CAC Minutes 05/08/2025 (Draft)
1
COLLIER COUNTY
COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAC)
THURSDAY, MAY 8 , 2025 – 1:00 PM
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD CHAMBERS
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER
3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, 3RD FLOOR, NAPLES, FL
Present:
Chairman Joe Burke, City of Naples
Vice -Chairman Dave Trecker, Unincorporated
Collier County
Linda Penniman, City of Naples
Bob Raymond, Unincorporated Collier County
Robert (Bob) Roth, City of Marco Island
Steve Koziar, City of Marco Island
Jim Burke, Unincorporated Collier County
Absent:
Dr. Judith Hushon, City of Naples
Erik Brecknitz, City of Marco Island
Sands (full name not provided)
ALSO PRESENT:
Andy Miller, P.E., Manager, Collier County Coastal Zone Management
Colleen Greene, Managing Assistant County Attorney
Justin Martin, Public Works Director, City of Marco Island
Mohamed Dabees, Ph.D., P.E., D.CE.
Rhonda Watkins, Environmental Specialist, Collier County Pollution Control
Nicole Sharp, P.E., Director, Coastal Sciences and Engineering, APTIM
Any person who decides to appeal a decision of This Board, you will need a record of the
proceedings 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. Neither Collier County nor This Board shall be responsible for
providing the record.
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 1:00 p.m. by the Chairman, Joe Burke.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLLEGIANCE
Led by Chairman, Joe Burke.
III. ROLL CALL
Chairman, Joe Burke, advised that a quorum was met with three members absent: Dr.
Judith Hushon, Sands, and Erik Brecknitz. There was discussion and a motion made by
2
Dave Trecker to allow Erik Brecknitz to attend the meeting through Zoom (if able to do
so); seconded by Bob Raymond; carried unanimously. Andy Miller indicated that the
committee would be advised if Erik Brecknitz joined in. No indication throughout the
meeting of Mr. Brecknitz joining the meeting via zoom.
IV. CHANGES AND APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Chairman, Joe Burke, asked if there were any changes to the agenda – none. Motion made
by Bob Raymond, seconded by Steve Koziar; Motion to approve agenda approved
unanimously.
V. PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
VI. APPROVAL OF CAC MINUTES
There were changes to the agenda suggested by Joe Burke on page 3, and Mr. Burke
indicated that he would supply the edit. Bob Roth corrected the name of Ms. Watkins on
page 4, should be “Rhonda Watkins”. For consistency, Dave Trecker suggested that all
parties be listed with their respective titles and where they are from. A motion was made
by Linda Penniman to approve the minutes of April 10, 2025, as corrected; seconded by
Steve Kozier; motion carried unanimously.
VII. Staff Reports
Extended Revenue Report
Andy Miller presented slides from 2024 and 2025 as a comparison to the 2025 Tourist
Development Tax Collection Report dated April 30, 2025. This year ’s collections exceed
last year slightly, and the excess of revenue is 31.9% above the budget. In response to
Dave Trecker’s question about the current balance of the 1105 Fund, Andy Miller did not
have an update from the last report of $52 million, but he advised that it should be slightly
above that amount.
VIII. New Business
1. ES-Sand Dollar Island Beach Storm Restoration
Recommendation to approve Tourist Tax Fund 1105 funding in the amount of
$647,843, for reimbursement of the costs to restore the beach sand berm of the
Tigertail/Sand Dollar Island spit in Northwestern Marco Island, resulting from
impacts of Tropical Storm Debby and Hurricane Helene and Milton, and
authorize the necessary budget amendment and deem that this expenditure
promotes tourism.
Tigertail Presentation:
3
Justin Martin, Public Works Director, City of Marco Island – Introduced the
Executive Summary record presentation, as well as the presentation by the
City of Marco Island.
