BCC Minutes 12/09/2025 RDecember 9, 2025
Page 1
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, December 9, 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
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal K. Kinzel, Clerk of the Circuit Court & Comptroller
Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations
December 9, 2025
Page 2
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Ms. Patterson, good morning, and
good morning to all of you. Welcome to our County Commission
meeting.
Before we begin the business of the meeting, we're going to
start, as we always do, with an invocation and the Pledge of
Allegiance.
We're going to have the invocation this morning by Reverend
James Baird from the Covenant Church of Naples, and following that
will be the Pledge of Allegiance, and that's going to be presented by
Bob Wild, an army veteran from Vietnam. I think it was 1967
through 1970, if I'm correct on that. And he's going to lead us in the
Pledge of Allegiance following the opening prayer.
Good morning and thank you.
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE –
INVOCATION WAS GIVEN BY REVERAND JAMES BAIRD OF
THE COVENANT CHURCH; THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
WAS GIVEN BY BOB WALD, VIETNAM AMRY VETERAN
REVEREND BAIRD: Thank you very much. Let's all bow our
heads.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Let us get stood up.
REVEREND BAIRD: Our great triune God, father, son, and
holy spirit, we come to you today asking for your blessing and
guidance as our civil leaders do the work that you have appointed
them to do. Lord, they hold great positions of public trust to care for
the well-being of our community, and we know that only through the
power of your spirit will they do it effectively and for your glory and
December 9, 2025
Page 3
the good of all the citizens.
Father, we ask that you would bless them with the ability to do
justice and to love mercy, to bear down appropriately upon
wickedness, and to praise those who do well.
We pray that through their work your name would be glorified,
that the gospel of your son would go forth, and that Collier County
would be known for its righteousness because of the blessings that
you've bestowed upon us. So we'd ask that you'd give them love, we
ask that you'd give them wisdom, and we ask that you'd give them
strength all for the sake of Jesus in his name. We ask this in his
name. Amen.
MR. WILD: I just thought I'd give a brief history of the Pledge
of Allegiance that everyone's so familiar with. They may not know
the history. It was created right after the Civil War, went through
several iterations in the '20s. In the '40s, '42, it was actually finally
determined that it was the official anthem, if you might, of the U.S.
President Eisenhower in 1954 added the phrase "Under God."
And as you probably know, in those days, up until the '40s, it used to
be rendered with a hand salute. Then it was determined it would be
done with the hand over the heart.
Every school day, every meeting used to be started with the
Pledge of Allegiance. I think we're coming back to those days,
fortunately.
So if we'd face the flag, and hand over heart, and join me,
please.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
MR. WILD: The only other think I'll add, Commissioner
Saunders was kind enough to say, "Take all the time you want." He
doesn't realize I wrote the famous Jim Valvano "Never Give Up"
speech that you've probably heard on ESPN, so I won't. But I will
thank the Commission for recognizing Vietnam veterans. I think we
December 9, 2025
Page 4
lose a thousand a day. There's not many of us left. So it's really
appreciated to be recognized and all -- myself and my fellow -- all
veterans, the Vietnam veterans particularly, we thank you for that
recognition.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you, and thank you for your
service.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Ms. Patterson, let's go through
the changes to the agenda.
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODAY’S REGULAR, CONSENT, AND
SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EXP-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
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. Agenda changes for December
9th, 2025.
First, we have Add-on Item 11C. This is a recommendation to
direct staff to advertise and bring back for a public hearing an
ordinance amending the Land Development Code to update the
regulations pertaining to the removal of prohibited exotic vegetation.
This item is brought to the agenda at Commissioner Saunders'
request.
Move the Companion Items 17E, 17F, 17G, and 16B9 to Items
11 -- to Items 9D, 9E, 9F, and 11D, respectively, to be -- all to be
heard at the same time. This is the Greenway Fritchey Residential
Planned Unit Development rezoning, Growth Management Plan
December 9, 2025
Page 5
Amendment, Laredo Street vacation, and the related developer
agreement. This is being moved at staff and Commissioner
LoCastro's requests.
Move Item 16B18 to 11E. This is a recommendation to declare
a valid public emergency to bring the unpassable roads in the Private
Road Emergency Repair Municipal Services Taxing Unit to a
passable condition, allow for a loan from Capital Reserves in the
amount of 1.5 million, approve purchase orders for Quality
Enterprises for a total amount of $1,238,800 to complete necessary
repairs by fire district zone for the Private Unpaved Road Emergency
Repair MSTU, and authorize any necessary budget amendments.
This is being moved at Commissioner Saunders, Commissioner Hall,
and Commissioner Kowal's separate requests.
Move Item 17J to 11F. This is a recommendation to enact an
ordinance which converts the East of 951 Ad Hoc Advisory
Committee from an ad hoc committee to a permanent advisory board
renamed the Rural Golden Gate Estates Restudy Committee and
appoints the current seven members of the ad hoc advisory committee
to the permanent advisory board.
I will note that this actually needs to move to an Item 9, not an
Item 11, so I will get you that number. I believe that will be 9G, not
11F, but we'll get it straightened around by the time we get there.
There are a couple of agenda notes. Items 16A4 and 16A5
relate to Valencia Trails Naples, Plat 4, instead of Valencia Trails
Naples, Plat 3.
And we do have a time-certain item, that's 11B, to be heard at
11 a.m., and this is the impact fee update study ordinance amendment
and rate schedule permission to advertise.
We do have court reporter breaks scheduled for 10:30 and again
at 2:50.
With that, County Attorney.
December 9, 2025
Page 6
MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing, thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We'll go through real
quickly just if there are any changes, those changes, and also ex parte
on the consent. Now, we do have a couple speakers on consent, so
we'll hear those speakers before we vote on the agenda and the
consent agenda.
Commissioner Kowal, any changes or any ex parte?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I have no changes, but I have
multiple ex partes for the consent and summary. I have meetings,
meetings, meetings, emails. Mostly meetings and emails. Do you
want me to name the actual --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: No, not necessary.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Chairman. Good
morning.
No changes, and I do have meetings, emails, and calls on
summary and consent.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Just one proposed
agenda change before we actually vote on it. On B1, I believe it is,
B1, I want to propose that we double the rent on B1. That's for Rep
Melo's office.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. That will go from $1 to
$2 a year.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We need to get $2, not $1,
from our state rep, just so it goes.
And no other changes other than the -- I, as well, have multiple
correspondence on both summary and consent.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And that change suggestion did not
get a second, so we'll --
December 9, 2025
Page 7
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, it failed due to a lack of
a second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We'll leave that at a dollar.
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I have no changes, and
on all the consent and summary agendas, I have meetings and emails.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. I have no changes as well,
and the same on consent, just phone calls and meetings.
We have two speakers, I believe, on the consent agenda. So let's
hear from the speakers on consent before we take that up.
MR. MILLER: Yeah, Mr. Chair, we actually have two speakers
here for summary agenda and one on Zoom for consent. We'll start
hear in the room. Cody Davis will be followed by Sean Gallaway.
MR. DAVIS: Do I go up to this mic?
MR. MILLER: Either one. Either one is fine, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And you do have three minutes.
MR. DAVIS: I believe Mr. Gallaway had ceded his time to me;
is that correct?
MR. MILLER: Oh, yes, he did. I'm sorry, sir. Sounds good.
You have six minutes, then.
MR. DAVIS: Good morning. Do I have to state my address?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Just -- we do request name and
address.
MR. DAVIS: Okay. My name's Cody Davis. 15126 Palmer
Lake Circle, and I wanted to speak briefly on the proposed West
Mercato redevelopment.
I understand that the developer is seeking a rezoning to allow 28
luxury units, but under the existing zoning, without any change, state
law already allows those same 28 units, plus 40 percent affordable
housing, 19 units, by right. For a county that repeatedly states it has
a workforce housing crisis, the by-right option is, I think, clearly the
December 9, 2025
Page 8
better outcome. It remains consistent with the zoning plan, preserves
the integrity of the growth management framework, and because the
site is so close to the highly walkable Mercato, Publix, Trader Joe's,
and more, it places minimal additional strain on the traffic network.
I'm very concerned with the trend of using parcel-specific
rezonings to override established planning policies. Spot zoning by
rezoning erodes the predictability and fairness that the Growth
Management Plan is supposed to provide.
When affordable housing is negotiated away through ad hoc
zoning changes, it undermines public trust and violates the spirit of
Florida's land-use laws. Big developers should not be granted zoning
exceptions when the outcome is more profit for them and reduced
public benefit.
In this case, approving the rezoning would reduce affordable
housing, contradicts the County's planning documents, and benefit a
private party at the expense of the County's residents.
I share concerns about the Live Local Act's preemption of local
authority, but in this particular situation, two wrongs don't make a
right. Commissioner McDaniel has often criticized past county
leaders for believing that if we don't build it, they won't come.
Approving this rezoning would repeat that same mistake by blocking
needed workforce housing in a suitable location near highly walkable
existing services.
I urge the Commission to deny the rezoning and allow the
project to proceed under the existing zoning which provides more
affordability, more consistency, and a far better outcome for Collier
residents.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. I believe that those
were the only -- those are the only comments from our speakers for
consent. Any discussion --
December 9, 2025
Page 9
MR. MILLER: Yeah, I have -- I do have someone on Zoom
who wanted to speak on a consent agenda item.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Oh, I'm sorry.
MR. MILLER: I'm not sure which item. All I have is 16.
Donna Stormer. Donna, you should be getting prompted to unmute
yourself. Let's see if she does. Donna, if you'll unmute yourself,
please. You're being prompted to do so. And one more time, Donna,
can you unmute yourself, please?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: All right. I'm going to say she cannot, so we'll
move from there. All right.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Any comments from the
Commission?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Then we need a motion to approve
the consent agenda --
COMMISSIONER HALL: Move to approve.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- and summary agenda.
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.
December 9, 2025
Page 10
Item #2B and #2C
BCC MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 28, 2025, AND BCC
MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 10, 2025 – MOTION TO
APPROVE AS PRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HALL – APPROVED
Items 2A and 2B are the minutes, October 28th and
November 10 of 2025.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Move for approval.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Second.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and a second to
approve the minutes. 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 #3A
EMPLOYEE AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS – 20 YEAR
ATTENDEES – PRESENTED
Item 3A, employee awards and recognitions. First our 20-year
December 9, 2025
Page 11
attendees. First up we have Michael Nell, Wastewater, 20 years.
Congratulations.
(Applause.)
MS. PATTERSON: Next up we have Dan Baptista, Water, 20
years. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
Item #3A
EMPLOYEE AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS – 25 YEAR
ATTENDEES – PRESENTED
MS. PATTERSON: Moving on to our 25-year attendees, Mario
Mendez -- Menendez, Fleet Management. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: How is the management of the
fleet going?
MR. MENENDEZ: Good.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. Good.
Congratulations.
MS. PATTERSON: Amanda Townsend, 25 years, Museums.
Congratulations.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thirty more years, you'll be a
display.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It was nice having a little extra
audience participation this morning on the service awards. I will say
that we are blessed here in Collier County to have a tremendous staff
on our county payroll. A lot of people complain about county
government, but we have a lot to be proud of here, and those folks
that just got those awards are examples of the quality we have here in
December 9, 2025
Page 12
the County.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JANUARY 23, 2026, TO THE
30TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE WOMEN’S FOUNDATION OF
COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY SHELIA SMITH DAVIS,
CHAIR, 2026 WOMEN’S FOUNDATION LUNCHEON –
MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL – ADOPTED
That moves us on to proclamations, Item 4. Item 4A is a
proclamation designating January 23rd, 2026, to recognize the 30th
anniversary of the Woman's Foundation of Collier County. To be
accepted by Sheila Smith Davis, Chair, 2026 Women's Foundation
Luncheon. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You're not going to say
anything?
MS. CONNOLLY-KEESLER: Well, I can, sure.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Let me say something. No,
you go ahead.
MS. CONNOLLY-KEESLER: I'm happy to say something.
So the Women's Foundation is actually a fund of the Collier
Community Foundation, has been supporting women and girls in
Collier County for the last 30 years. About $2 million the last few
years has gone out to help women who have been living in their cars
in Collier County, getting them placed in apartments, mentoring
programs for teens, and programs just in general around
issues -- healthcare issues and others, that affect women and girls. So
December 9, 2025
Page 13
it's very targeted, and just a wonderful opportunity to support women
and girls in Collier County.
THE COURT REPORTER: Can I get your name?
MS. CONNOLLY-KEESLER: Eileen Connolly-Keesler.
THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I just wanted to add that -- and
I'd invite anybody else to chime in. But I work very closely with
these two ladies, as we all do, but I've known Sheila for years, way
before I was even a county commissioner.
And these are two people that really fly under the radar but do
so many things for the county. Maybe their names aren't on buildings
all over the county -- and not taking anything away from that. We
love that as well. But we also have involved philanthropic groups
that Eileen and both Sheila represent that do so much that sometimes
does get lost a bit, but they don't care. They don't care who gets the
credit, you know. I mean, it's been said as long as good things
happen, who cares who gets the credit.
And they're making good things happen every day. And the two
of them are here representing such a large group that is behind you
and that stand on your shoulders and you stand on theirs doing just so
many great things. And I've been honored to be a part of just small
little pieces of it. But I couldn't be more grateful to have you in our
community for all that you do.
(Applause.)
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JANUARY 19, 2026, AS REV.
DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.’S DREAM DAY IN COLLIER
December 9, 2025
Page 14
COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY VINCENT KEEYS, PROSIDENT,
NAACP COLLIER COUNTY. MOTION TO APPROVE BY
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER KOWAL – ADOPTED
MS. PATTERSON: Item 4B is a proclamation designating
January 19th, 2026, as Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s,
Dream Day in Collier County. To be accepted by Vincent Keeys,
president, NAACP of Collier County. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
MR. KEEYS: Thank you so very much, County
Commissioners, Ms. Patterson, and everyone.
It is a true honor for the NAACP of Collier County after 29
years of holding this parade in celebration. And so we always look
forward to it every year. I know this has been somewhat of an
unofficial collaboration with the County, but we don't take it lightly.
And so we are so grateful to you for us for 29 years to be able to
collaborate on this event.
Dr. King was an honorable and hard-working individual, and we
hope that in the future -- and I know I'll be coming to you next year
to make it official that this collaboration between the NAACP of
Collier County and the Collier County Government will continue that
moving forward.
So I look forward to visiting you again, and I thank you and
invite every one of you out. Please plan to attend. I know we always
see Ms. Patterson there, and so we're very grateful, but we'd love to
see the county commissioners, and I know you have marched in the
past. We'd love for you to do the same thing.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, it's an election year, so you
may see more people there than --
MR. KEEYS: Thank you. Thank you so very much.
December 9, 2025
Page 15
(Applause.)
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, before we move on, if we
could get a motion to accept the proclamations.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So moved.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Motion.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and a
second to accept the proclamations. 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 #5A
PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS OF
THE QUARTER FOR DECEMBER 2025 TO FOSTERING
SUCCESS. ACCEPTED BY REPRESENTATIVES OF
FOSTERING SUCCESS AND THE GREATER NAPLES
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE – PRESENTED
That brings us to Item 5A. This is a presentation of the Collier
County Business of the Quarter for December 2025 to Fostering
Success. To be accepted by representatives of Fostering Success and
the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
December 9, 2025
Page 16
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And if you'd like to tell us a little
bit about the --
MS. HUGHES: Oh, I don't need to be there.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: No, please take the microphone so
we can keep that as part of the record.
MS. HUGHES: I just wanted to thank Greater Naples
leadership -- I mean Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce and all
the commissioners for thanking and thinking about foster children in
our community. We help 750 foster children each year by providing
them with emergency supplies, equipment, free education, tutoring
programs, and connect up babies to quality early learning centers
throughout Collier County.
We also help them go to summer camps and winter camps for
free, and we pay for any sports, dance, art, theater that they want to
so they can get back some of the childhood that they've lost. And
we're very grateful to you for acknowledging us and all the work that
my staff does to make sure that these vulnerable children are safe and
secure.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let me ask you a quick question,
because years ago, the way the state statutes were set up, the foster
kids would reach the age of 18, and then they were just simple
dropped.
MS. HUGHES: Yes.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And I know that's been changed.
MS. HUGHES: Correct.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: But my question is, are there things
in the statutes that you feel that need to be changed at this point, or
has that been pretty much taken care of?
MS. HUGHES: So we don't have any government funding.
We're completely a separate non-profit, and we help the children after
they get placed in their home by a case manager. But you're right, we
December 9, 2025
Page 17
have a program that now extends from 18 to 23, because when a child
is 18, if they don't stay in the program, they immediately, on their
18th birthday, will get kicked out of foster care, and that is -- I can't
even imagine being 18 years old and not having a support system.
So we do help them all the way through 23, and actually,
nationally, only 50 percent of foster children graduate high school.
That's just a sad and alarming statistic, and only 4 percent graduate
college.
The kids who are in our educational program, we have
100 percent high school graduation rate, and 100 percent of our
children have gone on to college, either a two-year or four-year or
technical school, so we make sure that they are in a safe environment
and have education to break the cycle.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. Thank you for -- for
your success.
(Applause.)
ADDED – ARTIST OF THE MONTH
ARTIST OF THE MONTH OF DECEMBER 2025 – COLLIER
COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS - ART FOR
DEMOCRACY CONTEST SUBMISSIONS BY LOCAL
STUDENT ARTISTS
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, if I could turn your
attention to the back of the room for the Artist of the Month. The
Collier County Supervisor of Elections office is honored to be the
Artist of the Month and to have the opportunity to share the artwork
created by local student artists for the Art of Democracy contest.
In partnership with Collier County Public Schools, Champions
December 9, 2025
Page 18
for Learning, and the local chapter of the Sons of the American
Revolution, the Supervisor of Elections conducts this annual contest
to showcase artwork that expresses what the democratic process
means to our student artists in Collier County. This contest offers a
unique opportunity for local student artists to celebrate civic
engagement through their creative talents.
This year the Supervisor of Elections invited students in Grades
K through 12 to submit original artwork with voting and election
centric themes. Students kindergarten through eighth grade also had
the opportunity to enter an original design for the 2026 "I voted"
sticker. To learn more about the contest, visit colliervotes.gov/art.
With that, Commissioners, that brings us to public comments.
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS
MR. MILLER: We have three registered speakers for this item.
Your first speaker is Don Braswell, and he'll be followed by Marsha
Oenick.
MR. BRASWELL: Coming. I'm not as young as I used to be.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That's true of all of us.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Oh, Don.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thanks, Don.
MR. BRASWELL: There you go, sir.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you.
MR. BRASWELL: Amy, if you need a copy of what they're
looking at, here you go.
MS. PATTERSON: Thank you.
MR. BRASWELL: Good morning, gentlemen and the rest of
the staff. Thank you for giving me the opportunity.
December 9, 2025
Page 19
What I'd like to talk about is encouragement of single-family
home building in the county. We've done a great job of producing
homes -- rentals and condos, and all those pieces of the pie meet a
public need. But I have a thing in my heart that says, "I will have a
more stable community if I find a way to make single-family homes
more affordable." And I had a privilege early in life to work on a
project where we had to get 1200 stores up in 18 months. That's a
big job.
Okay. No, I didn't do it. It was a team of us that did it. But
what we did is found a commonality because I was working for
General Motors, and they wanted 1200 stores. Whoa, how do you do
that in 18 months?
They standardized three different models for a building. I'm just
thinking, can we come up with communities that are a little more
standardized so that timelines don't drift. It gives the general
contractor an opportunity to buy ahead at a discount. There was a lot
of things in that project that gave us a leg up on time.
If you're a general contractor, and to get that house built it's
going to take me 24 months, I've had to finance that for 24 months.
If I can knock six months out of it -- it doesn't sound like much -- it's
huge.
That's what we did. I can't go into all the details. That's why I
gave a piece of paper. But, wow, it was a good project for General
Motors because we met our 18-month deadline, and more
importantly -- a lot of you are businessman. How about it? You
opened up a store six months early. Your competitor down the street
had another six months. You had six months of sales going on, all
right. So it was a great advantage.
A lot of those economies of scale in how the building process
went and how the execution went are transferable to any project.
Someday -- you got my pen, my phone. Let's go and have a
December 9, 2025
Page 20
half-hour conversation, because I can tell you a whole lot. Bye.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Marsha Oenick. She'll be
followed by Monica Ramos.
MS. OENICK: Good morning. My name is Marsha Oenick. I
live in Naples Park. I've been interacting with you collectively and
individually that the Future Land Use Element for the area along U.S.
41 bordering Naples Park needs to be updated, and I remain firm in
that opinion.
There are two goals to be met with the change to the FLUE.
One, enable preservation of the existing commercial zone. Two,
prevent further development of multi-unit residential housing along
U.S. 41. The existing commercial zone provides services including
banks, credit unions, car washes, gas stations, locksmiths, medical
service, a veterinary, dry cleaner, car repair, and others as well as
restaurants and a few stores.
Why is the County interested in encouraging dismantling this
collection of services to replace it with residential? Why are we
going to require people to drive somewhere else to get these services?
Why add to the congestion of U.S. 41 to put more cars on the road to
find access to these business -- these kinds of businesses?
Second, we need to prevent further development of multi-unit
residential housing along 41 in that area. In addition to be
incongruous in height and general density, there's frankly a real
safety issue here. Delivery trucks bringing online shopping goods to
residents. Our neighborhood really sees dozens of Amazon, UPS,
FedEx trucks daily. They don't use driveways now. They won't use
guest parking in a lot. They park in the 18-foot-wide streets and
block a lane of traffic.
Doing this at the corner of U.S. 41 will now cause traffic
backups and accidents on U.S. 41. We need to keep the density
constant along U.S. 41 for residential at RMF6 like the rest of Naples
December 9, 2025
Page 21
Park to minimize this issue.
So change the FLUE to accomplish these goals. One, maintain
the commercial zone. Two, prevent further conversion of
commercial to multiple residential housing. Allow businesses to
avoid the constant threat of their land being sold to create luxury
condos. Allow future businesses to set up shop. Allow residents of
Naples Park, Pelican Marsh, Pelican Bay, and many more have
access to the services, restaurants, and stores that currently operate
there.
If you don't like the say some of them look, provide incentives
to improve their look. The current strategy is not useful.
Is the answer to change the FLUE to C-3? I don't know an
existing res -- already is unmanaged conversion to Live Local
developments, but that would remain commercial.
Is the answer change the FLUE to RMF-6? Does that prevent
Live Local developments and minimize any incentives to convert
commercial to housing? I frankly don't know enough about the rules
to give you the right answer. I implore you to take up this quest:
Rezone the FLUE to enable commercial activity to remain and
prevent further multiuse unit residential complexes.
Thank you for considering my input.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Monica Ramos, and she'll
be followed by Daniel Zegarac.
MS. RAMOS: Good morning, BCC and to the Collier
community.
I know immigration reform is a sensitive subject that was not
added to today's agenda, but -- as I requested; however, I'm praying
today is a conversation starter.
My name's Monica Ramos, and I'm here before you today as a
mother, as a veteran wife, and as a colleague of our local construction
December 9, 2025
Page 22
industry to respectfully and urgently request your support for the
Dignity Bill act by Representative Maria Elvira Salazar out of Miami
that obtained solutions for our broken immigration system for the
sake of Collier County's workforce shortage. This should concern
every commissioner in every district in the country.
I'm here today with more faith and fear in God before me out of
the need, not want, for those community members who cannot be
present. After witnessing countless terrorizing and traumatizing
incidents across our nation and your county this year of Hispanic
children and families due to the current administration's immigration
policies, many of Southwest Florida's top industries are now
suffering due to the workforce shortage, including construction,
restaurant, and hospitality.
I've reached out to our state representatives as Lauren Melo,
Mario Diaz-Balart, Yvette, Byron Donalds, and I'm urging you local
leaders as well to please support the dignity bill. We need to find a
pathway for those who contribute to our local economy who have
paid their taxes, have no criminal record, and have been here for
decades wasting their money on legal representation because it's only
led them to dead ends.
I ask you to not forget the Hispanic small business owners who
contribute to your local economy, the Hispanic first responders who
keep your city safe, the Hispanic hospitality workers who clean your
plates at your favorite restaurants, and the Hispanic farmworkers who
pick the crops that keep our stomachs full. Since we're such a
faith-based community, I'd like to ask you to join me by a fitting
scripture in this time in history. Deuteronomy 27:19 says, cursed is
the one who withholds justice from the foreigner and the fatherless.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your final speaker under this item is Daniel
Zegarac.
December 9, 2025
Page 23
MR. ZEGARAC: Good morning, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Good morning.
MR. ZEGARAC: I haven't been this nervous since I was going
to find out if I made the junior high school basketball team or not.
I just wanted to come up here and tell you that decisions have
consequences. And when I look at a consent agenda that's loaded up
like ours very often are, my mind goes through a lot of different
pushups and sit-ups and deep dives, as some of you would call them.
I hope we don't regret using the consent agenda in the future too
often because I think it is something that we could -- we could
definitely abuse as a government. And so you know, I think it's
magnificent that we can govern ourselves, and I think Collier County
does a pretty darn good job in governing itselves [sic] and has a
pretty darn good staff. And, you know, moving forward, let's take
more advantage of this great staff that we have, so thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. That's a good -- you
raise a good point in reference to the consent agenda, and maybe it
would be useful just, Ms. Patterson, if you could tell the public what
types of items go on the consent.
I will say that each one of us reviews the consent agenda in
detail, and as you notice from this morning, items are pulled from
consent that are controversial. We don't have any hesitation in doing
that. And we permit people to speak on the consent agenda. So we
want to be as open as possible, but we don't want to bog down the
meeting with routine matters that really don't require any discussion.
And, Ms. Patterson, can you elaborate on that a little bit?
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. So the consent agenda is exactly
as you describe it. It's used for routine and administrative items.
There's a lot of payment of bills. We release bonds, accept plats on
the consent agenda.
There are dollar limits to what can be placed on the consent
December 9, 2025
Page 24
agenda, and that's not an absolute. If something was controversial
and was not -- not within that dollar amount, it still would go onto the
regular agenda, but it allows us to procure items up to a certain
threshold, again, being administrative in nature.
Anything that has any type of public interest or controversy does
not go onto the consent agenda, and the -- as you said, the Board
routinely examines the consent agenda. Each day -- each Monday
before our Tuesday meeting we go through the entire agenda, and if
there's something that the Board feels needs to be talked
about -- sometimes it's even for good news -- those items will be
placed onto the regular agenda. So there are definitely guardrails to
keep things from being placed onto the consent agenda that otherwise
belong on the regular agenda for open discussion.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Now, we do have land-use items
that appear on the summary agenda.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And, again, maybe, perhaps, you
can explain why something like what we did this morning appears on
the summary agenda.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. So items only qualify to be on the
summary agenda, which are advertised public hearings, if they have
had a unanimous vote of the Planning Commission and no public
opposition. So items where people have spoken in opposition or
perhaps sent in letters to the staff or to the Board, those also have to
be placed onto the regular agenda. So those things -- there are quite a
number of them that are on the summary agenda but, again, those are
ones that have made it through the Planning Commission with no
public opposition and a unanimous vote.
Some of the ones that were pulled today were ones that made it
to the summary and they qualified but because there were some
concerns raised after the Planning Commission, they have now made
December 9, 2025
Page 25
their way onto the regular agenda.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I think that I can say with a lot of
confidence that Collier County Government is very open. I think this
Commission is always very open. And if there's something that's
problematic, somebody asks a question about something, we always
get our staff to respond. And so I think all of us up here can be proud
of the fact that everything's -- everything's wide open. There are
no -- I shouldn't say there are no secrets, but there are not very many
secrets, and certainly no secrets as they relate to the operation of
county government.
MS. PATTERSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Thank you.
Then we will move on.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Can I add -- can I add
something, Chairman?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I just wanted to add,
Ms. Patterson, you know, one thing we talked about maybe a year
ago -- I brought it up and we all chimed in -- that I think definitely
has improved, I know when I got elected in 2020, the consent agenda
and summary agenda at times was like a one-liner that was written in,
like, hieroglyphics, and then you'd get citizens that would go to the
website and go, "Oh my God, you know, the sky is falling," where
the reality is it needed a little bit more depth.
The reason I think our agenda is an extra page or two than it was
maybe five years ago is because you, obviously, have given the staff
direction to put a little bit more of the details. So if a citizen knew
nothing about the project, there's still one or two things that do jump
out. So the comment that was made does have merit, but I really
thank the staff for making sure that it can be read by somebody that
December 9, 2025
Page 26
maybe has no knowledge, and it doesn't look like we're trying to sort
of sneak it in.
And then you've got five of us up here that read it. Somebody
always catches something that they think should be pulled, so -- but
we'll continue to make those improvements as well.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: But I just wanted to highlight
that, you know, you've made quite a bit already on the -- consent
agenda and summary agenda is quite a bit different than it was five
years ago, as I remember it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2025-286: A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING 560.2
ACRES IN THE RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING
OVERLAY DISTRICT AS A STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA
WITH A DESIGNATION AS “CLH SSA 19”; PURSUANT TO THE
TERMS SET FORTH IN THE ESCROW AGREEMENT,
STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT FOR
CLH SSA 19, AND STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA
EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR CLH SSA 19; APPROVE A
STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT FOR
CLH SSA 19; APPROVING A STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA
EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR CLH SSA 19; APPROVING AN
ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR CLH SSA 19; AND
ESTABLISHING THE NUMBER OF STEWARDSHIP CREDITS
GENERATED BY THE DESIGNATION OF SAID STEWARDSHIP
SENDING AREA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN
SECTIONS 6, 7, AND 18; TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH; RANGE 30
EAST. [PL20240000437] (THIS ITEM IS A COMPANION TO
December 9, 2025
Page 27
ITEM #9B) - MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER
MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HALL –
ADOPTED
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2025-287: A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING
1,217.84± ACRES WITHIN THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP
AREA ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT AS A STEWARDSHIP
RECEIVING AREA, TO BE KNOWN AS THE HORSE TRIALS
VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA, TO ALLOW
DEVELOPMENT OF A MAXIMUM OF 3,205 DWELLING UNITS
INCLUDING 305 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, AND OF
THE MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS A MINIMUM OF 10%
WILL BE MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS, A MINIMUM OF
10% WILL BE SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED AND A MINIMUM
OF 10% WILL BE SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED OR VILLA; A
MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM OF 169,865 SQUARE FEET OF
GROSS FLOOR AREA OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN
VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE; A MAXIMUM OF 100,000
SQUARE FEET OF INDOOR SELF-STORAGE USE IN THE
VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE; A MINIMUM OF 32,050
SQUARE FEET OF CIVIC, GOVERNMENTAL, AND
INSTITUTIONAL USES IN THE VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT
ZONE; SENIOR HOUSING INCLUDING ASSISTED LIVING
FACILITIES AND CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT
COMMUNITIES LIMITED TO 300 UNITS IN THE SRA; ALL
SUBJECT TO A MAXIMUM P.M. PEAK HOUR TRIP CAP; AND
APPROVING THE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA CREDIT
AGREEMENT FOR HORSE TRIALS VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP
RECEIVING AREA AND ESTABLISHING THAT 9,519.08
December 9, 2025
Page 28
STEWARDSHIP CREDITS ARE BEING UTILIZED BY THE
DESIGNATION OF THE HORSE TRIALS VILLAGE
STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY,
CONSISTING OF 1,217.84 ± ACRES, IS LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF OIL WELL ROAD, WEST OF STATE ROAD 29,
IN SECTIONS 5, 6, 7, 8, 17, AND 18, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,
RANGE 30 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
[PL20230009958] (THIS ITEM IS A COMPANION TO ITEM #9A)
MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HALL – ADOPTED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to our
advertised public hearings. We're going to get started with
Comprehensive Plan Items 9A and 9B. I apologize. I'm going to
read these into the record, and then we'll get started.
