a
meaningful -- or an un-meaningful dialogue.
So trust is not fungible. And -- gosh, you know, I rewrote this
so damn many times, I don't even know what I want to say anymore.
What I'm going to go to saying is -- what I'm going to go to say
is, the -- we take this matter of truth very seriously. We hope for
truth from each of our commissioners, and especially our very own
dedicated commissioners. We want to see water quality -- why am I
saying water? That was the last thing I was talking about. We want
to see the preservation conservation programs to continue in a way
that protects the investments that you-all are making in it and
preserves the trust -- preserves our trust in you making decisions that
most of us would agree with when you see percentages like
70 percent of Collier County voters voting with in the past and
hoping that that would be our future as well, but it's gotten a little
tricky.
And -- you know what, I'm going to stop right there. I'm
rambling. I'll get my thoughts together, and I'll save it for the end.
So sorry.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: There's nothing to be sorry
for.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Michele Lenhard. She'll
be followed by Ruth Nichols.
MS. LENHARD: Good afternoon, Commissioner. Michele
Lenhard, chair of your Conservation Land Acquisition Committee.
I, too, have to amend my comments. I appreciate your
conversation today and the work that's been done so far. I appreciate
the input from the community.
And I guess I wanted to -- I'm going to use a little bit of my
March 12, 2024
Page 120
prepared remarks to stay focused. I think from the committee's
perspective, we really feel that the public's expectations was
established through ballot language and voter education on this
program, and that we would like the ordinance revision to sort of
reflect those goals and long tradition that this program has held to
date. But we also respect and appreciate your perspective on fund
balance management and sort of the challenges that come with that.
And with the budget funding levels and proposed amendments
bring into question the viability of trust fund balances and acquisition
balances. So those are certainly serious concerns for all of us in this
community.
And since you have not finalized decisions today, I will offer the
following ideas: So we agree with the vote you took today in terms
of new wording on the fund balance and in terms of repaying fund
balances that might be used in an emergency situation.
With the sale of properties, the committee felt only
properties -- they wanted additional criteria "no longer meet the
program's criteria," something additional into that.
The Veterans Boulevard point you brought up, that would be
under -- in my opinion, in the exception benefits ordinance, you
would be able to use that for another benefit to the community. So I
see that in a different place than just selling property.
We support all the revisions which streamline the process.
We would like -- the only exceptions we sort of had was we do
feel properties with SSAs should just be blanket excluded because, as
you've all pointed out in your discussion, there are a lot of nuances
there, and I think the process of coming before CCLAC and then
going before you would vet that out, and you wouldn't acquire things
that were not appropriate.
We are not in favor of transferring development rights. We feel
that's contrary to the intent of the program.
March 12, 2024
Page 121
We're not in favor of skipping the CCLAC review, which I
know was conversation today. We feel we offer a vetting process
and another set of eyes and ears on this and that the holdup now with
all the streamlining would be very minimal.
And then I guess the only other piece I wanted to offer is that
property sizes vary, and acquisitions that come to us, total dollar
amounts vary over time. And I know you're familiar with the Owl
Hammock application that the state might fund. But if that had
come to us, that was a significant chunk of change.
So having money in the future is very important.
Thank you so much for your time.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Ruth Nichols. She'll be
followed by Andy Wells-Bean.
MS. NICHOLS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name's
Ruth Nichols. I'm from North Naples, and I've lived here for 25
years, so I've seen a lot of changes.
One of the most disturbing, actually, is taking place right across
from where I live where seven -- 170 acres were just cleared to make
way for a golf course. There was -- this was habitat for a bear,
bobcat, gopher tortoises, raccoons, and this is right near Barefoot
Beach Preserve, Wiggins Pass. So it's very sad to see our forested
lands disappearing. So Conservation Collier, in my opinion, is our
last best hope.
So I am very concerned that the opinion of the County Attorney,
no offense, is that you have such broad budgetary powers that you are
allowed to divert funds from a dedicated trust fund that was voted for
by the public, created by referendum to establish funds for
acquisition and maintenance. So I do have a serious issue with
including language in the resolution that gives you the explicit power
to use those funds.
And then I also do have a problem with the red language in
March 12, 2024
Page 122
"replacing funds as soon as practicable." I think that is way too
ambiguous. I'd like to see it say "within one fiscal year," something
like that, or have a monetary limit wherein when a certain amount has
been taken from the fund, that that needs to be returned before you
are ever able to touch the funds in Conservation Collier.
And, sorry, my brain is fried, like so many other people's right
now. I've got notes all over the place.
I am wondering why you can't consider a separate resolution
that would change the terms of Conservation Collier to allow access
to those funds if that is what the county feels it should be allowed to
do.
And one of my concerns is there's so much complexity and
conversation involved about how to return the 53 million that how is
it going to go if this happens in a recurring fashion? It's going to get
even more complicated.
The last point regarding Railhead Scrub Preserve, since you
brought it up, Commissioner Hall, can't we use Conservation Collier
funds to protect that property instead of having Veterans Memorial
bisect that preserve? How about we fund an overpass and protect
that land in perpetuity? We've got bears in there. We've got all
sorts of wildlife that needs to be protected.
So again, to me, this is a moral issue. You know, it's public
trust that I -- my tax dollars went into Conservation Collier, and that's
where that money should stay.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thank you.
MS. NICHOLS: Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Andy Wells-Bean. He'll
be followed by Julianne Thomas.
MR. WELLS-BEAN: Good afternoon. I wanted to start by
introducing myself. My name's Andy Wells-Bean. I'm the
executive director of Audubon Western Everglades. And I wanted
March 12, 2024
Page 123
to make sure to thank you-all for your time and careful attention to
this issue.
I know that Conservation Collier Program is only one part of a
very large portfolio at the county, and it's taking up a lot of your time,
so I appreciate your attention to it and your care with this really
important program.
One thing that I wanted to mention, you're all well aware of the
public support in the Conservation Collier votes, but also there was a
recent survey done by the Community Foundation that found that the
environment, and that included things like preservation and
resilience, that support for the environment, as people's number-one
issue in the county, doubled since the last time they did the survey a
couple years ago. So over 40 percent of respondents said the
environment was their number-one issue in the county.
And I know that that enthusiasm is real. We have 110
households who participated in the Starter Burrow program for
burrowing owls. We have countless volunteers in our Shorebird
Stewardship program with our burrowing owl -- owl watch program,
and that's not to mention all the folks who give their time at the
Conservancy, Sierra Club, Rookery Bay, Cypress Cove Landkeepers,
and many more.
That's why we need the county to keep doing its part to protect
wildlife and wild places as well, and that's why Audubon Western
Everglades, as Brad eloquently mapped out line by line, supports the
efficiency revisions and opposes codifying any diversion of
conservation funds for other purposes except possibly in the case of
an emergency.
So I wanted to say thank you again for your time and attention
to this vital issue. It does not go unnoticed the care that you're
putting into thinking through these really big issues.
Thank you.
March 12, 2024
Page 124
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Julianne Thomas. She'll
be followed by Bebe Kanter.
MS. THOMAS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name
is Julianne Thomas. I am speaking on behalf of the Conservancy of
Southwest Florida and our over 6500 supporting families.
Last fall, we were here asking you to support full funding of
Conservation Collier. When we made those comments, we had not
anticipated that the direction the Board would ultimately take would
be to take $53 million of the Conservation Collier funding to help
plug gaps in the proposed budget. We were disappointed, to say the
very least.
Today we are -- we're here to talk about the amendments to
Conservation Collier, and like everybody else, my comments had to
be revised because of your very good and welcomed conversation
this morning and the actions you took prior to lunch.
Like Audubon, we support the measures that are going to
increase efficiency in this program, and we support the language you
voted on, which makes clear that any diverted funds -- that will only
happen in an emergency and that the intent is to pay it back and that,
you know, this is not being looked at or considered by you as
anything more than emergency funds in emergency measures, not a
slush fund for county -- for holes in the county budget.
And I wanted to thank you for your conversation and, you know,
just let you know that your conversation was heard and appreciated
very, very much.
I'd like to just say a few words about conservation lands in
general because, as you know, conservation lands pay us back
exponentially. There's a tendency to look at natural undeveloped
lands and assume that they're not doing much outside of perhaps
providing a home to wildlife or looking more visually appealing than
a strip mall. But, in fact, natural lands are some of the lowest cost,
March 12, 2024
Page 125
most effective, and hardest working infrastructure we have.
Natural lands, especially wetlands, store floodwater during
tropical events and even heavy rain days. The more wetlands saved,
the more water that can be held there, and that means less flooding on
our roads, in our homes, and our business, not to mention that -- the
amazing job that natural lands do in filtering out pollutants from
runoff.
In Collier County, the environment is the economy, and the
natural areas and preserves that we are fortunate enough to have are
foundational in making Naples the economic generator that it is.
There are many warm, sunny, and attractive coastal
communities. What makes Naples a cut above the rest is our
environment as a whole, and Conservation Collier is an integral part
of this.
Thank you again for your time and interest in the Conservation
Collier Program. We really do appreciate that and the conversation
this morning.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Bebe Kanter. I don't
believe Bebe is here. She is not.
Brittany Piersma. She'll be followed by Gerry Manning.
Brittany's been ceded three additional minutes or -- excuse me.
Brittany's been ceded three additional minutes from Emily, is it
Reisinger.
MS. PIERSMA: She's not here.
MR. MILLER: Oh, she's not here. Okay. Then you'll have
three minutes, Brittany.
MS. PIERSMA: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name
is Brittany Piersma. I'm the field biologist for Audubon Western
Everglades.
We did have two high school students here today, so -- they
couldn't stay, but I wanted to appreciate their support for coming
March 12, 2024
Page 126
along.
I was actually initially hired for Shorebird Stewardship by Brad
five and a half years. So I've had him as a great leader throughout
all of my time.
My position now is a field biologist currently managing three
main programs: Burrowing owls, gopher tortoises, and nesting
migratory shorebirds. The common drive for each of these is
conservation. The scientific data I compile with my amazing army
of now 96 volunteers backed by the support of hundreds of local
citizens is vital for the fast-growing urban area that we live in now.
Our surveys are directly used for all of the recommendations for
Conservation Collier purchases.
We do most of our work on Marco Island, but we do extend our
support to research and knowledge to all of Collier County. Both
preserving conservation lands and educating how to coexist with
wildlife in our own yards is needed more than ever, and that is my
main focus of most of my education nowadays. Once altered, it’s
much harder to restore the native landscape so vital to the health of
our ecosystems. This is apparent in one example of the millions of
dollars that we are now spending trying to find ways to fix the water
flow and restoration within our state.
We are facing growing erosion, water-quality concerns, lack of
native vegetation, and displaced wildlife searching for habitat. We
have the ability now to make changes before it's too late.
I appreciate all the conversations I've heard throughout this
entire morning. It's given me much more hope.
Two main things that I wanted to talk about today was really just
to promote that this land management trust fund is vital to the
existence of this program. As you-all mentioned, your incredible
staff and land managers are working endlessly to not just restore and
maintain and preserve these lands but enhance all of the purchases
March 12, 2024
Page 127
that you make.
Whether it be urban or rural, whether it be one acre or a
thousand or whether it has public access or not, each of these need
constant management. This includes vegetation, both manually,
with equipment, prescribed burns, clearing pathways, providing
shelter, installing signs, managing cameras; that endless list is
supported by the stored money that would hopefully grow to continue
this program. Land does not manage itself, and especially in our
area when we're trying to prevent wildfires, this is essential.
Number two, I really urge you to continue supporting both urban
and rural properties as you move forward, looking at the list of
properties that you have and decisions to be made.
As we continue to track endless wildlife mortality from road
strikes and influences of poisons and toxins, we need both of these
types of property purchases to create the wildlife corridors within the
state. The public needs these areas to view and learn about wildlife
and how to coexist to protect them.
During the season, I heavily do a lot of presentations year round
as well, but I'm presenting to groups, programs, schools almost
weekly. The common theme I hear from the public is wanting to
keep their hope alive within this program. They want to see this
succeed for years to come for the future generation of all the children
that are coming behind us.
So I hope we can all be united on this common goal. Thank
you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Gerry Manning.
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Ray Bearfield.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: Susan Calkins, who is right there. She'll
be followed by Nancy Rose Spector.
March 12, 2024
Page 128
MS. CALKINS: Well, one advantage of the iPad is to be able
to revise without a great deal of confusion. So let's -- here goes.
I'm Susan Calkins. I've been a full-time resident of this county
for 25 years, and today I'm speaking to you as a past member of the
Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee.
I have a few comments and some concerns regarding this
proposed ordinance. But first, thank you for removing the multiple
times the statement that these funds can be used for any other county
purpose if found to be in the best interest of the public. I think
including such a statement in the ordinance, even once, implies that
it's kind of business as usual to do that. And as such, it violates the
public trust that people have already spoken quite eloquently to.
My second comment has to do with having served on the
committee before prior to the time that the referendum was -- the
2020 referendum. We reviewed the ordinance. And one of the
things that came up was that members of the committee as well as the
staff recognized that the 10 percent set-aside for management, which
existed at that time, was inadequate to cover the management costs,
and we decided to add to the ordinance a comment that said -- not
just a comment, but it was a statement that 25 percent -- up to
25 percent of the purchase would go for land management.
This 25 percent was stricken from -- and if you read over the
current ordinance, you'll see this 25 percent was stricken from the
ordinance. My concern is that what -- does that mean we're going to
have to sell conservation lands in order to cover the costs of
management at some point?
Item 5 of Section 8 does allow for the selling of land in order to
add to the management.
I would say that the proposed ordinance needs to make clear that
lands cannot be sold to raise money for land management and that,
moreover, land can only be sold after it's clearly been demonstrated
March 12, 2024
Page 129
that it no longer meets the criteria of the program, which has already
been discussed.
I also, as someone who spent quite a bit of time with the RLSA
program, I do believe that it is important that we clarify any land
that's permanently assigned as a sending area within the RLSA
should not qualify for purchase. That land has already been
permanently set aside, and the owners have been adequately
compensated.
I support Brad Cornell's suggested revision to Section 8, Item 1.
And, finally, I would agree with Audubon's recommendation
regarding one of the items in Section 8. He has been with that
program since its inception. He knows it very well, and I would
encourage you-all to seriously consider his comments and his
suggested revisions.
Thank you for your time.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Nancy Rose Spector.
She will be followed by Richard Grant.
Is Nancy here?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: No. Richard Grant?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Katelin Reisinger?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Jay Kohlhagen?
Uh-oh.
CHAIRMAN HALL: We have a bingo.
MR. KOHLHAGEN: Commissioners -- hey, Dan, Troy.
My name's Jay Kohlhagen. For the record, Jay Kohlhagen.
And I've been down here since I-75 stopped at Immokalee Road,
about the same time you got down here, Bill. I've been here a long
time.
March 12, 2024
Page 130
Anyway, I wasn't planning on speaking today, but I decided to
stick around and see what's going on here. And I -- I came up with
something I'd like to add possibly to here. It's for the people that
have a hard time getting around, like me. We really can't enjoy the
parks, you know, the pickleball because it's just hard to get around.
I'm thinking if we can add a community garden or something
like -- I'm part of one right now, and I've got a little plot, you know,
20-foot long, 3-foot wide. You know, I grow peppers, carrots,
tomatoes, lettuce, radishes, and -- well, the eggplant's not coming up
yet.
But what I'm saying it gets -- it gets people out there to do things
that they -- like, walking's hard for people. You know, but going out
and doing a little gardening, get out in the sun and enjoying nature. I
mean, at our garden, we've got butterflies. We have all kinds of
birds. We've got all kinds of little wildlife around there.
So I'm thinking there's got to be a spot here where we can do
something like that. I mean, I'm just bouncing it off you guys,
everybody here, because some people don't really have -- you know,
they've got their little condos. They don't have any place to do this,
kind of.
But like I said, 120 feet by 120 feet gives you 125 plots, you
know, with little walkways and stuff. And you need a little bit
water, you know, but it gives people something else to do beside
drinking in a bar. Anyway, that's it.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Judy Freiberg.
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Sharon Sanders?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Gaylene Vasaturo, and Charlotte Nycklemoe.
MS. VASATURO: She's not here.
MR. MILLER: She was ceding time. She's not here.
March 12, 2024
Page 131
MS. VASATURO: Don't need it anyway.
MR. MILLER: Gordon Brumwell. Gordon, you'll be after
Gaylene.
MS. VASATURO: Okay. Good afternoon, Commissioners.
I'm Gaylene Vasaturo.
MR. MILLER: Pull the mic down.
MS. VASATURO: I'm Gaylene Vasaturo. Thank you, again,
for that discussion this morning, especially, Commissioner Saunders,
for your additions and comments.
I have my comments here, and I'm setting them aside. I
did -- as what Ruth said, I don't think -- I still object to -- or I don't
agree with the Board diverting funds from Conservation Collier for
non-conservation purposes, but I've put those comments aside.
And also, I have concerns about the language "as soon as
practicable" that was added, because I think the Board could easily
find reasons why it wouldn't be practicable. It's just one of those
loose words.
But that aside, I just want to add a couple comments to
issues -- matters raised by Brad Cornell and to emphasize them. One
is Section 8, No. 1, if I can get that here. It's about the -- I agree, this
is -- this is on property eligible for acquisition. This should be
revised to prevent -- to prohibit acquisition of permanently
designated SSAs. And I have a reason to add to what Brad said.
He gave you one reason. It's -- they have the responsibility for
management, and we shouldn't be taking that over as a county.
But second of all, Conservation Collier funds should not be used
to buy these SSAs because the landowners have already received
compensation for this land in the form of development credits, and it
would be a double dipping, a double payment to them for them to
also get money from Conservation Collier. If they want to donate
the land with management funds, then that's something that could be
March 12, 2024
Page 132
considered.
Second of all -- second, Section 8, No. 4, which has to do with
the easements and the TDR credits, I oppose that -- allowing
Conservation Collier to acquire conservation easements primarily
because I have been here, and I've seen the Board of County
Commissioners do away -- release conservation easements when a
landowner comes back years later and wants the development. The
conservation easements say "in perpetuity," but guess what -- the
Board then says nope, guess what, it's not in perpetuity. And I'm just
concerned that that doesn't give the security of us owning the land.
And I also agree with Brad on you should delete this provision
until you can work out the wording, because it's very complicated,
and you don't want to have language that's going to cause unintended
consequences, which can happen if people haven't gone around and
really figured out what needs to be done. So I ask that you
reconsider doing that on that Provision 4. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Gordon Brumwell. He'll
be followed by Ellin Goetz.
MR. BRUMWELL: Hi. Gordon Brumwell, District 4.
We are for streamlining and speeding the process. Thank you
very much.
There is still problematic language in the draft, but the language
you've added about paying back borrowed funds is promising.
I'm going to propose that Conservation Collier be fully funded
to the .25 mill level, which we haven't talked about much today.
That level has not come up much. Why should it be? Because of
the broad and deep support for conservation in our county.
First, Conservation Collier had been voted in twice in the earlier
2000s.
And next, please -- well, I'm sorry. Nope, you're right.
Parks and Rec, the 2018 master plan survey results show we
March 12, 2024
Page 133
want preserves, the upper right. What needs should be prioritized?
The lower left, that huge bar, is enjoy nature, slash, green space. It's
the highest priority by far.
And next, please.
The East Naples Community Development Plan is for just a part
of the county, but let's look at it. From its green space section,
quote, preservation and increases in green space were noted often and
public engagement, end quote.
And next, please.
A recent community assessment found environment was ranked
third by residents, and managing growth and development ranked
second. There's a big overlap here.
The quality-of-life benefits that land preservation brings are all
wrapped up in managing growth, meaning managing growth ranking
second is bound to be partly due to voters' reactions to this place
dying as trees go down and concrete goes up.
Of course, tax revenue must be dealt with responsibly. No one
wants you guys buying $300 toilet seats. That's true. But back to
the early 2000s, up to now, select groups, the electorate at large,
there's no denying your constituents want our beautiful land woven
into the fabric of our future.
So we the people are literally asking you to deliver a fully
funded Conservation Collier funded to that .25 mill level.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Ellin Goetz. She'll
be -- is Ellin here?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: No, she's not. Sarah Werder?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: That is all of our public speakers.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay.
March 12, 2024
Page 134
MS. SANDERS: Did you mention Sharon Sanders? I heard
you mention my name.
MR. MILLER: Oh, yeah. What happened to you?
MS. SANDERS: I'm invisible.
CHAIRMAN HALL: You called her.
MR. MILLER: Sharon Sanders, yes, I do have a slip for her.
MS. SANDERS: It's Sanders. Burt, it's Sanders.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: You said it, the wrong name.
CHAIRMAN HALL: That's understandable.
MS. SANDERS: Sanders, like the Colonel.
MR. MILLER: Here you are.
MS. SANDERS: Okay. I'm Sharon Sanders. I'm -- I've
owned property in Collier County for 13 years. I have a lifelong
commitment to conservation.
Regarding the language in the ordinance, you voted to replenish
funds withdrawn for other purposes. I'd like the trust to be funded to
the 2.5 [sic].
Many of us will attend the March 26th meeting, and even more
will be monitoring the actual replenishment of funds diverted from
the trust over time.
But, in closing, I want to say I really appreciate the work of this
board. It's a thankless job.
MR. MILLER: Fairly confident that was your last speaker.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So we have -- we had staff's
recommendations. We've heard Audubon's recommendations,
CCLAC's recommendations. So, basically, we're at -- with what we
have proposed, still to discuss CCLAC involvement, the sale of
Conservation Collier land, whether it's going to be with criteria or no
criteria, and then we've already dealt with the change of
replenishment.
I would like to say and be on record that I don't want to be
March 12, 2024
Page 135
retroactive. That's going to be counterintuitive of what we did last
fall. We fully funded the program. There's $31 million in it this
year with limited access to acquisition. We're going to fully fund it
again next year, and I think the program is alive and well as we are
right now.
In the future, in emergency, if we have to do something, I'm all
about it. But retroactive, I'm not going to support that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I make a suggestion that
maybe Jaime come back up with the staff's recommendations and we
go --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- through those, if you want,
point by point just to clarify --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- our thoughts on those
things.
MS. COOK: Again, Jaime Cook, director of Development
Review, for the record.
So this was the first major change to the ordinance which would
allow you to establish the millage rate every year as well as set the
percentages for each the Acquisition and the Maintenance Fund.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want to vote on these
individually, or do you want to --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: That's what I think. I
mean --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I make a motion to support
the staff's recommendation here.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I second it.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Motion and second for this particular one
right here. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
March 12, 2024
Page 136
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And, Mr. Chairman, may I
ask a question as we go forward with these?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We still have the opportunity
to make changes even though we're sending this forward for
Advertising?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Of course.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: These are -- my perception
here now is that these are our suggestions for the final vote coming
up on the 26th.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I just wanted to make sure.