- Presented last year for the same project; however, this is a different request of
the previous request for assistance with the annual maintenance fees. Today’s
request is for reimbursement of expenditures for restoration of the sand berm,
resulting from three storms that we had, that affected and caused erosion on the
coastline of the Sand Dollar Spit. Martin is joined by Dr. Mohamed Dabees,
who will present the actual presentation.
- This is a request for reimbursement for costs related to restoring the sand berm
at the beach resulting from the storms, just like any beach renourishment
program occurring in other parts of the state and specifically, Collier County.
- One thing unique to this project and this portion of Marco Island is that we have
a standard source that is right there to recycle the sand (don’t have to truck in
sand). It makes the cost of this renourishment a fraction of the cost, compared
to other parts of Collier County, Lee County, Sarasota and further.
- This sand spit is naturally occurring, and that is why we have a bi-annual
maintenance plan, where we recapture that sand from the end of that spit with
excavators, and trucks bring it up the beach and renourish the needed areas.
- The spit is the first line of defense when you have waves and storms. Since this
is a narrow spit, it is a sand berm that is susceptible to breach. That is how it is
designed. It is a long, skinny sand spit that serves as the first line of defense for
wave action, and it serves as the first line of defense for storms (not just
landfall).
- We had Tropical Storm Debby and Hurricanes Helene and Milton, and all three
of those affected this beach since we completed the bi-annual restoration in the
past year.
- This is a significant tourist attraction (similar to Keewayden), and not a lot of
people are familiar with the Tigertail Sand Dollar Spit. It attracts as much
boating traffic as Keewayden.
- We intended to present the reimbursement request as early as March, but we are
now into May, so the cost that was presented with the agenda packet was
$575,000. The final actual cost, after completing all the work based on the
cubic yards, exceeds that by another $72,000, which brings the total to about
$648,000. This will also be covered in the presentation.
- Between this committee meeting and the Tourist Development Counsel
meeting, we will be changing the numbers so that they have that updated
number.
- The Sand Spit is shore-bird nesting area, it is on the national birding trail, and
birding tourists come worldwide.
- It is a sea turtle nesting habitat, it is a prime location for sea turtles, and we have
Collier County officials who monitor during the nesting season.
- We h ave several tours that stop on the island, including Dolphin Explorer,
Sunshine Tours, Eco-Endeavors, Florida Saltwater, Off-the-Hook Adventures,
etc., and then many boat rentals that stop at Sand Dollar Spit.
4
- This sand spit is a nature-based solution to be that first line of defense, like a
bumper on a car. It is intended to take the effects of that wave action and then
be restored.
- People misunderstand when the spit is breached, but that is the intent: to be
mechanically excavated and restored after storm events at a fraction of the cost.
- It is part of a project that is permitted by the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, Corp of Engineers, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Commission. This was extensive permitting that was coordinated with the
Audubon Society, and a lot of the environmental groups, and through all that, it
was decided that this was a very beneficial and important to the eco-system.
- The area behind the spit is a flow channel, that is a tidal channel that serves to
provide tidal flushing into the lagoon and Tigertail Beach Park, which is now
an estuary for spawning marine life such as fish, horseshoe crabs, and a dozen
other important marine life fed by the tidal channel provided by this Sand Dollar
Spit.
Mohamed Dabees, Ph.D., P.E., D.CE
- This is one of the signature projects in SWFL that has been recognized as a
natural and nature-based solution.
- We chose to work with nature for solutions, rather than putting hard barriers.
- This presentation supports our request for reimbursement for post-storm
recovery and impact. All the work has been done; it has already been restored.
That is thanks to all the stakeholders of the City of Marco Island and Collier
County. By February, we were already done with the repair.
- Our best bet for mitigating storm impacts is to have a plan. Having plans and
permit authorizations are the two legs that fix storm damage. It takes years on
other projects to get permits.
- We had significant damage, and we were able to restore it at such a low cost,
that you will not see in any project in Florida.