Item 9A is a recommendation to adopt a resolution designating
560.2 acres in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay
District as a Stewardship Sending Area with designation as CLH SSA
19 pursuant to the terms set forth in the escrow agreement
Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for CLH SSA 19, and
Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement for CLH SSA 19;
approving a Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for CLH
SSA 19; approving a Stewardship Sending Area Easement
Agreement for CLH SSA 19; approving an escrow agreement for
CLH SSA 19; and establishing the number of stewardship credits
generated by the designation of said Stewardship Sending Area. The
subject property is located in Sections 6, 7, and 18, Township 48
South, Range 30 East.
Its companion item is 9B. This item will require that all
participants be sworn in and commissioners provide ex parte
disclosure.
December 9, 2025
Page 29
This is a recommendation to approve with conditions a
resolution designating 1,217.84 plus/minus acres within the Rural
Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District as a Stewardship
Receiving Area to be known as the Horse Trials Village Stewardship
Receiving Area to allow development of a maximum of 3,205
dwelling units, including 305 affordable housing units, and of the
maximum dwelling units, a minimum of 10 percent will be
multifamily dwelling units, a minimum of 10 percent will be
single-family detached, and a minimum of 10 percent will be
single-family attached or villa, a minimum and maximum of 169,865
square feet of gross floor area of commercial development in Village
Center Context Zone, a maximum of 100,000 square feet of indoor
self-storage in the Village Center Context Zone, a minimum of
32,050 square feet of civic, governmental, and institutional uses in
the Village Center Context Zone, senior housing including assisted
living facilities and continuing care, retirement communities, limited
to 300 units in the SRA; all subject to a maximum p.m. peak hour trip
cap; and approving the Stewardship Receiving Area credit agreement
for the Horse Trials Village Stewardship Receiving Area and
establishing that 9,519.08 stewardship credits are being utilized by
designation of the Horse Trials Village Stewardship Receiving Area.
The subject property consisting of 1,217.84 plus/minus acres is
located on the north side of Oil Well Road west of State Road 29 in
Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 17, and 18, Township 48 South, Range 30 East,
Collier County, Florida.
With that, Commissioners, ex parte.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yes, Chairman, I have meetings
and calls on 9B.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Meetings and emails.
December 9, 2025
Page 30
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Meetings and calls, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Meetings and emails.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And I have the same, meetings and
emails and some telephone calls.
MS. PATTERSON: Very good. If all participants could stand
to be sworn in by the court reporter, that includes anybody that's
going to be providing public comment as well.
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: All right. We'll start, as usual, with
the petitioner.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't think Mulhere raised
his hand.
MR. MULHERE: I did. I did.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He did? Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Good morning. For the record, Rich
Yovanovich on behalf of the petitioner.
Can I ask Troy if there's -- I noticed there were no public
comments in the audience. Is there anybody registered on Zoom?
MR. MILLER: I have one registered on Zoom, Lucy Gallo.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And she's with our team.
MR. MILLER: She's with your team.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
MR. MILLER: That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure, Rich.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you. I just wanted that for
purposes of -- for purposes of the presentation.
With me today on behalf of the owner of the property is Pat
December 9, 2025
Page 31
Utter. He's vice president of real estate for Collier Enterprises, a
Tarpon Blue company.
I'm the zoning lawyer on this project. Mr. Mulhere and Ellen
Summers are our planners. Dom Amico is our civil engineer. Lucy,
who's on the Zoom, if you have any questions regarding our
economic analysis, is here. Mr. Trebilcock is our transportation
engineer. And then Heather Samborski is our ecologist for the
project.
As Ms. Patterson indicated, we have two petitions before you
today. You've seen many -- I shouldn't say "many," but several SRA
villages, and you've approved several SSAs for the Rural Lands
Stewardship Program.
We're available to answer any questions you have regarding
each of the petitions, and if you would like a detailed presentation on
the SSA designation, Heather is here and can take you through the
designation process in detail if you prefer.
As Ms. Patterson pointed out, the SRA is roughly
1,217.84 acres, and the SSA is 560.2 acres. And the property on your
visualizer right now is the property that comprises the village SRA.
And this SSA, together with a couple of other SSAs, provide the
credits for the designation of this property.
The overall request is for 3,205 dwelling units, almost 170,000
square feet of neighborhood goods and services, and a little over
32,000 square feet of civic government and institutional uses.
This visual -- this picture also shows you where the SRA is but
also shows you where SSA 19 is. That is your companion item for
this particular petition.
As I mentioned, we're in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area
overlay. The process we go through is to designate the SRA. It's not
a rezone, which is different from the normal entitlement process, and
the location of property is the northwest quadrant of Oil Well and
December 9, 2025
Page 32
State Road 29. And this petition -- and Bob will get into a little bit
more detail -- is villages are intended to be primarily residential, and
that's what this village is, primarily residential.
The location of the property is in the pink area. The pink area is
the portion of the RLSA that is the open area which is intended to be
where SRAs are to be designated. I'm not going to get into the details
of villages because you've seen this before. And since we don't have
any public speakers, I don't think we need to go through the details of
all of this. But both your staff, your Planning Commission -- and as
Bob will take you through, we meet all of the criteria related to
designating this property as a village.
I'm going to go ahead now at this point and turn it over to Bob to
go over briefly the master plan, and then with that, we're available to
answer any questions you may have regarding...
MR. MULHERE: Good morning. For the record, Bob Mulhere
with Bowman.
As Rich indicated, the SRA is requesting the 3,205 dwelling
units; 2.63 units per acre. We exceed the open-space requirement for
a village, 35 percent open space is required, and we're providing
basically 49.30, so substantially exceed that. The master plan, which
I'll get to in just a minute, is designed to encourage pedestrian and
bicycle circulation as is required by the stewardship program.
We have 37.29 acres of active parks and community green
space. Only 12.18 is required, 1 percent of the gross acreage. So we
substantially exceed that number.
There are three context zones in the SRA. You have the
ability -- actually, you have the requirement to create context zones.
Two are required, neighborhood general and village center, but most
of the villages that have gone through over the last few years have
also created a separate context zone, which is permitted for
affordable housing, because the development standards are very
December 9, 2025
Page 33
different for that type of use.
We do have direct access to Oil Well Road and State Road 29,
and we're providing a 25-foot-wide perimeter landscape buffer along
those two arterial roadways.
Just briefly, the neighborhood center is the largest area of the
overall SRA at 1,131.26. Village center is 56 acres in size, and the
affordable housing tract, which is required to be 2.5 percent of the
overall acreage, is 30.45 acres.
And this is the master plan. It may be a little bit hard to see. I'll
see if I can make that a little bit bigger.
Next slide. Thank you, perfect. Good thing I hear somebody
whispering behind me. I needed that help.
So you can see this project better. And here's Oil Well Road,
State Road 29. You can see the access point to 29 here and to Oil
Well Road right here. This area is the village center. Over here is
the SSA. And I don't know if you notice, but on the overall SRA
map that Rich pointed out where this area is designated pink, just to
the west in this area right here is a proposed panther corridor. So
this -- this designation assists with that benefit.
Here's your affordable housing tract, school tract. So this is
designed very similar to the other villages that you see, and that's
because there are very specific requirements for design.
We have a trip cap, as does every PUD and SRA that you see,
and ours is 2,429 two-way adjusted average weekday p.m. peak-hour
trips. As is allowed for, the TIS doesn't include additional
commercial and civic square footage for the 305 affordable housing
units.
And there is a fair-share contribution for State Road 29/Oil Well
intersection improvements of $835,800.
This exhibit shows you the connectivity. There's the main loop
road, which is in purple, right here, and then another main link road
December 9, 2025
Page 34
right here, and then there are sidewalks and 10-foot multiuse
pathways throughout the project.
We did have a neighborhood meeting in June of 2024, and
because we hadn't gotten scheduled for public hearings within a year,
we had another neighborhood meeting in -- almost a year to the day.
In June of -- June 23rd of 2025. In both of those, we had one
participant who had a few questions, and that was it.
As Rich mentioned, we have a recommendation for approval
from the Planning Commission and the staff. And at this point, I'll
open it up to any questions you might have.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. There was one slide that
you went past, and it had a Planning Commission recommendation.
MR. MULHERE: Sure.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It was unanimous.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Oh, okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It was unanimous approval.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I just didn't -- I didn't see it long
enough to know if there was a specific recommendation.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sorry about that. Yes, it was
unanimously recommended approval.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Any questions from the
Commission? Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have no question. If nobody
else does, I'd like to make a motion for approval.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, let's just -- let's for the
record, because there is always the potential of litigation -- even
though there's nobody here, let's have just a really brief staff report,
see if there's any public comment, then we'll take the motion.
MR. BOSI: Good morning, Commissioner. Mike Bosi,
Planning and Zoning director.
The SSA that was proposed on 9A has been reviewed by our
December 9, 2025
Page 35
Development Review team and Environmental staff, and we've
confirmed the NRI scores associated with the credits, and we feel that
that -- we're offering a recommendation of approval based upon that
review and the -- or the collaboration with the -- with their
environmental team in terms of the field verification of the NRI
scores for the various credits that are being suggested.
For the -- for the SRA proposal, staff is recommending approval
as well. They're providing for the mandatory affordable housing as
well as the required square footage for institutional, commercial, and
light industrial type uses. With all that, staff is recommending
approval of both of the petitions and would answer any questions the
Commission may have.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Seeing no questions, any
speakers?
MR. MILLER: No.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We'll close the public hearing.
Commissioner McDaniel, you had a motion.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want to do both of
them, or do you want two separate motions?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's do both of them at the same
time unless --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make a motion for both 9A
and 9B. And you know, as a -- as a comment with regard to it, these
things don't happen in a vacuum. This development's been coming
on for many, many years, and an enormous amount of
communication, an enormous amount of planning, and I'm pleased to
make the recommendation for approval.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion. Is
there a second?
COMMISSIONER HALL: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and second to
December 9, 2025
Page 36
approve both agenda Items 9A and 9B. Seeing no further discussion,
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.
Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: I just want to make a comment
about the project. This is -- to me, this is the exact kind of project
that we need to grow with. It's out -- it's not in our normal regular
traffic patterns. It's out there. It's got its own commercial, and it's
got its own schools. It's got its own fire station. I love the project,
and I'm glad that we passed that unanimously.
Thanks.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Ms. Patterson, then we'll
move on.
Item #9C
ORDINANCE 2025-66: AN ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF REAL PROPERTY FROM A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) ZONING DISTRICT
ALLOWING MIXED-USES, TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE
PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS MICELI PUD, TO ALLOW
DEVELOPMENT OF 63 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, TO CORRECT
PROJECT ACREAGE, AND PROVIDE FOR REPEAL OF
December 9, 2025
Page 37
ORDINANCE NUMBER 92-62, THE MICELI PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD). THE SUBJECT, 8.63±-ACRE
PROPERTY, IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TAMIAMI
TRAIL EAST, 200 FEET NORTH OF RAINTREE LANE, IN
SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20240012218] - MOTION TO
APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL – ADOPTED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 9C.
This item does require that all participants be sworn in and
commissioners provide ex parte disclosure.
This is a recommendation to approve an ordinance to change the
zoning classification of real property from a Planned Unit
Development zoning district allowing mixed uses to a residential
Planned Unit Development zoning district for the project to be known
as Miceli PUD to allow development of 63 residential units, to
correct project acreage, and to provide for repeal of Ordinance 92-62,
the Miceli Planned Unit Development.
The subject property -- or the subject 8.36 plus/minus acre
property is located on the south side of Tamiami Trail East, 200 feet
north of Raintree Lane in Section 29, Township 50 South, Range 26
East, Collier County, Florida.
With that, Commissioners, ex parte.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yes. I have meetings on this
item.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Meetings as well.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, meetings and calls, sir.
December 9, 2025
Page 38
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Meetings and emails.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And I have the same, meetings and
emails and some correspondence.
MS. PATTERSON: If all participants could stand to be sworn
in by the court reporter, including anybody that is going to speak on
public comment.
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: Mr. Yovanovich.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you.
If I can ask Troy again if there's --
MR. MILLER: Is Kendall Miller one of yours?
MR. YOVANOVICH: No.
MR. MILLER: Okay. So I have one registered speaker for this
item, then, on Zoom.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you, thank you.
Again, good morning. For the record, Rich Yovanovich on
behalf of the applicant.
With me today is Jessica Harrelson, who is our planner for the
project; Norm Trebilcock is our transportation consultant; and Jeremy
Sterk, our environmental ecologist for the project.
The proposed project is an existing PUD. It's a mixed-use PUD.
It's 8.63 acres along Tamiami Trail. And our request is to rezone the
project from a mixed-use project to a residential PUD to go to 63
units for the entire project. We are using the
conversion-of-commercial provision within the Growth Management
Plan that would allow us to convert the almost three acres of
commercial that is that portion of the project to residential. This is a
December 9, 2025
Page 39
little clearer -- a little clearer aerial of the project.
We have been through a review of your staff. We've been
through the review of the Planning Commission and have met all the
criteria for a residential PUD. The acreage we're asking for is
consistent with your Growth Management Plan -- I'm sorry. The
density we're asking for is consistent with your Growth Management
Plan. That's the "consistent by policy" map that I was referring to,
and you can see the small little yellow squares where the commercial
is. And as we all know that back in 1989, this little strip commercial
was intended to go away and have more functional commercial space
throughout Collier County, which was the activity center
designations.
That's the math if you're interested in the math on how we got to
the density for 63 units for the total project.
This is our master plan -- and I'm -- my watch, I may have just
answered the phone. I meant to turn it off.
So this is our master plan, and we've designed the project to
where it basically meets the same development standards that exist
today on the residential portion of the project. And by that I mean we
have -- we actually have lower heights. We're only two stories. Prior
we could do two stories over parking. We have the same setbacks.
So we have designed this to be basically similar to what was
previously there but, obviously, we could have a few more residential
units on the property.
The comments that we really -- we received at the Planning
Commission -- and I don't know if the public speaker's going to talk
to those comments, was they were concerned about height, which we
brought it down to the height that was already there. It's basically the
same height as any single-family zoning district allows. And the
comment we always hear is when you have an older community next
to our community is they're concerned about drainage.
December 9, 2025
Page 40
And we -- we have analyzed this. Some of their -- rear of their
lots do drain onto our property, so our water management system will
incorporate the existing drainage that comes from their community,
which is mathematically true and engineeringly true. We will
actually make drainage better because right now water just flows the
way water flows. We will accumulate the water. We'll hold the
water back, and we'll discharge it at a lower and slower rate than it
currently discharges.
A lot of older communities have issues because they
were -- they were built prior to the current engineering standards.
David Hurst is here to answer any specific questions you may have
regarding civil engineering.
But our -- those were the concerns that we heard both at our
NIM and at our -- at the Planning Commission was height and
concern about water management. We'll get a Water Management
District permit, and we will actually probably improve the water
management in the area by going forward with our project.
But that's a general overview of our project, and we're available
to answer any questions you may have with regard to our request.
Both your staff and the Planning Commission -- well, staff
recommended approval. Planning Commission unanimously
recommended approval.
We're on regular agenda because under the process if anybody
shows up at the Planning Commission or writes letters of objection,
we don't qualify to be on the planning -- I mean on the summary
agenda.
That's, in sum and substance, our project, and we're requesting
that the Board of County Commissioners approve our request to
rezone to a residential PUD.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. I don't see any
commissioners lit up to ask questions. Then we'll move over to the
December 9, 2025
Page 41
staff report.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Is there no public comment,
Troy?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We'll get to public comment in just
a minute.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. I gotcha. I'll ask Mike
something.
MR. BOSI: Good morning, again, Commissioners. Mike Bosi,
Planning and Zoning Director.
The Planning Commission heard the petition on October 2nd of
2025. And like I said -- and as indicated by the applicant, they had
recommended unanimous approval. Going into the hearing, staff had
recommended approval to the Planning Commission and is
recommending approval to the Board of County Commissioners.
The Miceli PUD, since 1992, has been a mixed-use PUD. No
action's been going on -- nothing has transpired. The Growth
Management Plan has an encouragement to transition some of these
commercial parcels that are outside of our activity centers to
transition to residential. That encouragement is -- it's an opportunity
for 16 units an acre when you do that. As a result of the conversion
of going to the 63 units, it is a significant reduction within the overall
traffic that will be associated with the project. That's one of the main
reasons staff is supporting it.
And as indicated during the Planning Commission, a number of
residents for the neighborhood to the south of the facility had
expressed concerns on water management. It's not the first time
we've heard those -- from this neighborhood related to the petitions in
close proximity.
As the applicant has indicated, they feel that the improvements
to the property with the engineered system should bring better water
management to the localized area. And for all those reasons, staff is
December 9, 2025
Page 42
supporting the petition and would answer any questions that you may
have.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Any questions or
comments from the Commission on the staff report?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Seeing none, Mr. Miller, are there
any registered speakers?
MR. MILLER: I have one registered speaker on Zoom, Kendall
Miller.
Kendall, you're being prompted to unmute yourself, if you'll do
so at this time. And, Kendall, you're being prompted to unmute
yourself. There you are. You have three minutes.
MS. MILLER: Are you able to hear me?
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am.
MS. MILLER: Okay. Perfect. Good morning. I am Kendall
Miller. I'm a resident of 5203 Raintree Lane. That is the property
kind of towards the end of where this development is going to be.
I'm just wondering, are you able to share your drainage signage
[sic], what you've been doing the last month, with the residents of our
street? Just to make sure all the water issues we have been having are
going to actually be resolved.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Hang on just a second.
Mr. Yovanovich, did you understand the question?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I didn't hear it all. I'm not really sure --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Ms. Miller, could you repeat the
question.
MS. MILLER: Can you hear me now?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah, we can hear you, but if
you --
MR. YOVANOVICH: It was a little muffled.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: If you'd repeat the question.
December 9, 2025
Page 43
MS. MILLER: I'm just wondering, are you able to share your
findings with what you've done for the last month and a half on
drainage with the residents of our street?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Hang on. We have someone that's
going to address that.
MR. HURST: David Hurst from Peninsula Engineering, for the
record.
I'm not sure exactly what she's asking, but we are evaluating the
overall system just to try and understand a little bit more about
capacity of swales, et cetera, along the perimeter. But I haven't had
any direct correspondence with any of the residents in the last month,
so I'm a little unsure of what the question is.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. But bottom line, from
what I understood from Mr. Yovanovich, is that there is some water
that flows to your property that that you're going to continue to
handle.
MR. HURST: Correct.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And the water that originates on
your property, you're going to continue to maintain that?
MR. HURST: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Ms. Miller, do you have anything
else?
MS. MILLER: Just a quick question. I'm not sure if you're able
to answer this today, but we have our manmade pond that sits on our
property with a little sliver of it sitting on their property. Most of our
drainage canal water flows into it. I'm just curious to know, have
they looked into that at all to see how their project is going to affect
our manmade pond.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, we'll -- obviously, when we enter
into the formal design process with the Water Management District,
we have to evaluate where water is coming from as part of this
December 9, 2025
Page 44
process.
I'm looking at an aerial right now, and I -- the shorter answer is,
we have not looked at her manmade drainage pond at this point. I'm
not even sure where it is on this aerial. But as part the process, we
have to look at all of that to determine what's coming onto our
property and how we have to address it in our water management
system. There is a swale along the rear of these properties that will
be incorporated into our system.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Ms. Miller, thank you very
much.
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Hey, Mr. Bosi. Can you
come back to the podium, please.
Thank you, Chairman.
I mean, the -- I wanted to just have you go on the record again,
you know, with maybe more specificity. But, you know, the two
complaints we always get from citizens when they have an empty
field next to them and they either want it to be a dog park or nothing
is they're worried about runoff, and that has merit, and they're
worried about traffic, and that has merit.
But usually it's a -- just a -- kind of an open statement out there
with very little engineering or details behind it. As you had stated
earlier, the details all went to the Planning Commission and was
unanimously approved.
So I just want you to go on the record to answer these two
questions. So if we left this zoned the way it was and let it develop
into a mixed-use or commercial or something like that, would that
create more traffic or less traffic than if we built these houses?
MR. BOSI: The proposal will reduce the traffic compared to
what currently is allowed by the existing Miceli PUD.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And as you know, a lot of
December 9, 2025
Page 45
times when I have a town hall meeting, you know, I infrequently
bring county staff, but when I do, it's usually because a community
has a very specific question about a nearby construction project or
runoff. And even though I know at times they don't believe me, but
if I had an empty lot next to me like this, and we had 24 inches of
rain, the water goes wherever it wants, and it goes to the lowest lying
area, which is usually the houses, you know, north, south, east, or
west.
If something's built on here, true or false, that, you know, before
they start buying curtains for the windows of the new houses, a very
detailed plan that goes through the Water Management District,
through us actually allows for more formal sewer, drainage, all the
above. It doesn't mean that somebody might not have puddling in
front of their house, but a lot of times the complaint is, "Well, I never
had a puddle in front of my driveway, but now I have one, and it's
because of the apartment building you built." And sometimes it's
apples and oranges. You know, the previous lack of puddling was a
small rainstorm, and then we have Hurricane Ian, and then, you
know, it's being blamed on the construction project.
But what I want to ask you -- and if you have -- if you want to
add any more detail into it, we don't just sort of put our thumb in the
air and say, "Approved, and let's see what happens."
But if this project was approved, a big chunk of what would
have to be done before shovels went in the ground for the houses
would have to be what you alluded to briefly in the beginning, which
would be significant drainage plan, retention pond, a whole bunch of
things that don't exist now and allows the water to go everywhere.
So can you elaborate on that or even just confirm what I said or
deny?
MR. BOSI: Yes, Commissioner LoCastro. You can see on the
visualizer that red area right now is just a natural area, undeveloped.
December 9, 2025
Page 46
It has no -- it has no stormwater control systems. It has no
engineering plans associated with it.
As Mr. Hurst has indicated, they've done a preliminary
assessment. They will have to work with the Water Management
District to be able to hold water for the required period of time before
it's discharged to the appropriate locations.
So when this project is constructed at the end of the day, that red
area will have an engineered water management system associated
with it which will improve the overall drainage for the area.
Now, what I will say is the Raintree area, the Maple Lane area,
these are older -- older developments so they're a little bit lower
lying. They still will have some drainage issues, but that red area
will be able to be controlled and the discharge rate will be
specifically allocated to the correct areas towards where it drains off
to. So it will be an improvement to the overall water management
system for the area.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have no other
registered speakers. No other comments. We're ready for a motion.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want to do it?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought there
was still somebody else. I'll make a motion to approve as-is.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I just wanted Mr. Yovanovich to sit
there for a few minutes wondering what was going to happen.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Let's let them all stew in their
own juices.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Oh, boy.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I don't think -- I don't think we've
gotten a second yet, have we?
COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes, we do.
December 9, 2025
Page 47
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. All right. There's still an
opportunity to withdraw your second. 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.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you, I think.
Item #9D
ORDINANCE 2025-67: A REZONING FROM A RURAL
AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE RURAL
FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT OVERLAY-RECEIVING
LANDS TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE RURAL FRINGE
MIXED USE DISTRICT OVERLAY-RECEIVING LANDS FOR
THE PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE GREENWAY
FRITCHEY RPUD TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 1,299
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS WITH AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF
±227.09 ACRES, IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEASTERN
INTERSECTION OF GREENWAY ROAD AND FRITCHEY
ROAD IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20220002061] (THIS ITEM IS
A COMPANION TO ITEMS #16B9, #17F, AND #17G) - MOTION
December 9, 2025
Page 48
TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED
BY COMMISSIONER HALL – ADOPTED
Item #9E
ORDINANCE 2025-68 (FLUE); ORDINANCE 2025-69 (CCME):
ORDINANCES AMENDING THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND MAP SERIES TO
ESTABLISH THE GREENWAY-FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL
OVERLAY ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE
AGRICULTURAL/RURAL, RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE
DISTRICT, RECEIVING LANDS, ALLOWING DEVELOPMENT
OF UP TO 1,299 SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY
DWELLING UNITS, INCLUDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING;
AND AMENDING THE CONSERVATION AND COASTAL
MANAGEMENT ELEMENT, POLICY 6.1.7, TO REDUCE THE
LITTORAL SHELF PLANTING REQUIREMENTS. THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY COMPRISES APPROXIMATELY 227.09
ACRES, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEASTERN INTERSECTION
OF GREENWAY ROAD AND FRITCHEY ROAD, IN SECTION 7,
TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA. [PL20220002063] (THIS ITEM IS A COMPANION TO
ITEMS #16B9, #17E, AND #17G) - MOTION TO APPROVE BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER HALL – ADOPTED
Item #9F
RESOLUTION 2025-288: PETITION VAC-PL20240001248, TO
DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY AND
December 9, 2025
Page 49
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE 60-FOOT-WIDE PUBLIC
ROADWAY, LAREDO STREET, AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL
RECORD BOOK 1033, AT PAGES 1087, 1098, 1099, 1103, 1107,
1122, AND 1126 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, LOCATED IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51
SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO
APPROVE THE QUITCLAIM DEEDS AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIR TO EXECUTE QUITCLAIM DEEDS CONVEYING THE
PUBLIC INTEREST IN LAREDO STREET TO CLEAR TITLE,
AND TO ACCEPT THE COMPENSATING RIGHT-OF-WAY
EASEMENTS FROM PETITIONERS. (THIS ITEM IS A
COMPANION TO ITEMS #16B9, #17E, AND #17F) - MOTION TO
APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER HALL – ADOPTED
Item #11D
EXECUTE THE ATTACHED DEVELOPER AGREEMENT WITH
GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND, LLC, AND HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY, INC., (DEVELOPER); TO
COORDINATE THE DEVELOPER’S PROJECT WITH
IMPROVEMENTS TO BOTH GREENWAY ROAD AND
FRITCHEY ROAD. (THIS ITEM IS A COMPANION TO ITEMS
#17E, #17F, AND #17G) - MOTION TO APPROVE BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER HALL – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to our items
that were formerly on the summary and consent agenda, so that is
Item 9E, which is now -- I'm sorry, 17E, which is now 9D; 17F,
which is now 9E; 17G, which is now 9F; and 16B9, which is now
December 9, 2025
Page 50
11D. And so I will read these into the record before we get started.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Before we start on that, we're
going to wind up taking a break here in about 15 or 20 minutes.
Mr. Yovanovich, is there any objection to if we -- we're going to
be in the middle of these petitions. We could either go to something
else for a few minutes, come back after the break and take these items
up so there won't be a --
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm happy to take a break in the middle
of this item if that works, because I know you have another time
sensitive at 11, and I'd rather --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But if I may -- well, let's do what you
normally do, but I do have a question on the presentation.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Well, let's go ahead and
proceed and see where we can get with this.
MS. PATTERSON: All right. Commissioners, so the new 9D,
this is a recommendation to approve a rezoning from rural
agricultural zoning district within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use
District Overlay Receiving Lands to a residential Planned Unit
Development Zoning District within the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use
District Overlay Receiving Lands for the project to be known as the
Greenway Fritchey RPUD to allow development of up to 1,299
residential dwelling units with an affordable -- with affordable
housing. The subject property consisting of 227.09 plus/minus acres
is located in the northeastern intersection Greenway Road and
Fritchey Road in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East,
Collier County, Florida.
Its companion Items are Item 17F, now 9E, which is a
recommendation to approve ordinances amending the Collier County
Growth Management Plan specifically amending the Future Land
Use Element and Map Series to establish the Greenway/Fritchey
December 9, 2025
Page 51
Residential Overlay on property within the Agricultural, Rural, Rural
Fringe Mixed Use District Receiving Land, allowing the
development of up to 1,299 single-family and multifamily dwelling
units, including affordable housing, and amending the Conservation
and Coastal Management Element Policy 6.1.7 to reduce the littoral
shelf planting requirements.
And its next companion is items -- is Item 17G, now 9F. This is
a recommendation to approve Petition VAC-PL20240001248 to
disclaim, renounce, and vacate the County and the public interest in
the 60-foot-wide public roadway Laredo Street as described in
Official Record Book 1033 at Pages 1087, 1098, 1099, 1103, 1107,
1122, and 1126 of the public records of Collier County, Florida,
located in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier
County Florida; to approve the quitclaim deeds, and authorize the
Chair to execute quitclaim deeds conveying the public interest in
Laredo Street to clear title, and to accept the compensating
right-of-way easements from petitioners.
And finally, its last companion item, formerly Item 16B9, now
11D, is a recommendation to approve and execute the attached
developer agreement with Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC, and
Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc., to coordinate the
developer project with improvements to both Greenway Road and
Fritchey Road.
With that, we have to -- sorry. Ex parte, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal.
MS. PATTERSON: I got confused.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah. Formerly summary. Yes,
I do have meetings, meetings, and email.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Meetings and emails as well.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And, Commissioner LoCastro.
December 9, 2025
Page 52
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Meetings and emails.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. And I have the same.
And when Commissioner McDaniel gets back, we'll go through his
ex parte, which most likely will be the same.
MS. PATTERSON: Before you get started, we've got to have
everybody stand to be sworn in by the court reporter, please,
including anybody that's going to provide public comment.
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: Mr. Yovanovich.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you. I did notice one public
speaker. But, Troy, is there anybody else on Zoom?
MR. MILLER: I have no one for this.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No one for this at all?
MR. MILLER: I have no one for -- under any of these item
numbers, Items 9D, E, F, 17s, none of them.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. If there's anyone in the
public, in the audience, that wishes to speak on this item, we'll permit
you to fill out a form right now, but otherwise, we're going to close
the public hearings.
