BCC Minutes 03/25-26/2008 R
March 25-26, 2008
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida,
March 25-26, 2008
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 district as has 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 members present:
CHAIRMAN: Tom Henning
Donna Fiala
Jim Coletta
Fred Coyle (Absent 3/26/08)
Frank Halas (Absent 3/26/08)
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Dwight E. Brock, Collier County Clerk of Court
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
and
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB)
AGENDA
March 25, 2008
9:00 AM
Tom Henning, BCC Chairman Commissioner, District 3
Donna Fiala, BCC Vice-Chairman Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Chairman
Jim Coletta, BCC Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Vice-Chairman
Frank Halas, BCC Commissioner, District 2
Fred W. Coyle, BCC Commissioner, District 4
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL
RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY
THE CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53, AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
Page 1
March 25, 2008
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMP AIRED ARE A V AILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Pastor J.R. Pagan, International Worship Center
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and
summary agenda.)
B. February 19,2008 - BCC/Tourist Development Council Joint Workshop
C. February 19, 2008 - BCC/Land Development Code Meeting Amendments
D. February 26/27,2008 - BCC/Regular Meeting
E. March 4,2008 - BCC/Strategic Planning Workshop
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
4. PROCLAMATIONS
Page 2
March 25, 2008
A. Proclamation designating April 2008 as Autism Awareness Month. To be
accepted by Brian and Dawn Itzkowitz, and Kristi-Leigh and Bruce Lyon.
B. Proclamation designating April, 2008 as Call 811 Before You Dig Month.
To be accepted by Lynn Dafron, Embarq (Committee Chairman), Bob
Martzloff, City of Naples (Committee Vice Chairman), Collier County Staff
Members: Fred Sexton, PUD Engineering, Trudi Ramirez, Trans. Traffic
Operations, Steve Shelton, PUD Wastewater, James French, CDES
Operations and Regulatory Mgmt. and Everildo "Evy" Ybaceta, CDES
Operations and Regulatory Mgmt.
C. Proclamation designating April to be recognized as Water Conservation
Month. To be accepted by Paul Mattausch, Water Department Director
D. Proclamation recognizing April 7-11, 2008 as National Work Zone
Awareness Week. To be accepted by Norman Feder, Administrator,
Transportation Services Divison, Jay Ahmad, Trans. Eng. & Const.
Management Dept. Director, Bob Tipton, Traffic Operations Dept. Director,
Diane Flagg, Alternative Transportation Modes Director, John Vliet, Road
Maintenance Director, Nick Casalanguida, Transportation Planning Dept
Director, FHP Sgt. Dwayne Cooper and Sgt. Dave Contessa, as well as Sgt.
Chris Gonzalez and Lt. Harold J. Minch from the Collier County Sheriffs
Office.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Recommendation to recognize Jecika DeLeon, Administrative Secretary,
Transportation Administration, as Employee of the Month for March 2008.
B. Presentation by DeAngelis Diamond Construction, Inc.; on the status of the
Golden Gate Library Expansion.
C. This item to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Presentation by Clerk of Courts
Dwight Brock regarding investments.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public petition request by Rene' Oliver to discuss the Dangerous Dog Law.
Page 3
March 25, 2008
B. Public petition request to discuss use of second driveway on Green
Boulevard. (As this item is an on-going Code Enforcement case, the
Board will hear the item but will not discuss the item after it has been
presented.) (Same subject matter as Item 10F)
C. Public petition request by Jim Kramer to discuss support for the platform of
the American people.
D. Public petition request by Brian Jones to discuss temporary conditional use
permit for Adventure Training Concepts, LLC.
E. Public petition request by Lois Selfon to discuss Collier County to provide
funding support for City of Naples Parks and Recreation facilities.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m., unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. ADA-2007-AR-12714,
Saundra Clancy-Koendarfer, represented by Ben Nelson of Nelson Marine
Construction, Inc., is requesting an appeal ofBD-2007-AR-12154 denied by
the Collier County Planning Commission on December 6, 2007. Subject
property is located in Section 5, Township 48, Range 25, Collier County,
Florida.
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. A Resolution approving
with conditions Petition CCSL-2008-0l/AR-12598 Requesting a variance
from the Coastal Construction setback line (CCSL) to allow construction for
seven picnic shelters, six chickee hut concession stands, replacement and
expansion of an existing park entrance Administrative office, and paved
drop-offlane addition to the Park Road, all of which are located on property
known as Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park with a street address of 11135
Gulfshore Drive North and more particularly described as that fraction part
of lots I & 2, located in Section 20, Township 48 South, Range 25 East,
Collier County, Florida
Page 4
March 25, 2008
B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners consider
adopting an Ordinance to establish a Job Retention Investment Program
available to targeted, high wage local companies in order to preserve the
existing targeted workforce and encourage the expansion of additional high
wage jobs; the Ordinance has been prepared in accordance with the request
by the Economic Development Council of Collier County and the prior
direction of the Board of County Commissioners. (Tammie Nemecek,
Economic Development Council)
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Environmental Advisory Council.
B. A resolution of the Board of County Commissioners supporting House Bill
965 and Senate Bill 1660, exemption of certain personal information of
employees working as paramedics and EMTs. (Commissioner Henning)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 11:00 a.m. To review the written and oral reports
of the Advisory Boards and Committees scheduled for review in 200S in
accordance with Ordinance No. 2001-55. Advisory Board's include:
lmmokalee Area Master Plan and Visioning Committee, Immokalee
Beautification Advisory Committee, Isles of Capri Fire Control District
Advisory Board, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and Collier County
Water and Wastewater Authority. (Mike Sheffield, Assistant to the County
Manager)
B. Recommendation to approve the purchase of property insurance for the
period April I, 200S through March 31, 2009 in the amount of $3,571 ,427, a
reduction of$510,262. (Jeff Walker, Director, Risk Management)
C. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution (Initiating Resolution) of the Board
of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, pursuant to Part II of
Chapter 171, Florida Statutes (Florida's lnterlocal Service Boundary Act) to
commence the process for negotiating an interlocal service boundary
agreement regarding 22.04 acres ofland, more or less, described as the
Senior Care Site, proposed to be annexed into the City of Naples. (Jim
Mudd, County Manager)
Page 5
March 25, 2008
D. This item to be heard at 2:30 p.m. To provide the Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) a resolution defining the Countys position on lanes 5
and 6 on Interstate 75 and requesting that the Southwest Florida Expressway
Authority (SWFEA) conduct a study to review alternative roadways to 1-75
that provide mobility between Collier County and Lee County. (Norman
Feder, Administrator, Transportation Services and Nick Casalanguida,
Director, Transportation/Planning)
E. This item to be heard at 3:00 p.m. Recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners (BCC) evaluate and consider proposals from the
various governmental agencies that have expressed interest in potentially
managing and accepting Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) severed
Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District (RFMUD) North Belle Meade (NBM)
Sending Land properties in a fee simple conveyance process as viable
alternatives in juxtaposition to the proposed Community Development
District (CDD) conveyance arrangement presented to the Board. (Joe
Thompson, Senior Planner, Comprehensive Planning Department, CDES &
Alex Sulecki, Program Coordinator, Conservation Collier, Administrative
Services Division)
F. To receive approval from Board of County Commissioners (BCC) to allow
the existing driveway connections on Green Boulevard, that serve as
secondary access point to the residents of 15th Avenue SW, to remain until
such time the County improves Green Boulevard to a four lane urban cross
section. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation Services) (Same
subject matter as Item 6B)
G. This item continued from the February 26. 2008 BCC meetin!!: and is
further continued to the March 25. 2008 BCC meetio!!:. Recommendation
to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and drainage improvements
for the final plat of Olde Cypress Unit One (Olde Cypress PUD). The
roadway and drainage improvements will be privately maintained. (Stan
Chrzanowski, Sr. Engineer, Engineering & Environmental Services
Department, CDES)
H. Recommendation to approve the purchase of a 4.98 acre improved property
(Parcel No. 147) and a vacant, 4.27 acre parcel (Parcel No. 146), both of
which are required for the construction of the Vanderbilt Beach Road
Extension project. Project No. 60168 (Fiscal Impact: $1,977,600.) (Jay
Page 6
March 25, 2008
Ahmad, Transportation/ECM Director)
I. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, to amend and clarify the Countys
Stormwater Funding Policy; Funding of Stormwater Management; Findings
and Purpose; Capital and Operating Budget; Definitions; and providing an
effective date. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation Services)
J. Request that the Board of County Commissioners provide guidance to staff
regarding the recently received application for a permit to allow for the
installation of two signs for a Coffee Shop business located at 6345 Naples
Boulevard, Pine Air Lakes PUD. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, CDES)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve an Agreement to accept donated
property for use as right-of-way on the Santa Barbara Blvd.
Extension, Project #60091 (Potential Fiscal Impact: $132.00)
Page 7
March 25, 2008
2) Recommendation to Award Collier County Bid #OS-5050 Diesel
Powered Refuse Loader to Wallace International Trucks.
3) Recommendation to consider a request to modify Haldeman Creek
Dredging Municipal Services Taxing Unit Ordinance No. 2006-60 by
adding 5 parcels and modify Section Six-B to add or owners of
residential or commercial property.
4) Recommendation to grant a special exception to The Shores of
Berkshire Lakes concerning the communitys request to pay the
Countys noise wall contractor on the Santa Barbara Boulevard project
to continue installing said wall from the limits of the warranted noise
wall, easterly along Radio Road to the East boundary of their
property. (Fiscal Impact: $0.00)
5) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to approve
an interim impact fee for new dry storage construction at Calusa
Island Marina until an approved alternative impact study is completed
and the appropriate fee is determined.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to Award Bid Number OS-5039 for the installation
of one fuel tank for the Carica Repump Station in the amount of
$2IS,S39 to Quality Enterprises, Incorporated.
2) Recommendation to amend award of Bid Number 07-41S1 for
landscaping maintenance of Public Utilities Division facilities to
rescind award to Florida Land Maintenance and award to Amera Tech
Incorporated in the estimated amount of $142,312.
3) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfactions of
Lien for Solid Waste residential accounts wherein the County has
received payment and said Liens are satisfied in full for the 1993,
1994, and 1995 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special
Assessment. Fiscal impact is $4S.50 to record the Satisfactions of
Lien.
4) Recommendation to approve Amendment 7 to Contract 03-3517 with
Greeley and Hansen LLC for Professional Engineering Services for
Page 8
March 25, 2008
Water Main Projects in the amount of$230,520. Projects 70151 and
70152.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment to purchase a
computer and additional operating supplies and appropriate $4,000 of
reserve for cash balance of the University Extension Trust Fund.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager, or his designee,
to submit a South Florida Program grant proposal to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) for $19,384 (of which $8,400 will be
reimbursable) to fund a native plant restoration project at the
Conservation Collier Otter Mound Preserve.
2) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager, or his designee,
to submit a Bureau of Invasive Plant Management (BIPM) grant
proposal to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP) for $132,000 to fund an invasive, exotic plant removal project
at the Conservation Collier Railhead Scrub Preserve.
3) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager, or his designee,
to submit a Bureau ofInvasive Plant Management (BIPM) grant
proposal to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP) for $150,000 to fund an invasive, exotic plant removal project
at the Conservation Collier/ Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem
Watershed Trust Starnes Property.
4) Recommendation to approve an amendment to the Collier County
Group Health and Flexible Reimbursement Insurance Plan effective
January 31,2008 to recognize the Voluntary Separation Incentive
Program.
5) (Companion to Item 16G3: must be approved prior to Item 16G3)
Recommendation to approve a Resolution authorizing the Chairman
ofthe Board of Collier County Commissioners to execute a Statutory
Deed for the conveyance of County owned property to the Collier
County Community Redevelopment Agency to implement provisions
Page 9
March 25, 2008
of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Master Plan and the Bayshore
Neighborhood Focus Initiative for the construction of quality housing
within the Coastal High Hazard Area as part of a CRA residential in-
fill project: Site Address 2605 Van Buren Avenue. (Fiscal Impact: No
impact to the County Managers Agency)
6) Recommendation to authorize and consent to the re-assignment of
Contracts No. 05-3826, "Furnish and Deliver Emulsions Polymer and
06-3898 "Chemicals for Utilities" from Calciquest, Inc., to Carus
Phosphates, Inc., and to release Calciquest, Inc., from liability after
the effective date of the Board's consent.
7) Recommendation to award RFP #08-5019 and Agreement between
Collier County and Building Systems Evaluation, Inc., dba Fire
Sprinkler Systems Company, dba BSE for Fire Sprinkler and Alarm
Testing, Inspection, Maintenance, and Installation for an estimated
annual amount of$125,000.
8) To award a contract for voice and data cabling and communications
related services.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2007 -08 Adopted Budget.
2) Approve the necessary budget amendment from Ochopee Fire Control
District reserves in the amount of $55,000 to purchase equipment for
the purpose of bringing an existing fire truck up to full Engine
specifications and make a mid year adjustment to routine operational
budget line items to address minor safety and compliance issues as
required by the National Fire Protection Association and the Insurance
Services Rating Organization.
3) Recommendation to approve a Resolution that supports proposed
legislation (HB 525) addressing loss of federal entitlement benefits for
inmates which would adopt the policy that they would remain enrolled
in Medicare or Medicaid on a suspended status if incarcerated less
Page 10
March 25, 2008
than a year.
4) Recommendation to approve a Resolution supporting and encouraging
enactment of Senate Bill 1634, which requires Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP) notification to counties and cities
within a five-mile radius of a wastewater facility in violation of Part I,
Chapter 403, Florida Statutes, and identification by the DEP the
source of sewage contaminants which result in health advisories
prohibiting swimming in waters along Florida beaches.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$54,083 to fund engineering, environmental and construction services
for additional work for the mitigation project at Rookery Bay National
Estuarine Research Reserve required by the South Florida Water
Management District and the Army Corps of Engineers permits for
the Marco Island Executive Airport
2) Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency to
approve the purchase of a residential (mobile home) lot in the
Bayshore area of the CRA as part ofa CRA residential infill project;
to approve payment from and authorize the CRA Chairman to make a
payment from the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Fund (187) in the
amount of $65,000 plus cost and expenses to complete the sale of
subject property. Site address: 3105 Karen Drive ($65,000).
3) (Companion to Item 16E5) Recommendation that the Community
Redevelopment Agency accept the conveyance of County owned land
located within the boundaries of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
Redevelopment Overlay and direct CRA staff to record the executed
Statutory Deed from the County to implement provisions of the
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Master Plan and the Bayshore
Neighborhood Focus Initiative providing construction of quality
housing within the Coastal High Hazard Area as part of a CRA
residential in-fill project: Site Address 2605 Van Buren Avenue.
(Fiscal Impact $3,000)
Page 11
March 25, 2008
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Halas requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a valid public purpose.
Attended the 4th Annual Freedom of the Press Luncheon at Naples
Hilton on Wednesday, March 12, 200S. $30.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Halas' travel budget.
2) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. She attended the
Marco YMCA Stan's Roast on Thursday, March 20, 200S at Marco
Marriott Resort & Spa. $150.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's
travel budget.
3) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function servinig a valid public purpose. She attended the
Charles Collier Luncheon and Presenation Thursday, March 6, 200S
at the Bellasera Hotel. $30.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's
travel budget.
4) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. She attended the
6th Annual Women in History Luncheon Friday, March 14, 200S at
Hilton Naples. $75.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel
budget.
5) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Will attend the Grand Opening
Celebration of the Isabel Collier-Read Medical Campus, March IS,
200S. $23.95 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
6) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Will attend the Physician's Regional -
Collier Boulevard "Hospital Check Up" Cocktail Party and
Presentation, March 20, 200S. $25 to be paid from Commissioner
Coletta's travel budget.
7) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Will attend the Chief Donald Peterson
Retirement Celebration, March 9, 200S. $14.SS to be paid from
Page 12
March 25, 2008
Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
8) Proclamation recognizing Connie Mack IV and thanking him for his
extraordinary service to Collier County.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of March
I, 2008 to March 7, 2008 and for submission into the official records
of the Board.
2) To obtain Board apporval for disbursements for the period of March
08,2008 through March 14,2008 and for sumbission into the official
records of the Board.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to Authorize the Making of an Offer of Judgment to
Respondent, Rose Somogyi, for Parcels 123 and 823 in the Amount of
$47,499.00 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. John J. Yaklich, et
a!., Case No. 03-2259-CA, Golden Gate Parkway Project #60027
(Fiscal Impact: $45,405.00 if offer is accepted).
2) Recommendation to approve two settlements for road right-of-way
parcels acquired through condemnation for the Oil Well Road Project
#60044. (Fiscal Impact $15,057.00)
3) Recommendation to authorize a second Offer of Judgment for Parcels
838A and 838B by Collier County to property owner, Nancy L.
Johnson Perry in the lawsuit styled CC v. Nancy L. Johnson Perry,
Individually and as Successor Trustee, et aI., Case No. 03-2373-CA
(Golden Gate Parkway Project No. 60027) (Positive Fiscal Impact of
$ 9000, if accepted.)
4) Request by the Collier County Industrial Development Authority for
approval of a resolution authorizing Palm Beach County to issue
Page 13
March 25, 2008
revenue bonds for the Children's Home Society of Florida, Inc. to
finance or refinance certain projects in several Florida counties,
including Collier County, and to authorize the Collier County
Industrial Development Authority to enter into an interlocal
agreement with Palm Beach County.
5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners consider
approving a Settlement Agreement and Release with Lodge Abbott
Associates, LLC (owner of the Cocohatchee Bay Planned Unit
Development) to settle alleged claims, including an alleged Bert
Harris Act claim purportedly arising from denial of an amendment to
the Cocohatchee Bay PUD to modify the Bald Eagle Management
Plan, and Lodge Abbott Associates, LLC v. Collier County, Case No.
05-962-CA, now pending in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for
Collier County, Florida, as well as amended Cocohatchee Bay PUD
Document with attached Bald Eagle Management Plan.
6) Recommendation to approve four settlements for road right-of-way
parcels acquired through condemnation for the Oil Well Road Project
(Oil Well Road Project #60044). (Fiscal Impact $19,207.00)
7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
budget amendment in the amount of $284,906.36, and direct staff to
deposit these funds into the Court registry, in order to effectuate a
November 22, 2006 Order ofInterpleader and a February 15,2008
Order Granting Motion for Summary Judgment relating to the
redemption of Tax Certificate No. 98-5482 (TDA #11983) and
subsequent conflicting claims for surplus funds.
8) Recommendation that the Board approve and authorize the Chairman
to execute a Retention Agreement with the law firm Nelson Hesse,
LLP to provide specialized legal counsel to the Collier County Water
and Wastewater Authority relating specifically to Orange Tree Utility
Company's Petition for Limited Proceeding Rate Increase.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
Page 14
March 25, 2008
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. SE-2007-AR-12229, an
ordinance amending Ordinance Number 07-34, for the Kaicasa Residential
Planned Unit Development (RPUD), to incorporate the inadvertent omission
of Section 5.6.E and Section 5.8.C-G that was approved by the Board of
County Commissioners on March 27,2007 and therefore constitutes a
scriveners error. The subject property, consisting of 100 acres, is located
along the north side of State Road 29, east of Village Oaks Elementary
School, and is approximately 2 miles east of the intersection of State Road
29 and County Road 846.
B. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to Fiscal
Year 2007-08 Adopted Budget.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 15
March 25, 2008
March 25-26, 2008
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good morning. Welcome to the
Board of County Commissioners' meeting of March 25,2008.
Pastor lR. Pagan is going to lead us in the invocation today and
to follow that, we'll do the Pledge of Allegiance.
Would you all rise, please.
Pastor?
PASTOR PAGAN: Good morning. Father, I thank you this
morning for this great opportunity that you have given us to be over
here. Thank you for the commissioners and the work that they do for
our community.
Allow them to do, Lord, the great work for this community so we
can go forward. Thank you for this station and thank you for
everything that you allow us to do in freedom.
I ask you all these things this morning in the name of Jesus
Christ, amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager, would you walk us
through the -- today's change?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Agenda changes, Board of County
Commissioners' meeting, March 25,2008.
Item 4A, Brian and Dawn Itzkowitz will not be present to accept
the proclamation. Kristi-Leigh and Bruce Lyon will be accepting this
proclamation. That change is at the recipient's request.
Page 2
March 25-26, 2008
We have an add-on item on item 4E. It's a proclamation
designating March 30, 2008, as National Doctors Day, to be accepted
by Dr. Fontana. That add-on is at staffs request.
We have an item that's withdrawn, and that's item 6B. It's a
public petition request by Barbara Segura to discuss use of second
driveways on Green Boulevard, and that withdrawal is at petitioner's
request.
We have an add-on of 9C, and that's a contact -- excuse me -- a
contract extension for David Weigel, county attorney, and that add-on
is at Commissioner Henning's request.
We have item 16E7. The title on the index should read, for an
estimated annual amount of $165,000, rather than $125,000. All
backup material is correct. That correction is at staffs request.
Item 16F3, the first line of this resolution should read, whereas
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 42, Part 435.1009, rather than
1008, and that correction's at staffs request.
Next item is to withdraw item 16H2, and that's Commissioner
Fiala's request, board approval for reimbursement for attending a
function serving a valid public purpose, and she didn't attend the
Marco YMCA Stan's Roast Marco on Thursday --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I did.
MR. MUDD: You did?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I did attend it, but there was a
mix-up in submission. One secretary submitted it and then another, so
we had to take the second one off.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. Withdraw item 16H2, thank you.
Next item is withdraw item 16H5, Commissioner Coletta's
request, the board approval for reimbursement, serving a valid public
purpose, will attend the grand opening celebrations of the Isabel
Collier-Reed Medical Campus March 18,2008. And I believe
Commissioner Coletta did not make that engagement.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct. I couldn't make
Page 3
March 25-26, 2008
it.