- There was discussion on the barrier island and the effects of coastline and
chronic erosion from fixed structures. Marco Island is a very heavily developed
island that creates chronic erosion issues. The anchors (the two ends of the
island) hold the island together. Cape Marco – hard structure – where we have
rock abatement; North side - we have a preserve, mangroves, wetlands. All
these natural forms are multitiered, energy dissipation mechanisms. Cape
Marco is still being repaired, and the magnitude and cost will be higher than
our initial cost of the spit.
- We are in a vulnerable state (open coast and warming gulf that keeps sending
us storm after storm); consequently, we must have a plan, authorization, and a
funding mechanism, so we can respond.
- Provided photos of destruction of the spit after Ian and post construction, that
put it back to what it was pre-hurricane Irma. This is a multitiered system with
a sandy berm as the first line of defense, and a tidal lagoon which is the
catchment reservoir (the sand that gets over washed and allows us to use it for
maintenance), and also the conduit for flow to feed the eco-system which is
viable for a lot of wildlife, and for tourism and recreation.
5
- The concept of the project: * Main element – natural/nature-based resiliency
system – multitier coastal storm risk management, including sand pit, tidal
lagoon, and mangrove shoreline; *Lagoon Flow Channel – restore tidal
exchange – improve water quality – maintain & promote SAV – inlet
closures/opening; * Renewable sand source – sand trap – maintain inlet open –
cyclic use of sand – incremental adaptation. [Relies on self-sufficiency – get the
sand from the tip of the spit, that we call the sand trap.]
- Marco Island Regional Sand Management Plan: Coordinated with Collier
County and City of Marco – the major five projects (Sand Dollar Island,
Tigertail Lagoon, Hideaway Beach, Collier Creek Entrance Channel & Capri
Pass Navigation Channel), and broke down the major 5 projects to determine
who is responsible for doing what. Those discussions took place earlier last
year, and the plan (absent tropical storms) was a maintenance cycle with cost-
sharing between the city and county for managing this natural system. If we
fast forward to getting that agreement, getting those allocations and plans in
line, we entered the 2024 season. We had Tropical Storm Debby and Hurricanes
Helen & Milton, as major hurricanes with significantly large storm surge, that
not only impacted our project area, but also impacted the whole coastline all the
way to Pinellas County. Each county was impacted $10 of millions of dollars
for beach repair.
- Provided table of major storms in SWFL and Central Florida over a 20-year
history: Governed by stochastic level of storms. From 2022 to now, we had 4
named storms – Ian, Idalia, Helene and Milton, and also Tropical Storm Debby.
There was discussion about options – natural features versus hard structures.
Discussion on impact of sand intrusion throughout the state.
- Displayed a table of beach profiles pre-Ian, after Ian, and after Milton.
- Displayed a table showing multiple breaching at several barrier islands. The
difference at the Sand Dollar Spit – it was recovered as part of the design.
- Displayed a slide of workplan and resiliency elements for Sand Dollar Spit
(sand was retrieved at 10-15% of original cost).
- Displayed photos of pre and post storm recovery and restoration (November 25,
2025 to April 25, 2025)
- Barriers also protect mangrove vegetation, which can’t survive the Gulf water.
- We can’t put artificial reefs and oyster reefs in the Gulf, and we cannot put a
barrier island off the coast to protect us. There are physics’ parameters that
control what we can and cannot do. The best that we can do is work with nature
and understand how nature works.
- Displayed photo of the boaters, etc. parked at the spit showing a variety of
recreational benefits (including kite surfers)
- Value of the project: displayed slide detailing pre-2022 trends from 2017-2022
which included 400 feet of shoreline retreat, 20 acres of wetland loss, shoaling
and closure of the lagoon entrance, and water quality degradation. This is
between Irma and Ian. At 80 feet per year, it would have reached Tigertail Park
and the buildings. Discussed the option of hard structures but pointed out that
these types of structures had already failed, and they require a lot higher price
to fix. Twenty acres of wetland were recovered with this project. The entrance
6
to the lagoon was opened up (from significant shoaling), which allowed these
recreational benefits to happen. We have improved water quality.