MS. COOK: Okay. This was a second part, which talked
about Conservation Collier easements as well as the TDR credits.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And this is the language that
I thought we should delete temporarily until we kind of fleshed this
out a little bit more.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: This -- personally, this kind
of addresses one of the issues that I wanted to address, and that was
allowing the property rights that were on lands that were acquired by
Conservation Collier to enure to the benefit of the county, which I
think is a benefit to the program as well. Those are TDRs that can
be utilized/purchased, credits that can be utilized/purchased, and then
those monies go back -- you have something to say, Michael?
MR. BOSI: Yes. Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
March 12, 2024
Page 137
One of the things that we have within this program is the
government is not eligible to participate in the TDR program. So we
will need to modify the GMP, so it will be contingent upon
modifications to the GMP to allow for such availability.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That was going to be -- thank
you for bringing that up. That's on my notes here, that we need
to -- if it is the will of the Board, to make that recommendation to you
to adjust the GMP to allow that to transpire.
MR. BOSI: And that would -- it would be full-scale
amendment, so that would be hearings with the Planning
Commission, the Board of County Commissioners, send it off to the
state to the Department of Commerce. They would have to bless it,
and then we'd be back for adoption. But I just wanted to make the
Board aware of those additional steps.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. So I'll make a motion
of approval of this to be added in, as staff has recommended.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, on the
motion --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- could I ask the indulgence
of the Board. I'm assuming that this motion will pass, but I'd like the
Board to concur in having staff work with Brad Cornell in the interim
to see if there's issues that need to be clarified in this. If we're going
to put this language in here, I just want to make sure that there's some
more communication between our staff and Mr. Cornell to see if
there's some clarification or other language that needs to be added to
it. Is there any objection to doing that?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I think they should
communicate with him.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So that will sort of keep the
issue alive.
March 12, 2024
Page 138
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm fine with that.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Well, I'll second it, then, if
you're fine with that.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So we have a motion and second to
include this with the addition of the Growth Management Plan
change where we're going to -- where government can participate
in --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
CHAIRMAN HALL: -- the TDRs. So I have a motion and
second. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay. You're doing good, Jaime.
You're winning.
MS. COOK: Thank you.
So the next one was the language about selling Conservation
Collier properties and that funds would be used to purchase
additional lands or maintenance of existing parcels.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And, Mr. Chairman, I think
the issue here was making sure that if lands are going to be sold, it's
because they don't meet the criteria.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And so would there be any
objection to adding that language to --
CHAIRMAN HALL: You know, I don't -- there are -- there
March 12, 2024
Page 139
could be lands that still have criteria that we could amend. It still
takes three votes to change this to agree to sell any property. I have
no problem with the way that it reads right there. We don't know
what the future holds, and we don't want to bind our own selves with
our own -- it's not the will of the Board -- it's not our will to go out
and sell Conservation Collier programs. We work hard to get it, but
we don't want to limit ourselves in case something happens that's a
special cause that we may need to look at, so...
MS. COOK: So, Commissioner, for the record, if I may.
There is a separate exceptional benefits ordinance that if property
needed to be sold to the county or someone else for any particular
reason, it would have to go through that exceptional benefits process,
including a hearing by the CCLAC as well as you for final approval.
So there would not be land disposed of just arbitrarily. It would
come through a public hearing.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Good enough.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll move for this to be
approved.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I'll second it. Motion and second for
this particular one right here to be approved. All in favor?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
(No response.)
MS. COOK: Okay. The next one is that parcels will be
evaluated as they are received instead of having large lists for you to
review all at once.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Put that in bold print. Move
March 12, 2024
Page 140
for approval.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
MS. COOK: The next is the addition of additional criteria for
lands in the consideration, and, specifically, the ones that are
highlighted are the ones that are being added. D through G are
already in the ordinance.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Go ahead. I'll go after you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Do you think it's too early to bring back
or to advertise or to come up with a weighted figure on these, you
know, kind of like we did for the --
MS. COOK: No. I think we can absolutely do that.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Because I think of points. You know,
instead of just number of criterias, a points system relating to the
criteria would be really valuable to have.
MS. COOK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My -- is it that important that
we get hung up on size of the land?
MS. COOK: I would be -- I wasn't here back in 2002 when this
program was established, but I believe the intent of the program was
to acquire larger parcels of land, not to try to piecemeal parcels
together to make a larger preserve. So that's why staff wanted to
consider larger tracts of land as a benefit.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I would rather not, to be
honest with you. My personal opinion was the -- and since we're
March 12, 2024
Page 141
going to sit around and talk about intent, the intent was to be
purchasing environmentally sensitive lands within the urban area. I
remember early in my tenure as commissioner, that was some of the
discussion that we talked about. So I would be less -- I'm not all
that -- I'm not all that happy about the 20 acres or larger having a
greater priority over an extremely environmentally sensitive one-acre
piece that could be -- that could be added.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Me, either.
MS. COOK: And I think, maybe to go to Commissioner
Kowal's point, if we provide you a weighting scale at the next
meeting, that's something that we could give a lower weight to.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Let's just take it out.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I don't like it. Don't
need it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make a motion for these
being approved except for the size stipulation. Take out "lands
20 acres or larger."
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All in favor to remove the 20 acres or
larger, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Opposed?
MS. COOK: Okay. So these next two -- since we're going
down to eight criteria, I don't know if that would change your
numbers or not. But this says -- currently says three out of nine but,
obviously, we're reducing that to eight total criteria.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I thought that was the six out of
March 12, 2024
Page 142
nine.
MS. COOK: So the three criteria would go to CCLAC for
consideration. Six would come directly to the Board.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I move to approve this as the way it
reads with three out of -- or three out of eight now.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And can I ask -- this is a
question of semantics. I'm not -- we're all about expeditious process
enhancements, but since we've already decided to take these on an
as-come basis, why can't we just, on an as-come basis, take them to
the CCLAC and then have them come to us, irrespective of how
many of the criterium they met? Are we adding that much time by
going to CCLAC first?
MS. COOK: No. But currently in the ordinance -- so CCLAC
would -- currently, the way the ordinance reads is if it meets two of
the criteria, it's forwarded to CCLAC. If it doesn't meet two of the
criteria, we notify them that we received an application but that it
doesn't meet at least two of the criteria. So unless the CCLAC wants
it considered, it kind of dies at that point.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, aren't we setting a
prejudice against any acquisitions if they don't -- I mean, certainly,
we have to have some level of criterium to be met, but that
criterium -- if all of the -- if all of the applications are submitted to
the CCLAC with a delineation of how many of the criterium that
we've established are met, then that recommendation can come to the
CCLAC, has met none, and then the CCLAC can come to the Board
and say, this piece -- this piece of property met none, so you
don't -- we don't recommend that you purchase it, and move -- just
have everything that comes in go to the CCLAC as opposed to
bypassing the CCLAC.
March 12, 2024
Page 143
MS. COOK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And when it goes to the
CCLAC, that allows for more public comment or -- correct?
MS. COOK: There's opportunity for public comment.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: That's why -- and I don't
mean to speak out of turn here or anything, but we're all -- we're
talking. I just -- I'm not looking for an expedient -- a sense of
urgency on the properties, and that's what I think we have now, and
we've seen the benefit of that. But I think the CCLAC serves a
purpose, and it also allows for more public comments and it gives
us -- then when it comes to us, it gives us the best amount of
information, I think.
And so I just don't see an advantage of trying to over-streamline
this. It doesn't add six months to -- you know, some of the things
we've streamlined made perfect sense. I don't think -- I think this
one's -- we're overengineering it too much, and maybe at the
detriment of the program, would be my thought, but --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So I'm going to make a
motion that we don't approve this, and everything goes to the
CCLAC -- every application goes to a CCLAC with the criterium
that's met, and then we get a recommendation from the CCLAC as to
whether or not we make the acquisition or not.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: How's that streamlining? I
mean, that's exactly what we do now.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do what?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: That's exactly what we do now.
How's that streamlining it? I mean, the whole idea of having six out
of nine, it doesn't have to go to the CCLAC. It goes to us.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The streamlining transpires
by not stacking up applications for six months.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: CCLAC don't meet every day.
March 12, 2024
Page 144
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: They meet once -- how often
does CCLAC --
MS. COOK: Once a month.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Once a month. CCLAC
meets once a month, so why --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: We could have -- and what I'm
trying to say is we have two meetings a month. So if it meets the six
out of nine, it doesn't have to go to the CCLAC. As long as it's
weighted, like I was talking about, so it gives it more validity that it's
really an important piece of property, we could see two of them
within one month while the CCLAC is still working on the other ones
that only meet three out of nine. That's all I'm trying to say is are we
talking about both the six and nine or the three out of eight, or
whatever?
MS. COOK: Right at the moment, we're trying to figure -- I'm
trying to understand if it meets three out of the criteria, do you want it
to go to CCLAC?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: It still goes to the CCLAC.
MS. COOK: If it meets less than three, do you want it to go to
the CCLAC?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I think that's a game-time
decision.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Personally, I think the
streamlining is -- we've addressed a large portion of the streamlining
by not accumulating for A List, B List, C List, and so on, and
everything going to the CCLAC with a delineation of how it -- how it
meets the criterium that we've got established. I don't think -- I don't
think. I don't want to bypass CCLAC at all.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I think we're talking about two
different levels. I think this particular level is saying it's the three
out of eight now, because we removed one. That's more likely going
March 12, 2024
Page 145
to go to the CCLAC.
MS. COOK: Correct.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: If something comes in that's
under the three out of the eight, that would be kind of like a decision
if the CCLAC wants to even look at it or not.
But the six out of nine should just bypass CCLAC, come to us
with the stronger weighed, you know, provisions in there out of the
eight that's left. That way we could be seeing them every -- twice a
month while the CCLAC's working on the ones that are only meeting
three criteria, and then they can give us that list as it comes in.
I'm just trying to think of -- because if we just -- everything goes
back to the CCLAC again, I think we're right back where we started
from. We're not streamlining nothing.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't agree with that
statement.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Because they're going to form a
list. We've got to wait a month, and it will be 30 days, and then
we've got to do it on a meeting, the next two weeks. So we're
getting a list again of A Lists, however you want to call them,
whatever the CCLAC's giving us, and it's not really streamlining
when we could have probably heard one or two properties in the two
meetings we already had that month because it bypassed the CCLAC.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll say it again: I would
rather not bypass the CCLAC.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I'm just giving my opinion why I
think -- to streamline something, I think we need to take it seriously.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I'm going to agree that if something
comes along that has six out of eight, that's going to be the exception
and not the rule. So by bypassing the CCLAC and coming straight
here, I think it's well on its way to approval, so I don't think we -- I
think we have everything to gain, absolutely nothing to lose if
March 12, 2024
Page 146
something six out of eight meets the criteria.
I'm all -- I'm all for keeping it, if it meets three out of eight and
the CCLAC wants to look at it, they could -- they can bring it to us,
I'm fine with that.
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Ms. Cook, let me ask you
this: Did anything -- historically, and you may not know how deep
you can go historically. If something met six out of nine and it went
to the CCLAC, did the CCLAC ever disagree with the six and said,
well, actually, in our opinion it doesn't meet six, in their discussions,
they thought it was less valuable?
MS. COOK: There have recently been some that -- currently in
the ordinance there's, I think, six criteria, and there's some that have
met five or six of the criteria that because of location, because it was
behind the owner of the property's house, it would have been very
difficult to develop in the first place. There was no access to it other
than through the seller's yard, that they didn't recommend those to
move forward, but we've had a couple instances of those, but --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I understand what -- and
Commissioner Kowal's -- there's nothing that he has said that doesn't
have merit saying, hey, if it's six, hey, bring it to us, you know, right
away, but it's not just about a numbers game or an algorithm. It's
also getting their input and their discussion and also the value of
citizens being able to come to the CCLAC.
And so it still might come to us and it might be six of nine, and
maybe it's a slam dunk, but it's also packaged with a bunch of
discussion and other things and maybe the CCLAC going, it's not six
of nine, so it's not a slam dunk.
And so if it would have bypassed the CCLAC, it might have
come to us with -- say, with six of nine, we might not have been
astute enough to realize that it was only four of nine. We wouldn't
March 12, 2024
Page 147
have had the benefit of, you know, public comment.
And I already think you've done so much to streamline the
program that I'll go back to what I said before, I think we're
overengineering this. I already think we've done so many things to
streamline, tighten, restrict that -- I mean, I bet if we had every
member of the CCLAC here, none of them would stand up and give
us a standing ovation that they were being bypassed.
I think they have a role, and I want the benefit of their feedback.
And I don't think it's -- we're not talking about a hundred, you know,
pieces of property a month. This is a small amount.
Like you say, Commissioner Kowal's right, we meet twice, they
meet once, but they don't meet once a quarter, and I already think
things are coming to us at light speed compared to what it was way
back when.
So, you know, I lean towards what Commissioner McDaniel is
saying which is, why are we going out of our way to bypass the
CCLAC when it will come to us quicker than it ever has anyway in
the past from some of the other changes you've made?
But, yeah, you've answered my question. There has been some
discussion sometimes where the staff has said six of nine, and after
CCLAC discussion, it wasn't two of nine, but a couple of things
were -- and I want the benefit of that discussion for the parcels that
we're going to use taxpayer, you know, funds for.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, I'll break the
tie and say I agree and Commissioner McDaniel and Commissioner
LoCastro that -- just send them to the CCLAC.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And we can always change it.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Do you want to make a motion to strike
this one and strike the next one, which is six out of eight?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. And we can always
March 12, 2024
Page 148
change it.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Send them all to the CCLAC?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I mean, if we sit here
go, wow, that wasn't a smart decision --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Fine with me.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- you know, we think, you
know, we're not getting the benefit, but...
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And -- my light's on.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: If, in fact, we find that this
adjustment is adding to a backlog that's unnecessary, we'll make an
adjustment, because I really think, like Commissioner LoCastro said,
we've done enough to -- we've done a lot of things to help streamline
the process.
I'll make a motion to not accept these next two.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: And send it all to the CCLAC?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. We have a motion and a
second to strike these two, send it all to the CCLAC and come back
to us. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
MS. COOK: Okay. The next one is for purchase agreements
that have been accepted by the property owner. This would bypass
CCLAC and come straight to you guys for a final approval and actual
March 12, 2024
Page 149
purchase.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, I don't see
any reason why a signed contract would have to go back to CCLAC.
They will have already reviewed the property and recommended it,
so I think that should be withdrawn.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I move to approve as it says.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: And I'll second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. Motion and a second to
approve as it says. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
(No response.)
MS. COOK: And then these were some of the additional
recommendations from CCLAC, and I only wanted to bring these up
because a few of them were in your discussions today, specifically
the last one about -- or the last two, which I do have Commissioner
Saunders' recommended language and what you-all voted on. But
then the last one regarding Stewardship Sending Areas within the
RLSA.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I thought you had -- I must have just
missed you lit up.
So we've dealt with the fourth one.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. So we're looking at
the last one.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yeah.
March 12, 2024
Page 150
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. And I don't think
we should preclude SSAs at all. We may not buy them if they're not
fitting -- if they're not fitting the puzzle, but I don't think -- I don't
think we should preclude them.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, I agree.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So we basically did the No. 4, and I don't
hear any support for the others.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So -- and I think we pretty
much already addressed the other ones.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Right.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So we're removing No. 5?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, remove No. 5.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: We don't agree with
removing the SSAs is what should happen. Do you want to make a
motion?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, I'll make a motion that
we approve the first four and remove 5.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Four and removing -- I
second it.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. We have a motion to approve
it except for the No. 5. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: What didn't you like?
CHAIRMAN HALL: I don't like a list of criteria for how
property would be considered to be removed, I don't like the
supermajority vote, and I didn't think perpetuity -- I think it's already
March 12, 2024
Page 151
in perpetuity. That's the intent of the program.
MS. COOK: So what I'm understanding, Commissioner Hall, 1
through 3, do not add. No. 4 we've already addressed.
CHAIRMAN HALL: They voted -- they voted to approve
everything except for the last one.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Except for No. 5, except for
the fifth one on this list.
MS. COOK: I think Commissioner McDaniel only voted on
No. 5.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No. My motion was to
approve the first four --
MS. COOK: Okay. But --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: -- not No. 5.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So the first four live, the fifth one dies in
this.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And --
MS. COOK: So we're adding supermajority vote and criteria to
sell a property? That's just what I want to make sure of.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Forgive me. I didn't see the
supermajority.
MS. COOK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's not listed there.
MS. COOK: That's No. 3.
CHAIRMAN HALL: It's No. 2.
MS. COOK: Or No. 2, I'm sorry. Number 2 is the
supermajority.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I missed the supermajority
vote.
And, Commissioner Hall, to your point, I think we already
talked about this, that there's another provision in the ordinance that
we're not -- that's not being addressed today that talks about the
March 12, 2024
Page 152
criterium, special -- what'd you call it?
MS. COOK: Exceptional benefits ordinance.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Exceptional benefits clause
that's already in there. So that part pretty much is already in the
ordinance that we have to go through to be able to dispose of a piece
of property.
I wouldn't be in favor of a supermajority vote on No. 2, so I'm
going to withdraw my first motion.
MS. COOK: That's what I wanted to clarify.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you. If you wanted --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Why?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- to change that just to a
regular majority, I'm fine with that.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Three out of five.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah, that's what I thought
it -- I'd missed that, so I agree with you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. So my motion is to
approve the first four with the change in the language to "simple
majority."
CHAIRMAN HALL: Which is the way it is now already,
right?
MS. COOK: Correct, simple majority.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Are you clear on that?
CHAIRMAN HALL: So we're going to approve 1 -- we're
going to approve 1, 3, and 4, because it already is simple majority.
MS. COOK: Maybe, just for clarification, we can do these one
at a time. So if you want to add the definition -- or add "in
perpetuity" to the definition of "management."
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes.
March 12, 2024
Page 153
MS. COOK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So moved.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Seconded. All in favor to add "in
perpetuity," say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
MS. COOK: Okay. And then for the supermajority vote.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Simple majority.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Simple majority.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Change the language to
simple majority.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Simple majority.
MS. COOK: Correct. Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So moved.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All in favor of "simple majority"?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
MS. COOK: Adding a list of criteria for how a property would
be considered for removal from the program.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Is this not duplicative of
what's already in there because of the special exceptions clause?
MS. COOK: The exceptional benefits isn't included in this
ordinance. It's a separate document.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So in this ordinance, we're not changing
March 12, 2024
Page 154
anything about --
MS. COOK: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HALL: -- how property is sold?
MS. COOK: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Are we going to develop a
new list someday that we're going to have to approve to hit the
criteria?
MS. COOK: If we were to need to do that, we would either
bring back this ordinance or the exceptional benefits ordinance.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I just say do without this.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Then let's just do without
this. So I'll make a motion to not include that.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All in favor to not include the list of
criteria to sell, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
MS. COOK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We already took care --
MS. COOK: The fourth one you've already voted on, and then
the last one would be to remove the SSAs from the list of
consideration --
CHAIRMAN HALL: So moved to --
MS. COOK: -- so we would --
CHAIRMAN HALL: -- remove it.
MS. COOK: -- actually strike the language that's currently
March 12, 2024
Page 155
proposed.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're going to -- we're not
going to --
CHAIRMAN HALL: To keep it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- take away SSAs. So we're
voting against --
CHAIRMAN HALL: To remove from this list.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. Remove from this
list, not from --
MS. COOK: Striking the language that's in there. Got it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Second. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
MS. COOK: And then that was the last of the suggested
changes.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: You got all that?
MS. COOK: I got all that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I have one quick
question for staff, and that has to do with the GMP amendment on
TDRs. Will that be inclusive of any and all property rights that
travel with a piece of property that Conservation Collier buys, or do
we have to specifically amend for credits or conservation easements
or conservation credits?
MR. BOSI: Well, all of those things are going to have to be
looked at. Currently, we have a prohibition about government
owning and exchanging credits, so that's one of the things that we'll
have to address, and then the conservation easements or the
March 12, 2024
Page 156
mechanisms that we have to restrict development will have to be
looked at as well. So we're going to have to analyze the specific
words within the GMP to see where -- what changes we're going to
need to fix where you guys want to go with this program.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Well, I think we're
sharing with you where we want to go.
MR. BOSI: Yep.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And the ultimate goal is for
that acquisition -- for those benefit -- for those property rights that are
already existent to enure to the benefit of the county.
MR. BOSI: Sure. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So I make a motion to --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Bless you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Was that on Zoom?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No. She was right down
there.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Oh, okay. I'll make a motion to approve
the changes as amended to this ordinance for advertising coming
back to us.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, if we could get
clarification on timing. Now, we had originally planned to bring this
ordinance back at the next meeting. I just want to make sure that
timing-wise that's what you-all are looking for. It's going to be
a -- and also check with the County Attorney that we can meet that
timing. If not -- for advertising.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, we can meet that time.
MS. PATTERSON: Okay. It's going to make the next board
meeting a little bit hectic, but I know that this is a high-priority topic
for you-all. So if you are planning for the 26th, we'll continue on
that path.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. So the motion to approve the
March 12, 2024
Page 157
ordinance with the amended changes that we've all agreed on.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: With the understanding that
we can make changes.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yep.
I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. Motion and second to
approve it as amended. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
MS. COOK: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted
to make a quick closing comment, if I would. I'm lit up here.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: First of all, Ms. Cook, you
and your team, I wanted to just thank you again for how much this
program's been improved.
And, you know, to Mr. Cornell, you know, you represented
quite a lot of voices at the podium very eloquently, you know, there
again. Thank you so much. It makes our job much easier.
The last thing I would just say is, you know, do you know how
many people have reminded us about the 77 percent and this is a
program everybody loves and all of that? Yet, as a citizen, my
biggest disappointment is why weren't people storming this building
when lots weren't being purchased? You know, in my own -- in my
own district of Marco Island, lots were coming and going. They
were sitting on the list forever well before I was a commissioner.
March 12, 2024
Page 158
And so I just say that as a statement, not to be, you know,
directional to any citizens. But what I would say is, help us really
keep this program clean and moving forward. And if you see it
stalling out -- it seemed like, you know, more citizens were
concerned about their money being collected for Conservation
Collier, yet when it wasn't being spent or invested and we lost out on
a lot of lots that now contain houses instead of habitats, you know,
the former -- you know, some of the former commissioners that were
up here, and even some of the current ones, weren't getting 500
e-mails saying, oh, my God, we can't believe what's going on with the
program.
So part of what we've done to really put a bigger spotlight on the
program, we also need citizens to watch it closely, and they are.
You know, one of the things I'll say about what we did last
September during the budget, you can agree or disagree, but you
know what it did? It caused a lot of conversation about
Conservation Collier, some of it that was way overdue.