MR. MUDD: Then we have a series of time certain items. Item
6C to be heard at 10 a.m. It's a presentation by Clerk of Court's
Dwight Brock regarding investments.
The next time certain item is item 10A to be heard at 11 a.m., and
that's to review the written and oral reports of the advisory boards and
committees scheduled for review in 2008 in accordance with
ordinance number 2001-55.
Advisory boards include the Immokalee Area Master Plan and
Visioning Committee, the Immokalee Beautification Advisory
Committee, the Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Board,
the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, and the Collier County
Water and Wastewater Authority.
Next item that's time certain is item 10D, to be heard at 2:30
p.m., to provide the Board of County Commissioners, BCC, a
resolution defining the county's position on lanes five and six on
Interstate 75 and requesting that the Southwest Florida Expressway
Authority conduct a study to review alternative roadways to I -7 5 to
provide mobility between Collier County and Lee County.
The next time certain item is item 10E to be heard at three p.m.,
and this is a recommendation that the Board of County
Commissioners evaluate and consider proposals for the various
governmental agencies that have expressed interest in potentially
managing and accepting transfer of development rights, TDR, severed
from the rural fringe mixed-use district North Belle Meade sending
land properties in a fee simple conveyance process as viable
alternatives in juxtaposition to the proposed community development
direct conveyance arrangement presented to the board.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Mr. Weigel, do you have any changes to today's agenda?
MR. WEIGEL: No, thank you, Mr. Henning. The county
Page 4
March 25-26, 2008
manager's covered it for us, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now if we could do ex parte
communication on today's summary agenda and any other changes to
the -- today's agenda by the commissioners, starting with
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I have no further
changes to the agenda and I have no ex parte disclosures for the
summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have no ex parte for either the
summary agenda or the consent agenda, but I would like to pull 16K5.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 16K5. County Manager?
MR. MUDD: Sir, that would go to 12 -- would go to 12A, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that the settlement agreement,
Cocohatchee?
MR. MUDD: I think so, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, it is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would you like a time certain for
that, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think -- what do we got for time
certains?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: One o'clock.
MR. MUDD: You have one o'clock where you do your Board of
Zoning Appeals and --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Why don't make it four o'clock?
MR. MUDD: Sir?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How about four o'clock?
MR. MUDD: That time's open, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I was just going to suggest
a similar time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I have no ex parte
Page 5
March 25-26, 2008
communication on today's summary agenda. I would like to pull
16B3, not that I'm opposed to it. I just -- I think it's worthy of having
more information about the changes to the taxing unit. And staff is
going to provide that.
MR. MUDD: That's 16B3, sir?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 16 Baker three.
MR. MUDD: And that would go to 10K, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have no ex parte on the consent or
the summary agenda, and I have no changes to the agenda. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you, sir. I have no
changes to the agenda, and in the summary agenda, item A, I have had
correspondence and emails, a letter from Johnson Engineering, and
also notice of a neighborhood informational meeting 7/812'05.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, great. Thank you.
Entertain a motion to approve today's agenda as amended.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve today's agenda as
amended.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 6
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Page 7
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
March 25, 2008
Item 4A: Brian and Dawn Itzkowitz will not be present to accept this proclamation. Kristi-Leigh
and Bruce Lyon will be accepting this proclamation. (Recipient's request.)
Add On Item 4E: Proclamation designating March 30, 2008 as National Doctor's Day. To be
accepted by Dr. Fontana. (Staff's request.)
Withdraw Item 6B: Public petition request by Barbara Segura to discuss use of second driveway
on Green Boulevard. (Petitioner's request.)
Add On 9C: Contract extension for David Weigel, County Attorney. (Commissioner Henning's
request.)
Item 16E7: The title on the index should read, " . . . . for an estimated annual amount of
$165,000." (rather than $125,000). All back up material is correct. (Staff's request.)
Item 16F3: The first line of this Resolution should read, "WHEREAS, U.S. Code of Federal
Regulations, Title 42, Part 435.1009 (rather than 1008) . . . .." (Staff's request.)
Withdraw Item 16H2: Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. She attended the Marco YMCA Stan's Roast
on Thursday, March 20, 2008 at Marco Marriott Resort & Spa. $150.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Fiala's travel budget. (Commissioner Fiala's request.)
Withdraw Item 16H5: Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement serving
a valid public purpose. Will attend the Grand Opening Celebration of the Isabel Collier-Read
Medical Campus, March 18,2008. $23.95 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
(Commissioner Coletta's request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 5C to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Presentation by Clerk of Courts Dwight Brock regarding
investments.
Item 10A to be heard at 11 : 00 a.m. To review the written and oral reports of the Advisory Boards
and Committees scheduled for review in 2008 in accordance with Ordinance No. 2001-55.
Advisory Board's include: Immokalee Area Master Plan and Visioning Committee, Immokalee
Beautification Advisory Committee, Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Board, Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board and Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority.
Item 10D to be heard at 2:30 p.m. To provide the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) a
resolution defining the County's position on lanes 5 and 6 on Interstate 75 and requesting that the
Southwest Florida Expressway Authority (SWFEA) conduct a study to review alternative
roadways to 1-75 that provide mobility between Collier County and Lee County.
Item 1 OE to be heard at 3:00 p.m. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
(BCC) evaluate and consider proposals from the various governmental agencies that have
expressed interest in potentially managing and accepting Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
severed Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District (RFMUD) North Belle Meade (NBM) Sending Land
properties in a fee simple conveyance process as viable alternatives in juxtaposition to the
proposed Community Development District (CDD) conveyance arrangement presented to the
Board. (Joe Thompson, Senior Planner, Comprehensive Planning Department, and Alex Sulecki,
Program Coordinator, Conservation Collier.)
March 25-26, 2008
Item #2B, #2C, #2D, and #2E
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 19,2008, BCC/TDC JOINT
WORKSHOP; MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 19,2008, BCC/LDC
AMENDMENTS MEETING; MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26-27,
2008, REGULAR BCC MEETING; MARCH 4, 2008,
BCC/STRA TEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOP
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion to approve
February 19,2008, BCC/TDC workshop; February 19,2008,
BCC/Land Development Code meeting amendments; February 26 and
27th 2008, BCC regular meeting; and March 4, 2008, BCC/strategic
planning workshop.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So move.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Halas,
second by Commissioner Fiala to approve the minutes of those
meetings.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Next we go to proclamations.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 28 2008 AS "AUTISM
Page 8
March 25-26, 2008
AWARENESS MONTH" - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Sir, the first proclamation is a proclamation
designating April, 2008, as Autism Awareness Month. To be accepted
by Kristi-Leigh and Bruce Lyon.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Lyon.
MR. ANNUNZIATA: No. There's been a change. My name is
Richard Annunziata. I'm here on behalf of Autism Speaks.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please, join us. Anybody else right in
front?
MR. ANNUNZIATA: I believe I'm the only one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Just right in front. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whereas, autism is a complex
neurobiological disorder that typically lasts throughout a person's life
and inhibits a person's ability to communicate and develop social
relationships and is often accompanied by extreme behavioral
challenges; and,
Whereas, one in 150 individuals is diagnosed with autism in the
United States, making it more common than pediatric cancer, diabetes
and AIDS combined; and,
Whereas, the diagnosis of autism has increased 10- fold in the last
decade with a new child being diagnosed every 20 minutes and 1.7
million individuals in the United States living with an autism spectrum
disorder; and,
Whereas, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have
called autism a national public health crisis whose cause and cure
remain unknown; and,
Whereas, early diagnosis, research and intervention are critical
components to provide families with necessary skills to support
individuals diagnosed with autism and related disabilities; and,
Whereas, April 2, 2008, is designated as the First Annual World
Autism Awareness Day by the United Nations General Assembly.
Page 9
March 25-26, 2008
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that April, 2008, be
designated as Autism Awareness Month and is proud to join Autism
Speaks, local professionals and parents that are working diligently to
combat autism, increase funding for research, raise awareness about
autism and its effect on individuals, families, and societies, and to
bring hope to all who deal with the hardships of this disorder.
Done and ordered this 25th day of March, 2008, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning, Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we accept this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle and
second by Commissioner Fiala to move the proclamation.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We'll take a picture of you first, sir.
MR. ANNUNZIATA: Again, my name is Richard Annunziata,
and I have a daughter who is diagnosed on the autism spectrum. And
on behalf of Autism Speaks, my family and the families of Collier
County, other families of Collier County who are impacted every day
with children with autism, I'd like to thank you for issuing this
proclamation.
It's recognition such as this which is a catalyst for real change
and awareness to improve the lives of those affected by autism in
Collier County. Thank you for taking such an important step in
Page 10
March 25-26, 2008
raising awareness today.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next proclamation?
Item #4 B
PROCLAMA nON DESIGNATING "CALL 811 BEFORE YOU
DIG MONTH" - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next proclamation is
designating April, 2008, as Call 811 Before You Dig Month. To be
accepted by Lynn Defron from Embarq, who's the committee
chairman; Bob Martzloff, City of Naples, committee vice-chairman;
Collier County staff members Fred Sexton, PUD engineering; Travis
Gossard, transportation operations; Steve Shelton, PUD wastewater;
James French, development's environmental services operations and
regulatory management; and Evy Ybaceta, community development's
environmental services operations and regulatory management.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Welcome, gentlemen. It's a
pleasure to read this proclamation.
Whereas, each year in Florida lives are endangered, money and
time are wasted, and property is destroyed because people fail to
locate underground facilities before beginning excavation or
demolition;
Whereas, Governor Charlie Crist recently issued a proclamation
endorsing the protection of underground utilities and the observance
of Call Before You Dig Month during the month of April, 2008; and,
Whereas, Call Sunshine, a one-call center that notifies
participating utility agencies of plans to engage in excavation or
demolition -- it is a free service to professional contractors and
Page II
March 25-26, 2008
homeowners; and,
Whereas, Collier County advocates the enforcement and
compliance with the Florida Statutes and local ordinances with regard
to protecting underground utilities;
Whereas, anyone planning any type of excavation or demolition
should notify Call Sunshine, and if a utility line must be located,
locating personnel will be sent to mark the location of buried line at no
cost to the inquiring party; and,
Whereas, Collier County recognizes Collier County and the City
of Naples Underground Damage Prevention Task Force as that group
of utility providers and local government agencies that are dedicated
to the protection of underground facilities and the community's
infrastructure through education and enforcement.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the month of April,
2008, be designated as Call 811 Before You Dig Month.
Done in this order, the 25th day of March 2008, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning, Chairman.
And Chairman, I make a motion that we accept this
proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Halas and
second by Commissioner Fiala to move the proclamation.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously. Thank you.
Page 12
March 25-26, 2008
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Evy, you're involved in all kinds of
stuff, aren't you?
Good morning, George.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4C
PROCLAMA nON DESIGNATING APRIL TO BE RECOGNIZED
AS "WATER CONSERV A nON MONTH" - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next proclamation --
MR. MUDD: Is designating April to be recognized as Water
Conservation Month, to be accepted by Paul Mattausch, the water
department director.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I am so delighted to be able to read
this one.
Proclamation: Whereas, water is a basic and essential need of
every living thing; and,
Whereas, the State of Florida, the water management districts,
and Collier County are working together to increase awareness about
the importance of water conservation.
Come on up, John Steiger -- and,
Whereas, Collier County and the State of Florida have designated
April, typically a dry month when water demands are most acute,
Florida's Water Conservation Month to educate citizens about how
they can help save Florida's precious water resources; and,
Whereas, Collier County has always encouraged and supported
water conservation through various educational programs and special
events; and,
Whereas, every business, industry, school and citizen can make a
Page 13
March 25-26, 2008
difference when it comes to conserving water; and,
Whereas, every business, industry, school, and citizen can help
by saving water and thus promote a healthy economy and community.
Therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the month of April be
recognized as Water Conservation Month in Collier County, Florida,
and calling upon each citizen and business to help protect our precious
resource by practicing water saving measures and becoming more
aware of the need to conserve water.
Done and ordered this 25th day of March, 2008, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning, Chairman.
And Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: A motion to approve by
Commissioner Fiala, seconded by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hi, Paul.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good to see you, John.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Thank you for all
you're doing.
MR. MUDD: Thanks, Paul.
It's good to see you, John.
Page 14
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You want to say a few words, Mr.
Mattausch?
MR. STEIGER: For the record, John Steiger, member of the Big
Cypress Basin Board.
I would like to commend you for passing this proclamation and
remind you that you should be extremely proud of your community
and your staff who have led in using alternative water supplies and
conserving water.
Collier County has the best record for this state for the use of
alternative water supplies and conservation of water. And with the
help of the county government, the City of Naples, the City of Marco
Island and the Big Cypress Basin kicking in money as well, the
alternative water supply issues have been addressed very, very
carefully.
And I believe City of Marco, for example, gets about 75 percent
of its drinking water from aquifer storage and recovery on alternative
supplies and just pumping it out of the Biscayne. I mean, not --
excuse me. I'm thinking the other side. The Hawthorne or Tamiami
aquifers.
You have a very dedicated group of public employees in this
county who are working very diligently to do this, and I think you
should be very proud of them.
And while we're talking about things like that, by the way, the
Big Cypress Basin was created to regulate and manage the water
supply in Collier County, and the Florida legislature is thinking about
sunsetting the basin. And if it went back to what it was before, all of
the tax dollars for the water management district that are collected in
Collier County would go east to Dade and Broward who want the
money, need the money and want our water, so just remember that.
It's, you know, this is -- this organization, the basin, was set up
by Mary Ellen Hawkins years ago to keep that resource under the
control of the people who live in this county and use it and not let the
Page 15
March 25-26, 2008
growing group in the east coast get hold of it. And I think that's
something that's worthy to remember.
Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just wanted to add -- and I'm
sorry, Paul -- no, not with you, John, but Paul.
I just wanted to say, because this is such an important subject and
I think a fascinating one, and most people don't ever think about the
water until they turn their faucet on or it doesn't go on -- that's the only
time they're prepared to even think about what's happening with the
water system.
But I offered a tour -- Paul was kind enough to allow me to tour
the water treatment plant. It worked out so beautifully. And I was
quite pleased that 20 people offered, and then they were so interested
in it they asked to then tour the wastewater treatment plant, which I've
set up a tour for next week. And so if anybody out there hears about it
and would like to be a part of that tour, just let me know because it's
also a fascinating thing.
And this is exactly what they're talking with -- talking about is
how we take our wastewater and treat it so it then can be used on golf
courses and medians and so forth as we conserve water better than any
other county in the State of Florida.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. MATTAUSCH: Commissioners, thank you very much.
For the record Paul Mattausch, director of the Collier water
department.
Mr. Steiger, thank you for your kind remarks.
I would like to introduce someone to you that we use in our water
conservation efforts in school. This is -- this is Mr. Wayne Drop. And
Page 16
March 25-26, 2008
Wayne Drop helps us get the conservation method message across to
our school people.
When we were at Coastland Mall, Wayne was -- Wayne was one
of the most popular attractions at the mall. And Wayne, thank you for
your appearance.
We just want to make sure that we take the conservation message
to everybody in Collier County. We want to create the conservation
ethic, not only for our full-time residents, but for those that visit us at
different times of the year.
So Commissioners, thank you once again for proclaiming April
as Water Conservation Month.
And, Wayne, as soon as you've shaken everybody's hand, we'll
go out the door together. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Before you leave, Paul, just one
quick question. Since we're in Phase 3 water restrictions, what is the
average gallons per -- that's gallons per person that's being used at this
present time? I think we were up around 158 before?
MR. MATTAUSCH: We use 185 gallons per person per day as
a planning mechanism to look out in the future. Right now, because
of Phase 3 restrictions, we're depending on the day. Irrigation days,
we're right around 185. In fact, in February when we last calculated
that through the end of the month, we were at 183. But on
nonirrigation days, we're around 162. And so we have -- we're about
15 percent below where we were in water consumption last year. So
we are saving a significant quantity of water.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Mr. Mattausch.
Next proclamation?
Item #4 D
Page 17
March 25-26, 2008
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING APRIL 7-11, 2008 AS
"NATIONAL WORK ZONE AWARENESS WEEK" - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Next proclamation is recognizing April 7th
through 11th, 2008, as National Work Zone Awareness Week, to be
accepted by Norm Feder, administrator of transportation services
division; Jay Ahmad, the transportation engineering and construction
management department director; Bob Tipton, the traffic operations
department director; Diane Flagg, alternative transportation modes
director; John Vliet, maintenance director; Nick Casalanguida,
transportation planning department director; the Florida Highway
Patrol Sergeant Dwayne Cooper and Sergeant David Contessa, as well
as Sergeant Chris Gonzalez and Lieutenant Harold Minch from the
Collier County Sheriffs Office.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
Whereas, Collier County recognizes that National Work Zone
Awareness Week, 2008, April 7th through the 11 th, provides an
opportunity for making all travelers throughout roadway work zones
aware of the need for safety; and,
Whereas, 119 fatalities occurred within work zones in Florida in
2006, making Florida the state with the second highest number of
deaths in work zones; and,
Whereas, more than 1,000 fatalities in work zones occurred
nationwide in 2006. One work zone fatality occurs approximately
every eight hours with one work zone injury happening approximately
every nine minutes; and,
Whereas, it is in the best interest of the traveling public to stay
alert and pay attention to all signs and flaggers when entering and
driving through construction work zones; and,
Whereas, law enforcement in Collier County is strictly enforcing
speeding and other infractions by motorists traveling through work
Page 18
March 25-26, 2008
zones with a special detail called, Let Them Work, during this
important awareness campaign; and,
Whereas, speeding fines are doubled in construction work zones
when workers are present; and,
Whereas, the national slogan for this year's National Work Zone
Awareness Week is "Slow For The Cone Zone;" and;
Whereas, when driving through work zones, everyone should
expect the unexpected. Traffic lanes may shift, crews may be working
near the edge of the pavement and drivers in front of you may
suddenly stop, so give yourself enough of a gap to not run into that
driver's bumper.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that April 7th through the
11 th, 2008, be designated as Work Zone Awareness Week, and that
the Board of County Commissioners does call upon everyone to pay
close attention when traveling through construction work zones in
order to do no harm and have no harm done. Think safety first.
Done and ordered this, the 25th day of March, 2008, signed by
Chairman Henning.
And I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Fiala to move the proclamation.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously. Thank you.
Page 19
March 25-26, 2008
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sergeant, good to see you. Thank
you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, you need a mascot.
Bob's Barricade mascot.
Diane, you should be in the middle.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
Whoops. Bob, do you have two proclamations there? I've got to
watch Mr. Feder. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next proclamation?
Item #4 E
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 30, 2008 AS
"NATIONAL DOCTOR'S DAY" - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next proclamation is
designating March 30, 2008 as National Doctors Day to be accepted
by Dr. Fontana.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And anyone else that's
connected with the Physician's Led Access Network, please come
forward.
Whereas, the Physician Led Access Network of Collier County,
known as PLAN, is an initiative begun by the Collier County Medical
Society to provide the safety net of access to healthcare for
low-income uninsured adults in our community; and,
Whereas, PLAN is a community-based reference network that
coordinates volunteer medical care for eligible low-income adults in
need of health service in Collier County; and,
Whereas, PLAN coordinates quality healthcare for the
underserved of the community; and,
Page 20
March 25-26, 2008
Whereas, PLAN is led by physicians and is a community
partnership that brings together our physicians, community clinics,
hospitals, diagnostic and laboratory facilities and other healthcare
providers through an integrated delivery system of care; and,
Whereas, recently the healthcare provider of PLAN reached a
milestone of $3,900,000 in donated care by the medical community of
Collier County;
Whereas, National Doctors Day is March 30th and will be
celebrated this week on Friday, March 28th, in Collier County.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that gratitude and
appreciation is extended to the Collier County Medical Society and
the Physician Led Access Network of Collier County for their
donation of$3.9 million in donated care and compassion in treating
Collier's underserved.
Done and ordered this, the 25th day of March, 2008, and signed
by Tom Henning, the chair.
And I make a motion for approval. I think this is absolutely
wonderful.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion to approve the proclamation
by Commissioner Coletta, second by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
(Applause.)
Page 21
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Congratulations. Thanks for being
with us today.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Nice to meet you.
You do a little bit of everything.
MS. KRUMBINE: I do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Doctor, thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for all your hard work.
MS. LEAFER: Thank you very much. I'm Lauren Leafer, the
director of the PLAN program, and I'd like to just take this moment to
introduce Dr. Mitchell who was attending; Dr. Colfer, one of our staff;
Michelle Jay; and this is Dr. Fontana who is bridging the gap between
the physicians and the dentists. He is an M.D. and a D.D.S. here in
the community and is at Gulf Coast Center for Oral and Maxillofacial
Surgery. I said it all.
DR. FONT ANA: You did it.
MS. LEAFER: Dr. Fontana.
DR. FONT ANA: Good morning.
It's my pleasure to accept this proclamation on behalf of the
community's physicians and all of the other volunteer providers that
are actively making a difference in the health of our community.
By the end of 2008, PLAN will have provided over $5 million of
donated medical care to the needy Collier residents. Weare truly a
private and public collaboration, and we are pleased to have the
continued support of our Board of County Commissioners and the
county.
So please join us in saying thanks to all of our communities'
doctors on Friday the 28th. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Page 22
March 25-26, 2008
Item #5A
PRESENTATION FOR EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH TO JECIKA
DELEON, ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY IN
TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our presentations
section, and the first presentation is to recognize Jecika DeLeon,
administrative secretary of transportation and administration as
Employee of the Month for March, 2008.
Jecika, if you could please come forward.