- Displayed slide showing results of the 2024 storm impacts without the project
(350 feet further in) which would have resulted in an expensive plan to protect
ourselves, and a total loss of critical wildlife space and habitat.
- Displayed slide showing the value of the project’s restoration costs versus
regional coastal restoration.
- Displayed slide of the Project Costs and Funding – 2024 Maintenance and Post
Storm Recovery – Hurricane Restoration - $647,873 (increase due to final
survey of $72,800).
- Summary and key points – tourism, eco-system, coastal resiliency benefits, fast
restoration, cost effectiveness, unanimous city council support and County/City
Management Plan
- Dave Trecker had questions relating to who is responsible for paying for the
reimbursement cost, possibly Emergency Management. Reviewed the
Executive Summary (last paragraph on page 1), which referred to an agreement
between the City of Marco Island and Collier County. Trecker asked for a copy
of the agreement. The summary indicates that the parties to the agreement have
defined responsibilities, and that the county agreed to fund the biennial
maintenance. Trecker questioned that the reimbursement request did not cover
biennial maintenance, but something beyond that. Dr. Dabees advised that this
request for reimbursement is to support the restoration from the storm impact
of hurricanes Helene and Milton and that this is in addition to biennial
maintenance.
- Bob Roth, being from Marco, needed to ask a few questions in response to the
emails received from residents of Marco Island. His understanding of the
management plan: Last year, 50/50 funding was approved with the county
agreeing to fund a maximum of $350,000 and that City of Marco would be on
the hook for anything above that (references the minutes). Dabees disagreed
on the terms of the agreement: the agreement is for maintenance, not
emergencies; we can’t pre-plan a major event. When a big storm occurs, the
situation would be assessed at that time. The agreement with the county was a
one-time agreement. Any reimbursement for storm damage must come in front
of the board and county commissioner for approval.
- Roth asked if this board could expect a reimbursement request every time there
is a hurricane. Suggested consideration of another funding source in the county.
Dabees states that Marco Island is part of the county’s coastal management and
no different than Barefoot beach or Vanderbilt or Park Shore. Roth agreed these
are county beaches, but he thought it was more about a private community
(further discussion between the role of Hideaway Community and the
community funding the project). Dabees’ take is that the project is being singled
out and is no different than any other project in the county.
- There was discussion on number of emails submitted asking that this project be
stopped. There was some discussion between Roth and Dabees on Tax Funding
with Collier County beaches. Further discussion on Hideaway’s initial permit,
their involvement in funding, and their responsibilities versus the counties’
7
responsibilities. Martin and Dabees failed to understand why they are getting
singled out over other beaches in Collier County. Dabees provided a detailed
account of the ask for assistance to the state and county after Irma to assist with
the lagoon. The issue was over the inability to get a permit because it was a
preserve, and so they went to the Hideaway Community, and they reluctantly
agreed, but always insisted that this was a county responsibility.
- Roth asked if it would be logical to assume that when there are future
hurricanes, Marco Island and/or Hideaway will come to this board for approval
of some sort of reimbursement and ultimately Tourist Development Council and
County Commission. The answer was yes.
- Some discussion on the intent of citizens complaining about the project and
potential misinformation. Roth did point out that the Audubon Society was
involved, and certainly has credibility, and they wrote a lot of letters. Martin
pointed out that the Audubon Society was involved with the permitting, they
did extensive coordinating with the Audubon Society, and it was permitted.
- Roth asked about the original purchase order which included a line item (think
it was Earthworks) to hydraulically remove the sand from the mangroves. It was
never done, rather it was listed again on a change order, and he did not think it
was ever done. Dabees said it was done but with different means. They had sand
encroachment in the mangroves along the shoreline and could not use the
excavator because it would break the mangrove roots. So, they dug up to the
roots and they hydraulically flushed the roots with the excavator.