All right. We have no registered speakers. If somebody pops
up, we'll -- oh, I'm sorry.
MR. MILLER: Oh, I am so sorry. I missed Tony Pires, which
is my fault, because I talked to him about this yesterday. Please
forgive me.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. All right. We'll get to
Mr. Pires, then.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'll do my ex -- I
apologize. I got -- I have ex parte on this item, meetings and phone
December 9, 2025
Page 53
calls.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We don't need you to go into
details.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: When nature calls, nature calls.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Where were you?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, I had to --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: What were you doing?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You want to know what I was
doing?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Can we roll the footage? We
have cameras back there.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Mr. Yovanovich.
MR. YOVANOVICH: What I -- what I intend to do is, since we
were on summary agenda, I was going to do a brief overview of the
project, since Commissioner LoCastro pulled us off the summary
agenda and staff pulled us off summary agenda. I'm assuming we
were pulled off the summary agenda because of a letter received from
Attorney Mr. Pires.
I was going to just focus -- do a general overview and then
respond to anything that Mr. Pires may bring up in his comments.
And then obviously any questions. I'm not trying to give the short
shrift, but since this was on the summary agenda --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We're just giving you an
opportunity to make whatever record you want to make.
COMMISSIONER HALL: You got eight minutes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I've only got eight minutes, thank you.
Anyway, for the record, Rich Yovanovich on behalf of the
applicant, which is basically -- and I'm going to use the term loosely.
It's a joint development between the Greenway/Fritchey Land, LLC,
and Habitat for Humanity of Collier County Inc.
Mr. Torres represents Greenway/Fritchey, LLC. And Mike
December 9, 2025
Page 54
Solorzano is here with Habitat. I don't see Lisa at this time, but I may
have missed her. Taylor Whitcomb is also here with Florida Star
Development, which is affiliated with Mr. Torres. Mr. Mulhere is
our professional planner. Norm Trebilcock is our transportation
consultant. Matthew DeFrancesco is our civil engineer.
Mr. Chastain is also one of our planners, and Bethany Brosious is our
environmental consultant for this particular project.
This is the subject property. It's not totally at the end of
Greenway. But it's pretty far down on Greenway where Greenway
interconnects with Fritchey Road. It's a 227-acre parcel of property.
Basically, this portion is owned by Habitat for Humanity, and then
the remainder is owned by Mr. Torres' company.
Bob will take you through the master plan briefly to show you
where these two parcels are. As it's been mentioned, we have four
items related to this project. We have basically two Growth
Management Plan Amendments, one PUD, a road vacation to vacate
this road that really never has been accepted by Collier County, and
in return -- and I'll get into this briefly later in the presentation -- and
in exchange for vacating that road, we're providing additional road
right-of-way for both Fritchey and Greenway, and I'll address it now.
The resolution in your packet needs to be revised to reflect the
warranty deeds from us to the County for the replacement
right-of-way, and then separately there are quit-claim deeds from the
County to us for Laredo, but there was a mix-up in the resolution to
where these were flip-flopped. Your deeds to us were originally
referenced in the resolution. So the resolution's been corrected to
reference that the warranty deeds from us to you are -- is what's
actually occurring in the resolution.
We're requesting 1,299 total units on the project, which is an
overall project density of 5.72 units per acre.
We started -- one of our Growth Management Plan Amendments
December 9, 2025
Page 55
related to the density in the affordable housing prior to the Land
Development Code being amended to update the new matrix. You
had the provision in your Growth Management Plan to allow us to
ask for up to 12.2 units per acre, but you didn't have the amended
matrix. So we started the process before you had amended the matrix
to create our subdistrict that -- now our subdistrict is consistent with
both your existing Growth Management Plan, which is 12.2 units per
acre, and your Land Development Code matrix that would allow us to
go to 6.2 units per acre.
We are providing 20 percent of the units, which is 260 dwelling
units, as for-sale product at the 80 percent and below income
category.
And then one of the other Growth Management Plan
Amendments is related to the littoral plantings. We were going to
consolidate the littoral plantings and provide additional plantings and
reduce the littoral plantings to 10 percent of the lake surface instead
of 30 percent, and your environmental staff has agreed that that is a
better environmental outcome than the current requirements in the
Growth Management Plan.
You've seen both Comp Plan amendments before. This is a
large-scale Comprehensive Plan amendment, so it goes to the State
first, comes back. There were no significant State comments. Then
it comes back here for adoption. So today we're doing the adoption
hearing for the two Growth Management Plan Amendments, and
we're doing the hearing for the PUD rezone.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Mr. Yovanovich, could you repeat
the number of housing units that are going to be workforce housing
or affordable at the 80 percent or below?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Two hundred sixty.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I'm sorry.
MR. YOVANOVICH: 260, two-six-zero.
December 9, 2025
Page 56
So this is probably one of the larger for-sale affordable housing
projects in the county.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Because we've had some
comments concerning single-family homes and that sort of thing, and
so this is part of the puzzle --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- for that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right.
The property is in the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District, not to be
confused with the RLSA. This is in the receiving area portion of the
Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District, which is where development is to
occur, and this is the location where affordable housing was intended
to be provided within the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District.
I didn't get into the details of when this occurred. But again, the
Growth Management Plan, as I'm pointing out, would allow us to ask
for 12.2 units, and we're asking for less than six. And we could get
six bonus units under the current Land Development Code.
The existing zoning is ag. I know Mr. Klatzkow's not going to
be happy with me, but we would like, on the Habitat portion of the
property, to be able to keep ag as interim use until they pull their first
CO. So we'd like to modify the permitted uses to allow ag to stay on
that R2 parcel. I think we could do it anyway, but we just want to
make clear that that's a permitted use and would not be considered a
non -- not conforming use under this. And I apologize for not
bringing this up earlier.
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't have an issue with that. I mean,
until they break ground, you can let them farm.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, he said CO. He didn't talk
about breaking ground.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Breaking ground is fine for the first
residential unit, if that would be acceptable.
December 9, 2025
Page 57
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: At the point of breaking ground on
the first residential unit?
MR. YOVANOVICH: In the R2 piece.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: In the R2 piece, it will be
considered R2 as opposed to agricultural. I don't have an issue with
that, but I did have an issue if it was going to be the CO.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. That's fine. That's fine.
I lost my train of thought. This is the overall master plan. I'll
have Bob come up here and briefly go over it. But this is the R2
piece we were just discussing. That's the piece owned by Habitat.
This is the piece owned by Mr. Torres' company.
With that, we'll turn it over to Bob to go through -- obviously,
you're at your --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. Well, let me see if there are
any questions, because I don't know if we need to go through any
detail on the master plan unless there's some questions on the master
plan. Let's go ahead and see if -- is there a staff report? And then
we'll get to the speaker. We're going to take a break, but I think we
can finish this and then take a break until our 11 o'clock time-certain.
So let's see where we go.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
And real quickly, staff is supporting the petitions. This was
recommended by the Planning Commission. We can answer any
questions that you may have.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. No one is lit up for
questions. Let's go to public comment.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Pires, Tony Pires. And, again, Tony, I'm
sorry. I don't know -- brain fade.
MR. PIRES: No problem, Troy. Thank you.
Members of the Board, staff, thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Good morning.
December 9, 2025
Page 58
MR. PIRES: Tony Pires with the law firm of Woodwards, Pires,
Lombardo. Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity.
I'm representing Fiddler's Creek Community Development
District No. 1 and Fiddler's Creek Community Development District
No. 2. They are the two community development districts for the
Fiddler's Creek Community, 951 and 41 in Collier County.
My focus is and my client's concern is in one item, one item
alone, a fair-share contribution for the traffic signal at the intersection
of Sandpiper, 41, and Greenway. The prior rezonings that occurred
in this area, the 7-Eleven that's currently at the northwest corner of
Greenway and 41 was required to have a fair-share contribution, and
that's estimated to be approximately 16 percent of the cost of the
signal.
There was another rezoning you had earlier this year in
February, I believe, the Tamiami Trail East rezoning that they were
also required to have a fair-share contribution, and it's estimated
theirs might be 9 percent.
At the present time, the traffic signal is estimated to cost $1.9
million. My understanding is, from talking with the chairman of one
of the districts, Mr. Schmitt, that contract is not yet closed out. And
what we're asking for is a fair-share contribution. And in my letter
that I sent to you last week, I suggested language, the language that's
similar to the language, almost exactly the language that was in the
Tamiami Trail rezoning, and that was on the second page of my
letter. I have a separate sheet of that language if you-all would like to
see that now. But I have provided that in my letter earlier.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Why don't you give that to the
County Manager, and she can put it up on the visualizer.
MR. PIRES: Okay. I'll give one to Terri, because I always get
in trouble with the court reporter.
And with regards to that -- and I do apologize for -- I had asked
December 9, 2025
Page 59
back in October 21st, after the October 16th Planning Commission
meeting, for a draft of the developer agreement, because the PUD
says transportation commitments, as far as this would go with regards
to that, would be in a companion developer agreement. And there
was no developer agreement in the Planning Commission agenda
packet for October 16th. The Planning Commission did not see, to
my knowledge, a developer agreement draft.
I asked for it on October 21st. I got a response back later on. It
was, like, in November, I asked again, "Where is it?" and it was -- the
response I received from staff was, "We anticipate the DCA being on
the December 9th agenda" but do not have an executed document yet.
And then I said, "Please send whatever drafts you have." And
then I got tied up in other matters so I did not make another request
until November 25th. I made a public records request. I said
drafts -- may I have one more minute?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah.
MR. MILLER: You have thirty seconds, at least.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We'll let you go a little longer.
You've got a specific issue with an agreement. So unless there's
some objection from the Board.
MR. PIRES: Thank you very much.
And so then I asked for -- and on December 1st I received the
drafts. And then last week, December 3rd, the agenda packet had the
development agreement signed by the developer back November 6th,
I believe. So that's when the letter went out in
November -- December 4th.
And so to that extent, that why at that time I requested -- and
appreciate it being pulled off the consent and summary agendas.
I'm not here on the vacation issue. It's not the GMPA, but it's
the rezoning, and not the rezoning per se that's the problem. It's the
developer agreement that's a companion item to the rezoning. We'd
December 9, 2025
Page 60
like to have the specific language requested in there for a fair-share
contribution.
And that's the request of both Fiddler's Creek Community
Development District No. 1 and No. 2. There's approximately 3,000
residential units and thousands of residents.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. I don't see anybody lit
up at this point.
Mr. Yovanovich, do you have a response?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. First of all, for the record, I don't
like the position my client was put in to have to respond to this
without being contacted at all ahead of time. I don't think that was
fair or appropriate to learn about this on a Friday afternoon.
So putting that aside, let's talk a little bit of history. The
property that Mr. Pires' client now is the two CDDs was originally
approved in 1984 as the Marco Shores PUD. And since 1984, there
was a commitment for that property that was now known as Fiddler's
Creek to pay for and provide traffic signals at all new project
entrances on 951 and U.S. 41. So since 1984, it's been a financial
obligation of that project to provide those traffic signals.
In 1996, the PUD was amended to specifically say it could be
the CDD. So for 29 years it's been a CDD financial obligation to
provide those traffic signals so that the original development that got
approved with those commitments could go forward.
The document that was attached to Mr. Pires' letter was a 2018
version of the Fiddler's Creek PUD, which would lead me, when I
read it, to think that's when the commitment occurred. But it didn't.
It occurred in 1984.
This traffic signal that is currently operational purely came
about because of the traffic generated from the 1984 project that has
been subsequently amended seven times.
If we didn't build a single unit, that traffic signal would still be
December 9, 2025
Page 61
there. So we're not the cause of that traffic signal. That happens
throughout projects that get developed in Collier County. Developers
have obligations to build certain infrastructure because of that
development. Developers don't come back and say, "You know
what, there's other people now using that infrastructure. Make
someone else share in those expenses."
The benefit that was provided was an approval and the -- they
were required to provide those traffic signals. Because two other
developers decided that it was in their financial interest to capitulate
at a Planning Commission meeting to a fair-share obligation doesn't
mean my client should capitulate.
And, in fact, there was a lot of discussion at the Planning
Commission meeting -- and I have the minutes -- at which the
question came about, what was my client willing to pay for? And my
client said he's willing to pay for the upgrades he's going to be
required to make to that intersection. He's not going to ask anybody
else to share even though they're going to benefit from driving
through that intersection and turn lanes he's going to extend. He's not
going to agree. He's not going to anybody else, not going to show up
at someone else's zoning hearing and say, "Please make them share in
what I agreed I would do." We're not going to do that.
We said that at the meeting, and we said we were not willing to
pay for the existing traffic signal. But there's no legal requirement
for my client to pay for the traffic signal. My client's going to have
to make further improvements to that intersection at his expense, and
we think it's inappropriate to require us to now share in an expense
and an obligation that the CDD had at that time. I think it would be
unprecedented to now come in after a signal's been accepted by the
County and now say, "Guess what, stroke a check to someone else."
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We're at a little bit of a
difficult situation up here. We've got two attorneys that are arguing
December 9, 2025
Page 62
about the -- a fair-share agreement that we probably don't have a
whole lot of knowledge about.
What's the pleasure of the Board? We have a couple of options.
We can simply move forward with the vote on the approval as-is, we
can direct the two attorneys to sit down and try to work something
out, or we can pick a -- pick a side right now and say Mr. Pires is
correct and require the agreement, or Mr. Yovanovich is correct, so...
Mr. LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman.
I'll give you my feeling on it. I'm prepared to make a motion. I
mean, I think we all want to ensure the right thing happens. You
know, Commissioner Hall, that's one of his -- you know, my line is
always "the juice isn't worth the squeeze," and, you know, he always
says, you know, "Hey, what would I want to have, you know, done to
me?"
And that does hold water, but also what's in writing, even if it
goes back many, many years, also holds water because we have to be
very careful about precedent.
And so some notes that I wrote here -- and then I invite either
side to tell me if I'm incorrect, and maybe we do that after the break.
I'm not sure. But I'll just throw my position out there.
I think current language mandates for no obligation for your
client to cost share anything. So it might be a nice-to-do. And if
you-all are, you know, working together and, you know, you want to
help fair-share something -- but I think your client's got a whole
bunch of expenses coming down the pike that nobody else is sharing
in that is his responsibility. And I'm not saying other people have to
share.
So I think the way things -- this is written, it might sound very
complicated with all these slides, but we've met at great length. I
read Tony's letter at great length, and I talked to the staff quite a bit.
December 9, 2025
Page 63
I think this would be a nice-to-do, but we've got to be careful of
nice-to-dos because then it sets the precedent.
I can see reaching out to existing businesses already built that
are benefiting and should have a fair-share cost for the light, but
you're not one of those. And so I look at it as -- like, I'll go back to
what I said at the beginning, this would be a nice-to-do, but I
wouldn't want to mandate it. If you-all do want to get together and
see if, you know, you want to give each other a Christmas present,
that's great, but I don't support that either because then it sets a bad
precedent.
And so I think the way I read the language, the way I look at
past history, which does matter even though we're quoting 2018 and
1986 and all, all that is the direction. And if somebody wanted to
change it, then we should have changed it. So I'm happy with the
way this is. I'm happy with not mandating you to do fair-share.
And, you know, I'll just throw one hypothetical out there. If the
two attorneys switched podiums right now, Tony, I bet you you
would fight for your client to not fair-share anything, and that would
be being a good attorney.
So I look at it is if we're really trying to do the right thing, it
shouldn't matter if we switch here. You would both be in agreement
for some sort of fair-share, and I don't think you would be.
And then in the end, like I said, I just go back to the language
here, and I think the language says that this isn't something your
client has the responsibility to pick up the tab.
I would -- I would go after those other entities that are already
established and make sure they're all paying their fair-share, and then
I look forward to all the improvements that are coming down that
might even exceed any check you might write now if we mandated
that. But I personally don't support mandating that. I think "as it is"
is the motion I would make.
December 9, 2025
Page 64
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Chairman.
I'm along the same lines. Nothing was ever written in the
original 1984. The first light that said, "Hey, if there's any future
development, then we're going to require fair-share."
The client -- your client, Mr. Yovanovich, has already agreed to
improve the light at his cost for any additional load and any
addition -- and the other side's going to be able to benefit, like you
mentioned.
I don't think -- and Ms. Scott can probably verify, but I don't
think that we've ever clawed back to a former developer any
requirements to cost-share in any improvements made to our road
system.
MS. SCOTT: For the record, Trinity Scott, Transportation
Management Services department head.
Commissioner Hall, you're correct. We went back and looked
through our tracking system. I've been in Transportation Planning
since 2015, and I can't think of a time when we have hit a
development that wasn't already approved for a traffic signal, so
someone that came in after the signal was operational. We looked
back at our records. We couldn't find any time where the County had
done that.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Okay. Thank you.
You know, I certainly understand the ask. There's no harm in
that. And it makes -- it makes good sense, but I think in this case that
I'll definitely support not making any cost-sharing.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
And I kind of am in line with my two colleagues up here that
shared kind of the same sentiments I was going to speak upon. And I
think the keyword "precedence" here. I think this is something
December 9, 2025
Page 65
that -- you know, that I surely don't want to be part of setting a
precedence in the future or even having people come back later or
people that already have done construction saying, "Well, where's my
fair share now?" You know, so it's just -- that's just a slippery slope I
surely don't want to go down, especially hearing from staff and
hearing from our attorneys that this is something we've never really
done before in the history of the Board.
It's something usually you agree on at the time you're making
your negotiations to get your projects over the finish line. And when
you agree to that, that's -- it's your commitment. It's not committing
to say, "Well, we're going to do it because I think somebody might
build something 10 years from now, and they're going to help us out."
You know, that's not what's in front of the dais that day. It's pretty
much a done deal. So I kind of feel the same way.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro, and then
we'll wrap this up.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Well, having said that, I
appreciate the comments of my colleagues, and I certainly agree with
it.
The person who came to the podium before -- and we've had
these comments before -- this is why we do pull things off of the
consent and summary, not only so that you guys can make your case
but also so that it doesn't look like one person's pushing all the
buttons. You know, you see that after we all read this in
private -- you know, it's not like we had a big meeting together -- we
all come to a very similar conclusion.
So unless there's any other comments, I'll make a
motion -- there's so many numbers on here, so I don't know how we
have to -- have to do it, but -- if we have to go through each one or --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: No. Unless there's some objection
from the petitioner, we will take Item 17E, 17F, 17G, and 16BH, the
December 9, 2025
Page 66
Greenway/Fritchey residential Planned Unit Development projects,
which are now 9D, 9E, 9F, and 11D, we'll take that in one motion --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Fine.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- if there's no objection.
I agree with my colleagues as well. I feel a little uncomfortable
being here at this point to try to negotiate something. And I would
say this to both attorneys, in the future if there's an issue like this, let
us know much further in advance than a few days before a hearing.
That's not a criticism. It's just because I understand this probably
came to you rather suddenly as well. But it puts us in a very
awkward position that I personally don't like to be in trying to decide
who's, you know, being correct and who's not.
So I support the motion. So the motion will be to that effect?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yes, sir. Motion for all as-is.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER HALL: Second.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and a second.
Seeing no further discussion, 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.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We'll take a break until 11. We'll
take up the time-certain at 11 o'clock.
MR. PIRES: Thank you for your consideration.
December 9, 2025
Page 67
(A recess was had from 10:44 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.)
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: If you'd please take your seats,
we're going to reconvene. We're on the 11 o'clock time-certain.
Item #11B
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE FOR FUTURE
CONSIDERATION AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 74
OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES, THE COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE, PROVIDING FOR THE
INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING EIGHT
(8) IMPACT FEE STUDIES: “COLLIER COUNTY ROAD
IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDY” (DATED OCTOBER 8, 2025);
THE “COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
(EMS) IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDY” (DATED OCTOBER 8,
2025); THE “COLLIER COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT
IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDY” (DATED OCTOBER 8, 2025);
THE “COLLIER COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDY” (DATED OCTOBER 8, 2025);
THE “COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDY” (DATED OCTOBER 8, 2025);
THE “COLLIER COUNTY LIBRARIES IMPACT FEE UPDATE
STUDY” (DATED OCTOBER 8, 2025); THE “COLLIER COUNTY
PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDY”
(DATED OCTOBER 8, 2025); AND THE “COLLIER COUNTY
SCHOOL IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDY” (DATED OCTOBER 8,
2025); AMENDING IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULES ONE,
THREE, FOUR, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE, AND TEN OF
APPENDIX A; PROVIDING ADDITIONAL ELIGIBILITY
December 9, 2025
Page 68
REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTICIPATION IN IMPACT FEE
PROGRAMS; PROVIDING IMPACT FEE STUDY UPDATE
REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE FOR ALL RATE
SCHEDULE DECREASES ON FEBRUARY 1, 2026, FOR PHASE
ONE, AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE FOR ALL RATE SCHEDULE
INCREASES, NEW AND/OR REPLACEMENT LAND USE
CATEGORY RATES SHALL BE DELAYED TO MAY 1, 2026,
FOR PHASE TWO; MAY 1, 2027, FOR PHASE THREE; MAY 1,
2028, FOR PHASE FOUR; AND MAY 1, 2029, FOR PHASE FIVE.
(GINO SANTABARBARA, MANAGER - IMPACT FEES) -
MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. That brings us to Item 11B, our
11 o'clock time-certain. This is a recommendation to authorize the
County Attorney to advertise for future consideration an ordinance
amending Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances, the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance,
providing for the incorporation by reference of the following eight
impact fee studies: Collier County Road Impact Fee Update Study
dated October 8th, 2025; the Collier County Emergency Medical
Services Impact Fee Update Study dated October 8th, 2025; the
Collier County Law Enforcement Impact Fee Update Study dated
October 8, 2025; the Collier County Correctional Facilities Impact
Fee Update Study dated October 8th, 2025; the Collier County
Government Buildings Impact Fee Update Study dated October 8th,
2025; the Collier County Libraries Impact Fee Update Study dated
October 8th, 2025; and the Collier County School -- I'm sorry. I lost
December 9, 2025
Page 69
my place, the Collier County Parks and Recreation Impact Fee
Update Study dated October 8th, 2025; the Collier County School
Impact Fee Update Study dated October 8th, 2025; amending Impact
Fee Rate Schedule 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of Appendix A;
providing additional eligibility requirements for participation in
impact fee programs; providing impact fee study update
requirements; providing for conflict and severability; providing for
inclusion in the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances; and
providing for an effective date for all rate schedule decreases on
February 1st, 2026, for Phase 1, and the effective date for all rate
schedule increases, new and/or replacement land-use categories, shall
be delayed until May 1st, 2026, for Phase 1 [sic]; May 1st, 2027, for
Phase 2 [sic]; May 1st, 2028, for Phase 3 [sic]; and May 1st, 2029,
for Phase 4 -- or 5. I got that out of order. Apologies.
Gino Santabarbara, your impact fee manager, is here to begin
the presentation.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. While he's getting ready,
Mr. Klatzkow, I'm going to ask you a question concerning Senate Bill
180. We received a letter from the CBIA asking whether or not
Senate Bill 180 applies. And I'm going to ask you that question at
sometime during the hearing, not right now, but just so you have an
opportunity to check on that.
Yes, sir.
MR. SANTABARBARA: Good morning, Commissioners. For
the record, my name is Gino Santabarbara. I'm your impact fee
manager.
Amy went through most of the highlights of the amendment to
Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, but I
did create a quick slide just going over the eight updated impact fee
studies.
Quickly, it adopts and incorporates by reference the eight
December 9, 2025
Page 70
updated impact fee studies. It amends the corresponding impact fee
rate schedules. In addition, the amendment establishes clear
eligibility requirements for participation in county impact fee
programs, and it clarifies our impact fee study update provisions to
ensure consistency with Florida Statute 163.31801. It also amends
the -- and includes the standard conflict and severability provisions,
and it sets the effective dates, as mentioned before.
Today with us we have Megan Camp with Alfred Benesch &
Company. She's going to walk you through the next set of slides
summarizing the methodology between the eight impact fees studies,
and she's going to highlight the key changes in the proposed fee
schedules.
And with that, Megan Camp.
MS. CAMP: Good morning, Megan Camp with Benesch.
We have a brief presentation starting with the background
purpose and then going through the technical study and next steps.
The purpose of the impact fee study is to reflect the current data
and also the most localized data which is part of the legal
requirements related to impact fees. Impact fees, by definition, are a
one-time capital charge to new development. They cover the cost of
new capital projects. They cannot be used for maintenance or
operations, but they do free up general tax dollars for those programs,
so they indirectly help them. They help implement the capital
improvement plans.
Impact fees were governed by case law for a long time in
Florida, and then in 2006 we had the Impact Fee Act passed. It had
multiple changes since then. Some of its key requirements are that
the fees be based on most recent and localized data, and "recent" is
defined as data available within the past four years.
There's a minimum of 90-day notice requirement once the fees
are adopted before they can be implemented. The law allows local
December 9, 2025
Page 71
governments to discount and waive fees for qualified affordable
workforce housing. And if there's any challenge to the fee now, the
local governments have to show that their fees are correct. It used to
be the other way around.
In 2021, we had House Bill 337 pass. It put some limits on fee
increases and also it requires some phasing of those increases. So if
the increases between -- up to 25 percent, it has to be over two years;
25 to 50 percent over four years. They cannot be increased more than
50 percent, and they cannot be increased more than once every four
years.
There's an exception clause if the local government shows
extraordinary circumstances, holds two public workshops discussing
those circumstances, and if the increase is approved by two-thirds of
the governing body, it could be higher than 50 percent or it could
be -- and may not need to be phased.
We had another bill this year that passed, Senate Bill 1080 -- not
180 but 1080 -- that made use of this clause more difficult, and it
basically needs -- as of January it requires that the increase is
approved by unanimous vote and also the local governments that
haven't increased their fees over the past five years don't qualify to
use this clause.
The technical studies use a consumption-based methodology,
which is very common in Florida, is also your adopted methodology.
It charges new growth based on the value of the infrastructure that it's
consuming, and fees are calculated in a manner that they ensure that
new development is not charged for existing deficiencies, which is
one of the legal requirements.
So basic formula looks at cost to add capacity, so that's really
the value of your capital assets. From that, any other revenue sources
that are going to be contributed by future development is subtracted
so that we are not charging new growth twice, once for the fee and
December 9, 2025
Page 72
once for the tax. And then that net cost is multiplied by demand,
which is measured in terms of travel for transportation, student
generation rates for schools, and population for the other fees.
The impact fee has several components. It starts with
documenting the capital inventory for each service area, reviews the
service area boundaries, level of service. Cost component reflects the
cost of providing that capital inventory. Credits component accounts
for any other revenue sources that are being contributed from new
development. And finally, demand component takes the net cost and
distributes it among land uses based on their impact.
So this chart shows the calculated impact fee by service area.
And you can see the total calculated impact fee for single-family
home. Like, mid-size single-family home is about 30,500. About
half of this is from schools, and schools and roads together make up
about almost 80 percent of that. They tend to be very expensive in
terms of capital, and that's what is reflected in the fees. Other
services such as law, EMS, so on, tend to be more operationally
heavy. In the case of schools, they are both operationally and capital
heavy. And then in the case of nonresidential, again, transportation
makes the most of that fee.
This chart is showing the calculated fee for several example land
uses. Current adopted fee, the percent change, and then the
maximum allowable fee under Florida Statutes with that 50 percent
limit applied to each service area. So currently, a mid-size
single-family home is paying about 23,000. That could go up to
27,900 or so at the most, which is a 22 percent increase.
And then you can kind of see in the case of nonresidential, some
are going down because of the changes to the demand variables and
some are increasing.
So in terms of next steps, we are here today to get your input,
direction, and answer any questions and move forward with the
December 9, 2025
Page 73
implementation process.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. I don't see anybody lit
up for any questions at this point.
Ms. Patterson, do you have anything to add before we go to
public comment?
MS. PATTERSON: No, sir. I'll hold my comment till after the
public speakers.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Do we have any public speakers?
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. We have six registered speakers. Your
first speaker is Amy Perwien. She'll be followed by Stephanie
Lucarelli. Amy has been ceded three additional minutes from Nancy
Chism.
Nancy, can you indicate you're present?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Thank you.
Amy, I hope I said the last name right. And you have six
minutes.
MS. PERWIEN: You did. Nice job.
My name is Amy Perwien, and I am speaking on behalf of the
Education Ambassadors. We are a coalition founded by the
American Association of University Women, Greater Naples
Chapter; the Interfaith Alliance of Southwest Florida; and the League
of Women Voters, Collier County. Our local organizations have
come together to support public education in Collier County. And
the statement I am about to read has been approved by all three of our
local organizations.
First of all, thank you to the County Commissioners and county
staff for working to update the impact fees to meet the future needs of
our A-rated school district. We appreciate that the County has spent
the time and money to hire an expert consultant to examine growth
projections and the impact of this growth.
December 9, 2025
Page 74
The technical report issued by the consultant is thorough and
sound, and we strongly encourage this board to adopt the school
impact fee as recommended by the expert consultant.
Hopefully all of us understand the importance of strong public
schools to our community. The majority of our community's children
are educated in our public schools. Our students are the next
generation of workers, and a well-educated workforce is important
for making Collier a strong county.
Excellent schools also attract new residents to our county, and
the quality of a school district is a major consideration when families
decide to relocate. Families are important because they often include
workers that keep this county functioning.
For residents that do not have children in our schools, good
schools support and enhance individual property values. Further, our
school buildings function as hurricane shelters during times of
emergency. Well-funded and well-built schools benefit everyone in
our community.
The intent of impact fees is to charge a new build its
proportionate share of the cost. Current homeowners should not
carry the financial burden of building new schools to handle new
growth.
The impact fees were last updated 10 years ago, and much has
changed since then. This county has experienced growth which
resulted in the district needing to build three new schools. Due to
responsible budgeting and planning, CCPS paid for the new schools
without borrowing money and has saved the taxpayers $40 million;
however, based on the projections for the future, this trajectory will
not continue. Without an increase in impact fees, the District is at
risk of needing to borrow money for schools at a time when interest
rates are high and educational funding from the State of Florida has
been flat. Today you have the opportunity to help secure the future
December 9, 2025
Page 75
of our school district by adopting the impact fees recommended by
the expert consultant. We hope this Commission takes the education
of our children seriously and adopts the impact fees at the fully
recommended rate.
And I now would like to speak from -- on my own behalf. So
I'm a CCPS parent and taxpayer. Our family moved here because of
the schools. And, in fact, we decided to not move to another city that
I will not name because we were concerned about that school district.
My children have received an excellent education in our Collier
County Schools and have decided to stay in Florida and attend
Florida universities. As a parent, I hope they want to return and
contribute to our local community.