Jecika was instrumental in the implementation of the new county
website. She currently serves as the lead web master for the
transportation division and works to streamline their web pages for the
ultimate in consumer-friendly use and navigation ease.
She also serves as backup for the front desk and the executive
secretary for all AIMS and internal tracking inquiries for the entire
division. AIMS is the tool used to track and account for the resolution
of inquiries from the general public.
Jecika works with all the departments to verify that information
that is sent out is correct for these inquiries.
Her assistance in this process has helped the division achieve 100
percent AIMS constituent contact within five working days for the
past two quarters.
Jecika also participated in the creation of an internal
tracking/AIMS report. This report will assist staff in addressing
resident needs and eliminating reoccurring issues so that they can
ultimately provide better service to the public.
Jecika is always willing to assist in these types of tasks that
continue to be beyond her duty -- excuse me -- to be -- I'll start that
agam.
Page 23
March 25-26, 2008
Jecika is always willing to assist on these types of tasks that
continue to be beyond her job duties with cheerfulness and a positive
can-do attitude. She truly deserves to be recognized for her hard
work.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present Jecika DeLeon, the Employee of
the Month for March, 2008.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Jecika, please don't go away. It's,
indeed, a pleasure for the board to recognize you as Employee of the
Month, and more importantly is the service that you do to our
constituents, answering very technical questions.
Transportation is a very important service that we provide to the
citizens, and the citizens are always looking for answers and service.
I want to give you a letter of thank you on behalf of the Board of
Commissioners, a small appreciation for the service that you provide,
and also a plaque for you to hang in your office or in the entryway at
transportation department. Thank you.
MS. DeLEON: Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you so much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for your service.
MS. DeLEON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much, job well
done.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good job, Jecika. Congratulations.
Item #5B
PRESENT AnON BY DEANGELIS DIAMOND CONSTRUCTION,
INC. ON THE STATUS OF THE GOLDEN GATE LIBRARY
EXPANSION
Page 24
March 25-26, 2008
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next presentation is by
DeAngelis Diamond Construction, Inc., to discuss the status of the
Golden Gate Library expansion.
Mr. Hank Jones will-- I guess, will introduce.
MR. JONES: For the record, Hank Jones, department of
facilities management. Good morning, Commissioners.
I'd like to introduce Mr. Norm Gentry, vice-president of
DeAngelis Construction Company, who will give you a brief
presentation of the status of the Golden Gate Library expansion
project. Norm?
MR. GENTRY: Good morning. It's a pleasure to be here this
morning and to show you the progress that we've made to date on the
Golden Gate Library expansion.
BSSW, the project architects, designed a great building, and it's
really been our joy to bring this facility into reality and to provide a
quality facility that the community can use.
It's -- we are currently tracking ahead of schedule. It's due in
large part to the great work of our staff that I'm going to introduce you
to, and they work very, very hard in communicating our schedules to
our subcontractors, making sure that things are thoroughly understood
and that we're communicating well and focusing very heavily on our
schedules as well as our quality.
So with that, I'd like to introduce you to our team. Reggie
Morgan, who's our director of construction is here today; Dan Wilson,
who's the project manager for the project. He's going to walk you
through the slides and show you some of the pictures of our progress;
and Bill Petre, excuse me, our project superintendent, is here as well.
So with that, I'd like to introduce Dan, and he can walk you
through the photos.
MR. WILSON: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Dan Wilson. I'm the project manager for the Golden Gate Library
project.
Page 25
March 25-26, 2008
The project was started in July. As you can see in this
photograph, one of the first things we did was put up a safety fence
around the project and we also installed the sidewalk along the
Lucerne Road for public access from the parking to the existing
library .
The existing library can be seen. It's in the upper left-hand
corner. And then the other building that's in the lower left-hand corner
is the tax office. Both of these were in operation during our
construction.
We began the foundations and the footings and moving vertical
with the building in the beginning of August. This project utilized
expose concrete columns and exposed concrete beams. In the front
entry of the building you can see our form work for the exposed
beams.
By October we received our trusses and we started installing our
roofing package. The roofing consists of metal trusses, metal decking,
fire-treated plywood, a dry underlayment, and standing seam metal
roofing panels.
Moving into November, we've done the addition of the parking
lot, we've put down the first layer of our asphalt, we've also installed
the concrete curbing and the sidewalks for the parking lot area.
In December we were beginning the exterior finishing around the
building as well as, you can also see, the addition of exterior site
lighting, and we're also working on our mechanicals on the interior of
the building at this point.
Moving into January, on the inside of the building, we are
wrapping up the drywall and moving into painting, while in the
exterior, we are continuing with a standing seam roof.
February was the big month as far as entering into our finishing
packages where we started the finishes as far as the doors, cabinetry,
the mechanical trim-outs, and also the light fixtures. In this
photograph you can also see the beginning of the landscaping. In the
Page 26
March 25-26, 2008
islands you can see the trees.
This is a photograph of Bill Petre, our superintendent supervising
the installation of the landscaping, finishing touches of the sidewalk
and everything else, wrapping up the exterior of the building.
This shot here is a shot of the interior. We've got a couple of
interior shots. You can see the finish of the ceilings in place, the
millwork and cabinetry package is in place. The green on the floor is
actually in preparation of the installation of the carpet that is being
installed.
This is an example of the rest rooms, inside the bathroom, the
tile, the trim package, the plumbing trim and accessories; everything is
in place.
Here is a -- here is the arts and crafts room in the back of the
library, and finally we have a shot of the front desk as you enter in the
main part of the library.
DeAngelis Diamond pays particular attention to detail. And in
this photograph in this slide presentation you can see the actual
photograph of the building overlayed on the architect's rendering. You
can see it matches to a complete match.
Thank you for your time. And at this time we can open it up to
any questions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the board members?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I have one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. When do you expect it to
open?
MR. JONES: The building is -- we're being optimistic and
hoping that we're ready for a move-in in May.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't know if you can answer
the question, but I'm sure somebody from staff could. Do we have
money set aside to be able to furnish the building and put the books in
Page 27
March 25-26, 2008
it?
MR. JONES: Blake?
MR. THOMAS: For the record, Blake Thomas, CH2M Hill,
representing facilities management. I'd like to clarify one quick point.
Move-in should be around July 1st of this year. The building
construction will be complete in early May. And money is set aside
for furniture and it's actually already been procured.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Did that answer your question,
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, it does.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Books and furniture by the 1st of
July?
MR. MUDD: The books part, I think they're moving a lot of the
books out of the old annex into the new one, okay. I can't -- outside of
that, that's what I've been -- that's what I've been briefed on. But the
new books, I don't know yet. I'd have to get somebody from Marilyn
-- Marilyn Matthes, she's here to come forward and tell you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What is that beeping?
MS. MATTHES: Good morning, Commissioners. Marilyn
Matthes, library director. We're moving the bulk of the library
collection.
The children's books in this library are heavily used, and we are
trying to replace a lot of those. But generally we're not buying new
books for the building. We have the old collection to use, and we'll
weed it appropriately and add what we need out of our existing book
budget.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Mr. Jones, thank you, as
always, doing a wonderful job overseeing our projects in Collier
County.
MR. JONES: It's a team effort.
Page 28
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, but I get -- I understand your
approach to our projects is to make sure that we have the value added
to the facility. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good job.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, good job. I like the design better
than the old one.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, yeah.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next presentation is a 10 a.m.
time certain, so with the board's indulgence we can go to public
petition and take the first one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's a great idea.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION BY RENE' OLIVER DISCUSSING THE
DANGEROUS DOG LAW - DAS TO REVIEW AND SUBMIT
RECOMMENDATION CHANGES OF THE BOARD
MR. MUDD: The first public petition is a request by Renee
Oliver to discuss the dangerous dog law. Ms. Oliver?
MS. OLIVER: Over here?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, whichever one.
MR. MUDD: And just for the record, state your name.
MS. OLIVER: My name is Renee Oliver. And, Commissioners,
thank you for allowing me to be here today.
I'm here because my two goats were killed by dangerous dogs
back on November 15th, and I know that it pales in comparison to the
killing and mauling deaths of Carshena Benjamin in the Estates.
But what I would like to see, if it's possible, some criminal
penalties added to the dangerous dog laws that we have. There are
some irresponsible dog owners who are allowing their dogs to roam.
The case with my goats, this was the third attack, and the owners
Page 29
March 25-26, 2008
keep having their dogs returned. They cannot contain the dogs. The
dogs got out again and happened to maul a potbelly pig that belongs to
a Domestic Animal Services officer.
So I am just asking ifthere's some way that the law for the
dangerous dogs can be stiffened to help curb irresponsible dog owners
so that they face some criminal penalties, stiff fines, and, perhaps, are
barred from owning any more dogs in the future.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions, comments by the Board of
Commissioners? Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. We've addressed this
situation several times and we've been limited a little bit by state
statutes, but I understand we can go further now, and I'd like to see
this ordinance come back.
The truth of the matter is, there's absolutely no excuse for any
owner allowing his dog to roaming free, and there's many people that
do that, especially in the area of the Estates. But we have to be able to
come up with more severe penalties that really reach out and touch
these people in a meaningful way.
If you own a dog, you have a responsibility to make sure that
your dog is sheltered properly and that it's on leash when it's outside
the house. If it's not, it should be a very, very large fine. Starting off
with something maybe on a reasonable side, but every occurrence that
it goes up should go into the thousands of dollars.
MS. OLIVER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's very unfortunate these things
happen. I hear about these occurrences continuously. We seem to
have difficulty addressing it. We also have to deal with the fact that
we have a budget crisis that we're dealing with. We're going to have a
diminished staff, ability to be able to respond.
We have to somehow maybe empower the Sheriffs Department,
when a dangerous dog is identified as dangerous and he's on the loose,
to be able to exert a final solution to it with whatever fire power they
Page 30
March 25-26, 2008
have available, because there's absolutely no excuse for this. People's
lives are much more important than the rights of a property owner to
be able to have a dog and let it run free.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, then
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I have a couple of questions
here. Since the potbelly pig belonged to one of the members ofDAS,
I would think that DAS needs look at this and then come before the
Board of County Commissioners and let us know what's going on.
The other question I have and -- is are there any other varmints
that were involved, like maybe coyotes or something of this nature?
MS. OLIVER: No.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. OLIVER: The dogs were positively identified. They had
first killed five of my neighbor's goats Labor Day weekend. They
came and were circling our goat pen on October 28th. They came
back on November 15th, killed our goats, came back on the 16th and
were gnawing at the carcasses.
My husband and I couldn't bury the goats at night yet because
DAS and the Sheriffs Office was over in the evening taking
photographs, so it was difficult for us to try to dig, you know, holes to
bury the goats.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I would hope that DAS
picks this up and figures out what needs to be done and come back
before the Board of County Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would like to see it come
back. I think we need some recommendations from DAS.
The perennial problem in many cases is that they cannot identify
which dog did the damage. Obviously in this case you know where
those -- who those dogs are and who they belong to.
But the real solution is to punish the owners even if dogs are
Page 3 1
March 25-26, 2008
running loose. And maybe rather than destroying a dog, we should
euthenize the owners. I think that would probably solve the problem
pretty quickly.
But seriously, we really do need to do something about that. It is
irresponsible behavior, and I'd like to see it come back for a full
hearing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coletta and
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. Let Commissioner
Fiala go first. I already spoke.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just going to ask if there was
any indication that these are wild dogs, or do they belong to people?
MS. OLIVER: No. They belong -- we know who the owners
are.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
MS. OLIVER: And they have been identified as the dogs in all
the attacks.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm having a hard time
accepting this as being all right, having dogs gnawing on your
domestic animals that are down.
Before the sheriff deputy disappears, a question, if I may, sir. If
you are out there and you have a dog that's endangering your property
and your animals, your wild -- your domestic animals or your pets or
your children, do you have a right to dispatch it with a firearm?
THE SHERIFF: Safely, yes. If you do it in a safe manner, yes,
you can.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I hate to -- it shouldn't be the
responsibility of every citizen out there to have to take this in their
own hands; however, with that said, you know, sometimes we have to
act in an orderly fashion to be able to bring solutions.
MS. OLIVER: I was given conflicting information on that by
Page 32
March 25-26, 2008
DAS and by the sheriff. The DAS officer said, shoot them, call them,
we'll drag the dogs out. Sheriff said you can't discharge a firearm, so
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Maybe that's something
else we need to address in our ordinances where a person won't be
held responsible for discharging a firearm. I can't believe this. You're
allowed to carry guns in your house to be able to protect yourselves
from intruders. You can have the guns but you can't discharge them?
That don't make any sense.
THE SHERIFF: You can use a weapon to protect yourself or
your property. But again, taking all the other safety issues into
consideration, you know, people around, what direction you're firing.
Just like us, any way -- where you're going to shoot at, where your
rounds are going to go, you've got to take all that into consideration.
But if you're protecting yourself or your property, you could.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I don't think anyone's ever
going to prosecute you for shooting a dog that's endangering your
property or your family and disposing of it in a humane and proper
manner.
THE SHERIFF: You just need to notify us after the incident,
that way there's no repercussions from the owners.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Well, that's possible
solutions. But we definitely take this seriously and we will be
following this through, and I'll keep you advised when it's coming
back before this commission,
MS. OLIVER: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for being here today.
MS. OLIVER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Just a footnote to that issue
about being able to shoot the offending animals. It really does, as the
sheriffs officer has pointed out, it really does depend upon who lives
Page 33
March 25-26, 2008
nearby. I mean, you could easily put someone else in danger by firing
at dogs, and a lot of common sense is necessary in order to take that
action. And I don't know that we can legislate that. That's the
problem.
People have to understand that if they were to fire at a dog and
hit a child several yards away, then they're going to be in serious
trouble.
MS. OLIVER: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you have to be very, very
careful about doing that, although the -- the solution is, you invite the
dog into your house and then you take care of it, okay. But in any
event, let's bring it back and we'll talk about it some more, okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. County Manager, it seems like
it's a consensus of the board that they would like to change the
ordinance or create an ordinance on dangerous dogs, and including
different enforcement agencies to assist our residents from dangerous
dogs. Is that a fair assessment?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Are we remanding the action back to your
Domestic Animal Services Advisory Board?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's where I think it should go.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. That's a consensus of the board
to create an ordinance or amend an ordinance through our advisory
boards and bring it back to the Board of County Commissioners.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Before we go to our time
certain at 10 o'clock, there's a beeping noise up here, and if we can just
take a short break and take care of that, because it is quite disturbing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Every 10 seconds.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Let's take a five-minute break.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it up here?
Page 34
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it up here somewhere?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think it is somewhere.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Maybe it's your pacemaker.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Probably a power supply.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Five-minute break.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Item #5C
PRESENTATION BY DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF COURTS,
REGARDING INVESTMENTS - W/PRESENTATION BY DR.
STUART BROWN
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item is a time certain. It's a
presentation.
MR. MUDD: It's a presentation by the Clerk of Courts, Dwight
Brock, regarding investments.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good morning.
MR. BROCK: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and fellow
Members of the Commission.
Commissioners, I'm here today because I was asked to be here by
Commissioner Henning, apparently at the request of the board, to
come and talk to members of the board about the taxpayers' portfolio
here in Collier County.
When we undertook this, you know, we looked at it from the
perspective, I can come up here and give you my personal opinion of
the portfolio, and that may not mean much, so what we did was we
undertook having an external valuation of the portfolio done by an
Page 35
March 25-26, 2008
individual that is going to talk to you today about some of the things
he found.
The clerk has been investing the county taxpayers' funds for
many years here in Collier County, and it's pursuant to a policy both
the board and the clerk derived years ago. And he's going to talk to
you about what's in the portfolio, how the portfolio functions, and
describe to you the return that we're receiving from our funds from our
investments and how it works.
Some of the things that we can do to improve, some suggestions
that he may have as to what we might ought to do with the portfolio,
and give you a critical, hopefully, analysis of the portfolio as it exists
and what we have done in the past.
I would like to introduce to you -- this is a gentleman that I have
known for many years. He is a gentleman who actually taught me in
securities at Florida State University back in the early 1970s. He was a
former professor at Florida State University dealing with securities.
He has been involved in securities analysis for many years. He has
retired from his professorship at Florida State, and he's now working
in private practice.
I will let him take over at this point and we can go through the
process, and he will tell you something about himself.
I thank you, and I will turn it over to Professor Brown. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Brock, and good morning.
As the screen shows, I was given an assignment --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your name for the record, please.
MR. BROWN: Oh, I'm sorry. Stuart Brown, and I live in
Tallahassee, Florida.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And if you could just speak up just a
little bit louder, we'd appreciate it.
MR. BROWN: Sure. My assignment was to look at the Collier
Page 36
March 25-26, 2008
County investment policy and portfolio and to identify potential
problem areas if they exist.
Simplifying this, my sense of it is that you folks just want to
know if your money's being handled properly and if your money's
safe, so I would like to address those concerns ifthere are any.
Now, it's customary in these situations for the person to thump
their chest and talk about their qualifications, and I always feel a little
self-conscious doing that, but it's obligatory, so I will do it.
So who am I? I have a Ph.D. in finance from the University of
Florida, I have published in the major academic finance journals, as
well as several books, and I taught for 30-some years at Florida State
University in the finance department; I taught investments and
portfolio management.
I hold the professional designation chartered financial analyst,
which is a real-world credential. It's sort of vaguely similar to a CPA
in an investment context.
And I have one -- I have had consulting positions in various areas
from 1983 until just recently, more than 20 years. I was a paid
consultant to the Florida State Board of Administration, which is the
state pension fund, currently with over a hundred billion dollars worth
of assets.
I was sort of described as a utility infielder. I would undertake
special projects and work with the executive director to give him an
independent insight, academic, if you will, to the investment process.
And finally, I have fairly extensive expert witness experience in
the securities litigation area. And, in fact, I was involved in 1994 in
the Collier County litigation when you sort of ran afoul of some very
complex and risky collateralized mortgage obligations.
I've also testified for the Securities and Exchange Commission
and in various arbitrations, state and federal courts, all relating to
securities and violations of securities statutes and regulations.
Now, it's impossible for a finance professor to talk about these
Page 37
March 25-26, 2008
areas without at least doing a little theory, so I'd like to apologize
ahead of time. I'll try not to put you to sleep, but I'd like to sort of
give you a context and some basic insights into the investment process
that will map directly into what's going on with your portfolio.
I promise not to take very long and to only do what I think is the
most important things. And, of course, any questions you have at any
time, feel free to speak up.
So the threshold issue is, if you want to invest money in financial
instruments, what are the instruments that are available to you? Well,
two big ones, stocks and bonds. Stocks, of course, represent
ownership in a corporation.
Now, the two important distinguishing features of equity or
common stocks is, number one, any funds that are paid out are not an
obligation of the corporation and, number two, there's no maturity
date. There's no -- there's no set time when you're going to get your
money back, as a result of which equities or stocks are only
appropriate for a portfolio that has very long-term liabilities.
For instance, the state board, which has the liabilities of funding
pensions will experience a positive cash flow essentially as far as the
eye can see because the State of Florida's growing so rapidly. So it's
appropriate for the State of Florida to invest their money in stocks.
On the other hand, if you have shorter-term liabilities, it's really
only appropriate to invest your money in what's called fixed-income
securities or bonds.
Now, bonds are really nothing more than loans. A bond is a
standardized marketable loan contract. The standardized typically, if
you buy a bond, you will pay a thousand dollars to the entity that's
issuing the bond, you'll get interest payments for however many years,
and then you'll get your thousand dollars back.
So bonds -- with bonds the interest payments or the cash flow are
a contractual obligation and there is a fixed maturity date.
Now, this is -- I want to do a little theory now. I promise you not
Page 38
March 25-26, 2008
to drag this out, but there's one very important feature of financial
markets that will be interspersed -- basically it will be the basis for
everything I want to talk about. And so, again, forgive me for doing a
little theory, but I think it's important.
Financial markets, as they exist in the real world, are very close
__ excuse me. Financial markets in the real world are very close to the
economic model of perfect competition. We have a large number of
buyers and sellers, we have a homogenous product. We don't have
barriers to entry or exit. Financial markets work.
And a major feature of financial markets working is that in
equilibrium there's a relationship between risk and return, that if you --
now, that -- the statement that I just made is really an overly simplistic
one.
There is a relationship between expected return and risk. If you
are willing to invest in a portfolio that's high risk over long time
periods, you are going to -- in a functioning financial market, you're
going to earn high returns; however, over shorter time periods, there's
the possibility because of volatility and risk of experiencing a
substantial loss.
So what you have is what's called a tradeoff, and you can see
from the graph up there on the screen that lower risk securities carry
lower expected returns.
Well, what are low risk securities? They are things like U.S.
government treasury bills, NOW accounts, short-term fixed-income
securities that currently -- well, let's say over the long run they return
between 3 and 4 percent, which is roughly the range that they're in
now.
If you are willing to take on slightly higher risk, say, corporate
bonds or government bonds of longer maturities -- I'm going to talk
about that a little bit -- then you might experience long-term returns of
5 or 6 percent. If you wanted to invest in the stock market over long
periods, you might get 10 to 15 percent.
Page 39
March 25-26, 2008
Now, again, we're stressing long periods. The riskiness of these
securities is such that in interim periods you can lose a lot of money.
So -- and because financial markets work in general over long time
periods, higher risk securities will give you a greater rate of return, but
also higher risk securities carry the risk that you could lose money in
the short-term.
Now, that's a fundamental feature of financial markets and it's
fundamental to the way your portfolio is invested.
So what are the risks, the specific risks, of a fixed income
portfolio? Bonds? Because Mr. Brock invests exclusively in bonds
and not in stocks.
The first two are the most important, and I'm going to talk about
those in more detail. A default risk is the chance of the probability
that whoever borrowed the money won't pay you back, that there
could be a default in this contract. Missed interest payment, missed
principal payment, violation of a covenant or something like that.