- Roth had a question about a living shoreline at Cedar Key used to reduce storm
energy, and wondered why the DEP did not approve one of these living
shorelines or something offshore to reduce some of that energy before it comes
ashore and hits the berm. Dabees advised that Cedar Key is in Big Bend, and
they do not get the same level of wave energy that we have, plus it is sheltered.
Wit h active shorelines, submerged structures and submerged reefs do not work
unless they are combined with other emerging structures. The best defense for
storm surge is large beaches, and we attempt to do this with beach
renourishment, unless you are going to build a big island, which will cost
billions of dollars to create.
- Roth brought it up because at the South end of Marco Island, right offshore
from the Marco condominiums, a riffraff shoreline was put there to break the
energy before it got to those buildings. Dabees advised that those buildings
were impacted severely by Hurricane Ian and the cost of fixing that seawall is
more than the money they spent on restoring two miles. Dabees advised that
Humiston and Moore redesigned those breakwaters, which are over 500 feet. If
you try to do that over 2 miles: it brings in more challenges with fish habitat
and impacts on resident beaches. The fact that this is a protected reserve, with
a lot of endangered species, they had come up with something that the agencies
deemed as no impact on their protected species.
- In response to Linda Penniman’s question about City of Marco support, Justin
Martin advised that the City of Marco support is not dollars but through votes.
Penniman advised that she was not comfortable voting for Tourist Tax Funding,
because she does not believe it is for tourism, rather, she heard protection of
8
properties, mangroves, water quality, restoration of an eco-system. She cannot,
in good conscience, release funding for restoration. Martin stated that the
Tourist Development Counsel last year deemed that this was the proper use of
tax dollars because of the tourism associated with it. Martin reiterated that it
does promote tourism and provided examples previously stated. You can have
a tourist attraction that has environmental benefits and a restorative feature; that
the Sand Dollar Spit is part of the Marco Island shoreline, and the rest of the
beaches in Marco Island are part of the beach renourishment through tourist tax
dollars. DaBees says that Sand Dollar Spit is no different than Clam Pass or
Pelican Bay. Everything in the Clam Pass talks about mangroves and
environmental protection and restoration of the inlet and the quality of the bay.
- Joe Burke verified the funding amount of $647,843. Burke indicated that he
would read what the ask is and ask for a motion. Colleen Greene intervened
and advised that there will not be a tourist tax funding agreement, that is set
forth in the title, because this is a request for reimbursement. If the City of
Marco had come to this board prior to doing their work, there would have been
an agreement with terms and conditions, but because the work is completed,
this is just a request for reimbursement, so the motion need not be read. Andy
Miller confirmed that fund 1105 is the correct fund.
- Joe Burke read the recommendation: Recommendation to approve a
reimbursement request by the City of Marco, under Fund 1105 for the amount
of $647,843, associated with costs to restore the beach and berm of the Tigertail
Sand Dollar Island Spit, in northwestern Marco Island, resulting from impacts
from Tropical Storm Debby and Hurricanes Helene and Milton, and authorize
the necessary budget amendment and deem that this expenditure promotes
tourism. [Colleen Greene supplied wording on budget amendment and
promotion of tourism.]
- Dave Trecker suggested a roll call. Steve Koziar made a motion that the
reimbursement request be approved; Joe Burke seconded. Roll Call: Bob
Raymond – No; Jim Burke – No; Linda Penniman – No; Steve Koziar – Yes;
Joe Burke – Yes; Dave Trecker – No; Bob Roth – No. We two yeses and five
nos.
- Colleen Green advises that the item will still go forward with the TDC with
committee vote noted.
- Joe Burke asked if there is a way we can reach a resolution, whether it is within
our jurisdiction or not?
- Colleen advised that one of the reasons you have this on your agenda is that we
do believe it is an eligible expenditure of tourist tax dollars. If she did not think
it was eligible as an expenditure for Tourist Development, the legal
considerations would say that. In the Tourist Development Tax Statute, there is
authorization for expenditures for this type of beach improvement, restoration,
erosion control renourishment. If we did not think it was authorized, the legal
considerations would say that and so would the executive summary from staff.