When we moved here more than 10 years, we purchased a new
house. I at the time did not realize that impact fees were included in
the cost of the home, but I would not have cared. The additional cost
was minimal, but the impact was great. The fees help the District
continue its important work of educating our next generation.
We should all recognize that the students we educate in our
schools today will be the ones working throughout our county.
They'll be in our tourism industry and service industry. They'll work
in our businesses, in our local government. They'll be in our doctors’
offices, our hospitals, and our healthcare facilities. Public education
is a public good for all residents of Collier County.
Having attended personally most of the school board meetings
over the past three years, I have seen how well the District manages
taxpayer funds. I strongly encourage you to support the revised
impact fees as proposed. These fees were determined by careful and
thorough study. Our students, both current and future, are counting
on your support. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Stephanie Lucarelli. She'll
December 9, 2025
Page 76
be followed by Tim Moshier.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Good morning.
MS. LUCARELLI: Good morning, gentlemen. Stephanie
Lucarelli, a long-time resident, mother of four, and Collier County
School Board chair.
The recommendation for the impact fees was a unanimous vote
by the entire school board, so just to let you know.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak about impact fees. As
we all know, Collier County is experiencing significant growth.
Many people choose to move here because of three things: Our safe
community, our quality healthcare, and our high-quality schools.
Even people who no longer have school-age children continue to
recognize that our high-quality schools signify high quality of life,
enhanced property values, lower crime rates, improved economic
development, and an overall greater investment in our area.
In addition, CCPS has responded to and is committed to
supporting the needs of this community. We have created specific
programs to help our businesses by graduating skilled workers who
can move directly into careers right after high school. As an
example, we are -- we will be graduating 32 RN nurses at the end of
August. Even our developers and our builders are benefiting from
some of these programs. We have construction programs within our
schools.
Impact fees are vital funds that allow us to address the growing
needs of our school system without overburdening our current
taxpayers. These fees charged to new development are specifically
designated for funding school infrastructure such as new classrooms,
schools, facilities, and transportation. In essence, they help build the
educational foundation needed for our expanding population. Fully
funded impact fees ensure that the developers benefiting from and
contributing to the growth of our county are also helping to fund the
December 9, 2025
Page 77
necessary resources that come with it.
I understand how costs of building have been increasing. The
high school that we just built three years ago cost us $97 million. If
we were to build that school today, just as another county in Florida
is trying to mimic that exact model, only actually a little bit smaller,
it is $200 million. Being able to pay cash for that school saved the
taxpayers over $40 million.
We've also just built an elementary school, and we have another
elementary school coming online for next August.
While the new high school and middle school are not yet on the
five-year plan, we know they will be coming as our middle schools
are just under capacity, and Palmetto Ridge High School is over
100 percent capacity even though we just built a new high school.
In closing, I urge you to consider the implications of funding
impact fees for CCPS and approve the requested rate. Let us
continue to work together to ensure our growing community
maintains exceptional education for our children and positive
outcomes for our residents. By supporting these impact fees, you're
not investing in our schools but all of Collier County.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Tim Moshier. He'll be
followed by Amelia Vasquez.
MR. MOSHIER: I would just like to thank you guys for
consideration of the impact fees and passing that. Just a little bit of
history on that, we have built three new schools in the last three
years, four years on that, and we've -- that's all been paid for by
impact fees.
Just a little bit of history lesson, we have just -- this year we'll be
paying off our bonds at 38 -- 36 to $38 million a year. So looking
forward to have these paid back. The impact fees to cover that would
December 9, 2025
Page 78
be greatly appreciated. And growth should pay for growth. I've been
working in this county since 2001, and as you all know, we have just
grown incredibly. I mean, NCH, I used to deal with all the hospitals,
built NCH North. And everyone kind of laughed saying, "We'll
never use that hospital." It's at capacity now, and then we used to run
trucks down Immokalee and Oil Well Road, and there was virtually
no development out there, and you can see how much it's gone. All
the development has given more residents, more schools, and more
everything else.
Now, the money that we're saving from when we get finished
with the bonds are now what we're going to put back into the schools,
because it's been over 20 years, and that's going to pay for the new air
conditioning systems and everything else, the maintenance of the
building, because it's on a 20 -- about 20-year term run for buildings.
So I greatly appreciate this, and thank you, and have a nice day.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Amelia Vasquez, and she'll
be followed by Diane van Parys.
MS. VASQUEZ: Good morning, Commissioners and Chair
Saunders. For the record, my name is Amelia Vasquez. I'm the
executive officer for the Collier Building Industry Association.
CBIA and our impact task force have spent several months
reviewing the proposed impact fee updates. We monitor DSAC and
participate and productivity committee meeting, met with County and
School District staff, and reviewed the Benesch studies and the CCPS
Capacity Improvement Plan and the Florida Impact Fee Act.
Our concerns focus on three areas. First, alignment between the
proposed school impact fees and CCPS capital plan. The CIP shows
76.4 million in reserves over the next five years, about 95 million in
projected school impact fee revenue, and no new schools
projected -- programmed until 2029. Only a transportation facility is
December 9, 2025
Page 79
scheduled.
The impact fee requires that recent localized data between four
years and a clear nexus between new development and additional
student stations and the user revenue. We're not alleging
noncompliance from the CCPS, but CCPS's own planning document
raises reasonable questions about near-term need and the balance.
Second, underlying assumptions in the school impact fee study.
The study assumes 75,000 per square acres in future school sites, but
several communities east of 951 have binding school and civic site
agreements for 22,500 per acre. If future sites will be required at
one-third of the assumed cost, per student capital cost, and therefore,
the fee may be overstated.
CBIA requests a list of contracted school or civic sites and their
pricing and a sensitivity analysis applying those actual prices.
Third, the SB180 and the need for a written legal interpretation.
There's the statewide uncertainty in multiple jurisdictions, including
Naples, are in litigation.
County counsel has formally advised that SB180 does not apply
to the impact fees, but SB180 restricts local governments from
adopting land-use regulations more restrictive or burdensome than
those ineffective [sic] on a specific date.
Given the ambiguity, CBIA requests a written interpretation
explaining why SB180 does not apply where impact fees intersect
with the LDC and County code, and how the County determines
whether a fee adjustment may function as a land-use regulation.
In summary, CBIA respects and asks the Board to delay the
proposed school impact fee increases until the CIP reserve strategy
and fee models are reconciled on record, direct staff and CCPS to
provide the requested land cost and capacity analysis, and request a
written SB180 interpretation.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
December 9, 2025
Page 80
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
Mr. Klatzkow, this is where I would ask you the question. I
don't need a written report or anything. But they raised an issue, and
I just wanted to have you say something on the record as to whether
SB180 applies, and if it does, in what capacity.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, I've taken the time to review SB180.
I do not think it applies to us, not to this matter anyway.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. You don't think it does. So
does it or does it not?
MR. KLATZKOW: It does not.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. I just didn't want to leave
you any room to maneuver there.
MR. MILLER: We have one final registered speaker, Diane van
Parys.
MS. van PARYS: Thank you, Board of County Commissioners.
Diane van Parys, 15-year resident. ZIP Code 34119. That's what you
have to do at the Naples City Council.
I will be speaking for the increase on the impact fees as it relates
to CCPS. I know we're looking at approving to notice it. I wanted to
let you know I'm on the audit committee of the Collier County Public
School Board, and as you know, impact fees were last changed in
2015. A lot has changed in Collier County over the last 10 years.
Aubrey Rogers High School was built for cash, as was said by
previous speakers, for the 97 million, and today there are over 1600
students attending that high school.
Bear Creek Elementary opened this past August at a cost of
83 million, paid for with no debt, and 600 students are attending that
school.
Ave Maria Elementary is scheduled to open in August 2026 with
an anticipation in being built for 900 students. Originally it was
planned for 440 students, and this also will be paid for with no debt.
December 9, 2025
Page 81
CCPS is an excellent steward of the taxpayer dollars. They will
be debt free by February 2026. They clearly -- this clearly shows
their fiscal financial responsibility of the CCPS School Board. Also,
CCPS has been recognized again this year with the following
financial department awards: Certificate of achievement for
excellence in financial reporting from the Government Finance
Officers Association of the United States and Canada; that's GFOA.
Also, the Certificate of Excellence in Financial Reporting from the
Association of School Business Officials International. This really
tells you what's happening.
I want to share a few facts about what's happening around the
state. Duval County School Board had a $100 million deficit '24/'25,
and they need to close 90 schools. Broward County had a $65
million deficit, '24/'25, and they need to close or repurpose 35 schools
this year.
Orange County has a school board [sic] building moratorium
until 2031.
Close to home, Lee County School Board has had a .5 tax -- this
is known as the half-penny tax -- since 2018. You know, we're not
going to have any pennies anymore because November 12th they
eliminated the pennies being made at the U.S. mint. That's for
their -- that's -- that .5 percent is for their schools for buildings.
In Collier County, a tax-neutral referendum was passed in 2024
with 84-percent-plus voters approving that school district to reduce
.35 mill in capital taxes and increase up to a 35 percent mill in
operating. So that was tax neutral, and in the state of Florida --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Don't worry about the time. Just
take whatever time you need to finish up.
MS. van PARYS: In the state of Florida, 47 counties have a
surtax for schools, and there are 67 counties. Florida -- Collier
County has zero. Once again, it was the tax-neutral referendum.
December 9, 2025
Page 82
And looking at the future landscape of Collier County with
growth that is protected, there's a definite need to increase our impact
fees. In fact, the study that was done actually shows that the
recommended impact fees are higher but the limit, due to state
statute, is 50 percent. And the maximum based on the findings for a
single-family home was $15,757 for the impact fee for schools.
The actual allowed, due to the 50 percent requirement, is
$13,184. That's approximately $2,500 below the study's findings. So
I wanted to make you understand that as well.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Chairman.
I'd like staff to bring up that chart. What is the -- and my
question is, what is the percentages of the overall increase for the
school district compared to all of the other areas like EMS, law
enforcement?
MR. SANTABARBARA: Troy, can you go to Slide 64 -- or 65.
MR. MILLER: I'm not sure what slide we're on.
MR. SANTABARBARA: Sorry. We came prepared. We have
backup slides for everything just in case.
So this is a -- this is an actual cost with -- for a home under
4,000 square feet with water and sewer all encompasses together all
in one package. The last -- the last column represents the percentage
of the $4,974.39 increase, which is -- which equates to 14.94 percent
overall increase from the current adopted to the proposed, but school
represents 88.35 percent of that total.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Okay. And, Ms. Vasquez, I have a
question. We talked yesterday, but I'm a little bit fuzzy, and I want to
see if you can -- you mentioned that they had 75 million in reserves.
And if we do not increase the impact fees, they'll go to 95 million in
December 9, 2025
Page 83
reserves --
MS. VASQUEZ: They'll collect 95 --
COMMISSIONER HALL: -- or 95 additional?
MS. VASQUEZ: -- according to the records. Collecting 95
million.
COMMISSIONER HALL: In addition to the 75 in reserves?
MS. VASQUEZ: Correct, if that is correct.
MR. SANTABARBARA: So we actually have a school board
representative here.
MS. VASQUEZ: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Yeah, because I -- I want to get it
clear.
MR. ANTONACCI: Good morning, Commissioners, thank
you. John Antonacci, for the record.
So the numbers Ms. Vasquez is referring to are the numbers in
our five-year plan. By 2029, we would have that amount in our
reserves.
So that's -- the model that we use is we save -- we collect about
$20 million per year currently in impact fees. And so in our five-year
plan, we currently have one new transportation facility scheduled to
be built, in 2027/'28. That will cost about $40 million. So our impact
fee reserves would be used to build that new transportation facility.
And then we update our five-year Capital Improvement Plan
every year. So the next one will be coming up in May 2026. In
the -- in the five- to 10-year window, that's when we're going to see
the next round of growth. So we're going to have a new elementary
school, a new middle school, and potentially another high school.
So what we do in the meantime is we save up those dollars
because impact fees can only be used for new growth and can only be
used to build new schools and new facilities. And we have a
seven-year time frame to use those funds.
December 9, 2025
Page 84
So we save those funds, and then when the need arises, we have
them available to build those new schools.
As some of the public speakers mentioned earlier, the costs have
skyrocketed really since the last impact fee increase in 2015. And
important to note, in 2015 when the school impact fee rates were
adopted, they were not adopted at the recommended rate. They were
actually adopted at a lower rate. So that right there kind of put us
behind the ball.
So the last three schools, as was mentioned, we used -- utilized
the impact fees, in 2023, for that Aubrey Rogers $97 million, which
today would cost $200 million, Bear Creek Elementary at 83 million,
and Ave Maria at another 80 million. So that's the model that we use
where we save up those reserves and then build the schools.
In the past, there was a different model where we utilized the
impact fees to pay down our debt. So in the early 2000s, we took out
a 20-year note to build about three to six different schools in the
2005/2006 time period. At that time, we didn't have the money
available, so we took out a bond and then every year thereafter
utilized impact fees to pay down the debt. We used that model for a
long time. But auditors ended up suggesting that impact fees should
really be used for new growth.
So if you built those schools in the past and then you're paying
them down using new impact fees to pay down old debt, it wasn't the
best use. So we switched that model to where we save the money in
reserves and then utilize it when the school needs to be built.
And all our growth projections are all based on Collier County
Government's Growth Management Plan. So our five-year Capital
Improvement Plan, all our numbers come from the growth that's
projected by the County.
COMMISSIONER HALL: What is the dollar figure based on
the next five years from growth for these at the new rate that's
December 9, 2025
Page 85
proposed?
MR. ANTONACCI: It's difficult to calculate because it also
depends on how much the development -- what development, in what
area.
You know, we estimate right now -- if you look at our Capital
Improvement Plan, we maintained it at 20 million. It fluctuates.
Some years it could be 16 million and some years it could be 22,
23 million. This rate increase, I know it says 88.35 percent there on
the screen, but it would be a 50 percent rate increase for us for the 87,
89, to 13,184. As another speaker mentioned, the recommended rate
from Benesch was actually higher than that, but we are -- the state
statute caps it at no more than a 50 percent increase, and it has to be
phased in in four years. So it would be phased in at, you know --
COMMISSIONER HALL: So based on growth, you've got
a -- you've got to guess that you're going to collect $20 million per
year for the next five years.
MR. ANTONACCI: Correct, yes.
COMMISSIONER HALL: So that's a hundred million plus
what you have in reserves?
MR. ANTONACCI: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Okay. How many schools are
planned in the next four or five years?
MR. ANTONACCI: In the next four years -- in the next five
years, we just have one transportation facility, which is 40 million.
COMMISSIONER HALL: The bus barn, the $40 million bus
barn?
MR. ANTONACCI: Yes, yep. And then when we issue our
next Capital Improvement Plan, like I mentioned every year we
update it, we will have the new elementary, middle schools projected
for the following year. In our -- we have another document which we
submit to the State, which is a longer-range document that goes past
December 9, 2025
Page 86
the five years, which is considered a facilities work plan. That's
where we have our estimates for five to 10 and 10 to 20. And so the
growth -- you know, growth gets adjusted annually.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Oh, sure. That's the obvious.
My last thing that I was a little bit fuzzy on was Ms. Van Parys
mentioned a .35 mill tax neutral something, something. But to me it's
still going from -- you're still robbing capital fund to go towards
operationals. I didn't understand that a little bit.
MR. ANTONACCI: Yes. So the -- we do do that. One of the
reasons we are doing that is because we are going to be debt free in
February 2026. So that 20-year note that we had is -- is going to be
fully paid off here in the next few months. So we knew we were
going to have that capital available which was previously committed
to paying down debt.
We have a need in our operating budget. As you know, teacher
salaries are a hot topic. We need to stay competitive, and so what
we've done is to allow us to maintain our operating -- operating
expenses and increase teachers' salaries, we shift that .35 millage
from our capital, and we put it into our operating so that we can -- for
example, you heard of the historic FPL rate increase recently that was
approved.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Yeah, we fought it.
MR. ANTONACCI: Yeah. So the Public Service Commission,
basically for us, increased our utilities by 12.6 percent. We're not
getting any additional money from the State to accommodate any of
these additional operating expenses. Our health insurance plan
continues to increase. Our property insurance, all these things in the
last few years have continued to increase while our State funding has
either increased or stayed at a modest increase. So we have a huge
deficit in our operating that we needed to help with.
MS. LUCARELLI: I just wanted to clarify that it is not the
December 9, 2025
Page 87
impact fees that are being transferred over to operating. The impact
fees have to stay in their bucket, and if they are not used within seven
years, those get returned.
MR. ANTONACCI: Thank you for that. Yes, the impact fees is
not part of that capital --
COMMISSIONER HALL: No, I understood that. But still,
capital is moved over to the operational, whether it comes out of the
impact fee bucket or it comes out of your budget for capital
expenditures out of the -- out of your General Fund.
I'm being scrutinizing because this is a large increase, and I just
want to make sure that if we're not required to do that today, that we
have further discussion. I mean, 88 percent of the overall impact fee
across the county you're grabbing. It's not just 88 percent increase on
your stuff. It's 88 percent of our impact fees that we're adjusting
upward. And that's a lot of burden on the people that are moving into
our -- you know, the whole thing -- you watch the news. The whole
thing is on affordability. How can we be affordable? So if we
continue to increase the cost of building in this county, we're going to
increase the non-affordability factor. So it's not that I'm opposed. I
just want to -- I want to make sure that what we're doing is super
smart at this very moment right now.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And that leads me to a question
that I'm going to ask Ms. Patterson. Under the new state law, or
existing state law, we can waive or defer or reduce impact fees for a
certain class of housing. I don't need an answer right now. I'll need
an answer -- I just wanted you to think about it as we go through the
speakers. But I want to know how we can -- I mean, the issue of
affordability really kind of relates mostly to workforce housing and
affordable housing. We're not too concerned about the folks that
come in and pay one and a half million dollars cash for a home, but
we are concerned about our workforce.
December 9, 2025
Page 88
COMMISSIONER HALL: Right.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And so give it a little bit of
thought, because I want you to spend some time with us before we
take a vote on this issue, what we can do with impact fees and
affordable and workforce housing. Unless you're ready to respond to
that right now.
MS. PATTERSON: I'm ready to respond whenever you'd like.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Well, let's hear what you
have to say on that now.
MS. PATTERSON: So this is -- this has obviously been an
issue that predates the time we are now. We were at a similar place
in the mid-2000s with the affordability being unachievable for many
people, very high costs, high median home prices. So we've had a
pretty robust Impact Fee Deferral Program since about 2003. Prior to
that, we've had Impact Fee Deferral Programs for several decades.
But the current form started in 2003. That's an impact fee program
for owner-occupied dwellings. We defer -- we defer several million
dollars a year in impact fees for people that own their homes, and
they don't have to pay those impact fees back until they sell the
home, transfer it, or refinance it. So it's a long-term deferral.
On top of that, we're running other programs for multifamily.
So these rentals that you-all see coming in here for affordable
housing, whether they're part of a larger complex or stand alone, they
can qualify for deferrals as well. Those typically run a 10-year term.
What we have found with the tax-credit projects is we've had to
get a little bit more creative, and so we've found some other ways to
help those projects. So think about the Golden Gate Golf Course or
Ekos. We've gotten out of that traditional deferral box with them a
little bit, still preserving that integrity of the fees, because it's very
important to understand that when we waive fees, it's not a magic
wand. It's just shifting that burden onto the other fee payers.
December 9, 2025
Page 89
So finding ways where either those fees can be paid over time or
where we bring another funding source in as a loan allows us to be
flexible and meet the needs of these affordable housing developers
but also keep the integrity of the program.
So the long and the short of it is is that we have existing
programs, and we continue to work with developers when they come
with a specific issue, again, like the tax-credit projects where they
need a longer-term deferral to be able to assist them and help with the
affordability of these units.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. We just approved a project
that will have, I think it was 260 units plus or minus, at a workforce
80 percent income levels or lower. How are impact fees handled on a
project like that?
MS. PATTERSON: So once the developer gets to the point
where they're looking at -- at their -- at their pro forma, they'll come
sit down with us, and we'll walk them through the programs that we
have available along, with our Human Services partners, Kristi
Sonntag and her group. We look at those and see which program
might work the best.
We've utilized SHIP dollars in the past. We've utilized straight
deferral programs. In the past we've also used ARP, which that
money is largely gone. But depending on their needs, whether they
can fit a traditional deferral program or if we've got to try to find a
different model for them, we will do that when they reach that point
in their development that we're talking about those impact fees.
And remember, impact fees aren't paid until CO, so there's a
long time between where they are and where they have to get to
actually deliver those impact fees to the County. So we work with
them through that development process.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
Commissioner McDaniel.
December 9, 2025
Page 90
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, Mr. Chair. Impact fees
are a tax. Like it, don't like it, impact fees are a tax. I don't like
impact fees. They're a one-time revenue source statutorily regulated
on what you can spend, where you can spend it, and when you have
to spend it.
How many times have you given back impact fees? Never.
MR. ANTONACCI: (Shakes head.)
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Nobody does.
It's hard to argue with the nexus studies. I'm speaking more
globally than I am specifically with regard to the specific studies and
what you're doing. I applaud the school district and what you have
done, the reduction of debt, yay.
I actually was curious two times in my tenure as county
commissioner. The superintendents came and asked for an
opportunity to move money out of capital over into O&M. Both
times I asked how they were going to replace it and didn't really ever
get a really good answer.
My statement is schools are a huge impact on our community.
We can -- you know, it's always been the adopted philosophy
counties build roads, schools build schools, but because of our
limited resources, because of our limited amount of infrastructure,
and no contribution from the schools with regard to the impacts of
those schools on our transportation system, I'm looking for reform at
some particular stage for contributions for the impacts on the overall
community with regard to schools when they, in fact, come in.
The colleagues that preceded me on this board hired the ULI,
came and did a really nice study, and they -- in that study, at the
demographic that we had at that time, every thousand-dollar
increment increase in the price of a home precluded 132 people that
lived in Collier County from being able to afford that home.
And right on this particular slide that we're looking at, we're
December 9, 2025
Page 91
talking about a $5,000 increase in impact fees that precludes 600-plus
people from being able to afford a home based on nine-year-old data.
I don't -- I have resolutions, but I know that we're governed by
statute with regard to how and when and what we do with these
impact fees when we, in fact, collect them.
So having said all that, I would prefer that adjustments be made
in the entire -- in the structure of how we're doing what we're doing,
allow for contributions coming from the school district to be able to
help offset the impacts for our overall community.
I know it's not possible today, Mr. Chair, but it's something
that -- as we're going through this, I think it's something that needs to
be taken -- taken into -- into consideration.
Immokalee Road right now has, I think, seven or eight schools
on it. And with the -- with the opening up -- and I'm all about school
choice, all about that. It also precludes a lot of bus routes to be able
to transport our children back and forth from the schools.
And when you have a thousand kids, that's two trips a day per
kid, parents bringing people in and out of these schools, new traffic
lights. Our infrastructure is limited, and so ultimately I'd like to see
some assistance from these schools as they come into our system.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner Kowal's
next, but a quick question for Mr. Klatzkow in terms of -- because
there's going to be a motion made here at some point on all of these
fees today, what are the voting requirements on these?
MR. KLATZKOW: Three votes.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It just takes a simple majority?
MR. KLATZKOW: Simple majority.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're just -- all we're doing
right now is voting to advertise, aren't we?
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. This is permission to advertise.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
December 9, 2025
Page 92
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. And the reason I raise
that point is if we don't have a -- I thought at one point there might be
a supermajority requirement on part of these, but apparently that's not
the case.
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't believe it is, but I will double-check.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: If you could double-check. Just
make sure so that we all know up here what the voting requirements
are.
Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
You know, I got in this business three years, and I'm still
learning, and the impact fees is just amazing how many statutorily
driven rules and regulations, and every -- every year it seems like we
have a different wave of changes or improvements or dis-
improvements.
But, you know, I like a lot of the things that were said by my
colleagues, but a lot of the things that I think what we can or can't do
is statutorily driven. So I think that's -- you know, for someone else,
to, you know, get behind and have some things change towards the
pro or the con.
But, you know, I just needed a little bit of clarity, because I was
getting it from different sides, was the -- someone -- in some point I
was told statutorily that you can't collect for things beyond four years
projected, but I was told again through questioning with other legal
that that was not true. So I just wanted some clarity that is not
something that's statutorily driven or not, if somebody can clarify that
as one question.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, the four-year requirement
being referred to is the data. Data can't be older than four years old.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Okay.
MS. PATTERSON: So there's no requirement for what
December 9, 2025
Page 93
we're -- there have been attempts in the past to more closely harness
the expenditure of impact fees to an exact improvement. That has yet
to make its way into statute. Now, you see I say "yet," because who
knows what surprises we have in store for us in the future. But now
these impact fees are authorized for a purpose, and in order to meet
the nexus, we have -- you have to show the need, essentially, and
then the benefit.
And so as long as that's the case, which you can clearly see the
need here as well as the benefit in each one of these fees, that
takes -- that's what it takes to satisfy.
Also, I will mention that each one of these impact fees is
reviewed by outside counsel as well as our County Attorney, and this
outside counsel specializes in impact fees and understands the ins and
outs of not only the 40 or 50 years of case law but the more recent
evolution of the statutes that govern how we -- how we build these
fees as well as how we implement them and then how we spend the
money.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah. You know, in our
responsibility as local government, we -- you know, it is our
responsibility to make sure our infrastructure and our schools and that
we're thinking well ahead of our growth. And our growth is coming
fast. Since COVID, I mean, I think it's been accelerated more than
we expected. And we're seeing that. We're -- today we approved I
think it was 3700 new homes out at Trail and then another 2,000 or
something down in the East Trial.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Twelve hundred.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So you're talking about 5,000,
6,000 new homes just in one meeting today, and there's going to be
children connected to those homes. There's going to be families,
especially when you have affordable housing connected to them,
because that's usually the young people starting out. And I just want
December 9, 2025
Page 94
to kind of -- I consulted a mortgage expert because I had the
opportunity --
COMMISSIONER HALL: Do you know one?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: -- to consult one. Yeah.
And I says, hey, just, you know, for -- you know, and
giggles -- I didn't say the first part, but I says, just -- you know,
because I'm looking at, like, a $4,907 -- 4,000, around $5,000
increase to what we have already in place.
And I said, over the average 30-year loan and, you know, on the
homeowner when they -- you know, to purchase the loan or service
the loan back, on average, what would that be, a difference, than what
they're paying today at the rate? And it was basically $4.97 a month
increase.
So that kind of brings it to reality of what the burden on the
homeowner at the time paying back their 30-year mortgage, or
whatever note they decide. But that's on average about what it would
be, a dollar per thousand that you would go over what you normally
would pay.
And the other part is, I agree with Commissioner McDaniel that,
you know, the acquired cost -- and the problem is that I don't think
it's the 4,000 or $5,000. It's the insurance system today that is really
burdening our homeowners to purchase homes. So many insurance
costs are as much as the mortgage, and especially in our low-lying
areas and our floodplains. And it's just -- that is what we're really
seeing a hard -- you know, to get people in the homes in this
community is -- and that's another problem that Tallahassee needs to
really, really tackle and tackle it fast to help us.
But -- you know, so in reality, I think -- you know, I -- I believe
that we need to stay ahead of -- that's our job. You know, we need to
stay ahead of our future, because when we don't -- and then we're
going to look at problems where we are going to be closing schools
December 9, 2025
Page 95
and not be able to provide the services we've provided in the past,
and it's just things that -- you know, it's all part of doing business, and
it's all part of doing business now and everything costs so much.
So I kind of support where we're moving with this, and I look
forward to having another discussion on it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman. I,
unfortunately, don't get to have dinner every night with a mortgage
expert, so my comments might not be as detailed.
I just wanted to say a couple things. First of all, the details that
the speakers -- the different speakers spoke of when they came to the
podium today, mentioned today, have so much merit, but one
suggestion I would say is they need to be better advertised to the
general public. I can't tell you the number of stuff -- you know, I'm
very active on social media. I try not to -- I comment a lot less than I
used to when I first got elected because you can have a -- you know,
an endless town hall meeting.
But you see the misinformation by people who say, oh
my -- and, of course, the blame always comes to us. You know,
Commissioners are in charge of EMS helicopters. Commissioners
are in charge of impact fees. Commissioners are in charge of this,
that, and the other. That seems to be the default because a lot of
times people aren't as informed as to what our state representatives do
who they elected who are in Tallahassee, and even how the school
board is set up and what our school superintendent does.
So one of the things that I would say -- and we don't always
have you all in one room like this, so this was very valuable
discussion. And some of the things that I heard here we know, but I
would encourage you to do whatever you can to really get that word
out and not just be experts among yourselves, because I can tell you
the general public sees a slide like this, has limited understanding
December 9, 2025
Page 96
because they're not going to school board meetings, they're not in this
meeting right now. We don't have 10,000 people in here. And this
stuff jumps out at them with a million red flags.
Having said that, much like Commissioner Hall, when I see
88 percent on there, that catches my attention. So this might be
apples and chairs, as I say sometimes. But one of the things the five
of us have really been trying to do over the last couple of years -- and
I'll give a very simplistic made-up example just to sort of prove my
point. If beach parking was $2 a day and it was that way for 15 years
and all of our predecessors were patting themselves on the back, and
then all of a sudden new people came in here and said, "Oh my God,
we are -- our bank account for beach restoration and all that is -- is in
such great need due to growth and all the things that you've talked
about" -- so it was great, everybody got to enjoy these low fees, but
now all of a sudden we need to make beach parking $25 to catch
up -- one of the things we do at every budget meeting -- and like I
said, it may be a little bit of apples and oranges, but maybe the
concept not so much -- we try to take smaller bites out of it because,
you know, similar -- similar things where we have to charge
people -- and it's not an impact fee.
And then I know what your reply's going to be. It is a little
bit -- a little bit different, but I mean, the concept of trying to explain
this to the common citizen who goes, "Why do you go from nothing
to all of a sudden 88 percent?" And then it's a much longer answer.
And I don't need it now.
But as part of even our advertisement -- you know, I'll write
about this in my next newsletter, and I've got to make sure I put the
details in there to say, "It's a little different than beach parking pass
that we raised 88 percent, and we didn't touch it for the last five
years," you know, that sort of thing.
So I just -- you know, I just throw that out there because there
December 9, 2025
Page 97
might be a great answer to it, but the average person doesn't know it.
They just see this and go, "Wow, all of a sudden these guys have
been dropping the ball for all these years, and now they need to raise
this by $5,000."
And I think that's sort of what, you know, Commissioner Hall
was actually saying is, "Okay, I get all the other ones, but that's a big
number."
So please explain it to us but also the people that are going to
have to be affected by it.