Interest rate risk has to do with the fact that when interest rates
change, the market prices of bonds change. In fact, they change in the
opposite direction.
So if you have a long-term bond and interest rates go up, the
market price of that bond will fall. If you have a long-term bond and
interest rates go down, the market price of that bond will go up. And,
again, I'm going to talk about those in a little bit more detail coming
up.
We also have something called call risk, which is -- which is
something that is embedded in the Collier County portfolio.
When issuers issue bonds, they often include what's called a call
feature, and that call feature allows them to retire that bond prior to
maturity. So if you have a lO-year bond, you may think that you
invested your money for 10 years, but it may be true that the issuer is
going to make you -- make you accept payment early, and that
happens when interest rates fall and issuers can go out and borrow
Page 40
March 25-26, 2008
money at lower rates and use the proceeds to retire old high-interest
bonds. And that's a feature that's very prominent today, especially
with the Federal Reserve aggressive lowing interest rates because of
our subprime mortgage problems.
Included in fixed income securities are mortgage backed
securities. Starting about 25 or 30 years ago, we made the decision as
a society that we wanted to foster home ownership. And one of the
things that we did as a society is we created federal agencies to aid in
people borrowing money.
As part of that process, we have securitized mortgages. So
federal agencies will package together mortgages and will sell off
standardized marketable parts of those mortgages.
Now, an important feature of mortgages is what's called
extension risk. As part of the cash flow of a mortgage, there will be a
certain amount of prepayments. People sell their house and payoff
the mortgage early. Those prepayments are related to interest rates.
If interest rates fall, people will refinance and you'll get your
money quicker if you own a mortgage portfolio. If interest rates rise,
there will be fewer refinancings, and you'll get your money further.
So mortgage portfolios have an uncertainty as to when you're going to
get your money back.
Now, mortgage portfolios can range from very risky, as
happened to the county back in '94, because there were certain types
of mortgage securities that were put in the portfolio that were very,
very risky, floaters and inverse floaters, but they also range to very,
very safe, depending on the actual type of security that's being issued.
But there is a risk in a mortgage portfolio of uncertainty as to when
you're going to get your money back.
And the final risk that I want to talk about is liquidity risk. When
you own a bond portfolio, it's generally assumed that if you want to
sell your bond, you can get your money out of it quickly, that there
will exist a market out there that you can sell the bond into it and
Page 41
March 25-26, 2008
you'll get a fair price.
Now, for the vast majority of securities, especially government
and agency securities, that's true. Now, if you know anything about
the recent problems of the SBA, that was not true. The SBA was
investing in rather exotic privately guaranteed -- they're called secured
investment vehicles. They were not government guaranteed. They
were very exotic.
And when there came to be a problem, the SBA found that they
couldn't sell those securities. The market just froze up.
Now, I still have -- I still know the folks at the SBA. And what is
true is that the actual losses that took place were very, very minimal,
but the liquidity risk, the ability to turn those securities into cash just
was not there. And that's what -- that was the major cause ofthe
SBA's difficulties.
I'm happy to report that none of those types of vehicles are in --
and we'll get to it in a second. But none of those types of risky illiquid
vehicles are in your portfolio. What you have is essentially the
ventures, all of them government guaranteed with very minimal risk,
but I'll get to that in a second.
This is probably taking a little bit long -- I may be going a little
bit too slowly. You can measure default risk. I am going too slow?
Yeah. That happened a lot when I was teaching. Unfortunately, the
students didn't have the ability to tell me that I was --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Here's what we're going to do. The
board asked about our investments.
MR. BROWN: Got it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I appreciate the education, but I think
really what we want to know is how our investments are doing; is that
correct?
MR. BROWN: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You got it.
MR. BROWN: Got it. You have a well -- you have an
Page 42
March 25-26, 2008
investment policy. That -- and I put up the opening paragraphs up
there. The investment policy, in my opinion, is very well suited to
your portfolio and your situation. And it's worth a little bit of time.
The primary objective is preservation of capital and protection of
investment principal. You don't want to lose money. There it is
written right out there.
Now, the second -- the second objective speaks very clearly to
your situation. Maintain sufficient liquidity to meet reasonably
anticipated operating and capital requirements. Now, that's important
because it addresses the principal risk reasonably anticipated operating
and capital requirements.
What's simply true is that Mr. Brock faces uncertain cash needs.
The capital expenditures can be predicted but not with a lot of
precision. So there is risk involved with when the cash is needed, and
that very much has to do -- has an impact on the investments that he
can make.
Mr. Brock?
MR. BROCK: Commissioners, one of the things that the
financial staff is doing in working with the county staff is, we're trying
to be able to anticipate the needs of the cash. And if we know that in
advance, one of the things that we would be capable to do is matching
our investment in terms of years to maturity or time to maturity. And
we eliminate a lot of the risk that he has just been talking about.
But as a consequence of our difficulty in doing that with the
county staff and with my staff in trying to anticipate that, it creates a
difficulty in trying to match those investments to the needs, and it's
going to go into some of the things that he's fixing to talk about as to
how we manage our portfolio.
The optimal situation for us would be able -- for us to know that
in three years, we're going to need these dollars; therefore, we could
take an investment that matches our needs in three years and put it in a
three-year security. But at present, even though we are working
Page 43
March 25-26, 2008
toward that goal, we don't have the capability.
MR. BROWN: Here's your portfolio as of a few days ago. This
comes right off of Bloomberg. Let me get it up here. This is what
your portfolio looks like as of right now. Now, what you have here is
all the venture-type bonds. There's no mortgage securities, but there
are agency securities.
For instance, the second one down is the Federal Farm Credit
Bank. So you are lending money to the Federal Farm Credit Bank.
Then there's the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, the Federal Home
Loan Mortgage Corporation, and the Federal National Mortgage
Corporation.
All of these credits are what are called triple A credits. They're
ultimately guaranteed by the U.S. government, so there is no -- there's
essentially zero default risk in your portfolio.
And this is your portfolio as of March 20th coming right off of
Bloomberg. Now, this is the investment part of the portfolio. More
about that in a second.
You had about 675 million with an average years to maturity of
3.8 years. So these -- the bonds in what I call the investment portfolio
have a maturity of 3.8 years. But as it turns out, these bonds -- a lot of
them have a call feature so that you're going to be getting that money
back in the short-term.
So even though it looks like 3.8 years, because of the federal--
recent fed action, a lot of those bonds are going to be called away
from you.
MR. BROCK: Before we go further, these are the instruments
that we have invested in. In addition to this, we have a six-month CD,
50 million, and we have a NOW account of 150 million, that gives us
liquidity.
MR. BROWN: And that's the portfolio as of March 20, as you
see it. So it's a total of almost a billion dollars, 974 million. Roughly
200 million very short-term, NOW accounts and a certificate of
Page 44
March 25-26, 2008
deposit; 675 million out at a little less than four years.
Now, one of the things that I did was I -- your benchmark is the
SBA portfolio. And incidentally, that NOW account with Fifth-Third
Bank earns, by contract, the SBA rates plus 11 basis points. So you're
getting the SBA rate plus a premium, and you're getting it in a secured
instrument.
The -- one of the things that I asked Mr. Brock to do was to
calculate the rate of return on the portfolio as it is right now. And as it
turns out, that is not actually very transparent, but you can see this
calculation up on the screen.
The annualized yield on the portfolio -- this is as of the end of
February, is 4.66 percent, and the SBA portfolio is 3.68 percent.
So right now you're doing very well. And I've looked at this over
the years. Sometimes it's better; sometimes it's worse.
Now, because of the nature of your liabilities, you can't match the
maturity of the assets with the maturity of the liabilities precisely. A
couple of reasons for that. The main one is that Mr. -- Mr. Brock
faces a lot of uncertainty as to when the cash is going to be needed,
and that largely has to do with capital expenditures because these are
uncertain.
Now, here's how the problem has been handled. Mr. Brock has
bifurcated the portfolio, and you can see it from what we just saw.
You have a short-term portfolio that can handle cash needs, and that's
very short-term. And if I had talked about it a little bit more, it would
-- it earns a low rate of return. And then you have a longer-term
portfolio that, because of a little bit of market risk, earns a higher rate
of return. And you can see that by the comparison of the SBA
portfolio to your current rate of return.
Now, what I wanted to do as sort of a due diligence is I asked Mr.
Brock to provide me with the cash flows, basically the county
expenditures on a monthly basis, so that I could compare that to your
short-term liquidity portfolio. I just wanted to check to make sure that
Page 45
March 25-26, 2008
it was safe because if your expenditures are greater than your liquidity
portfolio, there is a very small risk that you would have to sell bonds
prior to maturity and you could generate some losses.
So what I did is I got the numbers going -- and I did these last
night. And what you see here is the blue line is the -- is your liquidity
portfolio, basically the NOW accounts. When there was some SBA
investment, it would have included the SBA.
Now, Mr. Brock got out of the SBA almost completely in
November of 2006. Prior to November of 2006, there, at times, were
a couple hundred million dollars there. That has been blown away.
For about a year there was a half a million dollars or so in the SBA.
Currently there's nothing.
Now, the red line is the expenditures net of receipts that come
from the county. Now, what I've done is I've flipped this around. So
if you look at the three dips, those dips occur in December when tax
revenues come in, and then over the rest of the year, there are
expenditures made.
Now, coming right out ofthe accounting system, I saw two
periods when expenditures were greater than the short-term or the cash
portfolio, which gave me some concern, and we looked into it. And
the explanation for that has to do with the accounting system and a
switchover of accounting that basically caused an anomaly.
So Mr. Brock assures me that what it appears to be true is really
an artifact of your accounting system, and your cash portfolio has
always been sufficient to cover your cash needs.
MR. BROCK: Commissioners, so you'll understand exactly
what happened in those two periods, the SAP financial system, if there
were uncollected accounts during the period, we were having to deal
with those manually until we got the system fully set up.
And in the first anomaly, there were $83 million worth of
expenditures that were all posted in the accounting system on that
particular day, but they had transpired over a period of over a year.
Page 46
March 25-26, 2008
In the second one, there were 116, Derrick?
MR. JOHNSSEN: 119.
MR. BROCK: 119 million that were very similar. And what, in
essence, that will do to the graph is, in the period before it, it's going
to pull the cash needs to the cash ballots even closer and take out that
anomaly.
MR. BROWN: The -- I am -- I have looked at the -- you can tell
I have looked at this fairly closely. What is happening is entirely
consistent with the investment policy, and the investment policy
makes sense.
So you essentially have -- I hesitate to say no risk, but you have
tiny, minimalist risk of a principal loss. I guess I could go ahead and
say no risk with some comfort.
So what I did is I looked at the -- at the cash as a percentage of
the total portfolio. Over time it's 10 percent.
And it's worth noting that the cost of managing this portfolio is
very low. The investment costs, including Bloomberg and the salary
of the manager, are about $125,000. So given the average balance, the
investment, the external investment costs are about .15 basis points.
Now, a basis point is one one-hundredth of 1 percent. And so
you have -- you know, the cost to manage this portfolio is just
minuscule. I happen to know that the state board just hired federated
investment managers to manage their portfolio for 11 basis points.
You know, 100 times or so more than you're paying. And you can
pay up to 150 basis points in a bond-type mutual fund. So this -- the
costs of managing and doing what you're doing are minimal.
Bottom line, I think the clerk is doing a good job. There are no
significant risks of principal losses, and the use of this cash or this
concentration account is a shock absorber, is a reasonable solution to
the county's cash flow and certainty.
I do have -- and again, I apologize for rambling on. I do have
some recommendations from what I've come up with here.
Page 47
March 25-26, 2008
Number one, I think it would be useful to have better
coordination between the county and the clerk's office so that cash
flows are more predictable. That would reduce a major source of
uncertainty and, by the way, allow the clerk to go out further on the
yield curve and pick up a higher rate of return.
I think it would be useful to develop software to calculate returns,
that's total returns on an ongoing basis. The current cash accounting
system makes that cumbersome.
And finally, in looking in the -- at the portfolio, absent some
better coordination or predictability of expenditures, I think it would
be prudent for the clerk to shorten the maturities of this investment
portfolio a little bit, and that's going to happen anyhow because of the
call risks that we talked about.
I think probably the investment portfolio should be laddered
from, let's say, six months on out to five years with an average
maturity of two and a half years.
Now, what this means, of course, is that the rate of return of the
portfolio's going to come down a little bit. And if you could do some
better coordination, it probably would not come down as much.
So, again, I apologize for rambling on. I'd be more than happy to
entertain any questions you have.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Commissioner Coyle has
questions.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. With respect to laddering, I
believe that the clerk does that now. I think you ladder the maturity
dates of investments.
MR. BROCK: To a certain extent, Commissioner, we do, as best
we can, but I mean, it's not a perfect laddered portfolio.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It probably never will be.
MR. BROCK: I'm sure it won't.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. But that's one way of doing
it, but that results in shortening the maturities --
Page 48
March 25-26, 2008
MR. BROWN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- overall of the portfolios at any
rate. But laddering is a common method of trying to accomplish that
timing.
One of the things that we're concerned about is the fundamental
investment policy that we, the board, apparently, changed back six or
seven years ago. Have you looked at that--
MR. BROWN: Yes, I have.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- and the investment policy before
that that was developed in 1993 or '95?
MR. BROWN: Yes, I have.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can you tell me if that was a wise
move by the board.
MR. BROWN: In my opinion, it was a very wise move.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. BROWN: That there were ambiguities that allowed
unscrupulous people to sell securities that allowed you to make -- to
lose a lot of money and them to make a lot of money. And if you read
the policy, those sorts of investments, floaters, inverse floaters, IO
strips, principal-only strips, are specifically prohibited in your current
policy. You just can't do it.
So in my opinion, the written investment policy that you have
makes a lot of sense, and it is -- and the portfolio is being managed
consistent with that policy.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, one of the things that we try to do
-- and we've done it on one occasion and are contemplating coming
back again for a change to the policy. When we perceived that there
might be an advantage or a need for the board to look at the policy
again and make changes, is we try to bring them to the board.
One of the things that we're having to struggle with and deal with
currently is the situation that exists in the SBA. And where are we
going to park our short-term funds, our cash or liquidity needs in the
Page 49
March 25-26, 2008
near future? Coming in October, the investment or the banking
services contract we have with Fifth-Third is due to terminate subject
to renegotiation based upon the provision in the contract that exists
today to try to renegotiate with them to take all of the advantages that
the current banking service contract has.
But we're concerned at this point as to the potential of losing our
vehicle in which we park a lot of our short-term cash. And one of the
things that we're actually exploring and considering -- and we've
certainly not by any stretch of the imagination at this point in time
made a determination of that -- is to look at what's called FLGIT. Are
you familiar with FLGIT? Looking at that as a potential alternative.
You know, the SBA is trying to restore confidence but, you
know, the last thing that came out was the disclosure oftheir being
Bear Stearns securities in the SBA which, you know, we're stilln we
still don't have that confidence level in the SBA that we're wanting to
be parking the taxpayers' money there yet.
So we're looking for vehicles to park our short-term funds. Our
policy as it exists today, I don't think, allows us to park it in FLGIT, so
we're considering that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What would be the implications of
parking it in short-term treasuries?
MR. BROCK: A huge reduction in return.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In return, yeah.
MR. BROCK: I mean, annual treasury is paying today about
1.63, where we're making 4.6. You know, flight to secure investments
by the investment community has driven the return in treasuries to the
rock bottom.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, there's a reason for doing
that, and that's protection of principal.
MR. BROCK: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Which is sometimes more
important than a high interest rate.
Page 50
March 25-26, 2008
MR. BROCK: When you're dealing with the agency securities,
you know, they may not be 100 percent secure, but they're 99.9.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Well, one of the things that
I think we're all concerned about is the heavy investment at the present
time in mortgage-backed securities. We don't -- if we look at what's
going on on a national basis, mortgages seem like they're not a
particularly safe investment.
MR. BROCK: But--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But the return is pretty good, at
least right now.
MR. BROCK: And in addition to that, most of those are not true
mortgage securities. They are actually agency bonds, debentures.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, okay. Is there anything to be
gained by establishing a policy which assures that the investments are
distributed among different kinds of instruments in some percentage
rather than a policy which would permit the investments in single
types of investments, even though they might be agency investments?
MR. BROWN: In my opinion, no. In my opinion, at the end of
the day you have a policy but you have to allow your manager the
flexibility. You have to -- you make some assumptions that there's
some competence there, and if you attempt -- I hesitate to use the term
micromanage, you'll take away the flexibility that what is a perfectly
sensible investment now might not be five years from now.
MR. BROCK: However, Commissioner, if you'd like to
micromanage, I'll be more than happy to listen.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, thank you. In were that good
at it, I would be making a lot more money than I'm making now, so.
I just want to make sure that we're making the right kinds of
decisions and establishing the right policies that govern our
investments. And with the turmoil in financial markets now,
everybody is a little uneasy about what's going on. And we have seen
instances, particularly at the State of Florida level, where substantial
Page 51
March 25-26, 2008
losses have been -- haven't been incurred or threatened. So we want to
make sure we're not in that same -- fall into that same trap.
MR. BROWN: I am seeing no signs of any difficulties similar to
what the SBA got in. Quite the contrary. Aside from my
recommendations, the net effect of which, especially as your
expenditures appear to be slowly increasing over time, my sense of it
is that you can expect a lower net return on the portfolio going
forward, and that's just simply because of the situation in capital
markets and the amount of money you're spending.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My personal feeling is I would be
happy to accept a lower return in exchange for greater safety. So I
don't -- I don't believe that's a serious problem, at least for me right
now.
But we do need to pay closer attention to our performance. And
it would be helpful if we had information that would let us gauge the
results of these investments on a monthly or quarterly basis
comparison, one or the other consequently, as well as year-to-year
comparisons, and we cannot do that really with the investments
accumulated the way they are. We would need the CUSIP numbers
for each of these purchases.
MR. BROWN: I agree with that, and that's the genesis of my
second recommendation that software should be available to make
those sorts of reports. I believe that monthly is a reasonable time
period over which you should be able to gauge returns.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But Bloomberg does not provide us
with that capability?
MR. BROWN: I don't believe so, no.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, Bloomberg--
MR. BROWN: It certainly would not provide it including your
concentration portfolio and essentially your CDs.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Bloomberg clearly, though,
maintains accounts of these each by CUSIP number?
Page 52
March 25-26, 2008
MR. BROWN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So if we were able to track those
on a monthly basis, we could at least see what market values were and
take a look at protection of principal and how things might be
fluctuating. My only concern is, how do we determine what the real
market value is because you can't determine that until it's sold.
MR. BROWN: No, sir. I disagree with that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. BROWN: In the types of securities that you are investing
in, which are -- I describe them as plain vanilla, there is essentially no
uncertainty as to the amount that you can receive. These very deep,
thick markets, if you will, with a lot of trading and very, very tight
spreads.
Now, what you're speaking about is some of these specialized
investment vehicles where what I just said is not true, where there's
widespread and not much trading and they're not market to market.
But your portfolio essentially has none, as near as I can tell -- and
I've looked at it pretty closely -- has none of that risk. I mean, this is a
plain vanilla portfolio. It could be -- you know, the ability to buy
more exotic things, or they're slightly more exotic things, are there,
and it's just not in the portfolio now. We got out of the SBA back in
November of'06, and this thing has been essentially rationalized since
then.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Considering the current state of the
financial markets nationally, is there anything in our investment
strategy that we should be changing? Should there be other limits
placed upon the types of investments we pursue?
MR. BROWN: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. BROWN: No. I mean, I think you're -- the genesis or the
root of good investments is a rational, reasonable investment policy,
and you have that in place, and I do not see red flags. You know,
Page 53
March 25-26, 2008
aside from these rather minor recommendations that I've made, this is
a well-run portfolio.
MR. BROCK: Commissioners, you know, when the individual
that actually makes the trades for us took over managing the portfolio
in 1994 -- I'm a very fiscally conservative individual, and my
comment to him, you know, jokingly was, you lose my principal, I
break your face.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good, good.
MR. BROCK: And that's the philosophy that we have had. You
know, we have tried to stay plain vanilla from the beginning.
To give you an example, we've got $150 million in the NOW
account at the bank today. I think in the first week of April, we've got
a $50 million bond there. Since it's paying a little over five, there's
absolutely no question they're fixing to call that. We're going to have
the liquidity.
If you'll go back -- can you go back, Professor, to the graph? If
you will look, one of the things that we have noticed is that the
expenditures are beginning to increase which tells us that what we
need to do is we need to become more liquid unless we can get a
better handle on matching the expenditures. So that's -- that is one of
the things that we are trying to do as we speak and we're using the call
features and the bonds to do that.
The downside to that, and understandably because of the inverse
relationship between -- or the direct relationship between risk and
return, the return to the portfolio is going to go down, and there's no
way to avoid that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think we all understand that. And
I'd just like to point out to you though that that trend in that graph
occurred over periods of times when the costs incurred by the county
were at an all-time high for outside services.
MR. BROCK: And I think there are some major county projects,
you know, based upon what my staff is telling me, that there is
Page 54
March 25-26, 2008
anticipated expenditures for capital projects that are in the near future.
Is that correct, Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that will be ongoing, yeah.
MR. BROCK: And we're trying to prepare the portfolio to deal
with those things as we anticipate they occur.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, the staff has been instructed
to address those projects over their entire lifetime duration as far as
scheduling is concerned rather than coming to us for piecemeal
approvals, and that should be improving things a bit for you.
MR. BROCK: And I don't mean to be casting any aspersions on
the staff with regard to their inability to do that. I think that is
improving and will continue to improve, especially with the project
management piece that was just implemented for SAP. That will give
us a great deal of information that we otherwise would not have had.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good.