So, you know, Brad, you work with us so closely. Please
continue to do so and, you know, if there's lots that are on your radar
that you think aren't getting the attention they need, the money's
there. We don't want to waste it.
And, you know, my final comment will be, the success of
Conservation Collier isn't collecting .25 mills and putting it in the
bank somewhere. It's utilizing that money to buy environmentally
sensitive lots and to keep them protected in perpetuity. And if we're
not doing that, it doesn't matter how much money we collect. It
doesn't matter if we don't move the money around to emergency
funds. It's not a program that is doing anything.
And I'm so proud of what we've all done, citizens definitely
included, who, you know, storm these podiums because they thought
we raided Conservation Collier when, in reality, we put a spotlight on
March 12, 2024
Page 159
it, overhauled the program, and did a lot more good things today.
But, you know, we continue to really value when your radar's on.
And Brittany as well. You know, she hears about a lot of
things. She's been very beneficial on Marco on lots that sometimes
went overlooked and -- because she was very vocal and got other
people vocal. And so, you know, we need more of that, you know.
These are tough jobs up here. You know, we heard that from a
couple of people. You know, it's tough to speak for three minutes at
the podium. Sometimes we sit up here till midnight. And so we
know it's all tough.
But continue to keep us -- keep a spotlight on this program so
that we can ensure the purchase of lands is successful, not just the
collection of taxes. That doesn't make anything successful. But
thank you so much.
And to the citizens that gave a lot of their time to you, it made
the discussion very, very valuable today. And so really appreciate it.
And continue to look forward to working with you on making sure
we're buying things that are worthy of spending taxpayer dollars on,
and we're doing it with a sense of urgency.
Thank you, sir.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to our 1:00
time-certain, a little bit late. Immediately following this, I would
suggest that it's time for a court reporter break before we pick up with
our next time-certain.
Item #11B
ACCEPT THE AFTER-ACTION REPORT FOR THE 2024
FLORIDA LEGISLATIVE SESSION AND PROVIDE
GUIDANCE AS PRELIMINARY PLANNING BEGINS FOR THE
NEXT LEGISLATIVE CYCLE. (BRIDGET CORCORAN,
March 12, 2024
Page 160
LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS COORDINATOR) (ALL DISTRICTS) –
PRESENTED; DIRECTION GIVEN TO THE COUNTY
MANAGER TO PREPARE LETTER(S) FOR HAND DELIVERY
TO THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE ESPECIALLY REGARDING
THE VETERANS NURSING HOME
This is Item 11B. It's a recommendation to accept the
after-action report for the 2024 Florida legislative session and
provide guidance as preliminary planning begins for the next
legislative cycle.
Bridget Corcoran, legislative affairs coordinator, is here to
present, and I believe we do have our lobbyist, Lisa Hurley, by
Zoom.
MS. CORCORAN: For the record, Bridget Corcoran,
legislative affairs coordinator.
Is Lisa unmuted or --
MR. MILLER: She is muted at this time. If you -- there, she's
unmuted. Lisa.
MS. HURLEY: Good afternoon.
MS. CORCORAN: Unfortunately, Lisa couldn't be here in
person.
Okay. I just wanted to give a quick overview. Session ended
on Friday, so there's a lot of moving pieces still. Governor has 15
days for line-item veto for the budget and also for any of the bills that
have been proposed.
This session we had 1,957 bills proposed, 2,200 amendments,
and we were -- at Collier County we were monitoring 682 of them.
Ultimately, 324 passed.
All right. Okay. And then just some budget items. Again,
the Governor has line-item veto still.
Total budget is very similar to last year. It's less than a
March 12, 2024
Page 161
1 percent increase. So I'm not going to go line by line for all the
slides. I'm just going to give you an overview of the highlights of it.
So the total budget was 117.46 billion, total reserves in this
budget is 10 billion, and included was 500 million authorized to retire
some outstanding state debt.
Again, not many changes in the budget for emergency
preparedness, and I will provide all these slides for you as well.
Economic development, similar to last year.
And then just to point out a few things on this slide for
affordable housing. SHIP funding, SAIL funding, all of that
included, the Hometown Heros program was funded at 100 million;
My Safe Florida Home program, that was funded at 200 million; and
new this year is My Safe Florida Condominium Pilot program. That
was funded at 30 million.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: What is -- what is that? I
hadn't heard of that before.
MS. CORCORAN: So this is new. It's a new program that
they're -- you know, a lot of the representatives that have, you know,
high density of condominiums was very interested in expanding the
My Florida Home [sic] program to condominiums.
So for every dollar the association spends, the state will spend
$2. The state will cover up to half the cost of a roof replacement,
1,500 per unit for doors and windows, and it is capped at 175,000 per
association.
So I can get that information for you. Like I said, that's a new
pilot program. You know, definitely looking forward to seeing the
results on that.
For environment, the one that I wanted to point out, the
water-quality improvements new this year. One point 7 billion
is -- the Seminole Gaming Compact is now the dedicated funding
stream for this program. So the funding levels are similar. It's just
March 12, 2024
Page 162
now it has a dedicated funding stream.
Transportation, like I said, all the programs that were funded last
year.
And then onto the tax package. So these are always very
popular. The Back to School program, last year there was two of
them. This year there's one, one week -- or I'm sorry, 14-day
program. So that's changed from last year.
We also have two 14-day disaster preparedness holidays. Last
year, it was the Freedom -- I think it was the Freedom Summer.
This year it's Freedom Months. It's the month of July for all the
recreational items, so that has changed. Like I said, last year it was
from Memorial Day to Labor Day. Now it's simply the month of
July.
And then we also have the one day seven -- or I'm sorry, one
7-day Tool Time holiday for tools and equipment for skilled trades.
So that hasn't changed.
Toll relief is back. There's also some initiatives for property
insurance tax relief for homeowners. The premium is deducted from
the homestead property, property owners. Small business, tax relief.
And now for the good part, appropriations.
So 10 million -- thank you to everybody who went up to
Tallahassee. That was -- you know, Lisa did an amazing job with
getting us in to see all the right appropriations people, so we have the
10 million dedicated for the veterans nursing home. This is matched
surplus tax funds for the adult day health center.
The Fire Station 74, 3.6 million. This is the one in Golden Gate
Estates. It will also serve as forward command for Florida Forestry
Service and Fire Suppression.
The next one is the West Goodlette-Frank stormwater
improvements. We received a million dollars for that. This is the
joint project with Naples. It's Phase 2 of that.
March 12, 2024
Page 163
And then the next two are the public utility renewal projects that
have previously been approved by this board. We got 4.5 million for
the Naples Park project and 3 million for Palm River.
And, of course, we want to thank our state delegation for all the
work that they did. 22.1 million is the total for all those projects that
has been allocated. We are also working with Senator Passidomo's
office to try and schedule a time for her to come in to thank her for all
of her efforts as Senate President.
And right before I came up, I received a letter from
Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart's office confirming that we received
the 4.190 million for the Collier Area Transit maintenance facility.
So it's official. I have it in writing.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I interrupt --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- or add to? If I may. I
was going to bring it up under commissioner comments, but the
4. -- 4,190- -- 4,190,000 got approved for our transit maintenance
facility. We also got an approval for the police equipment upgrades
in the amount of a million dollars. That was done on March the 9th
as well. We also got approval for Copeland pump station
rehabilitation for $450,000. We also got approval for the city pump
station in Everglades City for $1,125,000.
So you had the first one of the four. It's going to save time at
the end of the meeting under commissioner comments, because I was
going to --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Good job.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was going to share all those.
And I did, by the way, let his office know that we voted in favor of
moving forward on that 6 million appropriation for the Veterans
Administration building.
MS. CORCORAN: Okay. So next is general legislation of
March 12, 2024
Page 164
interest. These items are awaiting presentation and action by the
Governor. So there's a few that -- of interest that did not make it to
the finish line. County Commissioner term limits, and Lisa can
attest to this. We thought for sure this was going. Both the bills
were amended to eight years, and then it just died.
The next one is sovereign community. Again, they were
moving forward and at end of session, that one died, and then the last
one is the transportation. This was one that specifically mentioned
Lee and Collier County required a feasibility study to report
regarding consolidating Lee County MPO, so I wanted to mention
that this did not pass.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So the MPOAC is going to
stay in existence for another year?
MS. CORCORAN: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALL: It lives.
MS. CORCORAN: And then Collier County specific, as
Senate President Passidomo had said during our meeting here in
September when we presented our priorities to her, she did commit to
working on the Mile Marker 63 public-safety facility. So she did
deliver on her commitment. This year, in the language of the
budget, it guarantees 2.31 million for Fiscal year '24/'25. The
current level was 1.4 million, and then also she set the framework for
language for negotiating the next contract that would be up in
June 2027.
So I included the language in the slides. I will get that to you.
And then the other one that's specific is the Collier County Mosquito
District, the expansion of that. Representative Melo presented that
legislation. That was approved as well.
The next two I'm mentioning just because it does have an impact
with Collier County. This one for fentanyl, for exposure for first
March 12, 2024
Page 165
responders, there was a Collier County sheriff who testified during
committees, and his testimony was very powerful. He was exposed
at a domestic violence call, and they had to give him two doses of
Narcan to bring him back. The person testifying behind him was
actually going to testify in opposition to it and changed her testimony
because of his testimony. So I just thought it was definitely worth
mentioning. So this was approved.
The other one that has a Collier impact is the veterans
long-term-care facility. This was also something that we were
advocating for when we were at the capitol. So it expands the
eligibility for residency and prioritizes admittance of veterans
long-term-care facilities to include spouses and surviving spouses of
veterans.
So the focus this year was also -- the hallmark legislation was
really the Live Healthy Act. Last year was the Live Local. This
year is Live Healthy Act. It addresses shortages in healthcare
industry as our population continues to grow. So this was something
that was a priority of Senate President Passidomo's. It provides, you
know, funding, and also streamlines processes for the healthcare
industry.
The other was Learn Local. This one deregulates schools.
Cuts some red tape, some bureaucracy, and it also provides
200 million in teacher salary increases and $240 increase per student
spending.
Okay. The next legislation of interest is affordable housing.
This was a Live Local glitch bill. So it addresses some of the, I don't
want to say disputes, but some of the discrepancies that there were
with density, height restrictions, you know, industrial land, parking
requirements, cleans up some of the finance corporation language as
well.
Okay. Alternative mobility funding systems and impact fees,
March 12, 2024
Page 166
this is something that proponents stated would make fees predictable
and assures there's no double jeopardy for builders. The language
makes it so that the -- only the government issuing the permit can
charge the impact fees.
So we currently have agreements with the City of Naples and
with Marco Island, so that's something I've been working with Ian.
We'll have to make some adjustments there.
And expedited approval for residential building permits, this is
almost like a bulk approval for housing developments that they can
approve up to 50 percent of the housing units in an expedited
procedure prior to the final plat being recorded.
Let's see. Employee regulations. So this addresses heat
exposure. It prohibits local governments from preferring contractors
and mandating pay benefits and heat-exposure requirements.
Annual adjustment to homestead exemptions; this is something
that's a joint resolution that will go to the ballot in November. It
proposes an amendment to the constitution requiring 25,000 of
assessed value currently exempt from ad valorem taxes other than
school district to be adjusted annually for inflation growth, and this
will require 60 percent of the votes.
This was one that was on our priority list, energy resources. So
this -- there is federal legislation that exists currently that prohibits
construction or expansion of offshore wind energy. So this also now
at the state level, it prohibits wind energy facilities within one mile of
the coastline.
Sampling of beach waters, this mandates the Department of
Health to sample waters and issue health advisories within 24 hours
of closure is required. The counties must notify the Department of
Health of any incidents that could have a negative impact on water
quality and, also, the county must maintain beach signage.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Don't we already do that?
March 12, 2024
Page 167
What's different about this one? What did it add or tighten? Do
you know offhand? Because, I mean, as I'm reading that, I thought
we already did all that.
MS. CORCORAN: That I'm not sure. I can get back to you.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'm just curious.
MS. CORCORAN: Let me find out what the difference is, and
I'll get back to you with the differences.
And then vacation rentals. This one was actually on my slide of
items that did not make it, and it was approved at the last minute. So
they're trying to strike the right balance between property rights of
your right to rent your property but then also the rights of your
neighbor to have -- you know, not have a party next door every night.
It addresses maximum occupancy, the designated responsible-party
owner, also owner identity. They have to be able to have all of that
information. Addresses registration fees, fines, suspensions. It's
something that the Governor has stated -- is micromanaging, and it
could be vetoed, so we're not sure what the status of this will be at
this point. Nobody seemed to be happy with it, but they all seem to
think that something needed to be done. So if it does continue,
chances are it would be amended next year.
Next one, this is kind of one worth mentioning. It's
unauthorized public camping and public sleeping. So this was an
initiative that the Governor was in favor of. He did a press
conference in Miami supporting this. They don't want to see, you
know, tent cities/encampments in the communities. You know,
business owners are not happy. This is a model that they use in
Miami that they say works, so it would be -- it provides authority for
the counties to establish a designated camp for up to a year, and at
that camp, they would have to have security, restroom, you know,
sanitation. They would also have to have -- you know, provide
services. So, basically, what they're saying is, it's easier to provide
March 12, 2024
Page 168
the services. Instead of people sleeping, you know, throughout the
community, to try to bring them to one location.
And this is really communities that don't have the capacity, you
know, enough beds for the folks that are homeless.
Okay. And then this one -- there was a big push this year for
oversight and accountability and reduction of fraud with a lot of the
associations. So the homeowner associations, mobile home
tenancies, community associations, really trying to put some teeth to
enforcement, like I said, to reduce fraud. So this is something that I
will get -- your offices, I'll get you all the information, because you're
going to be hearing about it in the community that it's something
that -- you know, with all the condominium associations,
homeowners associations. So it really -- like I said, there was a big
push for accountability.
And I am working on the bills of potential impact, so this will
outline everything that's been passed during this session and how it
impacts the county. So that will be coming soon.
And then, of course, I want to thank Lisa Hurley, and she'll give
an overview as well, you know, from Smith, Bryan & Myers, who's
our state lobbyist, and then also, of course, Amanda Wood and Omar
Franco from our federal team, and we also did have some folks in the
departments helping out, monitoring all the moving pieces this year.
So with that, I can answer any questions or, Lisa, if you want to
kind of give an overview.
MS. HURLEY: I'd be happy to.
Good afternoon, Chair Hall and Commissioners and the entire
Collier team. Lisa Hurley from Smith, Bryan & Myers reporting
live from Tallahassee.
Let me first start by thanking you for allowing me to appear via
Zoom today. Just could not -- with session ending on Friday and
other prior commitments, just couldn't make the travel work out to be
March 12, 2024
Page 169
with you in person today. But I do have plans to be down there in
just a couple of weeks.
So, you know, Bridget did a great job of giving you an overview
of those bills that we think are of particular interest to the county.
From a budget perspective, you know, what I want to make clear is
with regard to the funding for the next veterans nursing home in
Collier, in addition to the $10 million that was put in the budget, we
also got the necessary, equally as necessary, language in the budget
that authorizes the Department of Veterans Affairs to submit an
application to the federal government to pull down the necessary
federal funds to make sure that this home gets constructed in Collier
County.
So we had some last -- you know, some changes to the language
that we got in, the necessary changes, to make sure that in addition to
the nursing home, we encompassed the adult day health center
component to it. So that's in there.
Congratulations on the state appropriations that the legislature
funded. It's not over yet, of course, because of the Governor's
line-item veto authority. It's the general discussion up here not only
with the speaker and the president, but the Governor on the need to
trim back our spending. So I do expect some sizable vetoes coming.
So your team up in Tallahassee will be working -- continuing to
work with the Governor's office and his staff on the items that were
funded, your projects, to ensure against any vetoes.
From a timing perspective, I wish I could give you some more
guidance, but Bridget said it earlier, from here on out, once a bill or
the budget gets sent over to the Governor, he's got 15 days to act on
it. I think you guys are aware of this. But not all bills automatically
go to the Governor, that's -- or the budget, just because they're
passed. It's a coordinated effort between the president and the
speaker and the Governor, and it's, typically, that they agree upon
March 12, 2024
Page 170
what bills will go over and when. It's a timing. As you can
imagine, with over 300 bills that were passed this session, you can't
send them all over to the Governor at once and have him or her act on
it in 15 days.
So -- but what I will keep your team apprised of is when the bills
that we're tracking for you do get sent over to the Governor -- and
that necessarily includes -- includes the budget.
So really happy that, you know -- it was -- it was a fight to the
end on commissioner term limits. I have no doubt that it will be
back again next year. I think the fight will probably be a little harder
next year. I think that there are -- some of the -- the reason why the
bill didn't pass this year is just, you know, there are some elected
members that see the unintended consequences that come with term
limits. They are uncomfortable with deciding between eight years or
12 years, what's the proper balance, and thought best that local
communities should decide for themselves. But some of those folks
won't be here next year, so I do expect to see that one come back next
year.
Something that you didn't see in the presentation today but I
wanted to make sure, you know, it got addressed, because we had the
conversation when you traveled to Tallahassee, and that is the issue
of the modified mufflers, the exhausts. Didn't get any traction on
that this year, but I know you guys have a task force that's in place.
Look forward to kind of the recommendations that come out of there,
and maybe from your sheriff, and if that is something that is very
much a priority for the county, would like to get working on that this
summer.
We kind of have -- we have a long summer as opposed to last
summer. Because of the elections in November, we won't -- we
won't have committee weeks until after the general election in
November. So a lot of time to work this summer while everyone's
March 12, 2024
Page 171
on the campaign trail, but it's never too soon to go out and secure bill
sponsors for the county's priorities.
And then I think the last thing I want to mention -- and it's
mainly because of your Agenda Item 11A, I thought this would be of
particular interest to any of those residents that may still be listening
or still be there in commission chambers with you, and Bridget did
mention this before, but specifically it's Senate Bill 1638. And
it's -- and it's funding for environmental resources. Again, she
mentioned it, but it is the use of the funds that are generated from the
gaming compact with the Seminoles.
For the next five years, it's the expectation that that will generate
2.5 billion, with a b, dollars. In this year, the legislature placed into
statute how those funds are to be distributed. And so going forward
on an annual basis, it's $100 million for the Florida Wildlife Corridor,
$100 million for uplands management and invasive species removal,
$100 million for the Resilient Florida Trust Fund, and then the
remainder goes to DEP for the water-quality grant program.
So always wonderful to have a dedicated funding source for
those very important land management conservation priorities and
water-quality priorities.
And so I think -- I think there -- I mean, obviously I can't thank
Senator Passidomo, Rep Melo, Rep Botana and Rommel enough for
all their hard work, particularly your funding priorities this year.
And I will say the Mile Marker 63 was a great bonus. That's an
issue that our firm worked on for you guys back in 2018 and 2019
when we had to pass a bill two years in a row to keep that funding
extended but, you know, all the credit to Senator Passidomo and
Representative Melo and the Greater Naples Fire Department on that
issue. They picked up the ball and ran with it. So congrats on that
one.
So I'll pause there and open it up for any questions.
March 12, 2024
Page 172
CHAIRMAN HALL: Lisa, this is Commissioner Hall.
As far as veto attention, do you have any grid or any ear to the
ground which area is being focused, whether is SHIP/SAIL funds,
transportation, education, on other --
MS. HURLEY: Yeah. No, where I expect it, Chair Hall, is
local -- local projects, right? So I don't think -- you know, I think
transportation's going to be fine. Like, big state appropriations for
state agencies. Like, transportation's going to be fine. Water's
going to be fine. The big buckets -- the funding buckets that Bridget
mentioned in the PowerPoint.
So where you'll see, you know, the bigger cuts is local
government projects, so -- and that's -- and that can include road and
water. But I can tell you in years past, working with the Governor's
office, you know, the criteria -- and they look at every single local
project. And the criteria is in valuing whether to, you know, keep
the funding or not, is first and foremost, is this project shovel ready.
That's first and foremost. Second is can the local government that's
requested the funding, can they actually complete the project with the
amount of funding that the legislature appropriated?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Gotcha.
MS. HURLEY: So -- right? So those are the things that they
look like. And so -- you know, and just being -- being candid, out of
all of the projects that, you know, were funded, I have some concerns
about the Goodlette-Frank project because it was only funded at
1 million. You know, I've already had conversations with your staff
on whether, just with $1 million, is that something the county can still
move forward on, complete the project? And so, you know, the
preliminary answer back to me is yes, but I'm thinking on that one
we'll probably need -- we'll probably need a letter from you, Chair,
and the rest of the commissioners affirming as much to protect
against a veto on that one.
March 12, 2024
Page 173
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thank you.
Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
Lisa, first of all, well done. You've been an incredibly effective
lobbyist for us, and I just want to pass that on, that we really
appreciate it. I certainly really appreciate it, because I know how
hard you work for us.
I'm assuming -- and you may have covered a lot of this. I'm
assuming that you'll be interacting with the Governor's staff on some
of these -- some of these budget items. The question, I guess, is in
terms of, say, the funding for the adult day health care facility as part
of the veterans nursing home, the $10 million. We obviously have
$10 million in matching funds, and I think that that probably would
be somewhat significant along with the other 30 million for the
Governor's staff to be fully aware of, and I assume that you'll be
meeting with someone from the Governor's office to relay that
information. And do you know who that person might be in the
Governor's office that handles military-type appropriations?
MS. HURLEY: So -- yes. So the short answer is absolutely.
I will tell you, I've been in the Governor's office numerous times
on this particular item and have had nothing but positive feedback.
In fact, I mean, they're just so -- so thrilled with the county's level of
commitment to the nursing home and to the veterans. And so I don't
really have concerns there.
Having said that, you know, we will be back in. And it's
actually -- it's Katie Strickland in the Governor's office who oversees
this budget silo. And just so you know, that's health and human
service. That's where DBA's budget is.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Then in terms of -- is there
anything that we should do? Should the Chairman write a letter to
Ms. Strickland or any interactions that we should have from the
March 12, 2024
Page 174
county on that? I know you're handling it.
MS. HURLEY: So I -- no. Listen. No, I -- thank you.
I always am a proponent of additional support. So if the Chair
and the Commission would like to pen a letter in support, that would
be wonderful; I will hand-deliver it. But any letters on any of our
funding priorities should be addressed to the Governor.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right.
MS. HURLEY: But I will get those delivered.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. So I think that
covers -- I may have something else, Mr. Chairman, but I think for
right now that covers it.
Again, thank you, Ms. Hurley, for all that you do for us.
MS. HURLEY: My pleasure.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Great.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, on this
particular item, I'd like to suggest that we do write letters on each of
the appropriations and have them hand-delivered by Ms. Hurley, and
she can make a determination, like, on the $1 million issue, maybe a
letter's not worth the time or may not be of any value. But I think a
nice letter from the Chairman, especially on the nursing home
and -- would be really appropriate. So I'd like to suggest that, and --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
MS. CORCORAN: We'll get that prepared.