And then lastly, this is only because he's in the room -- and this
is totally unrelated, but we don't always get a chance to see all the
people that are in here. Gino, I just wanted to thank you -- totally
separate things. You and I are email buddies, but I don't get to see
you in person. The help you've provided me in my district with some
impact fee type of things, without getting into the details, has been
very much appreciated. Your sense of urgency, how you've been
replying to the constituents that had some questions and whatnot.
And so you know what I'm talking about, but I very rarely -- I
rarely get to see you, you know, in here. So I just wanted to say in
person, thank you so much for riding shotgun on those type of things.
And then obviously, you're intimately involved with the folks
here. So I can tell you, from my interactions with Gino, you've got
the right guy on it. I realize there's depth to this. I've oversimplified
it, but the average citizen does -- I will tell you, does look at it sort of
that way. So that explanation would really go a long way to not
make it sound like, "Oh, we dropped the ball for the last 10 years, and
now we're playing catch-up," which isn't the case.
So that's more of an observation. Because we also have to sell it
to the public when we vote here. If we vote and pass this, then I don't
want the medias -- I can tell you there's media in the room right now
or media who are on Zoom for 30 seconds, and the headline's going
December 9, 2025
Page 98
to be, "Collier County exponentially approved gigantic impact fee
increase," you know, "News at 11." And you know, let's try to make
sure that doesn't happen by whatever you can help us do to get the
truth and the facts out there.
Thank you.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, if I may, please, because
of this, I do have to defend the School District a little bit here.
Number one, they have no ability to raise their impact fees on their
own. They are -- they are absolutely dependent on the Board of
County Commissioners to prepare and adopt the impact fee, different
than the fire districts who can do that. This is a Collier County
impact fee on behalf of the School Board.
The second part of this is is that Collier County, up until the last
10 plus/minus years, had one of the most robust and aggressive
impact fee programs probably in the entire country. We regularly
updated the impact fees. We not only updated them every three years
to capture costs to keep exactly what you're saying from happening,
from happening, because you've got to think about other rapid growth
periods that we've been through. We actually would index the fees in
the years between the update studies, which would help us capture
those smaller changes.
Unfortunately, all ability to do any of this has been taken away
from us. So the reason why we're sitting here 10 years later is a
twofold answer. One is some reluctance to come after these fees
during COVID, understandable, because the economy was a giant
question mark, but more importantly is the legislature, since 2006 and
specifically for the last several years, has aggressively pursued
changes to the impact fees so much so that it has changed the entire
way that we administer this program.
There's no more indexing. There's no more three-year updates.
It's a prescribed process. There's mandatory -- there's mandatory
December 9, 2025
Page 99
phase-ins. That's something we used to use when we had big
increases in impact fees, but we're required to phase in if it's a dollar
or a million dollars.
So a lot of that that was left to the local level and local control
on the administration of these impact fees programs has risen up to a
statutory level, and just when we thought we had our arms around it,
we would turn around for another round of changes, as you can see
back-to-back changes even in the extraordinary circumstances.
So we are here at this place getting these fees at least to as
current as possible, and then we'll deal with the aftermath of a
program that's going to be administered completely differently.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You can see my point was
that's the sound bite --
MS. PATTERSON: Yeah. Understood.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- you know, that many
people don't get. We get the short email: "You guys are crazy.
You've dropped the ball. Now you're playing catch-up, and you're
stealing money out of my pocket." And so we'll all work together to
educate the public a bit more, inform, I should say, and separate
rumor from fact. But I got it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Chairman.
I need to put some numbers to this so that I can make sense in
my little brain. At $20 million of growth per year, do you have a
percentage of the people or the percentage of growth that you're
coming up with that? If you just take the 13,000 and divide it by 20
million, you come up with, like, 1500 homes a year. I didn't know if
you had a different figure that you were using.
MR. ANTONACCI: I don't. And some of -- I mean, the impact
fees come from single-family, but there's also condos, apartments.
MS. PATTERSON: Multifamily.
December 9, 2025
Page 100
MR. ANTONACCI: Yeah. So different rates for --
COMMISSIONER HALL: Fifteen hundred units.
MR. ANTONACCI: Yeah. Five hundred homes were just built
this year in Ave Maria, for example.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Okay. First of all, I want to say I'm
all about growing schools. I'm all about supporting the kids, doing
it -- keeping Collier County great again, I'm all about it.
I understand that it's up to us to be able to raise your impact fees
and to raise your collectability; however, I also know that I've never
met a government institution, including Collier County, that doesn't
love the next dollar. And I want to -- I have a question if we can -- if
we're able to pass everything and just have further discussion on the
school impact fees, or can we cherry-pick that out or --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We can -- yeah. We're going to be
voting to advertise. When this comes up for final vote, we can
cherry-pick. We don't have to approve road impact fees or increase,
or we can -- we can do as we please --
COMMISSIONER HALL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- with the School Board fees. We
just can't go above certain statutory levels.
MS. PATTERSON: You're show -- the amount that's proposed
is the maximum based on statute in the -- in the path that we went
down away from extraordinary circumstances. For the rest of the
fees, you're not required to raise any of them, but there are decreases
embedded in almost all of the fee schedules, not schools, that will
have to go into effect no matter what.
COMMISSIONER HALL: So I guess my point is if
we're -- this is 1500 homes. We pride ourselves on being debt free,
which I commend you, we saved the taxpayers $40 million once on
one school, but yet we're charging 1500 homes per year for the
20 million to make up the difference.
December 9, 2025
Page 101
I'm not opposed to raising the impact fees and making them
substantial. I just don't know that we need to do it this much this
soon. We have -- there's no schools planned other than the bus barn.
And I would like for you-all to come back to us on the final
vote, because I'm going to pass this to advertise, but I would like to
hear what the projected amount of financial actual dollars needed for
the next, you know, three schools over the next 10 years or whatever
it is so that we can -- you know, so that you can help us help you, if
that makes sense. So I'm not -- I'm being scrut -- I am being picky
about it, but I want to make sure that we just don't willy-nilly wave a
magic wand and cost the tax -- it's a tax, just like Commissioner
McDaniel says.
So anyway, if you could do that for us on our final, that would
be great.
MR. ANTONACCI: Sure. And we have that documentation
available.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You have to do it for us
before that.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I'll get to you in just a second,
Commissioner McDaniel. I just wanted to make a comment.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, and I have one quick
question. The $4300 proposed increase, is that going to be on an
annual basis phased in 4300 every year, or is that phased in over the
five-year --
MS. PATTERSON: The 4300 is phased in over four years, so
it's --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: This is a thousand dollar plus
or minus increase --
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- for next year. And that's a
point of clarification that I wanted to --
December 9, 2025
Page 102
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- make was that this is -- this
is the tip-out at the end of '29. And I also just wanted to say out loud
one thing. I -- I applaud the District with how you're doing, what
you're doing. The District is required, out of their O&M, to put a
percentage over into capital on a regular basis, and that's what's
allowed the District then to draw out a capital to support their own
O&M expenses.
So having -- I know -- I was aware -- Stephanie, I think you and
I talked about this. I was aware that you couldn't commingle the
buckets, as you and I say. Everything goes into specific buckets,
so -- but it is an important soundbite, as Commissioner LoCastro
says, that this is a total amount phased in over a five-year period.
MS. PATTERSON: Four.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: My comment -- a couple
comments. Commissioner McDaniel, you had said early on that you
don't like impact fees.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Nope.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And I think someone else kind of
echoed that. I don't like impact fees either. Quite frankly, I don't like
ad valorem taxes. I don't like sales taxes. I don't like impact fees, but
that's the world we live in. And I go back to the early days when I
was on the Commission a long, long, long time ago.
COMMISSIONER HALL: When was that?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I'm not going to say. I can -- I will
say that Immokalee Road wasn't six-laned at that time.
But the --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: It was Immokalee Trail, right?
Wasn't it? It was a trail? Yeah, wagon wheels.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: They had wagons and horses. But
anyway, the point is, that I was going to make, is back in those days I
December 9, 2025
Page 103
supported and proposed raising impact fees on every type of
governmental service that we could do that for, and we did that, and
we kept them basically at maximum rates for a long time. Even
during the slowdown in 2008, the Commission basically kept impact
fees -- I don't think there was reduction in impact fees.
Now, Lee County, I believe, eliminated impact fees for a while,
and I think they're charging now about half of what they could
charge. And if you take a look at the difference in our roadway
system, our schools, our parks compared to Lee County, it's a huge,
huge difference. So as much as I don't like impact fees, I think
they've had a very, very positive impact over the decades here in
Collier County.
And so I'm going to -- I'm going to support this when it comes
back. But I just wanted to emphasize that we would not have the
quality of life here that we have in this county if we didn't do
things -- some things that are very unpopular with some of the voting
public, and impact fees, that's very unpopular with the building
industry, very unpopular with, you know, new people coming in
having to pay these, but it hasn't slowed growth here in this county at
all. I don't think anybody in this board or in this room can say,
"Well, we've had high taxes and high impact fees, and it's killing
growth." That has just not been the case for as long as I've been in
this community. It's not going to be the case going forward.
My concern was how do we incentivize and keep building
low-cost -- or lower-cost housing for workforce housing and for
lower-income folks, and we're doing that. And so I think -- I think
this is the right formula, and I'm going to support it when it comes
back.
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: My last comment will be two
things. I feel the same way about taxes, and impact fees and all that,
December 9, 2025
Page 104
but one of the things I always say is when somebody comes up with a
great idea, "Hey, we're going to stop collecting this," I always say, "I
want to hear the second piece of that," which is "so the money that
we were collecting that did all these amazing things will now come
from where?" Because it's great, you know, to be a popular elected
official and say, "Guess what I'm about to stop? And I'm putting
more money in your pocket," but if that money was excess and it
wasn't needed, then that tax should have been stopped 50 years ago."
There's a reason why it's collected.
Different subject. Your slides can use some improvement.
There's press right now who aren't in this room who are watching this
on Zoom that are taking screenshots of this, and if they didn't get -- if
they didn't get -- so whoever makes these. If it's our staff or me -- I
didn't produce these.
So, Amy -- because here's an example. Commissioner
McDaniel just said, "Wow, you know, $5,000. Is that a year?"
And then you said, "No, it's over four years." Okay. If
somebody just printed off these slides and handed them out to every
citizen, it would -- it would look like a year. So this -- there could be
a little bit more detail on here that really defines it because you -- you
always know you have a perfect set of slides when you can hand it to
somebody that wasn't part of the briefing, but the slides speak for
themselves. And there's a lot of excitement that could be interpreted
out of these slides here if they didn't have the words that went with it.
So you might need a little bit -- some asterisks or some smaller,
you know, print somewhere that really explains what it is and
somebody just doesn't take it on face value, because we have the
benefit of getting the explanation here. But this stuff gets shot out by
a lot of people who then will draw their own conclusions, and that
makes it harder, then, to sort of correct the record.
MS. PATTERSON: Understood, sir.
December 9, 2025
Page 105
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Who made those, Amy
Patterson? No.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, my --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: It's a team effort. Whoever
did, you know, it's a team effort.
MS. PATTERSON: We'll take care of it, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We need a motion, then,
on Item 11B, the advertising of the Collier County Consolidated
Impact Fee Ordinance. Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, I'll make a motion to
approve.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: There's a motion. Is there a
second?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And we have no other speakers.
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.
When will this come back? When will the ordinance come
back?
MS. PATTERSON: January.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: January, yeah.
December 9, 2025
Page 106
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. Our first meeting or second
meeting, or is there --
MS. PATTERSON: We were aiming for the first meeting, but
it's the Board's pleasure. We have the information that you-all have
requested on what that looks likes as far as the next several schools.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's shoot for the first meeting in
January.
MS. PATTERSON: All right. Very good.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Any objection to that?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Thank you.
All right. We're sort of at a point where we don't have a whole
lot to do, but we do have --
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. We have a few -- another
advertised public hearing to attend to, which came off of the consent
agenda, and we have nine -- I'm sorry -- 10A and 10B.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So the question is, do you want to
take a -- we're going to take a short break, but do you want to take a
little lunch break or --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Just the court reporter break
and --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Twenty minutes.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We'll come back at,
what, 25 minutes after 12.
MS. PATTERSON: Very good.
(A recess was had from 12:10 p.m. to 12:25 p.m.)
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. We'll come back to
order.
Item #9G
December 9, 2025
Page 107
ORDINANCE 2025-70: AN ORDINANCE WHICH CONVERTS
THE EAST OF 951 AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM
AN AD HOC COMMITTEE TO A PERMANENT ADVISORY
BOARD, RENAMED THE RURAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES
RESTUDY COMMITTEE, AND APPOINTS THE CURRENT
SEVEN MEMBERS OF THE AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE
TO THE PERMANENT ADVISORY BOARD - MOTION TO
APPROVE WITH LANGUAGE MODIFICATION BY
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER HALL – ADOPTED
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. That brings us back to Item 9s.
This is Item 9G, formerly 17GJ. It's a recommendation to enact an
ordinance which converts the East of 951 Ad Hoc Advisory
Committee from an ad hoc committee to a permanent advisory board,
rename the Rural Golden Gate Estates Restudy Committee, and
appoints the current seven members of the ad hoc advisory committee
to the permanent advisory board. This item is brought to the regular
agenda by Commissioner McDaniel.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel, you're
recognized.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Thank you, sir.
And I just want to add specific -- because -- I want to add
specific language into this -- into the executive summary and/or
the -- probably the ordinance is where it needs to be added into for
the creation -- or for the extension of this committee.
I just wanted to say specifically that this committee is to review
the Golden Gate Estates Rural Master Plan. That's -- that was -- was
never -- that wasn't specifically said. I just want that language added
in.
December 9, 2025
Page 108
Mr. Klatzkow, you talked to me a little bit that you felt that
maybe it was covered, I think it's Section 2, but it didn't specifically
say it. So if it could be added in, I would appreciate it.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. But if we could continue this item,
and I could meet with you, we could get something to your
satisfaction.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We don't need to continue it.
Just add in that language, and --
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- let the committee go. I
mean, if you're -- if everybody's okay -- I'll approve it if you'll just
add that language into Section 2.
Make a motion for that adjustment and approval.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I don't see any objections but just
include that in your motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: In my motion to approve, I'd
like that specific language to be added into Section 2 of the
ordinance.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Can you go ahead and, for the
record, state what that --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Review of the Golden Gate
Estates Master Plan Rural. Because you'll recall when we adopted or
amended it back in '19, we trifurcated the master plan into three,
urban, rural, and Golden Gate City "the." And so this is for the
review of the Golden Gate Estates Master Plan Rural.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Do we have any
registered speakers? Any questions, comments?
COMMISSIONER HALL: I'll second the motion with a
comment that trifurcating is definitely word of the day.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It was -- I was actually
accused of making up a new word back in '19, and I found out that I
December 9, 2025
Page 109
didn't, so there you go.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. So we have an ordinance
to trifurcate something, whatever that means. No registered speakers.
Any comment, Mr. Bosi?
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
Just to let you know -- and we clearly agree with the additional
language for the direction. Mr. Teaters, the chair of the East of 951
Committee, soon to be the Rural Golden Gate Estates Master Plan
Committee, is meeting with our staff today to talk about a kickoff
meeting we're going to have in January. So we are coordinated, and
we are going to -- we will fulfill the modified direction as proposed.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Moved and seconded.
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.
Item #10A
DIRECTING THE COUNTY MANAGER TO BEGIN PUBLIC
EDUCATION ABOUT THE PURPOSE AND PROCESS OF
LEVYING AND IMPOSING THE 6TH CENT TOURIST
DEVELOPMENT TAX, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE
EXPENDITURE OF UP TO $100,000 FOR THIS PURPOSE -
MOTION TO APPROVE WITH CHANGES TO THE
December 9, 2025
Page 110
EXPENDITURE LIMIT BY COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that moves us to Item 10.
Item 10A is a recommendation to direct the County Manager to begin
public education about the purpose and process of levying and
imposing the sixth cent tourist development tax and to authorize the
expenditure of up to $100,000 for this purpose.
This item is brought to the agenda by Commissioner Saunders.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
As you recall, we've placed this on the agenda for November of
2026. We're committed to the next phase of the Paradise Coast
complex to complete the sports fields, and then the next phase would
be the field house, and if possible, we could do both at the same time.
But if we can only do one, we're going to be doing the fields.
And so this issue right now is to authorize an education
campaign. I'm going to ask that it be $150,000 instead of 100-. I put
100- in here because back in 2018, we did an advertisement -- not an
advertisement. We did an education program for the sales tax, and
we spent $100,000 on that. And I wanted to kind of keep it
consistent with that, but with increased costs and everything, I'm
going to ask the Board to consider setting this at $150,000.
The reason I brought this up now is because I met with the board
of directors of the Naples Chamber of Commerce. They like this
proposal. They like this tax proposal and what we're going to be
doing with these funds, and they're going to be making a final
determination end of January, first part of February as to how much
they're going to be willing to commit to a campaign to support and
promote this. We can't ask people to vote for this, but we can give
them information on that, and all that -- all those restrictions are
contained in the executive summary for you to see what the
December 9, 2025
Page 111
restrictions are.
In addition, it's important to send a message to the Collier
County Restaurant and Lodging Association that Collier County is
going to be spending some money to educate the public because
they're going to help participate in a campaign to get this done.
That one-cent increase will generate about $10 million a year.
Our project, we can only spend about 70 percent of that, I believe,
under state law on our project, and the balance of that project can be
funded with impact fees.
And so this will be a funding mechanism to complete the
Paradise Coast Park but will also provide funding for advertising and
all the other uses of tax -- tourist tax dollars and for other projects
long into the future.
And so I think it's really important for us to spend a little bit of
money to make sure that the voters are educated on what this means.
So that's the purpose of that.
So my motion is to approve the expenditure of up to $150,000
on an education program as permitted by Florida law on the one-cent
tourist tax increase.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And do we have any registered
speakers?
MR. MILLER: We do not.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Any discussion?
(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.
December 9, 2025
Page 112
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That passes unanimously.
Thank you.
Item #10B
APPROPRIATE A DONATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,276.05
FROM PHOENIX ASSOCIATES OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA,
INC., TO REIMBURSE THE COUNTY FOR THE COST OF
PRODUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF THE FOUR CHARLIE
KIRK MEMORIAL HIGHWAY SIGNS AND AUTHORIZE THE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT - MOTION TO APPROVE
BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER HALL – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, Item 10B is a
recommendation to accept and appropriate a donation in the amount
of $2,276.05 from Phoenix Associates of Southwest Florida, Inc., to
reimburse the County for the cost of production and installation of
the four Charlie Kirk Memorial Highway signs and authorize the
necessary budget amendments. This item is brought to the agenda by
Commissioner McDaniel.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, I -- I was approached by
Randy Johns, the owner of Phoenix Construction. When he saw the
agenda, commended us for doing the signage and acknowledging
Charlie Kirk. And then some of the objections in the newspaper and
so on came out that the cost that was associated with it wasn't
appropriate, and he volun -- he didn't even know what the actual cost
December 9, 2025
Page 113
was when he said, "I'll pay for the dang signs."
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And you told him it was only 2600
bucks?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. We could have padded
it a little bit. He's got money.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Bill, I know you're young at this,
but my goodness, that could have been a 30- or $40,000 expense. We
could've used $24,000 for something else or --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Help advertise the one-cent
tax.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Almost anything.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make a motion for
approval of this.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and second.
Any registered speakers?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. 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.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Randy.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: He does a lot.
December 9, 2025
Page 114
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He sure does.
Item #10C
DIRECTING THE COUNTY MANAGER TO CONDUCT A
THIRD-PARTY OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF THE
PARADISE COAST SPORTS COMPLEX, INCLUDING FACILITY
MANAGEMENT, FIELD USE, EVENT OPERATIONS, AND
RELATED PERFORMANCE COMPONENTS, AND RETURN
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR FURTHER POLICY
DIRECTION - MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER
LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL –
APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Item 10C is a recommendation to consider
directing the County Manager to conduct a third-party operational
assessment of the Paradise Coast Sports Complex, including facility
management field use, event operations, and related performance
components, and return findings and recommendations to the Board
of County Commissioners for further policy direction.
This item's brought to the agenda by Commissioner LoCastro.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, thank you, sir.
I just want to set the table a little bit for what this is and what
this isn't in case there's any confusion.
So I met quite a bit with Mr. French and his staff, with Amy
Patterson, with Ed Finn, and, you know, all the folks who are all
contributing to making the sports complex better.
So what this isn't is it's not an investigation into contracts or this
and that. It's basically to give us a report card. You know, we just
December 9, 2025
Page 115
finished the busiest year in the sports complex history with
FC Naples but also with lots of other things, lacrosse, concerts, the
FBU football folks, Snowfest. And so, simultaneously, while we're
looking to expand the sports complex -- and I actually think this
helps. I can just say in my newsletter I'm going to combine this with
our 6 percent -- or six-cent tourist development tax request and say,
"Hey, while we're -- while we're looking to expand the sports
complex, we're also not sitting on our hands and saying everything's
great." Maybe it is, but we're also looking at, you know, the
operations over the last two years and seeing how we can improve
your visitor experience and make sure that if we do get citizen
support for more funds that they know we're going to spend the
money wisely.
And you know, Mr. French has spent an awful lot of time, he
and his staff, out at the sports complex solving all kinds of problems
and things. And I just thought it was a perfect time to have an
assessment. And I don't know who that third party is. I don't want to
spend a million dollars on bringing an expert in here. But, you know,
I just threw around some ideas, could this be something that
ResourceX maybe moves up their priority list.
But then, Mr. French, if you want to take the podium. He had
some better ideas. And, you know, I'll quote Ed Finn, whether he
was just trying to be polite or not. But in my office he said, "Wow,
this a great idea. I wish I would have thought of it." That's a quote.
That's a quote. He said that.
And so it's really just a report card so that, you know, as we look
to make the sports complex better, we roll into the second season of
FC Naples, we add maybe other events, and now it's becoming a
popular place for somebody to give us feedback, just like we're doing
with the county budget.
Hey, you know, is Transportation being run efficiently? You
December 9, 2025
Page 116
know, are we running Parks and Recreation efficiently? How can we
restore in a smarter way Fun-N-Sun which, obviously, that happened,
so kudos to Commissioner Hall and working with the staff. So it was
just more of a proposal.
And then when I talked with Jamie and his team, he had some
really great ideas that weren't huge muscle movements. And it's not
to make anybody nervous that we're looking to fire anybody, but just
to bring us back some feedback of how we could make, like I said,
the visitor experience better, especially as we turn the corner on
2026.
So, Jamie, you want to just give us a short version of your
thoughts? Because you really had some really great ideas when I was
just talking out loud about this.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. For
the record, my name's Jamie French. I'm your department head for
Growth Management and Community Development.
As this board is aware, as of last January, the sports complex
was reassigned under our purview with -- and I hate to quote the
former County Manager Leo Ochs who never really told me how to
go fix things. He just said, "Go fix them." And I know,
Commissioner Hall, you and I have talked about managing, upper
managing out, and we've certainly taken that approach.
The community sets our expectations. We don't necessarily
compare ourselves to anyone else but Collier County visitors and
residents that pay our salaries and really put money towards these
type of operations.
In the last year, we have spent an inordinate amount of time,
one, bringing the facility up to standards, making sure certificate of
occupancy was issued. We've met all the Land Development Code
regulations and gone back and kind of fixed things where perhaps
there was contract negotiations and maybe a little bit of a value
December 9, 2025
Page 117
engineering. We've clarified roles, and we've certainly gotten more
community feedback.
Again, I've got a very large group, and I'm appreciative of the
effort shown by this board and trust that you've put in our group. But
I will tell you is that I think, Commissioner, when we spoke, we're
really looking at more so in examining the operations both current
and past. Looking at everything from that client experience to how is
it operating. How is it -- and we may find out -- as you said,
Commissioner, report card. We may find out that we're at a B, and a
B may be acceptable, maybe not to me or maybe not to our staff, but
clearly -- but we know it's a B, and we move forward with a B on a
fix to work towards that A.
And I think that this is really through a third-party independent
review. It will let you know, without staff, without bias, on what our
thoughts are, and is it performing both to your contract and to the
expectations of both this board and of your community as well as
FC Naples? FC Naples had a phenomenal season, brand-new
franchise team that made it almost to the end, which is unheard of.
My understanding -- I'm not a soccer person, unheard of in USL, and
created a lot of energy and certainly a lot of community involvement.
Snowfest, they had the largest numbers in the history of Collier
County in doing Snowfest. And Mr. Finn and I -- and Mr. Finn is
only -- the only comment that I get from Mr. Finn is, "Stop making
work."
But at the end of the day, I think we witnessed -- we were there
from start to finish -- the families, the children. And I raised my kids
here and grew up here. I never knew that there were that many kids
in Collier County, especially that would show up to our sports
complex.
So this board should be proud of your staff. Certainly should be
proud of the effort made. It's a wonderful amenity, and I think this
December 9, 2025
Page 118
will just help you get a better understanding of how it's operating,
how we're communicating, and also you, too, get a lot of feedback
from everywhere from FC Naples to concert promoters, to football
universities, Steve Quinn and his group and how we can better
coordinate even our park system on making this complex even more
successful.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And I'll just add that the
executive summary that hopefully, you know, everybody got to see
and read was put together by the staff just after our informal
conversations, and I thought it was spot on. It wasn't, you know, an
investigation or anything. It was a -- it was an overview of, like, as
you said, the operations to see if, hey, we're a B, maybe we're okay
with that, but as we look to expand the sports complex, are there
areas that bubble up that look like we could improve the fan
experience, because we've certainly got plenty of feedback.
And I just think this window where we have a little bit of a gap,
even though the FC Naples team's out there practicing and trying out
new players, we do have a little bit of a window here where the sports
complex maybe isn't as utilized as we have a little bit of a break.
Perfect time to just assess it.
And we weren't looking for, you know, some -- like I said, some
big investigation. I thought you guys captured it perfectly on this
executive summary to come back and just tell us what your thoughts
are.
And maybe it's a work in progress. Maybe it's much like
ResourceX. You come back and go, "Wow, the three biggest things
we really should not touch because they're perfect are," and the four
biggest things that didn't grade out as a B that we all agreed with a
couple of small tweaks could be a way better experience for the fans.
You know, I don't think any of us have that feedback yet. We've
all been at the sports complex, and we've seen little things where
December 9, 2025
Page 119
we've said, "Oh, that could have been better or this could have been
better," but putting it together in more formal presentation that isn't,
you know, 150,000 pounds. It's more of just give us a first, you
know, initial look. So that was my thought.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
MR. FRENCH: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. First of all, I love the
idea. I really like the specifics with regard to the report card, because
everybody -- everybody likes a different thing. Everybody has
different cares and concerns. Everybody has different opinions on
how things ought to be. So by being specific with these different
things is going to allow us to analyze the entire project. I just -- my
question is, is who's going to do it, and approximately how much is it
going to cost?
MR. FRENCH: Well, Commissioner, we would take that out
for a negotiated bid. We have some contractors in mind. And much
like we did with your fee schedule for Growth Management on
building, we would coordinate with ResourceX to have them do a
review. We're not envisioning that we would use Hunden to come
out and tell me why I need 12 more, you know, pickleball courts or
why it qualifies for tourist tax.
This is more show from a -- more so from a financial as well as
a -- really a -- not an audit, but really a consumer feedback finding on
your participants who paid the County, who paid Sports Facilities
Management to utilize that facility, what was their fan experience as
well as that. But I don't have a particular contractor in mind. But if
there's a budget that you'd like us to stay under, we can certainly --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You know, I don't -- I just
wanted to know. There wasn't anything in there just -- it's going to
December 9, 2025
Page 120
come back for an ultimate approval by us anyway once you put it out
for bid and they come and talk to us.
So I think -- I mean, I'm in complete support of the -- or of the
agenda item. I think some of the things that are patriant [sic] oriented
should be started now just even -- even a quick text message, because
we're geofencing everybody that comes in and out of there. A quick
text message, "How was your experience? How was your hot dog?
How was your -- you know, how do you feel the prices compare?"
ba, ba, ba, ba, ba, just to start that process with the actual participants
that are coming there. That's some of the things with the overall
financial operations and vendors that are wanting to get in and
couldn't get in and so on and so forth. That's going to be -- have to be
by a third party, so -- but I applaud -- applaud the report card. And if
it were up to me, I would never quit. I mean, its self-analysis is the
key to success.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Chairman.
I love the idea. I just -- and you said it, I just wanted to make
sure that -- and ask that we not use Hunden, not because they didn't
do a good job. I just don't want somebody justifying their previous
decisions. I'd like to have fresh eyes.
MR. FRENCH: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And I've got a couple comments.
First of all, I think it's a great idea as well. I'm looking forward to
that. It's going to take some time to get all of that done. And perhaps
you can come back as early as the first meeting in January with some
recommendations or something, or second meeting in January. But
it's got to be pretty quick. The official season, really, in terms of
soccer kicks off the first week of March.
And so that's going to lead me to two comments. One, with
staff's efforts, the difference between the first soccer match in March
December 9, 2025
Page 121
of 2025 and the last soccer match just a few weeks ago was night and
day. Traffic was great, the way it was handled. The parking was
handled properly. Everything was really perfect in that last game,
even the -- except for -- even the outcome of that last game was
perfect.
And so what I'd like in advance of the official report coming out
is perhaps a staff report to us before the new season starts for
FC Naples so that if there are specific little things that we can tweak
between now and the beginning of the March season we can do that.
For example, I understand some of the food was perhaps not to
the quality that we would prefer. Now, that's -- you know, I wasn't
there, but I've just heard some comments that the food was kind of
expensive and not particularly good.
And so those are the types of things that we can work on
between now and the time that we get this report. I think this report
is a great concept and a great idea, but it's going to take us a little
time to get it. I think we need some pieces of this put together by
staff. And I think that our staff, they're out there, and I think they
can -- they can work on a report to us on that and maybe some areas
of improvement.
Do we have a registered speaker? I think we -- it looks like we
have a representative of Sports Facility Management. Do you want
to make any comment, or are you just here to see what we're going to
do to you?
MR. ADAMS: Just here to answer questions if you have them.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Any questions for our
management company?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. So with that, any other
comments before we take a vote?
(No response.)
December 9, 2025
Page 122
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: If not, is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'll make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and
second to approve. I would only add to that that -- have staff come
back as quickly as possible. If January 13th works as a time to come
back with some ideas, let's do that.
All in favor of the motion, 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.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
Item #11A
AWARD INVITATION TO BID (“ITB”) NO. 25-8429,
“POINCIANA VILLAGE STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS” TO
QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC., IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT
OF $5,840,677.95, APPROVE AN OWNER’S ALLOWANCE OF
$584,067.80, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE
ATTACHED AGREEMENT, AND AUTHORIZE ALL
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS. (PROJECT NO. 50200)
(JAY AHMAD, DIVISION DIRECTOR TRANSPORTATION
ENGINEERING) - MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER
December 9, 2025
Page 123
KOWAL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL –
APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 11.
