Loading...
BCC Minutes 04/22/2025 RApril 22, 2025 Page 1 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida April 22, 2025 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: Burt L. Saunders Dan Kowal Chris Hall Rick LoCastro William L. McDaniel, Jr. ALSO PRESENT: Amy Patterson, County Manager Ed Finn, Deputy County Manager Trinity Scott, Transportation Management Services Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney Crystal K. Kinzel, Clerk of the Circuit Court Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations Page 1 April 22, 2025 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 April 22, 2025 9:00 AM Commissioner Burt Saunders, District 3; – Chair Commissioner Dan Kowal, District 4; –Vice Chair Commissioner Rick LoCastro, District 1 Commissioner Chris Hall, District 2 Commissioner William L. McDaniel, Jr., District 5 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 April 22, 2025 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; ASSISTED Page 3 April 22, 2025 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 2. AGENDA AND MINUTES A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex parte disclosure provided by Commission members for consent agenda.) B. March 11, 2025, BCC Meeting Minutes 3. AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS A. EMPLOYEE 1) 20 YEAR ATTENDEES a) Shirley Garcia - Community Redevelopment Area b) Ramiro Jurado - Pelican Bay Services 2) 25 YEAR ATTENDEES 3) 30 YEAR ATTENDEES 4) 35 YEAR ATTENDEES a) Ernst Augustin - Road, Bridge & Stormwater Maintenance B. ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS C. RETIREES D. EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH 4. PROCLAMATIONS Page 4 April 22, 2025 A. Proclamation designating May 1, 2025, as National Day of Prayer. To be accepted by Pastor Jesse Barrett. B. Proclamation designating April 13-19, 2025, as National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week. To be accepted by Sheriff Kevin Rambosk, Chief Greg Smith, Captain Chris Gonzalez, Manager Amy Tuff, and several members of the 911 Telecommunicators. 5. PRESENTATIONS 6. PUBLIC PETITIONS 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA 8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. This Item has been continued to a future Board of County Commission meeting, TBD. Recommendation to approve a Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment to the Urban Golden Gate Estates Sub- Element to create the Hope Home II Subdistrict to allow a recovery residence limited to 23 residents and three (3) resident supervisors, or in the alternative, a single-family dwelling, and a family care facility. The subject property is ±4.47 acres and is located at 3150 62nd Street SW in Section 29, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to Item 9.B.) [PL20220005195] B. This Item has been continued to a future Board of County Commission meeting, TBD. This item requires that all participants be sworn in, and ex- parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance rezoning property from an Estates (E) zoning district to a Community Facility Planned Unit Development (CFPUD) zoning district for the project to be known as the Hope Home II CFPUD, to allow a recovery residence limited to 23 residents and three resident supervisors or, in the alternative, a single-family dwelling and a family care facility for property located at 3150 62nd Street S.W. in Section 29, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 4.47± acres. Page 5 April 22, 2025 (Companion to Item 9.A.) [PL20220005096] C. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending the Pedestrian Safety Ordinance providing for a new section establishing requirements for the operation of bicycles on sidewalks, crosswalks, and in intersections within the unincorporated portions of Collier County, Florida. D. 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 an Ordinance amending the Sierra Meadows Mixed Planned Unit Development (MPUD) by changing the floor area ratio for group housing on Lots 8 and 9 of the Sierra Meadows Subdivision from .45 to .60. The subject property, consisting of 14.3+/-acres of a 90.8+/- acre MPUD, is located at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Rattlesnake-Hammock Road (C.R. 864) and C.R. 951, in Section 22, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. E. This Item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex-parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance Number 04-29, the Immokalee Senior Housing Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), and Ordinance Number 2004-41, the Collier County Land Development Code, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an additional 0.55+/- acres of land zoned Residential Multi-Family-6 (RMF-6), with a wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4) for a project to be known as Immokalee Senior Housing Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD), by reducing the number of multifamily residential dwelling units from 119 to 30 units, and allowing a 5,000 gross square foot 200-seat church, and up to 50,000 square feet of certain community facility and educational services uses; updating the Master Plan; and rescinding the affordable housing density bonus agreement on 7.99± acres of property located on the east side of 11th Street North, just south of Lake Trafford Road and Highland Elementary School in Section 33, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County Florida; and by providing an effective date. [PL20240005475] 10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Page 6 April 22, 2025 A. Recommendation to approve a Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners supporting the EOG DOGE Team effort and (1) commit Collier County to collaborate with the EOG DOGE Team; (2) direct the County Manager to transmit the Resolution to the Governor, and (3) appoint the County Manager as liaison to the EOG DOGE Team and provide regular updates to the Board regarding relevant EOG DOGE activities. 11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT A. Recommendation to authorize the County Manager or designee to execute and transmit a Notice of Termination to cancel the sale under the Agreement for the Sale and Purchase of the Williams Reserve Property. (Trinity Scott, Department Head - Transportation Management Services Department) B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a Resolution, amending Resolution No. 2007-300, as amended, the Purchasing Policy for the Conservation Collier Program, for the purpose of including mitigation expenses and adjustments within the appraised value of the property. (Jaime Cook, Division Director - Development Review) 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY’S REPORT 13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR 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 7 April 22, 2025 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 & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1) Recommendation to approve and execute an Agreement for the Sale of Culinary Kitchen Equipment with Core Health Partners Incorporated related to Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) No. 24-8291 and authorize the necessary Budget Amendment. (Companion to Item 16.G.1.) 2) Recommendation to approve the release of two code enforcement liens with an accrued value of $286,200, for a reduced payment of $43,960.20, in the code enforcement action titled Board of County Commissioners vs. Nicholas Ballo in Special Magistrate Case Nos. CEPM20190011873 and CEV20220000047, relating to property located at 807 108th Ave. N., Collier County, Florida. 3) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a Performance Bond in the amount of $25,000, which was posted as a guaranty for Excavation Permit Number PL20230005149, for work associated with Moorings Park at Grande Lake Phase Two – Lake #7 Modifications. 4) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a Performance Bond in the amount of $36,040, which was posted as a guaranty for Excavation Permit Number PL20230004543 and PL 20240005867, for work associated with SkySail Phase 4 Townhomes. 5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of the potable water and sewer facilities for Majestic Place, PL20240011370. 6) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the Page 8 April 22, 2025 potable water and sewer facilities and appurtenant utility easement for Terreno at Valencia Golf and Country Club – Master Amenity Center, PL20240011282. 7) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities for Hammock Park Phase 2B, PL20240013585. 8) Recommendation to approve a Resolution for final acceptance of the private roadway and drainage improvements, and acceptance of the plat dedications, for the final plat of Montiano, Application Number PL20140002750, and authorize the release of the maintenance security in the amount of $168,017.50. 9) Recommendation to approve a Resolution for final acceptance of the private roadway and drainage improvements, and acceptance of the plat dedications, for the final plat of Isles of Collier Preserve Phase 10, Application Number PL20160001842, and authorize the release of the maintenance security in the amount of $549,724.13. 10) 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 minor plat of Del Webb Naples Parcels 304- 306 Parcels 305-306 Replat, Application Number PL20240013991. 11) Recommendation to waive the nighttime hearing requirement and hear a Land Development Code amendment related to housing that is affordable, at two regularly scheduled daytime Board of County Commissioners meetings and approve a request to advertise the Land Development Code Amendment. 12) Recommendation to waive the nighttime hearing requirement and hear a Land Development Code amendment related to the Immokalee Urban Area Overlay District at two regularly scheduled daytime Board of County Commissioners meetings and approve a request to advertise the Land Development Code Amendment. 13) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager, or their designee, to submit an application to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Page 9 April 22, 2025 Commission's Invasive Plant Management Section to be eligible to receive funding assistance services worth $300,000 in FY 2026 through the Upland Invasive Exotic Plant Management Program for the removal of invasive exotic vegetation within Conservation Collier's Dr. Robert H. Gore III, North Belle Meade, McIlvane Marsh, and Shell Island preserves, and to authorize staff to accept such funding assistance services if awarded. 14) Recommendation to approve the properties on the January 2025 Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List (AAL) and direct staff to pursue the projects recommended within the A-Category, funded by the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund. 15) Recommendation to approve the properties on the February 2025 Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List (AAL) and direct staff to pursue the projects recommended within the A-Category, funded by Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund. 16) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program with Hendrix House, Inc., and Restoration Church, Inc. (“Hendrix House”), for a 17.66-acre property at a cost of $502,500, for a total cost not to exceed $507,870, inclusive of closing costs. 17) Recommendation to approve First Amendment to Agreement for Sale and Purchase for the Cypress Cove Landkeepers, Inc., f/k/a Cypress Cove Conservancy, Inc., a Florida not-for-profit Corporation (Cypress Cove), to extend the due diligence period to August 12, 2025, and the closing date deadline to October 11, 2025, or within thirty days of the Purchaser's receipt of all closing documents, whichever is later, to provide additional time for the County to complete the environmental investigations of the Property. 18) Recommendation to approve a Second Amendment to Agreement No. 22-7966, “Baseball and Softball Officials,” with the Collier Recreation Baseball/Softball Umpire Association, Inc., for a one-year renewal and a price increase for the remaining renewal terms. 19) Recommendation to approve a Resolution relating to the Stewardship Page 10 April 22, 2025 Sending Area 14 - Restoration Credits (CLH SSA 14) in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSA) and to award Restoration II credits to Collier Land Holdings, Ltd, in accordance with the approved restoration plan. 20) Recommendation to formally waive contractual payment obligations for Revenue Generating Agreement #22-8023, with Parks and Recreation Division concessionaire BluWater, LLC, for the retail sales of bait, drinks, food, and minor sundries at Caxambas Park until the park’s Fuel Delivery System renovations have been completed, and retail fuel sales can be reinstated. 21) Recommendation to approve Budget Amendments totaling $585,000 from the Park Bond Fund (3063) and Parks AD VAL CIP (3062) reserves and appropriate these dollars within Park Bond Fund (3063), RegPK Sun-N-Fun Project (80421), and Parks AD VAL CAP (3062), RegPk Pool Pump Rpr Project (80384) to make further repairs and renovations at Sun-N-Fun Lagoon. B. TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 1) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid No. 24-8319, “Collier Blvd (CR-951) & City Gate Blvd North Intersection Improvements,” to AJAX Paving Industries of Florida, LLC, in the amount of $1,966,506.61, approve a $167,153.06 Owner’s Allowance, and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Agreement. 2) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to execute twenty (20) 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. 3) Recommendation to accept a report on the status of Golden Gate Estates Land Trust and authorize the County Manager or designee to begin the disposition process for the remaining parcels. 4) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for the donation of a drainage easement (Parcel 119DE) required for Everglades City Page 11 April 22, 2025 stormwater drainage improvements. 5) Recommendation to ratify the administratively approved First Amendment to Agreement No. 21-7902 with AIM Engineering & Surveying, Inc., adding $42,660.00 and extending the days for tasks 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 for the “Goodlette-Frank Stormwater & Ditch Improvements (Section B)” project (60102). 6) Recommendation that the Board, as the Governing Body of Collier County, and the Ex-Officio Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, to approve the termination of two inactive easements – one being an Exclusive Well, Well Pump, and Water Pipeline Easement and the other being a Utility Easement to support the development of The Gate, Collier County’s contractor developing and operating the Golden Gate Golf Course, and the State Veterans Nursing Home. 7) Recommendation to amend Exhibit “A” to Resolution No. 2013-239, as amended, the List of Speed Limits on County Maintained Roads, to reflect speed limit changes at various locations. 8) Recommendation to approve Change Order No. 1 for Agreement No. 22-8053, “Professional Design and Related Services for Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Phase II,” with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., reallocating funds from Tasks 6 & 7 to a new Task 10 for Right of Way Acquisition Support. (Project Number 60249) C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, as ex- officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve Change Order No. 2, providing for a time extension of ninety-seven days to Agreement No. 23-8112, with Accurate Drilling Systems, Inc., for the “Western Interconnect Forcemain Phase 7” project, and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Change Order. (Project No. 72009) 2) Recommendation that Board of County Commissioners, as ex-officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, Page 12 April 22, 2025 ratify administratively approved Change Order No. 1, providing for an increase in the contract amount of $178,222.50, from $1,817,423.25 to $1,995,645.75, a time extension of 135 days, the reallocation of funds within existing Tasks under Agreement No. 22-8042, “CEI Services for Golden Gate City Transmission Water Main Improvements” with AIM Engineering and Surveying, Inc., and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Change Order. (Projects 51029 and 70253) 3) Recommendation to approve the Fourth Amendment to Agreement No. 15-6365, “Disaster Debris Management Removal and Disposal Services,” with AshBritt, Inc., to increase the fee schedule rates 2.7%, and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Amendment. 4) Recommendation to approve the selection committee’s ranking and authorize staff to begin contract negotiations with LJA Engineering, Inc., related to Request for Professional Services (“RPS”) No. 25- 8336, “Design Services for Tamiami Wellfield Improvements – Wells 41-49,” so staff can bring a proposed agreement back for the Board’s consideration at a future meeting. 5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, as ex- officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (“CCWSD”), approve the addition of seven Full Time Equivalent (“FTE”) positions in the Public Utilities Department, including seven vehicles and associated equipment based on cumulative asset acquisitions as approved in the CCWSD Operations Resourcing Strategic Plan, and authorize the associated Budget Amendments. 6) Recommendation to approve Change Order No. 16 and its associated Work Directives allowing for payment of up to $797,161.24, and adding 74 days to Agreement No. 18-7474 with Mitchell & Stark Construction Co., Inc., pertaining to the "Design-Build of Northeast Service Area Interim Wastewater Treatment Plant, Storage Tanks and Associated Pipelines,” and approve an after-the-fact for deficiencies found with Change Order No. 16, authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Change Order, and approve the necessary Budget Amendment. (Project 70194) Page 13 April 22, 2025 7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, as ex- officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, authorize an increase in expenditures for the single source purchase of mixers, pumps and related equipment, products, and services," with Xylem Water Solutions USA, Inc., in an amount not- to-exceed $2,360,000 per Fiscal Year (increasing the expenditure by up to $860,000 per Fiscal Year), and approve the attached Second Amendment to Agreement No. 24-029-NS. 8) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as ex-officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, authorize an increase in expenditures for the single source purchase of "ProMinent Equipment, Parts, and Services,” from TriNova, Inc., in an amount not-to-exceed $185,000 per Fiscal Year (increasing the expenditure by up to $85,000 per Fiscal Year) and approve the attached Second Amendment to Agreement #24-056-NS. D. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT 1) This Item continued from the April 8, 2025, BCC Meeting. Recommendation to award the Request for Proposal No. 24-8280, Services for Seniors, to Southern Home Care Services, Inc., d/b/a All Ways Caring Homecare; Personal Response Corporation; Eleven Ash, Inc., d/b/a Health Force; Home Health Care Resources, Corp.; and Always There Home Healthcare, Inc., and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Agreements. (Human Services Grant Fund 1837) 2) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign thirty (30) mortgage satisfactions for the State Housing Initiatives Partnership loan program in the amount of $288,311.92, and to authorize the associated Budget Amendment to appropriate repayment amount totaling $113,207.95. (SHIP Grant Fund 1053) 3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign three (3) mortgage satisfactions for the State Housing Initiatives Partnership loan program in the amount of $22,500.00 due to the death of the borrower(s). (SHIP Grant Fund 1053) 4) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign three Page 14 April 22, 2025 (3) Releases of Lien in the amount of $18,072.14 for properties that have remained affordable for the required 15-year period set forth in the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) Impact Fee Program deferral agreements. 5) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to sign one (1) Release of Lien for an Affordable Housing Density Bonus for a unit that is no longer subject to the terms of the agreement. 6) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Board of County Commissioners to accept the Year 3 allocation of Opioid Settlement Funds in the amount of $1,942,240.64 ($399,277.79 City/County and $1,542,962.85 Regional Abatement) and authorize the necessary Budget Amendment. (Opioid Abatement Grant Fund 1850 and Opioid City/County Subdivision Grant Fund 1852) E. CORPORATE BUSINESS OPERATIONS 1) Recommendation to approve an Assumption Agreement assigning all rights, duties, benefits, and obligations to Tigris Aquatic Services, LLC. 2) Recommendation to approve modifications to the 2025 Fiscal Year Pay & Classification Plan, which consists of one reclassification and removal of one obsolete classification from January 1, 2025, through March 31, 2025. F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS 1) Recommendation to approve a Second Amendment to Agreement No. 20-7753, “Design Services for Collier County EMS Stations,” with Schenkel & Shultz, Inc., adding 180 days to the project time, and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Amendment. (Project 55212) 2) Recommendation to approve a Third Amendment to the Collier County Emergency Services Deputy Medical Director Agreement to name Douglas S. Lee, M.D. the Interim Medical Director, increase his compensation to that of the Medical Director, extend the Agreement Page 15 April 22, 2025 term, and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Amendment. 3) Recommendation that the Board accept notification of the issuance of a Collier County Emergency Purchase Order issued to Cintas Corporation and authorize payment for the repairs services provided. (Project No. 52163) 4) Recommendation to ratify administratively approved Change Order No. 1, adding 24 days to the project time under Agreement No. 24- 8250, Golden Gate Golf Course Outfall Swale, constructing approximately 2,400 linear feet of a 35-foot-wide lined swale and a 300 linear foot outfall pipe at the Golden Gate Golf Course, and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Change Order. (Project No. 80412) 5) Recommendation to authorize an after-the-fact payment for Purchase Order No. 4500234864 in the amount of $107,562.50 to Earth Tech Enterprises, Inc., under Contract 21-7885, “Beach Maintenance and Related Services,” for Pelican Bay emergency beach debris cleanup following Hurricanes Helene and Milton. 6) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution approving amendments (appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds) to the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Adopted Budget. (The Budget Amendments in the attached Resolution have been reviewed and approved by the Board of County Commissioners via separate Executive Summaries.) G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY 1) Recommendation to approve and execute a Collier County Airport Authority Standard Form Lease with Core Health Partners Incorporated for the Immokalee Airport Culinary Accelerator related to Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) No. 24-8291. (Companion to Item 16.A.1.) 2) Recommendation to approve Change Order No. 1, deducting $12,626.46 from Agreement No. 20-7806 (Purchase Order 4500230969) with Bowman Gulf Coast, LLC., (previously Hole Page 16 April 22, 2025 Montes, Inc.), for post design engineering services on the “Bulk Aircraft Hangar at Marco Island Executive Airport” and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Change Order. (Project No. 33822) H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE 1) April 22, 2025, Miscellaneous Correspondence 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 $60,944,333.49 were drawn for the periods between March 27, 2025, and April 9, 2025, pursuant to Florida Statute 136.06. 2) Request that the Board approve and determine valid public purpose for invoices payable and purchasing card transactions as of April 16, 2025. 3) Recommendation to approve after-the-fact use of $1,000 from the Confiscated Trust Funds to support the Florida Agricultural Crimes Intelligence Unit, Inc. K. COUNTY ATTORNEY 1) Recommendation to appoint two members to the Emergency Medical Authority. 2) Request by the Housing Finance Authority of Collier County for approval of a Resolution authorizing the Authority to issue revenue bonds for the acquisition, construction, equipping, and development of a 230-unit multifamily residential housing facility known as Wave at Rose, and located at the northeast corner of Rose Avenue and School Drive in Immokalee, Florida. 3) Request by the Housing Finance Authority of Collier County for Page 17 April 22, 2025 approval of a Resolution approving a plan of financing involving the issuance by the Authority of single-family mortgage revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $50 million or, in the alternative, to use volume cap allocation for mortgage credit certificate programs or for multifamily housing for persons of low or moderate income. 4) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for the purchase of right- of-way (Parcel 1274FEE) required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext – Phase 2 Project (Project No. 60249). Estimated Fiscal Impact: $140,500. 5) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Order of Taking and Final Judgment in the amount of $99,000 plus $11,886.90 in statutory attorney and experts’ fees and costs for the taking of Parcel 1311FEE required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project No. 60249. 6) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Order of Taking and Final Judgment in the amount of $99,000 plus $11,791.28 in statutory attorney and experts’ fees and costs for the taking of Parcel 1307FEE required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project No. 60249. 7) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Order of Taking and Final Judgment in the amount of $103,000 plus $18,379 in statutory attorney and experts’ fees and costs for the taking of Parcel 1359FEE1 required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project No. 60249. 8) Recommendation to approve a Resolution to delegate authority to the County Project Manager, Robert White, P.E., and County engineer of record, Richard Arico, P.E., from Kimley Horn, to testify at the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Order of Taking hearing as to the project construction plans and bind the County to the plans. (Project No. 60249). L. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the County Attorney to advertise an Ordinance creating the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Advisory Board to replace the CRA-created Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board Page 18 April 22, 2025 and the Immokalee Beautification Advisory Committee and repeal Ordinance No. 22-52. 2) Recommendation to authorize a representative of the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to bid on behalf of the County at one code enforcement lien foreclosure sale scheduled by the Clerk in COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA v. Katrix LLC, et al., Circuit Court Case No. 24-CA-2591, in an amount not to exceed the value of the County’s in-house appraisal (approximately $65,000.00 for one parcel), and authorize necessary Budget Amendments. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 17. SUMMARY AGENDA - This section is for advertised public hearings and must meet the following criteria: 1) a recommendation for approval from staff; 2) unanimous recommendation for approval by the collier county planning commission or other authorizing agencies of all members present and voting; 3) no written or oral objections to the item received by staff, the collier county planning commission, other authorizing agencies or the board, prior to the commencement of the bcc meeting on which the items are scheduled to be heard; and 4) no individuals are registered to speak in opposition to the item. For those items which are quasi-judicial in nature, all participants must be sworn in. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A. A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, closing the approved Terafina Planned Unit Development, which has fully completed all its development pursuant to its Development Order(s) and has been found by Collier County to have only one Transportation Commitment remaining. (PL20240012112) B. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance establishing the Horse Trials Community Development District on 1,767.35± acres located north of County Road 858 (Oil Well Road), west of State Road 29, and east of Ranch One Road in Sections 7, 8, 17, and 18, Township 48 South, Range 30 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20250000514] C. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution designating 3,912.41 acres in the Rural Land Stewardship Zoning Overlay District as Stewardship Sending Area with a designation as “BCP SSA 21”; pursuant to the terms set forth in Page 19 April 22, 2025 the Escrow Agreement, Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for BCP SSA 21, and Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for BCP SSA 21; approving a Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for BCP SSA 21; approving a Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for BCP SSA 21; approving an Escrow Agreement for BCP SSA 21; and establishing the number of Stewardship credits generated by the designation of said Stewardship Sending Area. The subject property is located in parts of Sections 4, 5, 11 and 15, and all of sections 8, 9, 10, and 12, Township 48 South, Range 30 East. [PL20240004704] 18. ADJOURN INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD’S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER’S OFFICE AT 252-8383. April 22, 2025 Page 2 MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. Good morning. Welcome. We're going to start off with the invocation and the Pledge. Ms. Patterson. MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. We have the invocation by Pastor Glen Wiggins, Seagate Baptist Church, and our Pledge will be read [sic] Tim Guerrette, U.S. Air Force veteran, retired Collier County Sheriff's Office. Item #1A INVOCATION BY PASTOR GLENN WIGGINS – SEAGATE BAPTIST CHURCH. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY TIM GUERRETTE – US AIRFORCE VETERAN AND RETIREE FROM COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE – INVOCATION GIVEN PASTOR WIGGINS: Good morning. Let us pray together. Our Heavenly Father, we thank you for the honor of living in the great state of Florida, for the blessing of being in this wonderful, beautiful City of Naples. As we gather here today, we acknowledge our need for your guidance and seek your hand of blessing upon this County Commission. Your word declares that all authority is established by you. And we recognize these men and women have been placed in their positions for your divine purpose. We pray that you would grant them wisdom to lead with integrity, justice, and compassion. May their decisions reflect truth and righteousness. May they always seek the greater good for the people they serve. Bless each commissioner and their families, strengthen them, enlarge their influence for good. Please, Lord, place a hedge of April 22, 2025 Page 3 protection around them. May they sense your presence as they carry out their duties. Lord, may everything that's said and done in this meeting today be under your direction. We need your wisdom. We need your strength. We need your power. We thank you for the gift of salvation through Jesus Christ who died and was buried and rose again the third day, giving us hope and life eternal through him. We ask your blessing on this day you've given us. May we live it well, and may we serve you faithfully. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) 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 HALL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES MR. GUERRETTE: I just want to make sure Lois -- I got the order correctly. It's an honor to do the Pledge. For everybody here, just a little reminder, Collier County and the Board is so wonderful to our military members, and our law enforcement professionals here in our county and throughout the state. Just wanted to give everybody a reminder that May is our National Military Appreciation Month and, also, Law Enforcement Appreciation Month. May 15th is a big week as far as remembering those who have served and then sacrificed their life. April 22, 2025 Page 4 Also, a big thank you to the Robert L. Zore Foundation for everything they do. And there's many other ones out there that I do not have time to, obviously, bring up. But thank you, Board, for all you do, for your support. Being in the military, being in law enforcement here for a long period of time, our county and our Board is second to none anywhere in the state and thank you so much. I appreciate everything. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you and thank you for your service. MR. GUERRETTE: Thank you. MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, agenda changes for April 22nd, 2025. We have several. First is to continue Item 11B to the May 13th, 2025, BCC meeting. This is a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a resolution amending Resolution No. 2007-300, as amended, the purchasing policy for Conservation Collier program for the purpose of including mitigation expenses and adjustments within the appraised value of the property. This is being moved at staff's request. Next, move Item 16A14 to 11C. This is a recommendation to approve the properties on the January 2025 Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List and direct staff to pursue the properties recommended within the "A" category funded by the Collier County Land Acquisition Fund. This is being moved at Commissioner Hall's request. Next, move Item 16A15 to 11D. This is a recommendation to approve the properties on the February 2025 Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List and direct staff to pursue the projects recommended within the "A" category funded by Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund. This is being moved at Commissioner Hall's request. April 22, 2025 Page 5 Withdraw Item 16A18. This is a recommendation to approve a second amendment to Agreement No. 22-7966, baseball and softball officials with the Collier Recreation Baseball/Softball Umpire Association, Inc., for a one-year renewal and a price increase for the remaining renewal terms. This item is being withdrawn at staff's request. Finally, continue Item 17C to the May 13th, 2025, BCC meeting. This is a recommendation to adopt a resolution designating 3,912.41 acres in Rural Land Stewardship Zoning Overlay District as Stewardship Sending Area with a designation as BCP SSA 21; pursuant to the terms set forth in the escrow agreement, Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for BCP SSA 21; Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for BCP SSA 21; approving a Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for BCP SSA 21; approving a Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for BCP -- BCP SSA 21; approving an escrow agreement for BCP SSA 21; and establishing the number of stewardship credits generated by the designation of said Stewardship Sending Area. The subject property is located in parts of Section 4, 5, 11, and 15, and all of Sections 8, 9, 10 and 12, Township 48 South, Range 30 East. This is being moved at staff's request. With that, we do have court reporter breaks scheduled at 10:30 and again at 2:50 if necessary. County Attorney. MR. KLATZKOW: No changes. Thank you. MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, any changes or ex parte on the consent or summary? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: No changes and no ex partes on consent or summary. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. April 22, 2025 Page 6 COMMISSIONER HALL: Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I have no changes and no ex parte. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. Good morning, Mr. Chair. No changes and no ex parte. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Same for me. No changes, no ex parte. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I have no changes and no ex parte as well. Any objections to the proposed changes that have been presented? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Seeing none, we're ready for our motion to approve today's regular, consent, and summary agenda as amended. COMMISSIONER HALL: So moved. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Second. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and a second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That passes unanimously. SEE REVERSE SIDE Proposed Agenda Changes Board of County Commissioners Meeting April 22, 2025 Continue Item 11B to the May 13, 2025, BCC Meeting: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a Resolution, amending Resolution No. 2007-300, as amended, the Purchasing Policy for the Conservation Collier Program, for the purpose of including mitigation expenses and adjustments within the appraised value of the property. (Staff’s Request) Move Item 16.A.14 to 11.C: Recommendation to approve the properties on the January 2025 Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List (AAL) and direct staff to pursue the projects recommended within the A-Category, funded by the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund. (Commissioner Hall’s Request) Move Item 16.A.15 to 11.D: Recommendation to approve the properties on the February 2025 Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List (AAL) and direct staff to pursue the projects recommended within the A-Category, funded by Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund. (Commissioner Hall’s Request) Withdrawal item 16.A.18: Recommendation to approve a Second Amendment to Agreement No. 22-7966, “Baseball and Softball Officials,” with the Collier Recreation Baseball/Softball Umpire Association, Inc., for a one-year renewal and a price increase for the remaining renewal terms. (Staff’s Requests) Continue item 17C to the May 13, 2025, BCC Meeting: Recommendation to adopt a Resolution designating 3,912.41 acres in the Rural Land Stewardship Zoning Overlay District as Stewardship Sending Area with a designation as “BCP SSA 21”; pursuant to the terms set forth in the Escrow Agreement, Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for BCP SSA 21, and Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for BCP SSA 21; approving a Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for BCP SSA 21; approving a Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for BCP SSA 21; approving an Escrow Agreement for BCP SSA 21; and establishing the number of Stewardship credits generated by the designation of said Stewardship Sending Area. The subject property is located in parts of Sections 4, 5, 11 and 15, and all of sections 8, 9, 10, and 12, Township 48 South, Range 30 East. [PL20240004704] (Staff’s Requests) Notes: TIME CERTAIN ITEMS: 4/21/2025 8:29 PM April 22, 2025 Page 7 Item #2B MARCH 11, 2025, BCC MEETING MINUTES - MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO - APPROVED Item 2A, the minutes from our March 11 commission meeting. Any comments concerning the minutes? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Move for approval. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That passes unanimously. Ms. Patterson, we'll move on to the awards and recognitions. MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. Item #3A1 AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS - 20 YEAR ATTENDEES - SHIRLEY GARCIA, COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND RAMIRO JURADO - PELICAN BAY SERVICES First up we have our 20-year attendees. Shirley Garcia, Community Redevelopment Area. Congratulations. April 22, 2025 Page 8 (Applause.) COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Hey, hey, hey. No hugging the communications guy. MS. GARCIA: Can we bring up -- COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Wow. Holy mackerel. MS. GARCIA: It's only part Bayshore. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Mr. Chairman, can I just say a quick word? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes, sir. Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I just want to thank Shirley and all the work she does for CRA down in East Naples, that area, Shirley, because you do a great job. I know I've only been part of it for two years and a few months, but you're a great asset. I appreciate it, thank you. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. MS. GARCIA: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And I'll add to that that the CRA has done remarkable work in East Naples. It's unbelievable. I was out there just the other night, and a lot of people coming there, a lot of people having a good time, and it's just remarkable what you've accomplished -- what the CRA's accomplished out there, so thank you. MS. PATTERSON: Next 20-year attendee is Ramiro Jurado, Pelican Bay Services. Congratulations. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Got to get your hardware. MR. COLEMAN: Let me get one with him, he's so good looking. MR. JURADO: Thank you. (Applause.) April 22, 2025 Page 9 Item #3A4 AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS - 35 YEAR ATTENDEES - ERNST AUGUSTIN, ROAD, BRIDGE & STORMWATER MAINTENANCE MS. PATTERSON: Going all the way to 35 years now, Ernst Augustin, Road, Bridge, and Stormwater Maintenance. Congratulations. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Oh, the crew. The crew. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You are not centered. You're way off. (Applause.) Item #4A PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 1, 2025, AS NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER. ACCEPTED BY PASTOR JESSE BARRETT - MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO - ADOPTED MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 4, proclamations. Item 4A is a proclamation designating May 1st, 2025, as National Day of Prayer. To be accepted by Pastor Jesse Barrett. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Go. (Applause.) PASTOR BARRETT: Thank you all so much for this. The first Thursday of May every year is the National Day of Prayer, and we are hosting the event at 7 p.m. at Naples High School on the football field. And I'm expecting a good turnout. We pray for the April 22, 2025 Page 10 government and the leaders, you know, state, local, federal. We pray for schools, families, churches, businesses, the media, all sorts of good stuff. So I know you-all have been invited. Commissioner Hall will be there. He'll be praying. And so I just thank you guys so much. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. PASTOR BARRETT: Thanks, guys. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you, sir. Good seeing you, Jesse. PASTOR BARRETT: You, too. (Applause.) Item #4B PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 13-19, 2025, AS NATIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATORS WEEK. ACCEPTED BY SHERIFF KEVIN RAMBOSK, CHIEF GREG SMITH, CAPTAIN CHRIS GONZALEZ, MANAGER AMY TUFF, AND SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE 911 TELECOMMUNICATORS - MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO – ADOPTED MS. PATTERSON: Item 4B is a proclamation designating April 13th through 19th, 2025, as National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week. To be accepted by Sheriff Kevin Rambosk, Chief Greg Smith, Captain Chris Gonzalez, Manager Amy Tuff, and several members of the 911 telecommunications. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Sheriff, if you could tell us a little bit about what the team does. And as you get to the podium, I just want to thank the Sheriff and all of the folks that work in the Sheriff's April 22, 2025 Page 11 Department. We have a very safe community. It's not an accident. It's because we have a wonderful Sheriff. He has a wonderful team. This County Commission has always fully supported the Sheriff. When he's needed money for anything special, we've always been here to provide that because we all believe that the most important function of government is to keep us safe. It doesn't matter how wonderful the beaches are and everything. If you don't feel safe in your homes, if you don't feel safe when you're out on the streets, your quality of life is not very good. We don't have that problem here in Collier County because of our Sheriff and the wonderful people working with the Sheriff. So thank you. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Good morning, Chairman and Commissioners. Thank you on behalf of all the members of the Collier County Sheriff's Office and today our communications staff, who do an absolutely fabulous job. You know, they are not only multi-taskers, but they are technologists, when you see the electronics that they're using to reduce the emergency response times in our community and save lives. They, in most cases, are the very first critical element of the crime prevention and crime apprehension element, the life-safety element, and the information element. So they get it started, and they make sure that the rest of our deputies are informed and safe as they can be. To give you some sense in what they're doing, there were over 512,000 calls for service last year. There were about 200,000 911 emergency calls. As you know, we were the first to text emergency calls in Collier County, and we get those as well. And there are over one million radio transmissions that the staff takes cares of. So on behalf of everyone, thank you very much. Thank you for your support, and we are committed to keeping Collier County the safest community in the nation. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. April 22, 2025 Page 12 (Applause.) MS. PATTERSON: If we could get a motion to accept the proclamations, please. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So moved. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. We have a motion. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And we have a second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That passes unanimously. Item #7 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA MS. PATTERSON: That brings us to Item 7, public comments on general topics not on the current or future agenda. MR. MILLER: Good morning. We have five registered speakers on this item. I'll remind the speakers you'll have three minutes. You will get a beep at 30 seconds to remind you when your time is winding down. Your first speaker is Laurie Harris, and she'll be followed by Patty Teulet. Did you want that video now? April 22, 2025 Page 13 MS. HARRIS: Yes. Good morning, Commissioners. Laurie Harris, Marco Island. This is a very short video that I'd like you to watch, and then we can discuss. (A video was played.) MS. HARRIS: This is pretty much a normal day in Immokalee. In the video, you can see there was two sets of dogs that had just mated and are actually still hooked up in the video, so in a few months we should have around 12 more puppies. This is a normal day, as I said. It's in Immokalee. Immokalee has the reputation, but it's prevalent in Collier County. It's in the Estates. It's in East Naples. There was a pack of dogs running, so that was four dogs running. They find a female in heat. They will get aggressive. What we've heard is it's culture. While that might be true, we live in the greatest country that is made up of the rule of law. So unless there are "no go" zones, someone needs to address the dogs running at large, which is illegal. This video has triggered quite the backlash on social media and specifically towards the animal control officers. I personally believe they are stretched quite thin. There are about three of them now who can, on their own, go out in the field, who are fully trained, and issue citations. There are several more going through training right now, and that will bring us to about seven, and there should be 10 full-time positions. And while the population in Collier County has exploded, the number of ACOs has remained the same, and, sadly, we can't even fill those 10 positions. The posting was up for -- to hire for two weeks, and only five applicants applied for three open positions. I'm going to guess it's salary related. Imagine rolling up on a scene with little to no personal protection, no indication of any potential April 22, 2025 Page 14 violence, either human or animal, and have to issue citations. These ACOs, to me, are our first responders for the dogs. They have to get their reports right the first time when they issue a citation, or it will get kicked from the magistrate. We are -- and they would then be issuing citations for absolutely no reason. They must be trained properly to issue those citations that we can actually collect on them. There's tens of thousands of dollars a year of citations issues that have gone uncollected. I was told that there is no collection for citations that go unissued [sic]. You know better than most how large Collier County is. The ACOs drive all over the county. We could be creative, potentially get somebody to drive for them so they could do their reports while in the car, potentially create someone who can pick up strays that are held. Since moving the ACOs to Code, enforcement has declined, and I do not believe it is the fault of the ACOs. There are contributing factors. Enforcement with dogs running at large is nonexistent. The ACOs can only pick up a stray that is contained. There is no one out there who is picking up a dog at large. No one. They're running wild. I would like to see a similar commitment made to the animal control officers that was made to DAS. This includes salary structure, ongoing training for dangerous dogs, and continued education seminars to identify and document cruelty and neglect. I've heard for the last 10 months or so we will revise the ordinances and the hobby breeder ordinance. Even after repeated attempts to get this done, it has fallen by the wayside. Until we can get control of the spays and neuters, we will never get control over the population anywhere. We are their voice. I respectfully request you make this commitment. Thank you April 22, 2025 Page 15 for your time. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you, Mr. Harris. And, also I want to thank you for your service as chair of the DAS advisory board. I understand that you have resigned from that. And I think everyone on the commission perhaps would like to hear from you as to -- not now but in meetings -- as to what prompted you to do that, because I know of your dedication to DAS. So I think it will be good information for everyone. MS. HARRIS: Thank you, sir. I appreciate that. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Patty Teulet. She'll be followed by Al Schantzen. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Good morning. MS. TEULET: Good morning. My name is Patty Teulet -- pardon my voice -- and I've been a volunteer at the DAS shelter for 13 years. Two subjects I'd like to talk about. Collier County has an abundance of domestic animals running at large daily, most prevalent in the Immokalee and the Golden Gate Estates communities yet occurring throughout Collier County. Dogs have been observed breeding in the middle of the streets throughout the day. The last thing the county needs are their offspring running at large, perpetuating a never-ending cycle. At the rate at which Collier County is growing, so too will the pet population. Collier County has an opportunity to mitigate this very serious issue by increasing and improving ACO coverage. ACOs do not have to look for the stray animals, trap stray animals, or knock on the doors to find the owners, if any. Just drive there, which should be scheduled daily, knowing and seeing the problem, captured by Tom Kepp's video, which I believe you have seen. ACOs can put them in the van the same way Tom Kepp does every single day. If April 22, 2025 Page 16 hiring and retention is the issue, perhaps the starting pay and hourly wages need to be more competitive. The second subject is the decision by the county to put aesthetics ahead of safety and functionality at the DAS shelter. Housing large-breed dogs in a 4-by-4-foot space with an opening designed for small/medium dogs is inhumane. This was obviously not addressed in the renovation. This was not the appropriate use of the $6 million surtax earmarked for Domestic Animal Services. It is evident that the building should have been completely demolished. Instead, it took some eight months to fix everything by preparing and painting the walls and laying down new floors. Problems are still being addressed, including the new floors, which are too slippery for safety. The building could have been rebuilt in less time with secure fittings, expanding the kennel size for large dogs, and adding outside runs like most shelters have in place. My suggestion would be to demolish the building and build one that is appropriate for a dog shelter. If not, the hope would be to revisit the plans for the other two buildings before deciding on remodel instead of replacements. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. And thank you for your volunteer service at DAS. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Al Schantzen, and he will be followed by Tom Kepp. MR. SCHANTZEN: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Al Schantzen, for the record. Commissioners, I'd like to right off with a thing from Amos 6:12. It says, "Do horses run on rocks?" At DAS we have an issue where the ACOs went over to Code Enforcement, and the responsibility for Code Enforcement over the ACOs and the regulations all are housed there, and those are where April 22, 2025 Page 17 the Special Magistrate is and all of the legal action that goes on, including the ordinance rewrite requirements and stuff fall under Code now instead of DAS. What happens at DAS board is we end up in a quagmire because we're trying to solve regulatory issues that are not in our venue at the board. And forgive me for not following up with that. I am on the DAS board. I'm on the CRA board. And I'm an animal activist in that aspect. The one thing I'd really like the Council to -- the Commission to consider is moving the two or three seats that are available on Code Enforcement into the animal area and let people that have the passion and stuff go on the Code Enforcement Board to help guide Code Enforcement on the need for however many ACOs, the training, the specialty of what the animal control environment is, because in the way the ordinance is written domestic Animal Services Advisory Board does not have any ability to do these things unless we branch off into a subcommittee. So I'd like you to consider rearranging, as you did for the DAS board, to get board members on there. You manipulated the positions to let them get in. I don't recall if you did it through regulation or through the Board itself on a majority vote, but I'd like you to do the same with Code Enforcement to get some animal specialty on the Code Enforcement Board. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And, Al, thank you for serving on the DAS advisory board as well. Thank you. MR. SCHANTZEN: One more thing, flash news, it's the first I heard that you've resigned. And I bless your heart. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you, sir. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Tom Kepp. He'll be followed by Tom Despard. April 22, 2025 Page 18 MR. KEPP: Tom Kepp. I started SNIP Collier, as most of you all know. I've been coming up in front of this commission, and I have minutes from a lot of the meetings since about 2003. And we've -- if I add up the budget of the enforcement and DAS, it -- you use $3 million a year, which I think is very low. That's about $60 million we've spent since I've been talking about this. And these videos are ones I've taken. The next day after that video was taken, I have -- well, the still shots in there were of that, there was probably 15 dogs in one street. They were mating. Like Laurie says, it was just -- you know. But I want everybody to understand, this is not just Immokalee. I saw some of the comments made. And it's Bill's district, but everybody up here is a commissioner for the whole county. And this is a problem. There's a cruelty case. I used to live in Livingston Woods. Right now, there's a cruelty case from the Sheriff's Department going on from there. That's right downtown. There's a place in Golden Gate City that is -- I know they're dog fighting. And if you read the case, you will go, "Are you kidding me?" Because actually -- now, I don't know whether they ever did it, but the Code Enforcement actually said to me, "Well, Tom, we're going to make him get a breeder permit," because there were puppies. And I said, "Seriously? What are you going to do if they tell you, you can't come in to inspect?" "We'll pull their permit." Think of that. I mean, they don't want a permit in the first place. Naples Park has a cruelty case going on. I don't know much about it. That's with the Sheriff's Department. So this is -- this is all over the county. And we're getting ready to -- like I said, I just signed a contract with Benchmark Builders to start our facility in Immokalee. I do want to thank the Board for all the years that we've -- you know, it's been six years since we've had that lease. April 22, 2025 Page 19 Thank you. We're going to actually start building probably the first of May, as soon as my last permit's out. And so this is going to help it. But the problem is, our organizations, DAS, Humane Society, us, we can all do rescue. We can do spay and neuters. We've done -- SNIP Collier's done about 16,000 spay and neuters since 2015 is when we turned into a 501(c)3. I've been doing it a lot longer than that. Just this year alone, I've either trapped stray dogs or got owner surrenders, over 80 dogs already this year. And the ones that were owner surrenders and the puppies under three months, I've taken them to Cape Coral and Gulf Coast. So I've kept those out of your facility. And the other close to 50 that I've probably brought into DAS, we brought them in off the streets. So they're out there, and this is all over the county. So once we get this built and then we're going to start on our -- about a 4,000-square-foot medical rescue facility. So this is going to help a lot in the county, but we can't do -- we can't fix this problem until we go after the bad players, the bad actors, and that's what we're not doing. I just turned somebody in just recently, and it took them over a month to go there, and I have an eight-year history of turning them in for having puppies. So anyway, I guess my time's up. Any questions? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It is. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I don't see any questions. Thank you, Tom. Thank you for all that you're doing. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: As he's going away, I just want to say thank you to Tom, his efforts. Again, Immokalee is an aggregated community. It's easy to go over there because of the April 22, 2025 Page 20 urbanization of the town and see where strays are. This issue is prolific throughout the entire county and needs to be addressed, and I'm sure, as we move forward, we'll be taking these issues up. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker and final speaker for Item 7 is Tom Despard. MR. DESPARD: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. A small problem for the county. There's a hole in the fence. I live at the Isles of Collier Preserve, and I'm sure you're familiar with the stormwater channel between Isles of Collier Preserve and Treviso Bay. We have a situation where -- and I have drawings and I have notes here where there's a hole in the -- there's no fencing between the fencing that the developer put in several years ago on our property line, and there's a gate that needs to be repaired. This is on the west side of the canal. There's two roads, the county roads, one on each side of the canal. They're gravel roads, and that's fine. They're for service vehicles. What happens is, on the west side, people have been coming in on their bikes and walking in as if it was a public park. And the way their fencing's set up for the Isles is that we have a Florida Power & Light easement, we have other openings where they can actually walk right into our development. I've seen someone in my backyard. So I would like to see this addressed. And I can give you the drawings of the -- if you're familiar. Any questions? It's District 1. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: We'll take the drawings. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Is it your side or my side? COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I don't know. That's what I was going to see. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah, I'd have to look at it. MR. DESPARD: It's -- I think it's -- it's right next to -- or right April 22, 2025 Page 21 outside of Isles of Collier Preserve on the east -- on the -- COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Commissioner Kowal and I will work together on it, because I think it's, like, right on the line. But we could care less. We want it fixed. MR. DESPARD: Appreciate it. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: If you'll give the drawings to Ms. Patterson, she'll get them distributed. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, sir. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Ms. Patterson, before we move on to the next item, I want to talk for just a moment about animal control, because this has been a really difficult issue for -- certainly, I've been kind of involved with it for a year and a half now. That was at the beginning of the repairs to the buildings and the problems that were brought to my attention. We do need to get kind of a handle on what's going out there. There was some discussion about the cages not being big enough and things like that. I don't want to get into a discussion of all that, but perhaps you could at some point in the not too distant future kind of give us a report on where we need to go with this to solve this problem. You've got some real experts here that have been working with DAS for -- literally for decades, and so I'd like to -- MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- get some guidance from you and see if we can start solving some of these problems. MS. PATTERSON: We can bring something back pretty quickly and give you an update on not only the facility, but the situation with the animal control officers, as well as some of the plans we've been talking about to address these issues with the animals running at large and a more aggressive education campaign, because a lot of this -- there are people that mistreat animals, absolutely, but a April 22, 2025 Page 22 lot of it is people that don't know better or, you know, they come from places where it's okay for animals to run around. And so we do need to work on that. I've been talking to Mr. Dunnuck about Immokalee specifically and partnering with the CRA on some activities out there that would help the animal owners. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel, would you be willing to kind of help out in terms of the Immokalee area? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, absolutely. And, you know, I spoke -- I speak to Mr. Kepp on a regular basis. You know, we've gone without a board at Farmworkers Village for almost three years, and we just recently got four new appointees to that board. There are lease arrangements that the folks at the Village -- Farmworkers Village -- we call it the Village -- can put in effect to manage -- better manage that from their tenancy for the people that live there and promote the educational aspect as well. So along with what Tom's doing with SNIPs, over at our old DAS facility that had been shut down for years -- I mean, when I became a commissioner eight years ago, DAS was virtually nonexistent in Eastern Collier County, at large. And it -- again, it's a matter of semantics. It's a matter of budget with regard to your asset base, what you can and can't do. But I'd be more than happy to work. If I may, I kind of jumped out and then jumped in in front of Commissioner LoCastro. But one of the things that really needs to be addressed by this board -- and I had hoped that the DAS board was, in fact, going to take it up -- and that's the actual ordinance of DAS with regard to enforcement, with regard to care of the animals, with -- I mean, it was brought up years and years ago, if you'll remember, when we had the issue with illegalization of retail sale of dogs and cats, and it was talked about then, but then nothing ever, in fact, transpired with regard to the adjustments in that ordinance that I think would be a huge April 22, 2025 Page 23 enhancement to give our staff more support, give our enforcement officers a better capacity to do their job. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel, then, it sounds like you'd be willing to kind of work with the staff and all in terms of how to deal with some of the problems, especially those in the Immokalee area and with Tom Kepp and the -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Not Mr. Kepp, but everybody else, yes. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And I see that he is really grateful that you've excluded him from your list of people that you're going to talk to. Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman. I just want to add to that list, that when we have deeper discussion, after you do a little bit of a deeper dive, to not overlook the fines that have been given. I mean, the ACO officers that are out there actually have given fines; maybe not as aggressively. I don't disagree with some of the statements here. But I got a list yesterday of some people that have been -- you know, gotten citation after citation, and they blow it off. And so this might be something more for Mr. Klatzkow. But it reminds me of when I wasn't happy with Code Enforcement fines for nonanimal things, people that were getting these fines that were running up tens of thousands of dollars, and they were blowing us off. And if you remember, we all voted unanimously to put a little bit more teeth in the language. I think we pulled more people into this room, and our Code Enforcement Board, you know, handled them in a little bit more of an aggressive way. We stopped going from, you know, the fines of $10,000 and then lowering it to zero because they finally were in compliance. But I think we have a similar thing here. April 22, 2025 Page 24 And these fines aren't huge, but when, you know, 100 percent of the people seem to be not paying them and blowing them off, then, you know, it reflects poorly on us. So I don't know -- I know you can't drag these people off the street and throw them in jail because they owe us $200 in fines, but there's -- obviously, that's part of the problem as well. So these ACOs, I'm sure, are frustrated that the ones that are doing the work and then give out the fines and then nothing happens, they probably feel like they're just spinning their wheels. So that's a hot topic as well, obviously. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And, Mr. Klatzkow, you and I have talked about hobby breeders for quite some time now. I mentioned to you yesterday that there's a proposed bill before the Florida legislature to deal with hobby breeders. So I'd like for you to pull up that proposed legislation, because there may be some stuff in there that would be helpful to you. But when are we going to have our hobby breeders ordinance advertised and before the Board? MR. KLATZKOW: You're going to have that done at your next meeting, if that's -- CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We've been looking for this -- MR. KLATZKOW: -- your desire. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- for a while. So if we can -- if you could move that along. MR. KLATZKOW: But I will tell you that if those bills pass, we're preempted. They are extensive. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Well, in the meantime -- MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- let's -- we don't know what's in those bills. We don't know if we'll be preempted. We don't know, if there is a preemption, if it will be prospective as opposed to April 22, 2025 Page 25 retroactive. So let's get our ducks in a row on that. Thank you. Ms. Patterson, we'll move on. MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. That brings us to -- Items 9A and 9B are continued, as noted on the agenda. Item #9C ORDINANCE 2025-22: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR A NEW SECTION ESTABLISHING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE OPERATION OF BICYCLES ON SIDEWALKS, CROSSWALKS, AND IN INTERSECTIONS WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED PORTIONS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - MOTION TO APPROVE WITH CHANGES BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL - ADOPTED So that brings us to 9C. This is a recommendation to approve an ordinance amending the pedestrian safety ordinance providing for a new section establishing requirements for the operation of bicycles on sidewalks, crosswalks, and in intersections within the unincorporated portions of Collier County, Florida. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal, this has been your effort. Do you want to lead off? COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yes, Chairman. Thank you. Yeah, this is something -- you know, I've noticed the past few years an uptick in the use of these electric motor-assist bicycles. And, you know, in the past they were typically bicycles with pedal systems on them that had a little assist motor on them, but now they're being actual modes of transportation that are similar to motorcycles in some cases. I mean, some of the ones that we've seen out there. April 22, 2025 Page 26 And now they're classified. They're classified from Class 1, Class 2, Class 3, and then they have the Class 4 and unclassified, which some of those things, they go up to 50 miles per hour. And, I mean, the Class 3s can go up to 30 miles per hour, 28 to 30 miles per hour. And they're being driven on our sidewalks. They're being driven, you know, in areas that typically are not used to having a vehicle travel that fast, especially intermingled with the pedestrians that are just trying to navigate throughout our county. And we're seeing an uptick in accidents. So I felt that -- you know, visiting this, I met with a few different groups; Sheriff's Department; the bike pedestrian community, the chairman, and we sat around and discussed some options to bring forth to maybe strengthen the ordinance we already have to include the bicycle portions of it, including with the electric-assist motors and the electric motor bikes. So this is pretty much a combination of all that, and this is what we kind of came up with. And the County Attorney's Office assisted us in getting this prepared properly to make sure we weren't outside any statute or Florida Statute or standards or overreaching anything, so this is what we've come up with, so... CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm in complete support of this. This is the beginning of a process for us as a community to address a new issue. Who would have thought five years ago that folks would be riding around at 30-plus miles an hour on our sidewalks and on our streets without any kind of regulation. And I know it's been -- it's been an arduous trip for you. I have two comments and then a question. I'll ask the question April 22, 2025 Page 27 first. How are you -- how are you working -- how is the cooperation with the Sheriff with regard to the enforcement of this? Because that seems to be a revolving door as to who's responsible for upkeep on this, and then I have a couple of statements about your -- about the ordinance. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah. Initially the traffic, the STEB unit, which is their traffic enforcement safety unit, I met with them, the lieutenant and the sergeants, and they were part of the process of looking at different ways to attack it. And then after the fact, chief -- Undersheriff Bloom, we've had a couple conversations. And, you know, he gave me his word, his support that, you know, they believe it is an issue and that it's something that has to be addressed. So, you know, they were more in -- you know, definitely were motivated to have some other tool in the toolbox. Because right now they're kind of handcuffed, because by state statute -- even at an accident scene where you have an individual on a bicycle that leaves the sidewalk area of safety and gets struck by a car, there's no language in the state statutes that -- to distinguish that person from a pedestrian. And then the state leaves it up to the counties because they don't have jurisdiction over your sidewalks. So they leave it up to the county to create some sort of ordinance to address these problems. And they've always been handcuffed by that because, in the past, they have to act as a pedestrian, not a -- not a person on a bicycle or a bicycle that's traveling 20 or 30 miles per hour. So it's a game-changer. So now they have -- they'll have a tool to actually use when it comes to investigating these things or enforcing it. So I think they have a positive avenue so far. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel, did you want to make your comments now? April 22, 2025 Page 28 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I would like to, if I may. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Sure. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The bullet points that are here listed in the -- in the proposed ordinance -- and you would make -- I know your goal is to make my life easier, but if you number those bullet points so that we could talk about them specifically. But the two -- the two that are three-quarters of the way down that are addressing bicycle operations, they seem to -- if I'm not mistaken, there's already law in place with regard to the use of a pedal bicycle. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: No, there's not. Not on a sidewalk. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There isn't? COMMISSIONER KOWAL: No. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: That's why even with a bicycle accident involving a motor vehicle, we didn't have anything to label the bicyclist separate than a person just walking on the sidewalk. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So this, in fact, addresses that. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: It addresses it. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It was in my understanding that the bicyclists had laws already. They're supposed to stop at the intersection. They're supposed to walk their bike across the street. They're supposed to abide by the traffic laws at large. I didn't realize that we actually had to distinguish about a bicycle who's going in the opposite direction of traffic. That was a -- that was another new one for me. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah. And that's -- like an example is Airport Road. Airport Road does not have a designated bike lane, so all your traffic, bicycle, electric bike, all that, is going to be on the sidewalks because they're not going to go out in that traffic and try to traverse it without a safe bike lane being designated. April 22, 2025 Page 29 And what happens is that's a positively divided road, which a divided road means there's a median that you can't just cross to go the opposite direction. So a lot of these intersections where they don't have cut-throughs, the individual's not looking to their right. They're looking to their left because that's where the traffic, the danger of entering into traffic is. And then you have a bicycle coming 25 miles per hour, 20 miles an hour from the right. They can glance that way once in a while, but it's on top of them before they get a chance to react and, you know, that's where we see a majority of these accidents at those type of intersections. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We had that -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So controlling them by -- when they have to be put in that situation with, you know, stopping at the intersection is, you know, what I think would help us. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. MS. PATTERSON: Thank you, Chairman. This definitely needs to be addressed and definitely needs to be looked at, but there -- there are some of the things within this ordinance that I think we need to have a conversation about, and one of them is with everyone over the age of 16, we force them into the bike lane. And while I personally would love that, there's a lot of elderly people who ride e-bikes that are pedal assisted. They're not riding those -- they're throttle bikes. But they don't want to be forced into a bike lane because it's -- they're not comfortable. It's not safe for them. And by forcing them out there, they're basically just going to say, "You know what, we're not going to enjoy our e-bikes or our pedal-assisted bikes." I know that this -- when this came up earlier, the Sheriff took issue with something and didn't -- didn't like it. Do you remember -- can you -- do you remember what that was? COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I never specifically -- the Sheriff April 22, 2025 Page 30 didn't specifically say anything in particular. I know when it went through the motion -- when it went through the process, at one point it got to the legal department -- the County Attorney could probably help me on this, because it didn't really -- we didn't really get an answer, so we didn't know what happened, but if you can -- MR. KLATZKOW: One of the things that my office has traditionally done is worked with the Sheriff's Office on anything that would require his enforcement. And I was told by his counsel that there was no interest for this ordinance. COMMISSIONER HALL: Right. Well, we owe it to the people to do something and do something that's for benefit of everyone. And one of the things -- there's different classes of bikes, and there's Class 1s that's pedal assisted with no throttle, and then there's Class 2 that's pedal assisted with a throttle, then there's Class 3 bikes that are just -- you can just run them like a motorcycle. And I -- I would like to see us address or talk about maybe banning those Class 3 bikes from any sidewalk because -- or limiting any speed that's over 15 miles an hour. The other bikes can't go that fast. And the people that want to remain on the shared paths, they are wanting to be safe. They are wanting to be considerate to others. It's the people that are going against the traffic. It's the people that are going to work. I love the fact that they have these e-bikes that they can use for a cheaper mode of transportation. I just want to see this ordinance force those people to obey the traffic laws, to have consideration for pedestrians on the sidewalks, not to go fast, and not to be able to put other people in danger or even make them feel uncomfortable. I've been on those shared paths, and I've had people just blow by me when I'm walking, and it makes me mad. It makes me mad. It doesn't make me mad because they're going fast. It makes me mad because of the inconsideration of it. And you don't expect it. And, April 22, 2025 Page 31 you know, I'm out there with my grandchildren. I've got my grandchildren on bicycles. We've got helmets. We've got lights. We're trying to -- I'm trying to teach them everything, how to be courteous, how to announce traffic, how to point where they're going, and how to be a good, responsible cyclist, and yet we have these e-bikes coming against us, and we just basically have to get off of the path to make room for them, and that's not right. And so what -- however we come about this, I'd like to see us address those issues. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I think part of the bad news is the legislature's gotten involved in dealing with e-bikes and all, and so we have some limitations. Mr. Teach, can you -- MR. TEACH: I would -- Scott Teach, Deputy County Attorney. I just want to address Commissioner Hall's comments. And I'm actually in agreement. I was going to raise this today. When I explored and researched this, I looked at chartered, non-chartered counties, and municipalities and saw what they were doing. Some of them addressed -- very restrictive. Our ordinance -- proposed ordinance isn't very restrictive compared to some other jurisdictions. It's a very reasonable ordinance, I think. But some address speed limits. Now, Chapter 316 of the Florida Statutes allows the county to do what you want to do as far as an ordinance, implementing it; however, you really should limit -- and I think -- I would suggest to you that they add a Subsection I to the ordinance that's proposed today that simply says, "The operation of all devices allowed under the ordinance on any sidewalk shall not exceed 15 miles per hour." That addresses the issue, because Class 2 bikes can go up to 20 miles an hour. You're under 15 now. And I think if you put that in there, you're unassailable. April 22, 2025 Page 32 CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Great. Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman. Really, the meat of this is A, B, and C that's going to cause a lot of questions. And if I understand C correctly, it says, "Any person under the age of 16 is prohibited from riding a Class 3 electric bike on public roads, bicycle paths, and shared roadways." So like Chairman -- or like Commissioner Hall was saying, Class 3 are the fast ones, right? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: They're all fast. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And that's what I have a lot of in Marco Island. So if I look at C, if I'm 15, 14, 13 -- hell, we have 10-year-olds that are operating Class 3 bikes. They can still operate them, but they would have to be on the sidewalk. They couldn't be on the -- on the roads and whatnot. And, you know, that's where I think -- you know, I don't think any ordinance is going to be perfect, but we don't want to create more confusion out there, and that's the one that I think is going to give us a lot of pushback because it's -- we're putting the fastest bicycle -- unless I'm misunderstanding it. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: You're misunderstanding it. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So explain it to me. If -- are we putting the fastest bicycles with the youngest kids on sidewalks, or were -- or were -- so what are we doing? COMMISSIONER KOWAL: We're eliminating totally. They're not allowed to operate Class 3 in Collier County -- COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Totally. Maybe the wordage just needs -- you know, I mean, we've got to be able to send this out to citizens who haven't been part of the discussions we've had and make it crystal clear. And I like what Scott said about the miles per hour. Although, I'm sure if the Sheriff was standing here -- and we April 22, 2025 Page 33 have a sheriff right here. You know, I mean, Dan, you probably would sit here and say, "What, is the Sheriff going to be out there with a speed gun?" No, of course not. So it's more of guidance to citizens. And that's not bad. It's better than what we've got up to now, but I think we have to be very clear in the wording. And the fact that we've been talking about it -- and I'm sitting here trying to ask a question and understand it perfectly. I'm not sure that if we shoot this out to the world it's got, you know, the most specific wording, and it might be missing a few things, as our attorney was saying. So these are my concerns. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah. I would just -- Commissioner LoCastro, I would just -- COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: -- say that the C -- yeah, just to clear that up. That anyone under the age of 16 is prohibited, I mean, not allowed to operate a Class 3 or higher bicycle, electric-assist motor bicycle in Collier County. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: In public roadways, shared paths, all that. To address the other thing, we talked about the speed limits. I believe the PUD -- ped community board with the MPO had brought that up, and their chairman brought that up to me that they -- it was one of their ideas to have posted speed limits or a speed limit set on the sidewalks. And then when the sheriffs were like, it's almost impossible to enforce that, they would -- you know, you would almost have to have guys running their radar and laser. And if it's not posted, then they have nothing, you know, to articulate the area. You know, just -- to them they thought it was a harder thing to April 22, 2025 Page 34 enforce than just visibly seeing somebody that looked to be 25 years old or 30 years old operating a bike on a sidewalk. MR. TEACH: Commissioner Kowal, the only thing, when I said I looked up jurisdictions and some did restrict and some didn't, I went back to the enabling statute that allows the county to do this, and it's 316.008(7)(a), and the last sentence of that says if you're going to restrict anything on the sidewalks, "The ordinance must restrict such vehicles or devices to a maximum speed of 15 miles per hour." So I believe it needs to be in there. And as far as Commissioner LoCastro's comment and consistent with like Commissioner Kowal just said, you could change "C" to any person under the age of 16-year-olds is prohibited from riding a Class 3 electrical -- COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Period. MR. TEACH: -- bicycle, period, if that's what the Board wishes. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, that would be my suggestion. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well -- and I like that suggestion, and I like the speed limit suggestion. And at the end of the day, this boils down to enforcement, and we have an issue with our Sheriff's Department. If they don't physically witness an infraction, it's not enforceable. But to Commissioner Hall's point earlier, if -- as is with virtually all of our traffic circumstances, the Sheriff has a limited amount of assets and a limited amount of capacity to be everywhere, so they end up hitting hot spots. So when reports come in similar to what we do with traffic infractions, intersections that are bad, code enforcement, citizens can call and say that on whatever -- Commissioner Hall, what path was it April 22, 2025 Page 35 you were walking on when that person -- COMMISSIONER HALL: I was on the Vanderbilt Road shared path. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. So there's a -- we're -- and, Commissioner LoCastro, you have areas in your district where the bikes are heavily used. That can be a notification over to our sheriff's department. And is it worthwhile for us to send a deputy out there with a radar gun checking the speed on these things? Probably not. But it also is a mechanism that we have to start to bring down the level of danger that's -- that's actually impacting all of our community all the way across the board. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Mr. Miller, do we have any registered speakers? MR. MILLER: We do have one registered -- or excuse me, two registered speakers for this item. Your first speaker is Brian Lynch, and he will be followed by Susan Sonnenshein. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. If the speakers could come up on the microphones. Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I just -- I just want to put something out to my board members here, because there was two things, and Commissioner Hall brought it -- kind of brought it to light, and these are two things I was discussing last night with a very close friend, Captain Lee with the Sheriff's Department, who's been retired, Drew, for many years. We had a nice conversation last night, and we were talking about the Class 1 and the Class 2 bikes, and then if we have what the attorney's saying with the -- it's just understood that 15 is the maximum speed limit on the sidewalks; that then if you have people that are a certain age, elderly groups and things like that, it wouldn't, you know, affect them if they're on those type of bikes, and, you April 22, 2025 Page 36 know, of staying on the sidewalk. Now, there's two different things we're talking about, a shared pathway and a sidewalk. Shared pathways are designed to handle both bicycles, pedestrians because they're wider, they're designed, they have bigger buffers. But you can understand, we have sidewalks in this community that are here for 30, 40 years and never expected -- they're very narrow, you know, along some of our roadways. So those are the ones more of being addressed. And I felt those were two things that I think up here that we could have a healthy discussion on maybe cleaning those up, you know, because on the shared pathway or bikeway, I wouldn't force people on the roadway because I think that would -- it could accommodate both bicycle and people on there as long as they -- and there's more in the ordinance, if you read on, about the early warning, you know, when you're on a bike versus people and things like that. I think there's a lot of things that people have questions that are already in there that -- you know. And just to address the ones that are extremely fast that go 30-plus miles per hour, those are -- those are the ones that are over the 750-watt. Now, we have a provision in the ordinance to say those are just banned completely in Collier County in public. Now, if somebody wants to buy them for their children on their own property to ride around like a dirt bike or something, that's -- that's fine. But the minute they come out on the roadways, they're jeopardizing theirselves, you know. And that's why that's in there. And that's actually a state statute. The state doesn't recognize electric bikes over 750 watts. And we have -- I have a video right now -- I should have put it on there. I showed the County Manager yesterday. Three kids on the seventy fifty [sic] plus watt bikes on Goodlette-Frank Road going April 22, 2025 Page 37 60 miles per hour, and the constituent's driving next to them the whole time trying to keep up with a video camera; 14 years old. So it is what it is. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's go ahead and hear the public comment, and then we'll get back to the -- MR. MILLER: Your first speaker is Brian Lynch, followed by Susan Sonnenshein. MR. LYNCH: Hi, Brian Lynch. Marco Island. I just wanted to bring up the shared path versus the bike lane. I just want to make sure that there is an option for us to use the shared path or the sidewalk, because sometimes those bike lanes -- I mean, they're not -- sometimes they're not wide enough. Cars are not moving over, but if they can't get over, they're riding the white line so you're right next to the car. Very uncomfortable sometimes because -- I mean, you guys, I don't know if you've been on those bike paths and cars riding right next to you. Sometimes it doesn't feel like there's that much space. So maybe the width of that will need to be addressed for new roads if you're going to incorporate moving everybody over to give them more space. In regards to that, on 951 going towards Marco, I think they did a good job. They put in double white line, I think, on some of the 951 road, and then also there's reflectors. So that makes people see that there is a bike lane there so people will -- I think, are more cautious on that -- riding that lane. So I just -- thank you very much for your time. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your final speaker on this item is Susan Sonnenshein. MS. SONNENSHEIN: Good morning. My name is Susan Sonnenshein. Thank you for pronouncing that correctly. And I'm on April 22, 2025 Page 38 the board of Naples Pathways Coalition, so I'm in safety, et cetera. And I ride an e-bike, and I have for several years. I gave up my road bike because it's too scary here in Collier County. But I'd like to address the confusion around e-bikes. E-bikes are bicycles that require pedaling. If you are not pedaling, you're not on a bicycle. It's as simple as that. Rather than those speedy machines that we see, they really should be licensed, registered and insured, and controlled by the Department of Motor Vehicles. They're not bicycles. I've ridden thousands of miles responsibly here in Collier County, and I love biking safely, but I have to pedal to make my bicycle go. I frequently meet these throttle bikes, these motor bikes, and they zoom by me, and they are dangerous, but they should not be classified as e-bikes. They -- these motor bikes don't require a person to pedal. We've heard that a million times. And I have seen them go 30, 40, and 50 miles an hour. One example is that that kid that was killed recently in Palm River, he was 14 years old. He was going way over the speed limit of 15, and by the way, he was not wearing a helmet, which is required by law. I mean, we can't -- we can make the regulations, at least we have them on the books, but we can't police everybody. We know that. What we need is a big investment in education, the schools, the Sheriff, Naples Pathways, bike shops, we all need to be involved in teaching people how to safely ride these various pieces of equipment, whatever we call them. If we don't educate on safety and we don't enforce these rules, nothing's going to improve. There will be more accidents and more deaths. Those of us pedaling on e-bikes are mostly not dangerous. They're senior citizens like me, and we mostly obey the traffic laws. Pedal-assist bicycles are not the people that are the problem. The April 22, 2025 Page 39 problem are those throttle bikes or motor bikes or whatever you want to call them. Terminology is very important here. So please don't punish those of us who want to enjoy safe biking in Collier County. Instead, address the unsafe conditions created by these zooming motor bikes are on both the roads and the sidewalks, and please recognize these as two separate and distinct group of recreational riders, whatever you want to call them. And thank you so much for addressing this. We're going to see a lot of this in the future, and Naples Pathways is also working on trying to figure out where we fit. I believe Michelle Avola forwarded all of you a copy of the little sign that I just saw on Sunday at -- on Sanibel that differentiates who can come on their paths and who can't and what the rules are. I know we can't police it, but at least let people know. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman. First, I think our two speakers brought up two really critical points, and I think this is -- this is very close, but it needs a little bit more specificity. We already talked about shortening C to just basically saying, you know, if you're under 16, Class 3 bike is a no-go. The miles per hour that Scott mentioned, I think, is a good add, so I'm summarizing there. But I think more clarity. And the first speaker talked about this. There's a difference between sidewalk, shared path, and bike lane. And even though it might seem obvious to us because we've been talking about it and whatnot, when we shoot this out to the world, there's some ambiguity in there. So I think if there's more specificity where we can say a sidewalk is yay wide, a shared path is yay wide, bike lanes are, obviously, the lanes on the side of the road or April 22, 2025 Page 40 whatever the right verbiage is, I think this would benefit from a little bit more specificity there. And as the last speaker just said, there's different classes of bikes. I don't know how deep we can get into the specificity. But as I read this, it sounds like it could benefit from more specifics on the types of bikes. You brought up some really good points. And then unless I missed it in here, did we talk at all about safety gear that anybody on any of these classes of bikes require a helmet, require a headlight, or anything like that? And I don't know if in your discussions, Commissioner Kowal, you got into that. I mean, I know we can only drill down so deep. But, you know, we do have safety expectations for other things. Is that something that was ever talked about, you know, that anybody on -- regardless of the class, has to have a helmet, or regardless of the class, has to have a headlight? Anything like that that was -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: There's already state statute that covers that. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: The problem is the jurisdictions. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: We're talking about two different jurisdictions. The state can control, you know, any person under 16 years of age has to wear an approved bicycle helmet. That's already a law. Any bicycle that operates after hours has to have a white visible light up to 600 feet and a red visible light in the rear up to 300 feet. These are already in state statute. They're already in Florida that already govern these type of vehicles. The problem is when you take the vehicle off the roadway, the state statute doesn't enforce how they act. Once you put them on the sidewalk, then the state doesn't want to take jurisdiction over the county's property. We own the -- we own the sidewalks, the shared April 22, 2025 Page 41 paths, the parks, the stuff like that. The state's not going to come in and govern them. That's why they leave it up to the county to make their own ordinance. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: But when it comes to safety, we support the state statute, you know, correct? COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Well, yeah, that's automatic. Just to have the bike -- COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I just didn't know there will be a lot of people that will take this as the Bible. And I don't know if it behooves us to reiterate in that paragraph somewhere what the state statute also includes because we're assuming there's some additional things that are in the state statute that are already -- like you said, they're already enacted. Maybe if it's not, you know, reiterated in here -- and it might be overkill, but a lot of people are going to read this word for word, and whatever's not in here, they may not have a state statute in their back pocket, so they might not be able to fill in the gaps. And when it comes to safety equipment and lights, like you say, those things are already in print somewhere. But I think this is a document that, once we finalize it, is going to fly off the shelves quickly where, I think, most people probably are not aware of the state statute and how it complements this. So I don't know the -- I'm not saying I have the exact answer of how to combine the two, but it would be nice to have one document that that stood on its own and reiterated the big main points. And I think we've addressed some of them, but just a thought. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Chairman. Really, as I think about it, the problem areas in the county that I'm aware of -- and I'm not familiar with out east and down in Commissioner LoCastro's district, but around mine and April 22, 2025 Page 42 Commissioner Kowal's district, the problems are on 41, and the problems are on Pine Ridge Road and Airport Road because there's not -- there are not bicycle lanes on those roads. So people zoom in both directions on the sidewalks, darting through the intersections. Like Commissioner Kowal was mentioning, if I am turning right, I am only concerned about traffic from the left because I'm going to merge into the right. I have nearly -- I had nearly ran right over one guy right there on Pine Ridge Road across the street from Five Guys burgers. When I was looking left, I turned right, and as I did, I have no idea how I missed this guy coming from the right in front of me going against the -- against traffic. So I'd like to see this ordinance really either address that and educate people that we need you going in the direction of traffic -- I know that on 41 right as you leave downtown as you head east, there's not a -- there's not a sidewalk on the left-hand side. There's only one going across the bridge on the right. So there's probably areas in the county that people, you know, have to -- they have to come the opposite direction. So if -- but I want to make it plain and simple where we need to blend these bicycles, these e-bikes, these motorcycles, whatever we call them, to blend in with the traffic, obey the traffic laws, and limit, you know, the -- limit their ability to fly on the sidewalks where there's not a bike lane. And with those two little adjustments, I love the way the ordinance reads. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'm going to -- I'm going to second the motion once Commissioner Kowal makes it to make those two adjustments to the period, I think you said in Item No. C, and the adjustment of Item No. I for the added speed limit, and I'm going to second the motion for passing this. April 22, 2025 Page 43 CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Let's get a motion on the floor here and also add to that the changes that are going to be made to this. We have two or three that have been described. Mr. Teach, you might have to help us out with that. Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yes. All right. So, Mr. Teach, I know you had discussed the -- because by statute, once we start a restriction for the sidewalks, we'll have to implement some sort of top speed. MR. TEACH: What I would suggest is we have a Subsection H right now. Make a Subsection I that simply says -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I. MR. TEACH: -- the operations of all devices allowed under this ordinance on any sidewalk shall not exceed 15 miles per hour, and that would cover that. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: One five. Say 15. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: And then, Commissioner LoCastro, I think on Page 5 of 6 -- COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. I'm on it right now. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: -- if you look at C, C says, any person under the age of 16 -- COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: -- will be prohibited to ride Class C electric bike on public roadways. Were you looking at the description one or that one? COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Well, I think we were all saying that we thought it might be more clear if it ended sooner and just said, "Any person under the age of 16 years old is prohibited from riding a Class C electric bicycle," period. That, you know, the other stuff is not necessary, and it makes it very clear. Because you made it clear when -- when I was trying to understand that, and you April 22, 2025 Page 44 said, oh, under 16. And then like Scott said, maybe just put a period after the word "bicycle." COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I think the only reason we have those designated, because those are the ones that are public. You know, we can't restrict somebody on private property if their kid wants -- if they want to buy a Class C -- 3 bike. That's why we have that in there to say, "on public property", on these type of things. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm okay with that. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: If you have a farm and you want a kid to ride around on a Class C bike, that's up to you. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. So we have an ordinance. We have two amendments to the ordinance at this point that I think are pretty clear; is that correct? COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Correct. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Any other amendments to what's before us? COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER HALL: So when we see A, it says, "Any person over the age of 16 must operate their pedal-assisted bicycle/electric bicycle in the bicycle lane when available," that's going to force -- that's going to force elderly people into the bike lane, and that's the main feedback that I've gotten is, "Commissioner, please don't force us into the bike lane," because basically, we're going to say we can't ride that bike. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: And originally the ordinance was what you just discussed earlier about having -- you know, controlling the flow and which way people are going when they're using the sidewalk. But we were getting such a complaint about e-bikes being April 22, 2025 Page 45 intermingled with other people, pedestrians walking. And I started visiting and talking to people about, well, how can we kind of remedy it? Because it -- you had -- I was trying to draw a -- I think we drew a line, like, saying, all right, what's the age cutoff? Well, with drivers it's 16. You can drive a moped. You can get a motorcycle only license. You can operate on the roads at 16 and above, but -- and that -- the reason that came up was if you've ever been at 6 o'clock in the morning -- a.m. in the morning going down Vanderbilt Beach Road, and everybody's riding down to the construction sites, which is the giant Ritz-Carlton, there's 30, 40 of the workers -- because they're circumventing the system. We have to be honest. They don't have a driver's license. They're circumventing the system. They're using the sidewalks. They're using these e-bikes. And we've got children intermingling with them, going to school, we've got school buses stopping. We've got -- it's like a highway for them coming down through there. And so I had to say, somewhere, where do we draw the line, like an age? You know, I've got a 30-year-old going 30 mile an hour on a bicycle going to work on a sidewalk, you know, when kids are going to school. I mean, you know, that was the only reason we had to, like, say, all right, let's -- how do we appease the people that don't like them on the sidewalks? How do we appease the people that want to ride on the sidewalks? But like I said, my discussion last night, I started thinking about -- I don't know if it's -- if we could say only Class 3 bikes that adults are operating would have to go in the bike lane because they're faster, because now we have a restricted speed in the ordinance. COMMISSIONER HALL: We had a restricted speed -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So if we don't do the 1 and 2s can remain on the sidewalk, but once you go from Class 3 or above and you're over 16, you have to go on a bike lane, because those travel at April 22, 2025 Page 46 30 miles per hour, so they could travel with the vehicles. MR. TEACH: So are you suggesting, for example, this Subsection A on Page 5 of 6 say, "Any person over the age of 16 years old or who is operating a Class C bicycle must operate" -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Over 16. Still keep it 16 operating a Class C bicycle, because nobody's going to be allowed to operate a Class C -- 3 bicycle under 16. MR. TEACH: Over the age of 16 years old operating a Class C bicycle -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Three. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Three. MR. TEACH: I'm sorry. I'm saying C but I'm thinking 3 -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Or above. MR. TEACH: -- because A, B, C. COMMISSIONER HALL: I hear you. MR. TEACH: Operate -- over the age of 16 years old operating a Class 3 bicycle must operate the electric bicycle in the bicycle lane. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Off -- because of the legal off built -- because I know -- I understand what this gentleman was saying, too. I've seen -- I ride my bike, too, every weekend. I've seen some of these bike lanes. I don't think they meet the standards for FDOT's -- you know, in some of these secondary roads, and then you have the shared where they're called the chevron roads, which are shared roadways. MR. TEACH: And that would limit the excessive bikes to the bike lane. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Exactly. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. So we have a motion to approve an ordinance that's going to be amended. Just for clarification for the record, would you state what the three amendments are so far. April 22, 2025 Page 47 MR. TEACH: We have new Subsection I, "the operation of all devices allowed under this ordinance on any sidewalk shall not exceed 15 miles per hour." We're going to go to C, Subsection C, and say, "Any person under the age of 16 years old is prohibited from riding a Class 3 electrical bicycle." We know we can't regulate them on private property. And the last one would be, "Any person over the age of 16 years old operating a Class 3" -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Or above. MR. TEACH: -- or above, and those are prohibited anyways. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Because they have the -- they're prohibited anyways, but they're still going to be out. MR. TEACH: Yeah -- must operate an electric bicycle in the bicycle lane when available. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. So, Commissioner Kowal, you have the motion that incorporates those three amendments. Are there any other amendments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Then we -- COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Can I just add something? Is there any appetite up here to feel there isn't enough specificity in here about difference between sidewalk, shared path, and bike lane and not enough specificity in here about safety equipment? MR. TEACH: We do have some new definitions for those various things. They don't talk about the size or whatnot, but they provide the specificity as far as what is a sidewalk, what is a bicycle lane, what is a pathway, and those appear in Section 3, definitions, of the ordinance, including bicycle lane. And it just -- for example, "Bicycle lane means any portion of a roadway or a highway which is designated by pavement markings and signs for preferential or April 22, 2025 Page 48 exclusive use by bicycles," and we do that for each of those various -- CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And clearly, we can't give the dimensions because they're different sizes all over the -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, sure, of course. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So we have a -- we have a motion. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: We have a motion. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Do we have a second? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel seconded. That incorporates those amendments. Everybody's clear on that? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That passes unanimously. Thank you. And thank you, Commissioner Kowal, for shepherding this through. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you. MR. KLATZKOW: Mr. Chair, if it pleases the Board, what we will do is Scott will amend the ordinance, send each of you a copy of it for your review to make sure that it encompasses everything you wanted, and if we don't hear from you by Friday, we'll file the bill. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well -- okay. But let's clear about something. We only -- we have three amendments. April 22, 2025 Page 49 MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So if there's something else in this ordinance that someone's uncomfortable with, we're going to have to amend the ordinance again. That will require another public hearing. MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: What you're talking about is making sure the language on those three amendments is consistent with what we think it is. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Voted on. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I ask a question, sir? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Is this the -- doesn't this ordinance have to come back for final adoption, or is this it today? MR. KLATZKOW: No. What I'll do is I'll send each of you a copy of it, and if there's no objection, we will file it with the state on Friday. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm fine with that. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Can I ask -- CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So as we all advertise this in our different forums, newsletters, town halls, or this gets out on the street and we start to get some feedback, if there's something, then, specific, we -- I mean, we make it clear to citizens we could always amend this if we hear -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. KLATZKOW: Any commissioner can make a motion for reconsideration, and we can bring it back. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. Because, you know, we're wide-open listening to citizens. We have several that came to April 22, 2025 Page 50 the podium here. No ordinance is going to cover everything, but if there's something major that we missed or is ambiguous, you know, we want to know. So we'll work hard to get this out on the street when we see the final version and get feedback. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I hate to beat the dead horse. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: No, that's all right. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: But, yeah, I think -- I think a major portion of this ordinance, too, is -- and by us doing what we did today is, I think there's got to be a period of education before enforcement. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: And when I talked to Undersheriff Bloom, they understand that, you know, that -- and I think even including the school resource officers, you know, holding, you know, seminars with these children, advising them of how the ordinance works, you know, the safeties and the pros and cons, you know, just in general. You know, so I think it's going to be a big public push for, you know, many months until we actually have somebody that has to actually be, you know, monetarily fined for it, I guess you would say. But it has to be an educational period, and I think everybody connected to it understands that, so... CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Ms. Patterson. MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. Item #9D ORDINANCE 2025-23: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SIERRA MEADOWS MIXED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) BY CHANGING THE FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR GROUP HOUSING ON LOTS 8 AND 9 OF THE SIERRA April 22, 2025 Page 51 MEADOWS SUBDIVISION FROM .45 TO .60. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF 14.3+/-ACRES OF A 90.8+/- ACRE MPUD, IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE INTERSECTION OF RATTLESNAKE- HAMMOCK ROAD (C.R. 864) AND C.R. 951, IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL - ADOPTED That brings us to Item 9D. This item does require ex parte disclosure. This is a recommendation to approve an ordinance amending the Sierra Meadows Mixed Planned Unit Development by changing the floor area ratio for group housing on Lots 8 and 9 of the Sierra Meadows subdivision from .45 to .60, the subject property consisting of 14.3 plus/minus acres of a 90.8-plus/minus-acre MPUD is located at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and County Road 951 in Section 22, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Let's do your ex parte disclosures first, and then we'll swear everybody in with the court reporter. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I have meetings -- yeah, meetings. That's it. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And, Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. No, I have no ex parte. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Meetings. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I had meetings as well. April 22, 2025 Page 52 CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I had meetings, and I had emails, so I feel special. COMMISSIONER HALL: Whoa, whoa. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Commissioner Hall's left out. COMMISSIONER HALL: Purposely. MS. PATTERSON: If all participants could stand up, please, 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.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Before we start, this is clearly going to take more than eight minutes, and we are going to take about a 15-minute break. We can do that break now, and I'll just ask the petitioner, do you want to start, and then we'll break, or do you want us to go ahead and take a break or -- MS. PASSIDOMO: It probably makes more sense to take your break first. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. So why don't we come back at about -- what, about 20 minutes to 11. Would that work for everybody? (A brief recess was had from 10:22 a.m. to 10:40 a.m.) MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. Okay. We'll get back to the public hearing and the... MS. PATTERSON: Whatever you want to do, it's fine. We're going to start with the applicant. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. We generally, here, start with the applicant. MS. PATTERSON: I already -- yes, I already read the title in before the break. April 22, 2025 Page 53 CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes, we've already done the disclosure, and we're all set to go. MS. PASSIDOMO: Thank you. Francesca Pass -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We did that all ready. MS. PASSIDOMO: Good morning. My name is Francesca Passidomo. I'm an attorney with Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester here representing the applicant, the Morgan companies. With me today is Patrick Vanasse, the project planner, and the project civil engineer, Andrew Rath. I'll walk you through the scope of this petition, the purpose of this petition, and the location. Mr. Vanasse will explain in greater detail the planning principles in support of this petition. In summary, this is a request to allow for a floor area ratio of .6, which is a technical deviation to your Land Development Code. Sierra Meadows is an existing PUD. I will show you its location in a moment. When the PUD was approved in 1999, it adopted the Land Development's Code -- excuse me -- the Land Development Code standard of .45. An assisted living and independent living facility was constructed in accordance with the .45 floor area ratio, but that had an unintended consequence. Again, I'll walk you through in greater detail. This request will have no impact in terms of the actual commercial entitlements and commercial uses allocated to the PUD nor an impact on the location of those uses, external drives, preserve areas. The preserve and all of the access to the project was already approved as part of the PUD, platted and is developed. This is the location of the subject property. On the north side of the project is Rattlesnake Hammock Road. On the east side of the project is 951. Physicians Regional is caddy corner to the southeast. The assisted living facility is shown in yellow. The -- this facility was constructed in compliance with its approvals, as noted. The April 22, 2025 Page 54 approvals complied with a .45 floor area ratio standard, but through a somewhat unique mechanism of including lot six, also shown on the screen, it's that red box south of Sequoia Drive. Lot 6 was included as part of the gross floor area ratio for the assisted living and independent living facility in its Site Development Plan. The purpose of this PUD amendment is to allow a FAR standard of .6 in lieu of the .45 through the deviation process. A .6 FAR, as Mr. Vanasse will explain in greater detail, has become the current standard for independent living facilities and assisted living facilities, but in each case, a technical deviation is required, and that is the process that we are with you -- in front of you today. Staff and the Planning Commission support the deviation. There has been no public opposition to this request to date, to my knowledge. In terms of the result of this request -- so, really, the narrow question before you today is a rezone for the deviation from .45 to .6, and that is the standard of approval. That is what you are approving. But I think there's been a little bit of, perhaps, confusion on the result of that request. So as I -- as I explained, the two yellow pieces of property and that red piece of property, Lot 6, are in one Site Development Plan. In that Site Development Plan, Lot 6 was noted, as will at this -- will, at the time of Site Development Plan, remain unimproved. That allowed for a total project acreage of including Lot 6, but the facility was actually constructed on the yellow. The outcome, in our opinion, and I believe in staff's opinion, is the antithesis of the purpose of this location which is, in fact, in an activity center that is intended to accommodate a mixture of uses including commercial services proximate to those project -- excuse me -- those job employment centers and residential properties near April 22, 2025 Page 55 by. Lot -- Lot 6 is a relatively small lot. The maximum square footage that we could potentially put on Lot 6 through various assignments of intensity that we'll receive is 10,000 square feet. So this is not necessarily a huge generator in terms of impacts. All of those commercial square footages already exist in the PUD, so it's assigning it to this property, which was always intended to be developed as commercial but for that kind of odd Site Development Plan process that occurred with the assisted living facility. The commercial uses that exist in the PUD, as you can see the screen, are self-storage. Gas station. This is not intended to be duplicative of those. Right now they're talking to a coffee shop and maybe a small other retail store. But this, again, is not intended to be something that is hugely intensive. Certainly consistent with the square footages already allocated to the PUD. So in short, what we're attempting to do is look at the FAR, determine whether the deviation from .45 to .6 makes sense in this location. We believe it does because the assisted living facility is constructed, developed, and Lot 6 was intended to be a commercial piece of property. This process is usually contemplated at the time of PUD, but because the PUD is so old, that's likely why they did this through the Site Development Plan process rather than coming before you through what we're doing today. So we're here today. I'll turn it over to Mr. Vanasse to walk through, again, the planning principles in greater detail. MR. VANASSE: Thank you. Good morning. My name is Patrick Vanasse. I'm a certified planner with The Neighborhood Company. It's a pleasure to be here. Francesca did a good job giving you a good summary of what we are requesting. I'll just back things up a little bit, give a little context. April 22, 2025 Page 56 So the subject property, subject to these deviations, are Lots 8 and 9 within the Sierra Meadows PUD. What you see here is the boundary of Sierra Meadows. It's plus or minus 90 acres. Within that PUD, you've got a large conservation tract when you start from the west side going east, so that's on the left of the screen. Conservation tract, multifamily tract, and then the commercial tract towards the intersection. The property is bounded by Collier Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock. And as mentioned, the deviation would apply to Lots 8 and 9, which is where Discovery Village currently exists. The PUD was approved in 1999. Sierra Meadows started working on their SDP -- not Sierra Meadows -- Discovery Village on their SDP in 2014/2015. As mentioned, I can only assume -- I don't know all the answers. I haven't talked to the original developers, but -- other PUDs I've worked on, typically, you either start with what's allowed currently in the code -- and the standard in the code is .45 for assisted living facilities -- or you ask for a deviation, and the standard deviation that's been given to most ALFs in Collier County is a .6 FAR. Personally, I've worked probably on half a dozen to a dozen PUDs through the years that have requested that increase in FAR for assisted living facilities. And I think on all those projects that I was involved, it was granted at .6. So, again, here just to reiterate, Discovery Village in yellow, when they came in with the SDP, they utilized the area of Lot 6 to be under the .45 FAR. Without Lot 6, they would have been at .51. Just a slight increase. So this is the SDP. Again, Lots 8, 9, and Lot 6 over here. That entire area was utilized to calculate the FAR. Unfortunately, the unintended consequence is that a lot -- the Lot 6, which was always intended for commercial, always intended for future development, is now rendered undevelopable because it's encumbered with this FAR April 22, 2025 Page 57 calculation. So by granting the deviation, Lots 8 and 9 can stand on their own, and they meet -- they would meet the zoning FAR maximum, and Lot 6 could move forward with its own SDP. So this is just a slide reiterating what I just said. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Just a moment. Commissioner Hall, you have a question? COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes. Mr. Vanasse, yeah, I have a question. So what we're talking about is just granting the .6 on what's already built? MR. VANASSE: Yes, correct. COMMISSIONER HALL: And then Lot 6 would stand alone at the same .45, or would the whole PUD be .6? MR. VANASSE: The deviation as it reads right now just increases the FAR max at .45 to .6. So, technically, it would apply to the entire PUD, but we -- MS. PASSIDOMO: No. I was going to speak to that. The FAR is only for Lots 8 and 9, so it's a deviation only -- COMMISSIONER HALL: The deviation is, since you've already counted Lot 6, you need the increase for what you've already built and then to still be able to do the commercial on Lot 6; otherwise, you can't do it at all? MS. PASSIDOMO: Well, just to address the question, the deviation is not PUD-wide. It is solely with respect to -- COMMISSIONER HALL: That's what I was really asking. MS. PASSIDOMO: -- the two yellow lots. COMMISSIONER HALL: Okay. Good. Thank you. MR. VANASSE: So -- but correct, by having -- granting that deviation to Lots 8 and 9, it then allows Lot 6 to move forward for development. Also our understanding is Discovery Village has been there for close to 10 years. There's been no issues, no concerns with that April 22, 2025 Page 58 project. And no, we are not aware of any future plans for that community. So this slide simply shows what the FAR with that Lot 6 would have been. It would have been .51, slightly greater than what was allowed in the PUD of .45, and just reiterating that .6 is almost a standard deviation approved for many ALFs. Interestingly, when we went before the Planning Commission and we had a bit of a discussion about this, I think one of the members suggested that maybe the county would like to look at that .6 FAR because it is commonly approved by -- for most ALFs through a deviation process with the PUDs. This is a slide simply showing the PUD master plan. What I'd like to point out is this entire area is identified as commercial. There is a total commercial square footage allowed within the PUD of 260,000 square feet. With the planned 10,000 square feet on Lot 6, that would still leave about 76,000 square feet of commercial undeveloped. This is the plat of that area just showing the various parcels, Lots 8 and 9 and Lot 6 over here along 951. This is the rest of the PUD, the commercial tract and the multifamily tract. This summarizes the commercial cap within the PUD, 260,000 square feet. Built to date 173-; unbuilt 86-. We're planning plus-or-minus 10,000, and that would be the remainder. So to summarize, this is an activity center where we identify those locations for our most intense commercial uses. Lot 6, what is planned for that lot is commercial neighborhood type of uses to really address goods and service needs and local community. Also would like to point out that we sent out notices, held our NIM. No one showed up. We had no objections. I haven't received any comments or -- and I received one call. We had a neighbor call, ask what was planned for Lot 6. He had heard that there might be a April 22, 2025 Page 59 national chain going there for a coffee shop. I said, "Yes, that is the plan," and the gentleman was very happy. He's looking forward to it. So that's the only public comment that I've received. So with that said, we believe that the deviation which will then, in turn, allow development of Lot 6 will not be harmful to neighboring properties. I think it advances the intent of the activity center. And with that said, we respectfully request your approval, and we stand for any questions. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman. Obviously, this is in my district. Maybe just to speed things along. This is a small correction. I obviously had a deep dive with everybody that's here, to include our county staff. I have no issues at all. I got the same feedback from some citizens that are looking forward to something small and manageable being put on that lot, and it sounds like we're just taking something from 1999, catching it up to current day. I mean, I don't want to put off Ms. Cook or Mr. Bosi, but they both spoke to me in great detail yesterday, and they would come up here and reiterate what the group would say. So unless there's some questions or something that we're missing, I would make a motion that we approve. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's hold off on the motion until we hear the staff report and the public comment. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We're in a quasi-judicial proceeding, so we need to make sure we make the complete record. MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, zoning director. Yes, this is a deviation request. The current PUD has a .45 floor area ratio allocation for group care facilities. This is requesting to go April 22, 2025 Page 60 to .6. So it is a formal request to deviate from our current LDC standard. It's a deviation that is -- typically has been provided, and actually, we've coordinated with the Collier County Planning Commission, and they've asked staff to propose a modification to the -- to the Land Development Code to make .6 the new standard moving forward because this is such a frequently requested deviation. I can also let you know that within the proposed ordinance, it is specifically only for 8 and 9 where the .60 floor area ratio would be applied. Staff is recommending approval. It has been reviewed by all the divisions that review PUD amendments, including Transportation. It was heard by the Planning Commission. There was no opposition. It was unanimously recommended. As I said, staff is supporting, and we would answer any questions that you have regarding the proposal. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I don't see any lights up -- oh, Commissioner McDaniel. I wasn't fast enough. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was multitasking. And just as a point of clarification, I'm in support of the proposed -- or the to-be announced motion. But we're not increasing density. We're not increasing allowable square footage. We're just redistributing what's already approved. MR. BOSI: Correct. There are no deviations or no additional uses. There's no additional square footage. There's nothing other than the modification that requested the deviation from .45 to .60. That's the only request that's being made to the PUD. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Very good. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Mr. Miller, any registered speakers? MR. MILLER: We have none, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. We'll close the public hearing. We're now ready for a motion. April 22, 2025 Page 61 COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Seeing none, all in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That passes unanimously. Item #9E ORDINANCE 2025-24: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-29, THE IMMOKALEE SENIOR HOUSING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD), AND ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF AN ADDITIONAL 0.55+/- ACRES OF LAND ZONED RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY-6 (RMF-6), WITH A WELLFIELD RISK MANAGEMENT SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY ZONE W-4 (ST/W-4) FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS IMMOKALEE SENIOR HOUSING MIXED-USE PLANNED UNIT April 22, 2025 Page 62 DEVELOPMENT (MPUD), BY REDUCING THE NUMBER OF MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS FROM 119 TO 30 UNITS, AND ALLOWING A 5,000 GROSS SQUARE FOOT 200-SEAT CHURCH, AND UP TO 50,000 SQUARE FEET OF CERTAIN COMMUNITY FACILITY AND EDUCATIONAL SERVICES USES; UPDATING THE MASTER PLAN; AND RESCINDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT ON 7.99± ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF 11TH STREET NORTH, JUST SOUTH OF LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD AND HIGHLAND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20240005475] - MOTION TO APPROVE WITH CHANGES BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HALL - ADOPTED MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 9E. This item does require that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by the commission members. This is a recommendation to approve an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 04-29, the Immokalee Senior Housing Residential Planned Unit Development, and Ordinance No. 2004-41, the Collier County Code Land Development Code, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an additional .55 plus/minus acres of land zoned Residential Multifamily-6 with a wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 for a project to be known as Immokalee Senior Housing Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development by reducing the number of multifamily residential dwelling units from 119 to 30 units and allowing a 5,000-gross-square-foot 200-seat church, and up to 50,000 square feet of certain community facility and educational April 22, 2025 Page 63 services -- services uses, updating the master plan, and rescinding the affordable housing density bonus agreement on 7.99 plus/minus acres of property located on the east side of 11th Street North just south of Lake Trafford Road and Highland Elementary School in Section 33, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida, and providing an effective date. So ex parte. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I have no ex parte on this item. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: No ex parte. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Meetings, emails, and phone calls. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I have no ex parte. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And I have no ex parte as well. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You guys have all been left out. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: You got the trifecta. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Again. MS. PATTERSON: If all participants could please stand and 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: Very good. We'll begin with the applicant. MR. ARNOLD: Good morning. Wayne Arnold here representing the Immokalee Foundation and the Friendship Baptist Church. This is an amendment, as you heard Ms. Patterson say, to an April 22, 2025 Page 64 existing PUD, and we're also adding about a half an acre of land to the PUD. Friendship Church has owned the property for some time. This is the property that's been built or developed with 30 of the affordable senior housing units. They didn't exercise their ability to purchase the rest of the land many years ago, so the Friendship Baptist Church is going to retain a portion of it to build a church for themselves and also a new educational facility for the Immokalee Foundation. And we had a neighborhood information meeting, and we obviously had a Planning Commission meeting. We had two people who spoke in opposition primarily because we also, as part of the church, asked for a childcare facility, 100-student childcare facility. That seemed to be the issue, because, as you can see, the property's located here, but it's also just south of Highlands Elementary, and some of the neighbors felt that there might be competing traffic between a childcare center and the existing elementary school. So the change we did make after the Planning Commission hearing -- I'll go right to that slide. And I did have a conversation with Mr. McDaniel about this. What we've done is we've taken the childcare use out as an independent use, and we've made it as a use that can only be held during a religious facility [sic]. So I think most churches by right have childcare facilities during their services. In talking to Mike and his staff, we've agreed that we should probably put it in there just to make it clear that you could have childcare during religious services. That's kind of, in a nutshell, where we are. Noemi Perez is here from the Foundation, if you have any questions about the Immokalee Foundation and what they're doing. And Mike Facundo, who's on your CRA Advisory Board for Immokalee, is also here and is a local architect that's been working on the project. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Are there any questions or April 22, 2025 Page 65 comments from the Board before we move on to staff report? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Mr. Bosi. MR. BOSI: Thank you, Chair. Mike Bosi, Zoning director. Again, this was unanimously recommended by the Planning Commission. We did have a couple individuals speak in opposition at the Planning Commission regarding traffic and concerns, and I believe the removal of the 100-seat daycare facility probably addresses the area. I did want to bring up one area that's being requested from a staff perspective and let me get to this section. And here it is. It's the first -- it's 5.13, planning. And it reads, "The proposed educational use is not a traditional educational facility and serves the neighboring schools with after-school learning opportunities per LDC 4.05.04.F.4. 'The County Manager or designee may determine the minimum required spaces for uses not specifically referenced'; therefore, the educational, social service, and skill training uses shall provide minimum parking at the following standards: One space per one staff member and one space per seven students." What staff would request from the Board of County Commissioners is to eliminate from -- at the beginning "per LDC 4.05.04," and then all the way to here, remove that, because that seems like it gives, like, some sort of a discretion to staff to modify your parking standards. And what that does is it basically says, the educational, social service, and skill training uses shall provide a minimum parking of the following standards: One per staff member and one per seven students. So that's what -- that clarification, it's a small clarification, but staff just wanted to provide some -- or remove any ambiguity as to suggest that staff was going to deviate from what was adopted within the existing PUD. That's -- that would the one request that staff is April 22, 2025 Page 66 making for a modification to the existing ordinance, or proposed ordinance. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We -- I'll wait till after the public speaks, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Thank you. Any public speakers? MR. MILLER: No, we don't. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Close the public hearing. Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Well, I'll -- with that adaptation, I'll make a motion for approval. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. And you're talking about the clarification at Section 5.13.A? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Eliminating the language that Mr. Bosi had indicated. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That is correct. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER HALL: Second. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Motion and second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed? (No response.) April 22, 2025 Page 67 CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That passes unanimously. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you very much. Item #10A RESOLUTION 2025-89: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUPPORTING THE EOG DOGE TEAM EFFORT AND (1) COMMIT COLLIER COUNTY TO COLLABORATE WITH THE EOG DOGE TEAM; (2) DIRECT THE COUNTY MANAGER TO TRANSMIT THE RESOLUTION TO THE GOVERNOR, AND (3) APPOINT THE COUNTY MANAGER AS LIAISON TO THE EOG DOGE TEAM AND PROVIDE REGULAR UPDATES TO THE BOARD REGARDING RELEVANT EOG DOGE ACTIVITIES - MOTION TO APPROVE ADDING LANGUAGE ADJUSTMENT (COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE) BY COMMISSIONER HALL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL - ADOPTED MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 10. Item 10A is a recommendation to approve a resolution of the Board of County Commissioners supporting the EOG DOGE team effort and, 1, commit Collier County to collaborate with EOG DOGE team; 2, direct the County Manager to transmit the resolution to the Governor; and, 3, appoint the County Manager as liaison to the EOG DOGE team and provide regular updates to the Board regarding relevant EOG DOGE activities. This item is brought to the agenda by Commissioner Hall. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall, you're recognized. COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you. I wanted to make a resolution between us and send it to the April 22, 2025 Page 68 Governor's office to let him know that we're fully behind his efforts to eliminate any kind of wasteful government spending. And we actually have been doing this. We were doing DOGE when DOGE wasn't cool, and we're in our third year now. But it would be a resolution from us saying to the Governor, "We're behind you, and we're going to participate in any way that you want us to," and all of the questions have to go the County Manager, and she'll have to handle the whole load. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. And you're absolutely correct. We've been doing it since way before it was cool. My only comment that I had was allowing for County Manager or designee to be the facilitator between the state's DOGE team and ours. And when I read that, it specifically said the County Manager. And typically we include "or designee." Would you be okay with that? COMMISSIONER HALL: I'd be fine with that. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Do we have any registered speakers? MR. MILLER: We do not, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Then, unless there's further -- Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman. I was just going to ask the County Manager, when's our next ResourceX update? Do we have something on the books, or are they -- we're bringing them back to -- MS. PATTERSON: They'll be participating in our June budget workshop. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. MS. PATTERSON: We regularly collaborate with them, but the next time they'll be here will be for the June workshops. April 22, 2025 Page 69 COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. Like we're saying, that was sort of our DOGE before DOGE was a word, so it's good that we'll be hearing from them in June. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Any further comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Then we need a motion. Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: I move to approve. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Second. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and second. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Does that include that adjustment? COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes, that includes that adjustment. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That passes unanimously. MS. PATTERSON: Very good. Item #11A THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AND TRANSMIT A NOTICE OF TERMINATION TO CANCEL THE SALE UNDER THE AGREEMENT FOR THE SALE AND PURCHASE OF THE WILLIAMS RESERVE PROPERTY. April 22, 2025 Page 70 (TRINITY SCOTT, DEPARTMENT HEAD - TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT) - MOTION TO PROCEED WITH THE PROPOSED PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH ACCEPTANCE OF THE SELLER’S AMENDMENT #4 BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HALL - APPROVED (COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS AND COMMISSIONER KOWAL OPPOSED) That brings us to Item 11. Item 11A is a recommendation to authorize the County Manager or designee to execute and transmit a notice of termination to cancel the sale under the agreement for the sale and purchase of the Williams Reserve property. Trinity Scott, your department head of Transportation Management Services, is here to present. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Good morning. MS. SCOTT: Good morning. Hold on. I'm trying to find my presentation. I don't see it, but I can get there quickly. For the record, I'm going to dock Troy's pay, because usually he has my presentation up. MR. MILLER: It was being updated. MS. SCOTT: So for the record, Trinity Scott, department head for Transportation Management Services. And I have multiple folks in the room with me today that have been involved in this with our real property as well as County Attorney's Office -- oh, she just walked in -- as well as Growth Management and Community Development, as well as the County Manager's Office. So just a reminder, this is the Williams Reserve property. On the right -- I want to point out a few areas because I'm going to talk about them specifically. This particular area here, we refer to this as the boot, like your shoe; the yellow hashed area is the slough area, is how we refer to April 22, 2025 Page 71 that; and then the south area are kind of the farm field area. So you'll hear me reference that as we go forward in the presentation. Just a little bit of background, our initial -- the seller's initial asking price was $23 million for 2,247 plus-or-minus acres. Back in May of 2024, the Board approved a sale and purchase agreement. This was prior to our pre-environmental investigation, our due diligence period. The purchase price in the sales contract is $20,770,000, and that was -- the basis of that was the average of two appraisals. The property, the boot, 168 acres, give or take, approximately 5.9, that was the average of the two appraisals, and then the remaining acreage, which included the slough and the remaining fields, the average of the two appraisals was $7,100 per acre. The due diligence period has been extended multiple times to conduct environmental investigations. Results of those environmental investigations include some soil contamination that exceed allowable thresholds that will require remediation, as well as groundwater contaminants that exceed these allowable thresholds as well. At this time, from a county perspective, we are unaware that the full horizontal area of the groundwater contamination has been defined; however, this will require remediation. The seller is not obligated to involve the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in their remediation process; however, when the -- when the property is developed, the Collier County Land Development Code requires the county to complete a predevelopment sampling and coordination with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. The seller's approach may or may not satisfy the agency's expectations, and this may result in additional assessment and remediation that would be the financial responsibility of the county. This may result in development delays or underutilization of the April 22, 2025 Page 72 public investment. At the last meeting, the Board directed us to go back and see how we might be able to be -- find ourselves where we're okay without having FDEP involvement in this initial phase, and I remember Commissioner Saunders asking Ms. Ashkar, "How would this typically be done in a private transaction?" And the response was, "Typically there's an adjustment in the sales price." So following the Board meeting, we spent over four hours debating this with our staff, and our team came together for over four hours after the Board meeting to really talk about this and talk about pros and cons, and these are the key terms that were proposed by the county to the seller prior to that Friday deadline that we had given ourselves. And our first item was a purchase price adjustment. To mitigate the county's risks of not having DEP involvement, the seller would choose to either, one, accept a reduced purchase price of $18,693,000, or agree to escrow 10 percent of the purchase price, just over $2 million, which would be used by the county should further remediation post closing be necessary, with the balance being returned to the seller upon successful determination from DEP that no further remediation would be necessary. We also committed to no DEP review would be required in that slough area and that the county must initiate that coordination with DEP within 36 months; otherwise, the funds would be released to the seller. Both of these proposals were rejected by the seller. Other key terms of the fourth amendment -- by the way, every time I say "fourth amendment," I don't think of this. I think of the Constitution. So sorry about that. I go a different way. But inspection period waiver, that it would expire upon the execution of the fourth amendment. Both the seller and the county were -- county staff were in agreement with that. The environmental April 22, 2025 Page 73 waiver indemnification, that they would not be held liable. The remediation, the seller would decide whether or not they choose to remediate. Now, this was a new term. If the seller remediates -- not this particular one. But if the seller remediates, they cover the cost of the remediation. If the seller chooses not to remediate, the agreement would automatically terminate. If the remediation is completed, the lab results confirm the cleanup levels are met, then the county would proceed to closing. If the seller cannot achieve those cleanup levels, they may stop the remediation, and the agreement would also automatically terminate. Liquidated damages is how this term is noted in the sales agreement. When I'm talking about it and when I was talking with a few commissioners, I really look at this as kind of earnest money, is how I would look at it. But if the seller remediates and the county fails to close, the county would have to pay the seller liquidated damages of $500,000. This is part of fourth amendment. Currently that amount is $70,000. We would be allowed to do limited surface-water testing, but -- and then that was specifically to the slough area. These would be for informational only, and that as part of this, we would not obligate the seller to remediate those. And then the existing leases, that the seller could extend those existing agricultural leases on the property for one year due to the proposed closing date extension, but that they couldn't continue those for anything further once we had finalized the amendment. Based on the existing sales agreement in place today, the due diligence period expires tomorrow, so we need to make a decision today. If the county does not terminate or extend the date, the county is expected to close on the property. If the county does not close on the property, based on the existing sales agreement, we would be obligated to pay $70,000 in liquidate damages if we do not proceed to April 22, 2025 Page 74 closing. Based on all this information, our staff recommendation is to authorize the County Manager or designee to execute and transmit a notice of termination to cancel the sale. And with that, I'll ask [sic] any questions or allow for your discussion. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Chairman. Ms. Scott, was there -- in the option that we gave the seller to reduce the sales price, was there any discussion, if he reduces the sales price, not to hold his feet to the fire to any remediation, environmental remediation? MS. SCOTT: No. They would still be required to remediate for what has been identified today, but that they would not be -- they would not be required to remediate anything further with our -- with our participation with DEP in the future. COMMISSIONER HALL: Sure. No. I agree with protecting the public's money in that regard, but I was just curious as, you know, if I was the seller and I needed to reduce my sales price without any consideration for other terms, it's an automatic no for me because, why? But I was just -- I thought he's -- I think -- do you have any idea of what the cost could be for what's been known so far? MS. SCOTT: We do not have those yet because at this time we do not know the extent of the horizontal for the groundwater, and there have been no costs that have been shared with us to date. COMMISSIONER HALL: Okay. No, that's understandable. I think the seller's pretty much forced us into terminating this agreement with the terms that he's requesting. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. I don't see anybody else lit up. Do we have any public comment? MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. William Rollins is your only public April 22, 2025 Page 75 comment for this item. MR. ROLLINS: Good morning. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Good morning. MR. ROLLINS: Good morning. For the record, my name is William Rollins. I'm the senior broker at LSI Companies. On behalf of the family, they asked that I come here today and share with you a letter, a comment. (As read:) Dear Commissioners, when Collier County approached us to acquire the property, we were thrilled at the opportunity to contribute to the community's future. We believe that our lands offer tremendous potential in workforce housing, parks, recreation, conservation, and watershed improvements from Immokalee to Lake Trafford. Our family has worked diligently to bring this transaction to a conclusion. At the county's request we have agreed to conduct additional testing related to the known environmental issues, the condition causing -- and condition -- closing to remediate these areas of state, residential, and groundwater target cleanup levels without relying on institutional controls or recorded restrictions. Additionally, we agreed to extend the closing date until remediation is complete. At the most recent Board of County Commissioners meeting, James Williams clearly stated our position against involving the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, as this is neither required nor customary of the sale of the vacant property. We expressed our willingness to extend and inspect the inspection period to address minor cleanup items in the fourth amendment provided there are no DEP involvement. The agreement presented to us following the last meeting included significant changes including DEP involvement which diverged from our prior discussions. April 22, 2025 Page 76 We believe the fourth amendment we proposed aligns with the discussion at our BOCC meeting. It includes extending the closing date, removing unworkable short-term timing triggers, and maintaining the condition of the environmental issues be remediated prior to the county's obligation to close on the property. The Williams family respectively submits that our proposal, the fourth amendment, is fair and reasonable. We hope the Commissioners recognize the value the property brings to the -- brings to Collier County and agree that our proposed terms are appropriate for the state. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, the Williams family. I've been doing this for a long time, and I don't know of any land transaction that hasn't had any kind of an environmental issue on it. These issues are resolved by -- through remediation. A lot of times you do nothing. Sometimes you put a parking lot on top of it. It really is dictated by, one, your engineer that's doing the work, and then, of course, what DEP wants you to do. The next thing is the opportunity. This is a piece of property that I'm not sure exists anywhere around Immokalee or in East Collier County that could be acquired by the -- by the county and that could be turned into some really magnificent things. Today your decision is going to reflect what this property's going to be in 20, 30 and even 50 years from now. Our generation won't be here, but there will be other generations to enjoy this: Parks, recs, education, and also housing that people can afford. Yes, I mentioned there are risks, but risk comes with every property. Real quick, just one -- CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Don't worry about the timing, just whatever time you need. MR. ROLLINS: Okay. Thank you. April 22, 2025 Page 77 One thing I thought about was, is there a property that does not have risk? And I thought about the Garden of Eden, but the Garden of Eden also has risk. There's a serpent. So, I mean, you guys, you five gentlemen are going to make a big decision today that's going to impact Collier County for a long time and, quite frankly, I think not everybody in the Collier County is going -- let me back up. Not only the residents around Immokalee are going to benefit this. The entire county will benefit from it, and other counties. You're going to have people from other counties come and enjoy this educational and recreational parks and things. Look at the City Gate, people from all over come and enjoy that park. So, gentlemen, it's up to you guys, but I think this is a -- this is a big, big decision. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. MR. ROLLINS: Oh. And I'm open for any questions. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes. Hang on just a minute, because there may be a few. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't have any questions of him. I'm okay right now, Billy. MR. ROLLINS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Trinity, do you mind coming back up and putting up the aerial of the entire site. There you go. It's been mentioned -- and I guess my -- I have a couple of technical questions. We can -- oh, there we go. We can certainly -- we can certainly cancel the agreement today. My question for you is, how much -- how much study in the Phase 2 environmental inspection was accomplished? Do we have a map that shows where the drill holes were and the amount of contaminants that April 22, 2025 Page 78 were included? MS. SCOTT: I don't have a map in my presentation, but I do have Brian DeLony who's sitting behind me who can answer your question. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. I saw you looking at him. MR. DeLONY: Brian DeLony, Facilities director, for the record. Yeah, we do have the map of the Phase 2 and what was tested. I mean, the main focus on the testing was focused on current farm operations where tanks were located, where they actually move vehicles and store stuff. That's where the main focus of the testing was. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. MR. DeLONY: But it's mostly of the south -- southern side of the property. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Mostly on the farmlands. I think we all pretty much agreed that the slough area -- and from what I did see, there was one hole up in the -- one drill hole up in the boot area that found no contaminants. There was no issues with that. MR. DeLONY: Correct. In the area where we were looking at the affordable housing, there was no contaminants. We did find some contaminants over there on the northern side, in this area right here. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Uh-huh. And -- okay, that was my question for you. MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And the seller -- if I'm not mistaken, the seller -- if we were to consummate the transaction or extend the due diligence period for a final agreement -- I don't know what the process is right now. Are we forced into either doing this April 22, 2025 Page 79 deal as it is, or do we have to physically cancel the agreement? MS. SCOTT: I would defer to the County Attorney, but the seller -- the county's proposed fourth amendment, which as I noted the seller will not -- would not agree to the reduction in the purchase price, was included as backup in the documentation, as well as the seller's redline version of the county's fourth amendment is also included in the backup of the documentation. I would defer to the County Attorney if the Board is able to accept the terms of the seller's fourth amendment or if they need to proceed -- if they could proceed forward with the existing, or if their only option is to terminate. MR. KLATZKOW: The Board can approve if it's the will of the Board, terminate if it's the will of the Board, or seek additional changes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. So I guess my question -- or my suggestion for my colleagues here on the Board is to give due consideration to the opportunities that we, in fact, have here. You know, Billy Rollins said it best. There is -- there's no such thing as a free lunch. There's risk involved with everything. And I think we really need to give due consideration to the greater good that can transpire if we go forward with this transaction. There is a housing component which provides for housing affordability. We have -- and the County Manager can affirm this. We have long sought the acquisition of that slough area. If you'll notice to the west of that -- of that yellow hash mark there on the map, that's the -- that's the headwaters of Lake Trafford. That's a huge basin of heavily environmentally -- heavily environmental sensitive land. And out of Lake Trafford then flows -- out of it over into west of that into the Corkscrew Sanctuary area and the CREW'S lands. We have an enormous opportunity with this acquisition to April 22, 2025 Page 80 acquire this piece of property, facilitate health, safety, and welfare issues with the extension of Little League Road south all the way down to Immokalee Road for another ingress and egress for the residents of Immokalee. The acquisition of this slough property and these farm fields, we have ultimate plans for parks and rec and fields and all kind of wonderful things that are very much necessary for all of Eastern Collier County. We have the potential of really doing something wonderful. I mean, talk about -- talk about doing something wonderful for the environment with regard to the water quality that's coming through that slough. We all know what's to the east of that slough. There are other developed lands. There's a landfill -- there are two landfills that are over there that are basically unprotected, unlined landfills. We have an opportunity for retention, detention, and water cleanliness for water that's transferring over to Lake Trafford. We have a huge, huge value for flood protection for our residents, especially in the southern end of Immokalee, to be able to take on excess flooding water that is coming into those communities. You can see right there on the map the densities that are over there. I -- I've looked -- I've looked at the original contract for purchase. I saw the deficiencies in our contract that we had. Commissioner Saunders, you asked a while ago about deviating from normal business practices. Our original contract had the county being responsible for the ultimate determination of the -- of the plume of the existent contaminants that are on this piece of property. And to my knowledge, none of these contaminants exceed the levels of requisite to notify the Department of Environmental Protections. We then came back, entered into -- and performed the Phase 2. The seller necessarily has agreed to do the remediation on those April 22, 2025 Page 81 specific areas where it was -- it was -- where drilling occurred and where contaminants were, in fact, found. If they don't do it, we don't buy the property. But now we're coming back and asking the seller to put up even more money, and we haven't even given a -- done a site plan as to what we're going to do from a development perspective with the southern portion of this piece of property. And it is outside of normal business practice to hold a seller responsible for something that's necessarily out of their control. If they -- if we can't tell them what we're going to do, I don't find it -- I don't find it a good business practice for us to -- to be asking for exposure for the seller on that piece of property after the closing. The suggestions of potential contaminants coming from the ongoing farming operations -- there was a discussion about the extinguishment of the farming leases on this piece of property and the agricultural uses that are there. We really can't do that without actually going forward and closing on the property. If not, then exposing ourself to the loss of revenue that the property owner, in facts -- in fact, has. So my suggestion is buy the piece of property, assume the risk associated with it -- with any potential remediation that is necessary after the fact -- after -- after the remediation has been completed and we get the clean bill of health from the seller, which they say they are willing to do, utilizing an engineer that we, in fact, use. I think it's Stantec, if I'm not mistaken. Yeah. It's Stantec. Stantec -- we use them all the time. They're a licensed professional engineer. They're going to give us a clean bill of health that says this property is developable to a residential state. Now, in business practice, as was mentioned, if you're going to put a building in one particular location, you have to do testing there to ensure that there are no negative impacts that come from that, but April 22, 2025 Page 82 on the other side of the equation, you adapt your Site Development Plan based upon those necessary remediation efforts that could technically transpire. So my inclination with this transaction is the risk is there. There's no argument that there is potential risk with this piece of property in the future, but that determination of that risk is very difficult to ascertain given the fact that we don't have -- we don't have a site plan. We don't have any description of what we're, in fact, going to do with this piece of property. The benefits that transpire with this transaction far outweigh what I believe to be those risks, in fact, are. I've already stated that one of my first -- one of our first actions should be to replace the farm fields which are now currently included in Rural Land Stewardship Overlay for credit development and replace those lands with the slough area, and then allow for Conservation Collier to be able to do the cleanup of the slough and the water cleanliness circumstances that are involved with the slough and generate restoration credits which can then be a benefit to the overall Conservation Collier effort as well. Did that all come out okay? COMMISSIONER HALL: Perfect. MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Everybody's lit up here. Let's go -- Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Chairman. I'm a deal maker, and I did not want to see this deal go south, and that's why I asked the question about if we reduced the sales price, were other terms. When I just saw that the boot was where we are actually going to think about development and that there were no issues environmentally with that, that changed everything for me because April 22, 2025 Page 83 the DEP involvement -- the only involvement -- or the only hindrance is they take so long to stop any kind of development. Well, that's excluded. And so then -- and the seller saying that, well, we may remediate or we may not, that bothered me at first. But I don't think they're going to let -- you know, since the things that are found are actually less than what would be required for the DEP, I don't think the seller's going to say, "No, we're not going to remediate." I think they're going to do what they need to do to consummate the deal. I'm all about the risk without being risky. And I know that that's a play on words, but there -- you can do that. We can take the risk with the southern ag fields. But what we really want and the real value to us is up there in the boot, and we can deal with whatever we have to down in the southern fields. But the benefits to the whole property and the deal overall, I think, far outweighs what this -- what's being concerned. And I know that we're concerned. I was concerned. The scab of the Golden Gate property is still a little bit soft. And we wanted to learn from our mistakes, and we just wanted to make sure that we weren't entering -- doing the same thing here, and I don't think that we are. So I'm willing to -- I'm willing to do this. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman. That word "risk" has been thrown around a lot in business, as an investor, a visionary. COMMISSIONER HALL: What else? COMMISSIONER KOWAL: The problem is individuals make those decisions to take risk when they can see a vision what they can do with something or can't do with something. And if it doesn't transpire and it doesn't prosper to whatever their vision might be and the risk goes the other way, they're the only one that pays for it. April 22, 2025 Page 84 The five of us today are going to be asked to make a decision where we have -- we know there's risk, but the five of us -- when the risk comes up to the point where it's riskier than we thought, the five of us personally are not going to be punished by it. We're not going to be diminished by it. In the private sector you are. That's the risk you take. The problem is, the only people that are going to suffer is the taxpayer, because we're going to make the decision. Nothing's going to happen to us risk-wise, but the taxpayer will bear that risk. When I look at this property, I see two pieces that I think have any value to it, and being a person that knows there's a risk already going into it, I would feel more comfortable if we renegotiate this and try to purchase the slough and the boot, and the rest of the property, we already know there's a risk. And in good conscience, I don't want to go into a project knowing there's a risk. Because it's not my risk. It's the taxpayers' risk of Collier County. And that -- that's just kind of my position on it, so... CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I think we have the opportunity to obtain a very large and valuable piece of property. I believe we've taken greater risks on things here. And, you know, we always have to weigh that. In my notes here, and that's already been repeated, I said "In my opinion, the gain outweighs the risk." They've already accomplished environmental testing in the most risky area, and it hasn't exceeded any kind of, you know, standard or whatnot. And I think further -- as you go further north, there's going to be even less environmental issues, as has been stated. If we're blindsided a little bit by something, I don't think it's going to be, you know, overwhelming. And the gain to obtain this large of a footprint that surrounds so many other things, as Commissioner McDaniel was saying, I just -- I think the opportunity April 22, 2025 Page 85 to gain this parcel would be a big win for the county and also the way we're paying for it -- you know, the briefing I got yesterday, you probably all did as well, I just wanted to reiterate where the funds were coming from. And a lot of smart things are being done to pool funds together to obtain this large parcel. And I think it's a smart move. I'm going to support the purchase. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. I have a couple questions for our staff. In terms of the boot area, from what I understand, there is no environmental issues there. That property will be ready for development? MR. DeLONY: Yeah. We did one sample up at the boot and did not find anything in the boot area. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So will there need to be any other sampling, or does that take care of it? MR. DeLONY: It would be based on FDEP'S input when we go to develop it. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. So is there any way to determine in advance of closing as to whether there are environmental problems there? One sampling site doesn't sound sufficient, but I don't know. That's the question. MR. DeLONY: I mean, you know, all the sampling here is just, you know, maybe 50 sampling sites across 2,000 acres. It's all kind of just pinpoint testing. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. So we have one sample there that was clean. You can't indicate whether or not there were any other issues there with that site. But as far as you know, that site's ready to go? MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Then in the slough, we're not going to do anything with the slough in terms of development. So if there's pollution there, it stays there? We don't April 22, 2025 Page 86 have an obligation to clean the slough -- MS. SCOTT: Actually, we would through Conservation Collier. We would go in and, essentially, we want to restore our water quality through there. As Commissioner McDaniel noted, with regard to this, these are waters that go to Lake Trafford, so we would certainly look to attempt to clean this area up as best as possible. And I see the County Manager. I know this has been -- this has been the area that she has been most passionate about has been the slough. MS. PATTERSON: So we've, as Trinity said, been working to acquire the slough various ways for probably a decade now. So we know there's some issues in the slough leading to issues in Lake Trafford, but that's -- really, the slough takes water from large segments of Immokalee Road, so the goal is to get in and clean the slough, not as -- I guess what I'm trying to say is not -- it not being a part of this as the responsibility of the Land Development Code. This was something that we always were willing to embark on, and if it makes it better, we have already -- I already lined up partners that are keenly interested in assisting us with that cleanup, including the Water Management District. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So in terms of the slough, regardless of the environmental issues there, we want to acquire the slough. That's important for Lake Trafford and that whole area. MS. PATTERSON: And Immokalee, yes, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And then on to the farm fields. So what do we know about the farm fields at this point? MR. DeLONY: That -- you know, there's been testing around the areas where the farm operations are, where they fill up the vehicles, and there's been contamination found in both the soil and the groundwater. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Can you describe that a little bit more than just contaminants found? What kind of contaminants are April 22, 2025 Page 87 you talking about? MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. There's both hydrocarbons in the groundwater, there's both arsenic. We found lead in the upper portion in the groundwater. The main concentration is around the farm operations area where there's arsenic above the natural attenuation level for DEP, so there'd have to be active engineer controls to mitigate that. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. So in terms of the -- and we don't know the extent in the farm fields, but there's been testing around where there's been parking of vehicles, fueling of vehicles? MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: But the whole -- the whole area's not been evaluated? MR. DeLONY: The focus was on the current operations of the farm fields and where there was most likely to find contaminants. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Would you just, in your experience, expect problems outside of those particular areas? MR. DeLONY: I mean, just over the years, right, this has been farmland for many years. I expect operations out there has changed from time to time, where they're doing fueling, where they're not doing fueling. We're talking all, you know, above-ground tanks of 500 gallons. So they can pick them up and move them anywhere at any time. So I would expect, you know, there to be other locations within that area that that's occurred. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Will we have an opportunity to have some evaluation prior to being obligated to close? MR. DeLONY: My understanding is no. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Then in terms of if we want to do anything with those fields, if we want to turn them into football fields, you know, a passive park or recreational facility, an active park, we would have to remediate, and we just don't know what that April 22, 2025 Page 88 remediation would be? MR. DeLONY: Correct. I mean, we'd have to find it first, right? We don't -- we don't know where it's at. Then we would have to remediate. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. And if we decided not to do anything with those fields, continue it to be farming into the distant future, would we have to remediate anything at that point? MR. DeLONY: If we know about it, if we find it, then we would have to remediate. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. And we have no way of knowing what that remediation cost would be? MR. DeLONY: No, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Once we buy the property, it's our problem? MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. And we don't know the -- we don't know the scope of that problem. And is that partially because there hasn't been enough testing in enough locations to pinpoint it to test, or why don't we know? MR. DeLONY: I mean, it's hard over a large parcel like this. I mean, you could go and spend, you know, $2 million in testing and still not know. So you've kind of got to throttle how much testing you do versus how much you don't -- you don't do. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Well, once we buy this property, are we going to spend $2 million doing the testing you just described, since it's now our property and we need to -- we'll have to clean it? I'm just trying to get a -- MR. DeLONY: Yeah. It would be -- it would be really based on DEP's recommendation when we go to do our development -- to target the amount of testing that would be needed. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I see the value of this property April 22, 2025 Page 89 from an environmental standpoint and from the community, but I'm a little concerned about how much risk we really are assuming. If you're even suggesting that it could cost millions of dollars just to test, that doesn't even get into the cleanup. And then I think what you're suggesting is that if we do acquire the property, we are going to test, and we are going to clean it up. MR. DeLONY: I wouldn't expect we would do $2 million in testing, sir. I'm just saying that due to the size of the land, right, you could -- you could do all the testing out here and maybe not find everything. It's a large -- it's a large parcel, and you can -- you have to kind of target the areas you're testing where you expect contamination. Typically, how that's done is by looking at historical photos, trying to figure out where operations occur, interviewing the existing operations out there, asking them what has changed since they've known the land, and then looking for, like, low-lying areas where water would have stored in concentrated contaminants. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, we've been dealing with this piece of property for I don't know how many -- a year, year and a half, whatever the time period has been. That testing has not been -- those specific points that you're talking about from the aerials and the history of it, has there been testing in those specific sites as far as you know? MR. DeLONY: Again, I'd say the testing was focused in the existing operations, where there's current operations. Now, we did do some additional testing in lower-level areas, and you know, most of what we found was, you know, one, the lead up in the northern portion that I've previously indicated, and then we found a location of arsenic in the soil. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. And one of the things -- and this is just for your thought process, Commissioner April 22, 2025 Page 90 Saunders. When we bought the Golden Gate Golf Course, and as Commissioner Hall mentioned, that, you know, the wounds from the Golden Gate Golf Course are, relatively speaking, fairly fresh, we had -- we had a Site Development Plan. We knew where the residential was going to go, we had a decent idea that we were going to do a center for The First Tee, we knew where, predominantly, that we were ultimately going to do a veterans nursing home on that piece of property, we knew that a portion of it was going to be redeveloped into a golf course, and we also knew that there was going to be, inevitably, remediation requisites once we actually determined what we were going to do and where we were going to, in fact, do it. This piece of property -- in comparison, that was 169 acres. This is in excess of 2,000 acres. And so -- and without a Site Development Plan, only conceptual thoughts as to what we can do with it with the -- with the location of the road, with the location of the fields, with the location of particular buildings, as the case may be, it would be impossible to do enough testing today to ascertain that we could do whatever we want wherever we want because we don't know what we want to do just yet. In the event -- and I'm going to offer this up to you. I mean, if you'll recall, I -- hydrocarbons that are found on a farming operation oftentimes come from fuel splashes and things, and those are de minimis remediation efforts unless someone were to have a tank rupture or something along those lines. We have been assured that the lessees that are on this piece of property operating these farming operations do have accountability -- I'm sorry -- do have accountability with regard to potential contaminants that could, in fact, transpire from those operations. So, again, I go back to the ability to ascertain the exposure, if any, is actually dictated by the county at all with regard to what we April 22, 2025 Page 91 do with the piece of property. If we -- if we find -- if we find -- as was stated, if we find a contaminant in a particular area, we will be required to clean that up. It's that simple. Right now there are 50-some holes. And I call them holes. Those are drill holes that they do the sampling from. And if you've ever done any kind of drilling or testing, all you actually know is what comes out of that 4-inch hole. That's all you know. And until the perimeter holes are actually done and the plumes are ascertained. That's what comes after the -- within the Phase 2 process, and then the, in fact, remediation is completed. So for and until we know what we're going to put where -- and we do have the capacity to manipulate the construction and what we plan on utilizing this piece of property for. Did we lose the picture? So that's just -- that's just me trying to share with you the 169-acre piece of property where we -- where we got exposed heavily for a lot of -- relatively speaking, a lot of remediation, it would be very difficult to determine what the actual exposure is here for this piece of property, especially when we have a chance to maneuver the Site Development Plan to be able -- to be to our benefit and mitigate that exposure as much as is physically possible. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman. I just -- two things. I'd like to just revisit the boot a second, because there was a comment made that we did one core sample, and I think Commissioner Saunders says will that be -- will we be able to proceed? And we know what we kind of want to put up there is basically affordable/workforce housing, that type of project in that area, but that's not factual because we still have -- once we do a site plan and we have to develop it, then we're held to DEP to test it again, correct? MR. DeLONY: Again, I can't -- I can't speak to what DEP's April 22, 2025 Page 92 going to want or not want. They could ask for additional testing. They might not. There's no -- I mean, from our environmental consultant that went out there, I mean, the only reason they did testing up there is because we knew we were looking at putting housing up there and asking them to do testing. There was no indicator that there would be contamination in that area. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Because the seller was adamant that he doesn't want to be involved when DEP does participate in anything we do in the future. You know, that's kind of like -- to me, like, it gives me a red flag to think that -- does he know something I don't know, or you know -- because it was even in the amendment four of having money taken into escrow. And if there's no issue, you know, he basically got the balance back if we didn't have to remediate anything else other than what the known risk is. And it was a cold hard no to even participate in that. So these are just red flags to me, you know, that I -- you know, because now I've got to enter into risk, unknown risk, which we know is the farmlands. And I'll just go -- touch on the farmlands. We keep referring to the Golden Gate Golf Course project, and we did find some contaminants, probably more than anybody thought we'd find there. And that was a farmland decades ago. This is still an active farmland. That was decades and decades ago. That was a golf course when we purchased it. It was a golf course for decades for before that. So we can only imagine what else, on an active farm, the amount of contaminants can be let alone one that was buried underground for 30 years, and we still found contaminants. So I think you've got to take all these things kind of into consideration that, you know, we're -- you know, what is the true risk? We already know factually today. And that's what I'm trying to April 22, 2025 Page 93 say. I'm trying to wrap my head around me being part of that risk. And when it's not my money to risk, it's a hard pill for me to swallow. I think the slough's important, and I think the boot would be important, but it doesn't sound like the seller just would want to sell us just those two parts. I mean, I just -- it's just -- I can't get myself to that point. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You know -- well, you know what, I'll hold my comments till I hear from the rest of you. I thought we were pretty much done discussing it, so... CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Chairman. You know, I looked at the seller in the eye and I said, because you're not willing to let the DEP in, that's -- you know, it seems to me like you would be hiding something. And he said, "I would think the same thing if I were you." He said, "But the reason we didn't want the DEP involved was the time issue of closing." So there's a big difference between having the DEP as an agency involved and then DEP standards for remediation. And they have -- they have promised us that they would remediate what's known. If they -- if they choose to do that, to the standards of the state. And so that to me is -- we can take a risk, but it's not risky. And that's -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Can I have a direct comment to that, since it was kind of a piggyback on back on my comment? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Sure. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Now knowing what was proposed to the seller with the money in escrow, wouldn't it change the closing date? The money would be there. And if there wasn't an issue, like he said, by looking you in the eye, would that change your opinion now knowing he still turned that down? April 22, 2025 Page 94 COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes, because of the timing that it would take. That money could be held up for two or three years or longer before we decide what DEP's going to ask us. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I was just going to make a comment. I think we're trying to learn some lessons from the golf course, but it isn't quite apples to apples. You know, Commissioner McDaniel frequently refers to his other life and his experience. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I do have a bit of experience building on top of golf courses in my previous life, and it's usually the golf course fertilization which has -- contaminants the property. So, you know, I didn't do the testing on Golden Gate, but I would venture to say that the 30 years of farming prior to it being a golf course was probably less of an issue as the fresh golf course and the years and years of fertilization and other things that were done. That's what I primarily -- in my experience, when we built on top of some golf courses in the military that weren't farmland prior, they -- they exploded with DEP testing, and it was because of the fertilization and other things that we had done, you know, on the golf course. So this one's a little bit different. And I'll echo what Commissioner McDaniel says. We have a lot of flexibility and latitude, and me, just as a -- to environmentally protect this big parcel of land and then maybe do something with pieces of it, I still say that the gain outweighs the risk. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Now I'm ready. I'd -- I think, as Commissioner LoCastro just said, I think it's important that we -- I'm going to paraphrase what he said, and it's not "we throw out the baby with the bathwater." I think the greater good April 22, 2025 Page 95 being served here from an environmental perspective is -- how come every time I'm talking a whole bunch of technological things go south? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Somebody may be trying to tell you something. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Exactly. I've got a lot of things being told to me. The bottom line, I'm going to -- I'm going to make a motion that we go forward with this transaction as it was -- what? MS. SCOTT: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. You were going like this (indicating). I'm going to make a motion that we go forward with this transaction as it was proposed for the original purchase price that we agreed upon, that the remediation be completed by the seller, that it be -- receive the clean bill of health, that we put up the 500,000 earnest money that secures the seller's position to go ahead and take on the risk of the -- of the remediation expense. Because they are bearing that expense themselves. And the way our current contract reads -- I've said this regularly, but our current contract reads "if my shoes come untied the third Thursday of the month, we have the right to walk away from this transaction," and they're exposed for that expense. So I'm going to make a motion that we go forward with the transaction. MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner, just for clarity, are we going forward with the seller's fourth amendment, or are we going to simply stick to the third amendment? MS. SCOTT: Sir, what you've described is the seller's fourth amendment. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. So specially, then, the seller's fourth amendment is adequate for my satisfaction. April 22, 2025 Page 96 MR. MILLER: Mr. Chair, I did have one other person submit a public comment slip. I didn't know if you wanted to hear that or not. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Oh, absolutely. Let's -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Public hearing's been closed. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's hear the public comment. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, I'm joking. It's Cliff. MR. MILLER: Cliff Donenfeld. MR. DONENFELD: Hello, everyone. Cliff Donenfeld, speaking as a private citizen who has heard a lot about this property for -- is it two years now? A year and a half? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: A year. MR. DONENFELD: Okay. And what I haven't heard at any of these discussions is -- and I'm sure all of you guys are aware of the big lawsuit with the Collier family and the state for spending 30 million on 11,000 acres that -- even though it -- the long-term exposure to creosote would cause birth defects, blah, blah, blah, it -- it's still in the courts right now. The Collier family sold it to the state. It was then realized that it was contaminated lands. And per the many articles, it did have the standard environmental reviews and what have you. It was a huge error. So I hear a lot talk about the error in the golf course, and maybe because this was a state purchase, but it's in Collier County. It is Collier family that sold it. And I haven't heard anybody, pro or con, referring to this case, which this land was purchased about one year ago, and it's going on. And I do think that more due diligence and exploration of the mitigation factors -- because I appreciate Commissioner Kowal's responses about the riskiness and risking other people's money, but it -- you also may be risking other people's health issues in a big, big way, and this is a big, big purchase. And I think you should really, you know, be careful about the risk before you move ahead. April 22, 2025 Page 97 And nothing against conservation. Nothing against all the great proposed uses. But it's one thing for the state to defend itself in a $30 million lawsuit. It's another thing for the county to. So that's all. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have no further speakers. Let me ask a question, because this gets to be a little bit confusing. We have an existing contract right now that expires tomorrow; is that the -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Tonight at midnight. MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And so -- MR. KLATZKOW: And then you have proposed amendments. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: The motion is to approve Amendment No. 4 -- MR. KLATZKOW: The seller's version. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- as presented by the seller? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Can you go through what the existing agreement does and what these things do so that everybody on the Board understands what we're voting on, because I'm not sure I fully understand? MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. I'll let Sally take the lead on this. MS. ASHKAR: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Sally Ashkar, Assistant County Attorney. I'll walk you through some of these changes that are up on the screen right now. Primarily, the biggest change is that the seller is going to be responsible for the remediation in this case. The county doesn't have a say over that remediation. The county doesn't have the ability to get DEP approval, but the seller will be completing that remediation. The remediation will be done to residential state standards. That is the standard that's outlined in the agreement. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Which portion of the property April 22, 2025 Page 98 would be subject to that remediation? MS. ASHKAR: Trinity, do we have the map that was shown? So the map that you see up on the screen right now, I believe it is everything except the hashed area will be subject to that remediation protocol that will be set by the seller. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So that would include all of the farm fields? MS. ASHKAR: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: But could -- MS. SCOTT: For the areas that were identified in the Phase 1 and Phase 2 environmental. So those areas where we -- where we and the seller conducted those investigations. So for those specific areas only, they would go in and remediate those areas. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I -- can I say something? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Sure. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Have you ever done remediation before? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I haven't personally. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. You drill a 4-inch hole here, and then you drill out from there to determine where the plume, in fact, goes, and then the -- and once you reach the point where the contaminants no longer exist, then you have to remediate from here back to here. And so there were 50 holes drilled on this piece of property, and where there were contaminants found, they will spread out from there to develop the ring of the plume and then remediate back to clean that -- clean that area up. So it will consume -- not all of the farm fields, but it will consume larger areas than the -- than the actual 4-inch hole. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And they'll pay for it. MS. ASHKAR: So what Trinity is putting up on the screen April 22, 2025 Page 99 right now is those testing areas where the testing has been completed, and that will be the location of that remediation and that remediation protocol. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Can I ask a question? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman. So from what I understand is -- so how many actual holes were drilled in the farm portion? Because I know you drilled some in a portion of the slough, portion of the boot. MR. DeLONY: I mean, I don't have a specific number, but it was around about 50. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So 50 is the number for the farm, not counting the others? MR. DeLONY: Over the entire property. There was only probably -- you know, up north there was -- I think we only had three or four. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Okay. So let's say -- let's say 45 or whatever. So out of 45 on the farm property, did every one of the 45 have contaminants of some type? MR. DeLONY: No, they didn't all have contaminants. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So how many do you recall? MR. DeLONY: I mean, I'd just be giving you a number off the top of my head, but I want to say probably about 50 percent to 25 percent had some kind of contaminant. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Okay. So 50 percent. So if you just do simple math, we're talking -- how many acres is that? About a thousand-some acres? MR. DeLONY: I mean, I would point out that these tests -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: The farmland I'm saying. MR. DeLONY: -- were done where we expected to find April 22, 2025 Page 100 contaminants. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I understand. But you also made the statement that that was a mobile fueling site. They can move it anywhere on the farm where they had the fuel equipment. MR. DeLONY: Yeah. They were -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: They can bring it to where they're working on the back 40 if they had to for a week or two. MR. DeLONY: They could. They were typically, you know, 500 gallon fuel tanks that could be moved. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: They were mobile. Yeah. They weren't stationary. MR. DeLONY: They were on -- they were on skids. They weren't, like, you know, trailers. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I know exactly what they are. I've used them before. I guess what I'm trying to say is, mathematically, you could say that 50 percent of a thousand acres is possibly contaminated. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, that's not -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Well, 50 percent of the holes were contaminated. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's not a -- that's not a fair assumption. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I don't know. I mean, I'm just looking at the sample size. I'm just -- I'm just throwing a spitball, and the sample size is, say, 50 holes. So 25 of them had contamination. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I'm just -- I'm just -- never mind. I already know how I'm voting, so let's just -- CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. So I'm just trying to -- I'm just trying to make sure we understand what the contract is that we're voting on, so that -- because that -- and I think Ms. Ashkar was in the April 22, 2025 Page 101 middle of you outlining what the changes are that will be the vote on this. MS. ASHKAR: Yes, Commissioner. Thank you. So in addition to the seller completing the remediation that we just showed up on the screen, there -- it's a waiver of the indemnification provision in the contract. And so our existing standard form contract has an environmental indemnification provision. This amendment would strike through that. So it means once we close, the seller has no further liability related to any environmental contamination on the property and, of course, that's due to the fact that they're going to be remediating it. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. And so there's going to be some remediation. MS. ASHKAR: Yes. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: From this point forward -- if we adopt this amendment, from this point forward, we can still terminate the agreement, but we have to pay a half a million dollar -- MS. ASHKAR: Correct. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- liquidated damages. MS. ASHKAR: So once the -- the liquidated damages goes up from 70,000 to 500,000, which is effective following the seller's election to remediate. So once the seller elects to remediate the property, now that -- those liquidated damages go up to a half a million dollars. So if the county fails to close on the property after the seller has agreed to conduct that remediation and complete that remediation, we're on the hook for half a million. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Well, I would be supportive of this if we didn't have to risk the half a million. Now, the property owner -- and this is a question for Mr. Rollins, I think. The property owner is going to have to April 22, 2025 Page 102 remediate whether he sells the property or not. At some point in time, the property owner's going to have to remediate. MS. ASHKAR: The seller has the option to remediate. So that's an important piece of this contract that was discussed earlier. Once the seller gets all of the information for remediation, the seller may exercise its option to remediate. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Understood. But I'm saying in the real world, when this property is sold, whether it's to us or to somebody, the buyer's going to require remediation. And so I guess my question is, to Mr. Rollins -- and I hope I'm saying that properly, correctly -- any consideration for keeping the -- you're going to make the decision as to whether you're going to remediate. You have that total option. MR. ROLLINS: Okay. In the real world, you have a property owner. They sell their property to a developer. The developer does the Phase 1. If there's a Phase 2 required, they'll -- they can elect to do that. But the Phase 1 basically identifies everything that's there, areas of interest. The developer would then make up their mind, okay, I'm going to acquire the property, and I'm going to decide on whether -- whether or not I'm going to remediate or I'm not going to remediate. And then they're going to take their site plan and design that around the areas that need to be remediated, because they might put a building or a parking lot over an area. If they decide to put a ball field over an area that's been -- that's contaminated, then they would go and they would remediate. Typically the sellers are not required to remediate the properties. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Would you be willing to consider reduction of that liquidated damage number from a half a million to something -- MR. ROLLINS: I think what you have on the table is what the April 22, 2025 Page 103 sellers are willing to do. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. All right. MR. ROLLINS: Yes, sir. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And, Commissioner Saunders, that 500,000 is a protection for the seller. After they've made the choice to do the remediation, they're going to bear that expense. Our contract that we have -- all of our contracts that we have allow us to cancel without cause, and we would only have 70,000 exposed. And the 500,000 is for us to have skin in the game to show that we are interested in acquiring the piece of property and mitigate the risk for the seller and the burden of that expense of that remediation, whether it's 100,000 or whatever the actual expense is. So we're not losing that money unless we chose to not buy that -- we're not exposed for that money unless we chose to not buy that piece of property. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. All right. I think we have a -- MS. KINZEL: Commissioner, I'm sorry. It's Crystal. I do have some questions that I'd like to clear up just from a contractual standpoint. When we say remediate, are you only talking about the designated areas where they've done the preliminary? Are you talking the whole area? Obviously, we've all been around for the golf course. It took seven years. We had many issues of what went where. One of the things that struck me from the whole conversation is that we don't really know all the things we're buying it for and planning it; and therefore, even to get to the level of remediation that's required, we don't seem to know that. We've talked about more ball fields, more parks, affordable housing, different levels of contamination, what are those things. And the protection in the contract -- I see the red flags also. As April 22, 2025 Page 104 your comptroller, the price in the appraisals -- which we're reviewing a lot of appraisals right now, and I think we have noticed you on that, for some of the things that we have already purchased and we intend to purchase. And it just does concern me, as comptroller, that without a guarantee of remediation or even is EDP [sic] the one that is going to come in, or no, EDP's, totally off the table. Because you're taking a risk that you don't even know what the risk is, and yet we're paying a price that was from an original appraisal amount that may or may not have taken those factors into account when the value was determined. So sloughs, I know the importance of the water, but weighing an unknown to a 20-million-plus pricing, we've done that before, and it did not turn out well for the taxpayer. So I just wanted to get that to your information. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Any other -- Commissioner McDaniel, anything else? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Are you okay with my motion per amendment four? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I'm okay to vote on it. I'm not so sure I'm okay to vote positive. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I understand. But I'm going to make a motion to accept the amendment four. COMMISSIONER HALL: I second it. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and second. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed? April 22, 2025 Page 105 Aye. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I believe that passed 3-2; is that correct? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You are correct. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro, you voted in the affirmative? COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I think we need to take a break. Come back at 1:15? Is that satisfactory? All right. We are in recess until 1:15. (A luncheon recess was had from 12:13 p.m. to 1:15 p.m.) MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic. Item #11C THE PROPERTIES ON THE JANUARY 2025 CONSERVATION COLLIER ACTIVE ACQUISITION LIST (AAL) AND DIRECT STAFF TO PURSUE THE PROJECTS RECOMMENDED WITHIN THE A-CATEGORY, FUNDED BY THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION FUND. (COMMISSIONER HALL’S REQUEST) - MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO - APPROVED (COMMISSIONER HALL OPPOSED) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We'll head over to Item 11C. I think that's where we are. MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. Item 11C is a recommendation to approve the properties on January 2025 Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List and direct staff to pursue the projects recommended April 22, 2025 Page 106 within the "A" category within the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund. This item is moved from the consent agenda at Commissioner Hall's request. And we have Jaime Cook, your director of Development Review -- I always I get it wrong -- here to present. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall, did you have anything specific? COMMISSIONER HALL: No, we'll listen to Ms. Cook a little bit. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. MS. COOK: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Jaime Cook, your Development Review director, for the record. The January 2025 list consisted of three properties. Two were recommended for the A list or to pursue acquisition by both -- by the Conservation Collier Land Advisory Committee, and there was one property that was proposed for the C list, which would mean that staff would not pursue acquiring this. The first property -- properties are the Edwards Trust properties. This is nine parcels consisting of 65 total acres. It does contain wetland and more upland habitats. It does expand existing conservation lands both with Picayune Strand to the east and Hacienda Lakes and the San Marino PUD conservation lands to the west. The site is utilized by both Red-cockaded woodpecker and Florida panthers; however, this area is in the Transportation Management Benfield Road extension study area, and there is limited access. There is no vehicles access, and there is only access through an existing trail from Picayune Strand that would cross other privately owned parcels. Management activities for these parcels, which by the way, are shown in red on that map below, would include some cabbage palm thinning, restoration, as well as exotic April 22, 2025 Page 107 removal. The Golden Land Partners is adjacent to the Edwards Trust parcels. It's shown in yellow on the map on the bottom of the screen. It is 20 acres. It is entirely wetlands. Again, expands existing conservation lands and is utilized by cockaded woodpeckers and the Florida panther. Again, this one is in the Benfield Road extension area, and we would have the same access issues; however, this parcel is different from the others in that the first two -- the first two TDRs have already been stripped from the property, so no development is allowed already. The third and fourth TDRs would still be available if a restoration and maintenance plan were established as well as conveyance through the fee simple to a state or a federal agency. And the third parcel which was on the C list and is not recommended for acquisition is adjacent to the Gordon River Greenway in the urban area. It is about a third of an acre of disturbed mangrove habitat. It does provide storm surge protection from the Gordon River. But again, there is limited access, and a parking area off of the Bembury Drive where this is located would not really be feasible. Some of the other concerns and issues are it appears that the site was used as a construction debris site where there's been a lot of debris dumped over the years, so that would require significant cleanup. We did discuss with the owner if he would be interested in doing it, and he declined. He also does have permits to build a single-family home on this property currently. So the cost to Conservation Collier, this -- again, the two projects that staff would recommend approval of total 85 acres, and the estimated value for these two properties is just under $500,000 with about $100,000 in initial maintenance activities. And with that, staff would recommend approval of the April 22, 2025 Page 108 January 2025 Active Acquisition List and request that you would direct staff to pursue appraisals as well as the due diligence periods that we typically go through with any other properties. With that, I would take any other questions or comments. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes, Chairman. I pulled these because it looks -- it appears that we're already going to accomplish greatly what we would be doing by spending half a million dollars of Conservation Collier money. The Edwards Trust, the 65 acres, it's basically landlocked, wetlands, but the Gordon -- the other property was 20 acres. The TDRs have been stripped. It's not -- two of them have -- half of them have been. It's landlocked as well. There's no public access. And, you know, CCLAC recommended them. They clicked the boxes on them, but they were so low. I think that we're basically accomplishing really what we want to accomplish with these properties without having to spend additional money or incur further expense in perpetuity with our Conservation Collier funds. So I would recommend not going forward with these two properties. If there's any other discussion... CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. We do have some lights lit up, and I don't know if we have any public speakers. Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. This is a technical question. I thought that the -- to acquire the additional restoration credits, that the restoration had to be completed and the land transferred to a government agency. I didn't remember it having to be a state or federal agency. MS. COOK: It could be county, state, or federal. Sorry. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. That's all right. So we could -- if we did buy this land and we did the restoration, we could April 22, 2025 Page 109 strip those credits off and have them available for future disposition. If I recall, we amended the ordinance to allow for Conservation Collier to be the -- or Collier County to be the beneficiary of those credits. MS. COOK: Correct. It was in the program ordinance to allow it. It hasn't been updated in the purchasing policy yet, that we continued this morning. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. And so it wasn't addressed in the purchasing policy at all. MS. COOK: TDRs are in the purchasing policy. Because right now the purchasing policy resolution states that the owner has to strip the TDRs before the program buys it. The recommendation that you've made previously is that we don't strip the TDRs, so we haven't. They're still on all of the properties that we've acquired within that last year or so. But we still need to amend the Growth Management Plan to allow Conservation Collier to then sell those credits. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. To receive them. So the correction, then, for my brain is we still have the capacity to develop the TDRs and strip them for the benefit of Collier County/Conservation Collier? MS. COOK: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a couple registered speakers. MR. MILLER: We have one, sir, Brad Cornell. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Good afternoon. MR. CORNELL: Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Commissioners. I'm Brad Cornell, and I'm here on behalf of Audubon Florida and Audubon Western Everglades. So Audubon strongly supports the staff recommendation and the April 22, 2025 Page 110 CCLAC recommendation to approve this Active Acquisition List from January. This is -- I remember the review and the ranking that they did. And I want to flag -- so these are really an opportunity to complement and add to the Picayune Strand State Forest, which is an amazing resource. It's the western half of the CERP, the Everglades restoration project, which is south Golden Gate Estates. This is the South Belle Meade part of the Picayune Strand State Forest. Important panther habitat, Red-cockaded woodpecker habitat, watershed for Rookery Bay. Really important for all kinds of Collier County interests. To the question about restoration, the problem with the restoration is that you only will get that if the landowner does that by stripping the third and fourth credits, and they're dis-incentivized to do that because restoration is very expensive. So nobody -- that's why you often see the first two credits in the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District, they strip those two credits off and sell those, but they don't do the third and fourth because restoration is tough, and also donation is tough because many of the agencies don't want to take it because it comes with a land management obligation. And so if -- that's the advantage, Commissioner Hall. If you want to have restoration of these parcels, you're going to have to acquire it or change the policies to incentivize the landowner to restore it; otherwise, you're going to end up with a lot of cabbage palms that are a fire risk that kill pines, that destroy habitat. So restoration is important. The only way you're going to get that done is by acquiring it yourself and working out something that way, and then you would have those TDR credits to discuss how -- what the eventual fate of those is; otherwise, it's not going to happen. So that would be an important reason to buy these. Thank you. April 22, 2025 Page 111 MR. MILLER: That's it. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Nobody else is lit up, so -- no other speakers. Any other comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I'm just going to make one. I've been supporting the CCLAC and their recommendations, and I'm going to -- I'm going to continue to do so. So I'm going to support the acquisition. MS. COOK: Can I just note that this doesn't actually acquire the properties. This just allows staff to move forward with the appraisals and the due diligence. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I'm assuming that it ultimately will lead to that. That's -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Can you go back to the slide that had the dollar figures on it real quick. MS. COOK: Sure. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro, anything else? COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I guess I just would have one question. When you have -- on that one slide when it says "no development is possible" and -- which is -- there's always a way, you know, but, you know, the way it sits now -- and maybe this is a hypothetical -- then why would we buy it? You know, because we buy property to preserve it in perpetuity. And if that property preserves itself, it's not going to be built on. So I just -- I want to hear a really good answer to this because I'm in line with Commissioner Saunders, when stuff comes to us as a recommendation -- and like you said, it's just moving forward. It's not necessarily purchasing it. We assume it's going to come to us with all the positive type things, but it's not a foregone conclusion. April 22, 2025 Page 112 But if it's a piece of property that's not buildable -- and I realize the TDRs and all that and how we can manipulate that, but what would be the reason for acquiring it if it seems like the land already preserves itself if we don't spend the money? MS. COOK: So -- a couple things. This is in the Rural Fringe Sending District area, which the sending area is designated and -- I don't know the word -- but it's designated so that agencies -- conservation agencies buy those lands and keep them in conservation forever. The other thing, as Brad mentioned, that this area is just east of a lot of development. Hacienda Lakes, the Caymas development. That if it isn't maintained, there is the potential for more wildfire risks on those properties that staff would be maintaining those properties better than if they're left in an -- COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: We just leave it. Okay. No, that's fair. I wanted to hear -- that's what I wanted to hear, something like that. So I mean, I'm supportive of purchasing both these properties. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We're ready for a motion. I'll make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'll second. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed? COMMISSIONER HALL: Me. April 22, 2025 Page 113 CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. It passes 4-1. Item #11D THE PROPERTIES ON THE FEBRUARY 2025 CONSERVATION COLLIER ACTIVE ACQUISITION LIST (AAL) AND DIRECT STAFF TO PURSUE THE PROJECTS RECOMMENDED WITHIN THE A-CATEGORY, FUNDED BY CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION FUND. (COMMISSIONER HALL’S REQUEST) - MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE EXEMPTION OF THE LUCARELLI PROPERTY BY COMMISSIONER HALL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL - FAILED (COMMISSIONERS SAUNDERS, MCDANIEL AND LOCASTRO OPPOSED) - MOTION TO APPROVE THE LIST AS PRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS - APPROVED (COMMISSIONER KOWAL AND COMMISSIONER HALL OPPOSED) MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 11D, formerly 16A15. This is a recommendation to approve the properties on the February 2025 Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List and direct staff to pursue the projects recommended within the "A" category funded by Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund. This item was also moved at Commissioner Hall's question. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: I pulled this one because there was one of the properties that I took exception to, and that was the Lucarelli property. If you take a look at the top picture right there, that's five acres that are right in the middle of urban land. And to spend two and a half million dollars on that piece of property to put it April 22, 2025 Page 114 in conservation, I didn't see the value of it. I didn't see what the purpose of it was. There's a large code case with exotics already existing on the property. And for two and a half million dollars, that -- this is basically an exit strategy for these owners. They have no other thing that they can do with it. They have talked about selling it and remediating the exotics and fixing the code case and selling it to a developer, which, in that case, would be the obvious thing, because it's surrounded, and I just don't see -- I just didn't see the value of it, including this on an "A" list for us to come back and say, no, this is not worth it in the end. So that's why I pulled it. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Any comments? MS. COOK: No. The Commissioner is absolutely right, there's been an existing code case since 2018 for exotics on this property. They have also been through four reviews of -- for a subdivision plat plan to develop eight single-family homes on this lot. So there's a multitude of development options on this property other than just conservation; however, again, they did apply to the program. It does meet the criteria of the program, so it was brought forward to the CCLAC and ultimately to you. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Any public comment? MR. MILLER: Yes, Brad Cornell. MR. CORNELL: Good afternoon, again, Commissioners, Mr. Chair. Brad Cornell with Audubon. I share your skepticism about this parcel because of its -- the context of the urban place that it is, but you'll notice that it's adjacent to conservation easements and some waterways. And I want to make a point that Conservation Collier's role in Collier County has some purposes that no other agency is going to pursue. You're not going to see the federal government come in after this or the state government, Florida Forever. Nobody wants this except for possibly Conservation April 22, 2025 Page 115 Collier, and the reason it's got value is think about Hurricane Ian just a couple of years ago, and what we lack is a place to put stormwater and -- in urban areas. And so there's a really -- whether you're talking about the East Coast or our coast or even in Central Florida where they suffered some significant flooding in urbanized areas that they did not realize they had built in floodplains, you need to have a place to put stormwater. That's the value of this parcel, because it's in the midst of urban development. It's a place to put water that's not in people's houses. So I know it's expensive. It does give you some pause, but that -- if I may suggest, that would be the value of places like this in an urban setting. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Is that a proper function of Conservation Collier? MR. CORNELL: I think not -- not as an engineering strategy for stormwater, but as a natural -- they call it nature-based solutions where you use natural wetlands. Yes, restore that, get rid of the exotics, but keep the capacity for storing rainwater, precipitation naturally the way wetlands normally do. They cleanse the water, and they hold the water, attenuate it so that's not running off immediately into people's streets and houses and those kind of situations. Nature-based solution is the term. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman. Ms. Cook, I was surprised this one was on the "A" list. I mean, what's the big thing that we're missing here? The pros are, in my opinion, kind of thin. I mean, that -- you know, I hear what Mr. Cornell says, but I can't imagine that this one little plot saves this whole area -- and I know he's not exactly saying that -- from flooding, that sort of thing. April 22, 2025 Page 116 But is there anything that we're missing, or is one of the pros a really strong pro that I'm missing? Because you can always say, aquifer recharge, stormwater storage. I mean, you probably almost call any piece of land that, as a pro. And from what we hear, the woodpecker's everywhere, the panther's everywhere. You know, that's not the case here. But is it something that we're missing that is a stronger pro than maybe what we're seeing on this slide? MS. COOK: I would say that going back to we have eight criteria that we look at when we look at properties: Native vegetation, listed species, stormwater recharge, opportunities for the public. This does meet the habitat, it does meet the ability for stormwater storage, and it also is within the target protection area being an urban area preserve. So that's why it was -- it was brought forward. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner McDaniel, I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. My question is, are we agreeing to pay these monies for these properties now, or is this authorizing you to go forward and negotiate with the purchasers? MS. COOK: This is -- this is the same where we would go get appraisals and do due diligence and then move forward to make offers. This is not a set purchase price. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And then maybe with Mr. French standing behind you, it was mentioned that there were code enforcement liens that are out here on this property. What happens to those? MS. COOK: So they have not actually gone to hearing yet. If the county were to buy it before it would be resolved, which I -- I'll have no opinion on, then everything would disappear, and it would be up to Conservation Collier to mitigate. Conservation Collier staff April 22, 2025 Page 117 would highly recommend that be addressed and that code case closed before an actual closing date. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And the code case has to do with exotic removal? MR. FRENCH: Yes, sir. Commissioner, for the record, Jamie French, your department head for Growth Management and Community Development. This has actually appeared before your Special Magistrate on numerous occasions, and Mr. Lucarelli has asked for continuances, which he has been granted. He's made obligations to your Hearing Examiner -- I'm sorry -- to your Special Magistrate that this would be cleaned up, as well as obligations to the community, and that's why this continuance. Some of those have been hiring staff, getting an engineer, which he has come back, and he has given reports to Mr. Neale. Although it's not discussed and it's not identified within your Conservation Collier ordinance purchasing policy, one consideration that we might ask is that you give, on -- if the Board were to move forward with this property, that he would have to satisfy all the code issues, which would be the removal of the exotics; otherwise, if this remains, that code case transfers over to the county. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My question in regard to the exotic removal, it was my understanding that a property owner -- private property owner wasn't required to do exotic removal unless they were coming forward with a development order. MR. FRENCH: That would be in the Estates. In your Estates subdistrict, you're absolutely right. But when you have development that is within 250 feet, we have this throughout the county, and in many cases this is where we would work with the Sheriff's Office to disrupt homeless activity. I would point to Texas Tony's just down the road where they April 22, 2025 Page 118 endured that, and that's the code we used, and that's where your exotic ordinance does help with law enforcement and help keep the quiet enjoyment of communities to keep that type out of there, and so this was a legitimate code case that was called in. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. MR. FRENCH: There's been obligations made by this property owner. And apparently unbeknownst, I would imagine, to Code Enforcement, he has chosen a path to nominate -- have this property nominated for a Conservation Collier purchase. We do think that there's adequate benefit. It does meet the criteria, stormwater recharge, as Mr. Cornell said. As your floodplain administrator, I would totally agree with that. But with these hardwoods and the exotics that are in there now, it would not perform in the ideal fashion, as a conservation easement that was well maintained. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman. Some of my questions got answered through your questions already. But I'm just trying to figure out exactly where this is along Immokalee Road. What is that community that it's -- MS. COOK: Sir, it's part of Willoughby Acres. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Oh, okay. MS. COOK: This is Airport Road right here -- or I'm sorry, Livingston and Immokalee, and then this is Willoughby Acres. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So I know there was mention of Hurricane Ian. So I don't believe we have flooding -- did we have flooding in that community during Hurricane Ian? MS. COOK: Not that I'm aware of. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Not that I'm aware of either. It was in an A zone? April 22, 2025 Page 119 MR. FRENCH: It is not within an A zone. It would be in the AH for ponding. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: This isn't Willoughby Acres. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Huh? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's Palm River, isn't it? MS. COOK: It's off of Erie Drive. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Off of Erie, oh, in the back of Willoughby. Okay. MS. COOK: Yes. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: It's in the back of Willoughby, yeah. All right. I was just curious. I was just -- you know, I'm just trying to figure out how would -- how would the water -- because I assume they have a stormwater plan in that community already that takes their stormwater. How would the water make itself to this isolated piece of woods within the community, help the community somehow? MR. FRENCH: The natural attenuation of that area, it is an AH, so it's going to be subject to ponding. It would not be subject to either rivering or coastal surge. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Okay. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: I was going to make a motion to approve, on the A list, all of the properties with the exception of this one. The -- CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, sir. Would an appropriate course of action, like you said -- we're voting to move forward and get appraisals and things like that. But because this one is unique, it has, you said, liens against it, right? MS. COOK: No liens. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: What is it -- what was the April 22, 2025 Page 120 issue? MS. COOK: There's an existing code case that -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, the code case. MS. COOK: -- the property owner has continued to request continuances. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So then -- so we have that, and then we have the removal of exotics. And so I'm never a huge supporter of creating extra work for you-all, but also, I'm not a supporter of holding up something to give us more information, and I don't think this is -- we're not launching the space shuttle here. You're going to do a real estate assessment and come back to us with some information. Would it be appropriate to move forward? But then the only way I would vote on this would be if you came back with the appraisal and we went to the owner and made an offer that would say, "You have to clear the exotics, you've got to, you know, clear the code case and all those things," then if they said no, I don't know that I would spend $2.5 million for this piece of property. But we couldn't -- could we make that offer now to the person? And I think that answer's no, we have to move forward first with an appraisal and all that and then negotiate with the landowner, correct? I mean, that's the right course of action? MS. COOK: Correct, it would -- staff would recommend that if that were your -- were your decision, that it would be subject to resolution of the existing code case. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I mean, that's the only way I think that I would support it. I would say bring us back some of the information, and then let's see if we can, you know, negotiate aggressively and not take all the liability for the exotics and the code case and all that and have that, you know, jump on the county, if that's an option. So I'm just trying to throw out some things here April 22, 2025 Page 121 without totally killing it. But I certainly wouldn't want to take up all the extra expense. I don't think it's that valuable of a piece of property. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, just one little point. And, Commissioner Kowal, this is all part of Palm River watershed, and it did receive extensive flooding during the Ian event and the Irma, because we had issues getting water out from the Irma event with Palm River and the weir system. So this -- if you look at the aerial photo, the big aerial photo of this, that little crick bed that goes up along the north end here is the extension of Palm River's basin all the way up through, so... MS. COOK: The other option, Commissioner -- and we didn't discuss it earlier, but would be to put this property on the B list, which would mean that staff would reevaluate it within a year and bring it -- re-rank it and bring it back to you. We could see -- if we put it on the B list, we could see if they've made any resolution towards the code case. If not, we may have a different overall ranking. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, the only -- I guess the only problem with that, if there is a problem, is that the property could be sold for development between now and the time the B list is evaluated, but that's -- MS. COOK: Absolutely. But it's been going through a subdivision plat review for a couple years anyway. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. Well -- and that was my question is, what is our benefit for belaying this? If we do move forward, we still will have an opportunity to review all of the extenuating circumstances and make a decision as to whether or not we wish to proceed with the transaction based upon everything that April 22, 2025 Page 122 you've just outlined, correct? MS. COOK: Yes, absolutely. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Anybody else? Any additional speakers? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We just had the one. All right. So we have a -- I'm not sure if there was -- I think there was a motion to approve the whole list with the exception of the Lucarelli property. There has not been a second to that motion yet. If there is no second -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and a second to approve the list with the exception of the Lucarelli property. We're going to call for the vote on that. If that vote fails, we'll take another motion then. All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye. Now that motion fails 2-3. Is there another motion? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make a motion. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion to approve the whole list as -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want to make the motion, and I'll second it? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: No. Go ahead. You've got the floor. April 22, 2025 Page 123 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We'll make a motion to approve the list as presented. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I'll second that. Any further discussion? COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'll just say when this comes back, I would -- the aggressive negotiation would be something I definitely would be looking for. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. If it really has the water management type or stormwater management value, you're going to have to do some convincing on that. MS. COOK: Okay. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and a second. I don't believe we voted on that. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We haven't voted yet. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All in favor of the motion, signify by saying. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye. All opposed? COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That passes 3-2. COMMISSIONER HALL: Did anybody change their mind? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I came close. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Come back with a deal -- come back with a deal, Jaime. Come back with a deal. MS. COOK: Thank you. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I've got two houses on Johnny Cake that didn't get a drop of water two streets down. April 22, 2025 Page 124 CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Ms. Patterson. 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, staff and commission general communications. Item 15A is public comments not on the current or future agenda by individuals not already heard during previous public comments in this meeting. MR. MILLER: I have no additional comments at this time. Item #15C STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS MS. PATTERSON: Very good. That brings us to Item 15C, staff and commission general commissions. We do have a workshop scheduled for the first Tuesday in June. We've confirmed that with each of your aides. That will be a shared workshop between mental health in the morning, and then we'll start the AUIR, and we may be able to get it done by lunchtime; otherwise, we have the afternoon reserved for the AUIR. And with that, I have nothing else. County Attorney. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Nothing else. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal. April 22, 2025 Page 125 COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman. I would just like to thank the gentlemen sitting on the Board up here with me in brainstorming and, I think, making a much stronger ordinance than the original one that I presented. So I think the language changes and things like that, it did shore it up a little bit more. But I do appreciate you guys' support, so... COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You did a good job. COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes, you did. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: I do have -- I do have one thing that I want to bring up. It came to my attention that the military museum was not going to get to go into the building that we wanted it to. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And I can explain what the situation is there. COMMISSIONER HALL: I know. I understand what the situation is about the -- with the funding and the appropriations and the limitation of a museum versus veterans service center. But we have 30,000 veterans in Collier County, and they have some amazing artifacts. I mean, stuff that dates back to the Spanish American War. So did -- did everybody get the email from Joe Algers? Okay. When I got the email, I was -- I thought, "Doggone, we have got to work this out." So I had a thought, and I talked to the County Attorney and the County Manager yesterday about it. And my thought was, what if we put the military museum in that building with TDC funds, and then when and if we ever get ready for the veterans services, we can put them in there like we were going to, and in the meantime, because it would take so long to do and that doesn't fix their immediate end-of-the-year problem, we could allow them some space at the museum over here to exhibit their stuff and function for two years until we get that building over there in Golden Gate ready, and then April 22, 2025 Page 126 they could move over there on a permanent basis. And that's -- I thought that that might be a win-win situation for them and for us, and, Commissioner Saunders, you probably know a whole lot more about that. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, let's talk about that particular building for just a moment. Structurally, it's sound, but it's going to -- I think the estimate is probably going to cost 6 or 8 or $9 million to get it into a position where it can be occupied. Are you -- if the Board wants to use TDC funds for all that -- I don't know that anybody would complain -- that would limit any potential of getting any federal money; that would be the only thing. In terms of the potential for federal money, we cannot commit to space for a museum in there if we're going to use federal money. Mario Diaz-Balart -- Congressman Diaz-Balart has put into the -- will be putting into the next budget a request for $9 million. He already did that for this year, but as you know, Congress went with a continuing resolution. They went back to the 2024 budget which did not include our $9 million. So we're going to be delayed, I would guess, another year before we really know if we have federal funding. But I think if we -- if we're not careful, we would eliminate that potential. But that's what -- if the Board wants to put the museum in there, we can certainly do that. And I'm not sure what you'd want to do with all of the other office space that would be available there. There's more space there than the museum would need. It's about 17,000 square feet. And Mr. Mullins is back there. He knows all of the details. But the thought was that there would be all the offices for all the veterans services organizations and for the county's veterans operations, and that would take up the bulk of the building, but then there would be an open area where different things could be placed. April 22, 2025 Page 127 COMMISSIONER HALL: If we could fix the building, if we could put it in there with tourism money, showing that it benefits tourists, and then if we don't have to rely on federal funds, then that's savings to the American taxpayer. MR. MULLINS: For the record, John Mullins, your director of Communications, Government, and Public Affairs. To the Chair's point, the veterans community center, as rebranded during this process, does provide space for some different veterans organizations that we had been serving over the last several months. Those include not only our own veterans services division but also home base of Southwest Florida the Naples Vet Center, who I think may have met with another one of our commissioners about some needed space; Gulf Coast Veterans and Friends; and the Warrior Homes of Collier County. So the thought was trying to put all of these services in one one-stop-shop location for veterans to make easier for them to coordinate all the different benefits and programs that are available to them. So whether or not you want to use this space for the museum using TDT or use this space for the veterans service center which -- or veterans community center, apologize, which the Commissioner's correct, we're at least six months away from another federal budget being adopted if they're on time, and the last few years they've not come close. So it could be closer to a year before we have the 6 to $9 million available. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And as you noted, there are close to 30,000 veterans in the community, and right now there is no central place for them to go to access services. With the nursing home there, there would be a veterans service officer at the veterans community center, and then there'd be other services available. So that was sort of the idea was to have this campus where we could April 22, 2025 Page 128 have everything. The hope was that we could have a museum there sort of in the center and -- but that became a bit complicated. MR. MULLINS: That's the appropriations subcommittee rules. This is community project funding, otherwise known as earmarks. It's legislatively directed spending. And the subcommittee sets the rules, which is what preclude museums from being a part of it, because it's not considered economic development. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: What we could do -- and I apologize. I'll go down the list here. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: What we could do is use TDC funds for the portion of this building that would be used for the museum, which would not be the entire building, and then use general revenue of the county to finish off the building for those veterans organizations. Because there's about 17,000 square feet. I think the museum probably needs 7- or 8,000 maximum, maybe a little less. MR. MULLINS: And yes, that square footage depends upon whether or not you complete the second floor. I think it goes between 14- and 17,000 square feet depending upon that component. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. So there are options, but we'd have -- we'd be digging into the general revenue. Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman. Regardless of what kind of money that we use for the veteran community center and if it does or doesn't fit the museum, whether it's tourist dollars or not, they need a home now. And a lot of the emails that I saw, I saw you, John, and even Ms. Patterson offered them space here on the -- at the government center footprint. And it wasn't optimum, and it didn't give them 20,000 square feet, but all the emails I was seeing was, "Hey, we're being thrown out of the airport. April 22, 2025 Page 129 We need a place, like, yesterday." And then I saw answers to those emails from you-all, and then I saw emails then more from that group because then they got all salivating about the big museum that was going to be built. And there's many ways that that pie can be cut, but it's not going to be done today. We could -- we could figure out some unique ways of funding, and we've just heard a few. But for the space right now, I thought we had offered them something that at least allowed them to maybe display their most valuable items and at least have something on display while we worked out the uniqueness of the money. And I think we've all brainstormed a couple of different possibilities that I think we would all support. But what happened to the footprint that we offered them to at least move now? MR. MULLINS: We had looked -- and we still look at options for them to try to accommodate them. One of them was the facility at Freedom Park. Of course, because it is Freedom Park, it has the first responders memorial, it has the freedom memorial. There's a natural synergy and topical alignment between what they would be offering as a museum and what's already there on that location. It would also provide us the opportunity to maybe move some of the items that we have here on campus to that location. The only problem is that facility, those grounds of that park, were also paid for with state Florida's Community Trust Fund money, which in the agreement says we cannot lease that space to a private sector entity, which means they would have to become a part of the museum system. Now, that was one thing that they had approached us with at the outset, too, was what were the steps to become part of the county museum system? And we led them to those, and to your point it looked like it was going in a positive direction, but then the tides turned, not exactly sure why, and now we're looking at other ways to April 22, 2025 Page 130 accommodate them, potentially with the actual museum here on the main complex, which was not constructed with Florida Communities Trust funds, which means there are no strings attached. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: See, I actually think that's the priority right now, and to try to encourage them to take the keys to that space. Whether it's perfect or not, they need an interim place now that -- you know, nothing's going to be built at the veterans center. But like I said, I saw a couple of emails, and then it seemed like they stopped talking about it. MR. MULLINS: And keep in mind, part of their issue is a lot of the stuff that they have in storage, too, which has never really been a part of this conversation because we don't really have the space to take care of all their wares that they have in storage units and other hangars at the airport. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Part of the complication, Commissioner LoCastro, with that concept was that in order to be part of the museum system, they would have to provide to the county in the form of ownership those materials that the county would determine would be appropriate for a museum. And so they didn't -- they didn't want to give up control over the inventory. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: They had to do that for even the space that was here? MS. PATTERSON: No. COMMISSIONER HALL: Only at Freedom Park. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Right. So that's -- I agree. That's why that fell out. But we did have some square footage right here within walking distance of this building. I'm wondering why that fell out. Because as you just said, John, they didn't have to go through all those gyrations. MR. MULLINS: Well, because there was initially a lot of interest from the representatives of the Naples Military Museum in April 22, 2025 Page 131 Freedom Park, we've annually submitted a land management plan proposal to FDEP that administers the Florida Communities Trust program to get permission to have a military museum on those grounds should we wish to. So we're still doing all of that due diligence to have that option available, but we only did so because of their sincere interest at the outset. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: If we refunded the state grant -- I'm not sure how much that is -- but then that would eliminate all of the roadblocks. MR. MULLINS: Upwards of $12 million. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, no. COMMISSIONER HALL: Twelve? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes, ma'am. MS. KINZEL: Commissioner, I hate to interrupt, but last week I was at a presentation of the Airport Authority director, and he openly committed that they had the space at the airport for as long as they wanted it. So I'm -- I mean, that was just him verbally, obviously, but maybe that's why you're no longer seeing the letters. He definitely committed to the audience that, no, the veterans are good at the airport. So I don't know how recently you checked with them, but I just want to say that came straight from the director. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I think part of the problem is they only have, I think, 800 square feet there. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So it doesn't do much for this one. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Do we have more than 800 square feet? And what we were offering them on the footprint here was more, wasn't it? MR. MULLINS: Yes, it would be more here. It would be about 1,400 square feet if it was at Freedom Park, internally, in the building. April 22, 2025 Page 132 MS. KINZEL: And I guess that would just give you a little bit more time that -- if they have the existing. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro had mentioned the potential for here on -- our museum here on this parcel, on this site. What's the story there? MS. PATTERSON: So we have -- over in the museum, we have the room where we hold trainings and different things. The idea -- and then it has a little gallery in the back. The idea was to allow them to use that space. We would give it up for our exhibits and other things and allow them there. It also would allow them potentially to use some of the grounds around there as well. We have a beautiful but underutilized garden in the back where we have some -- a train and some other things, as well as the tank that's there, so there may be a way to integrate things in over there and possibly attract more people over to that museum. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: How big is that space? MR. MULLINS: If I had to ballpark it -- we measured, I think, the gallery component at one point to see if it was an option. I think it was around 600 feet. If I had to ballpark the other part, I'd say it was an additional maybe 1,200 square feet. So I'm thinking 1,800 to 2,000 square feet maybe. And that's napkin math. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That would be a nice -- COMMISSIONER HALL: Temporary fix. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I mean -- Mr. Chairman, if I may. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Those were the numbers that I think you had given to me, John, when I was talking to them sort of like one-on-one trying to work a deal, and then they got very excited about the vet center but got ahead of the headlights is what I actually April 22, 2025 Page 133 told them. I said, "Listen, you're speeding." And not only did I love the option that you offered them here -- because it didn't come with all the strings of Freedom Park -- but also, too, they -- by their own admission, a move would help them sort of go through all their inventory. And one of the things that I told them is, look -- and what our Clerk of Courts said might be true and -- or it is true. She heard it. But that's not anything that I've seen, you know, in writing. But it's still not a permanent home for them, and I think at least putting them here -- I said the same thing. I thought it put them in a more visible place. There's a lot of people that don't even know there's a backside of that airport unless you're -- you know, you're using it. But then, you know, in my final sentence I said, "Guys, it's more square footage than you have now, and I betcha the move would help you shake the dust off of some things that maybe aren't as displayable as you think, and you'd get a better feel for what you really have, you know, to display." So, I mean, I thought that was the winner. Maybe we need to reengage with them and say, "Hey, for the interim, we might be able to do some magical stuff with money, but it's not going to happen today." And the offer of what's on the footprint here, hey, bring over what fits. We'll make it work, and then at least you have a home closer to the county, a more visible spot, and then we'll continue to brainstorm, you know, unique funding and -- for some possible space, you know, eventually at the veterans community center. That was, you know, my thought. I think we should reoffer that and try to convince them to take that, because I think it's the best interim option. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Just as a -- just as a point, this issue with the veterans museum's April 22, 2025 Page 134 been going on since I became a county commissioner and they started getting squeezed at the Naples Airport in that facility. And as an organization, their leadership changes, and so then there does their direction changes. And I don't think any of us can argue how important having a military museum or a veterans museum is for our community, but I just want to -- I want to caution us with these potential discussions of TDC money funding up a veterans museum. I think there are real complications if we start moving them over to the veterans nursing home facility and our capacity to receive federal money. There is legislation going on in Tallahassee right now that maybe allow -- hopefully will allow us to manage the TDT revenues for the benefit of the whole community in offsetting ad valorem expense and maintenance and capital expenses and all kinds of nifty things. So I would caution us at this stage to stay put. I'm really happy with this particular site here at campus. The tank is over there. It was donated by one of my friend's fathers to the county. It is the -- it is a -- it is a nice happy home without a lot of management, without a lot of fuss. And then as evolution transpires -- Collier County has five museums already that we're tending. So adding another one into the mix is not, I don't think, an appropriate discussion for us to be having right now. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. So it sounds like -- Commissioner Kowal. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman. I was under the same impression. I knew there was a lot of strings, especially with the federal funding coming from D.C., and then, of course, the park down on Goodlette -- or not Goodlette -- yeah, I guess it would be Goodlette -- so I thought for April 22, 2025 Page 135 sure they were already coming here. I don't know why I thought -- I thought this was a good fit for them here on campus for what they have right now. And I know a little history because I went down there, and I talked to the director of the airport about a few things. And what happens, every time they remodel another section of the terminal, they keep squeezing them smaller and smaller and smaller. Like, right now they're, like, in this little cubicle basically, and everything's just shoved in there. You can barely get around. But I told them they need to start taking things a little bit more seriously. They probably need to think about getting, like, one individual, like, a curator or something that actually can look at their inventory, see what they have, and they can -- you know, like Commissioner LoCastro said, you don't need 500 uniforms of, you know, desert fatigues or something. You know, you can find one or two that are unique. You have them as display items. You know, they have tons of stuff in storage. It's just a duplicate of things. So I think that gives them a little more legitimacy if they have somebody like that. And I also told them, I says to the board, I says, "What you need to do is research Collier County's military history." Our airport was a training facility for the Army Air Corps. They trained there, and, you know, before they gave the airport over to the county in 1971, that was a military base. And if you can get more on the lines of you start on the base of what our military history here is in Collier County, then you feed off of that. And it gives you a little more legitimacy to be part of the county government while you occupy a space here. And I don't know if they're going to take any of these recommendations, but I think that would make it an easier pill for the community to swallow to see that, you know, there is a history of military activity here in Collier County. There is -- you know, in April 22, 2025 Page 136 having it part of our system here. Not necessarily saying we absorb it, but, you know, while they occupy our property, I think it would be a good idea. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I think the -- I think the consensus is that let's see if we can move them into the museum here. That's close to 1,400 square feet with some outdoor space. That may be -- MR. MULLINS: That would have been Freedom Park. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: No. MR. MULLINS: We're talking 2,000 square feet here on campus. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Oh, 2,000. I thought you said -- yeah, I'm sorry. Okay. (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER HALL: That's even more better. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. It's a whole lot more better. So let's -- I think the consensus is we'd like to see them move into our space, the 2,000 square feet, which should be sufficient, that way -- and we have someone who can curate those types of things as well. MR. MULLINS: Well, to Commissioner Kowal's point, the museum does have standards for things that are allowed into the museum setting, and one of the things that we were looking at, should they have been acquired by the county museum system, was bringing on an actual professional museum curator that has experience in military history. Because the Commissioner is correct, these things really do have to have a little bit of a nexus to Collier County itself. So that museum curator would be going through a lot of their wares over there, seeing what is appropriate to be placed here, whether it be Freedom Park or on this campus, as part of the museum display. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Do you need anything else April 22, 2025 Page 137 from us to move forward? MS. PATTERSON: No, no. We'll chat with the military museum folks, and we can update you. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you, Commissioner Hall, for bringing that up. Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, sir. Number 1, I want to have a -- we had a discussion today about the floor area ratio that's currently set by our LDC a .5. How do you-all feel about making a move to .6 on ALFs alone? I don't want to do it on all development, but just for assisted living facilities, because that seems to be the trend. You feel okay about giving staff direction to look into that and amend our -- COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Blanket approval, is that what you're saying? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, blanket approval. I mean, amend the LDC. It's not a blanket approval, but it's an amendment to the LDC. The -- what was shared with me was the trend is .6 FAR, and it's been the case, and to not have to require the deviations and such. If you're okay with that, carry on. Number 2, I learned of another deficiency in our Land Development Code with the notice processes for agriculturally zoned lands. Agriculturally zoned land only requires a thousand foot -- lineal foot notice to property owners of a use change. We have a big one coming up in May, I think, is when it's coming to us, out off of Sabal Palm Road, fairly large subdivision. It's in your district. And it's an orange grove that's being converted. The request is for close to 400 units, and they only had to notify a thousand feet in each direction from where it is on a single-use road with a lot of people between them and 951. And so my suggestion is we amend -- we ran into this in Golden April 22, 2025 Page 138 Gate Estates. When I first came into office, it was 500 feet, and that required [sic] two property owners maybe. And then we went to a quarter mile, half mile. Now it's a mile ring. So my suggestion is we go to that mile ring across the board with rezones, conditional uses, and use changes just to better edify the community as to what the neighbor's planning on doing, specifically on that one on Sabal Palm. You know how folks are, if you -- if you live out towards 951, you go to 951, go to the store, you come back, you go home. You don't ride down -- you don't ride down Sabal Palm for fun. And so the sign was posted legally out on the front of the property, but nobody even knew about it. Planning Commission meeting, NIM meetings were held. Nobody -- nobody showed up, and now they're -- now -- now everybody's showing up. So my suggestion is we elevate everything for a notice process to a mile ring. COMMISSIONER HALL: I'm good with that. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Mr. Bosi's jumping out of his seat. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Like he doesn't have anything else to do. MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Zoning manager. Just to clarify, you're -- agriculture. You're not talking about a mile for the urbanized area? You're talking about agriculturally zoned property that you want to increase it from a thousand feet to a mile, correct? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Specifically on agriculture, but I wouldn't be opposed to all rezoning requests. MR. BOSI: In the urbanized -- just as a heads-up, in the urbanized area, you're talking thousands -- April 22, 2025 Page 139 COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Big number. MR. BOSI: -- thousands within a mile of some of these locations, especially within a coastal area. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm not suggesting -- specifically for ag lands. MR. BOSI: Okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We did it for -- we have already done it for Estates-zoned property. I'm trying to weigh the benefits to the notification to the neighborhood of a use change in relationship to the expense for the developer, because that -- that notice process is an expense to the developer to let the world know they're changing something from A to B. And I haven't -- I haven't ascertained whether the public benefit of the increased notice is worth it for us, but I'd like that to be explored, but minimally on agriculturally zoned lands, that that be extended to a mile. We may give consideration to it on everything. It could be very voluminous, but I -- here again, you weren't always negatively impacted -- or you weren't always impacted by somebody that's on a pass to you with a use change until you happen to go down that road. COMMISSIONER HALL: I mean, I totally agree. I've got a seven-acre ag ask coming up in Pine Ridge Estates, and a thousand feet's going to reach one neighbor. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. And so for ag specifically, I want to go to the mile ring, similar to what we've done in the Estates. And then we can debate, talk, hear from the community as to whether the entire county needs to go to a mile ring or not. It's going to -- it's -- you know, at the end of the day, it's government of and by and for the people, and it's letting the folks know what's, in fact, happening in the area. April 22, 2025 Page 140 CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'm not in opposition to that, so... There is another LDC amendment coming forward. From my understanding, the current Land Development Code allows for an unlimited amount of commercial vehicles to be utilized at a residence, if I'm not mistaken. MR. BOSI: The Code of Laws is where we have commercial vehicle restrictions, and it does not have a number. It only has conditions towards where -- how commercial vehicles could be stored on residentially zoned properties, but it doesn't have a specific number, and it does not apply to the Estates properties. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So therefore, then, there is no limit on commercial vehicles in the Estates or on a residential piece of property. I would like to -- I understand that that's up for review, and my suggestion is is that it be limited to one in the Estates as well as residential. MR. BOSI: In residential, you're allowed to do it, but it has to meet certain conditions. It has to be screened. It has to be an enclosure. If it's a truck for a temporary duration, it could only be for a short period of time. So you want this -- the limitation of commercial vehicles to be one per lot? So that would mean if you had a roofing company that -- you're in the urbanized area, you're in Pine Ridge subdivision and you had a roofing company, they could only have one commercial truck at that location. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. MR. BOSI: So they couldn't bring -- there couldn't be two trucks there to do the roof install. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, if they're coming to a house to do a job -- I'm talking about being utilized as -- April 22, 2025 Page 141 MR. BOSI: You want an exception for active -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Forgive me for my tone of voice, sir. You misinterpreted where I was going. What's happening -- I'm not trying to limit 10 commercial vehicles going to his neighbor's house to fix a roof, but because they're only -- I'm pointing at you, Chris, because you're in Pine Ridge. Well, they can't do that in Grey Oaks. But I'm not talking the action of coming to a property and doing work. I'm talking about the utilization of a residential home for a commercial storage facility and/or to and from for operation of a business. MR. BOSI: Okay. So you want -- and this is -- when you construct regulations, as you know, you've got to make sure that all these exceptions that you're thinking have to be expressed to the people who are writing them so we can understand what the intent was. So this is -- this is for, say, a take-home vehicle? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. MR. BOSI: So this would exclude -- you know, this would exclude home improvements or -- this limitation wouldn't be imposed upon a parcel that was -- had an active -- an active building permit for an improvement. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Absolutely not. This has to do with the utilization of a residential property for a commercial operation to utilize to-and-from commercial vehicles for the business. MR. BOSI: You keep -- and I keep hearing the term "residential," but then I hear "Estates." Because residential and Estates are two separate properties. The Estates are an ag zoning district and is not considered by our commercial vehicles [sic] a residential district. So your request -- and we have a restriction upon commercial properties within residential districts. It doesn't have a number, but it April 22, 2025 Page 142 just talks about if you do have it, they have to be enclosed, have to be screened, those types of things. I think what you were describing is you want a specific program about commercial take-home vehicles within the Estates zoning district. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And residential, yes, both. MR. BOSI: Oh. So you want to include all -- you want to open up residential districts as well. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Absolutely. MR. BOSI: Okay. COMMISSIONER HALL: So if a guy has a handyman business with a handyman sign, is that excluded? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He can take his home -- he can take his truck home. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: One truck. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: One truck. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: What if his son works for Aztec Plumbing, and he brings his truck home? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: He better hide it. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Oh. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I tell you what's generated this -- because there's a gentleman in the audience, I think, that you may have spoken with, and I have as well. There's a -- like, a two-parcel area in Golden Gate Estates and a gentleman that has a tree -- a landscaping business is renting that space to other landscapers to park their trucks overnight. And so at 6 o'clock in the morning, there's a half a dozen, or whatever, landscaping companies coming out and grabbing their trucks, and, of course, that's disruptive, and I think that's what you're trying to get at. You just -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's not just landscaping. That -- April 22, 2025 Page 143 CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: No, no, no. I'm using that as an example. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Tim's neighbor's there. But, you know, in Golden Gate Estates, we have -- we have a dump truck driver that buys a house in Golden Gate Estates. He's allowed to have -- he's allowed to bring his dump truck home, or an on-road truck. But then the next thing you know, there's two dump trucks, then there's four dump trucks -- four dump trucks. Then there's two on-road trucks. Then there's a shop being built. Then there's maintenance being done. And then you have an industrial operation transpiring in a neighborhood that was never intended to be an industrial use. And it is everywhere, especially the further east you go. And so this -- this may sound -- this may sound -- and we can sit here and pick this apart all we want. I'm looking to come up with some limitations to provide for the property owner to be able to utilize their commercial vehicles. And, Commissioner Kowal, you know, what are you going to do with a son that works for a different company and -- those are, in my mind, special exceptions. What I'm looking to do is protect the neighborhoods that we, in fact, have that are residential. Even though Mr. Bosi sits there and argues with me that the Estates aren't residential. It's agricultural with an Estate overlay on top of it, which has a residential component. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I like case by case. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No? MR. BOSI: No. The Estates is a zoning district. It's not an overlay. It's a zoning district. It's a zoning district within the agricultural zoning district. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct, but there are -- it is a residential zoning. MR. BOSI: The primary purpose is for low-density April 22, 2025 Page 144 single-family residential development with ag -- with limited agricultural activities. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. So the limitation is one truck. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: But you're allowed to have a business on your property in the Estates as long as you don't service more than one person at a time on the property at any one given time, right? MR. BOSI: You're allowed to have a home occupation within any of our residential zoning districts. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So if that's four roofing trucks and you have a warehouse in the back, I mean, that can exist, right, the way it is now? MR. BOSI: The way that it's currently -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: There's no customers that are coming to the property to purchase or exchange, but he keeps his roofing materials, his tools in his workshop, he has three, four trucks, and they go out to work every day from there. Is that allowed? I'm asking him if that's something that's allowed now. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I make a suggestion, Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Sure. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I would like to have -- to give direction to staff to make the amendments as we are -- not debate it today. This has to be -- this has to come through -- COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I wasn't debating. I was asking for more information, that's all. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I understand. But this is going to come back to us. And rather than us -- I mean, you can certainly ask all the questions that you want. I didn't mean to take an enormous amount of time. I just -- I April 22, 2025 Page 145 would like to put the limitation of one commercial vehicle on the residence. And we can still debate that when it comes back to us. If you-all think it needs to be five, then -- CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So, Mr. Bosi and Commissioner McDaniel, I think -- correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this is what you're trying to accomplish, because I've had the same conversations. You have some homeowners or property owners -- sometimes there's not even a house on the property, but you have some property owners that are parking their commercial vehicles in the Estates, and they're -- they have multiple vehicles. It's not just their vehicles. It's other people's vehicles. And so there's got to be a way to control that. The one gentleman I spoke to talked about a half a dozen or more landscape companies that are paying to park their vehicles on somebody's property and picking them up in the morning and bringing them back in the afternoon, and that's creating tremendous havoc. Commissioner McDaniel's talking about a little -- a broader situation than that, but that's the problem we're trying to address; how to protect the communities from having commercial vehicles parked on their property. One vehicle is what Commissioner McDaniel has recommended. Maybe it's two. But whatever, you can come back with some solutions to that problem. COMMISSIONER HALL: You could include a gross weight limitation. That only eliminates pickups, but it includes the dump trucks and the -- CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So there's a way -- there's got to be a way at least to address that. COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Trucks -- MR. BOSI: And just to provide for a little bit more complication, though, there's two different issues we're talking about. April 22, 2025 Page 146 Your home occupation -- your home occupations allowances within the Estates, the number of trucks associated with that, that's one thing. The amount -- just an individual taking their landscaping or taking their plumbing truck home with them, that's a different issue. That's not a home occupation. That's an individual who works for a plumbing company that takes their plumbing truck home with them. From what I'm understanding, we would like to limit that individual to one -- to one commercial vehicle per Estates lot as an allowance with some other -- some other conditions we talked about, screening of those vehicles from the right-of-way or from neighbors. Is that something that this Board of County Commissioners would be interested in as well, or do you just want us to come back and then you guys can sort through? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Come back. I mean, as Commissioner McDaniel said, we're not trying to debate this. He just wants to get the ball rolling on trying to control that problem. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Because, again, it's -- it's prolific throughout Golden Gate Estates, and the problem with the buffering aspect, Mike, is what's satisfactory to us for buffering isn't satisfactory to you when there's a dump truck firing up at 3 o'clock in the morning and running for two hours before he hits the road and runs all day long. Those guy crank those motors early on, let them run for some time, and that's not really a sufficient buffer. How do you mitigate those things? So those are all things that we can have discussions about. MR. MILLER: Mr. Chair, if I might, I think a couple of you referenced the gentleman in the audience. I know we don't normally take speakers here. He did submit a slip. Did you want to hear from him, or are you good? CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, did he want to speak on the -- April 22, 2025 Page 147 MR. MILLER: He wanted to speak during commissioner comments, and I gleaned that this is the item. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, we missed him. You've got to -- come on up. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He sat out there all afternoon. MR. MILLER: He indicated this item and not 15A, and I was -- CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Oh, okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I do have one more thing after we're done with Tim. MR. MALONEY: Good afternoon. Tim Maloney, for the record. John Q. Citizen for everybody else. We appreciate -- we want to express our gratitude for potentially taking the steps forward by staff and commissioners to address this. And whether I'm in an ag district with "E" Estates zoning, or you can call me whatever you want, but I've lived in the Estates for my entire adult life, and we have a -- we have a big problem. And these operations -- they're trying to convert the Estates into more commercial activity. And mostly, you know, Mike pointed it out, when you read the purpose and intent of the Estates, it never intended to be a lay-down area for commercial activity. It never -- it never really mentions commercial parking for commercial vehicles. It's low-density residences. And, you know, that's where we live. So this is our -- this is our -- these are our homes. And I think if we go unchecked, we're going to lose the entire Estates. I mean, you're talking about 177 square miles of neighborhood here, and it's already out of hand. I think COVID, and I think the home occupation statute that's been abused and distorted has probably added to the problem. But if -- we need to get a handle on this, and we really, really would appreciate addressing this. I'm hoping -- you know, obviously, we're hoping for one. You know, that would be -- I guess from my April 22, 2025 Page 148 standpoint, if it truly is unlimited, which I'm on the fence about that -- I mean, I'm not sure that's been proven to me, but if we go from unlimited to one, that's a bone. But if we're at one, we should stay at one, you know. And if we're at unlimited and we're not at one and we go to two, well, you know, we could probably live with that. But our experience is, right now, five to seven rigs 5:30 in the morning. And I've shown the video to a couple of commissioners. And I just don't think it belongs here. I have a -- we have a son who's got a future here, too. I may not have, you know, too many years left living in the Estates, who knows, but I mean, my son's 30 years old, and what's going to be left for these young guys that -- you know, people that choose to live out here? So... COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's the goal. Thank you for sharing. MR. MALONEY: Thank you for listening. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel, did you have -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's being abused. There's no argument that it's being abused. How we ultimately get there -- you know, I'm the first one to argue for property rights for you to utilize your property as you see fit, but you also have the responsibility with those property rights to not negatively impact your neighbors, period. So last but not least -- and this is for us to have a chat about. You don't know this is coming as of yet, and so I'd like to maybe engage with the County Manager, and that is our staff, at least my staff, my executive coordinators received an email from HR that seems to be a minute cumbersome with regard to time calculations, so on and so forth. And I would -- I would like for this board to be able to necessarily -- and I don't know how we're going to manage this. This just came to me, I think, yesterday, and so I -- you know, not -- our April 22, 2025 Page 149 executive assistant coordinators don't work 9 to 5. They don't work 8 to 5. They don't punch in. They don't punch out. They work all of the time. And I -- and I foresee an opportunity for me to have to be signing off on a time sheet where I have no -- I have no clue about what it is that I'm actually theoretically ratifying. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I gave my -- I gave my assistant some very sage advice. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You did? Well, share it. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And that advice was, "Just ignore it," which she is doing. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was told that there was a system change over at HR. MS. PATTERSON: This has to do with the SAP upgrades, and this is something that we've been wrestling with as well. So that's -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: SAP stands for? MS. PATTERSON: That's our financial system. And time -- and so it's a timekeeping issue as well. So it's something we've been wrestling with because we have a lot of people that don't work a traditional work schedule. If you think about people that work shift, think about people that work, like, EMS, 24 hours on and 48 off. So we can chat about it and see what solutions we can come up with. We knew that there was going to be some bumps over some of this, and we've been -- we've been working through it as we go along. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I started doing a little bit of exploration, and that's quite sage advice, Commissioner Saunders, but I saw a potentiality where a superior was maybe having to sign off on something that could put that superior and/or the employee in a liable position. We don't need to do that. MS. PATTERSON: No, sir. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's all I have. April 22, 2025 Page 150 CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, mine should be fast compared to that. First of all, I didn't hear any debating or arguing. It was good, healthy exchange is what I heard. I'll just add one little thing, though, on the executive assistants. I just think everybody who works behind this wall is very unique. Like you said, Amy, there's other unique positions, but you can sort of count their hours, you know. The five of us and the five of them are salaried employees, and sometimes they're working all day Saturday and Sundays, and then other days, you know. So when I read it -- I didn't tell her to ignore it, but I read it, and I said, "I don't think that you should have gotten this because it doesn't seem like it applies to you." But like you said, you'll work it out. Just a couple of quick comments. Just a healthy reminder that there were some DAS homework assignments that we talked about here, so I just want to make sure those don't get forgotten. I really also want to thank Commissioner Kowal for his sense of urgency pushing forward, you know, the e-bike ordinance, and then we'll all see in our inboxes, if you haven't seen already, Mr. Klatzkow's office has already quick turned it with the changes. The only thing that I would say is let's really now get that ordinance out there. None of us are e-bike experts. And I actually talked to somebody on Marco who's probably one of my biggest e-bike riders. And I know that when I show him that ordinance -- and it's a very professional person that -- I know I'm going to get some feedback where he's going to say, "You might have a couple of holes here." So just -- we've got to just be open to that. I know none of us are going to shoot it out and go, "Here's the law. This is it." You know, it's -- it might be Draft No. 5, and Draft 6 could be coming. So we all just, obviously, need to be open to that. April 22, 2025 Page 151 And then I'm going to -- Dan, I'm going to send it to the City of Marco. I don't know if you need to send it to the City of Naples, but the last time I compared -- okay -- notes with the City of Marco, they said, we're not waiting on the county. We're going to do our own thing. And then we, obviously, have something out now. So hopefully they can -- they can do their own thing, but I'd like to see some cohesion, so I'll be very impressed if they say, "Wow, we like that as a start, and, you know, we have something that's very similar." And then lastly I always like to use this time to, you know, thank people where thanks are due. And Jamie French and Jaime Cook -- and they also represent a whole bunch of people whose names I don't have written down here, but there's just been heroic efforts at Caxambas and at the 951-boat ramp, heroic efforts working with the City of Marco and catching a few stones and some spears but doing it so professionally and marching forward. So I just wanted to go on record. They already know that I can't thank them enough. You know, last night the two Jamies were at the Marco City Council meeting, and I think just by your presence, it -- it made it a valuable minimal discussion because it shows that we're not just operating on autopilot and doing our own thing, and we're trying to be as cooperative as possible. And, you know, I've had to work with the two of you. And then, like I said, I know you rely on some other teams. But thank you so much for all the work that you've done behind the scenes and how responsive you've been to me so I could be responsive to my constituents when it came to Caxambas, 951, and a few other things. And lastly, I'll just say to Mr. French -- and I think we've all been attending the FC Naples soccer games. Game one was a little bit of a fiasco as we were sort of learning a few things, but you know, April 22, 2025 Page 152 now it is such a polished event, people getting in and out. And, Jamie, I know that, you know, you went over there as sort of our field general and sort of directed the traffic with the staff there and really took charge, and you can -- you can tell not only aesthetically, but logistically how different it is now and how much of a big impact you made. And people just sing your praises over there from the staff, from the FC Naples staff to Adrian's staff as well, that -- how valuable your leadership was over there. So thank you. It's noticed and appreciated. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. I think I'm going to tag onto that discussion for just a moment. I was at the soccer match, the FC soccer match this past Saturday, and I've been to two other ones. And it was good seeing other county folks there, other commissioners there. I think it's important -- if a commissioner hasn't been to one of those games, I think it's important to go to one. There's going to be another one, I think, on Saturday night. And it's -- it's really a nice experience. You see 3- or 4,000 people having a really good time. All the kids are having a great time. It is really a nice operation out there, and that is to be credited to our staff because, as you said, Commissioner LoCastro, the first night was maybe a little rough. Lessons learned. But leading up to that first night, there were some problems at the park in terms of the just needing cleanup, needing new vegetation, new painting, things like that. So the park is in tiptop shape. It's absolutely beautiful. So if you get a chance, if you haven't been out there for a soccer match, try to get out there on Saturday and just witness that. In addition, there's another company that's having a huge soccer tournament in Collier County. I think they're using all of Collier County's soccer fields for this. Literally thousands of people are going to be involved in that, plus all the facilities at Paradise. April 22, 2025 Page 153 So Hunden Partners -- this board directed staff to have Hunden Partners freshen up their pro forma, their proposal that went back when we first started developing this park. They've issued their preliminary findings, presentation. That's available. I assume the Manager has that if anybody wants to take a look at it. This first report deals with facilities, and they're going to come out in the next week or two with some information about what -- if the park is continued to be developed, what the financial situation would be in terms of the different types of tournaments. I've been meeting with all of the stakeholders. I say "all of the stakeholders," but I'm sure I've missed a few. But I've been having a fairly large group meeting with me to go over issues dealing with how to improve operations, how to make things a little smoother. I think that the -- we've gotten a lot of good information. And I'm going to be coming back to the Board starting in May, but the first couple meetings -- the first meeting and second meeting of May with some information about the facility and the reports. And it would be nice if you're able to -- if you haven't been to a soccer match, it would be nice if you could see one or just make sure to be out there this Saturday during the day when there are literally thousands of people out there enjoying that. So I don't have anything else. COMMISSIONER HALL: I've got one last thing. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall. COMMISSIONER HALL: Our next meeting, I'm going to get to fly to San Antonio and receive an award on behalf of Collier County from Tyler -- from the ResourceX people, so I will not be at this meeting. We're not going to handle any big land issues, so... CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I don't know what the agenda's going to look like, but the Manager's very accommodating if we're not going to be able to make meetings. April 22, 2025 Page 154 MS. PATTERSON: Yep. So we'll leave it to the applicant. But we had scheduled for that meeting NC Squared [sic]. So we'll reach out to them and see if they want to push that land use to the second meeting in May. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Is there a -- you're going to be out in San Antonio. That's three hours, or is it two hours’ time difference? I think it's two hours. COMMISSIONER HALL: It's just an hour difference. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: An hour. If we set that for a time-certain, would you want to -- I don't care if FC -- if NC Naples [sic] gets continued. It's just -- COMMISSIONER HALL: If we set it for time-certain -- I'm traveling back that day, so I don't know if I'm going to be on the airplane or not. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah, okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My only thought -- I mean, it was Commissioner Hall that had the issues with NC Squared [sic] and -- CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That's true. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- I certainly -- even though -- COMMISSIONER HALL: I'd rather be here. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And the folks at NC Square know how to count to four. MS. PATTERSON: They do. CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So they're going to want Commissioner Hall to be here. I doubt that they're going to object to a continuance. MS. PATTERSON: I would imagine that they'll be amenable. (Simultaneous crosstalk.) CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, that's true. That's true. If there's nothing else, we are adjourned. April 22, 2025 Page 155 ***** ****Commissioner Hall moved, seconded by Commissioner Kowal, and carried that the following items under the consent and summary agendas be approved and/or adopted**** Item #16A1 AN AGREEMENT FOR THE SALE OF CULINARY KITCHEN EQUIPMENT WITH CORE HEALTH PARTNERS INCORPORATED RELATED TO INVITATION TO NEGOTIATE (ITN) NO. 24-8291 AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT (COMPANION TO ITEM #16G1) – TERMINATING THE COUNTY’S MANAGEMENT OF THE ACCLERATOR AND EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT FOR THE SALE OF THE CULINARY KITCHEN EQUIPMENT Item #16A2 RELEASE OF TWO CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS WITH AN ACCRUED VALUE OF $286,200, FOR A REDUCED PAYMENT OF $43,960.20, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION TITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS. NICHOLAS BALLO IN SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CASE NOS. CEPM20190011873 AND CEV20220000047, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 807 108TH AVE. N., COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA – FOR A POOL BARRIER VIOLATION THAT WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE BY THE OWNER ON NOVEMBER 6, 2024 April 22, 2025 Page 156 Item #16A3 THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000, WHICH WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER PL20230005149, FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH MOORINGS PARK AT GRANDE LAKE PHASE TWO – LAKE #7 MODIFICATIONS – THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED THE AS- BUILT LAKE CROSS-SECTIONS AND THE LAKE INSPECTED ON FEBRUARY BY STAFF Item #16A4 THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $36,040, WHICH WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER PL20230004543 AND PL 20240005867, FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH SKYSAIL PHASE 4 TOWNHOMES - THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED THE AS-BUILT LAKE CROSS- SECTIONS AND THE LAKE INSPECTED ON FEBRUARY BY STAFF Item #16A5 FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES AND ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER FACILITIES FOR MAJESTIC PLACE, PL20240011370 – FINAL INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY STAFF AND FOUD THESE FACILITIES SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABE ON JANUARY 22, 2025 April 22, 2025 Page 157 Item #16A6 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 TERRENO AT VALENCIA GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB – MASTER AMENITY CENTER, PL20240011282 - FINAL INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY STAFF AND FOUD THESE FACILITIES SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABE ON JANUARY 3, 2025 Item #16A7 FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR HAMMOCK PARK PHASE 2B, PL20240013585 - FINAL INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY STAFF AND FOUD THESE FACILITIES SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE ON FEBRUARY 24, 2025 Item #16A8 RESOLUTION 2025-79: A RESOLUTION FOR FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT DEDICATIONS, FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF MONTIANO, APPLICATION NUMBER PL20140002750, AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $168,017.50 April 22, 2025 Page 158 Item #16A9 RESOLUTION 2025-80: A RESOLUTION FOR FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT DEDICATIONS, FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF ISLES OF COLLIER PRESERVE PHASE 10, APPLICATION NUMBER PL20160001842, AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $549,724.13 Item #16A10 RECORDING THE MINOR PLAT OF DEL WEBB NAPLES PARCELS 304-306 PARCELS 305-306 REPLAT, APPLICATION NUMBER PL20240013991 – LOCATED IN SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST Item #16A11 WAIVE THE NIGHTTIME HEARING REQUIREMENT AND HEAR A LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT RELATED TO HOUSING THAT IS AFFORDABLE, AT TWO REGULARLY SCHEDULED DAYTIME BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS’ MEETINGS AND APPROVE A REQUEST TO ADVERTISE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT - TO INCREASE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM Item #16A12 April 22, 2025 Page 159 WAIVE THE NIGHTTIME HEARING REQUIREMENT AND HEAR A LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT RELATED TO THE IMMOKALEE URBAN AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT AT TWO REGULARLY SCHEDULED DAYTIME BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER’S MEETINGS AND APPROVE A REQUEST TO ADVERTISE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT – FOR THE IMMOKALEE URBAN ATEA OVERLAY DISTRICT Item #16A13 THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR THEIR DESIGNEE, TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION'S INVASIVE PLANT MANAGEMENT SECTION TO BE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE FUNDING ASSISTANCE SERVICES WORTH $300,000 IN FY 2026 THROUGH THE UPLAND INVASIVE EXOTIC PLANT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR THE REMOVAL OF INVASIVE EXOTIC VEGETATION WITHIN CONSERVATION COLLIER'S DR. ROBERT H. GORE III, NORTH BELLE MEADE, MCILVANE MARSH, AND SHELL ISLAND PRESERVES, AND TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ACCEPT SUCH FUNDING ASSISTANCE SERVICES IF AWARDED – THROUGH AN APPROVED CONTRACTOR UNDER AN EXISTING STATE CONTRACT Item #16A14 – Moved to Item #11C (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #16A15 – Moved to Item #11D (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #16A16 April 22, 2025 Page 160 AN AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE UNDER THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM WITH HENDRIX HOUSE, INC., AND RESTORATION CHURCH, INC. (“HENDRIX HOUSE”), FOR A 17.66-ACRE PROPERTY AT A COST OF $502,500, FOR A TOTAL COST NOT TO EXCEED $507,870, INCLUSIVE OF CLOSING COSTS – FOR THE FOLLOWING FOLIOS #41711000002, #41770040003, #41770080005, & #41770120004 Item #16A17 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE FOR THE CYPRESS COVE LANDKEEPERS, INC., F/K/A CYPRESS COVE CONSERVANCY, INC., A FLORIDA NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION (CYPRESS COVE), TO EXTEND THE DUE DILIGENCE PERIOD TO AUGUST 12, 2025, AND THE CLOSING DATE DEADLINE TO OCTOBER 11, 2025, OR WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF THE PURCHASER'S RECEIPT OF ALL CLOSING DOCUMENTS, WHICHEVER IS LATER, TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TIME FOR THE COUNTY TO COMPLETE THE ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS OF THE PROPERTY – FOR FOLIO #41501440005 Item #16A18 – Withdrawn by Staff (Per Agenda Change Sheet) RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 22-7966, “BASEBALL AND SOFTBALL OFFICIALS,” WITH THE COLLIER RECREATION BASEBALL/SOFTBALL UMPIRE ASSOCIATION, INC., FOR A ONE-YEAR RENEWAL AND A PRICE INCREASE FOR THE April 22, 2025 Page 161 REMAINING RENEWAL TERMS – FOR ELEVEN PARKS AS LISTED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKUP Item #16A19 RESOLUTION 2025-81: A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA 14 - RESTORATION CREDITS (CLH SSA 14) IN THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT (RLSA) AND TO AWARD RESTORATION II CREDITS TO COLLIER LAND HOLDINGS, LTD, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED RESTORATION PLAN Item #16A20 FORMALLY WAIVE CONTRACTUAL PAYMENT OBLIGATIONS FOR REVENUE GENERATING AGREEMENT #22-8023, WITH PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION CONCESSIONAIRE BLUWATER, LLC, FOR THE RETAIL SALES OF BAIT, DRINKS, FOOD, AND MINOR SUNDRIES AT CAXAMBAS PARK UNTIL THE PARK’S FUEL DELIVERY SYSTEM RENOVATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED, AND RETAIL FUEL SALES CAN BE REINSTATED – ENSURING UNINTERRUPTED PUBLIC ACCESS Item #16A21 BUDGET AMENDMENTS TOTALING $585,000 FROM THE PARK BOND FUND (3063) AND PARKS AD VAL CIP (3062) RESERVES AND APPROPRIATE THESE DOLLARS WITHIN PARK BOND FUND (3063), REGPK SUN-N-FUN PROJECT April 22, 2025 Page 162 (80421), AND PARKS AD VAL CAP (3062), REGPK POOL PUMP RPR PROJECT (#80384) TO MAKE FURTHER REPAIRS AND RENOVATIONS AT SUN-N-FUN LAGOON Item #16B1 AWARD INVITATION TO BID NO. 24-8319, “COLLIER BLVD (CR-951) & CITY GATE BLVD NORTH INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS,” TO AJAX PAVING INDUSTRIES OF FLORIDA, LLC, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,966,506.61, APPROVE A $167,153.06 OWNER’S ALLOWANCE, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT (PROJECT #68056) Item #16B2 THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE TWENTY (20) 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 #16B3 A REPORT ON THE STATUS OF GOLDEN GATE ESTATES LAND TRUST AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO BEGIN THE DISPOSITION PROCESS FOR THE REMAINING PARCELS April 22, 2025 Page 163 Item #16B4 AN AGREEMENT FOR THE DONATION OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT (PARCEL 119DE) REQUIRED FOR EVERGLADES CITY STORMWATER DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS – FOR FOLIO #84090400047, PROJECT #77777 Item #16B5 RATIFY THE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 21-7902 WITH AIM ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, INC., ADDING $42,660.00 AND EXTENDING THE DAYS FOR TASKS 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, AND 9 FOR THE “GOODLETTE-FRANK STORMWATER & DITCH IMPROVEMENTS (SECTION B)” PROJECT (#60102) Item #16B6 THE TERMINATION OF TWO INACTIVE EASEMENTS – ONE BEING AN EXCLUSIVE WELL, WELL PUMP, AND WATER PIPELINE EASEMENT AND THE OTHER BEING A UTILITY EASEMENT TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE GATE, COLLIER COUNTY’S CONTRACTOR DEVELOPING AND OPERATING THE GOLDEN GATE GOLF COURSE, AND THE STATE VETERANS NURSING HOME Item #16B7 RESOLUTION 2025-82: AMEND EXHIBIT “A” TO RESOLUTION NO. 2013-239, AS AMENDED, THE LIST OF SPEED LIMITS ON COUNTY MAINTAINED ROADS, TO April 22, 2025 Page 164 REFLECT SPEED LIMIT CHANGES AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS – CHANGING THE SPEED ON JOSEPH LANE FROM US41 TO ISLAMORADA LN FROM 30 TO 25 AND FOR ANDREA LANE FROM JOSEPH LANE TO THE END OF THE ROAD FROM 30 TO 25 MPH Item #16B8 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR AGREEMENT NO. 22-8053, “PROFESSIONAL DESIGN AND RELATED SERVICES FOR VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PHASE II,” WITH KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC., REALLOCATING FUNDS FROM TASKS 6 & 7 TO A NEW TASK 10 FOR RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION SUPPORT (PROJECT NUMBER #60249) – FROM 16TH ST. NE TO EVERGLADES BOULEVARD Item #16C1 CHANGE ORDER NO. 2, PROVIDING FOR A TIME EXTENSION OF NINETY-SEVEN DAYS TO AGREEMENT NO. 23-8112, WITH ACCURATE DRILLING SYSTEMS, INC., FOR THE “WESTERN INTERCONNECT FORCEMAIN PHASE 7” PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED CHANGE ORDER (PROJECT NO. 72009) Item #16C2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $178,222.50, FROM $1,817,423.25 TO $1,995,645.75, A TIME EXTENSION OF 135 DAYS, THE REALLOCATION OF FUNDS WITHIN EXISTING April 22, 2025 Page 165 TASKS UNDER AGREEMENT NO. 22-8042, “CEI SERVICES FOR GOLDEN GATE CITY TRANSMISSION WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS” WITH AIM ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC., AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED CHANGE ORDER (PROJECTS #51029 AND #70253) Item #16C3 FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 15-6365, “DISASTER DEBRIS MANAGEMENT REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL SERVICES,” WITH ASHBRITT, INC., TO INCREASE THE FEE SCHEDULE RATES 2.7%, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED AMENDMENT Item #16C4 SELECTION COMMITTEE’S RANKING AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO BEGIN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH LJA ENGINEERING, INC., RELATED TO REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (“RPS”) NO. 25-8336, “DESIGN SERVICES FOR TAMIAMI WELLFIELD IMPROVEMENTS – WELLS 41-49,” SO STAFF CAN BRING A PROPOSED AGREEMENT BACK FOR THE BOARD’S CONSIDERATION AT A FUTURE MEETING Item #16C5 THE ADDITION OF SEVEN FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (“FTE”) POSITIONS IN THE PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT, INCLUDING SEVEN VEHICLES AND ASSOCIATED April 22, 2025 Page 166 EQUIPMENT BASED ON CUMULATIVE ASSET ACQUISITIONS AS APPROVED IN THE CCWSD OPERATIONS RESOURCING STRATEGIC PLAN, AND AUTHORIZE THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS Item #16C6 CHANGE ORDER NO. 16 AND ITS ASSOCIATED WORK DIRECTIVES ALLOWING FOR PAYMENT OF UP TO $797,161.24, AND ADDING 74 DAYS TO AGREEMENT NO. 18- 7474 WITH MITCHELL & STARK CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., PERTAINING TO THE "DESIGN-BUILD OF NORTHEAST SERVICE AREA INTERIM WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, STORAGE TANKS AND ASSOCIATED PIPELINES" AND APPROVE AN AFTER-THE-FACT FOR DEFICIENCIES FOUND WITH CHANGE ORDER NO. 16, AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED CHANGE ORDER, AND APPROVE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT (PROJECT #70194) Item #16C7 AN INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES FOR THE SINGLE SOURCE PURCHASE OF MIXERS, PUMPS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT, PRODUCTS, AND SERVICES," WITH XYLEM WATER SOLUTIONS USA, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO- EXCEED $2,360,000 PER FISCAL YEAR (INCREASING THE EXPENDITURE BY UP TO $860,000 PER FISCAL YEAR), AND APPROVE THE ATTACHED SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 24-029-NS April 22, 2025 Page 167 Item #16C8 AN INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES FOR THE SINGLE SOURCE PURCHASE OF "PROMINENT EQUIPMENT, PARTS, AND SERVICES,” FROM TRINOVA, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO- EXCEED $185,000 PER FISCAL YEAR (INCREASING THE EXPENDITURE BY UP TO $85,000 PER FISCAL YEAR) AND APPROVE THE ATTACHED SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 24-056-NS Item #16D1 – Continued from April 8, 2025, BCC Meeting AWARDING THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NO. 24-8280, SERVICES FOR SENIORS, TO SOUTHERN HOME CARE SERVICES, INC., D/B/A ALL WAYS CARING HOMECARE; PERSONAL RESPONSE CORPORATION; ELEVEN ASH, INC., D/B/A HEALTH FORCE; HOME HEALTH CARE RESOURCES, CORP.; AND ALWAYS THERE HOME HEALTHCARE, INC., AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED AGREEMENTS (HUMAN SERVICES GRANT FUND 1837) Item #16D2 THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THIRTY (30) MORTGAGE SATISFACTIONS FOR THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP LOAN PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $288,311.92, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENT TO APPROPRIATE REPAYMENT AMOUNT TOTALING $113,207.95 (SHIP GRANT FUND 1053) April 22, 2025 Page 168 Item #16D3 THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THREE (3) MORTGAGE SATISFACTIONS FOR THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP LOAN PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $22,500.00 DUE TO THE DEATH OF THE BORROWER(S) (SHIP GRANT FUND 1053) (PROJECT #33863) Item #16D4 THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THREE (3) RELEASES OF LIEN IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,072.14 FOR PROPERTIES THAT HAVE REMAINED AFFORDABLE FOR THE REQUIRED 15-YEAR PERIOD SET FORTH IN THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) IMPACT FEE PROGRAM DEFERRAL AGREEMENTS Item #16D5 THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN ONE (1) RELEASE OF LIEN FOR AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DENSITY BONUS FOR A UNIT THAT IS NO LONGER SUBJECT TO THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT – LOCATED AT 4430 BOTANICAL PLACE CIRCLE #204 Item #16D6 ACCEPT THE YEAR 3 ALLOCATION OF OPIOID SETTLEMENT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,942,240.64 ($399,277.79 CITY/COUNTY AND $1,542,962.85 REGIONAL ABATEMENT) AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET April 22, 2025 Page 169 AMENDMENT (OPIOID ABATEMENT GRANT FUND 1850 AND OPIOID CITY/COUNTY SUBDIVISION GRANT FUND 1852) Item #16E1 AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT ASSIGNING ALL RIGHTS, DUTIES, BENEFITS, AND OBLIGATIONS TO TIGRIS AQUATIC SERVICES, LLC – STAFF WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ACQUISITION ON JANUARY 29, 2025, AND THAT TRGRIS ASSUMED ALL RESPONSIBILITIES, OBLIGATIONS AND DUTIES UNDER THE DEANGELO’S AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY Item #16E2 MODIFICATIONS TO THE 2025 FISCAL YEAR PAY & CLASSIFICATION PLAN, WHICH CONSISTS OF ONE RECLASSIFICATION AND REMOVAL OF ONE OBSOLETE CLASSIFICATION FROM JANUARY 1, 2025, THROUGH MARCH 31, 2025 Item #16F1 SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 20-7753, “DESIGN SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY EMS STATIONS,” WITH SCHENKEL & SHULTZ, INC., ADDING 180 DAYS TO THE PROJECT TIME, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED AMENDMENT (PROJECT #55212) April 22, 2025 Page 170 Item #16F2 THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPUTY MEDICAL DIRECTOR AGREEMENT TO NAME DOUGLAS S. LEE, M.D. THE INTERIM MEDICAL DIRECTOR, INCREASE HIS COMPENSATION TO THAT OF THE MEDICAL DIRECTOR, EXTEND THE AGREEMENT TERM, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED AMENDMENT Item #16F3 NOTIFICATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF A COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY PURCHASE ORDER ISSUED TO CINTAS CORPORATION AND AUTHORIZE PAYMENT FOR THE REPAIRS SERVICES PROVIDED (PROJECT NO. 52163) – FOR FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS REPLACEMENT Item #16F4 RATIFY ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, ADDING 24 DAYS TO THE PROJECT TIME UNDER AGREEMENT NO. 24-8250, GOLDEN GATE GOLF COURSE OUTFALL SWALE, CONSTRUCTING APPROXIMATELY 2,400 LINEAR FEET OF A 35-FOOT-WIDE LINED SWALE AND A 300 LINEAR FOOT OUTFALL PIPE AT THE GOLDEN GATE GOLF COURSE, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED CHANGE ORDER (PROJECT NO. 80412) Item #16F5 April 22, 2025 Page 171 AN AFTER-THE-FACT PAYMENT FOR PURCHASE ORDER NO. 4500234864 IN THE AMOUNT OF $107,562.50 TO EARTH TECH ENTERPRISES, INC., UNDER CONTRACT #21-7885, “BEACH MAINTENANCE AND RELATED SERVICES,” FOR PELICAN BAY EMERGENCY BEACH DEBRIS CLEANUP FOLLOWING HURRICANES HELENE AND MILTON – UNDER PROJECT #50320 Item #16F6 RESOLUTION 2025-83: A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 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 #16G1 A COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY STANDARD FORM LEASE WITH CORE HEALTH PARTNERS INCORPORATED FOR THE IMMOKALEE AIRPORT CULINARY ACCELERATOR RELATED TO INVITATION TO NEGOTIATE (ITN) NO. 24-8291 (COMPANION TO ITEM #16A1) Item #16G2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, DEDUCTING $12,626.46 FROM AGREEMENT NO. 20-7806 (PURCHASE ORDER #4500230969) April 22, 2025 Page 172 WITH BOWMAN GULF COAST, LLC., (PREVIOUSLY HOLE MONTES, INC.), FOR POST DESIGN ENGINEERING SERVICES ON THE “BULK AIRCRAFT HANGAR AT MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT” AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED CHANGE ORDER (PROJECT NO. 33822) Item #16I1 APRIL 22, 2025, MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE April 22, 2025 1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED: A. DISTRICTS: 1) Quarry Community Development District: 01/13/2025 Agency Memo, Signed Minutes, & Agency Mailing 2) Immokalee Fire Control District: 9/30/2024 FY 2024 Annual Audit Report April 22, 2025 Page 173 Item #16J1 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 $60,944,333.49 WERE DRAWN FOR THE PERIODS BETWEEN MARCH 27, 2025, AND APRIL 9, 2025, PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 136.06 Item #16J2 REQUEST THAT THE BOARD APPROVE AND DETERMINE VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR INVOICES PAYABLE AND PURCHASING CARD TRANSACTIONS AS OF APRIL 16, 2025 Item #16J3 AFTER-THE-FACT USE OF $1,000 FROM THE CONFISCATED TRUST FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE FLORIDA AGRICULTURAL CRIMES INTELLIGENCE UNIT, INC. Item #16K1 RESOLUTION 2025-84: APPOINTING TWO MEMBERS TO THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL AUTHORITY – APPOINTING DAVID LINDSTROM AND BARRY CONTEE BOTHFILLING VACANT TERMS EXPIRING ON DECEMBER 31, 2026 Item #16K2 April 22, 2025 Page 174 RESOLUTION 2025-85 AND RESOLUTION 2025-86: THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY OF COLLIER COUNTY FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS FOR THE ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, EQUIPPING, AND DEVELOPMENT OF A 230-UNIT MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOUSING FACILITY KNOWN AS WAVE AT ROSE AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ROSE AVENUE AND SCHOOL DRIVE IN IMMOKALEE, FLORIDA Item #16K3 RESOLUTION 2025-86: THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY OF COLLIER COUNTY FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PLAN OF FINANCING INVOLVING THE ISSUANCE BY THE AUTHORITY OF SINGLE-FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $50 MILLION OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO USE VOLUME CAP ALLOCATION FOR MORTGAGE CREDIT CERTIFICATE PROGRAMS OR FOR MULTIFAMILY HOUSING FOR PERSONS OF LOW OR MODERATE INCOME Item #16K4 AN AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY (PARCEL 1274FEE) REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXT – PHASE 2 PROJECT (PROJECT NO. 60249) ESTIMATED FISCAL IMPACT: $140,500 – FOR FOLIO’S #37392080002 & #37392080109 April 22, 2025 Page 175 Item #16K5 A STIPULATED ORDER OF TAKING AND FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $99,000 PLUS $11,886.90 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY AND EXPERTS’ FEES AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 1311FEE REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249 Item #16K6 A STIPULATED ORDER OF TAKING AND FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $99,000 PLUS $11,791.28 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY AND EXPERTS’ FEES AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 1307FEE REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249 Item #16K7 A STIPULATED ORDER OF TAKING AND FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $103,000 PLUS $18,379 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY AND EXPERTS’ FEES AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 1359FEE1 REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249 Item #16K8 RESOLUTION 2025-87: A RESOLUTION TO DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY PROJECT MANAGER, April 22, 2025 Page 176 ROBERT WHITE, P.E., AND COUNTY ENGINEER OF RECORD, RICHARD ARICO, P.E., FROM KIMLEY HORN, TO TESTIFY AT THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION ORDER OF TAKING HEARING AS TO THE PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND BIND THE COUNTY TO THE PLANS (PROJECT NO. 60249) Item #16L1 THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD TO REPLACE THE CRA-CREATED IMMOKALEE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD AND THE IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND REPEAL ORDINANCE NO. 22-52 Item #16L2 THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO BID ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY AT ONE CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN FORECLOSURE SALE SCHEDULED BY THE CLERK IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA V. KATRIX LLC, ET AL., CIRCUIT COURT CASE NO. 24-CA-2591, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED THE VALUE OF THE COUNTY’S IN-HOUSE APPRAISAL (APPROXIMATELY $65,000.00 FOR ONE PARCEL) AND AUTHORIZE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS Item #17A April 22, 2025 Page 177 RESOLUTION 2025-88: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CLOSING THE APPROVED TERAFINA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, WHICH HAS FULLY COMPLETED ALL ITS DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO ITS DEVELOPMENT ORDER(S) AND HAS BEEN FOUND BY COLLIER COUNTY TO HAVE ONLY ONE TRANSPORTATION COMMITMENT REMAINING (PL20240012112) Item #17B ORDINANCE 2025-21: AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE HORSE TRIALS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ON 1,767.35± ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF COUNTY ROAD 858 (OIL WELL ROAD), WEST OF STATE ROAD 29, AND EAST OF RANCH ONE ROAD IN SECTIONS 7, 8, 17, AND 18, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 30 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA [PL20250000514] Item #17C – Continued to the May 13, 2025, BCC Meeting (Per Agenda Change Sheet) RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING 3,912.41 ACRES IN THE RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT AS STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA WITH A DESIGNATION AS “BCP SSA 21”; PURSUANT TO THE TERMS SET FORTH IN THE ESCROW AGREEMENT, STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT FOR BCP SSA 21, AND STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR BCP SSA 21; APPROVING A STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT April 22, 2025 Page 178 AGREEMENT FOR BCP SSA 21; APPROVING A STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR BCP SSA 21; APPROVING AN ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR BCP SSA 21; AND ESTABLISHING THE NUMBER OF STEWARDSHIP CREDITS GENERATED BY THE DESIGNATION OF SAID STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN PARTS OF SECTIONS 4, 5, 11 AND 15, AND ALL OF SECTIONS 8, 9, 10, AND 12, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 30 EAST [PL20240004704] April 22, 2025 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:36 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL Ag,t,z€44.40-- B U RT SAUNDERS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST CRYSTAL K. KINZEL CLERK 1 �w �4)t ' ' 4. { = i tr These minutes appro ed by the Board on / l 3 J�S as 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 179