CHAIRMAN HALL: That was the nod I was looking for.
MS. CORCORAN: You got it.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, a court reporter break is
due at this time, and we'll come back to begin our no-sooner-than
1:30.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Great. We'll do our 1:30 at 3:10.
(A brief recess was had from 3:01 p.m. to 3:10 p.m.)
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic.
March 12, 2024
Page 175
CHAIRMAN HALL: That's going to bring us to our 1:30.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir.
Item #11C
ACCEPT A PROJECT UPDATE ON THE COLLIER COUNTY
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CENTER AND PROCEED WITH THE
DESIGN FOR 87 TOTAL BEDS (45 CSU, 30 ADULT
MEDICARE/ACUTE AND 12 ESAC) WITH AN ESTIMATED
CONSTRUCTION COST OF $49.9 MILLION. (PROJECT NO.
50239) (ED FINN, DEPUTY COUNTY MANAGER) (ALL
DISTRICTS) - MOTION TO ACCEPT PROJECT UPDATE BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS – APPROVED
That brings us to Item 11C. This is a recommendation to accept
a project update on the Collier County Behavioral Health Center and
proceed with the design for 87 beds, 45 CSU, 30 adult Medicare
acute, and 12 ESAC, with an estimate construction cost of
$49.9 million.
Mr. John McCormick, your director of Facilities Management,
is here to begin the presentation.
MR. McCORMICK: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Patterson.
Chair, Commissioners, good afternoon. I'll try to be brief.
This is an update on our behavioral health project, and it's also a
chance for me to solicit your input and maybe receive some direction.
This is a CMAR project that affords us some opportunity to
periodically check budgets and step back and look at scope, all those
kind of things, and that's where we're at right now.
We just recently finished our design development in December.
We've been scrubbing it for the last two months trying to
March 12, 2024
Page 176
value-engineer it, and we thought it would be ready to update you
with where we're at.
I have with me -- actually most who are here represent our
project team here from DLC; RG Architects, their sub-consultant;
and DeAngelis Diamond, who's our CMAR contractor.
We also have some of our advisory committee in the room as
well. So we've got the whole team here. If there's any questions,
we could certainly tap them for some input.
Just to remind you what this building's going to look like, this is
the rendition from the architect.
And the objective, and some recent history. Here to provide a
project update to the Board for 87 beds at $49.9 million. The 87
beds was determined to be the program that is needed by the
community and developed by our team.
On June 27th last year, we were here for the same 87 beds,
under a schematic design only, and that was at $44 million.
December of this year -- of last year, we completed our design
development, and we put all the pieces together and did some heavy
estimating, re-estimating, and it came out to be 53 million. And so
we went back to the drawing board and for the last two months have
been value-engineering this thing to a $49 million figure.
This is the basic layout floor plan of the 49.9 million, 87 beds,
and a little chart here showing that, look, it's not in line with the 6/27,
budget; however, it is in line with the program. It is
value-engineered. It does meet the current community needs and
future, and we will have some money in there for design Change
Order 4 of the value-engineering, and I've got a chart here showing
you what we've done the last two months.
So here's a side-by-side comparison that shows from the 6/27 to
the 3/12/24. It's still 60,000 square foot. We're still in a good
range, I feel, from a -- it's a lot of money, but dollars per square foot
March 12, 2024
Page 177
that -- the $800, plus or minus, is kind of a sweet spot. Quite
frankly, the VA's kind of in the same zone right now for a very
similar type of structure, although it's going to be more than one
story.
Some of the value-engineering ideas we had, you know, we had
to go to -- we're doing tilt-wall in lieu of the CMU unit, and you can
see a list of several things there, and that all totaled to about a $3.2
million VE savings.
So, again, this meets the current program, and that would be our
recommendation at this point.
Project timeline, where we're at here, March 12th, we're on a
fast track. I want a GMP by the end of the year. We've got to make
some construction drawings. Design development's done, but we've
got some work to do. And it's a pretty aggressive schedule but, you
know, time is money, especially in this business. And we're anxious
to turn some dirt.
So we're hoping for a Q4 GMP. Hopefully I'll be back to you
with that in the last quarter of this year.
So, again, the recommendation would be to accept our current
project update, and if you think we're in line and I'm directing this
team in the right direction or if there's a change to be needed, right
now's the time to do it, okay -- and but I think the 87 beds meets the
criteria. I've got all the experts behind me to back that up. And
49,9- is a realistic construction number.
So with that, I'll open it up for questions.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I don't have any questions.
I'd like to exceed the need, not meet it, but I definitely don't want it to
be underserved. So hopefully these numbers will hold tight.
Who's here from DeAngelis Diamond? Hey, come on, you
guys can't give us a better deal? I saw your two Ferraris out there.
March 12, 2024
Page 178
What's the deal? Huh? Come on, sharpen your pencils.
No. Unless somebody -- and I saw Commissioner McDaniel
probably has a question, but I'm a strong supporter of this program,
as I think we all are.
We've seen construction costs go up, so, you know -- and, you
know, all joking aside, you know, we realize the issues here and how
you value-engineered this.
And, you know, I see Scott Burgess in the back, who's been an
incredible leader in this entire program and making sure that
continues to move forward and working closely with us.
So, you know, we have the team. We have, you know, a
construction company here that we value greatly in our community
who measures twice, cuts once, doesn't let us down. So, you know,
I'm all for a full speed ahead Mach 10. Let's go. The longer we
wait -- like you said, time is money. We're going to be sitting here if
we stall on this thing, and it's going to be 67 beds for 55 million.
MR. McCORMICK: Right.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And we're going to be going
backwards.
So I saw Commissioner McDaniel light up. He might have a
question. I don't. I'd make a motion to approve, but I'll defer to my
colleagues.
MR. McCORMICK: Appreciate that, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, time is money.
There's no -- there's no argument -- I can't disagree [sic] more about
the need. There's no argument that there's a need.
But talk to me about the money. How much money do we have
appropriated in the sales tax referenda to support this development?
MR. McCORMICK: Well, I'm not sure if Ed's here, but we
fenced in enough money for this project, forensic. And I also act as
March 12, 2024
Page 179
surtax liaison, so I'm kind of in turn with that budget and how much
money we have.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. That's what I'm
wanting to hear. Talk to me.
MR. McCORMICK: So this is fully surtax funded. Oh,
there's Ed. Sorry, Ed. Ed has the real raw numbers, and maybe if
you want to share some of that with them to make you feel a little
better.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Either -- somebody talk to
me. That's all. I'm okay with -- here we go. There we go.
MR. FINN: Thank you, John. Thank you, Commissioner.
Edward Finn, Deputy County Manager.
I just put together a quick update on the surtax just to indicate
where we are with it. You can see here there's kind of some of the
back story on the surtax. Most recently the Board authorized us to
turn that off as of December 31 of this [sic] year, having achieved
and exceeded our goal of $490 million.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: December 31 of last year?
MR. FINN: '23, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: There are a lot of people
listening.
MR. FINN: I apologize.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: All three of them.
MR. FINN: Collections to date are shown at the top of this
table, the validated projects to date are shown here, and the surplus
balance is provided in the lower box, approximately $96 million.
The additional funding needs that thus far have been identified are
about $76 million. And if I go to this sheet, this shows you where
the 76 million is coming from.
The forensic evidence building for the Sheriff has been a subject
of discussion with the Board. We enhanced that project significantly
March 12, 2024
Page 180
from the concept included in the surtax original program plan. That
one is moving forward. And, in fact, we have received a bid for that
that we actually had to turn down and go back out to bid, so that will
be coming back to the Board.
The state veterans nursing home, that is shown there because
there is a possibility of attempting to recover the land value from
surtax. That would also be covered by the surplus if the Board were
to move in that direction. And then, finally, at the bottom is the
Collier County Behavioral Health Center that we're talking about
today. The original programmed amount in the surtax program was
$25 million.
As John mentioned, we were to the Board in June. And given
the program needs of the project, and at the schematic design stage
we were at at that point, we came to you with roughly a $44 million
construction budget that John is now reporting to achieve the same
goals that the Board approved in June is going to be about 49.9- to
achieve the same construction.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Forty-nine point -- say 50
million for today's discussion. Go to the previous slide, if you
would, please, and the excess funds.
MR. FINN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Total surplus was 96, and per
the -- per the previous slide, which is the one after this one, that still
leaves 20 million, 21 million left over in those surplus funds, and that
funds the construction of this 87-bed facility actually to a
5-million-plus.
MR. FINN: Yes, sir. Fifty-million-plus. So what we've been
doing since is we've been talking about the construction budget.
There's approximately 3 million in soft costs that have also been
incurred.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Go to the next slide -- the
March 12, 2024
Page 181
slide you just had. So there you go. So per this, there's 55 million
appropriated for an estimated $50 million cost, right?
MR. FINN: Uh-huh. This is, essentially, a stress test on the
surplus so that we have a sufficient amount.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I wanted to hear the
stress test. Ed, you and I talked about this yesterday, and it's been
something that's been troubling me since this came along as to how
this was going to be funded and how it's going to be paid for. So
this is -- this is good for me from a construction standpoint.
Now, talk to me about the 4.2 FF&E.
MR. FINN: Yes, sir. As is mentioned in the executive
summary, the furniture fixtures and equipment, as well as the
operating margin that might come back to the county on this project,
has been a matter of some discussion between county administration,
David Lawrence Center, and the constituency group that represents
this behavioral health center. They have, in fact, designed a
campaign to provide for naming rights for the building to generate
some funds. That would include the FF&E and, presumably, a
portion of the operating budget. That is a matter that will be brought
back to the Board in the form of an executive summary and an
agreement with David Lawrence Center covering those naming
rights.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I -- and then -- and then
the estimated -- the estimated O&M. Now, you basically -- you've
talked about the one-time -- relatively speaking one-time expense of
the FF&E funding. Now I need to hear about the ongoing O&M,
operations and maintenance.
MR. FINN: And let me try to respond to that. And
Mr. Burgess is here, and he could respond, perhaps, in a little more
depth than I.
He did share with me an updated pro forma on this project, and
March 12, 2024
Page 182
that indicates that the bottom-line funding they would need, on an
annual basis, ranges between three -- peaks up to about $3.9 million
as it comes fully up to staffing. And then as billings and staffing
kind of come together and coordinate, reach some level of
equilibrium, that will ease back down to a net cost above and beyond
what we're currently providing of approximately 3.4 to $3.5 million a
year.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's a hole in the doughnut.
MR. FINN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: From my perspective, that's a
difficult -- I mean, I'm having trouble authorizing the construction of
this facility without certain -- without certain timelines, without
certain -- without certain measurables and milestones in place to
cover these known deficits. These are front-end -- walking in the
front door known deficits.
MR. FINN: Well, let me address it two ways. Perhaps we
could hear from Mr. Burgess. And I will say that John -- John's
presentation today is about obtaining direction on moving forward
with the balance of design. Once that design is complete, John also
referenced his guaranteed maximum price that's going to be
generated by DeAngelis Diamond based on those final designs. That
contract on the guaranteed maximum price, of course, comes back to
the Board for final -- final action to proceed, and that would include
authorization on the funding as well. So there's still some steps that
the Board is going to have.
And with that, Mr. Chair, if it pleases the Board, I could ask,
perhaps, Mr. Burgess to come up and --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I certainly wouldn't
mind hear -- I mean, Mr. Burgess is more than welcome, but the
bottom line is he isn't going to tell me anything you haven't already
told me, Ed, and that is there is a deficit in the O&M --
March 12, 2024
Page 183
MR. FINN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- that David Lawrence is
going to be looking to the county to make up, and potentially a deficit
in the FF&E if the naming rights and the fundraising efforts aren't
sufficient to cover those expenses. And --
MR. FINN: And if I may, I think it might well be a good
opportunity to let David Lawrence Center respond to that. They, in
fact, are the ones that design their campaign. They have been our
partner in trying to cover this FF&E issue and the operating expense
issue since the early stages of this project. So I think -- I think it
might be better to have Mr. Burgess response to that than me.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. I'm sure.
MR. FINN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Before we get to Mr. Burgess,
Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes, I had a question for
staff. I think I heard you indicate the cost per square foot, if I'm not
mistaken. What was that number? I think -- I thought I heard 800.
MR. McCORMICK: About 830.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: $830 per square foot?
MR. McCORMICK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I know Mr. Mullin's is
in the back corner there. John, if you could come on up, I may have
to ask you a question, not necessarily on the microphone, just off the
side there. Because we're doing all of the estimates for the
construction costs for the veterans nursing home, and the architects
and engineers have come up with a number, and I think it was less
than the 830. These are similar -- probably similar structures except
yours -- the David Lawrence facility's two stories, and this is just one.
MR. McCORMICK: David Lawrence is one story.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Oh, is it one story? Okay.
March 12, 2024
Page 184
MR. McCORMICK: That typically runs a little higher per
square foot. And the VA --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So that's what we're talking
about with the veterans nursing home. And I know this is not related
to David Lawrence. But, Mr. Mullins, what number are we using?
MR. MULLINS: Yes, sir. John Mullins, director or
Communications, Government and Public Affairs.
The last draft -- and this floor plan does change by the week as
they try to make tweaks to it, as you well know.
Right now I think the long-term-care facility is at about 115,000
square feet total. That includes the adult day health care portion as
well, and I think the last estimate was about $766 per square feet,
currently.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: You might want to talk to
the folks on the next phone call. Thank you. I just wanted to
clarify that. I appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And if I can, Mr. Chair, just
to -- in all sincere- -- I mean, there's a hundred-dollar difference in
estimation of cost for veterans nursing home and this facility, which
is equivalent to a hospital. This facility that we're proposing here,
there's not that large of a disparity in cost.
The -- and the -- you did very well as far as answering my
concerns with regard to the actual construction costs.
Now we're going to hear from Mr. Burgess with regard to the
large number, because it doesn't take but about 10 years at 4, 4 and a
half million dollars a year, and you're at another 45 million in O&M.
MR. BURGESS: So good afternoon. Thank you very much
for allowing me to be here. Scott Burgess, David Lawrence Centers
for Behavioral Health CEO.
Appreciate, as always, the support of the Commission related to
this important project for our community. It sounds as if you want
March 12, 2024
Page 185
me to specifically speak about the gap in the operations cost for this
facility.
Related to that, I think it's really important to kind of set
the -- you know, set the understanding that about 70 percent of those
that come to David Lawrence Centers are either uninsured or
underinsured. So there is a significant issue related to payer mix as
far as what can be generated through the services that we provide.
These issues continue to grow and grow in our community. It's
desperately needed for us to attend to these needs. And as we ran
out our fiscal pro forma associated with this project, we -- I think
we've been very clear from the beginning of all this, including the
time that we put together the Collier County Strategic Plan that was
unanimously supported, as a coalition, that there is going to need to
be some sort of operational assistance related to this, as there has
been operational assistance from Collier County Government to help
support our operations year over year under the state-mandated
agreement that the state requires.
We know that there are individuals that will be coming to us that
are going to have some level of funding. They're going to have
some insurance, whether it's Medicare or Medicaid. Medicaid pays
for about 50 percent of what it costs to provide the service, which is,
you know, kind of the actuarial study related to that. So even the
folks that come to us that have some form of funding, if it's Medicaid
funding, which is 40 percent of those that come to us, there's a
significant gap in funding with that. So -- and then 20 to 25 percent
have absolutely no income and no insurance whatsoever.
So those are -- from a business model standpoint, it's very hard
to be able to break even on operations when you have that level of
funding challenge.
That being said, we have about 10 percent of our budget -- even
a little less than 10 percent of our budget that is supported through
March 12, 2024
Page 186
Collier County Government. The remainder of that is supported
through -- whether it's state funding, federal funding, or donor
funding.
So we've -- I don't think we've ever said that we fully expect the
county to pick up the full gap of what's being estimated at about 3 to
$3.8 million year over year. We understand that that's something
that we need to work together to try to fill that gap, whether that's
through federal funding, whether that's through state funding,
whether there's other sources of funding that we can find from the
community, our donor support that we have been blessed to have in
this community. It would be a very different community without
donor funding to help support our -- not only our mission, but other
missions in this community.
So we're very much wanting to be a partner with that. We've
already had at least, you know, one meeting with other community
partners with the county staff to try to encourage others like
hospital -- the hospitals in the area that don't provide anything related
to detox or psychiatric services to help us with this as well. We'll
continue to do that.
And at the end of the day, while we also believe there's
tremendous cost savings and cost avoidance with a program like this
when you look at what we've already done with decreasing the
census, in partnership with the Sheriff's Office in partnership with the
treatment -- specialty treatment courts, we know that there's been a
tremendous annual savings to the taxpayers associated with diverting
individuals into treatment, which is really helping them,
versus -- versus law enforcement which might not necessarily be the
right treatment approach.
So with that, I hope that helps. I'm happy to answer any
additional questions that you have.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thank you, Scott.
March 12, 2024
Page 187
Besides basing the success on the number of beds, is there any
other data that we have to justify the operating -- you know, this
3.4 million? You know, have you got a figure of how many patients
or how many people leave your facility, never do drugs, never do
alcohol again, or get actual help, provide -- you know, they go back
to society as a normal person, or is there -- you know, is there any
other substantial data that we have other than number of beds?
MR. BURGESS: Oh, absolutely. I mean, there's an outcomes
report that we provide which demonstrates a number of different
metrics that we're measuring ourselves against benchmark, and I can
certainly --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yeah. I'm not interested in benchmark.
I'm interested in what "success" means. Others benchmark may not
mean success.
MR. BURGESS: Correct. So, you know, traditional outcome
measures are things like recidivism rates. And we've been able to
demonstrate that people are doing well when they discharge so that
they're not coming back as frequently --
CHAIRMAN HALL: That's what I'm looking for.
MR. BURGESS: Yeah, exactly. So those -- so when I use that
as a benchmark, we're comparing against other agencies that also
recognize that as a measure of success, and we do better than that.
CHAIRMAN HALL: What is the recidivism?
MR. BURGESS: The recidivism rate? Well, we've got it for
multiple -- we've got a recidivism rate for multiple programs. So it
all depends on which program you're talking about.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I'm just looking for a rule of thumb, like,
you know, seven out of 10 guys don't come back, or just on average.
MR. BURGESS: Well, it's about seven and a half out of 10
don't come back. So about 24 percent recidivism rate. If you're
looking at other types of programs which would be -- you know,
March 12, 2024
Page 188
we've got outpatient programs where -- our partial program, we've
got about an 8 percent recidivism, so 92 percent don't come back.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I'm asking these questions not because
I'm opposed to it. I love the -- I want to move forward with this, but
at the same time, we're at 60 percent design, which means we have
40 percent to go, and now is the time to have these discussions. And
just like the sports complex -- did I say that out loud?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You did.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I want to learn from those mistakes. I
don't want to get to the point we just have to keep going because
we're that far -- we're so far along. If we need -- you know, I don't
want to encumber the taxpayers on somebody else's business. I want
that business to -- I want to build an asset and let it be operated
without taxpayers being on the hook for what's going on.
Whether we need to take a hard look on our budget -- I don't
want to be 49 million now, and by the time we get our GMP stuff
done and we're looking at the first quarter of next year, oh, now all of
a sudden, it's 59 million. I don't want to be there. I want to say, this
is the amount of money the taxpayers have to use. Get 'er done,
period.
And I don't want to move forward with what if this or what if
that. I don't want to buy furniture and fixtures for somebody that's
going to operate. They need to buy their own furniture and fixtures.
I don't want to have the taxpayers on the hook. I need to get
something solid that we can hang our hat on that we can be proud of
moving forward and that we're not just having to continually
feed -- feed this monster.
Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
Commissioner Hall, all really good points, and I think we all
feel the same way, that we don't want to get involved in a project that
March 12, 2024
Page 189
is going to be a taxpayer cost, increasing cost. But I think
there's -- another -- the rate of recidivism and all of that, the success
of that program is all very important. But I think we have the Sheriff
here, and I think this is an appropriate time for Sheriff Rambosk to
come forward, because there's another aspect of this that we're all
talking about, but it's part of the equation, and that is you've got
funding in the Sheriff's Department, in the jail, where they're treating
patients with mental health problems or housing them at a particular
cost, and a lot of that cost will be eliminated by having this. So I
think that's part of the equation also is how much are we saving on
one end and how much more are we spending on the other end.
And perhaps, Sheriff, you can elaborate on that, because I know
you were instrumental in making that point to this commission back
when we were looking at putting this in the sales tax, that this
is -- this is a -- though there's going to be a line item for operations in
the net of this, there's a savings to taxpayers because of what we're
saving in the jails and in law enforcement.
So I think -- I think some elaboration of that would be helpful.
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Thank you, Commissioner.
Kevin Rambosk, Collier County Sheriff.
You know, the cost of incarceration is dependent upon the day
and the number of people in the jail, but anywhere between 160 to
$180 a day, typically, is what is expended. And if we look over the
past year, as an example, our behavioral health unit has worked with
2,000-plus individuals in the community.
I will reference that relative to our current jail population which
is about 40 percent lower than it was 10 years ago. We are at about
750, give or take, each and every day. We were pushing 1,300 at
that time.
Part of that has to do with our behavioral health unit, our mental
health court, our drug court, our 287(g) program all put together to
March 12, 2024
Page 190
lessen those dollars and that cost for us.
So we are definitely saving money. If we think back -- so that
would have been four or five years ago when I was up here. We
have dramatically increased the amount of people that we have
referred to the David Lawrence Center under the Baker Act rather
than housing them in the jail facility.
So specific dollars, you'd have to give me an opportunity to take
a look at those dollars. But I can tell you the cost of operations due
to the number -- the less number of individuals that are referred to the
David Lawrence Center, we absolutely are saving on those.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, the one thing that -- or
there were multiple things. But one of the things that sold me on
putting this into the sales tax and continuing to support this project is
the fact that we are saving a tremendous amount of money. And my
assumption is that with the completion of this building, we will
enhance those savings going forward, from your operation. And I
know you can't give us a number, but --
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALL: There is a number.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Huh?
CHAIRMAN HALL: This is a number.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah.
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: There certainly is a number, and any of
those individuals in crisis that we can refer to the David Lawrence
Center rather than house in our jail facility will save us those
operating dollars at the very least, which I just mentioned to you, but
there are other dollars as well because there's an impact on deputy
and their individual responses. There are impacts to our behavioral
health unit who stay in contact with all of these individuals, and if
they're being assisted by the David Lawrence Center, none of our
staff is impacted in that way, and we can defer those resources to
March 12, 2024
Page 191
other individuals that need them.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. I guess what I would
suggest -- I'm fairly confident this will be approved today, and
assuming that to be the case, at some point we're going to have to
vote on whether to proceed with construction. And so I think at that
point, which will be a year from now, it would be very helpful to
have an analysis done as to what the real impact will be on other
county operations.