- Joe Burke – Good information and in the future, this should be treated like any
other project.
9
- Bob Roth – We have already agreed to $350,000. I could see that being the
county’s contribution to this on our bi-annual basis.
- Joe Burke – I look at it like it’s the same thing; we do a beach renourishment,
four months later a hurricane comes in and then we are doing an emergency fix-
it job. No different than what was going on there. One of my questions would
be if FEMA would contribute and offer some level of reimbursement. I think
that is where the nature preserve comes in. The Corp wouldn’t touch it either
because of that. I think it should be treated in the future like any other.
- Bob Roth – Can I get a suggest another motion. No response. I would go with
$350,000. Already covered.
• Residents’ Opinion
Several emails were attached to the agenda from residents of Marco Island, who
protested the funding of this project. Discussion of same addressed above.
Presentation
1. Collier Creek – Nicole Sharp, P.E., Director, Coastal Sciences and Engineering,
APTIM
- Andy Miller advised that Nicole would be presenting by zoom in response to
Erik Brecknitz’s request for an update on Collier Creek (a long-awaited
project), and our efforts to make improvements to the Collier Creek Inlet,
terminal jetty and perpendicular drawing. We have been trying to get a permit
with the Corp since late 2021. Nicole has joined us today to give an update on
where we are with our communications with the Corp and hopefully some sense
of when we might finish off that effort.
- Nicole Sharp: The Collier Creek project is a critical project for the community
to help reduce the navigation hazards that we do have within that area. The
plan has been to modify the dredge templet, to construct a rock drawing, modify
the existing terminal jetty, and place the sand in the Big Marco, Capri Pass
disposal area. We presented permits in December 2021 to the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection and Army Corp of Engineers. The
permitting process with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection is
completed. We received permits in March 2023 from the FDEP. The Corp of
Engineers has been a little bit more difficult to deal with throughout the
permitting process. We sometimes send emails, and they go non-responsive for
months on end. To m ultiple emails, we had six to seven months of them being
non-responsive in 2023 and 2024. We do copy leadership in the emails, and
they are aware of the non-responsiveness.
- Project progress: Since November or December of last year, through the federal
permitting process, we did go out to public notice in late 2024, and we had no
adverse public comments received. That was a very positive step forward. In
addition, formal consultations for the project through National Marine Fisheries
and Florida Wildlife & Fisheries and all five services. Those did occur in early
2025, so initiation with FWC commenced on February 3, 2025, with National
Marine Fisheries Service. The Army Corp of Engineers initiated a Section 7
10
consultation on March 17. We have followed up with the Corp to ask them the
status on both, and we have not heard back from Mr. Fleming, who is our permit
processor with the Corp. We are pinging him on that biweekly for a status
update, and requests for how we can get this project moving forward. We did
let them know that this is a critical project to the community, and we are trying
to address navigation hazards. We are trying to advocate as much as we can on
behalf of the county.
- Joe Burke – in response to Burke’s question on a rough ETA, advises that they
are at the last phase of the federal permitting process. The consultation with the
federal agencies, usually Fish & Wildlife takes about usually 90-120 days to
coordinate with them. They might have questions, and then they can produce
what is called a REI (request for additional information). We are trying to
ensure that we are very responsive, and on top of everything. Additionally, the
National Marine Consultation Service can be up to 120 days. If all things go
well, we could be looking at 120 to 150 days. If we have additional questions,
that resets the clock, and sometimes it buys them an additional 30 days. We are
hoping for the best, but there is some possibility that we will have questions
from the federal level.
- Joe Burke – the message to take back to Erik is 4 months to a year.
- Bob Roth – Are there any changes to the original proposal? None, it is still the
original project in 2021.