Item 11A is a recommendation to award Invitation to Bid
No. 25-8429, Poinciana Village Stormwater Improvements, to
Quality Enterprises USA, Inc., in the amount of $5,840,677.95,
approve an owner's allowance of $584,067.80, authorize the Chair to
sign the attached agreement, and authorize all necessary budget
amendments.
Mr. Jay Ahmad, your division director of Transportation
Engineering, is here to present or answer questions.
MR. AHMAD: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. I'm Jay Ahmad, your Transportation Engineering
director.
I have a presentation I'd be happy to present, or I can answer
questions.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Let's see if there are any
questions or comments. Do we need a full presentation?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I'll just say a word or two, if you
don't mind.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes, sir. Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: This is in my district. And I have
to say really, I don't -- like, I can't speak on what happened before I
got here, but since I've been gone on this board, I've seen a lot of
movement in getting these -- towards these projects and actually
getting some dates to kick them off and get them moving in the right
direction.
This particular community is in dire need of this stormwater
improvement. You know, they had -- I know we had to do special
provisions before Ian to get canals drained and stuff like that ahead of
December 9, 2025
Page 124
time, get special emergency permits because we knew they were in a
very -- you know, in a pickle, and their infrastructure was in dire
needs. So these are the type of projects I like to see, especially in my
district.
I used the word "old," but people tell me to say "aged" district.
Yeah, we're coming up on those years, 60, 70 years of infrastructure
that needs to be addressed. So I just -- I would like to make a motion
to approve it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and
second. Any registered speakers?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Mr. Miller, do we have any
registered speakers on this item?
MR. MILLER: We do not, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All in favor of the motion, 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.
MR. AHMAD: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
Item #11C
December 9, 2025
Page 125
STAFF TO ADVERTISE AND BRING BACK FOR A PUBLIC
HEARING, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, TO UPDATE THE REGULATIONS
PERTAINING TO THE REMOVAL OF PROHIBITED EXOTIC
VEGETATION [PL20250006145] (COMMISSIONER SAUNDER’S
REQUEST) - MOTION TO APPROVE WITH CHANGES AND
BRING BACK FOR THE JANUARY 13, 2026, MEETING BY
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to our
add-on item, 11C. This is a recommendation to direct staff to
advertise and bring back for a public hearing an ordinance amending
the Land Development Code to update the regulations pertaining to
the removal of prohibited exotic vegetation. This item is brought to
the agenda at Commissioner Saunders' request.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. The reason I put this on -- it
was scheduled to be heard for advertising in January, I think the
second meeting in January. What I'd like to do is have this come
back at our first meeting in January for final consideration. The
reason is that there are some folks that are not able to get a CO
because of existing -- this existing ordinance, and this amendment
may help them out.
And there's really no reason for us to hold off a couple months
to get this done. So that's why I've added it to this meeting and
would request that it come back at our meeting on January 13th, I
believe is our next meeting.
Mr. Bosi, you're recognized.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
This is the contents of the actual amendments that were
requesting the advertisement for. What it's providing for, it says,
December 9, 2025
Page 126
"Before you get your certificate of occupancy, you have to clear the
exotics from your lot." We've created -- but it also had said any
additions to that -- to that -- to that permit on a single-family or a
two-family lot that would require the exotics to be removed again.
This -- this carves out an exception to that, and it allows for the
Estates lots that have been issued a certificate of occupancy to be
only responsible for removing the prohibited exotic vegetation within
30 feet of the addition or modification of structures described in the
permit application submitted for principal or accessory structures on
or after December 12th, 2023.
So what that's saying is you only have to clear around -- 30 feet
around what's being proposed, a shed or whatever the addition is, not
having to clear the entire lot again to provide for a little bit of
flexibility within the exotic removal process. And if it's the desire of
the Board to bring this back for the -- bring this back on the 13th of
January with a recommendation to approve the direction to advertise,
we'll advertise it and bring it back on the 13th.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, the request was I thought that
we could authorize the advertisement of this ordinance today and
bring it back for final approval on January 13th.
MR. BOSI: And that's what I -- yes, that's what I was -- if you
direct us to advertise, we will advertise this, make sure that we
advertise it so it's advertised and will be on the 13th agenda.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Maybe I misunderstood
what you said.
All right. Any other -- Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No. Complete support.
Really happy that you pushed this forward. The previous ordinance
was onerous. A huge dredge on our population that's, in fact, already
here. And so I'm really happy that this is coming forward. And I
basically -- just so you know, I like the cleanup language that was
December 9, 2025
Page 127
brought into it from what was, in fact, proposed to what's being
proposed here, so...
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you. So is this only for
Estates?
MR. BOSI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALL: The carve-out?
MR. BOSI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALL: So the lots in Pine Ridge Estates or
Livingston Woods or -- they all have to clear their exotics over and
over and over even if they build a shed?
MR. BOSI: If they were adding a shed, yes, they would have to.
COMMISSIONER HALL: I don't like it. I like it if they buy a
new lot and they build a new house, clean the exotics up, but after
that, I want these people not to be burdened and not to be onerous,
because there's older -- the reason why I mentioned this in the
beginning is I know of two instances. One was a widow lady. Her
exotics were, like, 20,000 bucks, and she couldn't do what she wanted
to do which was add a screen or something on her back -- on her back
porch.
I would like to see it included -- or I'd like to see all the lots that
are in the county included in this. And I don't know why it couldn't
be if -- even if they have to keep their fence -- if they have to keep
their exotics off of the neighbors, I understand that. But to build a
shed or to do something -- to put a sidewalk in from their house to
their outside kitchen, to have to clear the exotics off I think is super
onerous.
MR. BOSI: And if that's the direction of the entire Board of
County Commissioners to make this applicable to if you've already
got a CO on your primary structure and you were adding an addition,
this exemption carve-out would apply to single-family and all Estates
December 9, 2025
Page 128
lots, we could make that modification if that's the majority direction.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Let's see. Is there any
objection to that change?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Not at all.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. So let's go ahead and --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I was under the assumption that's
what we talked about a year and a half ago.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. Let's go ahead and add that
for the January 13th.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm good with that, too. I like
that idea.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We need a motion, then, to move
this forward.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and a second.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: With those -- with those
additions.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah, with the changes
recommended by Commissioner Hall.
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 #11E
December 9, 2025
Page 129
DECLARE A VALID PUBLIC EMERGENCY TO BRING THE
UNPASSABLE ROADS IN THE PRIVATE ROAD EMERGENCY
REPAIR MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING UNIT (MSTU) TO A
PASSABLE CONDITION, ALLOW FOR A LOAN FROM
CAPITAL RESERVES IN THE AMOUNT OF $1.5M, APPROVE
PURCHASE ORDERS FOR QUALITY ENTERPRISES FOR A
TOTAL AMOUNT OF $1,238,800 TO COMPLETE NECESSARY
REPAIRS BY FIRE DISTRICT ZONE FOR THE PRIVATE
UNPAVED ROAD EMERGENCY REPAIR MSTU AND
AUTHORIZE ANY NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS –
MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO CREATE AND
SUBMIT AN AGO REQUEST BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, Item 11E is formerly
16B18. This is a recommendation to declare a valid public
emergency to bring the unpassable roads in the Private Road
Emergency Repair Municipal Services Taxing Unit to a passable
condition, allow for a loan from Capital Reserves in the amount of
$1.5 million, approve purchase orders for Quality Enterprises for a
total amount of $1,238,800 to complete the necessary repairs by fire
district zone for the Private Unpaved Road Emergency Repair
MSTU, and authorize any necessary budget amendments.
This item is moved to the regular agenda by Commissioner
Saunders, Hall, and Kowal's separate requests, and Ms. Trinity Scott,
your department head for Transportation Management Services, is
here to present or answer questions.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, let me start by just saying
why I had requested this to be pulled off the consent agenda. I don't
oppose it, but it just struck me as -- that we've created a scenario that,
December 9, 2025
Page 130
on its face, is somewhat unfair. And I want to find ways to make it
fair. Not to eliminate it, but to make it fair.
So, for example, the roads that are going to be improved in the
first batch are the ones that need it the most, and I don't have any
issue with that at all, but the other roads in that area will not have
funding available for 13, 14, 15 years, but they'll continue to be
taxed.
And so part of the problem, I think, is that there's a cap on the
millage rate, which may be problematic, and, secondly, maybe there's
a way to improve this so that once a -- once -- if you're on a road
that's going to be fixed, perhaps there's additional fees for that.
Commissioner McDaniel, this was really your item.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So if you've got some ideas on how
to make this more fair, that's what I'm looking for.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro -- well,
we had two other people that pulled this off.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You know what, I'll go last
after I hear -- you four are the ones that pulled it, so...
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'll just add briefly, so there's
some roads in my district that are affected by this, correct, Trinity,
obviously. And we've talked quite a bit. And I won't venture to
know that I have the answer. The Clerk had some issues that she sent
to all of us that had merit. Even in our discussions, nobody's raising
their arms saying, "Hey, we solved it."
But the underlying issues, these are unsafe roads. We have first
responders who have sent us notes saying we're concerned that we
can't, you know, go down these particular roads. We can't afford to,
you know, kick the can, and not that we're doing that.
But help us find the right solution, get it -- you've gotten input
December 9, 2025
Page 131
now from the Clerk, from all the commissioners, your own staff and
whatnot, and now maybe we'll hear something from, you know,
Commissioner Daniel [sic] who's knee-deep into this one where he's
got some direction, which I hope.
But it's hard for me to answer my constituents when they say,
"What's the latest with the Six L’s road?" And granted, some
of -- some of these roads not being in excellent condition, they're
partly to blame. There's enough blame to go around. But we want to
find a solution.
So we don't have a time machine. We can't go back in time. So,
you know, I want to make sure we push forward toward something
and not just shoot down a whole bunch of ideas that maybe aren't the
best ones. Okay, great. I love when somebody says, "Hey, this isn't
really the best idea."
Then I go, "Okay. So what's the better one?" And if you don't
have it, then, you know, a bad idea sometimes is better than no idea.
Sometimes, sometimes.
So I'm hoping we can -- we can really march towards something
because, you know, every rainy reason, every storm season, those
roads don't get better, and we all know that.
But like you said, I think Commissioner McDaniel having the
last word here would be great, because I'm sure he's sitting on a few
ideas, but...
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I think what I would want to add to
that is I'm not looking for solutions to this issue at this hearing,
because I think what we're going to do today, what my position is, we
approve this today and direct staff to come back and --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Way forward.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- with a way to fix this, and
Commissioner McDaniel would be a prime participant in that
discussion.
December 9, 2025
Page 132
Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you. I pulled it just for one
reason. I love the idea. I love the MSTU that's created. But when I
saw the expense, the 1.5 million, I wasn't shocked because I knew it
was coming, but I did -- I was kind of shocked at the amount of
money that we collected, $142,000. So to pay that loan back, it's
going to take us 15 -- 10, 15 years, which is going to be farther out
than, I think, what the actual improvements are going to last.
So my only point was, I think that we need to look at raising the
millage and collect the millage on the private roads so that we can
create a five-year payback, and after that, if we start getting a
little -- you know, after we get the roads improved and get the loans
paid back, if the -- if the improvements are lasting and we get a little
surplus, then we can always adjust the millage every year to back it
off.
But even if we tripled the millage on the collections, it's still a
whole lot better off on every homeowner than having to come up
with the improvements themselves.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALL: And it's everybody that's
participating. So that's my only thought.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel. No one
else sell is lit up, so...
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Oh, I'm sorry. I just thought you
were going down the row.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I'm sorry. Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He's going down -- he's
actually going down a private dirt road.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yes, he's going down a private
dirt road.
I know I've dragged kicking and screaming on this thing over
December 9, 2025
Page 133
several months, but I won't relive that. Yeah, I was the same thing. I
know we all agreed and we all said, you know, we're going to cap
this at the one mil, or whatever it was, and, you know, you-all were
kind of like pushing it. Let's make it happen.
You know, in the long run it's good. But then when I saw the
actual numbers and they were pulling 1.5 from, you know, the
Capital Fund and sliding it over, and I saw the same numbers looking
at 14 to 15 years paying this one, you know, segment of it back, and
then, you know, denying -- denying the opportunity for the people to
be paying into it over those 15 years, and they're probably not even
going to get their roads touched yet.
And then what do we have guarantee that we go fix these roads
at the 1.5, and that -- this is a perishable thing. We're not going in
paving these roads. We're not asphalting. We're not draining them.
We're not putting storm drains. You know, these are just -- we're
dumping good material over bad material and hoping it will last
through the next couple storms. It's perishable, you know, and I think
we all have to understand that.
And then what do we do now -- how do we enforce the fact that
we came in, we fixed these really bad roads we know to be fixed for
public safety reasons, which I agree with -- how do we hold their feet
to the fire now that they maintain it? How do we hold their feet to
the fire? How do they maintain it after we fix it? Because we don't
want to have to come back and fix their -- because typically, if it's a
really, really bad road, there's a reason. It's because it's either
sink-holed, infested. It's going to keep having that problem over and
over, historically, and they're probably going to be the worst roads
again four or five years down the road.
So how do we hold their feet to the fire that when they are
finally -- their roads are brought to a certain standard, how do we
force them to maintain it from that point on so we can move on to the
December 9, 2025
Page 134
next roads that need the next ability to be addressed for public safety
concerns?
And I agree that we probably -- I'm going to support this, but I
think we really, really need to take a long, hard look on how we're
going to -- you know, to create this MSTU and how we're going to
collect this money, at what levels, at what times. I think it should be
a flexible thing that we could look at. I don't know what the
increments would be, but as it comes up, we have the ability to adjust
the millage rate to keep it at more like a four- or five-year payback.
So that's kind of my opinion on it.
But I'd really like to see those answers. It's easy to fix
something, but how do we make sure it's maintained? And that's -- I
think that's just as important as fixing it, so...
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Ms. Kinzel, did you want to say
something before Commissioner McDaniel?
MS. KINZEL: No, no, no. Whenever -- next.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't want to talk until she's
done.
MS. KINZEL: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No,
because -- because -- please, Madam Clerk. I'll wait till she's
completed, and then we'll call the -- I'll make my adjustments, and
then we'll go.
MS. KINZEL: Okay, Commissioners, and thank you so much.
I provided everyone with the information that I had. Talked to
the County Attorney, talked to individuals, you-all.
Everything I'm reading and seeing from every AGO that's been
created says that you cannot use public funds to repair private roads.
It goes so far on some of these AGOs that say the fact that certain
December 9, 2025
Page 135
public vehicles such as school buses or ambulances or mail services
used a private road does not authorize the County to expand your
taxing authority to maintain these roads when -- which general public
doesn't drive on.
Those road descriptions -- I'm going to get with Trinity and get
the actual roads and everything. I think we reviewed this over a year
ago. I had cautions for everyone then. The establishment of an
MSTU seemed a little clearer, but I'll be honest, in researching this
further, AGO 9231, an old one, says the MSU [sic] does not avoid the
constitutional prohibition directly on point to the Florida -- you
know, to this Attorney General's.
The opinion states, for example, a city did not have the authority
to create a taxing district to cover unit costs associated with private
common areas such as maintenance costs, liability, property taxes,
even if the tax is only imposed on those homeowners that are
primarily benefiting.
So I was looking for something to counteract this, a more recent
opinion, a more recent legal status. I don't think the County Attorney
had one. These are older, but they stand until they don't.
And so at best I would suggest we do a very specific AGO with
our circumstances and our particulars and get this resolved so that if
the law changes, the law changes. But the way I'm reading
everything right now, I don't think we have the ability.
And the glitch was, again, borrowing 1.5 very clearly from
public funds in capital projects that have already been budgeted,
considered, and authorized, taking money out of that to have a
payback of 15 years or five years or three years, these AGOs all seem
to support "can't do it." So I want to put that on the record.
Be glad to work with staff, do what we have to do. And I would
like to get some more information on the specificity of the roads. Be
glad to draft up the AGO request, bring it back and get it authorized
December 9, 2025
Page 136
by the Board, and we do it as a joint request, would be my preference
at a minimum.
Thanks.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, I think that this may be the
opportune time to ask the County Attorney. I mean, I don't want to
be flippant or anything. You know, AGOs are things to consider, but
they're not binding. And then -- you're better off following them
when you don't have any other authority.
And so I'm going to turn to the County Attorney and ask the
County Attorney, we adopted this ordinance, felt that we were doing
something that was legal. And so I'm going to place the burden on
our County Attorney to tell us are we going -- is this going down an
illegal path, or do we have the ability to continue along the path that
we're on?
MR. KLATZKOW: I've put up on -- I've put on the overhead
one of the AG opinions. It says that "a county may supply county
grading of private roads if payment of all actual cost is undertaken by
the owner of the private road." I think the disconnect I have with the
Clerk is whether or not we could advance the funds.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Whether or not what?
MR. KLATZKOW: We could advance the funds.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Ah, yeah.
MR. KLATZKOW: But from a practical standpoint, by the time
you've generated $1.5 million to do this, the costs will go up anyway.
But I think we're fine.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. So I guess the question
becomes how do we get the payment made more quickly than over
the 12 or 15 years. And that's where Commissioner McDaniel's
expertise will come in in solving this problem.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have a couple ideas.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
December 9, 2025
Page 137
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you.
And I'm -- Commissioner Hall, I'm -- you know, first of all,
thank you all for your support -- this circumstance has been prevalent
since Commissioner Coletta was in District 5 seat.
These private -- these private dirt roads have been a thorn in our
side, prominently from a health, safety, and welfare standpoint, and
primarily that's why local government exists is to protect our people.
This was an answer that I came up with without further
regulation. Without -- I mean, we could compel these people by law
to fix the roads and burden them even in excess of what we're, in fact,
doing, but I'm not a proponent of that either.
I'm not opposed to writing up -- requesting an AGO on this just
to make sure we're within Hoyle. I think we are within Hoyle. I have
read these opinions that the Clerk's lawyer has put out. And I think
that every single -- every single AGO, every single legal opinion is
based upon a different set of facts. And the facts that are prevalent
here in Collier County don't line up with a lot of these.
I would suggest that we work with the Clerk, our staff work with
the Clerk to find an applicable reserve account that can be drawn
from that doesn't conflict with the law. I do think that it is prudent
for us to go forward and do this. What we do know that we didn't
know before is effectively how much it's going to cost -- and how
many miles of roads are we contemplating fixing here, Trinity,
plus/minus?
MS. SCOTT: I have that number.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, plus/minus.
MS. SCOTT: Just under 20, 19.459 miles.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I had 20 in my head. So we're
going to monitor per road what the cost associated is going to, in fact,
be. I'm in complete agreement, Commissioner Saunders, in lifting
the cap on the -- on the millage rate. We'll do an assessment before
December 9, 2025
Page 138
our next budget hearing. Increase the tax -- even if it's on a per-road
basis, increase the millage rate commensurately to not totally burden
the people but also service the -- service the payback period and
shorten that time frame down and not shy the other people that are in
the system that are in the MSTU that are looking ultimately for -- to
have their roads brought up to snuff.
Now, Commissioner Kowal, your comment is with regard to the
ongoing maintenance. It's always been contemplated that we're going
to continue -- you are correct. This isn't a one-time fix. It's always
been contemplated that we're going to continue to salt these roads.
That's the reason that we're collecting 150,000 a year now. A
hundred was going to go to debt service. The other 40- was going to
be appropriated to ongoing maintenance -- other 50-.
And so -- but all you need's one heavy rainfall year and a whole
bunch more, a whole bunch more expenses go up. But this is going
to require ongoing maintenance, ongoing assessment, and then an
adjustment in these -- in these assessed valuations to reduce this
payback period of time.
It really doesn't -- my personal opinion, depending on what
bucket, as we were talking about before, where we get the money to,
in fact, do the roads or to do the improvements, as long as -- as long
as that bucket is going to be replenished, it really -- I'm not all that
concerned about the actual time. I just want to make sure that we're
not shying to people that are already in the MSTU, depleting all of
the funds and not fixing the roads that are, in fact, necessary.
So we can do an assessment on that five-year proposition,
Commissioner Hall. I'm totally fine with that, just to have a look and
see what the imposition is on those folks. We'll know exactly on a
per-road basis what the costs associated for the repairs, in fact, are.
We'll then -- we'll also have an ongoing maintenance accumulation as
we're -- as we're doing the salting -- I call it salting. That's what you
December 9, 2025
Page 139
do is you spread a little gravel and do your thing, fix your holes and
whatnot.
And we work with the Clerk's Office to find an appropriate fund
that can be utilized to front the money to take care of the necessary
repairs and have a -- have a proper mechanism in place to repay it.
I think that -- the fact that we're doing this under -- you were
very specific with regard to the public emergency, valid public
emergency. That lifts a lot of the shrouds of concerns that have, in
fact, been raised, and that's necessarily why we're doing this, why we
can take public assets onto -- onto private property and take care of
these things.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I think the big problem here is -- or
a problem here is that we don't intend -- or I certainly don't intend to
put the Clerk in a position of having to write a check that she
considers to be an illegal use of public funds.
And so, you know, we can approve this today -- I'm just kind of
thinking out loud while the Clerk is here. We can approve this today,
and it will sound like we've done something positive. But when it
comes down to are we actually going to pay the bill, that's where the
Clerk has to determine whether it's a lawful use of funds. That's her
responsibility, and she's telling us that that's a problem.
And so, you know, I'm trying to find a way to solve all of this.
Yes, ma'am.
MS. KINZEL: And could I just put one other thing -- going into
the legal side, which is lawyers, but also the fiscal side, as your
comptroller. We don't borrow funds ordinarily -- beach
renourishment. They wash away at the next big hurricane. They
wash away at this. It's one of the things that you try to maintain a
"pay as you go" in any framework of what we're doing. You don't
borrow more funds than the life of the asset for which you are paying.
You don't -- 30 years. We went through this with the Pace
December 9, 2025
Page 140
where -- 30 years for an air-conditioner, it's not going to last that long
in Florida.
These roads could wash away at the next event. You're a
million-five in debt to a public fund, if -- if we didn't even have this
legal issue, just going to a fiscally responsible avenue. These are the
worst of the roads. By the time you get down to the other segments
and the other segments, how much money are you planning on
borrowing and compounding?
You're in a vicious cycle. But making the individual
homeowner pay for their own driveway -- we have HOAs where they
assess me, and I have to pay those HOAs. And other people in this
community, you have a personal responsibility for your personal
property, driveway, roadway around my development.
So while it's only 19 miles, it could grandly expand. With other
people, what's my demand? Why are you -- why do I pay an HOA if
the whole good of the community's going to pay for my road if I don't
keep it up? There are a lot of fiscally responsible elements to this
that I hope the Board will take into consideration also.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes. Okay. Well, like I said, you
know, my concern now is making sure --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The legality of it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- that we're paying, you know --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Our County Attorney has
said --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: There's got to be a way.
MR. KLATZKOW: Would you like an Attorney General
Opinion, sir? We should get that before --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, that clears it for every --
MS. KINZEL: It will take that for me to pay, quite frankly.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That clears it for everybody.
Now, the risk, of course, is that we ask for a County
December 9, 2025
Page 141
Attorney -- or Attorney General Opinion, and it comes back saying
we can't do this.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So, I mean, that's -- but then again,
that's kind of where we are right now.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm totally fine with that as
opposed to accepting the Clerk's opinion on a legal --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. No. I understand.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- on the legal aspect of it.
With all due respect, I don't --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That does -- that does --
MS. KINZEL: And, Commissioner, that does not offend me. I
need the cover one of that with my own attorney's advice on --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And that's where -- that's
where I suggested that we --
MS. KINZEL: That's why we have the AGO.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- utilize the -- utilize your
office as far as making sure that what we're doing's, in fact, legal.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So that's what I would recommend.
Now, that means we defer this until we get the AGO.
MR. KLATZKOW: But the other opportunity you have -- the
other opportunity you have is to go to court on this issue and get a
judge -- a judge to do it rather than an attorney from the AG. It
would be a declaratory judgment. It would not be a hostile lawsuit at
all. It's just putting to the judge: "These are the facts. What is the
law?"
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I prefer the AGO approach. I think
it's quicker, and -- I don't know.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm fine -- I'm fine with the
AGO approach.
MS. KINZEL: Probably free.
December 9, 2025
Page 142
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
MS. KINZEL: We'll draft it with your office. If you don't care,
we'll do that.
COMMISSIONER HALL: I mean, one of the options that
hasn't been mentioned is we can always borrow from Conservation
Collier. I'm just teasing. I'm just teasing. I'm just teasing.
MS. KINZEL: I know. Okay.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: It does fall under emergency.
MS. KINZEL: All right. To lighten --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: You know what's going to happen
is somebody's going to get a transcript, and they're going to use that,
"I could borrow -- we could borrow from Conservation Collier," and
the "I'm just teasing" part will be left off the quote.
MS. KINZEL: Actually, Commissioners, I was going to --
COMMISSIONER HALL: I couldn't help myself.
MS. KINZEL: I was going to add a bit of levity by saying that
there are paychecks of commissioners that want to do this, that we
could maybe tap into those donations. Just kidding. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. So we have --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I like asking the Attorney
General.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: -- what may very well be a plan.
Commissioner McDaniel, why don't you -- if you can crystallize this.
You don't have an objection to an AGO. The County Attorney's
indicated he'll get that, or he'll file a friendly lawsuit.
Whatever -- whatever approach you think is best, let's go ahead and
make a motion. But that -- again, that's going to delay this.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The problem -- I mean, the
motion's going to have to be to defer this again, and the people that
are living on these 19 miles of roads, again, are not going to have any
particular relief. And I -- I'm frustrated at the least, in order to -- in
December 9, 2025
Page 143
order to defer this any further. I'm not -- I'm not opposed to doing it.
I mean, if that's what we -- if that's what we, in fact, have to do.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's -- let me suggest this. Let's
ask for the AGO or ask the County Attorney to file a lawsuit. While
that's pending, take a look at the ordinance and see if there's some
way we can fix this and bring it back where we're not using public
funds on a private road. That means increasing the millage rate.
Maybe that means assessing individual property owners when a road
is fixed in front of their property. But some way to enhance the
revenue from this. Now, that's a --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The issue that we're dealing
with here, Commissioner Saunders, is that's the way that it was
always done in the past. Whenever a road became impassable, the
County did an emergency special assessment and whacked those
people for that particular cost. The -- and did it again when a storm
event, in fact, came through and damaged their road.
This holistic approach was a way to spread that burden out
over -- over the entire 100-and-something-odd miles of -- I don't
know. And that's, you know, one thing, Trinity, that you and I talked
about, I don't know how many people actually -- we had to put the
opt-out provisions in because there are some people that live on
private roads that take care of them.
MS. SCOTT: We started with just over 71 miles in the MSTU.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
MS. SCOTT: We had just under 25 miles -- 24.6 miles opt out.
And so we currently have just over 47 miles that are in the MSTU
with the mileage -- the just 19.5 miles that need attention.
And in the past -- we actually have another MSTU that has a
long payback as well, 42nd Street, but in the past it was never a
question of payment because the County, Road
Maintenance -- because they were just one-offs. It was one road.
December 9, 2025
Page 144
Road Maintenance would actually go out and do the work. And we
had lime rock, so there was never a question of payment. In this
particular instance, this is 19 and a half miles. This is going to take a
lot of resources. And I can't pull the Road Maintenance team off to
be able to take care of these 19 miles.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
MS. SCOTT: So that's why the need to be able to hire a
contractor to be able to take care of this to be able to get it taken care
of in one fell swoop.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So you want me to -- are you
suggesting I continue this until we get the AGO opinion?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, I don't know that we have a
whole lot of choices because, again, we can't put the Clerk in the
position of writing a check they she's not going to feel is legal. She's
not going to do that, so we have contractors that simply wouldn't get
paid.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're not going to do that.
All right. So I'll move to continue it till the AGO opinion comes
back.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And in the interim, while
you're -- while we're waiting for that, take a look at how we might be
able to fix this.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, the -- the short answer
is what Commissioner Hall suggested. We amended the
Conservation Collier ordinance that in a declaration of emergency we
could borrow from that fund.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It's still public funds. I mean, that
doesn't get you where you want to go.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I understand, but where else
do we have funds that aren't public funds, sir?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We don't.
December 9, 2025
Page 145
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Can we put some Charlie Kirk
signs on those roads and have Phoenix pay for it?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Maybe.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. Just checking.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll continue the -- I'm sorry.
MS. SCOTT: I was going to say, continue the item. We did
contact our vendor last night, and they did agree to hold our bid
prices because that was in the -- that was the reason why this was
coming forward is our quote was going to expire. So they have
agreed to hold our bid prices, so we'll work through that. Hopefully
we can get an AGO opinion back quickly because they're not going
to hold them indefinitely.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It certainly won't be quickly
with the holiday coming upon us.
MS. SCOTT: Right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: But, I mean, I don't know how
long those things usually take. It all depends on the complexity of
the question, I would assume, so...
MR. KLATZKOW: We've done it in the past. The time frame
varies considerably.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Sir?
MR. KLATZKOW: We've done this in the past, AG opinions.
And sometimes we get them quick, and sometimes we don't.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. Okay. So for now
we'll continue this until we, in fact, receive the AGO's opinion on it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And I would suggest that the
County Attorney works with the Clerk in the wording of this request
so that it's a request coming from two governmental entities as
opposed to just one.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So we have a motion. I'll second
December 9, 2025
Page 146
that.
Any further 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.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And just -- and just as a
footnote, we want to make sure that when we do come back, if we do
come back, we address the other concerns that were brought forward
with regard to the cap and make sure that we have the proper
assessment amount on the per-road basis so we can make those
decisions in the budget hearings.
MS. SCOTT: Certainly.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Ms. Patterson.
Item #15A
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS –
PUBLIC COMMENS 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.
December 9, 2025
Page 147
Item 15A is public comments on general topics not on the
current or future agenda by individuals not already heard during the
previous public comments in the meeting.
MR. MILLER: We have none.
Item #15B
STAFF PROJECT UPDATES
MS. PATTERSON: Item 15B is staff project updates. We do
not have any today.
Item #15C
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MS. PATTERSON: That brings us to Item 15C, staff and
commission general communications.
The only thing I have for you today is we are close to having to
implement a burn ban, so I'll keep you-all posted as the drought
numbers continue to go in the wrong direction. Let's hope for rain.
But I was advised several weeks ago by the fire chiefs that we're
pretty -- we're pretty close. So I do have the authority to put that in
place, and then I'll bring it back to you, but we'll advise you in
advance if we -- if we get there.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Do you want us to just
give you the authority once the fire chief requests it?