Law enforcement, certainly, is No. 1. What are the benefits to
the community at whole -- as a whole in terms of having folks with
mental illness being treated properly as opposed to being convicted of
trespassing, serving 90 days in jail, getting released, and trespassing
again on somebody else's property? What are the real benefits? I
think we're going to need that analysis to be able to justify going
forward. And I know those numbers are going to be positive for us
in going forward. But that will help, I think, convince the public that
this is really the right project.
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: I would agree with that. I would ask
though, that -- you know, there are numbers that we're not going to be
able to quantify, because one of the things that we had hoped when
we first developed this discussion of having this facility was not only
to defer individuals from coming to our jail, but to encourage families
and those in crisis to go directly to the facility thereby saving all
impact and contact, and certainly that may be extrapolated through
Dr. Burgess and the David Lawrence Center in assistance.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you.
Because when I was making eye contact with you, that was what
I was going to ask is -- it's going to be really important for me to
know the referrals that physically come from our Sheriff's
March 12, 2024
Page 192
Department and then be able to look at the outcomes of those
referrals, and then correlate that back. Again, this doesn't have to
be -- it certainly isn't even implied to be a money-maker, per se,
because we all know the community benefit that comes from proper
treatment, proper programming, re-institution back into society and
not the recidivism aspect is imperative, and that's -- and that's a game
we can't even quantify. We can't even quantify that, so -- but we can
quantify numbers, the people, the cost associated with the -- you and
I agree on several points, but there's little to no rehabilitation that
comes with incarceration.
And so if we can -- if we can divert people over there to seek the
proper assistance, come up with necessary programming and have
them integrated back into our community, the value -- it's valueless
[sic]. You can't even -- you can't even quantify that value. But it
will help me from a -- from a moving of expense standpoint, if you
will, to be able to show that we diverted -- and I'm just going to use a
hypothetical number. We diverted 200 people out of the jail system
and into effective programming, and then we can look at David
Lawrence Center's capacities, which they do track and they do
document the recidivism that comes from their different types of
programming so that we can -- so that we can better quantify the
reality of the expense associated with it.
I don't want to -- I don't want to sound harsh when I start talking
about the -- you could say 3.8 million, $4 million O&M deficit. It's
not really a deficit if we can at least come up with a quantification of
what we're not spending over here in the jail and then add to that the
benefit to the community for the re-initiation of these folks back into
society.
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: I think you bring up a very good point,
and I think that goes to the Chairman's question about what are the
positive outcomes with this type of programming. I'm going to tell
March 12, 2024
Page 193
you -- and I have nothing to do with the David Lawrence Center
budget and operations today. But I will agree, it is not a
money-making proposition. We are investing in the community to
make a safer community.
What I can tell you is that when we release individuals from the
jail system, we have a process to try and get them referred to
whatever assistance they may need just to reduce the potential for
them returning. And I know the David Lawrence Center has the
same philosophy in doing that.
So we are making an investment in that. I mean, if you think
about -- and these are probably older numbers, individuals who not
only are involved with mental health crisis but typically have a
substance abuse problem -- because we see a lot of individuals that
come into the jail that we're treating for that. To treat for that today,
you're talking 30- to $50,000 a month in a facility, and then -- you
know, then try and return back into the community, and is there a
good strong program? Is there follow-up? Which I can tell you that
we have follow-up with our behavioral health unit for a lot of these
things, because once we've made that investment either in the jail or
in the future through the David Lawrence Center and their operation,
we don't want to be repeating and re-spending those dollars. But the
medical staff and clinicians, better than I, will tell you that not
everybody gets the ability to reintegrate after their first 30-day rehab.
In fact, it's probably two or three by the time they go through. So
there are a lot of factors in it. I think we can give you a lot of
information to utilize.
The other thing is, from what I recall, there are a lot of our
residents who want to support the operation of the David Lawrence
Center and a new facility, and I know a number of them personally.
They're just waiting for the opportunity to do that. So I think we're
at this Catch 22. And I agree with you that -- because we're going
March 12, 2024
Page 194
through it with the CSI building. I would have much preferred to
see that two years ago built than have to deal with it today and having
to rearrange things that we thought we were going to be able to do,
and build a building for the next 50 years.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you. That will be
very helpful for me just from a -- from a count standpoint.
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Thank you. Any other questions?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
And I guess I'll piggyback along with Sheriff and what he's
saying. I had the opportunity to chair the Public Safety Committee
last year, and I have the honor of doing it again this year. And one
of the big subjects we talk about a lot is the MAP program with the
Sheriff's Department and the jail. And to understand that MAP
program, it -- basically, these are the people that are addicted to these
opiates that are on this -- you know, that may have some mental
health issues, you know, attached to it.
And it's very expensive, like the Sheriff said. We look at
sometimes some of these treatments with these subcutaneous shots
now that we're moving towards. It's 25-, $2200 a dose, you know,
but at least they're only getting it once a month.
But the big problem we discuss a lot in there is, where do they
go when they no longer are serving their time in the jail? And it's
funny because some organizations here in town won't accept them,
but David Lawrence, I think, is going to be helpful in the future, you
know, of getting these people back when they're outside and staying
on these programs so they're successful on the outside of the jail.
And, you know, we have monies that come in. We have the
state opiate settlement money. You know, that's about a million-plus
a year that comes through this county that's funneled into these
programs, and I think some of those monies maybe could follow
March 12, 2024
Page 195
some of these people over to the center and help offset some of the,
you know, cost of operation, you know, because I think we have the
ability to do that.
And there's another program I think we're trying to enter into
right now to get some more money that I had a bunch of papers to
sign. But there is some monies outside of just, you know, what we
talk about in here that can follow some of these patients as they leave
the jail program, with the MAP program, that, you know, will maybe
offset some when they are on the outside or getting extra treatment
through the David Lawrence Center in the future when we build it.
So I think we'll find ways to do it. I'm sure there's monies out
there, you know, to keep the programs going. Because if we can
treat them on the outside, they typically won't return. And then, you
know, the housing part and then the feeding and the clothing, and,
you know, the daily care of the inmates is a big cost, a big burden on
the taxpayers.
So, you know, if we can nip it in the butt [sic] and get these guys
from returning back to the jail and have a good program on the
outside they can follow up on and have this money follow them that
we do get in these programs may offset some of the care [sic] of
operations.
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: And I agree with you completely,
Commissioner. And just to reemphasize for the public that is
watching, that 2,000, $2200 per treatment, that's not tax dollars. We
have a -- that's fully grant funded through opiate dollars and other
sources.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman.
A couple of my colleagues are, you know, implying, and in
conversation with the Sheriff, the savings that he will benefit from if
this facility is built as-is. I guess to just alleviate any ambiguity, are
March 12, 2024
Page 196
any of you implying that part of his budget should make up the delta
that's on here because he's going to be saving some money? I mean,
nobody -- nobody asked that, but as I was sort of following the
conversation, it was almost, you know, like you were kind of maybe
leaning that way, or maybe I was just connecting dots that weren't
there.
But, you know, if you ask him, wow, if we build this as-is, you'll
save a bunch of money, right, Sheriff, and then he says, yes, I will,
then the last part of the conversation is, are we looking for him to
make up the delta? And I think the answer's no, but I just want
to -- I want to get some clarity here that we still have a delta that
Commissioner McDaniel is concerned about and that I think none of
us are ignoring, but we're not looking for the Sheriff to be the answer
to that.
CHAIRMAN HALL: You're connecting dots that are not there.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Right. Yeah. Well, I just
wanted to make sure we're -- that there's a couple of us that might not
be saying that. So I want the Sheriff to leave here knowing that, you
know, we're not going to -- we're not looking to pick his pocket,
unless, Sheriff, if you think you're going to save $3 million, then, you
know, we'll take it and put it into the project. But I don't think that's
what any of us are saying.
But also, too, people are watching this, and so I want to just
make sure that we -- there's no ambiguity in, you know,
what's -- what money we're missing and where it's coming from and
where it's not coming in.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Well, I was referring to is
exactly what the Sheriff said. The monies that we're getting in these
programs, they're not coming from the taxpayers. These are grants
coming through different -- the opiate settlement, which is a big thing
in the state of Florida, and they distributed that money out. You
March 12, 2024
Page 197
know, a portion of that can follow these patients when they're on the
outside now getting their treatment when they're in the facility at
David Lawrence to offset the cost that they're receiving, which
doesn't come from the taxpayer or the Sheriff's budget, but it's just
monies that's there that -- you know, to keep these people from, you
know, revisiting the jail.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: But DeAngelis Diamond
could always make up that delta, right? Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Hey, sell one of them Ferraris.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I just wanted to go on the
record, gentlemen.
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Last point. I would like to agree with
all of you in that the facility is absolutely needed, but we need to
operate it in a professional fiscally responsible manner, and we need
to know where that's going to be. So I agree.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And that brings up the point
that I wanted to ask our staff, because I remember when
Commissioner Solis was here. We whipped up a mental health
committee that studied mental health. He worked -- they worked
diligently on that. Is that committee in existence today? I'm going
to call it a mental health -- a mental health commission. Is it in
existence today?
MR. BURGESS: It is. It was a formal task force of the
Commission to the point where the strategic plan was then presented
to the commission. That commission unanimously supported that.
At that point the commission formally sunsetted. That was now four
years ago, and that has been continuing to meet, though, as a group.
All of those task force members have continued to meet under kind of
this moniker of Collier County Healthy Minds Coalition. And those
March 12, 2024
Page 198
group -- those group members are still coming together with
regularity, and we are in the process -- if you can imagine. It doesn't
seem like it was that long ago, but it was preCOVID, so -- that
strategic plan is now in the process of being updated.
So now we're meeting. We have been meeting consistently.
We're going to update what are the outcomes and what we've made
progress on as a community and as a group, and then what are the
continuing issues so that we can update that strategic plan. So that
group does meet monthly, yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, I'd like to make a
suggestion. Maybe not today, but consideration for us to reconvene
a commission, if not a portion embodied of the group that's already
meeting as a -- as an oversight mental health commission to oversee
all of the institutions so we have comparison as to results as far as the
rates of recidivism goes, as far as just, in fact, what savings are
accommodated with the diversion from our jail system into
rehabilitation centers throughout the community. There is a myriad
of providers that do offer assistance for those suffering from
substance abuse and mental issues. And so I think oversight coming
to this board will be -- will be a great benefit, at least to me.
MR. BURGESS: Absolutely. Our intention was to try to have
another county workshop where we could lay out that information
which we had done under Commissioner Solis a number of times,
and we would like to have that opportunity to do that before the
Commission to give you the data, the tracking, the progress and, quite
frankly, where we're really falling pretty significantly short in this
community related to the needs of those that are struggling.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I already made a motion to
accept the project update, and I'll just restress that.
March 12, 2024
Page 199
But I did want to add one little thing, in fairness. Former
Commissioner Andy Solis, he actually still is very involved. So I
attended -- I don't think it was at the last meeting, because I was out
of town, but I was at the meeting prior, and he Zoomed. And so just
to give him a little bit of a shout-out, you know, this is still something
that's a passion of his, and he has helped -- you know helped put
some things on the map, and he has not disappeared. And so, you
know, I just thought -- I'm sure he's not listening, but it's important
that...
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He's listening.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, I'm sure he is. But,
you know, if there's no other questions, I just wanted to reiterate the
motion to accept this project update and hope there's a second.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay. As far as direction, you've heard
the conversation.
MR. McCORMICK: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I just want to reiterate, I would like to
see the project meet the budget instead of the budget meeting the
project, or some balance thereof.
And with that, we have a motion and a second. All in favor,
say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: Good job.
MR. McCORMICK: Thank you.
March 12, 2024
Page 200
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, with your indulgence, we
have two items that were pulled off of the consent agenda by
Commissioner LoCastro and a couple of others, probably quick items
that we could take before we got -- we're going to spend a little time
on the budget policy, if you would be okay with that.
Item #11F
DIRECT STAFF TO ADVERTISE AND BRING BACK AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
TO UPDATE THE REGULATIONS RELATING TO THE
REMOVAL OF PROHIBITED EXOTIC VEGETATION. (ALL
DISTRICTS) - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO A FUTURE
MEETING BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED
BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: The first item is now Item 11F,
formerly -- hold on. I've got to get organized. Ha -- formerly
16A14. This is a recommendation to direct staff to advertise and
bring back an ordinance amending the Land Development Code to
update the regulations relating to the removal of prohibited exotic
vegetation.
Ms. Jaime Cook is back again to answer questions or present.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Mr. Chairman, I'll just say
these two items are -- they're good-news things. So this is another
example of where let's not let it get buried in the consent or summary
agenda. You know, these are things we had previously talked about
and, you know, you leave it in the consent or summary agenda and it
gets passed, and maybe it doesn't get the spotlight it deserves,
especially from the hard work from the staff here.
So give us some good-news stories on 11F, and then also we'll
March 12, 2024
Page 201
get a good update on what's actually going on at Caxambas. You
know, a lot of misinformation out there as well, so...
MS. COOK: Jaime Cook, your director of Development
Review.
So in 1979 the first exotic vegetation removal ordinances were
passed in Collier County except for lots that are platted single-family
and ag-zoned properties. Between 1979 and 2004, there were
various iterations. Sometimes those requirements were removed;
sometimes they were put back in. But, ultimately, in 2004 the
requirement for exotic removal for new principal and accessory
structures was required prior to a certificate of occupancy.
In 2005, an exemption was added specifically for certain
accessory structures, including screen enclosures, tents, awning, and
other similar smaller structures.
Back in December during your board meeting, during the
commissioner comments toward the end of the meeting, I believe,
Commissioner Hall, you raised this issue, and all of you had various
circumstances that you brought forward of homeowners with this
situation where they were being required to remove exotics, mostly
for accessory structures, and directed us to take a look at the language
and provide you with some potential updates.
We've worked through that process and presented our proposed
changes to the DSAC subcommittee in January, the full DSAC in
February, and the Planning Commission last week. DCA
recommended approval as long as we approved the proposed
language, and both DCA and the Planning Commission
recommended denial mostly because they felt that removal of exotics
was for betterment of the community as well as that it created
confusion in the instances where the homeowners may have to get
state or federal permits for impacts to wetlands or other things where
they're being required to remove exotics.
March 12, 2024
Page 202
So the proposed language that we were presenting to you today
is in Section 3.05.08 of the Land Development Code. And in
Section A, staff is proposing to add that "except for Estates-zoned
lots as described further below," which I'll get to in a minute,
"prohibited exotic vegetation is required to be removed." And this
section of code specifically refers to subdivisions or commercial
developments. So we were making it clear so that there was no
confusion that these requirements would not apply to Estates-zoned
properties.
But the meat of the change is that in 3.05.08.C -- and the new
additional language is highlighted in blue for you -- that for new
structures and additions on Estates-zoned lots, after the effective date
of this ordinance, which we're proposing to bring back to you the
next meeting, prohibited exotic vegetation shall be removed only
from the county-approved cleared areas and also within seven and a
half feet from all property lines excluding rear yard electric service
utility easements. And, again, it would not apply to some of those
structures that were exempted back from 2005.
So what staff is trying to envision, if you look on this aerial, the
property on the top is one that has a house. It's been permitted.
They've cleared about a half an acre. They haven't cleared a full
acre, but they've requested to clear about a half an acre. So staff
would recommend that exotics within that half acre, that shaded red
area, would remain clear of exotic vegetation as well as the
highlighted blue, which is about seven and a half feet around that
property line.
The property below has not been developed yet, but if it were to
move forward with a building permit of some kind, that purple area is
about one acre of clearing that they could do under their building
permit as well as the seven and a half feet around the property, which
is highlighted in yellow.
March 12, 2024
Page 203
And the reason staff is recommending this seven and a half feet
is because smaller zoned Estates lots, which are a little over an acre
in size, their minimum setback from their property lines is seven and
a half feet for all of their structures. This seven and a half feet on all
property lines would give Fire the ability to get through in the event
of a fire. For example, if there was a fire in the rear of the property,
you can see that to the left of the screen, those properties are also
vegetated in the rear, so that would make it difficult for Fire to get
through.
Additionally, it provides a fire break, that if there is a fire, there
is some sort of break -- break line that fire would not necessarily be
able to jump and impact any existing structures.
Additionally, staff considered that these homeowners are able to
put fences on their property lines. Most put it right at their property
line. And if their neighbor isn't required to remove their exotics
from their property line as well, it could impact their fence,
potentially damaging it and costing that homeowner money to replace
or repair their own fence.
So with that, staff is recommending that you direct us to
advertise the ordinance amending the Land Development Code with
these changes, but I will turn it over to you for any questions or
comments.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thank you, Ms. Cook.
When I brought this up, I felt like this ordinance was onerous
and cumbersome for the landowners, especially if they just wanted to
add something. And my intention was if you want to build a new
house, you've got to clear your exotics, clear them out in the
beginning.
We've had this -- we've had this ordinance 30 years, and it has
not helped the exotics at all. They're still out there growing like
wildfire.
March 12, 2024
Page 204
But to require someone -- when would the seven-and-a-half-foot
buffer -- that would come -- if we pass this like it is, people would be
required to remove their exotics seven and a half feet on their
property all the way around?
MS. COOK: With the -- with this effective date, yes. But
for -- but this -- the way the language was written, it would apply
to -- for new structures and additions.
CHAIRMAN HALL: And additions would be an addition to
their home and not --
MS. COOK: So accessory structures; a garage or pool or
something like that.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So if somebody wanted to put a tool
shed, they'd have to clear their exotics?
MS. COOK: Only in the approved cleared area as well as the
seven and a half feet, yes.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay. I don't like it. I don't like it
because I think it's not -- it's not doing what we want to do. We
want to get out of the way for people.
This is only the Estates. And if we approve this, I want to add
Pine Ridge Estates in there as well. I don't want -- I mean, I take
care of my exotics, and it's a lot of work, and I don't want to put that
on people that don't want to do that.
My neighbors, they don't take care of anything, and that's their
business.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: They're listening.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You've got to move to a new
hood.
CHAIRMAN HALL: They're not listening. Trust me, they're
not listening.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I love my neighbors, by the
way. I just want to go on the record.
March 12, 2024
Page 205
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I agree with Commissioner
Hall. You know, when this came to us, he brought up an example
that I had cross my path a couple times, too. And I don't want to
oversummarize, but someone's trying to build a shed, the
shed's -- and I'm just making up numbers. The shed's $2,000.
Removing all the exotics is 10,000 or -- there was some crazy
example. And I was hopeful that we would update a dated, dusty
ordinance and have the legal authority -- you know, I realize that
there are some standards when it comes to exotics and things, but I
remember the open conversation was, let's do a deep dive. Let's
blow the dust off this. Let's have, you know, government get out of
the way. Let's let somebody buy a shed and not have the greatest
expense be the removal of the exotics, and it's four times the price of
the cost of the shed.
You know, there was a couple of weird examples out there, and
I can't remember if it was you, Ms. Cook, or somebody from the
podium that said, yeah, that example pops up more often than you
think.
And our direction was, do we have the ability to fix it? Come
back to us with something that fixes it. I don't think this does.
It's got some new verbiage in it now. If the answer is,
Commissioner, you really can't do -- you can't just make stuff go
away, okay, well, then that's what I was expecting to hear, that, you
know, we had a great idea, but it wasn't doable due to state statute
something that governs exotics.
But I was looking for something much more robust that would,
you know, help the average citizen who wanted to put a shed in their
backyard and not have to overly pay, you know, to remove exotics.
I didn't know what the answer was, but I was hoping the answer
would come to us and it would be aggressively different and more
March 12, 2024
Page 206
supportive of the average citizen who was trying to do something and
didn't have to go above and beyond and excessively pay for
something. I don't think this does it either. So I concur with, you
know, Commissioner Hall.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Is there a statute that requires
us to impose exotic removal on the private sector?
MS. COOK: Wetlands. Properties that have wetlands on
them.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Only on wetlands. This
isn't -- this doesn't have to do with that, because that's a separate
permit for exotic removal in a wetland area. So this has to do with
new construction.
MS. COOK: Correct.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, I agree, this doesn't
help. I have struggled with exotic removal on the private sector all
my life -- in the private sector. I actually shared with you, and I'll
say it out loud, it would be my -- it would be my wish to stop this
imposition at all on the private sector until the government actually
takes care of its own. I can drive up and down any right-of-way
that's managed by the Florida Department of Transportation, the
federal highway systems, even so far as our park system at the federal
and state level that are fraught with exotics.
And so this -- I consider this an imposition on the private sector
far and above. I mean, I'll say it as well. We've just come off of
this last legislative session, but one of my hopes is to convene a study
to actually have a look at the environmental impacts that the
existence of exotics have contributed to habitat, because we all know
that the birds and the bears and panthers live in these pepper hedges.
I use pepper as the primary example.
CHAIRMAN HALL: That's the primary.
March 12, 2024
Page 207
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: But I don't think this gets us
to where we want to go. I mean, it's -- even though there's
consideration given for a firebreak, exotic removal is not a clearing of
the entire seven and a half foot so that a truck could get down that
fence line to be able to fight a fire in the back. There's still going to
be natural vegetation that's still in that seven and a half feet, even if
the -- even if the exotics are removed.
My thought would be -- if you go back to where you had the
picture up here -- if we eliminated the seven-and-a-half-foot
perimeter and just asked for the clearing of the exotics out of the area
where the home was going to be, I'm just -- I'm just throwing that out
as something.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I guess my point was, just to make it
simple, that if you're going to build a new home, if you're going to
tear down a house and rebuild another one, you've got to clear your
exotics. That's a one-time deal. You've got equipment out there.
It's a no-brainer.
But if you're existing and you've lived there for 30 years and you
want to put -- you've got your mom that you want to move in and
you're going to add a bedroom on, leave the shade. You know,
just -- that's cumbersome and onerous to add a bedroom and have to
remove all exotics again.
So it's just -- for new construction or a new lot, I can see it's
beneficial, and it's known, it's known what's expected, and there's no
surprises in the end if you want to do something -- if you want to put
a tool shed on it. So that would just be my plain and simple.
I understand the rationale, I really do, and the rationale's worthy.
But for what I want to accomplish, it's just getting us out of the way
and it not being ownersome [sic]. And I understand DSAC, and I
understand the Planning Commission, because for new construction
that's going to be on the builders, and that's going to be an expense
March 12, 2024
Page 208
that they're going to have to -- but that's what they get paid the big
bucks for.
Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
I live in the Urban Estates, and I go around cutting some of the
pepper plants and things like that, and two years later they've all
grown back. So it doesn't really help to clear the property line and
then -- because you've got to keep doing it year after year, and people
aren't going to do that. And I would think even for new
construction, to clear the whole property line, that would be a -- I
think would be a rather expensive proposition.