- Steve Koziar: Comments that since the permits have been pending, he was
hoping that there was a plan to go to the Corp of Engineers. Suggested that
something is going on with Collier Creek.
- Nicole: Have been working with Andy and team with lobbying; we have
struggled with project processor and expressed our frustration. We are
continuing to advocate to move this thing forward – being a squeaky wheel and
poking them.
- Andy Miller: FYI, the Commissioner and Lobbyists are in Washington, and we
hope to hear back from them when they return.
2. FY23 Water Quality Report – Rhonda Watkins, Environmental Specialist,
Collier County Pollution Control
Bob Roth requested Rhonda Watkins appear and give a presentation on the 2023
water quality report. Ms. Watkins presented a slide show and a quick introduction
to pollution control.
- Inhouse NELAC Certified laboratory; program is NEFAP certified. Basically,
like auditing from an outside entity which ensures the quality of our data.
- Follow the standard operating procedures DEP sample collection.
- Monitor both surface water and ground water throughout the county, and we
also collect and analyze samples for other agencies (like City of Naples, Pelican
Bay Services Division and Coastal Zone Management).
- Today’s presentation is on surface water quality monitoring for the 2023 data.
- Monitor 54 sites in the freshwater portion of the county.
- Monitor three sites for Lake Trafford Watershed and 9 sites monthly for
Cocohatchee River.
11
- For the FY 23 assessment, used water quality standards found in Florida
Administrative Code 62-302. We do not have numeric nutrient criteria for
nitrogen and phosphorus in our canals. We do have those American criteria for
our estuaries. I used the closest standard for the peninsular nutrient region that
is used in Lee County by DEP to assess streams. Any accidents of nitrogen or
phosphorus or chlorophyll in our canals are not true exceedances. They are just
used here to screen data for the purpose of assessment. The assessment I did is
very simplified compared to the DEP impaired water assessment. I am not
trying to duplicate that assessment; I am just trying to figure out whether the
result is good or bad yearly. Slide shows the highest level of exceedances: Total
Nitrogen at 28.80% and Dissolved Oxygen Saturation at 28.50% in FY year
2023. Total Nitrogen, Dissolved Oxygen, and Enterococcus Bacteria are
exceeded most frequently; but as a collective nutrient (including Phosphorus
and Chlorophyll), which is an indicator that Algae Blooms have the highest
number of exceedances in FY23.
- The biggest takeaway from FY23 [Shows slide of water quality highlights for
FY23]: Good news – 50% of the watersheds showed decreases in the overall
percent exceedances compared to FY22. Other 50%, no change and there were
no copper exceedances at any of the trend sites. Had at least one exceedance at
one of our source tracking sites in Lely. Bad news – 53% of those watersheds
showed increases in nutrients; 45% showed increases in algae blooms bacterial
levels, but not in 60% of the watershed. Every watershed had at least one
exceedance.
- [Provides a graph detailing percentage of exceedances for nutrients, dissolved
oxygen, bacteria, metals, ph & turb.] Nicole provided as a handout a Collier
County Pollution Control Map showing the waterbody ID, 2022-2024
impairments, ongoing restoration activities, natural conditions, TMDL
Complete, Roads and County Boundary as well as a Table of the 2022-2024
Verified Impaired Waters by WBID. Lake Trafford had the most exceedances
in 2023. Cow Slough and Silver Strand are both heavily influenced by
agriculture, and Silver Strand has phosphorus contamination coming from a
fertilizer plant.
- Every five years we contract out a trend analysis of our data. [Provides a slide
regarding trend analysis]. This report looks at the cumulative long-term trends
and the most short-term trends. Highlighted from the report: [Shows a graphic
showing phosphorus trends in the county.] In that graphic you can see Camp
Keais, Fakahatchee Strand, Rookery Bay East and Haldeman Creek Upper and
Lower have increasing trends. [Shows a graphic showing total nitrogen trends
in the county.] There are increases at Camp Keais, Cocohatchee Inland, Cow
Slough, Fakahatchee Strand, Haldeman Creek Upper, Ten Thousand Island,
Rookery Bay East and West, and Wiggins Bay Outlet. [Shows a graphic
showing total copper trends in the county.] Copper is going down almost
everywhere, and we only have one watershed that had an increase in copper.