MS. PATTERSON: I already have it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. So you don't have to come
back to us?
MS. PATTERSON: No. I'll come back to you -- I mean, there's
December 9, 2025
Page 148
things I'll do afterwards. But I'll still advise you when we get there so
you're not surprised.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Great.
MS. PATTERSON: And we will make sure that in advance of
that we put out social media and other educational posts for people so
they understand what's happening.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right.
MS. PATTERSON: Other than that, I hope everybody enjoys
their holiday.
And, County Attorney.
MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
I'd just like to wish everybody a Merry Christmas and a Happy
New Year, and I'll see you when we get back to work.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you.
And me, again, Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, whatever
you want to do.
And I'm looking forward to Commissioner Kowal being in the
middle seat; wish him the best with that.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That's two of us.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Two little quick feel-good items.
The Vanderbilt Beach pickleball facility that we all did with the 20
new pickleball courts and eight new tennis courts had a soft opening
right after Thanksgiving, and that's going super well. And they'll
have an official ribbon cutting with our private-public partnership
with the Pelican Bay people sometime next month.
December the 19th at 2 o'clock we have our baby box blessing.
The baby box is in. It's operational, and they're going to come down
and fully bless the box. And we invite everybody out there. So that's
December 9, 2025
Page 149
December the 19th at 2 o'clock.
And with that, I'm finished.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner
McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Commissioner
Saunders, number one, congratulations, you did a good job this
year --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- serving as our chair. I'm
not sure how Kowal's going to do matching up to you, but I think
we'll get him through it.
I also want to wish everybody a Merry Christmas, Happy New
Year, whichever way you swing on those things.
I have an issue in Immokalee that I need to address. There's a
person that has leased, bought, done something with the old firehouse
in Immokalee, because they built a new one on New Market. They
built a new one over there. So number one, there is a -- there is an
active zoning action in place to allow for a comparable-use
amendment to be brought into the industrial zoning to allow
this -- this is a doggy daycare center.
There's an active zoning action in place. And with -- so with
that active zoning in place, I would like to afford them a
temporary-use permit while that active zoning is in place for them to
get through the three- or four-month process of actual getting the
comparable-use determination accomplished and being there allowed
to legally go order forward.
I'd like to offer up the opportunity for them to have a
temporary-use permit, because he's already been in, done
improvements, so on and so forths, while this active zoning
circumstance for the comparable use has, in fact, been in place.
So there's two items that we need to -- that I want to address and
December 9, 2025
Page 150
that is allow for the temporary use to go forward while the active
zoning action is, in fact, in place. Did I spit that all out okay?
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He'll probably say it better
than me.
MR. BOSI: And currently we are in the process of amending
the Land Development Code. It came to our attention that the
industrial zoning category is the only category that doesn't have the
comparable-use language at the end of it, so you can't seek a
comparable use in the industrial zoning category, and we don't think
that benefits anybody. So we're in the process of adding that, but it
takes three to four months to add that into the official process.
So we would ask the Board to declare that an "active zoning in
progress" so they can move forward with their comparable use, and
in the meantime, while they're doing that, because that still will take a
couple -- a month or two to get to the HEX and have the hearing and
then have the final decision made upon that, they're asking the Board
to exercise the right under 5.04.05.E, which is a temporary use not
else classified, to allow for the applicant to move forward on a
temporary-use basis. And he had indicated, at his own risk, that his
comparable use will be approved to be able to operate, because he's
trying to capture the holiday season for the Immokalee community
and individuals with pets who may be leaving town, and I guess he
has some clients already lined up.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So as I said, he said it way
better than me.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Then, Mr. Klatzkow, I
assume that there's no problem with Commissioner McDaniel making
that motion and moving in that direction?
MR. KLATZKOW: We've done zoning in progress multiple
times here. It's fine.
December 9, 2025
Page 151
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So I'll make that motion with
the zoning in progress and the comparable use and then a temporary
use for up to four months.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. I'll second.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. 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.
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I, too, wanted to thank
Commissioner Saunders. A year goes by fast, right --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Actually it did.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- sitting in this seat?
One of the things that I really like that we do -- and I spent some
time with Cecil Pendergrass up in Lee County a couple -- maybe
about a month or so ago -- and even how some of the municipalities
function. I really think by us rotating it once a year and giving us all
a chance is really a smart way.
And when I was talking to Cecil and I was telling him the
advantage of that, you know, he was sort of scratching his head, and
he was saying, "Wow."
And I said, "Yeah." You know, I mean, when you sit as the
Chair, you get a little different exposure to the staff. You also run the
meeting, and I just think it's a great thing, and we all get a chance to
December 9, 2025
Page 152
do it. We've all -- Commissioner Kowal now will have his first
chance of doing it. And so it's a real advantage. But, you know,
thank you, sir. Like I said, you know, a year goes by very fast. And,
you know, we look to Commissioner Kowal's leadership, which I
know will be stellar.
Just two quick things. One is -- and I'll just say to my
colleagues here, at our first commissioner meeting on January 13th,
one -- a big heavy lifting thing is on the agenda, okay. It's the citrus
grove/Sabal Palm, okay. It's another Costco-y thing. But the
difference is it -- it is kind of complicated. And so alls I say is, trust
me, I'm knee deep into it. We're not going to discuss it here. But
between now and the 13th, it would really help the
discussion -- Mr. Bosi has got all the detail, so if you've got time to
sit and meet with him and add that to your list to really understand
the uniqueness of this one. It requires some very -- a little bit more
complicated in this discussion than just yay or nay on, you know, a
rezone or building something. And I'll just leave it at that.
And then I had spoken with Ms. Patterson yesterday in my
office, and I said I was going to throw her an option here to have her
comment on something that is heavily in the news, misinformed;
heavily on social media, misinformed; and something that she has
spent a lot of time with that it isn't getting quite the right media
details, and that has to do with our EMS helicopters.
And so when we spoke in my office, she educated me on the
difference between rumor and fact, but then I said, "Do you want me
to bring it up in my comments here so, on the record, you could sort
of give us a short version, separate rumor from fact, anybody who
might be listening?" But then it also allows us that if you get an
email from a constituent, you can say, "We spoke about this very
thing at our last commissioner meeting," and take some of the fine
points.
December 9, 2025
Page 153
But, you know, Amy, if you want to, you know, just fill in the
blanks of the many things that, you know, we don't know that you do
and some of the stuff that's untrue as well.
MS. PATTERSON: Sure. So there has been some activity on
social media regarding the EMS helicopter. As you all know, we
replaced the helicopter -- actually, it was a 2019 agenda item
planning to replace an aged helicopter, one that was becoming
increasingly unreliable and difficult to get parts for.
So it laid out a plan to order the new helicopter, get the new
helicopter here, and keep the second helicopter in service for up to a
year while we worked out the kinks with the new helicopter. The old
helicopter did stick around for a little while longer, but in that time it
didn't get any younger or any easier to get parts for. So there was
never really a scenario where we ever planned to have two
helicopters.
So the helicopter has since been sold in accordance with Board
direction. We do have the helicopter, but like all things, helicopters
do have difficulties. Most recently it was down for longer than we
anticipated due to an engine issue. During that time period, though,
we do have MOUs in place to utilize both Broward and Lee County's
helicopter should we have trauma alerts during that time period.
There seems to be an idea that we should have a second
helicopter available at all times. We do via MOUs but not by us
having two helicopters sitting there. Now, this is more than a
$10 million apparatus.
So the other thing that puts some perspective on this is that up
until about two months ago -- and I might be being generous -- we
were really evaluating all options for our flight program because we
couldn't hire a mechanic. And as you know, this is heavily regulated
by FAA how they can work, how long they can work.
So there's been times our helicopter has been down because our
December 9, 2025
Page 154
mechanic was mandated to take time off. So that was a real sticking
point. We have been very fortunate to hire a new director of
maintenance as well as a helicopter mechanic and have created a
pipeline with Collier County Public Schools for an internship
program through their aviation program that's going to bring interns
in to work on the helicopter as well under those qualified individuals.
But I wanted to put it out there, we take, obviously, the safety of
the public very seriously, and having the helicopter is another very
important piece of that puzzle. But we do have backup MOUs in
place to allow for those needed flights.
Helicopters go down for other reasons that are beyond our
control. Things like weather are not things we can control. So you
never had a helicopter available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year
because there are things beyond our control.
But we do our best to have that helicopter available. We have
dedicated pilots, flight crews, mechanics that are there serving the
public.
So there's a public records request that's in. We will answer
that, and we're going to try to meet with these folks that seem to
have, perhaps, been provided information that was not completely
accurate and see if we can answer those questions.
Potentially, they may want to come and speak to the Board,
which is -- which is great. We obviously love when the public
engages you as elected officials. But in advance of that, we will
provide that information to them.
And with that, if you -- I know each of you have probably seen
some of these emails coming in. But it did get a little bit -- a little bit
slanted from what's actually happening.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. Thank you.
And then Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, Happy New
Year.
December 9, 2025
Page 155
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: On the helicopter issue, I'm
wondering if we should turn that over to ResourceX to really take a
look at how we handle that. I don't have any issues with maintaining
the way we do it, but maybe that's not the best way, so --
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. We have found out some very
enlightening things about the out-source contracts that are utilized by
most of our public safety partners. We're one of the few that has an
in-house program, and there are a few others ones, but a lot utilize
outsourced resources.
We'll have ResourceX take a look at that, compare the two, and
provide that information.
Very important -- and you'll probably have heard that I've said
we need to look at outsourcing. We do, because the Board needs to
have all the information when you have to make decisions. It doesn't
mean we're going to do it, but it means I need to be able to answer to
you.
And the same thing with liability. Obviously, having a
helicopter, anytime it's up in the air, it not only incurs cost but
obviously incurs liability because we're putting an aircraft in the air.
These are all things that we manage every single day. It doesn't mean
that I personally feel one way or the other, but it's our job to provide
you-all all of the information so you can make informed decisions.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Any objection to having
ResourceX take a look at this, that issue?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, no. I think it's a good
idea. And on that note, one of the things that we're seeing from a
transition of population is a lot of people moving here from the other
side, and they're moving into rural yet residential areas, and they're
used to an advance or a helicopter being there when they came out of
the Dade/Broward County. That new subdivision, Sky Sail, I spoke
to them a couple of months ago, and these are folks that are coming
December 9, 2025
Page 156
here from the other side that are used to having a Publix on every
corner, not in our community. So I think that this analysis is perfect
and will provide additional information for our new residents.
MS. PATTERSON: It will be timely with the AUIR, although
I'm happy to -- even though it will take a little thunder out of the
AUIR, I will tell you that we have struggled for many years now with
EMS on how to put additional units up. And you may recall that
we've run -- we've run a deficiency for several years, a calculated
level-of-service deficiency in EMS.
We have hit the place now where we're going to be putting up
seven units in the next five years, and they are disbursed throughout
the county. So it's actually a really good turning of the corner for the
future of EMS and the way that we look at delivering that service.
But we will get in contact with ResourceX and have a look at this.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Amy, can I just ask this? And
it's not directive. It's just inquisitive. Because -- and I don't know,
maybe the other commissioners aren't -- you know, maybe I'm just a
target from people because they just send me a lot of emails. But at
times when we've gotten emails on things, whether it's a sports
complex or beach restoration or whatever, you and John Mullens
have worked together to give us sort of like a little one paragraph, so
we're all sort of saying the same thing because -- not that we should
be chasing Facebook and Nextdoor -- and I haven't commented on
any of those things, but I do monitor it to get a tone.
And, you know, you've got people out there that say things like,
"Wow, you're spending millions on the sport complex. What you
should be doing is buying two helicopters so people don't die,
millions on beach restoration," you know, those kind of things. And
so -- and not that we should be addressing some of those, you know,
comments that are apples and oranges, but maybe something
from -- you know, you all have done it before where you've sent
December 9, 2025
Page 157
something to the five of us and said, "If you needed a sound bite at a
town hall meeting or on an email or whatever, here's something that
could help you."
I know that those were very helpful to me, John, when you sent
us those things on the veterans nursing home to separate rumor from
fact and whatnot, and then, you know, we're all -- we're all singing
from the same sheet of music and not, you, know, freelancing maybe
on our own without all the details, because this is something you've
got a lot of depth in. We're just seeing some of the, you know, media
stuff out there.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I just know for me that would
be helpful.
MS. PATTERSON: We can put that together for you. It's not a
problem at all, yep.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. I have just one thing of
business. And we just approved the $150,000 for an education
campaign for the tourist tax. And there's going to be a lot of support
for this. I'm pretty confident that it's going to pass. You know, the
message is that it's a tax on our tourists, not a tax on our residents.
And so what I would like the Board to consider doing today is
some direction to staff. It takes us six months, eight months for us to
do a request for proposals, to evaluate bids, and on some projects that
will delay things for a year. What I'd like to do -- and it's the same
thing we did with the veterans nursing home. We got the State to do
a request for proposals for architects, engineers, and a contractor with
the condition that funding would be available. So there was no
obligation to move forward if there was no project. I'd like to do the
same thing with the sports fields and the field house for the sports
facility.
December 9, 2025
Page 158
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It kind of will accelerate that
construction.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. Direct staff -- we got the
fields first, so direct staff to design the RFP, or whatever competitive
process you need, have it issued, have select -- select contractors,
engineers, whatever you need to select for that, and have it -- have
them understand that it's conditional upon approval of the one-cent
tourist development tax in November of 2026. On the day that that
passes, we'll be in a position to issue a notice to proceed because
we'll have a revenue stream that will start in January of 2027, but in
addition, we'll already have tourist tax dollars that are available that
could speed this up a little bit. And so I just don't want to sit back
here and then -- and sometime in late 2027 we're still waiting to get a
contract to move forward on a project.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALL: No, I'm all for it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So that's my request. If there's any
objection -- so that's your direction on that.
MS. PATTERSON: Yep. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: On the other thing, I've got my
copy of Robert's Rules of Order that I'm going to give to
Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: You going to sign it?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: You'll be -- I will sign it, but you'll
be surprised to know it's never been opened. I suspect that after a
year of you having it, you won't open it as well.
And beyond that, I just want to wish everybody a happy, safe
holiday season. It's been a pleasure serving as your chairman, and
I'm looking forward to not serving as your chairman after we open
the meeting in January.
And with that, if there's nothing else, we are adjourned.
December 9, 2025
Page 159
*****
****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
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER
UTILITY FACILITIES; AND ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF
THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES
AND APPURTENANT UTILITY EASEMENTS FOR ORANGE
BLOSSOM RANCH OUTPARCELS [PL20250008188] – FINAL
INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY STAFF ON SEPTEMBER
5, 2025, AND FOUND THESE FACILITIES SATISFACTORY AND
ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A2
RESOLUTION 2025-248: A RESOLUTION FOR FINAL
ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS, AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT
DEDICATIONS, FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF VALENCIA TRAILS
NAPLES – PLAT TWO, APPLICATION NUMBER
PL20210000056, AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $321,752.35
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER, IRRIGATION
December 9, 2025
Page 160
QUALITY WATER, AND SEWER FACILITIES, AND ACCEPT
THE CONVEYANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER, IRRIGATION
QUALITY WATER, AND SEWER FACILITIES FOR SKYSAIL -
PHASE 2D. [PL20250002655] - FINAL INSPECTION WAS
CONDUCTED BY STAFF ON JUNE 17, 2025, AND FOUND
THESE FACILITIES SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A4
RESOLUTION 2025-249: A RESOLUTION FOR FINAL
ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS, AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT
DEDICATIONS, FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF VALENCIA TRAILS
NAPLES – PLAT THREE, APPLICATION NUMBER
PL20210000755, AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $352,117.84
Item #16A5
RESOLUTION 2025-250: A RESOLUTION FOR FINAL
ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS, AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT
DEDICATIONS, FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF VALENCIA TRAILS
NAPLES – PLAT THREE, APPLICATION NUMBER
PL20210002132, AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $617,293.80
Item #16A6
RESOLUTION 2025-251: A RESOLUTION FOR FINAL
December 9, 2025
Page 161
ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS, AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT
DEDICATIONS, INCLUDING THE DEDICATION OF TRACT
“R1”, FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF BRENTWOOD LAKES – PLAT
ONE (A/K/A VALENCIA TRAILS NAPLES – PLAT ONE),
APPLICATION NUMBER PL20180001880 (PPL) AND
APPLICATION NO. PL20190001608 (PPLA), AND AUTHORIZE
THE RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY IN THE
AMOUNT OF $594,912.54
Item #16A7
RESOLUTION 2025-252: 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 3, APPLICATION NUMBER PL20140001035,
AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE
SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $351,964.66
Item #16A8
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES
AND ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF THE SEWER
FACILITIES FOR MAREA LUXURY APARTMENTS – OFFSITE
FORCE MAIN IMPROVEMENTS. [PL20250006784] (THIS ITEM
IS A COMPANION TO ITEM #16A17) - FINAL INSPECTION
WAS CONDUCTED BY STAFF ON NOVEMBER 4, 2025, AND
FOUND THESE FACILITIES SATISFACTORY AND
ACCEPTABLE
December 9, 2025
Page 162
Item #16A9
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER
UTILITY FACILITIES AND ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF
THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER FACILITIES FOR
ESPLANADE BY THE ISLANDS - PHASE 4A & 4B
[PL20250006538] - FINAL INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY
STAFF ON OCTOBER 7, 2025, AND FOUND THESE FACILITIES
SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A10
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER UTILITY
FACILITIES AND ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF THE
POTABLE WATER FACILITIES AND APPURTENANT UTILITY
EASEMENT FOR COLLIER COUNTY RESOURCE RECOVERY
BUSINESS PARK – PHASE B. [PL20250010538] – FINAL
INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY STAFF ON OCTOBER 27,
2025, AND FOUND THESE FACILITIES SATISFACTORY AND
ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A11
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE
BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $593,500, WHICH WAS POSTED
AS A DEVELOPMENT GUARANTY FOR AN EARLY WORK
AUTHORIZATION (EWA) FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH
AVALON NORTH AT AVE MARIA - PLAT ONE [PL20240013707]
Item #16A12
December 9, 2025
Page 163
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE
BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $339,167.46, WHICH WAS POSTED
AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER
PL20240004900 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH SUMMERLIT
Item #16A13
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE
BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $134,911.20, WHICH WAS POSTED
AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER
PL20210003121 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH WILLOW
RUN MINE – BAKER PARCEL
Item #16A14
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE
BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $140,340, WHICH WAS POSTED
AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER
PL20200002244 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH SKYSAIL –
LAKE 5
Item #16A15
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE
BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $67,060, WHICH WAS POSTED AS
A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER
PL20220003084 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH RCMA
IMMOKALEE MPUD
Item #16A16
December 9, 2025
Page 164
THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE
UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) IN THE
AMOUNT OF $12,537 TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR
DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT FOR FIDDLER'S CREEK
PLAZA - US 41 TURNLANE OFFSITE FORCEMAIN
REALIGNMENT [PL20240002087]
Item #16A17
THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE
UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) IN THE
AMOUNT OF $190,080 TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR
DEVELOPER’S DESIGNATED AGENT FOR MAREA OFF-SITE
IMPROVEMENTS [PL20230015665] (THIS ITEM IS A
COMPANION TO ITEM #16A8)
Item #16A18
THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE
UTILITY PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) IN THE AMOUNT
OF $19,013.97 TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR
DEVELOPER’S DESIGNATED AGENT FOR ESPLANADE BY
THE ISLANDS AMENITY CAMPUS [PL20230008063]
Item #16A19
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $724,400 FOR A REDUCED PAYMENT
OF $1,434.40 IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION TITLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS. JANET SNEEDEN,
IN CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE
December 9, 2025
Page 165
NO. CESD20110009351, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 540 PLATT RD., COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA – FOR A
CODE ENFORCEMENT VIOLATION THAT WAS BROUGHT
INTO COMPLIANCE ON FEBRUARY 22, 2022
Item #16A20
RELEASE OF THREE CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $234,650 FOR A REDUCED PAYMENT
OF $4,991.30 IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS TITLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS. TITUS
ENTERPRISES, LLC, RELATING TO THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 2185 MARKLEY AVE, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA – FOR VARIOUS CODE VIOLATIONS THAT WERE
BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE AS LISTED ON THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16A21
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $616,300 FOR A REDUCED PAYMENT
OF $1,508 IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION TITLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS. NANCY
PATTERSON, IN CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE
NO. CELU20160016735, RELATING TO FOLIO
NO. 39837680004, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA – FOR CODE
VIOLATIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON
AUGUST 20, 2025
Item #16A22
December 9, 2025
Page 166
AN EASEMENT USE AGREEMENT (AGREEMENT) FOR LOT 4,
IMPERIAL GOLF ESTATES, PHASE IV, ACCORDING TO THE
PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 104
OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY – PARCEL
ID #51540280009
Item #16A23
COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION PERMIT PL20230018067 TO
EXCAVATE AND REMOVE 15,672,275 CUBIC YARDS OF
MATERIAL FROM A NEW COMMERCIAL MINE, TO BE
KNOWN AS THE SILVERSTRAND MINE. [PL20230018067]
(THIS ITEM IS A COMPANION TO ITEMS #16B8, #17C, AND
#17D)
Item #16A24
THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING WITH THE FLORIDA WILDLIFE
CORRIDOR FOUNDATION (FWCF) UNDER THE
CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM,
EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT AND
EXPANDING THE PROJECT AREA, ALLOWING FWCF TO
CONTRIBUTE UP TO $1,171,070 TOWARDS THE ACQUISITION
OF CONSERVATION COLLIER A-LIST PARCELS WITHIN THE
PANTHER WALK PRESERVE PROJECT AREA – EXTENDING
THE MOU THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2026
Item #16A25
December 9, 2025
Page 167
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 2003-37, AS AMENDED, CITED
IN CHAPTER 110, ARTICLE II OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, WHICH REGULATES
CONSTRUCTION IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY, TO ADD
ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND
A SECTION REGULATING EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES WITHIN
THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
Item #16B1
RESOLUTION 2025-253: A RESOLUTION AND A LEASE
AGREEMENT WITH STATE REPRESENTATIVE LAUREN
MELO FOR THE USE OF COUNTY-OWNED SPACE WITHIN
THE COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING,
LOCATED AT 3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, SUITE 212,
NAPLES, FL 34112
Item #16B2
THE SELECTION COMMITTEE’S RANKING AND AUTHORIZE
STAFF TO ENTER INTO CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH
HIGHSPANS ENGINEERING, INC., RELATED TO REQUEST
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (“RPS”) NO. 25-8369 FOR
“DESIGN SERVICES FOR GOLDEN GATE CITY OUTFALLS,”
AND BRING A PROPOSED AGREEMENT BACK FOR THE
BOARD’S CONSIDERATION AT A FUTURE
MEETING (PROJECT #51029)
Item #16B3
December 9, 2025
Page 168
THE SELECTION COMMITTEE’S RANKING FOR REQUEST
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES NO. 25-8377, “DESIGN
SERVICES FOR OIL WELL ROAD WIDENING SEGMENT 3,”
AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO BEGIN CONTRACT
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP-RANKED FIRM, JACOBS
ENGINEERING GROUP, INC., SO THAT STAFF CAN BRING A
PROPOSED AGREEMENT BACK FOR THE BOARD’S
CONSIDERATION AT A FUTURE MEETING (PROJECT #60144)
Item #16B4
AN AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF PARCEL 125FEE
REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE LAKE PARK FLOW
WAY PROJECT (PROJECT #60246) AND AUTHORIZE ANY
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS (ESTIMATED FISCAL
IMPACT: $288,000)
Item #16B5
THE CHAIR 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 COURTS' RECORDING DEPARTMENT
Item #16B6
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ACTING AS THE
EX-OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, APPROVE AN
December 9, 2025
Page 169
AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE WITH JOSE
RODRIGUEZ AND NORMA RODRIGUEZ, FOR PROPERTY
WITH A TOTAL COST OF ACQUISITION NOT TO EXCEED
$326,450 (PROJECT #70243)
Item #16B7
RESOLUTION 2025-254: THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HER
DESIGNEE TO MAKE PRE-SUIT OFFERS FOR THE
EASEMENT PARCELS REQUIRED FOR THE OAKES
BOULEVARD SIDEWALK AND ROUNDABOUT
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT NO. 60228) IN
AMOUNTS BASED UPON THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE
EASEMENTS SOUGHT TO BE ACQUIRED, WITH PURCHASE
AGREEMENTS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE BOARD
(ESTIMATED FISCAL IMPACT: $282,000)
Item #16B8
DEVELOPER AGREEMENT WITH SILVER STRAND III, LLC,
AND BARRON COLLIER PARTNERSHIP, LLLP, (DEVELOPER);
TO COORDINATE THE DEVELOPER’S PROJECT WITH THE
DESIGN OF THE CAMP KEAIS ROAD AND IMMOKALEE
ROAD ROUNDABOUT PROJECT (THIS ITEM IS A
COMPANION TO ITEMS #16A23, #17C, AND #17D)
Item #16B9 (Moved to Item #9G per Change Sheet)
Item #16B10
AWARD OF INVITATION TO BID (“ITB”) NO. 25-8352,
December 9, 2025
Page 170
“IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R. 846E) PAVED SHOULDER
IMPROVEMENTS – FPID 451525-1-54-01 SCOP II,” TO
THOMAS MARINE CONSTRUCTION, INC., IN THE AMOUNT
OF $1,253,125.00, APPROVE AN OWNER’S ALLOWANCE OF
$50,000, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE
ATTACHED CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT
(PROJECT #60253, FUNDS 1841 AND 3083)
Item #16B11
RESOLUTION 2025-255, 2025-256, 2025-257, AND 2025-258: A
RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE PUBLIC TRANSIT
GRANT AGREEMENTS (PTGA) FPN 439255-1-94-23 (G2W58),
FPN 448810-1-94-23 (G2Y33), FPN 451147-(1,2,3)-94-22 (G2Y74),
AND FPN 448810-1-94-02 (G2Y32) WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO EXTEND THE END
DATE TO JUNE 30, 2026
Item #16B12
RESOLUTION 2025-259: THE ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL OF
THE GRANT APPLICATION’S UPDATED FORMS TO REFLECT
THE ADDITION OF A VEHICLE AND REDUCTION OF
OPERATING FUNDS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM 5310 AND APPROVE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16B13
December 9, 2025
Page 171
CARRYFORWARD FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE
TRANSPORTATION SUPPORTED GAS TAX FUND (3083) AND
TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL FUND (3081) IN THE AMOUNT
OF $179,426.25 AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS. (PROJECTS #60214, #60085, #60088, #69331,
#69333, AND #69336)
Item #16B14
THE FY 2026-2035 COLLIER COUNTY TRANSIT
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (TDP) MAJOR UPDATE
Item #16B15
RESOLUTION 2025-260: A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE THE FY26 PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION GRANT AGREEMENT (PTGA) 410139-1-84-
09 WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(FDOT) STATE BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT
OF $2,556,190 PROVIDING FOR STATE FUNDING FOR
ELIGIBLE COLLIER COUNTY FIXED-ROUTE TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATIVE, MANAGEMENT, AND OPERATIONAL
EXPENSES IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,278,095, APPROVE A
LOCAL MATCH IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,278,095, AND
AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16B16
RESOLUTION 2025-261 (5310), 2025-262 (5311) &
RESOLUTION 2025-263 (5339): RESOLUTIONS APPROVING
AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF FEDERAL TRANSIT
December 9, 2025
Page 172
ADMINISTRATION (FTA) SECTION 5310, RURAL 5311, AND
RURAL 5339 FY2026/2027 GRANT APPLICATIONS AND
APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) THROUGH FDOT TRANSCIP
TO SUPPORT TRANSIT OPERATIONS AND SYSTEM CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS; WITH A TOTAL ANTICIPATED FISCAL
IMPACT OF $3,756,150 WITH A FEDERAL SHARE OF
$2,537,520, STATE SHARE OF $370,190, AND LOCAL MATCH
OF $848,440 SUPPORTED BY GENERAL FUND (0001) ANNUAL
TRANSFER; AND APPROVE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
Item #16B17
A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT (MOA) BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND THE COLLIER COMMUNITY
FOUNDATION TO DEFINE THE TERMS FOR PROVIDING A
TRANSIT SERVICE PROGRAM TO THE CITIZENS OF
IMMOKALEE. FURTHERMORE, STAFF RECOMMENDS
ACCEPTING AN UPDATE ON THE TRANSIT SERVICE
INITIATED FOR IMMOKALEE AND AUTHORIZING THE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT. THE MEMORANDUM
REFLECTS THAT THE OPERATIONAL COST SHARE OF
$7,233.60 (PAID BY COLLIER COMMUNITY FOUNDATION)
REPRESENTS HALF OF THE TOTAL OPERATING COST OF
$14,467.20
Item #16B18 (Moved to Item #11E per Change Sheet)
Item #16B19
December 9, 2025
Page 173
AN EASEMENT TO FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY,
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, INSTALLATION AND
MAINTENANCE OF UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINES
AND RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE AT THE SITE OF THE
NEW COLLIER COUNTY BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CENTER,
BEING CONSTRUCTED AT 5959 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY,
NAPLES, FL 34116; AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO
EXECUTE ANY ADDITIONAL UTILITY EASEMENTS FOR
WATER, SEWER, OR COMMUNICATIONS, NECESSARY TO
SERVE THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CENTER PROJECT
Item #16B20
AN EASEMENT TO FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY,
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, INSTALLATION AND
MAINTENANCE OF UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINES
AND RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE AT THE SITE OF THE
NEW COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE FORENSICS
EVIDENCE PROJECT, BEING CONSTRUCTED AT 3953 CITY
GATE BLVD N., NAPLES, FL 34117; AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIR TO EXECUTE ANY ADDITIONAL UTILITY
EASEMENTS FOR WATER, SEWER, OR COMMUNICATIONS,
NECESSARY TO SERVE THE CCSO FORENSICS EVIDENCE
PROJECT
Item #16B21
AWARD AN AGREEMENT FOR REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NO.