CHAIRMAN HALL: No, it's just the acre or half acre.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. So I would agree that
clearing the exotics out of -- either the acre or the half acre, that
makes all the sense. But I would eliminate all of the other clearing,
and -- because I just don't think it's effective, and even if you do it,
it's going to -- they grow back pretty fast.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yep.
Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
Yeah, I was under the impression that this was going to the
drawing board, and you guys were going to come -- something back
with us. It was going to be like -- you know, this was more on the
lines that, you know, the gentleman that wanted to put the tool shed
on his property. He had a $2,000 tool shed and spent $8,000 to clear
the exotics before he's allowed to go out there and cut some wood or
hammer some nails.
You know, I was assuming you were going to come back with
something saying, all right, well, if you're going to put a structure like
a lanai, a fenced-in or an extra garage on the property, it would be
certain buffer around that that would be required to clear the exotics,
March 12, 2024
Page 209
because now it's a new structure, and keep a little fire barrier away
from it, but not 600 feet down one side, 600 feet down the other side,
and 140 feet across the back and a 7-foot swath.
And, you know, it just seemed like a lot more than I thought that
we were really looking for or trying to achieve with the whole idea of
going to the drawing board with this.
And -- so that's what I was more or less looking for, you guys
coming back saying, yeah, it makes sense. You've got a structure,
you want to add a structure, we'll figure out a ratio how far out you've
got to take the exotics and clear it, and then we're good to go.
You get your occupancy permit. You're not clearing the
600 feet to the back, like it was before. You know, you've got to
clear the whole lot every time you apply for the permit.
But how ironic it is that we just spent hours today with
Conservation Collier and about the Maintenance Fund and how
important it is to have, and the first things we do is we go in and clear
the exotics. It's our biggest expense of the Maintenance Fund is
clearing exotics on property that we buy with that money, and we
maintain it on a yearly basis. We revisit it and cut it out again and
cut it out again and cut it out again, but then we're talking about here
we don't want to, you know, put that burden on the citizens, but then
we don't have the problem putting the burden on the overall
taxpayers. So, I mean, sometimes we need to re-think the game
here, you know. So...
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Which part of the game do
you want to re-think?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I'm just saying, we just talked
how much money we're going to need for maintenance into
perpetuity, and the biggest part of that money we talk about is the
clearing the exotics. That's the biggest part of the maintenance --
March 12, 2024
Page 210
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm aware.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: -- is clearing the exotics. But
then you're saying they like to hide in the pepper bushes. I don't
know.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well -- and that is a fact.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So...
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There's no magic wand for
this. I mean, if -- you know, I'm sure at the beginning of time when
pepper bushes and Melaleucas were first introduced, there was a
reason for them to be here, but now they're everywhere, and they've
actually become a part of our ecosystem from a habitat standpoint for
the wildlife.
I think if we were -- to accomplish what we're looking to do, if
we go back to the language portion of the suggestion here, if we
make it for new structures, not additions, make it for the whole
county, not just the Estates, and eliminate the seven-and-a-half-foot
perimeter buffer, we at least get a start on relief on the community
from the imposition of the clearing. I see the two gentlemen
standing up.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
Just a clarification. So you're talking Estates-zoned lots,
single-family lots, any residential properties would be exempt from
what we were proposing, and PUDs?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Residential and commercial.
I don't think it's -- I don't think -- I mean, if you need to have two
acres for a commercial building, then you clear the two acres. If you
need a half an acre for your house, you clear the half an acre.
If you want to put an addition on a home that's already there,
you shouldn't have an additional imposition of a
seven-and-a-half-foot perimeter clearing that as -- I shared with
Commissioner Saunders, I spent -- I spent four hours on the wrong
March 12, 2024
Page 211
end of a chainsaw Sunday taking care of exotics at my house and
didn't even touch them, so -- because it's a never -- it's a no -- it's a
zero-sum game. There's -- there's no beating them.
Because if I live next to Commissioner Saunders, my cardinals
fly over and eat his pepper berries and then come over and go to the
bathroom on my property, and I'm propagated because you weren't
cleaning your pepper bushes.
CHAIRMAN HALL: You got fresh peppers.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, I get fresh pepper
berries.
So -- and I don't know -- if the goal here for us is to lift the
imposition on the private sector with regard to this, then let's
minimize the exposure they have for -- to whatever it is that they're
looking to actually build and let them be, both residential and
commercial.
MR. BOSI: Residential and commercial. Industrial as well?
I mean, all --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
MR. BOSI: All land uses. All land uses, they are only to clear
the exotics from their clear area for where their proposed buildings
are and not along the perimeter.
CHAIRMAN HALL: On brand-new construction.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And additions.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So if I want to add a bedroom so my
mom can move in, now I've got to redo all my exotics?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No. Just on the area that
you're going to build on.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So if I have a half acre and lived there
for 30 years and I got exotics that are on the side of me now --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: On the back 40.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Backyard, front yard, whatever, and now
March 12, 2024
Page 212
I want to add a bedroom for my mom to move in, now I've got to turn
around and remove all the exotics again?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, sir. That's what I'm
saying is eliminate that provision.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The example that I cited last
year when we were talking about this was with a young lady that
works for me lives in the Estates in a Jim Walters home that was built
back in the '80. They put a mother-in-law quarter on the house, on a
75-foot tract, and it cost them $4500 because we
required -- Environmental Services required exotic removal on the
entire property before they could get a CO and legally occupy that
addition that they put on their home. And so my thoughts were, only
require the exotic removal on the new structure for the area that
they're actually going to use and eliminate the buffer, and include the
entire county, and not the perimeter clearing.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Troy, we have a comment?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Could I just say one more thing?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Just for understanding that, you
know, if you are going to put this additional structure or this addition
onto the home, I think there should be some sort of ratio out so far the
exotics need to be cleared, just because you want to have that buffer
for your own protection. But I don't want to see the whole lot
having to get, you know, redone again, because I think that's
senseless. Because you go out, and four, five years down the road,
everything's back again.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: It's the same exact condition it
was when you originally built your house. But if you're adding a
structure or you're adding something on the property, I think there
March 12, 2024
Page 213
should be some sort of ratio figured out how far out from that new
structure, that new footprint you should clear it, you know, but not
the whole perimeter around the edges of the lot and all that stuff. So
I'm just trying to just -- you know, you don't want to build it right up
to, you know, a fire hazard.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: If I may, the recommendation
is 30 feet from your structure on the perimeter of your home. That
should be --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Suffice.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That is what the fire
departments recommend, that you have that 30-foot buffer on the
perimeter of your home. That allows them to safely get in, park a
truck between your house and the fire and be able to fight the fire off
your home. So that 30-foot perimeter from the home is what the fire
department recommends.
And I'm not necess- -- I'm not proposing that today unless
we -- unless we can devise some sort of an incentive program to
incentivize people to actually partake in that.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So you assemble a $2,000
shed, and you'd have to go 30 feet? I mean, that's one of the
examples, you know -- okay, yeah.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: If you don't want it to burn.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I'm going to make the motion here to just
have this say, "Exotic removals are required on new construction for
the county cleared area," and other than that, we're good to go.
Countywide.
MR. BOSI: It's countywide.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Industrial, residential and --
MR. BOSI: The clear area for new construction.
CHAIRMAN HALL: For new construction only, if you need a
half acre, you clear your half acre.
March 12, 2024
Page 214
MR. BOSI: So if that addition was going on, that addition
would not be subject to -- only -- only your -- the principal structure.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Only on new construction on brand-new
structures.
MS. COOK: So just for a point of clarification, we have
another section of our code, 3.05.07, that deals specifically with
preserves and conservation easements that if we do countywide, this
may conflict with that if we're not going to require exotic removal in
Conservation Collier easements and preserves, which would also
conflict with the state.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We do want to do that.
MS. COOK: So I just want to be sure that --
CHAIRMAN HALL: I'm just talking about for homeowners
who are building stuff.
MS. COOK: Got it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're talking about new
construction. We're not talking about another section of the --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Correct.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Excuse me, sir. I can hit my
light. I jumped in front of Commissioner LoCastro, so...
CHAIRMAN HALL: He's full of grace this afternoon.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Go ahead, please.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No. I was just going to
say -- and not in the interest of time, but in the interest of getting this
right, I think you've heard all of our concerns here.
I'd make the motion that you guys go back to the drawing board,
that this does not meet our requirement, because the other thing here
is, we're brainstorming a lot of stuff up here, and I was just about to
say that I bet this conflicts with something, and then you said it does.
So I think this is the time to take a pause and go, thanks for
doing a dive, but it's not a deep enough dive. Keep us out of trouble.
March 12, 2024
Page 215
We don't want to put something in writing that then, you know,
conflicts with something else.
And we want to make sure also, too, that all the -- all the right
examples are covered. You know, the new construction sounds
great, but then, you know, it might leave a loophole that, okay, so
then if somebody wants to add a mother-in-law bedroom, then they
don't have to do anything. But then, Commissioner McDaniel says,
yeah, but then there could be a fire hazard, and, you know -- and so
it's like I don't want to sit here and dissect this thing in this meeting.
It's already not what I want.
And I just think that this is -- you've gotten enough input from
us to go back and bring us something that you can explain better that
meets our -- the criteria we originally had said, or you tell us why it's
impossible and give us something that at least is as aggressive as
possible to meet, you know, what our intention is, and it's something
that's also enforceable. We could say -- we could pat ourselves on
the back here and pass something, and then in the end it is a whole lot
of nothing.
So I don't think we're ready to talk -- you know, wordsmithing
this thing on the fly isn't something I'm ever hugely supportive of
unless it's something, you know, a happy to glad or something really
small. But I don't think this is close to what we would like, and
there's also other moving parts that you just brought up with other
ordinances out there that I think make this whole thing a little bit
sloppy.
So my recommendation would be, come back at the next
meeting. And it also gives you a chance to talk to us all one-on-one
between now and then, too, to make sure that we're all paddling in the
same direction. I don't think we are right now.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm okay with that.
March 12, 2024
Page 216
CHAIRMAN HALL: Me, too.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Let's continue it.
CHAIRMAN HALL: You get the point. You know what we
want.
MS. COOK: We got it.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Do we have to make a
motion to continue it?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yep. I make a motion we
continue it to --
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chair, I'm sorry. I don't believe this
gentleman's here, but I don't know. Steve Matteau.
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Just had to do that for the record. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Make a motion to continue
and bring it back at your earliest convenience. I don't even know if
we have to set a date, because we've got kind of a complicated
agenda coming up over the next couple, but, you know, this is one
that -- sooner than later, but we'll let you figure out the date. So
that's my motion. Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. Motion and second to
postpone it. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
(No response.)
March 12, 2024
Page 217
MS. COOK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Can we bring it back on the consent?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: If we get it right.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'd suggest that sometime in
2028 will be a good time to bring it back.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: With the what?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Sometime in 2028 would be
a good time to bring it back.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Could I just say one thing,
though? Commissioner Kowal really did bring up a really important
point, that we sat here and we dissected this thing for sheds and
mother-in-law homes, but we are paying through the nose on
property in Conservation Collier. So maybe that's a separate thing,
and maybe I'll just let it sit there, but that resonated with me, and I
think it's very -- it's a very astute observation that you made.
And, you know, we want to make sure that we're consistent. So
here we are, you know, helping the taxpayer with their shed and their
mother-in-law home, but then, you know, it's a much bigger number
on lots that aren't really infringing on anything that we bought under
Conservation Collier. So, you know, maybe that's for another day,
another time, but not 2028, so...
CHAIRMAN HALL: Brazilian peppers puts a new perspective
on "in perpetuity."
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, absolutely.
So maybe -- Commissioner Kowal, maybe that's something that,
you know, you champion or talk with the County Manager, but I
think bringing that back and seeing what we could really do to
save -- and anything we save from Conservation Collier allows us to
buy more properties, which is -- you know, when I made the motion
to say, let's negotiate with some of these property owners, and then
March 12, 2024
Page 218
what, the next 10 properties, most of them we bought under the
appraised value saving money. This now -- now we're talking really
significant dollars if we made some sort of aggressive change.
And, you know, lastly, to Commissioner McDaniel's point, drive
down any part of I-75 or anywhere in the county, right, they're
everywhere, you know, so --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: U.S. 41.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- anyway, I'll just end with
that, but that was a -- I hadn't really made that connection until he
mentioned it, and then I started, you know, adding up the dollar
figures, and that's a significant amount.
So maybe we can combine the two, and when it comes back to
us, it talks about both. Just a thought.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: We ain't got kudzu, right?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: What's that, sir?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Kudzu.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, yeah, kudzu. Yeah.
Kudzu, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALL: We have air potato.
Item #11G
AWARD CONSTRUCTION INVITATION TO BID (“ITB”)
NO. 23-8182, THE “CAXAMBAS PARK AND BOAT
REHABILITATION PROJECT” TO KELLY BROTHERS, INC., IN
THE AMOUNT OF $2,735,926.67, AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT, AND
APPROVE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT.
(PROJECT NO. 50280). (DISTRICT 1) - MOTION TO APPROVE
BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY
March 12, 2024
Page 219
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item
16F7, now Item 11G. I hesitate to call this a good-news item. We'll
see what happens.
Recommendation to award construction Invitation to Bid
No. 23-8182, the Caxambas Park and Boat Rehabilitation Project, to
Kelly Brothers, Inc., in the amount of $2,735,926.67; authorize the
Chairman to sign the attached agreement; and approve the necessary
budget amendments.
This is being moved to the regular agenda by the separate
requests of Commissioner LoCastro and Commissioner Kowal. And
Mr. Tony Barone, from Facilities Management, he'll tell you his title,
is here to present.
MR. BARONE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Tony Barone, principal project manager, Facilities
Management Division.
I am very excited to bring to you today our recommendation to
award the construction contract for Invitation to Bid 23-8182 that is
for our Caxambas marina seawall and dock replacement. It is the
large-scale replacement of the seawall and docks, much of which
were damaged by Hurricane Ian. This contract moves us forward
into the construction phase of that project.
I also brought for you today two other projects just to quickly
highlight those projects and show you some other things we have
going on on the site both in parallel with this project and as a
follow-on, if you'll indulge me.
So first we have our seawall replacement project. That is the
full replacement of the entirety of the seawall and boat ramp at that
facility. It also includes a full replacement of all the docks, the
floating docks, the fixed docks, and the resetting of the Marco Police
March 12, 2024
Page 220
Department boatlift as well.
In parallel with that project, we are replacing the entire fuel
system down there. The fuel system is running as a separate project.
It was a bit of a separate inspection process and determination that
that system was actually out of commission. We found some fuel
that had leaked out of that. We had to get into cleaning that up and
working with DEP on that, and we have a team following up on that
to make sure that's fully cleaned up.
But now we have the opportunity to design and construct an
entirely new fuel system down there and dispensing system that will
be away from the water. It will be above ground. It will be more
resilient and protected from future storms as well.
Those two projects, both, we are seeking the maximum
reimbursement we can get through our insurance policy and
coordinating with FEMA to effect reimbursement there as well. A
lot of that depends on the total costs and how things shake out with
the validation process with FEMA, but everything we're doing, we're
doing in a way that effects maximum reimbursement where we can
get it.
As a follow-on project, we do have the Sheriff's Office boatlift.
We've been working with the Sheriff's Office and the Parks folks to
broker a deal to get them down there and provide a boatlift at that
location as well so they can provide their service there at Caxambas
Pass.
I also have here a coordinated schedule that shows the seawall
dock replacement project, which would start in the next few weeks
getting the contractor mobilized out there, provided you approve this
contract.
It additionally shows the Hurricane Ian schedule and, you know,
all the work related to Hurricane Ian in terms of us getting hit with
that storm at this location, getting out there, cleaning up, doing
March 12, 2024
Page 221
damage assessments, doing the emergency seawall stabilization that
we had to do out there, effecting the repairs out there at that site to
get it open. Even in the temporary way that it is open right now for
residents to put small craft in, we did our due diligence out there to
do our best to get it open in as safe a way possible.
But now it's time -- this project will shut it down for
approximately seven or eight months to get it done, to get it reopened
for the public and to have it fully restored.
The fuel system replacement project, given it is a parallel project
and depends a little bit on City of Marco permitting, we're trying to
catch that one up to the seawall and dock replacement project and get
that going. That way that fuel system is opening and for the public's
use as soon as possible, either aligned with or just after the
completion of the overall park.
And with that, if you have any questions on this project or --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: What I didn't hear you
mention was the marine store. Is that going to be addressed at all?
That marine store was totally destroyed. So is that part of this
project?
MR. BARONE: Yes, sir. The interior -- that's part of our
overall hurricane --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Restrooms as well? That's
all part of it?
MR. BARONE: Restrooms, the marine store, the --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So this is completely
inclusive? There's nothing that's -- I mean, I heard all the big things,
but I know there was a bunch of little things. Is there anything that's
not inclusive?
MR. BARONE: Those smaller-scope items happen to not be in
this marine contract. This is a specialty marine contract that's really
March 12, 2024
Page 222
targeted at those docks and the seawall.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Are we working a separate
contract for those other things?
MR. BARONE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And, you know, I would just
say, it goes without saying, anything we can do in tandem, you know.
I mean, because if we're going to close it for seven months, it would
be great to have two or three contractors out there all doing their
thing rather than, yeah, great, the docks are open and the fuel's open,
but, you know, you can't go to the bathroom and you can't buy ice,
and we can't buy bait and, you know, we don't want to have that
happen. And I know that sounds obvious, but we've done some
things in this county before that weren't obvious, you know. We
didn't measure twice and cut once. You know, we cut and then we
stopped and we cut.
This has already been, you know, closed for longer than any of
us wanted. But what the average citizen didn't realize was the level
of destruction of Caxambas. I deal with this -- every single day I get
e-mails on Caxambas, and I try to explain to folks, it's not us driving
to Lowe's and getting a little bit of plywood and a little bit of spackle.
You know, if you think everything's been fixed -- I've said this
before in my newsletter, if you think everything's been fixed in
Collier County except for Caxambas, let me know how the sunset
looked from the Naples Pier last night. You know, that was a total
destruction, and the reason they haven't moved forward at light speed
is it's a little bit more complicated than just calling Allstate and
having your roof repaired.
This one has dragged out, you know, because of some starts and
stops that probably could have been prevented. And I don't want to
go backwards, but I want to make sure if we're at -- we're at the point
now where we've done all of our due diligence, that some of those
March 12, 2024
Page 223
smaller things that actually would allow us to cut a ribbon and reopen
the marina actually would include everything, and it wouldn't be
another sort of half/partial open, and then it has to be closed again for
the restrooms.
So I think all of us would like to continue to hear updates on the
other contracts that are -- also be -- that are also being worked
simultaneously to marry up with this one. So like you said, this one
isn't fully inclusive. You've got some other ones behind this. But I
hope the timing is all being worked in unison; is that a true
statement?
MR. BARONE: That is a true statement.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay.
MR. BARONE: Our intention is, at the completion of this
project, the ship shore, any of the other miscellaneous damages
around there at that site would be completely restored.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: What do you see as the total
investment? So this is two-point-something. You know, when you
add in all the other things, do you have a guesstimate as to what the
total investment would be in restoring Caxambas back to -- it will
actually -- it won't restore it. It will make it better than it was,
because it was in disrepair in some places. Those seawalls were
about to -- had serious damage even before Ian.
But do you have a round figure as to what our total investment
would be?
MR. BARONE: Top end of the range on the fuel system was
approximately three-quarters of a million. So if you add that to this,
additionally, the ship store could range anywhere from 100- to
150,000 to restore that. There's some various things that Parks has
had to replace out there as well. I mean, we could compile all that.
We're certainly at -- part of our FEMA reimbursements process,
we've got a system where we're compiling all those costs, all those
March 12, 2024
Page 224
out-of-pocket costs so we can turn them in to insurance and to
FEMA. And so we could pull that information.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Let's just say it was -- it was
shy of four million, we'll just say. I'll just sort of throw a number out
there. You know, we know it's not 10-, and we know it's not 3-. It's
a little more, 3 and change or a little less than 4-. Do we have an
idea of what FEMA -- the FEMA reimbursement could be in a
perfect world? Do we get all of that back? Seventy-five percent of
it back?
MR. BARONE: The FEMA public assistance grant program
typically provides a 70 or 80 percent -- sometimes that amount is
changed as we go through that process -- reimbursement after our
insurance reimburses. And so we are responsible for our deductible,
then we seek money from our insurance company, depending on
what they fund us, then we get a percentage back from FEMA -- a
percentage approved from FEMA of our remaining out-of-pocket
costs.
So it's approximately 80 percent of our out-of-pocket costs that
we'll be seeking. But how much of that we could get really depends
on the process.
And we continue to move forward with design, engineering, and
construction as that FEMA process and FEMA coordination is going
on. So we don't wait -- we would still be waiting, if we were waiting
on FEMA, to fully validate this project.
We are just doing everything in a way that's compliant with
federal procurement guidelines and consistent with the rules and the
guidelines associated with that FEMA public assistance.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I mean, I really
wanted citizens to hear that. You know, the county and Parks and
Rec haven't been sitting on their hands. I mean, like I said, there's a
couple things that we did that moves a little slower than I thought
March 12, 2024
Page 225
they should have, and I think we would all agree with that. But here
we are now. And it -- because it's more complicated than just, you
know, repairing the roof on your house after a hurricane.
As you said, FEMA, insurance, finding the money, making the
assessment. And there's, you know, a dozen different things down
there that got -- that got damaged. It wasn't just, you know, seawall
and docks.
And I've gotten a lot of feedback from citizens that all have
really quick, easy ideas. You know, put three floating docks out
there and get that place reopened, and, you know, it's not as easy as
that, and nor would that be an approved solution. You know, we
want to do this right.
So -- okay. I just -- I knew those -- I wanted to just get that on
the record as, you know, somebody that might be listening or
somebody that goes back through the minutes understands that we
have the big nuggets covered and it's just more complicated than a lot
of people think.
It was the same thing with the Tax Collector's Office. You
know, I heard for six months we were all sitting on our hands doing
nothing, and then, you know, our tax collector, Rob Stoneburner,
then released an artist's rendering, he rented space on Marco, and
everything was announced, and then everybody was flabbergasted
who was all -- who were all screaming that we were doing nothing.
And so maybe sometimes as you drive by Caxambas from, you
know, 500 feet away, it looks like there's been no activity out there,
but I know you-all have been working really hard trying to not only
assess the damages, but also there's not as many contractors out there
that were screaming for the work, you know. They were all up in
Fort Myers making money hand over fist. They were over at the
Ritz-Carlton making money hand over fist.
So even though some citizens said, "I have a few friends that
March 12, 2024
Page 226
would take the contract in a heartbeat," they have to be approved
contractors in all the things that you're doing.
So thank you for your due diligence. And, you know, this is
one that I know we all have been working closely, even if the average
citizen doesn't think so.