MR. BROCK: Okay?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have other commissioners.
Commissioner Coletta, then Commissioner Halas. Commissioner
Fiala, do you have anything?
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: (Shakes head.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: First off, I think the idea of the
graphs displayed on a web site or whatever so the public can see what's
happening with their money as far as the fluctuation with monthly
reports is absolutely a wonderful idea.
You've been a good steward of the money you've had in your
charge. I see the recommendations that are made there. At this point
in time I don't know if this commission can go with those
recommendations without bringing it back again.
I guess that would be a question for Mr. Mudd's office. Is this
something that we can act on today and give direction or something
Page 55
March 25-26, 2008
that should come back to us?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Tell me what page you're on. I don't
see any recommendations.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The recommendations that we
had up just a moment ago.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, whether you give
recommendations to carry that out or not, we're already in the throes
of doings that, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I mean, if it's different
than our original directive a number of years ago, then it would have
to come back to this commission, I would assume.
MR. BROCK: I don't think it is an additional directive at all. It's
within the confines of the policy that already exists. I mean, we
simply -- we happen to agree with them and, you know, we think that
we have placed ourselves in the position to do them by virtue of the
call features of the bonds that we have, knowing that that is going to
happen, which is going to shorten the duration.
Weare fully aware that it is becoming so complicated that we
have got to use technology to be able to track this as opposed to the
human resources that we're now expending to do that. We're already
in the process of considering that.
So, you know, the recommendations we agree with and are
already attempting to move in that direction.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you.
MR. BROCK: Not a problem.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, Professor, in light of what's
going on in the financial markets today, do you feel that there's going
to be some additional fallout with failure of banks and -- because of
the way that financial markets are at at this present time?
MR. BROWN: I think there is a possibility of further -- of bank
Page 56
March 25-26, 2008
failures, in all likelihood, would be the banks that are heavy into
exotics and derivatives and the investment banking function. Yeah, I
don't think -- I personally do not believe it's over.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Do you feel that we ought
to be more prudent in regards to being more conservative and --
maybe in some of the areas of investment here in the county?
MR. BROWN: No. You are already and plain vanilla. I would
feel a little bit more comfortable if you did shorten the maturity of
your portfolio. That's already taking place. But the securities that you
have are plain vanilla, safe securities. I wouldn't -- I have no concern
about it at all.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Do you have any concerns
about the devaluation of the dollar in the financial markets throughout
the world and how it affects us in the county here?
MR. BROWN: Well, the -- in my opinion, the net effect of the
weakness of the dollar is going -- is going to play out over the next
few years with higher inflation and higher interest rates, but I think it's
impossible, given all of the different variables, to say those sorts of
things with any certainty or to know with any certainty sufficient to
cause you to change your policy.
Your policy is reasonable, rational, and it's sufficiently flexible,
that as those situations come along, the clerk will be able to handle
them.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. You touched upon
something, I think, that's near and dear to all of us, and that's inflation.
What do you think the rate of inflation will be in regards to the
liquidity of what we have right now?
MR. BROWN: I don't know. I believe it will be higher. I would
not venture a guess as to how much higher. But given the Federal
Reserve monetary policy and the weakness of the dollar, I think there
would be a fair consensus that the bias is going to be towards higher
prices and higher inflation.
Page 57
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So the cost of doing
business here in the county is obviously going to escalate.
MR. BROWN: Given what I've just said, I believe that would be
true, yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Coletta.
MR. BROCK: -- Coletta, before we move on, I sense from each
of you that you would like to see the securities that we purchase
marked to market more frequently --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. BROCK: -- on a monthly basis. I don't have a problem
doing that and we will put that in the portfolio on a monthly basis that
you can find so that you can look at the securities and determine the
market value as of the end of the month. I think we can do that
relatively simple with Bloomberg and present that to you in the same
manner.
You know, one ofthe things that we do now because of the way
that we deal with the portfolio is our yield is based upon our cash basis
as opposed to expected, and hopefully that will change when we get
the technology in place to provide the anticipated annual yield. But
we can mark the securities to market so you can look at them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: From the web?
MR. BROCK: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: From the website also?
MR. BROCK: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And your page, thank you.
MR. BROCK: Right, yeah. We can do that with relative ease.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that would be individually?
MR. BROCK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good. Because otherwise in
the aggregate --
Page 58
March 25-26, 2008
MR. BROCK: Right, it won't make any sense.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- you can't do anything with it,
yeah.
MR. BROCK: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it my turn --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- to ask one more question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In view of the uncertainties -- and
I'll ask both of you this question. In view of the uncertainties of the
future, would it not make a lot of sense just to ladder the entire
investment portfolio?
MR. BROCK: Well, I -- from my perspective, I can do that, but
in order to do that, I've got to give up some return. I don't think there
is any risk in this portfolio the way that we're doing it for loss of
principal, but certainly if the policy is that you want me to ladder the
securities, you want to micromanage the portfolio to that extent, we
can certainly do that, but I think what you will end up by doing that is
-- and I'll defer to Professor Brown -- is you will limit the securities
that we will be able to buy.
You know, one of the things that we do is, before we buy a
security, we bid it. So we're out there looking for the best deal for that
security. And, you know, we can do it, will not be a problem, but I
think you give up some opportunity if you do it.
MR. BROWN: I'm not sure if I understand your question. Do
you mean -- you've phrased it as laddering the entire investment
portfolio. Did you mean the whole amount?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. Clearly not the cash portions.
MR. BROWN: See, you've got to -- you've got a liquidity
portfolio --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
MR. BROWN: -- that concentration account.
Page 59
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. BROWN: You know, I would like to see it laddered with
some flexibility. I mean, the ability to perfectly ladder something is
just not there. You can't get the securities. But I would think that you
could move more in that direction.
As it is right now, there is some laddering. There is some
short-term securities, but most of them are out there as what we call
the bullet portfolio.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. It just occurs -- and no, I
don't want to micromanage it. That's why I asked you the question,
you know.
I am just looking for ways to try to make our exposure smaller
because none of us is smart enough to really forecast what the interest
rates are going to be 10 years from now or 15 years from now or, for
that matter, six months from now.
But if we -- if we did ladder the portfolio, perhaps, more
effectively, it would protect us somewhat from those fluctuations. So
we would be constantly rolling over the short-terms that matured and
investing them in what our best bet is at that point in time, and you'd
have that opportunity to reassess those investments at every rollover
point. And consequently, you're getting better information as you go
forward and hopefully you make better decisions to do that. And it
just seems like -- to me it might be a good thing to do in a period of
uncertainty.
MR. BROCK: We can certainly go in that direction,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But only if it makes sense.
MR. BROCK: I understand.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. BROWN: I believe that, given your situation, it makes
sense.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, okay. Then there we are,
Page 60
March 25-26, 2008
okay. Good.
MR. BROCK: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No other further questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have a time certain at 11 o'clock.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That is report of our advisory boards.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. That's item --
MR. BROCK: I did pretty good if you have another time certain
at 11.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're two minutes over.
MR. BROCK: Thanks, Commissioner.
Item #10A
TO REVIEW THE WRITTEN AND ORAL REPORTS OF THE
ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMITTEES SCHEDULED FOR
REVIEW IN 2008 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE NO.
2001-55. ADVISORY BOARD'S INCLUDE: IMMOKALEE AREA
MASTER PLAN AND VISIONING COMMITTEE, IMMOKALEE
BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE, ISLES OF CAPRI
FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD, PARKS AND
RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD AND COLLIER COUNTY
WATER AND WASTEWATER AUTHORITY - MOTION TO
ACCEPT REPORTS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: That's item lOA, to be heard at 11 a.m., to review
the written and oral reports of advisory boards and committees
scheduled for review in 2008 in accordance with ordinance 2001-55,
advisory boards, which include the Immokalee Area Master Plan and
Page 61
March 25-26, 2008
Visioning Committee; the Immokalee Beautification Advisory
Committee; the Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Board,
the Parks and Rec Advisory Board, and the Collier County Water and
Wastewater Authority.
And Mr. Mike Sheffield will try to lead us through that.
MR. SHEFFIELD: Good morning. Mike Sheffield from the
County Manager's Office.
The written reports are included in your agenda packets, and
representatives from each of the advisory committees mentioned by
the county manager are present today. Only one advisory committee
has suggested revisions to their ordinance.
If you'd like, I can call each up in order or just the one that has
suggested a revision.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't want to prohibit any of the
advisory board members to come up and talk to the board. That was a
mistake I made last time.
And so if it's okay with my colleagues is, you know, let's call the
advisory board chairmans up and see if they have anything other to
report to us besides what's in our agenda.
Commissioner Fiala's okay with that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The other commissioners?
Commissioner Halas? Yes.
MR. SHEFFIELD: Then the first speaker is Fred Thomas
representing the Immokalee Area Master Plan and Visioning
Committee.
MR. THOMAS: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Fred N. Thomas, Jr., the chairman of the Immokalee Master Plan and
Visioning Committee.
I want to first apologize for taking so long to get our tasks done.
We started in 2006, and we appreciate you being patient with us by
reauthorizing us until 2009.
Page 62
March 25-26, 2008
Hopefully things will move a whole lot faster now that we have
an outstanding young lady. I'm going to ask her to stand up. Mrs.
Penny Phillippi will be our executive director. We stole her from
Highlands County, and we should be able to move a little bit faster to
get some things done so things could happen in a positive way.
We also have a couple of vacancies, and we've had two people
apply for two of the vacancies; James Gerrarro and Carrie Williams.
And if you can all expeditiously handle that; we need some more flesh
on our committee. I know --
MS. FILSON: It's on the agenda for April 8th.
MR. THOMAS: April 8th. Thank you very much.
We invite all of you to come to our meetings. Our meetings, we
meet every third Wednesday of the month from 8:30 to 10:30 in the
one-stop center, every third Wednesday of the month. We're trying to
get things done as quickly as possible because there's a lot of things
happening around us in Immokalee, a lot of new petitions coming to
Immokalee. They need to be consistent with the new master plan as
opposed to the existing master plan. And I thank you, and I'll answer
any questions you may have of me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions of the board members?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Don't see anything. Thank you, Mr.
Thomas, for --
MR. THOMAS: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
MR. SHEFFIELD: The next speaker is Cheryl Thomas
representing the Immokalee Beautification Advisory Committee.
MS. THOMAS: Hello. How are you?
I'm representing the Immokalee Beautification, and there are
some things that we need help from you. And as you saw on my
report, one of them is increasing. I would like for you to increase the
taxing district of the MSTU in Immokalee.
Page 63
March 25-26, 2008
When we first had the MSTU, this area was not included. I do
have the map to show you -- if somebody would put it up for you --
the area in which we would increase. This area is -- has affordable
housing. The area is growing, and I think they -- the residents have
mentioned their concern. Six, Arrowhead PUD; six have a concern
about the services that they should get, and they would be sidewalks,
bicycle trails, and lighting. So we need your help in increasing the
taxing district of the Immokalee Beautification MSTU
Do you have any questions?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the board members?
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Just a comment. I think
at some point in time we need to have this come before the
commission. I'm not too sure what the process, but I think it's a
reasonable request. Now I don't know if it could be granted or not, but
I would certainly be willing to entertain it.
MS. THOMAS: Thank you. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can -- Mr. Sheffield, can you help me
on where those recommendations are to expand the MSTU, what
page?
MR. SHEFFIELD: Page 2 of3.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Two?
MR. SHEFFIELD: Yes, item I5, and it simply states, yes,
Immokalee would like to increase its taxing district to include new
community growth in developing in our area.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's page 9 of 23 in our packet --
MR. SHEFFIELD: Oh, in your packet.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- because each of these things is
numbered individually. So I think 9 of 23, I5, Commissioner
Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. That would -- I guess that
would be a process. Mr. Weigel, I know you're very familiar with
Page 64
March 25-26, 2008
taxing districts, MSTUs. And in light of the fact of the legislation of
last year, how would that be possible to do so?
MR. WEIGEL: I think it's -- I think it is possible to do so, but as
you and Mr. Coletta indicated, I think you'd want to report back to the
board tying that in.
You have what's called the citizen's petition process policy
relating to the establishment or enhancement of MSTU s and other
types of districts. And in the past that policy has been applied in a
modified form, not rigorously in terms of citizen requirement in the
petition process, but it has been used to provide the sense of desire of
areas and residents that would be affected by a potential MSTU taxing
district.
And the board has typically applied, more often than not, the 50
percent plus type of ratio to see if there is, in fact, a desire for
inclusion or the creation of a district.
So that could be brought back to you as well as, I think, a -- call
it a side report relating to the legislative impacts that came from last
year's reform.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do you think in light of what's
taking place up in Tallahassee, that it might be better to look at this as
an MSTBU, as a benefit unit, instead of an MSTU?
MR. WEIGEL: That's a good question. The taxing unit is in
place utilizing the ad valorem formula. Benefit unit is based upon a
methodology of improvement -- a ratio of improvement to particular
properties, and it can be done. I think that if you -- if you as a board
would like, we could report back to you, I'll call it, the pros and cons
-- or the feasibility of going that route there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that we ought to have, as a
board, we ought to have that option to look at both an MSTU and how
it would affect -- especially with what's going on in Tallahassee, and
then also looking at the benefits or the pros and cons of both of benefit
Page 65
March 25-26, 2008
unit (sic).
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I can tell you for a fact I
don't think you're ever going to get 51 percent, being that Immokalee
is the way it is and it's so divided culturally, and landowners being
what they are there, to be able to do it. We're going to -- the original
one, when it was set up -- do you recall, Cheryl, how it was done?
Was it done by a petition method? I don't think it was.
MS. THOMAS: No, it wasn't done by petition method.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. It would be impossible.
MS. THOMAS: The board just approved it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, I mean, we can
always entertain the thought, but I don't see how you would -- it would
be a futile effort to even try it, just because of the demographics there
and trying to reach the people. Community meetings, having that, and
letting the commission make the final decision with a recommendation
of the leaders of Immokalee and hearing the input from the residents
would be the best way to go through those types of meetings. But it
would be extremely difficult to ever get the 51 percent.
MS. THOMAS: Yes, it would. Right now that area has about
2,400 landowners, and 15 of the 24 are absent landlords, meaning we
had to go out of the state to even try to look them up.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. We have that a lot in Collier
County .
MS. THOMAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So is it a consensus of the board to
bring back some modifications to the MSTU?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Bring it back in a public
hearing, and the people who object will have a chance to object. You
won't need a petition.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Very good.
Page 66
March 25-26, 2008
MS. THOMAS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. All right. Thank you.
MR. SHEFFIELD: Okay. The next speaker is Joe Langkawel
representing the Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Board.
MR. LANGKA WEL: Good morning. I'm Joe Langkawel from
the Isles of Capri Advisory Board. Our report has been submitted. I
have no changes to it, things are operating quite well and I believe that
things are going very good for us.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions by the board
members?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, sir. Thanks for being
with us today.
MR. LANGKAWEL: Yes, sir.
MR. SHEFFIELD: The next speaker is John Ribes, representing
the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
MR. RIBES: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm John Ribes,
chair Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Thank you for the time
to make this report on behalf of the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Board.
Status: I can tell you that the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Board is alive and well. I've been involved in it for a number of years.
We've always had excellent people on the board, but it is my
estimation that the present board is the strongest and most
conscientious to date.
Some of our highlights: We have been very active and have
excellent communication with parks and recreation staff. The board is
far-reaching and has addressed some diverse issues, among them
promoting advancement of Manatee Park. Weare working closely
with the staff to maintain equitable competitive prices for the county
boat slips and fuel charges. Weare working and are active with the
various sports league organizations to develop sports field access and
Page 67
March 25-26, 2008
scheduling. We're participating in the continued study for the
Vanderbilt recreation fishing pier, and we are working closely with the
City of Naples on a number of items.
But most importantly, we work closely and open to and welcome
public concerns. In essence, we are your eyes and ears in bringing
you the public voice as it pertains to recreational needs.
Major priorities we see in the future: The items we think critical
to reaching resolution are continued efforts to develop greater beach
access, resolve the sports playing field increased availability and
scheduling, and reach a prudent beach parking permit both from an
equitable and financial standpoint.
And as a future vision, we see the continued -- we want to
continue to search for ways to offer, participate and partner greater
environmental sensitivity and educational awareness in our park
systems, both in the land and water. We want to become a more
recognized leader in the greening of our community.
This concludes our report, and I thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. We do have some
questions, if you don't mind, Mr. Ribes.
Commissioner Fiala has a question for you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. One of them, I know that you
have -- you and all of your folks have been trying diligently to get that
soccer field in place for us in the East Naples Community Park. I
know that they had to send it back because the quotes were outlandish,
outrageous, but they were hoping now with this downturn in times that
-- and labor that maybe we could get that at a cheaper rate.
Can you give me a status report on that?
MR. RIBES: I can't give you a specific status, Commissioner
Fiala. It's come before us on a number of occasions. It was expensive
to look at. We've looked at the East Naples area, and I think we're also
taking a look at another piece ofland in the East Naples area off 41 as
another possibility. That came before us at our last meeting, and the
Page 68
March 25-26, 2008
staff is coming back with further information at our next meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But we already have -- own the land
there and it's already cleared. I was just wondering if that is moving
forward.
Oh, here comes Barry.
MR. RIBES: Perhaps Barry can give you a better answer to it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. We've been waiting for that
for 11 years, so I figure it's about time.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. For the record, Barry Williams,
parks and recreation director. In answer to your question, the project
is moving forward. We have gone through the process of having the
project repermitted. We're working with South Florida Water
Management, U.S. Corps of Engineers for the permitting, and that's
going well.
Weare -- they're looking to grandfather the permit that expired in
2002, so we should have the permits in our hands in the spring. We
anticipate this spring, late spring, early summer, breaking ground and
constructing through the summer, so it's moving forward.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I knew you had the money
set aside to do that, and I knew the permits had expired. I just was
hoping that -- because they really need a soccer field there.
Okay. And can you also give me an update on Manatee Park?
MR. WILLIAMS: I can. Yes, ma'am. As you're aware, we are
working with three T -- three ST -- a design firm -- I'm sorry. I have a
hard time with remembering their name -- a design firm, and they are
working through the process of estimating costs associated with the
proj ect.
Weare working with coastal zone management on that particular
project and the design firm. We have some primary information, and I
believe Gary is going to be bringing -- will be bringing that to the
board. We're looking at either the second meeting in April, the 22nd,
or the first meeting in May. So we will be bringing that to the board
Page 69
March 25-26, 2008
and getting approval for moving forward with that project as well.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, thank you.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. John, you guys do a
great job, thank you.
MR. RIBES: I'm sorry for the confusion of your first question,
Commissioner Fiala. I was thinking of another piece of land that we
were looking at for a practice field.
Manatee Park, we also are very enthusiastic and anxious to see
what Gary is bringing forward so that that can be a reality.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Any further questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Mr. Ribes. Good to see
you agam.
MR. RIBES: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion to accept the
reports and find -- we have one more?
MR. SHEFFIELD: We have one more.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We do?
MR. SHEFFIELD: The next chairman -- the next chairman
could not be present, so we have Jamie French representing the Collier
County Water and Wastewater Authority.
MR. FRENCH: Good morning. For the record, Jamie French. I
serve as the executive director of the Collier County Water and
Wastewater Authority, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. As
Mike said, our chairman, Jack Markel is on his way back from visiting
his family during Easter and could not attend.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the board members?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none. Thank you.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you.
Page 70
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: With that, I'll entertain a motion to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- accept the report and find these
advisory boards as a public purpose. There's a motion --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- by Commissioner Coletta, second
by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all those in favor,
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. I seen
Commissioner Halas's lips move when we said aye, so that --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That is an affirmative, right?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I also see a lot of my colleagues
taking a break, so I don't know if it's -- at this time should we take a
break?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It depends on the court reporter to
me. If the court reporter can do it, I can do it.
THE COURT REPORTER: I'm fine.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You're fine. Yeah, we know that.
Okay, let's go.
Page 71
March 25-26, 2008
Item #6C
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY JIM KRAMER DISCUSSING
SUPPORT FOR THE PLATFORM OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
- PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is public -- back to
public petitions now. We go to 6C. 6B was withdrawn.
MR. MUDD: This is a public petition request by Jim Kramer to
discuss support for the platform of the American people.
Mr. Kramer?
MR. KRAMER: Good morning, Commissioners. My name's
Jim Kramer, and I live in the Naples Mobile Estates.
Jim, as we go through would you place these on?
Quote, when in the course of human events it becomes necessary,
unquote, so begins our Declaration of Independence. The preamble
states, quote, that to secure these rights, governments are instituted
among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed,
that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these
ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.
We are at such a juncture today.
Five hundred thirteen thousand elected officials in the United
States will be asked to take this platform of the American people to
heart. I ask you today to affirm with me the will of the people of
Collier County and of America.
In a letter from our general chairman, Newt Gingrich of
American Solutions, we are at a critical point in American history.
The American people are calling for their elected officials to actually
represent their evaluation and their principals. They're calling for real
change.
The platform of the American people is a solutions-oriented
agenda that has the overwhelming support of the majority of the
Page 72
March 25-26, 2008
Americans. It's our hope that beginning with this commission, that
you will consider each plank of the platform of the American people
as a foundation for bringing us together. The American people are
united. Now you have a historic choice. Continue politics as usual or
stand for real change.
I hope you'll join me in urging the citizens of Collier County to
stand with the American people for real change. Signed, your friend,
Newt.
This is a petition to the board that the citizens of Collier County
petition you to formally consider, by allowing for a full and open
debate and a clear and fair vote, each of the planks of the platform of
the American people.