25-8379 “LOAN AND/OR GRANT ACQUISITION AND
COMPLIANCE SERVICES,” TO ANGIE BREWER &
December 9, 2025
Page 174
ASSOCIATES, L.C., AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN
THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT
Item #16B22
1) RATIFY THE THIRD ADDENDUM TO AGREEMENT FOR
SALE AND PURCHASE WITH BIGI & BIGI LLC FOR COURT
PLAZA III, A COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM, LOCATED AT
2671 AIRPORT ROAD SOUTH, 2) ACKNOWLEDGE COLLIER
COUNTY’S STATUS AS MAJORITY OWNER AND, BY
OPERATION OF THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION AND
BYLAWS, ITS RIGHTS TO ASSUME CONTROL OF THE
ASSOCIATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS, 3) AUTHORIZE
ACTIONS RELATED TO ASSOCIATION GOVERNANCE, THE
ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING, AND INTERIM PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT, AND 4) AUTHORIZE DISMISSAL OF THE
LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST BIGI & BIGI, LLC, RELATED TO
THE ACQUISITION
Item #16C1
AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO AGREEMENT GC919 WITH THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
(“FDEP”) FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF FDEP’S
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STORAGE TANK SYSTEM
COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION PROGRAM, AUTHORIZE
STAFF TO RECEIVE AND EXECUTE ANNUAL TASK
ASSIGNMENTS, ASSOCIATED CHANGE ORDERS, SIGN THE
CONTRACTOR CERTIFICATION FORM, AND AUTHORIZE
THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE AMENDMENT
December 9, 2025
Page 175
Item #16C2
RESOLUTION 2025-264: THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, AS THE EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD
OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT,
APPROVE A RESOLUTION REMOVING UNCOLLECTIBLE
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AND THEIR RESPECTIVE
BALANCES FROM THE FINANCIAL RECORDS OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT AND
APPROVE A TOTAL WRITE-OFF IN THE AMOUNT OF
$14,199.33
Item #16C3
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ACTING AS THE
EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, AWARD INVITATION TO BID NO.
25-8404 TO INDUSTRIAL MARINE ENGINEERING SERVICES,
LLC, FOR RECLAIMED WATER GROUND STORAGE TANK
CLEANING AND INSPECTION, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR
TO SIGN THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT
Item #16C4
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AS THE EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, APPROVE THE SELECTION
COMMITTEE’S RANKING AND AUTHORIZE CONTRACT
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP-RANKED FIRM, STANTEC
CONSULTING SERVICES, INC., RELATED TO REQUEST FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES NO. 25-8375 FOR CONSTRUCTION
December 9, 2025
Page 176
ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE
NORTHEAST SERVICE AREA UTILITY EXPANSION PROJECT
SO THAT STAFF CAN BRING A PROPOSED AGREEMENT
BACK FOR THE BOARD’S CONSIDERATION AT A FUTURE
MEETING (PROJECT #70194)
Item #16C5
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, AS THE EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD
OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
(HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CCWSD), THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE BIG CYPRESS
STEWARDSHIP DISTRICT (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS
THE DISTRICT), CDC LAND INVESTMENTS, LLC, AND
COLLIER LAND HOLDINGS, LTD., (HEREINAFTER
REFERRED TO AS LANDOWNERS) TO EXCLUSIVELY
PROVIDE POTABLE WATER, WASTEWATER AND
IRRIGATION QUALITY WATER SERVICES TO THE TOWN OF
BIG CYPRESS STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA (SRA)
DEVELOPMENT, REPEALING AND REPLACING THE PRIOR
AGREEMENT DATED JUNE 27, 2023 AND RECORDED AT OR
6266, PAGES 2221-2231 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (THIS ITEM IS A COMPANION
TO ITEM #16C6)
Item #16C6
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, AS THE EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD
OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
December 9, 2025
Page 177
(HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CCWSD), THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE BIG CYPRESS
STEWARDSHIP DISTRICT (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS
THE DISTRICT), CDC LAND INVESTMENTS, LLC, AND
COLLIER LAND HOLDINGS, LTD., (HEREINAFTER
REFERRED TO AS LANDOWNERS) TO EXCLUSIVELY
PROVIDE POTABLE WATER, WASTEWATER AND
IRRIGATION QUALITY WATER SERVICES WITHIN BELLMAR
VILLAGE, REPEALING AND REPLACING THE PRIOR
AGREEMENT DATED JUNE 27, 2023 AND RECORDED AT OR
6266, PAGE 2206 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA (THIS ITEM IS A COMPANION TO ITEM
#16C5)
Item #16D1
APPROPRIATING FY 2025 Q4 RESTRICTED DONATIONS
FROM THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY AND VARIOUS
DONORS IN THE AMOUNT OF $48,863.08 FOR THE BENEFIT
OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY; TO ASSIGN
THE RESERVE AND CARRY FORWARD BUDGETS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $180,800.00 TO THE APPROPRIATE FUNDED
PROGRAM; AND TO AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
Item #16D2
A GRANT DONATION FROM THE WILLIAM AND NAYDINE
HANNA FUND THROUGH THE FIDELITY CHARITABLE
DONOR-ADVISED FUND GRANT PROGRAM IN THE
AMOUNT OF $250.00, FOR GENERAL SUPPORT OF THE
December 9, 2025
Page 178
COLLIER COUNTY LIBRARY (PUBLIC SERVICES GRANT
FUND 1839)
Item #16D3
THE CHAIR TO SIGN ONE RELEASE OF LIEN FOR FULL
PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,676.32 PURSUANT TO
THE AGREEMENT FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER
COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR OWNER-OCCUPIED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWELLINGS
Item #16D4
THE CHAIR TO SIGN TWO (2) RELEASES OF LIEN IN THE
TOTAL AMOUNT OF $25,971.96 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 (SHIP GRANT FUND 1053)
Item #16D5
THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
SPONSOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
RENAISSANCE HALL AT OLD COURSE, LLC, STATE
HOUSING INITIATIVE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT SHRD-22-
001 TO EXTEND THE PERFORMANCE PERIOD, ADD TO THE
SCOPE OF WORK FOR PAYMENT OF IMPACT FEES,
INCREASE THE FUNDING AMOUNT BY $1,121,747.80, REVISE
EXHIBIT E FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF RENTAL HOUSING
UNITS AND RECORD AN AMENDED AND RESTATED
December 9, 2025
Page 179
MORTGAGE, PROMISSORY NOTE AND LAND USE
RESTRICTION AGREEMENT (SHIP GRANT FUND 1053)
Item #16D6
THE CHAIR TO SIGN A STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP SPONSOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY AND COMMUNITY ASSISTED AND SUPPORTED
LIVING, INC., (CASL) IN THE AMOUNT OF $300,000 FOR THE
RENTAL REHABILITATION STRATEGY (SHIP GRANT FUND
1053)
Item #16D7
THE CHAIR TO SIGN (A) HOME INVESTMENT
PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM DEVELOPER AGREEMENT
#HM24-01 IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,250,000 (B) MULTIFAMILY
HOME-ASSISTED PROJECT LETTER OF COMMITMENT AND
(C) LOCAL GOVERNMENT VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION
AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,500 BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND CASA SAN JUAN DIEGO, LTD., TO
SUPPORT THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION ASSOCIATED WITH
THE DEVELOPMENT OF FIVE (5) HOME ASSISTED UNITS.
HOUSING GRANT FUND (1835), MISCELLANEOUS GRANTS
FUND (1077)
Item #16D8
THE CHAIR TO SIGN A STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) SPONSOR AGREEMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $1,200,000 FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION
December 9, 2025
Page 180
ASSISTANCE WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER
COUNTY, INC. (GRANT FUND 1053)
Item #16D9
THE CHAIR TO SIGN THIRTY-THREE (33) MORTGAGE
SATISFACTIONS FOR THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP LOAN PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF
$2,250,000. THIS TRANSACTION INVOLVES THE TRANSFER
OF MORTGAGE LIABILITY FROM HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
OF COLLIER COUNTY, INC., TO HOMEOWNERS WHO
RECEIVED HOME PURCHASE ASSISTANCE THROUGH THE
NEW CONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE STRATEGY
Item #16D10
THE CHAIR TO SIGN TWO (2) MORTGAGE SATISFACTIONS
FOR THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP LOAN
PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $34,500.00 DUE TO THE
DEATH OF THE BORROWER(S) (SHIP GRANT FUND 1053)
Item #16D11
THE CHAIR TO SIGN THIRTY-FIVE (35) MORTGAGE
SATISFACTIONS FOR THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP LOAN PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF
$223,363.00 (SHIP GRANT FUND 1053)
Item #16D12
THE CHAIR TO SIGN TWENTY-FIVE (25) MORTGAGE
December 9, 2025
Page 181
SATISFACTIONS FOR THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP LOAN PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF
$250,000.00 (SHIP GRANT FUND 1053)
Item #16D13
THE CHAIR TO SIGN A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT CD25-03
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND COLLIER COUNTY
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (BAYSHORE
GATEWAY TRIANGLE) IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,388,500 FOR
THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY. HOUSING GRANT
FUND (1835) (THIS ITEM IS A COMPANION TO ITEM #16L1)
Item #16D14
RESOLUTION 2025-265: THE SUBMISSION OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM YEAR 2024 CONSOLIDATED
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND EVALUATION REPORT FOR
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT, HOME
INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP AND EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS
GRANT PROGRAMS AS REQUIRED; APPROVE THE
CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND
EVALUATION REPORT RESOLUTION; AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIR TO CERTIFY THE CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE AND EVALUATION REPORT
Item #16D15
THE MCKINSEY & CO., INC., NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION
December 9, 2025
Page 182
OPIATE CONSULTATION LITIGATION (CASE NO. 3:32-MD-
02996-CRB (N.D. CALIFORNIA)) FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$172,595.68, AND THE ENDO SETTLEMENT FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $41,942.84, AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENTS (FUND 1851 AND 1852)
Item #16D16
AN AFTER-THE-FACT SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE FY25
OLDER AMERICANS ACT TITLE III AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA,
INC., AND COLLIER COUNTY TO REDUCE THE AWARD IN
THE AMOUNT OF ($2,077.67) AND AUTHORIZE THE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT BRINGING THE TOTAL
AWARD TO $2,656,828.02 (HUMAN SERVICES GRANT FUND
1837)
Item #16D17
THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE DIVISION OF
HISTORICAL RESOURCES FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE
HISTORIC COTTAGES AT MAR-GOOD HARBOR PARK TO
EXTEND THE PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE TO JUNE 30, 2026
(PUBLIC SERVICE GRANT FUND 1839 AND PUBLIC SERVICE
MATCH FUND 1840)
Item #16E1
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 14-6293,
December 9, 2025
Page 183
“COLLIER COUNTY ONSITE MEDICAL CLINIC,” WITH
MILLENNIUM PHYSICIAN GROUP, LLC, EXTENDING THE
AGREEMENT THROUGH JUNE 30, 2026
Item #16E2
THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT BY THE PROCUREMENT
SERVICES DIVISION FOR VARIOUS COUNTY DIVISIONS’
AFTER-THE-FACT PURCHASES IN ACCORDANCE WITH
PROCUREMENT ORDINANCE NO. 2025-34 AND THE
PROCUREMENT MANUAL AND AUTHORIZE THE TIMELY
PAYMENT OF OUTSTANDING INVOICES IN THE AMOUNT OF
$50,361.59
Item #16E3
THE BOARD, PURSUANT TO SECTION 274.06, FLORIDA
STATUTES, APPROVES THE SALE AND DISPOSAL OF
SURPLUS ASSETS VIA PUBLIC AUCTION ON DECEMBER
12th AND 13th, 2025
Item #16E4
ACCEPT AND RATIFY THE DEBARMENT DETERMINATION
MADE BY THE PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION
DIRECTOR, PLACING JUVERT BRICKS & MORE, LLC, IN A
DEBARRED STATE FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS,
BEGINNING DECEMBER 9, 2025, AND ENDING ON
DECEMBER 9, 2030
Item #16F1
December 9, 2025
Page 184
THE SALE/PURCHASE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1945 BAY
STREET IN THE AMOUNT OF $693,500
Item #16F2
THE PURCHASE OF GROUP HEALTH REINSURANCE FROM
SWISSRE AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER OR
DESIGNEE TO SIGN ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO BIND
AND INITIATE COVERAGE EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2026
Item #16F3
RESOLUTION 2025-266: A RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS,
CONTRIBUTIONS, OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F4
RESOLUTION 2025-267: A RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING RESERVES) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F5
A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT (MOA) BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND THE FLORIDA DIVISION OF
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT FOR THE TRANSFER OF
STARLINK SATELLITE EQUIPMENT
December 9, 2025
Page 185
Item #16F6
RESOLUTION 2025-268: A RESOLUTION NAMING THE
GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER GYMNASIUM IN
HONOR OF MS. JANICE ELLIOTT
Item #16G1
RESOLUTION 2025-269: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION GRANT AGREEMENT (PTGA) 452976-1-94-
01, CONTRACT NO. G2J23 WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ADD $52,700 OF
FDOT FUNDING TO THE AGREEMENT FOR THE SECURITY
ENHANCEMENTS AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL
AIRPORT, INCREASING THE TOTAL COST OF THE PROJECT
FROM $243,125 TO $309,000, AND FDOT PARTICIPATION
FROM $194,500 TO $247,200, AND THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
Item #16G2
RESOLUTION 2025-270: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION GRANT AGREEMENT (PTGA) 453536-1-94-
01, CONTRACT NO. G2Y90 WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ADD $56,720 OF
FDOT FUNDING TO THE AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE
& INSTALLATION OF AN EMERGENCY GENERATOR AT THE
IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT, INCREASING THE TOTAL
COST OF THE PROJECT FROM $199,100 TO $270,000 AND
December 9, 2025
Page 186
FDOT PARTICIPATION FROM $159,280 TO $216,000, AND
ADDING SIX MONTHS TO THE CURRENT EXPIRATION DATE
OF DECEMBER 31, 2025, MAKING THE NEW EXPIRATION
DATE OF JUNE 30, 2026, AND AUTHORIZING THE
ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16G3
THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MDA)
BETWEEN GLOBAL FLIGHT TRAINING SOLUTIONS, INC.,
AND THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY TO
DEVELOP LARGE TRACTS OF LAND AT THE IMMOKALEE
REGIONAL AIRPORT
Item #16G4
THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO BEGIN
NEGOTIATING A NEW LEASEHOLD AGREEMENT FOR
HANGAR CONSTRUCTION WITH COLLIER MOSQUITO
CONTROL DISTRICT, RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF
AIRCRAFT HANGARS AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL
AIRPORT
Item #16H1
THE CHAIR TO SIGN A LETTER DESIGNATING THE
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA CRIME STOPPERS, INC., A NON-
PROFIT AGENCY, AS THE AGENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF
APPLYING FOR AND RECEIVING FUNDS FROM THE CRIME
STOPPERS TRUST FUND
December 9, 2025
Page 187
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 $59,475,808.77 WERE DRAWN FOR THE
PERIODS BETWEEN OCTOBER 30, 2025, AND NOVEMBER 12,
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 NOVEMBER 19,
2025
Item #16J3
TO RECORD IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, THE CHECK NUMBER (OR OTHER
PAYMENT METHOD), AMOUNT, PAYEE, AND PURPOSE FOR
WHICH THE REFERENCED DISBURSEMENTS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $62,075,365.66 WERE DRAWN FOR THE
PERIODS BETWEEN NOVEMBER 13, 2025, AND NOVEMBER
26, 2025, PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 136.06
Item #16J4
REQUEST THAT THE BOARD APPROVE AND DETERMINE
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR INVOICES PAYABLE AND
December 9, 2025
Page 188
PURCHASING CARD TRANSACTIONS AS OF DECEMBER 3,
2025
Item #16J5
REPORT TO THE BOARD REGARDING THE INVESTMENT OF
COUNTY FUNDS AS OF THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 2025
Item #16J6
THE CLERK’S REPORT INDICATING THAT NO INTEREST
WAS PAID PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 218.78 FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2025
Item #16K1
RESOLUTION 2025-271: REAPPOINTING FOUR MEMBERS
TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
– REAPPOINTING JAMES BOUGHTON, CLAY BROOKER,
CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL AND JEFFREY CURL ALL FOUR
W/TERMS EXPIRING ON DECEMBER 14, 2029
Item #16K2
RESOLUTION 2025-272: APPOINTING OSCAR PEREZ TO THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD – W/TERM
EXPIRING ON FEBRUARY 14, 2029
Item #16K3
December 9, 2025
Page 189
RESOLUTION 2025-273: APPOINTING TIFFANI MENSCH TO
THE COLLIER COUNTY CITIZEN CORPS – FILLING A
VACANT TERM EXPIRING ON NOVEMBER 5, 2026
Item #16K4
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$131,000 PLUS $29,808 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY AND
EXPERTS’ FEES AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
1322FEE REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249
Item #16K5
RESOLUTION 2025-274: APPOINTING RYAN SCHWARTZ TO
THE VANDERBILT BEACH BEAUTIFICATION MSTU
ADVISORY COMMITTEE – W/TERMS EXPIRING ON
NOVEMBER 13, 2029
Item #16K6
RESOLUTION 2025-275: REAPPOINTING WILLIE BRICE III
TO THE GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY
BOARD - W/TERM EXPIRING ON DECEMBER 31, 2028
Item #16K7
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$56,000 PLUS $19,390 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY FEES,
EXPERT FEES, AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
1277FEE REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
December 9, 2025
Page 190
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249
Item #16K8
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$100,000 PLUS $26,968 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY FEES,
EXPERT FEES, AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
1312FEE REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249
Item #16K9
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$150,000 PLUS $36,412 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY FEES,
EXPERT FEES, AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
1316FEE1 REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249
Item #16K10
RESOLUTION 2025-276: REQUEST BY THE COLLIER
COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR
APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
AUTHORITY TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS TO BE USED TO
FINANCE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NCH HEART,
STROKE, AND VASCULAR INSTITUTE, THE NCH
ORTHOPEDIC CENTER, AND OTHER NCH CAPITAL
PROJECTS IN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE REFUNDING OF
CERTAIN BONDS ISSUED IN 2024
Item #16K11
December 9, 2025
Page 191
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$140,000 PLUS $45,917 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY FEES,
EXPERT FEES, AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
1347FEE REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249
Item #16K12
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$70,000 PLUS $19,611 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY AND
EXPERTS’ FEES AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
1332FEE REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249
Item #16K13
RESOLUTION 2025-277: 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, LOCATED IN IMMOKALEE,
AUTHORIZING THE AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO A LAND
USE RESTRICTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION
196.1978(4) FLORIDA STATUTES, AND REPEALING
RESOLUTION 2025-85
Item #16K14
December 9, 2025
Page 192
RESOLUTION 2025-278: 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 #16K15
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$255,000 PLUS $78,635 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY FEES,
EXPERT FEES, AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCELS
1325FEE1 AND 1325DE REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249
Item #16K16
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO FILE A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF
OF COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AGAINST CABULL-LINK, INC., AND ANY
OTHER RESPONSIBLE PARTIES FOR $16,773.56, IN
DAMAGES CAUSED TO THE COUNTY’S WASTEWATER
LATERAL LINE, LOCATED AT OR NEAR THE 1585 GULF
COAST DRIVE
Item #16K17
December 9, 2025
Page 193
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$30,000 PLUS $13,589 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY AND
EXPERTS’ FEES AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
1461RDUE REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249
Item #16K18
ACCEPT AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT AND APPROVE A
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $72,000
PLUS $31,199 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY AND EXPERTS’
FEES AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 1462RDUE
REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60249
Item #16L1
THE BOARD, ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA), APPROVE
THE CDBG SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT CD 25-03 BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND THE BAYSHORE GATEWAY
TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY;
ACCEPT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,388,500.00, PLUS ALL
RELATED COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPERTY
ACQUISITION; AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE THE
GRANT AGREEMENT, AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER
OR HER DESIGNEE TO SIGN ALL NECESSARY GRANT
REQUIRED FORMS FOR COMPLIANCE AND AUTHORIZE
THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS (FUND 1022
PROJECT #33970) (THIS ITEM IS A COMPANION TO ITEM
December 9, 2025
Page 194
#16D13)
Item #16L2
THE BOARD, ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB),
APPROVE THE REMOVAL OF ONE UNCOLLECTIBLE
RECEIVABLE FOR NON-PAYMENT OF RENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $12,720.00
Item #16M1
THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE A WORK ORDER WITH HUMISTON
& MOORE ENGINEERS, PA, UNDER CONTRACT NO. 18-7432-
CZ TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
FOR MAINTENANCE DREDGING OF DOCTORS PASS FOR A
LUMP SUM FEE OF $56,247.00 AND MAKE A FINDING THAT
THIS ITEM PROMOTES TOURISM (FUND 1105, PROJECT NO.
90549)
Item #16M2
THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE A WORK ORDER WITH HUMISTON
& MOORE ENGINEERS, PA, TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE STATE-REQUIRED
ANNUAL MONITORING OF COLLIER COUNTY BEACHES
AND INLETS FOR 2026 UNDER CONTRACT NO. 18-7432-CZ
FOR A LUMP SUM OF $161,547.00 AND MAKE A FINDING
THAT THIS ITEM PROMOTES TOURISM (FUND 1105,
PROJECT NO. 90536)
December 9, 2025
Page 195
Item #17A
ORDINANCE 2025-61: A REZONE ORDINANCE TO CHANGE
THE ZONING FROM THE COMMERCIAL INTERMEDIATE (C-
3) ZONING DISTRICT TO THE RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY-
16 (RMF-16) ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW UP TO 16
MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FOR A TOTAL
OF 28 MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS. THE SUBJECT 1.86±
ACRE PARCEL IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF
TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH (US 41) AND BORDERED ON THE
NORTH BY 93RD AVENUE NORTH AND ON THE SOUTH BY
92ND AVENUE NORTH, IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
[PL20240013324, 9271-9295 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH REZONE]
Item #17B - Continued to January 27, 2026, BCC Meeting (Per
Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION
RELATING TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT OF
THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN,
ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, PROVIDING FOR THE
ANNUAL UPDATE TO THE SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, WITHIN THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN BASED ON THE 2025
ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT ON PUBLIC
FACILITIES (AUIR), AND INCLUDING UPDATES TO THE 5-
YEAR SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL PROJECTS CONTAINED
WITHIN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT (FOR
FISCAL YEARS 2026 – 2030) AND THE SCHEDULE OF
December 9, 2025
Page 196
CAPITAL PROJECTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT FOR THE FUTURE 5-YEAR
PERIOD (FOR FISCAL YEARS 2031 – 2035), PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
[PL20250000000]
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2025-280: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF
ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CONDITIONAL
USE FOR EARTHMINING WITH EXCAVATION, BLASTING,
AND PROCESSING OF MATERIAL, PURSUANT TO SECTIONS
2.03.01.A.1.C.1 AND 4.08.05 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, ON PROPERTY ZONED RURAL
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT (A) WITH A MOBILE HOME
OVERLAY (MHO), PARTLY WITHIN THE RURAL LANDS
STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT (RLSAO),
ON 3,937.88± ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN STATE ROAD 29
TO THE EAST, CAMP KEAIS ROAD AND IMMOKALEE ROAD
TO THE WEST AND STOCKADE ROAD TO THE NORTHWEST,
IN SECTIONS 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24 AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47
SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
[PL20220001634] (THIS ITEM IS A COMPANION TO ITEMS
#16A23, #16B8, AND #17D)
Item #17D
RESOLUTION 2025-281: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF
ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
RELATING TO AN EARTHMINING OPERATION APPROVING
December 9, 2025
Page 197
FOUR VARIANCES FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE RELATING TO LANDSCAPE
BUFFERS, PAVING, OUTDOOR SCREENING AND
FOUNDATION PLANTINGS ON APPROXIMATELY 3,937.88±
ACRES ZONED RURAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT (A) WITH
A MOBILE HOME OVERLAY (MHO), PARTLY WITHIN THE
RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY (RLSAO),
LOCATED BETWEEN STATE ROAD 29 TO THE EAST, CAMP
KEAIS ROAD AND IMMOKALEE ROAD TO THE WEST, AND
STOCKADE ROAD TO THE NORTHWEST, IN SECTIONS 13, 14,
15, 22, 23, 24 AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA [PL20230001067] (THIS ITEM IS
A COMPANION TO ITEMS #16A23, #16B8, AND #17C)
Item #17E (Moved to Item #9D per Change Sheet)
Item #17F (Moved to Item #9E per Change Sheet)
Item #17G (Moved to Item #9F per Change Sheet)
Item #17H
RESOLUTION 2025-282: A RESOLUTION RENAMING
GORMAN AVENUE TO SUGARWOOD DRIVE, WHICH IS
DEPICTED AS TRACT R OF THE MAPLE LANE HOME
SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 76, PAGES 25-
26, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, LOCATED IN SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
[PL20250008479]
December 9, 2025
Page 198
Item #17I
RESOLUTION 2025-283: A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE
GORE NATURE CENTER AS HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT,
PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL
PRESERVATION REGULATIONS AS PROVIDED IN SECTION
2.03.07.E OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, APPROXIMATELY 10±
ACRES IN SIZE, IS LOCATED IN THE GOLDEN GATE
ESTATES, IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 28
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA [PL20250010255]
Item #17J (Moved to Item #11F per Change Sheet)
Item #17K
RESOLUTION 2025-284: AMEND AND EXPAND A
CONDITIONAL USE FOR EARTH MINING BY ADDING 39.92±
ACRES AND REVISING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR PROPERTY ZONED RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) WITHIN
THE MOBILE HOME OVERLAY (MHO), THE RURAL LANDS
STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY (RLSAO), AND WELLFIELD
RISK MANAGEMENT SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY ZONE
W-4 (ST/W-4) FOR A TOTAL OF 490.62± ACRES LOCATED ON
THE WEST SIDE OF SR 29 NORTH, SOUTH OF SR 82 IN THE
IMMOKALEE PLANNING AREA IN SECTIONS 17, 18, AND 19,
TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
Item #17L
December 9, 2025
Page 199
ORDINANCE 2025-62: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE
CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AMENDING ARTICLE IV, AS PROMULGATED BY
ORDINANCE NO. 04-55, AS AMENDED, AMENDING SECTION
22-110, PERTAINING TO EXCAVATION REVIEW
PROCEDURES; AMENDING ARTICLE III, AS PROMULGATED
BY ORDINANCE NO. 04-31, AS AMENDED, AMENDING
SECTION 134-58, PERTAINING TO CONSTRUCTION
APPROVAL AND DOCUMENT SUBMISSIONS; PROVIDING
FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
[PL20250008677]
Item #17M
ORDINANCE 2025-63: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 04-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES
THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
TO MAKE CHANGES CONSISTENT WITH SECTION 177.071,
FLORIDA STATUES, WHICH REQUIRES ADMINISTRATIVE
APPROVAL OF PLATS AND REPLATS; SECTION ONE,
RECITALS; SECTION TWO, FINDINGS OF FACT; SECTION
THREE, ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, MORE SPECIFICALLY AMENDING
THE FOLLOWING: CHAPTER ONE – GENERAL PROVISIONS,
INCLUDING SECTION 1.08.02 DEFINITIONS; CHAPTER FOUR
– SITE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS,
INCLUDING SECTION 4.03.02 APPLICABILITY; CHAPTER
December 9, 2025
Page 200
TEN – APPLICATION, REVIEW, AND DECISION-MAKING
PROCEDURES, INCLUDING SECTION 10.02.04
REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISION PLATS, SECTION
10.02.05 CONSTRUCTION, APPROVAL, AND ACCEPTANCE OF
REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS; APPENDIX A – STANDARD
PERFORMANCE SECURITY DOCUMENTS FOR REQUIRED
IMPROVEMENTS; APPENDIX C – FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT,
REQUIRED CERTIFICATIONS AND SUGGESTED TEXT AND
FORMATS FOR OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION; SECTION
FOUR, CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; SECTION FIVE,
INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE; AND SECTION SIX, EFFECTIVE DATE
[PL20250007882]
Item #17N
ORDINANCE 2025-64: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES
THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
TO CORRECT SCRIVENER’S ERRORS AND UPDATE NAMES
AND CROSS REFERENCES, BY PROVIDING FOR: SECTION
ONE, RECITALS; SECTION TWO, FINDINGS OF FACT;
SECTION THREE, ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, MORE SPECIFICALLY
AMENDING THE FOLLOWING: CHAPTER ONE GENERAL
PROVISIONS, INCLUDING SECTION 1.08.01
ABBREVIATIONS, 1.08.02 DEFINITIONS; CHAPTER TWO
ZONING DISTRICTS AND USES, INCLUDING SECTION 2.01.03
ESSENTIAL SERVICES, 2.03.07 OVERLAY ZONING
December 9, 2025
Page 201
DISTRICTS, 2.03.08 RURAL FRINGE ZONING DISTRICTS;
CHAPTER THREE RESOURCE PROTECTION, INCLUDING
3.05.07 PRESERVATION STANDARDS; CHAPTER FOUR SITE
DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, INCLUDING
4.02.14 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE ST
AND ACSC-ST DISTRICTS, 4.02.16 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR
DEVELOPMENT IN THE BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA, 4.03.03
SUBDIVISIONS EXEMPTIONS, 4.03.04 LOT LINE
ADJUSTMENT AND LOT SPLIT, 4.06.05 GENERAL
LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, 4.08.05 BASELINE
STANDARDS; CHAPTER FIVE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS,
INCLUDING 5.04.05 TEMPORARY EVENTS, 5.05.08
ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE DESIGN STANDARDS, 5.05.12
SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC UTILITY ANCILLARY
SYSTEMS IN COLLIER COUNTY, 5.06.04 DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR SIGNS IN NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS;
CHAPTER SIX INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AND
ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES REQUIREMENTS,
INCLUDING 6.06.03 STREETLIGHTS; CHAPTER TEN
APPLICATION, REVIEW, AND DECISION-MAKING
PROCEDURES, INCLUDING 10.02.03 REQUIREMENTS FOR
SITE DEVELOPMENT, SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANS AND
AMENDMENTS THEREOF; APPENDIX A; AND APPENDIX C;
SECTION FOUR, CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; SECTION
FIVE, INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE; AND SECTION SIX, EFFECTIVE DATE
[PL20250005385]
Item #17O
December 9, 2025
Page 202
RESOLUTION 2025-285: A RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD,
TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #17P
ORDINANCE 2025-65: THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, AS THE EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD
OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT,
APPROVE THE REPEAL AND REPLACEMENT OF
ORDINANCE NO. 2012-13, THE COLLIER COUNTY
INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT ORDINANCE, TO
INCORPORATE FDEP-RECOMMENDED ORDINANCE
REVISIONS TO THE INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT
PROGRAM, REQUIRED BY FDEP PERMITS FLA141399 AND
FL0141356
*****
December 9, 2025
Page 203
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 1:42 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
________________________________________
BURT SAUNDERS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK
___________________________
These minutes approved by the Board on ____________________,
as presented ________ or as corrected ________.
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS
COURT REPORTING BY TERRI L. LEWIS, REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL COURT REPORTER, FPR-C, AND NOTARY
PUBLIC.