MR. BARONE: Thank you, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want to make a
motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'd like to make a motion for
approval.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. Motion to approve. All in
favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
(No response.)
MR. BARONE: Thank you very much. We'll go to get it
done.
Item #11E
APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY, TERRORISM,
WATERCRAFT HULL AND BOILER & MACHINERY
INSURANCE EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 2024, IN THE ESTIMATED
AMOUNT OF $11,615,027. (MICHAEL K. QUIGLEY, DIVISION
DIRECTOR, RISK MANAGEMENT) (ALL DISTRICTS)
MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL;
March 12, 2024
Page 227
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, working backwards, Item
11E is a recommendation to approve the purchase of property,
terrorism, watercraft hull, and boiler and machinery insurance
effective April 1st, 2024, in the estimated amount of $11,615,027.
Mr. Michael Quigley, your division director for Risk Management, is
here to answer questions or present, at your pleasure.
MR. QUIGLEY: Could we get the mouse to work here?
Michael Quigley, risk manager.
I'm thankful I get to come before you today. Our original
agenda item for the property renewal we had best guessed, if you
would, not to exceed about $11.6 million. Since that time, we've
recently been able to come to an agreement and get a proposal
through Brown & Brown with a renewal of 10 million -- just a little
over $10 million with a savings of about $1.5 million.
With what we're finding, there's no changes in coverage, no
changes in deductibles or anything. So the only increase would be
the cost in the values of our buildings and our pump stations.
So, really, it's almost a flat renewal, if you would. What I'd like
to do is both myself and Keith Solkol (phonetic) from Brown &
Brown, we're here to answer any questions. I put up a slide to assist
with that. Any questions?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Are there any questions or
comments from the Commission?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Any registered speakers?
MR. MILLER: No.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Then we need a motion to
approve.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So moved.
March 12, 2024
Page 228
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So moved -- second.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We have a motion -- we
have a motion and a second to approve. All in favor, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: (Absent for the vote.)
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That passes unanimously.
MS. PATTERSON: Thank you, Commissioners.
First, let me just check with the court reporter. We have one
more item to go plus communications.
Do you want to take a break, or we ready to go?
THE COURT REPORTER: (Indicating.)
Item #11D
RESOLUTION 2024-42: ADOPT THE FY 2025 BUDGET
POLICY, AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A
DEADLINE OF MAY 1, 2024, FOR BUDGET SUBMITTALS BY
THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS, THE SHERIFF’S OFFICE,
AND THE CLERK. (CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON, DIRECTOR OF
CORPORATE FINANCIAL AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES)
(ALL DISTRICTS) - MOTION TO APPROVE BY
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO – ADOPTED
MS. PATTERSON: Okay. All right. Item 11D, our favorite
March 12, 2024
Page 229
topic of the day, recommendation to adopt the FY'25 budget policy
and adopt a resolution establishing a deadline of May 1st, 2024, for
budget submittals by the Supervisor of Elections, the Sheriff's Office,
and the Clerk of the Courts.
Mr. Chris Johnson is here to start the presentation. He is -- I'm
sorry. He's your director of Corporate Finance and Management
Services. Mr. Johnson.
MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, Amy.
Good afternoon, Mr. Vice Chairman and Commissioners.
As Amy stated, I'm Chris Johnson, your director of Corporate
Finance and Management Services, and I'm here to present the
highlights of the FY'25 budget policy.
What we're going to be doing today is I'll go over the requested
action today. I'll be going through the FY'25 budget schedule again,
and we'll discuss, again, the priority-based budgeting approach and
kind of where we're at at the moment with ResourceX. We'll do a
brief FY'24 budget overview, we'll go through the FY'25 budget
policy highlights and, finally, provide you with a recommendation for
approval today.
All right. So what are we doing today? Today we are seeking
the Board's approval to adopt the FY'25. This budget policy will
serve as our foundation for developing our priority-based budget
utilizing the ResourceX tool.
Additionally, we aim to have the Board set dates for the June
workshops and the September public hearings.
Finally, we request that the Board approves a resolution that sets
the deadline of May 1st for budget submissions for the Supervisor of
Elections, the Sheriff's Office, and the Clerk of Courts.
Briefly, I know you guys are familiar with this; this is our
FY'24/'25 budget schedule. As you can see, we had our strategic
plan AUIR budget workshop on February 6th, and now we are here
March 12, 2024
Page 230
to adopt the FY'25 budget policy.
Some of the dates on here that we'll be looking at today, the
tentative dates for the priority-based budgeting workshop in June is
June 20th and June 21st, that's a Thursday and a Friday. When we
get to September for public hearings, the tentative date is -- the
tentative date for the first public hearing is September 5th, and the
second public hearing is September 19th. Those dates do not
overlap the school board, as they have priority with their budget
hearing, which I believe is on September 10th this year.
Moving on, let me just talk a bit about the priority-based
budgeting. For FY'25, the county will be employing a priority-based
budgeting approach allocating resources based on the strategic
importance and financial impact of our individual programs. This
method emphasizes the alignment of financial allocations with the
organizational goals and priorities that we outlined in our FY -- I'm
sorry, FY'24 strategic plan.
Identifying and ranking priorities will ensure that limited
resources are directed towards initiatives that deliver the greatest
value for our community.
Looking at this slide here, you'll see this is the ResourceX
approach to priority-based budgeting. It kind of starts from the
bottom and goes up.
We start with our program inventory, identifying our programs
that we offer throughout the county. We are currently working on
this with ResourceX on updates since the 6th. We had a countywide
workshop, if you will, with all of the department heads and division
directors to introduce the product, and ResourceX came in to kind of
go over what the expectations are moving forward as we -- as we
utilize this product to streamline our priority-based budget.
Currently, staff are working on identifying those programs and
working on that program inventory.
March 12, 2024
Page 231
With the approval of the budget policy today, we will start kind
of Step 2 here, which is -- which is putting together the line-item
data. So that's kind of what we do -- typically we've done in years
past. We've put together budgets based on cost centers, line items.
This is our postage, this is our contractual services, et cetera.
What we'll be doing with that line-item data is identifying which
programs it belongs to, and then utilizing Step 3 here, we'll be
programming basic attributes and kind of impacts on what those
programs have with the community, our strategic plan, and, you
know, the cost associated with those programs. We will be bringing
those programs -- prioritized programs back to you in June with the
County Manager's recommended budget.
Any questions on that process and kind of where we're at?
We've also been working with the constitutional officers to set up
meetings to go over this process with them as well and see if they
want to follow along with this process.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I don't see any questions.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have one, and it has to do
with ResourceX. Are they going to reach out to us individually, or
are we going to wait till we have a pep rally and we're all in here
together?
MR. JOHNSON: I believe it will be while we're in here
together. If the Board would like them to reach out individually, I
can work with Chris and Eric and see if that's something I'm sure
they'll be willing to do.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'd like to. I don't know
about my colleagues, but I'd like to have a shot at them alone before
we all come together, and maybe they can assimilate some
similarities from those individual conversations so they can be a little
more succinct when we do have the workshop.
MR. JOHNSON: And program our attributes and everything as
March 12, 2024
Page 232
well.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Sir?
MR. JOHNSON: If that's the Board's direction, I can try to
facilitate that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'd like it, myself.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Talking with ResourceX?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Because other than
engaging them and hearing their presentation, I haven't heard from
them. So I'd like to have a talk with them.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I've been in contact with them a little bit
but, yes, I encourage everyone to --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALL: -- talk to them.
MR. JOHNSON: All right. We'll go ahead and do that, then.
All right. Moving on to a brief overview of the FY'24 budget.
Again, I went through most of this at the workshop; just wanted to go
through it one more time really quickly.
The net adopted budget for FY'24 was $1.995 billion. As you
can see here, this breaks it down by kind of the uses of the funds.
Where does the money go? Public safety; physical environment,
which includes our water/sewer districts, solid waste, stormwater,
beach renourishment, et cetera. General governmental services, over
there at 10 percent. Culture and recreation, debt service, and, of
course, our reserves.
Moving on to the General Fund, General Fund total budget for
FY'24 was about $687 million. As you can see there, 56.1 percent of
General Fund expenses are for health, safety, and welfare; 30 percent
for general governmental; 12.6 percent for mandates; and 1.3 percent
for debt service.
Following on with the Unincorporated Area General Fund,
$83.7 million; general governmental services, approximately
March 12, 2024
Page 233
70 percent; health, safety, welfare, 17.5 percent; and mandates,
12.3 percent.
This slide here depicts our sources of revenue. As you can see,
the ad valorem, in other words, your millage rates and your tax base,
is the majority at 47 percent.
And here's the ad valorem breakdown, the 554.7 million last
year. Of that, 80 percent of the ad valorem went to the General
Fund.
Any questions on any of those slides at all?
(No response.)
MR. JOHNSON: All right. I'll move on to the FY'25 budget
policy highlights, then. Today we're going to talk about the
operating control lines; mission critical program enhancements; new
language for our expanded requests. I guess this is the second year
of that; millage rate policy; Conservation Collier; employee
compensation; health insurance; capital allocations; and, finally,
reserves.
Starting with the General Fund and Unincorporated Area
General Fund operating control lines, the recommended policy here,
as we discussed in beginning of February as well, is to establish a
control line of 3.5 percent for operational increases at the department
level. What this means is that each department for FY'25 which rely
on the General Fund and/or Unincorporated General Fund for
funding will be restricted to a 3.5 percent increase in their current
programs and services. And this is obviously going to be subject to
the prioritization through ResourceX. This gives us a baseline
moving forward for departments to kind of program through.
Any questions or concerns on that?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: No. Go ahead.
MR. JOHNSON: All right. Mission critical program
March 12, 2024
Page 234
enhancements or expanded requests, these expanded requests will be
limited to Board-approved capital facilities openings -- I'm
sorry -- capital -- yeah, capital facilities openings, priority-based
service-level adjustments, and/or historically strained mission critical
imperatives. What happens with this is the departments will provide
us with these requests. They'll be vetted through the County
Manager's Office. We will put these into ResourceX as well as
prioritized enhancements. These enhancements are above and
beyond the 3.5 percent. That's kind of how we move them out as,
hey, these are additional program enhancements, but they will all be
prioritized through the software as well.
Any questions on that at all?
(No response.)
MR. JOHNSON: All right. Millage rate policy. For the
General Fund and Unincorporated General Fund, we are going to be
utilizing the priority-based budgeting approach. The recommended
millage rates will be calculated utilizing preliminary taxable value,
which we get in June, and the prioritized budget requirements within
the established control lines that we're establishing today.
Program adjustments or funding realignment may result in
changes to these millage rates as we go to June and discuss them.
It doesn't look like there's any questions on that.
MSTU millage, for FY'25 it's suggested that MSTUs be limited
to a millage rate sufficient to cover their current-budget-year
operations and any planned capital allocations. A lot of times in the
MSTUs we will build up to a project, so those allocations we want to
make sure we're covering as well. Again, these adjustments will be
subject to prioritization.
Conservation Collier. The planned allocations as -- we've
talked about this a lot today. The planned allocations will be
consistent with the approved Conservation Collier ordinance, which
March 12, 2024
Page 235
will be coming back to you shortly, and any direction we get from
that as well.
Any questions on that at all?
(No response.)
MR. JOHNSON: No? No?
All right. Employee compensation. The recommended budget
policy for employee compensation is to appropriate the equivalent of
3 percent for base wages, 1.5 percent for a merit-based incentive
program, and a half of percent for pay plan maintenance to strengthen
certain classifications and pay grades that are currently below market.
The total cost of this for the County Manager's agency is about
seven and a half million dollars. Keep in mind that about 10 percent
of our employees, this would not affect them because they're under
collective bargaining agreements.
Questions on that at all?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: Health insurance, for 2025 we're
recommending a 7 percent rate increase to the existing rate structure.
This increase would cost the County Manager's agency
approximately $2 million. As far as it goes for the individual
employees, the bi-monthly health cost would increase between $4
and $7 for those with single coverage, and $10 and $16 for those with
family coverage.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I do have a question there.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Did we do any exploration on
the raising of the percentage of our participation with regard to that
offset in comparison to the straight-across 3 percent?
MR. JOHNSON: We did. And in the private sector, that
works out because you have -- you have a tax burden to the federal
government and to the state government, depending on where you're
March 12, 2024
Page 236
at. In this case, if you were to increase the healthcare cost on our
end, you would then decrease the healthcare cost on the employee's
end, therefore creating Social Security and Medicare tax that they
would have to pay that we would have to match. So it balances itself
out.
And in addition, with those folks that are under those collective
bargaining agreements, they wouldn't be subject to the raise that we
were talking about, but they would be subject to the healthcare
increases.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. And I'm not talking
about unions or collective bargaining agreements. I'm talking
about -- because I think -- I don't want to misquote, but I recall that
there are at least two constitutionals that pay a higher percentage of
their employees' health benefits.
MR. JOHNSON: You are correct. I believe the Tax
Collector --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Tax Collector and tax
assessor.
MR. JOHNSON: And it might be the Property Appraiser.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Tax assessor. Yeah,
Property Appraiser's Office, and they're in the -- they're in the
90 percentile.
Can -- sometime between now and when we get back together
again, I'd like to hear their rationale as to -- as to how that benefits
their department. They're constitutional officers, but they come to us
with their funding requisites. So I'd like to hear their rationale.
I certainly don't want to -- I don't want to burden our employees
with an additional taxation that they may have to make up. It was
my impression that we paid those FICA, MICA, and those
withholdings.
MR. JOHNSON: We split it. It's split between the employee
March 12, 2024
Page 237
and the employer.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. JOHNSON: But we can do that. We have a meeting with
the Tax Collector here at the end of the month, so...
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. JOHNSON: Any other questions on that?
(No response.)
MR. JOHNSON: All right. Planned General Fund capital
allocations, as you can see here, this total is -- and then, again, this is
the planned total -- is $71.4 million. Of that, we're planning to
augment the long-term capital reserve by $5 million. The transfers
to stormwater, the road network and parks were increased by the
5 percent that we discussed during the budget workshop.
The countywide capacity, that's the number available in this
planning scenario to be utilized for our facilities -- Sheriff's facilities
and named projects, and then we have our debt allocations over on
the other side.
Any questions on that?
(No response.)
MR. JOHNSON: Planned Unincorporated Area Capital Fund
allocations, again, transfer to parks, road, and stormwater. The total
is about $24.1 million in the planning scenario.
Finally, we'll talk about reserves. General Fund, the floor,
8 percent of operating revenues or 44.9 million; the ceiling,
16 percent of operating revenues are 89.9 million. That's one to two
months, give or take. For FY'24, the budgeted reserve was
72.2 million. The planning scenario puts that reserve at about
$77 million.
For the Unincorporated Area General Fund, the target is
8.3 percent of operating expenses, approximately one month of
expenses, or 6.6 million. For FY'24, the budgeted reserve was 6.8
March 12, 2024
Page 238
million. The planning reserve is -- this year, for 2025, is
$6.6 million.
Other general governmental funds that receive transfer revenue
from the General Fund will have reserves sized to cover the first
month of operations or until we put the first transfer into the fund.
Any questions on general governmental reserves?
(No response.)
MR. JOHNSON: Enterprise reserves, the Collier County
Water/Sewer District user fee reserve established minimally between
5 percent and 15 percent of revenues with working capital resources
set between 45 to 90 days of coverage.
Solid Waste reserves are set between 45 and 90 days based on
the FY'24 operating expenses, and we're also going to continue to
reestablish -- the reestablishment of a solid waste restricted reserve
for disaster response. Basically, we want to size that around
10 percent of the budgeted charges.
And then targeted reserves within GMD building permit
fund -- and I see I haven't updated these fund numbers. That's 1013,
and the Planning Fund has changed to 1014, will be set at 12 months
and 24 months of the total budget appropriations respectively.
Any questions on that?
(No response.)
MR. JOHNSON: And this is just a chart to kind of show you
the history of that capital -- countywide capital reserve that started in
FY2020. As you can see, currently in '24, we're at 22.5 million.
The planned amount would bring us to 27.5 million in FY'25.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have a question there.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: How far along are we with
the data input in calculation as to what that number actually needs to
be? Ultimately, the -- it needs to be -- it needs to be a number
March 12, 2024
Page 239
attributable to the actual amount of repairs and maintenance and
ultimate replacement of our asset base.
MR. JOHNSON: We worked on it a little bit. We'll have
something for you by June.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Because I -- I
remember in a previous life that that number was significantly higher
than the 5 million contribution this year. So I would like to, at some
point -- and, again, I realize that this is a pretty big lift for how we've
been conducting business forever. But I would like to be able to
correlate that contribution to actual assets and the useful life of those
assets with regard to their -- interim repairs and ultimate
replacements and have that -- have that be -- have that be less of an
arbitrary number and more of a fixed number attributable to proper
maintenance and upkeep and ultimate replacement of our assets.
MR. JOHNSON: All right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. JOHNSON: Got it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, sir.
MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.
Any other questions on that capital reserve?
(No response.)
MR. JOHNSON: All right. And with that, the
recommendation today, to adopt the FY2025 budget policy, establish
June budget workshop dates of the 20th and the 21st, and September
public hearing dates, and adopt a resolution establishing a deadline of
May 1st, 2024, for budget submittals by the Supervisor of Elections,
the Sheriff's Office, and the Clerk.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want me to make a
motion? I'll make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. Motion to approve the budget
March 12, 2024
Page 240
policy, seconded. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All opposed?
(No response.)
MR. JOHNSON: Thank you very much, gentlemen.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I do want to make a comment regarding
that. I read through all those 52 pages.
MR. JOHNSON: Oh, good deal.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: How long did it take you?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Too long.
And by the time I was a third of the way through, I felt like I
was being sold. And there was a lot of focus on revenue deficit,
competition for revenue, requirements, and there wasn't a whole lot
being said about a posture of reducing expenses or being excited
about reducing expenses. And I would like to see that posture
change, especially as we get ResourceX in here, because that is
something -- you talk about mission critical. That is mission critical
to me.
And I didn't want that -- I didn't want you to go without that
being said, because I read through every single page. So thank you.
MR. JOHNSON: I appreciate the feedback. Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And as a public service
announcement, if you haven't read it yet, it's a deep dive. And I
highly recommend to anybody that's interested in our upcoming
conversations as to how and what we're going to be doing with regard
to the expenditure of our taxpayers' money, I highly recommend that
you read that document, as we all have.
March 12, 2024
Page 241
MR. JOHNSON: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thanks, Chris.
Item #15A
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA BY INDIVIDUALS NOT
ALREADY HEARD DURING PREVIOUS PUBLIC COMMENTS
IN THIS MEETING
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 15.
Item 15A is public comments on general topics not on the current or
future agenda by individuals not already heard during previous public
comments in this meeting.
MR. JOHNSON: We have one, Katie Tardif.
MS. TARDIF: I'm going to pass.
MR. MILLER: She is going to pass.
CHAIRMAN HALL: You might have agreed with Bill.
Item #15B
STAFF PROJECT UPDATES
MS. PATTERSON: Item 15B, we have no staff project updates
on this agenda.
Item #15C
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MS. PATTERSON: So that brings us to Item 15C, staff and
March 12, 2024
Page 242
commission general communications.
I have no -- nothing today.
County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: Nor do I.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Topics for us, closing out.
Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman. I'd just
like to announce that Collier County's population grew last night by
two.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Hey, congratulations.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Grandpa.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah. We had two new
grandsons last night, Kane and Steel. They were big boys, seven
plus, six plus.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Nice.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So they were cooked -- cooked
in that oven pretty well. But that's why I'm a little tired. I was up
pretty late last night, but -- and, no, I think we had a great meeting
today. I like the light agenda and us getting through it, so...
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, 5:06.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Just as a -- just as a
repeat, I mentioned it earlier when Bridget was up here, but we did
get approved for that 4,190,000 for our -- for our transit maintenance
facility. We did get approval for the million dollars in police
equipment. These are federal appropriations coming to us from
Mario Diaz-Balart. Everglades City, Carnestown, our Copeland
pump station rehab for 450,000, and then another one in Everglades
City for 1,125,000 for the city pump stations as well, and those are
really important. I'm going to supply that information to the County
Manager to get to you-all just so you're aware of it as you're going
March 12, 2024
Page 243
with your travels, if they haven't already got to you, so...
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir, thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And that's all I have, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Klatzkow, we were talking about it before we started here,
but just for the sake of my colleagues here, because they might have a
house of horrors in their district like I have in Goodland that's been
there for many years, we finally took some aggressive action, you
know, led by you and your team.
Give us the short version of where we are on the lien that we put
on this house that is basically one big, giant junkyard in a very visible
part of Goodlette that they've been complaining about for years, and,
you know, finally it sounds like we're turning the corner on it. Give
us an update, if you would.
MR. KLATZKOW: We filed a complaint for foreclosure. The
homeowner didn't appear, so we got a default judgment. They're just
walking away from their property. And we're -- next step, we have
to wait for scheduling with the Court, is to actually have a foreclosure
sale. It used to be on the courtroom steps. I don't know if they still
do it that way.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So the bottom line is the
county will own it, then the county will sell it.
MR. KLATZKOW: There will be a sale.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: All right. And whoever purchases that
property will get it, and our code lien will be satisfied out of the
proceeds.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. Thanks. Appreciate
all that hard work. We'll continue to follow that one closely.
And I know some people in Goodland who are interested who
March 12, 2024
Page 244
are following it closely because there are citizens there that are
interested in buying that corner lot and making sure that it gets
cleaned up and upgraded and, you know, it's turned around.
And then I just had two quick comments. It's -- if I was Chief
Sapp, I'd probably want to be at Disney World as well. But for those
of us that went to his retirement -- 46 years of service -- our County
Manager really represented us well. I was telling her she said some
great comments up at the front, very meaningful, and I know he
appreciated it.
The comments that touched me the most, just being a dad, and
we can all relate to it, is it was great that he got all these plaques, you
know, and all kind of loot, but if you were there, what you would
have really been emotionally hit by a little bit more was his daughter.
You know, he has an adult daughter who went up there and talked
about her dad, you know, not just the fire chief and not just the
leader, but not only was he a hero, but he was hardly ever home, but
they had a family that understood why.
And a lot of us have been in jobs where we're hardly ever home,
and sometimes family understands it, sometimes they don't. It was
really impressive to hear his daughter sort of talk about her dad, and
that really sort of got me.
And then, lastly, you know, I hope this is never really lost on us.
Sheriff Rambosk, you know, he's a constitutional officer. He can
kind of fly on autopilot and sort of -- I don't want to say do whatever
he wants, but, you know, he's always here and sits quietly in the back
to make sure that he's representing not only his department and his
men and women, but his mission.