[Shows a graphic showing total iron trends in the county.] Iron is another one
where we have impairment and we have increasing trends, and this is from
groundwater pumping or base flow into the surface water. [Shows graphic of
12
Current Impairments] DEP conducts this assessment every two years. Since the
last assessment, we increased the number of impaired waterbodies from 25 to
26, but we decreased the number of parameters not meeting standards from 59
to 44. [Shows a table of current TMDLs.] Shows existing TMDLs and new
copper TMDLs. The copper TMDLs are Naples Bay, Rock Creek and
Haldeman Creek Lower. The copper is so bad in Collier County because of the
herbicides used to treat algae blooms, so the root cause of the copper is still
nutrients causing algae blooms. Since we don’t have nutrient criteria, we can’t
regulate the nutrients. We also can’t regulate the copper because it is a pesticide,
and we are pre-empted by the Department of Agriculture on pesticide
regulation. Additionally, these TDMLs are all marine water bodies and the
marine standard for copper is 3.7 mg per liter.
- We are continuing to work with DEP, but it feels like we are being set up for
failure. We have more TMDLs coming – bacteria TMDLs for 10 more
watersheds: Cocohatchee Inland, Cocohatchee River, Gordon River Marina,
Gordon River Extension, Haldeman Creek Upper, Lower Naples, Bay Oak
Creek and Rock Creek.
- [Shows slides of Source Tracking Efforts.] Did 23 source tracking events
concentrating on fecal indicator bacteria and nutrients. We did sampling in the
first 4 watersheds; no sampling at Silver Strand because it is a known source of
nutrients due to a fertilizer plant. Did some sampling for rain events and storm
events – showed bacteria levels elevated for 3 days after storms. Almost all the
sites were elevated for both bacteria and nutrients. Issue with homeless camps,
human and dog DNA at the Cocohatchee River, and various tributaries at
Gordon River contributing to bacteria and nutrients. [Shows slide of source
tracking efforts.] Running out of tools. Sucralose is present in surface and
groundwater everywhere reused irrigation is used. DNA costs $700 per sample
or $1,000 to include bird or dog DNA. If homeless camps are present, data is
not distinguishable. Isotopes take extensive sampling for fingerprints of all
sources – expensive $1,000 a sample. In addition, we have limited resources;
takes a lot of manpower. Will continue to monitor in bacteria and copper.
Provided a map of the county-wide sampling.
- Bob Roth – Based on this Collier County has a water quality problem and is
there anything meaningful being done? That would be a question for public
utilities. Nicole relates some of the projects that have been. Hard due to
restrictions to regulate nutrients and copper Solution: Give TMDLs to all the
estuaries and monitor each watershed.
IX. Old Business
None.
13
X. Announcements
Advised that this was Steven Koziar’s last meeting and that he had been a committee
member for ten years. Mr. Koziar was presented with a plaque on behalf of the CAC
committee and staff as a thank you for his work with the committee.
XI. Committee Member Discussion
Bob Raymond suggested that there should be discussion on limiting the time and putting a
maximum of 15-20 minutes for each presenter. Agreed that we should ask Erik Brecknitz
on Robert’s Rules. The committee agreed it was a good suggestion.
XII. Next Meeting Date/Location
June 12, 2025, at 1:00 p.m. (Andy Miller can’t think of anything pressing for June & July).
XIII. Adjournment
There being no further business for the good of The County, the Coastal Advisory
Committee Hearing was adjourned at 3:03 p.m.
Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee
_____________________________________________
Chairman, Joe Burke
The Minutes were approved by:
_____________________________________________
NAME
_____________________________________________
SIGNATURE
As presented on ___________________________
Or amended on ____________________________