Here are some highlights. American values and solutions. There
are values which unite a large majority of Americans. We want to
strengthen and revitalize America's core values. Our goals should be
to provide long-term solutions instead of short-term fixes.
Government clearly has to change the way it operates and bring
in ideas and systems currently employed to increase productivity and
effectiveness in the private sector.
The changes we need in government have to occur in all 513,000
elected offices throughout the country and can't be achieved by only
focusing on Washington.
Regarding English in American civilization. English should be
the official language of government. New immigrants should be
required to learn English. Government should offer intensive English
language instruction to all who need it, including stipends to help
immigrants attend the programs, and businesses should be able to
require employees to speak the English language while on the job.
For the civilization, the United States should grant only
citizenship to those who want to embrace American values and
culture. It is important to have references to God in the Pledge of
Allegiance and the Declaration of Independence that, in fact, we are
Page 73
March 25-26, 2008
endowed by our Creator with the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit
of happiness because they make clear that certain rights can't be taken
away by the government.
Statements regarding religion and morality made by our founding
fathers are just as important today as they were 200 years ago. We
reject the idea that the times change and the language in the Pledge of
Allegiance and Declaration of Independence must change with the
times. Our public schools should teach more American history.
Regarding immigration, the border, and assimilation. The
American people favor legal immigration, control of the border,
ending illegal immigration with the emphasis on employer
responsibility, immediate deportation of felons who are here illegally
and required to return home and become legal temporary workers, the
assimilation of those who sincerely want to become an American, and
a sophisticated technologically advanced temporary worker system.
Under science and technology, there are incredible possibilities
to meet our country's challenges in a variety of fields, because in the
next 25 years, there will be four to seven times the amount of new
science and technology in the world as there is in the last 25 years;
therefore, we should dramatically increase our investment in math and
science education, and we must rely on innovation and new
technology if we're going to compete successfully with India and
China.
We should be giving prizes to companies and individuals that
invent creative ways to solve problems. We support large financial
prices to companies and individuals who can invent an affordable car
that gets 100 miles to the gallon, and we support giving a prize to the
first company and individual who invents new ways to successfully
cut pollution.
Under the energy and the environment, we have an obligation to
be good stewards of God's creation for our future generations. We can
have a healthy economy and a healthy environment. We can solve our
Page 74
March 25-26, 2008
environmental problems faster and cheaper with innovation and new
technology than with more litigation and more government regulation.
Entrepreneurs are more likely to solve Americans' energy and
environmental problems than our bureaucrats.
We should hold city governments to the same standards for
cleaning wastewater as are applied to private industry. We are
prepared to use public funds to preserve green space and parks to
protect natural areas from development, but especially with public and
private partnerships.
Under oil and national security, our current dependence on
foreign oil threatens our national security and threatens our economic
prosperity by making us vulnerable to dangerous dictatorships.
Under taxes and jobs. We favor tax incentives for companies
who keep their headquarters in the United States. Taxpayers should
be given the option of a single income tax rate of 17 percent. They
would still have the option of filing their taxes in the current system.
The option of a single rate system should be given taxpayers the
convenience of filing their taxes with just the single sheet of paper.
Social security and retirement. It's important for the President
and Congress to address the issue of social security in the next few
years. The current social security system is broken. And if it isn't
reformed, future generations will no longer have it as a safety net for
retirement.
Under the freedom of religion. References to the Creator in the
independent -- Declaration of Independence are very important.
Keeping the reference to quote, one nation under God, in the Pledge of
Allegiance is also very important.
The phrase, quote, under God, unquote, in the Pledge is perfectly
in line with the United States Constitution. We reject that this phrase
violates the separation of church and state.
The best way to ensure religious freedom is to protect all
religious references and symbols, including those on public buildings,
Page 75
March 25-26, 2008
lands, or documents.
Children should be allowed a moment of silence to pray for
themselves in the public school if they so desire. We reject banning
all prayer in public schools.
Defending America. We must help defend America and her
allies. We have to be prepared to survive an attack by nuclear,
biological, or chemical weapons. America should take the threat of
terror by fanatical religious groups more seriously.
Congress should make it a crime to advocate acts of terrorism or
violent conduct or the killing of innocent people in the United States.
Homeland Security should develop programs to teach Americans
what they can do as individuals to help in the fight against terror.
The American people are united. Now we have a historic choice;
continue politics as usual or stand up for real change. I hope you'll
join me in urging the citizens of Collier County to stand with the
American people for real change. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Mr. Kramer.
Question, comments from the Board of County Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I have a comment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Kramer, you've appeared here
on numerous occasions with numerous proposals. This is probably the
most worthwhile I have heard. And whether you're a Democrat or
Republican or whether you like Newt Gingrich or not, this proposal
prepared by him and his organization is one that focuses on solutions,
not ideology, and I support almost everything in here. And I would be
happy to support it, and I would encourage our political parties to
support it, but I think they're part of the problem. So I'm not sure they
will.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, almost to a point I agree
with Commissioner Coyle. I think this is a wonderful thing you
Page 76
March 25-26, 2008
brought forward. It's about as plain language as we can ever get for
identifying the problems and coming up with a meaningful solution. I
appreciate you sharing it with us. I can support it, and I do think it's
something that we should share with the political parties out there and
get their endorsement on.
MR. KRAMER: Thank you. There are 513,000 elected officials
in the United States, and you're the first five that I've been to. I'm
going to be busy.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Have a good trip.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Mr. Kramer.
Next public petition?
Item #6D
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY BRIAN JONES DISCUSSING
TEMPORARY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ADVENTURE
TRAINING CONCEPTS, LLC - TO BE BROUGHT BACK AT
THE NEXT BOARD MEETING - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: It's 6D, and it's a public petition request by Brian
Jones to discuss temporary conditional use permit for the Adventure
Training Concepts, LLC.
MR. JONES: Thank you, sir. Greatly appreciate the opportunity
to be here today and address the board.
First of all, I want to thank you for the great amount of support I
got from your staff, especially Mr. Schmitt. Once he understood
exactly what it was I was asking for, more than supportive.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your name for the record, please?
MR. MUDD: Just state your name.
MR. JONES: My name is Brian Jones.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. JONES: CEO and owner of Adventure Training Concepts.
Page 77
March 25-26, 2008
Once again, I'd like to thank Mr. Schmitt and his staff for
understanding what it is we wanted to do, and once he understood
that, he gave me a lot of guidance on how to move forward and what I
could do to make this happen.
Before I talk about that, I just would like to take a minute to talk
about some of the mitigating circumstances that I think are important
to this, because as you know, we all want to live within the spirit of
the Collier County growth plan, we also highly respect the
environmental concerns.
And I think you'll -- once you see the picture here, that you'll
understand, and as we all do, that although there are regulations that
we all want to adhere to and staying within the spirit of those, that we
can find a way to do things, and sometimes there may be those
mitigating circumstances to allow away, and I think we've found that.
I'd like to start off by, just about four years ago, talking about
Fred Cannan, captain, ranger, a native of Naples, a hero, the national
wrestling champion here in Florida, attended the high school here in
Naples, he came with this dream and this vision of the concept of our
company to do this -- use military leadership training to perform
corporate team building and also do things for the youth and
underprivileged and those kind of things and give back to the
community. This was his home, he loved it here, and I think he
brought a lot to the community.
Fred, at the age of 35, about two-and-a-halfyears ago plus
suddenly passed away, leaving a one- and a six-year-old child at
home. That's how I got involved.
Came down here when we buried him, and because at 35 you
don't have a plan, the company could not go on. My wife, who's also
a captain in the u.s. Army at the time, and I, I was a Delta Force
operator and a Ranger, served my country, was on many battlefields,
including Somalia in a Blackhawk down fight, and several others.
But we made this our dream. I fell in love with it, and my
Page 78
March 25-26, 2008
answer was that, yes, it would go on, and we've sacrificed everything
we had for the last two-and-a-halfyears. We've won the EDC's
Excellence in Industry Awards. We've done a lot for this community
at a great cost, because at the same time we knew we needed a place
to put our stuff, mobile stuff. It's a huge expense lugging those things
around.
We searched, we wanted to do it right, we didn't want to take
shortcuts, so we found a piece of land that I thought and we thought
that would work. And come to find out, there are some processes in
place, some of them very important processes, that would be very
costly.
And I'm not a big corporate community builder. I don't have the
money or the means or the background to litigate those things. So we
found a piece of land because of the market going down that we could
afford, and we were under the impression that we could go there with
mobile things, nothing permanent, but to go in there and -- at least for
a couple years -- and get the money to either rezone it -- the big
dollars it takes in Collier County to, you know, go through those huge
processes, give us a little bit of time to do that.
And with the great counseling I got from Mr. Schmitt, that's
possible. All it's going to take is for you five to agree that we can do
this.
Like I said, we don't want to violate any regulations, any
permitting requirements, and we don't want to interfere with the
overall growth plan. We want to be a part of it. I think we are a part
of Naples. We love it here. In order to go forward, we're going to
have to have a place to call home. We're, you know, like I said, at the
two-and-a-halfyear mark, and it all comes down to today.
I don't think it stops here. I believe we go forward. I believe we
owe it to Fred and to other -- some other citizens in Collier County
here, to the veterans that are coming back home and wanting a start
and love it here and want this to be home. I certainly do, and I know
Page 79
March 25-26, 2008
Fred does.
And a lot of people in the community now -- we're bring a lot of
attention into Naples and raising a lot of charity dollars for a lot of
causes here, a lot of them being environmental, the history, and
sharing the beauty of this place.
What I'm asking you for is a conditional use as we go through
this process to allow me some time to get some funds in so I can do
this properly.
I've seen the guys that have taken the shortcuts, have gone out
there and done it, and then wait for the repercussions. I haven't done
that and I refuse to do it. I want to do it right, and that's why I'm here.
I would rather take my licks and face the consequences of not being
able to go forward instead of trying to do it illegally or take the
shortcuts. And I know those who have and I know there have been a
few of those that have been doing that for 20 years that have been
before you here that have gone out there and just destroyed land and
built structures.
I'm not asking to do that. All I'm asking to do is put mobile stuff
in there, nothing in the ground, nothing to bother the environment and
not to interfere with any plans or -- there are no neighbors out there, so
with anybody like that. It's in a remote site. It's beautiful.
We can -- we can do a lot with that. I'm asking your permission
to do it. And you can certainly do it -- help me with that today.
And my promise to you is that we won't violate any of the
regulations, the enforcement codes. We'll be in compliance, and I
think it says a lot today that I'm here trying to be in compliance and
doing it right.
So that's my request to you today is, let us do it. Let us put our
stuff in there temporarily, and at the same time, continue to work with
the great staff that you have and do it, you know, get the permits that
we need as we go, if those are requirements, and give me some time to
either move, stay, or change the zoning.
Page 80
March 25-26, 2008
So that's pretty much all I'm asking you for today is to -- within
the spirit of these laws, there are exceptions, and I believe this is one,
without violating any codes, just a conditional use.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Are you done, sir?
MR. JONES: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta has a question
or a comment.
MR. JONES: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Actually I'd like to bring
Joe Schmitt up for just a moment, in may, Chair.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
Mr. Schmitt, this seems like something that has almost no impact
at all on any particular site. We're talking about no other structure
other than the trailer that's mentioned that's already allowed to be put
into this particular zoning district.
We're talking about a minimum amount of parking. Is there
some way that we might be able to find a way to make this work so
we could grant something that would go for a short period of time
until the proper permits and everything get into place or another
location is found?
MR. SCHMITT: For the record, Joe Schmitt, administrator of
community development/environmental services division.
Commissioner, to answer your question, that is strictly up to the
board, but can I provide some background?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Please.
MR. SCHMITT: The first I heard about this was a week ago or
almost -- about two weeks ago when I saw this on the agenda. I
contacted Brian and asked him, what was he trying to do and what
was the intent.
We finally sorted that out. The best that I could do on this is, we
titled this a sports and recreation camp.
Page 81
March 25-26, 2008
Now, he's got an option, or at least he's in the process of closing
on a piece of property. It is in the neutral land, in the rural fringe
mixed use district neutral lands. And I explained to Brian what he's
going to have to do in order to get a conditional use.
A conditional use has to go through the public petition process,
public hearing process. He's here today asking for a special
exemption. But in order to get a conditional use -- and you're all
familiar with the conditional use process, neighborhood information
meeting before the Planning Commission, then before the county
commissioners. Also--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Could you wrap it up, please?
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. I was just kidding. I was just
kidding.
MR. SCHMITT: Also he would have to go through all the other
type of analyses, listed species, listed species habitat survey,
transportation impacts.
Now, he knows he's got to do all that. We pretty much
determined probably that he would not have to go through a compo
plan amendment. We believe that this use is allowed on neutral lands.
But you're asking, can you approve it temporarily? The code
does allow for a temporary sports event type of permit, two 14-day
periods, no greater than 28 days per year. Anything beyond that, he
would have to come back and ask this board for that approval, and
they can get up to four weeks additional by the board approval. So
basically that's the limits by the code.
What Brian is asking for is, basically, to use the analogy -- and
Commissioner Coyle understands -- basically it's a leadership
challenge course or -- that's pretty much what it is. He has an
apparatus that he pulls on site, a trailer, that actually elevates and
creates the height element that he needs, but it's nothing more than a
confidence course or a leadership reaction course. Very little impact,
Page 82
March 25-26, 2008
but it still does impact the properties.
We would need a site plan, we would need all the other kind of
things. I've already been in conversation with Mr. Jones telling him
he needs to schedule for a preapp. and those kinds of things.
But it's in your hands. If you allow him to do it, I think the
county attorney's going to have to render an opinion whether it's legal,
but that's up to this board.
And I answered your question, but I know I'm providing --
basically I'm trying to give you leeway. If you want to do it, it's
something we cannot do unless he goes through the public hearing and
public petition process.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Maybe we ought to go to Mr.
Klatzkow now to be able to get --
MR. SCHMITT: Yeah.
MR. KLATZKOW: You don't have a mechanism in your code
that allows you to simply wave a magic wand and say, do with it what
you want to do. I mean, I understand what he wants to do. I
understand our codes can be very complex, maybe they're too
complex, but they are what they are, and we can grant these temporary
uses, 14 days here, 14 days there. But for a conditional use, we've got
an entire process that the LDC requires us to go through.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas? Are you
complete?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In regards to Mr. Schmitt finding
out that this was going to be on this upcoming agenda, Joe, you're
telling me basically that this is the first indication that you knew that
this conditional use was going to come forth?
MR. SCHMITT: Yes. It appears -- and from my discussion with
Brian, he had talked to folks at the EDC. The EDC staff was aware of
it. I know that one of my staff folks who's involved with EDC was
informed of it, but Susan and myself, we knew nothing about this.
Page 83
March 25-26, 2008
And when I -- like I said, when I saw it on the agenda, I said, well,
what is it you need and what is it you want and what kind of
information are you looking for? And we've been in conversation
SInce.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Since you've only found out about
this about a week ago, it also sounds like Mr. Jones was also talking
about that he's just closed the deal on this land; is that correct?
MR. SCHMITT: I believe, just discussing with him this
morning, he's close to closing on the property.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So ifhe went through the normal
channels, how long would it be before he could get a conditional --
that the conditional use would come before the Board of County
Commissioners?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, that's going to depend. It could take --
yeah, about four months, four to six months, and that depends on him
getting his application together and meeting the requirements that may
be placed. And I say may be because we would do it in a preapp.,
whether it's a listed species habitat, listed species study. Those kinds
of things are going to take time on his part.
But basically, the neighborhood information meeting and the
Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners,
maybe the EAC. You're talking a minimum four months to go
through that -- that linear approval process. That's, you know, pretty
much back-to-back meetings.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've got some concerns, because if
we allow a conditional use on this -- and it may go on for two years
before we get anything accomplished on this. It could be four months,
it could be longer.
MR. SCHMITT: Right. He's going to -- most likely going to
have to hire a consultant to do some of the studies that will be
required. My staff can assist him through the application process and
those procedures.
Page 84
March 25-26, 2008
And the question is -- and I know he's got a corporate office. The
corporate office is not there. It's located in a storefront elsewhere. All
this property will be is nothing more than a training site out in what is
existing field right now.
I believe it was a former tomato field gone fallow. And so I think
the impacts are going to be minimal. But, again, that's the issue, as
you heard from the county attorney. And there's -- it is a conditional
use and legally it has to go through the public hearing process.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I just don't feel comfortable
-- myself, I just don't feel comfortable about -- where a person just
closes on a piece of property now comes in here and tries to force our
hand, I guess you'd say, in regards to this, and I think maybe we--
cooler heads need to prevail to find out exactly what's going to happen
here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Before I go to Commissioner Coyle --
this is in Commissioner Coletta's district, so I'm going to ask him for
guidance on what I should do.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Sergeant Major Jones, I
would first like to express my appreciation to you and your wife for
your service to your country, as well as to Captain Cannan.
I understand what you're trying to do here, and I strongly support
your efforts. We have a process, unfortunately, that makes it
somewhat difficult to do it under these circumstances. I would -- I
wonder if we can't give conditional use approval. Can we approve a
series of special events --
MR. JONES: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- and let him have his events?
MR. JONES: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand most of your
equipment is portable. You can remove it, install it. So it seems to me
that we have granted other organizations the right to have special
Page 85
March 25-26, 2008
events at a specified number of times during the year, and if we can do
that and let you proceed, and then on a parallel course, we could,
perhaps, if the other board members would agree, ask the staff to work
with you to get through the process as quickly and as inexpensively as
possible so that we can grant you proper approval here.
MR. JONES: Yes, sir, yes, sir, and that's exactly what I'm
asking. And just to answer your question, sir, I'm not coming in here
trying to force a hand. And one thing over the last two-and-a-half
years was trying to find a piece of land, and it wasn't up -- until about
two weeks ago that I found something I could use that I knew that we
were going to close on, sir. So that's -- those are not my tactics, and I
wouldn't do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we can't solve this today and
we probably shouldn't be debating it today. Let's schedule -- can we
give -- would you be amenable, Commissioner Coletta, to -- if I made
a motion, to give the staff -- or to grant him the right to have special
events, specified number of special events?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Very agreeable. The only thing
is he's got to book way ahead of time for these events.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We could say he could do -- how
many, 12 a year, 15 a year?
MR. JONES: That would be fine, sir. That would be -- that's all
I'm asking is let -- because I'm going to need the income off of that to
go through this process we're talking about.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Would 12 special events for the
rest of this year -- would 12 special events for the rest of this year get
you through?
MR. JONES: Yes, sir, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then I would make a motion -- if
we can do it legally, Jeff -- to let him have 12 special events.
MR. KLATZKOW: I would prefer if we can come back to the
board with that so we can get everything tied up.
Page 86
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: There may be an issue with getting some
sort of Site Development Plan or conceptual plan together. I don't
know what the property looks like. I'm not even sure he owns the
property as we speak. If we can come back at the next meeting, we
can give you better --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I'll modify my motion then
to bring it back to the next meeting, we will consider a request for
special events, and then encourage the staff to work with Mr. Jones to
get the permit through and in the proper way.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I appreciate that, Commissioner
Coyle. I'll second your motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I just had a question
pertaining to what he was saying before. There was only -- you could
only have it for two weeks, then you could extend it a little bit, and I
was just wondering if you could use that on a day -- instead of two
contiguous -- two weeks of contiguous days, could you use the days
here or there, but I think you came up with a better solution.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just whatever the special events
are, and he's going to schedule them, and --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. That's a better solution.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, would you like
the cost associated with --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- special events? If they are 14 days,
then you have to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, they're not our costs. I don't
think they will be our costs, will they?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, they are.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They will be.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There is a permit associated with that.
Page 87
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I see.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There is temporary uses, too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's all different ways. But I think
we ought to be honest and open --
MR. JONES: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- of what the costs should be.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So that's a -- there's a motion on the
floor to bring it back at next meeting by Commissioner Coyle, second
by Commissioner Coletta.
Any discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, just one point. You brought
up a very good point about the cost. And I know special events
because I used to be in the business before. And normally they're
very, very detailed. They require all sorts of inspections. But what
we're talking about is a minimal type of operation. There may have to
be special fee assessed to it rather than the hundreds of dollars that's
usually assigned to these kind of permits.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The board can modify or waive
permit fees, and that's why I wanted to make sure that we have that
information so we can kind of take a look at what's being proposed
what -- the cost associated with it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm fine with it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Who collects the fees, and are they
put into the general fund or do they go to a certain identity within the
county, community development?
MR. MUDD: The fees will come into Joe's shop because they'd
issue the permit, they'd have to go out and inspect the site and things
like that to make sure they're in compliance. That would stay in
community development's environmental service.
Page 88
March 25-26, 2008
I think by having the information there, either the cost to the
county and/or the petitioner, the board will have the information that
they need in order to make the decision at the next meeting one way or
the other.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, good.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Anything else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. JONES: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have one more public petition.
Does the board want to go to the final public petition?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Please, please.
Item #6E
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY LOIS SELFON DISCUSSING
COLLIER COUNTY TO PROVIDE FUNDING SUPPORT FOR
CITY OF NAPLES PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
STAFF TO BRING BACK A FUNDING POLICY FOR PARKS
AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: The next item is 6E. It's a public petition request
Page 89
March 25-26, 2008
by Lois Selfon to discuss the Collier -- to discuss Collier County to
provide funding support for the City of Naples Parks and Recreation
Facilities.
MS. SELFON: Thank you. It was a very interesting morning.
Pleasure to be here. Good morning -- we still have a few more
minutes -- Chairman and county commissioners and staff.
My name is Lois Selfon, and thank you for -- very much for
allowing me to appear before you today as a public petitioner.
I am here as a resident of Naples and Collier County. I love my
city, I love my county, and I love my country. In thinking about how
best to present my petition this morning, I noticed a headline in the --
on the Internet yesterday, budget cuts could shut down Mars Rover.