And, you know, he doesn't have to do that. He could send
somebody or say "I can't make it" or, "if you've got a question for me,
send me an e-mail." And, you know, I'm just always really
impressed by that. You know, we don't get that across the board
March 12, 2024
Page 245
from everyone. And, you know, if he's out there listening -- and I
know he's not at Disney World, but I think I speak for all of us
when -- you know, he's always at the ready, and if he has to talk to us
for two minutes but sit here for two hours, that's probably not the best
use of his time, and I like how at times we sort of move him a little
bit more towards the front so we're not wasting his time. But I'm
always really impressed that he's a man who leads from the front.
And so today was no exception.
But having said that, you know, there again, Mr. Klatzkow,
thanks for all your work in Goodland, and looking forward to the
ribbon cutting of that pretty new house, whoever buys it, and it will
definitely look better than it does now.
MR. KLATZKOW: It may wind up with us. We'll see.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Possibly, possibly. But
that's all I have. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
The only thing I would add is we have our Clerk who sits with
us all the time also. I saw her smiling when Commissioner LoCastro
was mentioning the other constitutional officer. So thank you for
everything that you do as well.
And other than that, I have nothing to add other than everybody
have a nice evening and, staff, go home and get some sleep.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I have no further comments. Great
meeting today. Thanks.
We're adjourned.
*******
March 12, 2024
Page 246
****Commissioner McDaniel moved, seconded by Commissioner
LoCastro and carried that the following items under the consent and
summary agendas be approved and/or adopted****
Item #16A1
APPROVE FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN
HORTICULTURAL COMPLEX, PL20230015483.
Item #16A2
AUTHORIZED THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A
PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $123,880, WHICH
WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT
NUMBER PL20230002528 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH
IMPERIAL GOLF CLUB – GOLF COURSE
RENOVATION.
Item #16A3
AUTHORIZED THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A
PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $163,840, WHICH
WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT
NUMBER PL20210002249 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH
ESPLANADE BY THE ISLANDS AMENITY CAMPUS.
Item #16A4
AUTHORIZED THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A
PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $26,280, WHICH
March 12, 2024
Page 247
WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT
NUMBER PL20220001584 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH
WINCHESTER.
Item #16A5
APPROVED FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER
AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR PELICAN MARSH
GOLF CLUB – GOLF TEACHING FACILITY, PL20230018213.
Item #16A6
APPROVED FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER
AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES AND ACCEPT THE
CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF THE POTABLE WATER AND
SEWER FACILITIES AND APPURTENANT UTILITY
EASEMENTS FOR MAGNOLIA POND RESIDENCES PHASE 1,
PL20230014175.
Item #16A7
APPROVED FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER
AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES AND ACCEPT THE
CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF THE POTABLE WATER AND
SEWER FACILITIES AND APPURTENANT UTILITY
EASEMENT FOR YOUTH HAVEN INTAKE COTTAGE,
PL20230011349.
Item #16A8
APPROVED FINAL ACCEPTANCE AND ACCEPT THE
March 12, 2024
Page 248
CONVEYANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER
UTILITY FACILITIES FOR ESPLANADE BY THE ISLANDS –
PHASE 2C, PL20230008069.
Item #16A9
APPROVED FINAL ACCEPTANCE AND ACCEPT THE
CONVEYANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER
UTILITY FACILITIES FOR ESPLANADE BY THE ISLANDS
LUCERNA STREET, PL20230008065.
Item #16A10
APPROVED AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE
AN AMENDMENT TO AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DENSITY
BONUS AGREEMENT FOR THE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF
COLLIER COUNTY, INC., DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE TREE
FARM PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO MAKE AN
INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
Item #16A11
APPROVED FOR RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF ARTHREX
COMMERCE PARK - PHASE 2 (APPLICATION NUMBER
PL20230008595), APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, AND
APPROVAL OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY IN THE
AMOUNT OF $1,613,841.85.
Item #16A12
March 12, 2024
Page 249
APPROVED FOR RECORDING THE AMENDED FINAL PLAT
OF GROVES AT ORANGE BLOSSOM, PHASE 3A, APPROVAL
OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, AND APPROVAL OF THE
PERFORMANCE SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $72,483.95.
(PL20230011875)
Item #16A13
AUTHORIZED THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO
INITIATE FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO
SECTION 162.09, FLORIDA STATUTES, IN RELATION TO
$578,223.90 IN ACCRUING CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS FOR
ONGOING VIOLATIONS AT 523 EUSTIS AVE., IMMOKALEE,
FLORIDA 34142, ARISING FROM THE OFFICE OF THE
SPECIAL MAGISTRATE ENTITLED, BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, VS.
KATRIX, LLC.
Item #16A14 – Move to Item #11F (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16A15
APPROVED THE CONSERVATION COLLIER MCILVANE
MARSH PRESERVE FINAL MANAGEMENT PLAN UNDER
THE CONSERVATION COLLIER PROGRAM.
Item #16B1
APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIR TO SIGN
AMENDMENT 3 TO THE TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS
March 12, 2024
Page 250
GENERATING ECONOMIC RECOVERY (TIGER) IX -
IMMOKALEE COMPLETE STREETS GRANT AGREEMENT
WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION/FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
GRANT AWARD #693JJ32040007 UPDATING THE GRANT
MILESTONES AND EXTENDING THE PROJECT COMPLETION
DATE TO THE AGREEMENT.
Item #16B2
APPROVED CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, ADDING TWO
HUNDRED THIRTY-SEVEN (237) DAYS UNDER AGREEMENT
NO. 20-7811 WITH QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC., FOR
THE “DESIGN-BUILD OF THE IMMOKALEE AREA
IMPROVEMENTS – TIGER GRANT” PROJECT, AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED
CHANGE ORDER. (PROJECT NO. 33563)
Item #16B3
ESTABLISHED A POLICY AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIR TO
EXECUTE EASEMENT USE AGREEMENTS FOR CERTAIN
EXISTING MINOR ENCROACHMENTS DISCOVERED AS
PART OF THE 16TH ST NE BRIDGE PROJECT (60212).
Item #16B4
APPROVED THE SELECTION COMMITTEE’S RANKING AND
AUTHORIZE STAFF TO BEGIN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE TOP-RANKED FIRM, HARDESTY & HANOVER
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, LLC, CONCERNING REQUEST
March 12, 2024
Page 251
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (“RPS”) NO. 23-8196, “CEI
SERVICES FOR 16TH STREET NE BRIDGE,” SO THAT STAFF
CAN BRING A PROPOSED AGREEMENT BACK FOR THE
BOARD’S CONSIDERATION AT A FUTURE MEETING.
(PROJECT NO. 60212).
Item #16B5
APPROVED A FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 18-
7379, “FOREST LAKES MSTU LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE,”
WITH GROUND ZERO LANDSCAPING SERVICES, INC., TO
EXTEND THE AGREEMENT’S TERMINATION DATE FOR AN
ADDITIONAL 180-DAY PERIOD THROUGH AND INCLUDING
SEPTEMBER 18, 2024.
Item #16B6
APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN AN
AMENDMENT TO ITS LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT WITH MARBELLA LAKES OWNERS
ASSOCIATION, INC., FOR ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE AND
IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN MARBELLA LAKES
DRIVE, WHIPPOORWILL LANE, AND LIVINGSTON ROAD
PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF WAY.
Item #16B7 – Language Added (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
AUTHORIZED ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION BY STAFF THE
COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
OF A SMALL COUNTY OUTREACH PROGRAM FOR RURAL
AREAS OF OPPORTUNITIES APPLICATION WITH THE
March 12, 2024
Page 252
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO FUND
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PAVED SHOULDER TO IMPROVE
SAFETY ON A SEGMENT OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR 846E)
IN THE AMOUNT OF $999,855.21.
Item #16B8
AUTHORIZED A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE
REVENUE AND TRANSFER FUNDING FOR PROJECTS
WITHIN THE TRANSPORTATION SUPPORTED GAS TAX
FUND (3083) AND TRANSPORTATION & CDES CAPITAL
FUND (3081) IN THE AMOUNT OF $230,253.23. (PROJECTS
NOS. 60085, 60066, 60088, 69331, 69333, 69336, AND NO. 69340)
Item #16B9
RESOLUTION 2024-37: APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT TO
THE LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM (LAP) AGREEMENT WITH
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT)
TO INCREASE THE GRANT AWARD FROM $983,670 TO
$1,984,140.56 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF FIVE-FOOT BIKE
LANES ON GREEN BLVD; TO ADOPT THE ACCOMPANYING
RESOLUTION FORMALLY APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING
THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE SAME ON BEHALF OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; AND TO AUTHORIZE
THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS, FPN 438093-2-58-
01. (PROJECT NO. 33849. FUND 1841).
Item #16C1
March 12, 2024
Page 253
TERMINATED FOR CONVENIENCE CONSTRUCTION
AGREEMENT NO. 22-7953 WITH DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS, INC.,
PERTAINING TO THE “NCWRF OPERATIONS BUILDING
HVAC MAINTENANCE” PROJECT. (PROJECT NO. 50196.2)
Item #16C2
APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED CHANGE
ORDER NO. 3, PROVIDING FOR A TIME EXTENSION OF 30
DAYS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT NO. 23-8058,
WITH ACCURATE DRILLING SYSTEMS, INC., FOR THE
“GOLDEN GATE CITY TRANSMISSION WATER MAIN
IMPROVEMENTS – PHASE 1A – GOLF COURSE” PROJECT,
AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED
CHANGE ORDER. (PROJECT NO. 70253)
Item #16C3
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AS EX-OFFICIO
THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, AWARD INVITATION TO BID
(“ITB”) NO. 23-8187, “PUBLIC UTILITIES 33 LIFT STATION
PANELS REPLACEMENT,” TO POWERSERVE
TECHNOLOGIES, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,112,404.29,
APPROVE AN OWNER’S ALLOWANCE OF $155,000,
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED
AGREEMENT AND APPROVE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT. (PROJECT NO. 50280.6.4)
Item #16C4
March 12, 2024
Page 254
APPROVED CHANGE ORDER NO. 2, PROVIDING FOR A TIME
EXTENSION OF 4 DAYS UNDER CONSTRUCTION
AGREEMENT NO. 22-7981, WITH ONESOURCE
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY & BUILDERS, INC., FOR THE
“NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT
(NCRWTP) STORAGE BUILDING” PROJECT, AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED
CHANGE ORDER. (PROJECT NO. 70136)
Item #16C5
APPROVED CITYWORKS LICENSE AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT, AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AGREEMENT NO. 13-
6064 (#C156213), WITH AZTECA SYSTEMS, LLC, TO RENEW
THE AGREEMENT FOR ONE ADDITIONAL YEAR, APPROVE
AN EXPENDITURE IN THE AMOUNT OF $111,228.00 FOR THE
RENEWAL YEAR, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO
SIGN THE ATTACHED AMENDMENT.
Item #16D1
APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN AN
IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$281,589.12 WITH CASA AMIGO EHT, LLC, FOR TWENTY-
FOUR (24) MULTI-FAMILY AFFORDABLE HOUSING RENTAL
HOUSING UNITS.
Item #16D2
APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN
ELEVEN (11) MORTGAGE SATISFACTIONS FOR THE STATE
March 12, 2024
Page 255
HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP LOAN PROGRAM IN
THE AMOUNT OF $122,941.49 AND AUTHORIZE THE
ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENT. (SHIP GRANT FUND
1053)
Item #16D3
APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN
ONE (1) RELEASE OF LIEN FOR AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT FOR A UNIT THAT IS NO
LONGER SUBJECT TO THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT.
Item #16D4
APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A
LANDLORD PAYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY AND CLARK COURT BUNGALOWS LLC,
ALLOWING THE COMMUNITY AND HUMAN SERVICES
DIVISION (CHS) TO ADMINISTER THE RAPID RE-HOUSING
AND HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION PROGRAM THROUGH
THE EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS AND RAPID UNSHELTERED
SURVIVOR HOUSING GRANT PROGRAMS.
Item #16D5
APPROVED AN EXTENSION OF LOAN AGREEMENT WITH
THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA MUSEUM OF
ARCHAEOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY ALLOWING THE
COLLIER COUNTY MUSEUMS AND THE MARCO ISLAND
HISTORICAL SOCIETY TO CONTINUE TO EXHIBIT
FOURTEEN (14) ARTIFACTS FROM THE 1896 PEPPER-
March 12, 2024
Page 256
HEARST ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXPEDITION TO DISPLAY AT
THE MARCO ISLAND HISTORICAL MUSEUM.
Item #16D6
APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN
THREE (3) RELEASES OF LIEN FOR FULL PAYMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $57,427.98 PURSUANT TO THE AGREEMENT
FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT
FEES FOR OWNER OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DWELLINGS.
Item #16D7
ACCEPTED A DONATION OF GOODS FROM THE BENNY
FUND, AN OHIO NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, FOR THE
PURPOSE OF PROVIDING FENCED ASTROTURF PLAY
YARDS AT THE DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES SHELTER OF
AN APPROXIMATE VALUE OF $58,155.
Item #16E1
APPROVED THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO.
18-7287, “ENTERPRISE ASSET MANAGEMENT CONSULTING
SERVICES,” WITH EMA, INC., GRAY MATTER SYSTEMS, LLC,
AND STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC., EXTENDING
THOSE AGREEMENTS FOR ONE YEAR UNDER THE SAME
PRICING, TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT
Item #16E2
March 12, 2024
Page 257
APPROVED AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT ASSIGNING ALL
RIGHTS, DUTIES, BENEFITS, AND OBLIGATIONS TO RVI
PLANNING + LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, INC.,
CONCERNING AGREEMENT NO. 18-7432-LA,
“PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LIBRARY - LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURE CATEGORY.”
Item #16E3
APPROVED AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT ASSIGNING ALL
RIGHTS, DUTIES, BENEFITS, AND OBLIGATIONS TO GRACE
HERBERT CURTIS ARCHITECTS, LLC, CONCERNING
AGREEMENT NO. 18-7432-AR “PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
LIBRARY ARCHITECTURAL STUDY, PLANNING AND
DESIGN CATEGORY”.
Item #16E4
APPROVED AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT ASSIGNING ALL
RIGHTS, DUTIES, BENEFITS, AND OBLIGATIONS TO
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC., CONCERNING
AGREEMENT NO. 22-7973 “INDEPENDENT DESIGN PEER
REVIEW SERVICES FOR TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
PROJECTS”.
Item #16E5
AUTHORIZED EXPENDITURES FOR A SINGLE SOURCE
PROVIDER FOR BROADBAND INTERNET SERVICES WITH
ORLANDO TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC., D/B/A SUMMIT
BROADBAND, WITH PROJECTED ANNUAL COSTS OF NOT
March 12, 2024
Page 258
TO EXCEED $100,000 PER FISCAL YEAR FOR A FIVE-YEAR
PERIOD, AND TO RATIFY THE APPROVAL OF ATTACHED
MASTER SERVICE AGREEMENT NO. 22-021-NS.
Item #16F1
APPROVED A REIMBURSEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$281,589.12 TO CASA AMIGOS EHT, LLC, FOR IMPACT FEES
PAID ON BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER PRBD20201252841
AND PROPOSED TO BE DEFERRED THROUGH AN IMPACT
FEE DEFERRAL AGREEMENT FOR A MULTI-FAMILY
AFFORDABLE HOUSING RENTAL PROJECT.
Item #16F2
AWARDED INVITATION TO BID (“ITB”) NO. 23-8107S,
“PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF PLANT MATERIAL FOR
PELICAN BAY SERVICES - SUPPLEMENTAL,” TO HANNULA
LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION, INC., AND SITEONE
LANDSCAPE SUPPLY, LLC, AS PRIMARY AND SECONDARY
VENDORS.
Item #16F3
APPROVED A QUOTATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $440,220
AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ISSUE A PURCHASE ORDER FOR
A REQUEST FOR QUOTATION, UNDER MULTI-CONTRACTOR
AWARD AGREEMENT NO. 19-7525, TO CAPITAL
CONTRACTORS, LLC, FOR REPAIRS TO FIVE HISTORIC
STRUCTURES AT THE COLLIER MUSEUM AT THE
GOVERNMENT CENTER. (PROJECT NO. 50510)
March 12, 2024
Page 259
Item #16F4
AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRPERSON TO EXECUTE NINETEEN
(19) DEED CERTIFICATES FOR PURCHASED BURIAL RIGHTS
AT LAKE TRAFFORD MEMORIAL GARDENS CEMETERY
AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE
TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY TO RECORD THE DEED
CERTIFICATES WITH THE CLERK OF THE COURT’S
RECORDING DEPARTMENT.
Item #16F5
APPROVED THE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT TAX
PROMOTION FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE UPCOMING APRIL
2024 SPORTS TOURISM EVENT, NAPLES SPRING SHOOTOUT,
PAYING UP TO $3,000 TO KICKOFF SOCCER, AND MAKE A
FINDING THAT THESE EXPENDITURES PROMOTE
TOURISM.
Item #16F6
AWARDED FIXED FEE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE
AGREEMENT TO DIGITECH COMPUTER, LLC, UNDER
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) 23-8098 EMS BILLING
SERVICES AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE
ATTACHED AGREEMENT.
Item #16F7 – Move to Item #11G (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16F8
March 12, 2024
Page 260
DONATED TWO (2) SURPLUS VEHICLES TO EVERGLADES
CITY AND AUTHORIZE THE PROCUREMENT DIRECTOR, AS
DESIGNEE FOR THE COUNTY MANAGER, TO SIGN FOR THE
TRANSFER OF THE VEHICLE TITLES, PURSUANT TO
FLORIDA STATUTE CHAPTER 274.05.
Item #16F9
RESOLUTION 2024-38: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION
APPROVING AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS,
DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS, OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS)
TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 ADOPTED BUDGET. (THE
BUDGET AMENDMENTS IN THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION
HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VIA SEPARATE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARIES.)
Item #16F10
APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO
EXECUTE A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) IN THE
AMOUNT OF $5,000 BASED ON THE NOTICE OF PROPOSED
CIVIL PENALTY ISSUED TO COLLIER COUNTY
HELICOPTER OPERATIONS REGARDING AN ALLEGED
VIOLATION OF FAA REGULATIONS.
Item #16F11
March 12, 2024
Page 261
AWARDED REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL ("RFP") NO. 23-8133
FOR AGENDA MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE TO CIVICPLUS,
LLC, AND APPROVE THE RELATED ATTACHED AGREEMENT
WITH CIVIC PLUS, AS WELL AS APPROVING AMENDMENT
TWO, WITH GRANICUS, LLC PERTAINING TO AGREEMENT
NO. 15-6431, BCC AGENDA SOFTWARE REPLACEMENT
(EXTENDING THE EXISTING SERVICES THERE UNDER FOR
AN ADDITIONAL SIX MONTHS).
Item #16H1
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 18 - 22, 2024, AS
GOVERNMENT FINANCE PROFESSIONALS WEEK IN
COLLIER COUNTY. TO BE MAILED TO DEREK JOHNSSEN,
CLERK OF THE COURT DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND
ACCOUNTING; AND CHRIS JOHNSON, DIRECTOR OF
CORPORATE FINANCIAL AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
Item #16H2
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 16, 2024, AS SAVE
THE FLORIDA PANTHER DAY IN COLLIER COUNTY. TO BE
MAILED TO ERIN MYERS, REFUGE MANAGER, FLORIDA
PANTHER AND TEN THOUSAND ISLANDS NATIONAL
WILDLIFE REFUGE.
Item #16H3
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 2024 AS NATIONAL
ATHLETIC TRAINING MONTH. THE PROCLAMATION WILL
BE MAILED TO THE ATHLETIC TRAINERS' ASSOCIATION OF
March 12, 2024
Page 262
FLORIDA, NEW PORT RICHEY,
FLORIDA.
Item #16H4 – Add-On Item (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 21 – 31, 2024, AS
THE 48TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE COLLIER FAIR. THE
PROCLAMATION WILL BE MAILED TO RHONDA WARD,
COLLIER FAIR MANAGER.
Item #16I1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE MARCH 12, 2024
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
March 12, 2024
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS
DIRECTED:
A. DISTRICTS:
1) Greater Naples Fire Rescue Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory
Committee:
12/11/2023 Signed Minutes
2) Terreno Community Development District:
02/15/2024 Agency Letter, Proposed Budget for FY 2024/2025
(October 1, 2024 – September 30, 2025)
3) Quarry Community Development Committee:
02/16/2024 Agency Memo, Signed Minutes, & Agency Minutes
09/18/2023 Agency Mailing and Signed Minutes
10/09/2023 Agency Mailing and Signed Minutes
11/13/2023 Agency Mailing and Signed Minutes
4) Cedar Hammock Community Development District:
11/14/2023 Agency Mailing and Signed Minutes
March 12, 2024
Page 263
Item #16J1
RECORDED IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, THE CHECK NUMBER (OR OTHER
PAYMENT METHOD), AMOUNT, PAYEE, AND PURPOSE FOR
WHICH THE REFERENCED DISBURSEMENTS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $50,833,110.42 WERE DRAWN FOR THE
PERIODS BETWEEN FEBRUARY 15, 2024, AND FEBRUARY
28, 2024, PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 136.06.
Item #16J2
THE BOARD APPROVED AND DETERMINED VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE FOR INVOICES PAYABLE AND PURCHASING
CARD TRANSACTIONS AS OF MARCH 6, 2024.
Item #16K1
RESOLUTION 2024-39: APPOINTING TWO MEMBERS TO THE
BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE –
APPOINTING JAMES CASCONE AND REAPPOINTING SUSAN
J. CRUM BOTH WITH TERMS EXPIRING ON MARCH 3,
2028
Item #16K2
RESOLUTION 2024-40: APPOINTING MR. RICHARD ANNIS AS
A MEMBER TO THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY –
W/TERM EXPIRING ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2027
Item #16K3
March 12, 2024
Page 264
APPROVED A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $117,100 PLUS $27,598 IN STATUTORY
ATTORNEY FEES, APPORTIONMENT FEES, EXPERT FEES
AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 1114FEE
REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168.
Item #16K4
APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO
EXECUTE A SECOND AMENDMENT TO RETENTION
AGREEMENT FOR SPECIALIZED FEMA LEGAL SERVICES ON
AN “AS NEEDED” BASIS WITH THE LAW FIRM OF BAKER,
DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, P.C.
Item #17A – Moved to Item #9A (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #17B – Moved to Item #9B (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
March 12, 2024
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5: 11 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
CHRIS I LL, CHAI AN
ATTEST
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK
„ Attest as to Chairman's
,, signature only
These minutes appr ved by the Board on 3 1.9 a o q-` s
presented or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS
COURT REPORTING BY TERRI L. LEWIS, REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL COURT REPORTER, FPR-C, AND NOTARY
PUBLIC.
Page 265