We all recall Mars Rover and watching it on television. NASA is
facing a budget cut. They're short about four million for the rest of the
physical (sic) year, and some genius decided the best way to save the
money was to shut down Mars Rovers, those fabulous little machines
that were built for 90 days and have lasted for four years. They've
survived real sub-zero weather, asteroids, Martian sandstorms, but
powerless against some accountant in NASA with a sharp pencil.
And this is my point to my county commissioners. When you
make your budget cuts, please do not sacrifice our little prodigies, our
children, and our future.
I am here to petition, please, and to ask you, please, not to cut
back but to actually reprioritize county support for parks and
recreational facilities, including those in the Naples city limits. Our
park and recreational facilities are where we want our children to be,
not in the malls and not in the streets, but in safe, interesting,
educational and above all, supervised recreational facilities.
For the teenagers, particularly, which have the most choices, we
must maintain and improve our parks and recreational facilities and
keep them interested in these facilities, and we need the support of
you, the county commissioners, especially in these tough financial
Page 90
March 25-26, 2008
times.
Like some invisible barrier, the county doesn't express strong
financial support for parks and recreational facilities that are located
within Naples city limits. Ifthere ever was a good reason for that
policy, it has long since passed.
It is a matter oflogic. All residents of Naples are Collier County
citizens. All residents of Collier County are not residents of Naples;
therefore, I petition you, the county commissioners, that logically and
practically the City of Naples cannot afford to provide recreational
facilities and parks for -- that are open to all county residents, and the
solution is not to limit access to our city residents, to only our city
residents, for parks and that -- in the city limits, that this should also
be extended at all times to the county children.
The solution is for the county commissioners, financially and
seriously, to help the City of Naples maintain and operate these crucial
facilities.
When economic times are tough, like NASA -- please don't be
like NASA and sacrifice a popular and successful program and such a
needed program as being there for the children. Please don't do that,
not only don't think of budget cuts, but instead recognize that when
the economic times are tough, that it is important to sustain these
programs and develop them further.
These children have parents who are working two shifts. They
have some parents who are not working at all. They're laid off.
They're under stress, these families are under stress, and there's even
more need than ever at this time for our children.
So I ask you, please, don't forget the children, invest in the future.
They are our little -- our little Mars Rovers. And please, include
those in the city limits. Please support them in the confidence that the
city community services department will be a good steward of your
money.
Please don't ask for control, please don't ask for ownership, and
Page 91
March 25-26, 2008
please don't ask for more parking lots as a higher priority. Just
demand excellence in maintenance and operations, and this is what
Naples does best. This is Naples' priority, and the children is Naples'
priority. Our -- all of our children in the county deserve it and our
children need it, and I thank you for your consideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Ms. Selfon didn't tell you
this, but Ms. Selfon is the chair for the Parks and Recreation Board for
the City of Naples. She is very familiar with the issues.
And I've asked her to come here today because the city has some
difficult choices to make. Like us, they are -- have a shortage in
funds, and they are in the process of expanding facilities in the city
that are used, I think, predominantly by Collier County children.
We told them some time back that as long as there was a
differential price charged for county residents that we wouldn't
provide financial support to the parks and recreational facilities. And
so the city council eliminated that disparity, with the expectation that
something would happen, that we would provide some support. And
although we've made promises to do that, we really haven't done
anything.
We've told them that they had the flexibility to use some money
for the Pulling Park that we had approved for the Fleischmann
renovation, but yet we haven't given it to them. It's tied up and they
can't get it unless they come in with a design for parking facilities at
the Pulling Park which isn't even under consideration for the city now.
So they're in a bind.
Do we go back to the time when the city has to charge Collier
County, that is non-city residents, an additional amount of money to
play in their parks, or are we going to do what we said we would do
during a joint workshop meeting with the city council and during
workshop meetings of our own where we were going to take into
consideration the inventory for the entire county as far as parks and
Page 92
March 25-26, 2008
recreation resources are concerned so that we can allocate money to
the city parks so that they can serve the children who live outside the
city?
And so that's what Ms. Selfon is asking, that we develop a policy.
We've talked about it a long, long time. I'm frustrated with the fact
that they have not gotten what we implied they should be getting.
And so I think that we cannot solve this today, but I would like to
see it brought back either as a workshop item or as a publicly
advertised item on the next agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner
Halas?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I thoroughly agree with you
and am happy to support that effort.
I went down to see the park just to take a good look at it. I hadn't
been there in a little while. I was amazed at -- this was an old building
and yet they've done so much to give it a good look with paint jobs
and they've got good programs and good equipment, and I know that
in East Naples -- and we have so many, many children in East Naples,
and they use that park before they use ours because it has so many
more things for the children to use.
In East Naples we only have one community center, and it's very
small, and we don't have any type of like fitness centers or anything
like that, and they've got so many programs here. So I know our kids
are using that park, and I think we ought to be there to help offset the
expenses of it.
MS. SELFON: May I add to that by saying--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang on, hang on, just a minute.
Commissioner Halas wants to speak.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, no.
MS. SELFON: I'm sorry. I apologize.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: She can finish up, then I'll go.
MS. SELFON: I just wanted to say, as Commissioner Fiala
Page 93
March 25-26, 2008
mentioned, our buildings are pretty shabby actually, but our programs
are excellent.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. My concern is -- and I
appreciate you coming here, and I think all of us are going to be under
the gun pretty much as we work through a budget cycle.
So I guess what I'm asking Commissioner Coy Ie is, is this
something that if we have it in today's budget that we allocate a
certain amount of money on today, or is this something that we need
to discuss when we go through the budget process?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think it's something we'll have to
discuss during the budget process. I think if we start dealing with
funding in an incremental way, we're not going to be making right
decisions, because if we try to make a decision on this one,
somebody's going to be in next week asking us to make a decision on
something else. We need to do it in a comprehensive manner.
I still maintain we can do this with the money that we have
available for parks and recreation facilities in the government right
now. So that Ms. Selfon does not misunderstand what I'm about to
say, I have always advocated that you count the city facilities in our
inventory of parks and recreational facilities.
And when you distribute money, you distribute money on that
basis, too. It doesn't mean the county controls it. It merely means that
when we're looking at how many recreational facilities we require for
the people of Collier County, we count all of the recreational facilities
because people go there. They go to Cambier Park to play tennis.
So I still advocate that we count all of that recreational inventory
and we take the money that we have and we divide it up
proportionately to those -- it doesn't result in any more money --
expenditures for us. It just means we divide it up a little differently.
And so we've discussed that at a joint workshop in the city
council chambers two years ago. I've brought it up here. We have
Page 94
March 25-26, 2008
talked about allocations when it came to unfunded priorities on
multiple years, and we never seem to do anything.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I think what you stated
earlier, that we need to look at this when we go through the budget
process because I think it's going to affect everyone, and there may be
other means. One other question I'd like to ask you or Louise -- Lois,
I guess.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Lois.
MS. SELFON: Lois.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Excuse me. Is that -- does the City
of Naples have a park and rec department that is allocated money
through the tax dollars that the City of Naples collects?
MS. SELFON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. SELFON: And I also would like for you to know that I
didn't come here to interrupt your budgetary process, but only to say,
please do recognize this when you get to it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. SELFON: And I did come here in an unofficial capacity.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, my concern was that I
thought maybe when you came here today you were looking for an
immediate fix.
MS. SELFON: No. I'm looking for an immediate understanding
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. SELFON: -- and commonalty.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But she'd be happy to take a check
now if you wanted to do that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, get the pen out and get the
check out.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. County Manager, I have some
questions. We allocated some monies for, I think it was Fleischmann
Page 95
March 25-26, 2008
Park. They were doing some renovations to it and additions. Is those
monies still under the control of the county?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I don't believe the Fleischmann
renovation monies were allocated. There was $700,000 that was
allocated in two different increments. The first increment was
$300,000, and that was what -- and that was 50 percent of the cost that
the city told us at the time, which was about three and a half to four
years ago, of developing the Pulling boat ramp. And when they -- and
of course they were in court with Mr. Pulling on that particular issue
and that particular property. And I'm not too sure where they're at
right now in that juncture.
But about a year and a half ago they came forward and said, well,
the price of building the boat ramp went up and it's now, instead of
$600,000, it's 1.4 million, and we would like you to increase that
allocation. So the board allocated another $400,000. All of this stuff
is sitting in the account ready to go.
During the discussions, as I remember them in September, Mr.
Lykins was here, who's the director of the parks and rec. department in
the City of Naples, and was talking about the particular issue. And I
believe the board's decision at the time was that Mr. Lykins would
come back and share with this board -- and this is where the board
direction comes in and I believe Mr. -- Commissioner Coyle alluded
to it during his comments -- would come back and show you the
design plans, may they be Pulling Park or Fleischmann Park
renovation or whatever it was, and then the board basically decided
that then they would allocate those dollars to the City of Naples.
And I was of the opinion and -- because Fleischmann Park was
talked about. Those renovations --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
MR. MUDD: -- for that building that might need to be replaced.
The allocation of the dollars was when this board got to see the plans,
you would allocate the bucks, and it really didn't -- from what I
Page 96
March 25-26, 2008
gathered from that conversation, it didn't make a difference if it was
Pulling Park and/or if it was Fleischmann Park because the city was
going to put money into -- I believe at the end after the -- after the
Pulling lawsuit, their application to Pulling Park was going to be about
12 parking spaces going over the bridge to the greenway, and they --
because they lost the ability to have a boat ramp there.
And then Mr. Pulling has been in discussions with our staff about
the county doing the boat ramp. We're not quite where we need to be
to provide the board details of that particular issue yet. We're still in
conceptual discussions with Mr. Pulling.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So the monies are still--
MR. MUDD: $700,000 is still sitting there and it's dedicated to
the City of Naples.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. SELFON: May I please add one other thing so you'll know
why I'm here today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm not done.
MS. SELFON: I apologize.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But you go ahead. We got--
MS. SELFON: Well, I just wanted you to know that I'm taking
my advisory board to our next meeting to make a decision on fees.
And that is the reason why I'm here today, because I just need to know
basically where you are because I don't want to guide, and I hope to
keep the fees from going up or changing. I don't want county
children, since they're all county children, to be in a different fee
structure.
So my goal today is just to know that we all understand each
other and that I can go back with some sense of honesty and say, I
believe that our county commissioners understand our plight and
would want to support us rather than putting the burden of increased
fees on the families.
If something costs one child $30 a year, it doesn't sound like
Page 97
March 25-26, 2008
much, but if they have three children, it's not doable, and we don't
want the families to have to eat that expense, and I've got to go back to
my board and bring a decision, a recommendation to city council, for
our next meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Well, that's not going to
happen today.
MS. SELFON: I don't mean a financial.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. It's just not going to happen
today. We don't do things on the fly. But I know the board,
Commissioner Coletta wants to talk, Commissioner Halas wants to
talk, Commissioner Coyle wants to talk.
Do you have anything else that you want to say before I ask you
to sit down so that we can have a discussion?
MS. SELFON: I'm happy to sit down.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Great. All right. Let's see.
Where was I?
Okay. So that money is still whole?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And we're waiting for the city to
come back on, you know, what their decision is with Fleischmann or
MR. MUDD: Pulling or whatever that is. And the board said as
soon as they came forward with the plan, that they would allocate the
dollars. It was basically for a capital improvement. And I'm not too
sure -- Ms. Selfon is asking about capital improvements. I think she's
talking about O&M money --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
MR. MUDD: -- on a perpetual basis, on an annual basis--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right, and that's kind of what I get
too. But I'm not sure where the growth is of children. Is it in the City
of Naples, is it in Golden Gate Estates? Is it in Immokalee? Should
we -- should we -- you know, it is my understanding we were trying to
Page 98
March 25-26, 2008
provide to the residents in their area. But, you know, we have four
other municipalities or three other municipalities. We've got to play
fair to everybody.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So maybe we should bring everybody
at the table and decide how we're going to just split up the monies, the
county parks and rec. monies.
MR. MUDD: I believe the Fleischmann Park -- and I might be
wrong, and I can -- and I'll stand to be educated. But I believe
Fleischmann Park is probably an anom -- yeah, easy for me to say --
an anomaly in the system because Fleischmann Park is right next to
the Coastland Mall. So if I want to go shopping and I've got a teenage
son or daughter or whatever that might be into skateboarding or
whatever, I'll go shopping to drop them off, and I believe that's what
happens.
And when shopping is over and I put my bags back in the car, I
go -- I go fetch the kids and we go home. And because of its location
to the mall, I think it -- I think that's where they get -- they get the
extra load from county residents. But I'm not too sure that the
statistics -- and there are other parks that aren't located next to a
gathering place for shopping.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Or school.
MR. MUDD: Or school -- is the same. So I believe Fleischmann
Park may be an anomaly, and maybe Mr. Lykins can educate me a
little bit more on the attendance for county participants versus city
participants and other parks and recs.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you very much. And
I have to tell you, I've also been supportive of Naples when they take
care of the citizens of the county. I do think that we should be able to
step forward in a reasonable way, of course within the budget
restraints that we've got. And, you know, the needs are great
Page 99
March 25-26, 2008
throughout the whole county.
There is one thing though when we have this discussion. I want
to know the direction that the city took as far as the boat ramp. They
have a boat ramp where you have to feed quarters into it to go there.
City residents are exempt, and they were going to look at the
possibility of bringing that boat ramp under the county's system of
where we issue stickers, and would come up with some way to be able
to do a back and forth trade of some dollars to be able to make it so
that county residents that have a boat sticker could use that ramp as
they do county facilities. I think it's only fair that we look at the
whole picture when we get involved with this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coyle, then
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, let me add some additional
detail concerning what happened on this vote about letting the city use
the money from Pulling Park for Fleischmann or anything else.
At that point in time the city could not go ahead with the Pulling
Park. The money was sitting there. I made the motion, look, why
don't we just let the city have the right to take that money and use it in
Fleischmann Park since Fleischmann Park services a lot of county
residents?
There was, I think, almost unanimous agreement on the board,
with the exception of two concerns expressed by Commissioner
Coletta and Commissioner Henning about parking spaces for boat
launches.
And so what has happened, there was not, to the best of my
knowledge, three people who said, I will not approve this motion
unless you come back with a plan to build some boat -- or some
parking spaces at Pulling Park, which wasn't even being planned.
So -- but the staff has interpreted the remarks and concerns by
Commissioner Coletta and Commissioner Henning as a way to keep
from giving the city the money.
Page 100
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What was the date on that; do you
remember?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, the staff has it because
they've provided me the minutes on this stuff.
So what we're really doing is that we're finding reasons to keep
the city from getting the money that we allocated to be used for city
parks by saying that, well, you know, unless you come back with a
plan to build boat -- or boat parking somewhere, we're not going to let
you have that $700 -- $700,000. That's where we are right now with
the staff, okay. The staff isn't going to release that money.
If the staff is concerned about a project, they've got a capital
improvement project at Fleischmann right now that can be verified.
The city can provide them plans if they want -- if the staff wants to
listen and get the money to them. Staff doesn't want to do that, okay.
So that's where we are.
Now, as far as trying to hold the city's money hostage while we
also negotiate another arrangement about boat launching fees is a
perpetuation of that same subterfuge. You know, let's deal with the
parks and recreation things and --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Make a motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, okay. I make a motion that
we release the $700,000 from the amount that's held in the Pulling
Park thing to the city to use at Fleischmann Park as they see fit to
improve the facilities there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second the motion, okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Wait. Hang on. Just hang on. We
got Commissioner Halas, and then I need to recognize what the
motion is. And the motion by Commissioner Coyle is to release the
$750,000 to city --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Seven hundred, I think it is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seven hundred thousand dollars to the
City of Naples to use as they wish for their parks and recreation.
Page 10 1
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, for the Fleischmann Park.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: For the Fleischmann Park.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Fleischmann Park project.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And there was the second by
Commissioner Fiala.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Could parks and rec. give us some
guidance here so that we don't get ourselves in some deep water?
MS. RAMSEY: Marla Ramsey, public services administrator for
the record.
I do -- you have approved on two different occasions an
interlocal agreement with the city, which is based upon reimbursement
for the Pulling Park property. So we have a document in hand that
says that the $700,000 that is currently allocated to the Pulling
property can only be utilized as a reimbursement for that project. So
if you want to give us direction to make changes to that interlocal
agreement, then that's what we would do.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll ask some other questions, but
I'll let you --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's in your neighborhood.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I'm sorry to interrupt, but --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, no.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But are you saying that we didn't
vote as a board to let the city have the allocation -- have the $700,000
to use as they see fit?
MS. RAMSEY: Commissioner, I don't believe that there was a
vote. I have the minutes in front of me. I do not see that there was a
Page 102
March 25-26, 2008
vote and a second taken upon that. There was discussion, I'll agree
with that, that there's discussion, but there was not a specific vote that
says that that money would be allocated to the Fleischmann property.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There was a majority of the
commissioners who were in favor of that proposal. And the city
representative stood right at the podium, and I asked him if that would
serve a useful purpose for him, and he said yes, it would help a lot.
He understood that he was going to be given the $700,000 and the
right to use it. I don't see how you read those minutes any other way.
MS. RAMSEY: They're September 6, 2007 is the --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I've read them, and I have
them.
MS. RAMSEY: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I've read them several times,
and I cannot find anything there that says it was not the sense of the
board to do that, and the majority of the board, as a matter of fact.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: County Manager, I can see that you
want to say something, so I would -- what do you want to add to this
conversation? Because I want to --
MR. MUDD: The only piece in there, I believe there was an
understanding that the city was going to come back with some plan to
use the dollars. With the motion that sits there on the floor, I need you
to also add -- and I'm not going to belabor this point. We can discuss
it back and forth.
I haven't -- all I need is you to declare that interlocal agreement
null and void from your standpoint so that we don't get ourselves in a
position where you give them the $700,000 and there's an interlocal
agreement that's still standing that says they have another $700,000
for some boat ramp if Pulling ever decides to -- if Mr. Pulling ever
decides to change his mind in that process.
So we just need to get rid of that agreement so that we're no
longer -- we're no longer obligated to provide those dollars because
Page 103
March 25-26, 2008
things have changed based on what the board's direction is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang on, hang on. I don't know if
Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm done.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You're done. And Commissioner
Coletta's over here shaking his finger at me, and I don't know what to
do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, actually I'm pointing it at
the audience.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I wasn't directing it right to you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. I didn't want to ignore you.
That's the only thing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I appreciate it. When it's my
turn. When it is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. But it is your turn.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, thank you.
Yeah. I first want to clarify a couple things. I'm not holding
anybody hostage. I can't remember the minutes from way back when.
You have an unfair advantage in the fact that you've got the minutes
in front of you, had time to deliberate on them. The rest of this
commission hasn't. This item should come back.
I may even be supportive. The question I had regarding the boat
ramp and the one that exists now was a good question, and they told
me they were going to take care of it and they may have. That's what
the question was. They may have already taken care of that. It was an
issue that I wanted to know about.
I think it's unfair to expect us to vote on something when we have
nothing in front of us, we're not prepared to be able to discuss it
intelligently. You're the only one that's prepared and your definition
Page 104
March 25-26, 2008
does not quite take -- or doesn't quite rhyme with what we just heard
from staff.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, and I would agree because
I've never heard that definition from staff, and I've been talking to staff
about this for almost two months, okay?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Could we bring it back?
You might find me to be very supportive.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I'll be happy to bring it back,
yeah. I have talked with the county manager and assistant county
manager about this in great detail, and not once, not once during the
entire discussion has anybody raised an interlocal agreement issue, not
once.
The only issues that were raised were that you and Commissioner
Henning were concerned about the building of some parking spaces in
the Pulling Park area and that you wanted to see a plan for that.
Well, Pulling Park isn't even planned, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How many years ago was this?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, it was just in December.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's still long enough.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, when you get old it
seems like it's a long time. But I don't have a problem bringing it
back, you know.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I really would love that if
you would.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So do you withdraw your motion
now, if you're going to bring it back?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: May I assist you?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure, go ahead.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I would encourage you to withdraw
your motion because your motion -- there's no stipulations on the
money. And what the public petition was about was about the fees for
Page 105
March 25-26, 2008
the -- for the county children or residents to be equal as the city
residents.
I don't see any reason why we should give them a -- government
municipality moneys that doesn't come with conditions. Any grant or
monies that we get always comes with a condition. And I just want to
see what the benefit is to the county residents.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Well, I don't have a
problem withdrawing the motion and substituting another motion. But
please remember that the City of Naples gives us 20 percent of all of
the money we get, and they give it to us without conditions, okay.
They expect that it be spent wisely to benefit everybody in the county,
not just county, not -- and excluding city residents. So they give us 20
percent of all the property tax money we get, and they have a right to
expect something in return.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that might change with the
valuation of properties in Collier County.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think it's probably going to go up
because the valuation of properties is falling in the rest of the county.
But nevertheless, my motion is this, that we bring this back for a
publicly advertised --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: For the purpose of establishing a
policy concerning funding for recreational facilities in the cities and
the municipalities.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second the motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion on the floor
by Commissioner Coyle to -- for staff to bring back a funding policy
for the municipalities for --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Parks and recreational facilities
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- for parks and recreational capital or
Page 106
March 25-26, 2008
just whatever?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Everything.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Everything. Capital and --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Operation and management.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Operation, thank you. And there's a
second --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- by Commissioner Fiala.
Okay. Does everybody understand the motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think I do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have any questions,
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I do. When we start looking
at funding municipalities along with the unincorporated area of the
county, I think this is going to put us in an area where there's no way
that we can adequately support all areas and all functions of parks and
recreation activities in Collier County.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what the meeting's for.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And I'll add, in some
instances, like, for instance, in Marco Island, a couple of the facility
there we own, and maybe that would be the benefit. South Beach we
own and Tigertail we own. And so maybe that would be what our
donation is to that area. I mean, but that's something we need to
discuss at the next meeting.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think -- don't we do that now?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, that's what I said.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Tigertail Beach now? Yeah. So
that's already in the equation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right, right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm looking at where we're
Page 107
March 25-26, 2008
expanding other parks, other communities, okay, and I think they have
some obligation, but, anyway.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All righty.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. One last note, too.
Everglades City has a park there that they pay for from Everglades
City that provides a service to everyone from Copeland right through
Chokoloskee, a large percent of the people. I mean, their skating rink,
everything's open to the general public in that area. So when the time
does come, I'm sure they're going to want to be heard, something
realistically, for the size of their area. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good.
Any other discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor ofthe motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion, carries 4-1, Commissioner
Halas opposing.
Commissioner Coyle, we haven't breaking (sic) for lunch. I'm
not sure if the rest of them want a break.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, we're going to stay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, you're going to stay? Well, I'm
breaking.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I guess we want to break for
lunch. How long should we take?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Ten minutes.
Page 108
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ten minutes?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let's try an hour and one minute.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: An hour and a minute?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We'll be back at 1:30.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, great. We're in recess until
1:30.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
The -- we're going to go in the afternoon session on land use
items, but before we do, I just want to remind anybody, if they want to
speak on a topic, item on our agenda, to please sign up in advance and
give it to Sue over here.
Also, cell phones and pagers be on vibrate or off.
And the next item is?
Item #7 A
ADA-2007-AR-12714, SAUNDRA CLANCY-KOENDARFER,
REPRESENTED BY BEN NELSON OF NELSON MARINE
CONSTRUCTION, INC., IS REQUESTING AN APPEAL OF BD-
2007-AR-12154 DENIED BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION ON DECEMBER 6,2007. SUBJECT
PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 48,
RANGE 25, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - MOTION TO
REMAND BACK TO THE CCPC (SPECIFICALLY THOSE
MEMBERS THAT VOTED AGAINST THE PETITION) WITH
STATEMENTS OF THE LEGAL BASIS FOR DENIAL; TO BE
Page 109
March 25-26, 2008
BROUGHT BACK TO THE APRIL 22, 2008 BCC MEETING -
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Is 7 A. This item requires that all participants be
sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by commission
members.
It's ADA-2007-AR-12714, Saundra Clancy-Koendarfer -- and I
probably messed that one up -- represented by Ben Nelson and Nelson
Marine Construction, Inc., is requesting an appeal of
BD-2007-AR-12154 denied by the Collier County Planning
Commission on December 6,2007.
Subject property is located in Section 5, Township 48, Range 25,
Collier County, Florida.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And this one requires ex parte
communication and all people who wishing (sic) to participate as far
as the public stand up and be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and responded in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Halas, do you have any ex parte communication
on this item?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I do. I had correspondence in
regards to this item that was sent to my office.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's it, and I talked with staff.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. I also spoke with staff
and spoke to Mr. Nelson and received a correspondence from the
petitioner.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've received correspondence
and I've spoken with staff. Oh, and I mentioned something in the hall
to Mr. Nelson.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
Page 110
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I received a letter from
Saundra Clancy-Koendarfer -- I hope that's right -- memos and emails
regarding boat docks and LDC amendments and also talked to Mark
Strain from the Planning Commission.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Mr. Nelson?
MR. NELSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners and Mr.
Chairman. I've had the pleasure of watching you perform your duties
this morning, and I feel a little more better about my particular
situation at the moment now so -- mainly because, not being a city
councilman anymore.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your name, for the record, please?
MR. NELSON: Ben Nelson. Ben Nelson, Bonita Springs,
Florida, representing the client.
I'm going to use the visualizer here to put this up; if you'll put
that up.
We're here today for -- because on December 6, 2007 we were
denied for our request to replace an existing 20-foot dock with another
dock and add a boat lift. That's the essentials of it.
I've had the pleasure of working with the commission and the
building and zoning in Collier County for the last 25 years. This is the
first time that I've come before the county commission for something
like this.
That's because -- that's due to your staff. Your staff has been
really, really good, very competent about working with the applicants,
being sure everything meets the criteria, and that's really important
here. You've got a really good set of criteria for these.
It's not a regular kind of a variance, as you know. What you go
through on the docks, the docks was -- regulations were set at 20 feet.
And I think that everybody recognizes that there are some really
extenuating circumstances in Florida. Not all waterways are created
equal. Not every lot's equal. Some of them are very, very shallow,
some of them deep. Some of the waterways are really wide across.
Page III
March 25-26, 2008
But everyone, I think, has the right to some riparian access.
In this particular situation, I think that we met the criteria here.
As a matter of fact, I know we met the criteria here, and there was
necessary approval. We had the staffs approval and we had their
recommendation.
This was a simple reasonable request for relief. And you can see
by the drawing, it doesn't get much simpler than that. A simple boat
dock and a simple lift. We're required to do a lot of things for these. I
mean, we're required to get a surveyor, bathymetric surveys to be sure
that there's no opinion involved here. It's real straightforward.
You've done really well on getting criteria set up so that nobody
can come in and say, well, I walked out there and I think it's deeper or
shallower. We have to work with surveyors. We have to get the right
information. We have to work with your staff.
I think that what seemed to be the major contention here was, the
neighbor to the east had came through and was concerned about his
view. We presented what I considered and what staff had considered
to be substantial competent evidence that we had little or no effect on
the view of the neighbor.
And it's one of these things that you have to really see to believe.
Because of what we were doing, we were extending out -- there's an
existing dock there. Weare going to extend that dock out, but at the
same time we're moving it over when we add the boat lift. So really
the view line doesn't change very much.
And the criteria actually, the secondary criteria, doesn't say it will
-- can't affect it at all. It says it can't have a major effect. And I
believe that the neighbor said that we would actually be affecting his
view of the sunset. I think that would be very difficult because if you
look at the orientation of the drawing, the house runs east and west. If
we were to look due west on the best summer day, he's going to be
looking at the house. He can't -- there's no way possible that this boat
lift or this dock can block the view of a sunset unless you're a fish, and
Page 112
March 25-26, 2008
that's about all I can say about blocking the view.
There's some other things that were mentioned on the record
there. But basically, I think what we have to look at is that without
this relief, there's an oyster bar there that we cannot get a dock on.
This is an expensive piece of property. There are many, many
examples that the board has seen, many examples around the area that
have -- go out 40,60 feet, docks that are three times the square footage
of this dock on the same size lots. This is very simple. And we're
here to ask for your relief in this case right here.
I think that this was a fair -- fair request on this part. And if we
were to stick to this 20- foot rule, she would have no choice but to try
to moor her boat in six inches of water without the relief that I hope
that you give us today.
And I will take any questions now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I was under the impression that at
the end of the -- that you had about four foot of water there. That's
what I read in some of the minutes, that you had four-and-a-halffoot
of water at low tide and about six foot of water at high tide.
MR. NELSON: That's correct. And -- but that's without having
a boat lift. As soon as you add a boat lift to that, that's what -- that's
what the major part of the extension's for.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. NELSON: That's with the boat sitting in the water.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: If that's the case -- because I have a
21- foot boat.
MR. NELSON: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I have maybe three foot of
water. It's a deep v haul. So when I have three foot of water or less, I
can get the boat out. So my question is, how large -- obviously there's
going to be another boat that's going to be put in this slip.
MR. NELSON: Sure.
Page 113
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So what's the draft of this boat
that's going to be put in the slip?
MR. NELSON: We use that minus four as the basic criteria.
And if you know anybody who's in the environmental services, DEP,
that's their criteria. They want you --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm asking, what is the draft of the
boat that you want to put in the lift?
MR. NELSON: The draft of the boat that we would want to put
on there would probably be anywhere from a two-foot-eight draft all
the way to a three-foot draft.
And so DEP wants you to have that four foot because they want
you to have clearance underneath there because they don't want you
do to prop dredging, and that's a good -- that's a good question,
because what you see typically happening in these areas, people do
not want to go through this process that I'm standing up here going
through right now.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. You answered my question.
MR. NELSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The other question is, normally -- I
know where these waters are located because I do boating in there
myself. And I find that I have to be very careful. I have to read the
tide charts.
So there's a lot of times that I'd like to go out but I can't because
those particular waters, there's areas in there where you only got one
foot at low tide and you might have four foot at high tide.
So I'm just trying to get an idea of what size boat we're putting in
here. If you have four and a half foot of water at low tide, that should
be sufficient to put down the hoist without going into six and seven
feet of water.
MR. NELSON: Yeah. At low tide, if it's four foot deep, the
cradle of a boat lift, as you know, is probably about 10 inches thick,
another foot thick, so you have to allow for that.
Page 114
March 25-26, 2008
So, you know, then you're talking three foot of draft there, so --
and this is -- there's nothing unusual about that type of depth, this type
of request. It's really common. The sizes of boats in this bay go from
-- I mean, you can look at them. They go from 30 foot long down to
pontoon boats to 32-footers. People have a lot of big boats. And it is
channelized. And you know if you stay in the channels in there,
you're okay in these areas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I differ with you, but you --
I've been in there.
MR. NELSON: I've been in the waters a few myself the last 45
years, too, yeah. But thank you very much for your questions. Any
other questions?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I can only judge from the
picture that I see. But it looks like they're at the widest part of this
whole bay, and it's surely not going to stop anything from moving in
or out. I see other places that -- where there are protrusions of 112
feet, 117 feet, 28.6 feet, and I don't understand what the problem is. I
could see if it was a really narrow channel, but it isn't even a narrow
channel. So I'm really not sure -- I don't see why there's a problem at
all.
MR. NELSON: I would concur.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It appears that the petitioner is--
one of the reasons the petitioner wants us to make this decision is that
the CCPC failed to, in his words, verbalize a specific reason for denial
and ignored the county criteria for consideration in approval of such
vanances.
The staff also seems to disagree with the CCPC
recommendations. So, you know, we've got to resolve that issue.
We've got to know why there is a difference between what the staff
Page 115
March 25-26, 2008
thinks should be done and what the CCPC thinks should be done.
And the best way in my mind to do that is to remand it to the
CCPC and have them give us the reasons for their decision, and then
we can sort it out. Right now I'm not sure I know. I've read the
minutes. I -- like the petitioner, I can't figure out what criteria was
violated that resulted in their disapproval.
But they generally do a very thorough job, and I think we will
not be doing our job if we don't get to the bottom of that issue and find
out why there is such a divergence of opinion between the staff and
the CCPC concerning this particular issue.
And I would like to hear from the CCPC, have them tell us
specifically what provisions of our code were violated here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to comment on that. I
know today that, when we have the one item coming before us that
was pulled off the consent agenda, that there will be three people from
the planning staff here. You may want to -- you know, rather than
move this forward to some future date, you might want to just move it
forward until after that point in time where we could query them then.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You say planning staff or --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Planning Commission, three
members of it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's not the majority.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're right, it's not. I'm just -- I
just kind of think -- they already rejected it once. Why send it back to
them?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, because if, in truth, they did
not cite a reason for rejection, I think it's necessary to complete the
record.
Secondly, I think it is important that every time we disapprove
something or they disapprove something that we must state it so it's
part of the record and there's not this kind of confusion.
Page 116
March 25-26, 2008
Let me be absolutely clear. I can guarantee you that CCPC spent
a lot more time on this issue than we have. And I would be very
interested in their opinion. And if they cannot justify their decision,
then I think we have the right to overrule it. But without giving them
the right to provide us that justification, I think we're not doing our
job.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So let me just clarify what you're
asking. You're just asking to inquire of the Planning Commission
commissioners of why they voted no?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just tell us what legal criteria did
they use to dis -- recommend disapproval for this petition. They don't
have to have another petition, they don't have to have presentations.
They can do it from the record. Everything's been done. It shouldn't
be a big burden on anybody except to ask the members of the CCPC
to please provide us with sufficient information to make a final
decision whether we should overrule their decision or not.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that's fair enough.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, in might ask, this is an appeal
to the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So we really would have to have the
applicant agree to that, what you're asking.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: If you're asking for more information,
I don't disagree with that, but since this is an appeal, I think Mr.
Nelson and his client is going to have to give us direction if they're
okay for the Planning Commission to tell us what criteria that they
denied it under.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let me say this. If I'm not
given an opportunity to ask the Planning Commission why they
denied it, I'm going to deny it now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
Page 117
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay? So I do not normally rule
against the Planning Commission unless there's a good reason to do
that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I want to find out ifthere's a good
reason to do it. And so you can take your choice. But I don't agree
that it's necessary for the petitioner to approve that process. I think we
have the right to select -- or to get as much information as possible
before we make a decision.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I'll ask the county attorney, but
I think Mr. Nelson sees the -- reads the tea leaves, and it might be
something that he might agree to.
Mr. Weigel, does -- since this is an appeal, does the appellant
need to agree?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, two things. The appellant, on the record,
can agree, but this is the board's -- this is an appeal before the Board
of County Commissioners, and the board has the full authority to
either make a determination today based upon the material that's
before it or, in fact, to remand it to the Planning Commission for a
clarification and have it returned to the board consistent with the
appeal that's already ongoing. So there would not be a new appeal
from what is -- from what has occurred. This is merely proceedings
consistent with this appeal that you're hearing right now.
And the Planning Commission, yes, in fact, can provide, to the
extent that it can or wishes to do so, additional information and
reasoning for you, upon which then you will ultimately make a
decision, and you will apply criteria yourself.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great, okay. Do you want to make a
motion -- Commissioner Coyle--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- before you make a motion, since
we are talking about this, could you give any ex parte communications
Page 118
March 25-26, 2008
that you have had?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I have not had any ex parte
communications at all concerning this item.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. NELSON: Mr. Chairman, would it be appropriate for--
Ms. Koendarfer would like to say something before you vote on this.
Would that be appropriate? She's registered to speak.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have no objections to that
whatsoever.
MR. NELSON: Okay. Ms. Koendarfer?
MS. KOENDARFER: Hi. Thank you for listening to me. I
wanted to be at the first meeting, but I had a death in the family and
had to leave the state.
Each of you got my package with pictures, and explanations of
everything; is that correct? Each one of you did?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MS. KOENDARFER: May I ask, as you looked through it, in
would have sent that same package in to the first meeting, do you
think they would have come to the conclusion that there was no
problem? Because I wasn't able to be there and present that I wasn't--
I was totally unaware that a neighbor would even, you know,
contradict it.
First of all, they don't live there. They just own the home, and I
am homesteaded there. And I use my boat. It's a pontoon. It doesn't
draft very much. I'm a new boater, as you may -- so to speak.
But in the future, I would like to get a boat, possibly, that drafts
enough where we can enjoy the Gulf like other people do that have
waterfront. And as it stands, I wouldn't be able to do that, and I would
like that to happen.
It doesn't mean I'm going to get one, but I'd like the option if I'm
going to put the money into a new, you know, dock and lift.
Our house does face the north. And as far as I know, the sun has
Page 119
March 25-26, 2008
never set in the north, and that's what they were saying, that they miss
their sunsets. You'd have to knock my house down and every other
house facing the west in order to see one. I've never seen one myself
from my house, so I can't imagine how they could have either, but
that's what they used.
I just hope that you will see, what I've sent you explains it. I'm
the only house on the road that has all these barnacles -- not barnacles,
but a coral, that was dumped there by the previous owner, supposedly
to help their seawall.
And when the tide comes in and goes out, it just keeps making it
go forward and backward, and it's a mess. And when the tide goes
out, as you can see by the pictures, there's no water there to speak of
to put a boat in, so I can't comply with the 20 feet inside that dock
area.
Now, the people next door, they bought the home with the dock
and a lift, but I've never seen them take the boat out. Of course, I've
never seen them there. But that boats sits up high, and that's right in
smack of their view.
I don't understand personally why I should have to accommodate
their view when they chose to buy that house facing north looking at
that boat up high, and they want to look crossways over to my house,
and if I have a dock there, they don't want to see it. I didn't -- I don't
understand why that should be -- overrule -- okay, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that, as it stands today, I
think if we get a little more information from the Planning
Commission, I think that everything would probably be more in your
favor. But we just want to make sure that we have all of the
information in why it was turned down, other than the fact of the view
of the neighbor, okay?
MS. KOENDARFER: Okay. I understand that, but I did apply
for my dock permit -- or, you know, the construction of it. What
month was that?
Page 120
March 25-26, 2008
MR. NELSON: June.
MS. KOENDARFER: June of last year because this -- it had to
-- I had to put it into dry dock for the summer and then clean it, and
I've got to clean it right now again. It's costing me money, and in go
out this summer, the same thing, if something -- you know, everything
takes so long. And I guess that's why we've appealed this. And I
thought if we gave all the information -- I mean, there was no reason
to turn it down.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think it probably could come back
by the next meeting, if we could get something back from the
Planning Commission in writing. I think that's what Commissioner
Coyle was looking at is something in writing from Planning
Commission on it in regards to this; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes; yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. KOENDARFER: Do I have any other questions from any
of you?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any other questions?
(No response.)
MS. KOENDARFER: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. Thank you.
MS. KOENDARFER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala has a question of
staff.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Were any of our staff
members there at the Planning Commission meeting? Maybe we
could ask you what happened.
MS. CASERTA: Hi. Ashley Caserta (phonetic), senior planner,
department of zoning. Yes, I was there. What's your specific
question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Why did they -- why did they deny?
MS. CASERTA: Well, the -- I read the meeting minutes this
Page 121
March 25-26, 2008
morning, and it just seemed mostly because of the size of the boat as
well as the view but, I mean --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It wasn't clear to you either?
MS. CASERTA: They didn't state a specific reason. But it's
staffs determination that the proposed dock would not be a factor with
regards to the view, so --
MR. KLATZKOW: I was there. It was my clear understanding
that the reason it was denied was because of the view. That was the
issue that they discussed.
Commissioner Caron discussed the fact that also she didn't see
the reason to grant this just so they could have a bigger boat. A bigger
boat would not have been something that was desirable in this
particular area.
But the primary discussion they had was the blockage of the
view. That was the witness that they had, the neighbor. And sitting
through it, it was crystal clear to me that that's why they denied it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think Commissioner Coyle is asking
something that I kind of wonder, when you have a split vote, or maybe
even one planning commissioner recommending denial, but there's no
reason for it. I mean, we don't have the facts of why they did that.
And since this particular item came up, maybe there's a way to
correct that so we can really understand what the Planning
Commission is trying to tell us and, more importantly, what each
individual planning commissioner is trying to tell us.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. You're absolutely right.
The county attorney provides us with a list of things that we must
consider under these kinds of circumstances, and he also reminds us
that we need to state our reasons for disapproving something based
upon those legal considerations.
We sometimes are remiss in doing that clearly. And apparently in
this case maybe the CCPC was too. We need to get that resolved. It's
Page 122
March 25-26, 2008
a procedural question. Let's get it done and then let's try to make the
right decision when it comes back to us as quickly as possible.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Do you want to make a
motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: He already did.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I did.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I seconded it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So the motion was?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: To remand it to the CCPC for a
specific statement of the reasons for disapproval.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Each member? Because not all
members voted to deny.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's true.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you want each member to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Those who voted to deny --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: To deny.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- should provide us the legal basis
upon which they voted to deny.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Is there any further discussion
on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. I think
Page 123
March 25-26, 2008
it's an appropriate time for us to ask the Planning Commission
members on future recommendations, if a member votes no, to give us
the reason why. Would that be a fair one? Because, again, when I
look at a split vote, I'm trying to figure out why they're saying no.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that the majority or the minority?
If someone in the minority votes no, it doesn't have any bearing on
the final decision. But if someone in the majority votes no or
disapproves something, then, you know, it is important to know why
they did it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Actually if it's just one person
requesting -- or voting no on it, I'm looking at that and I'm really
trying to figure out why they're trying to deny when our staff, our
professional staff, is saying we ought to approve an item, or even deny
it too.
MR. NELSON: Mr. Chairman, I don't know if it's appropriate --
is it appropriate for me to hang myself further here?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ifwe could finish this discussion first.
MR. NELSON: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I agree with you, Commissioner
Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think we're on it. We've got to
be careful. The motion may be to deny, in which case anyone that
votes in favor of that motion would have to give an explanation why.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's true. But the issue is, is when
staff supports the petition and somebody votes no on it, I'd like to
know why. If staff is recommending denial, I would like to know why
they support it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would agree.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, then David
Page 124
March 25-26, 2008
Weigel.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Especially because they're
talking about view, yet they're talking about 640 feet across this thing.
It's not like the 15 feet is going to change their view much or anything
at all. So, you know, maybe we need something, when it isn't
obvious, some definitive note on why they voted.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, but that's not -- a view is not
part of the criteria.
MR. NELSON: Yes, it is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It is.
MR. NELSON: It's part of the secondary criteria, but it has to be
major obstruction.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. It sounded from the discussion of
the petition that the material that she provided you was not material
provided to the Planning Commission, just as a side note.
But additionally, in regard to knowing the reason for a motion,
for a vote that's taken, particularly to deny, it's really only relevant to
know the motion maker's reasoning, because everyone else, the person
who makes the second and those who vote with the motion, are
following the motion maker's reason.
The reasons that the other members of the Planning Commission
may entertain in their minds are not important.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That may be true.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. And I agree with Mr. Weigel.
But I think what you were getting at, would you like to get an
understanding of whether or not the people who are voting on these
important issues are doing so from the standpoint of legal and logical
decision-making processes? I think that's what you were looking for.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that would be -- it is
Page 125
March 25-26, 2008
important, I think, that we discourage people from making votes,
whether it's for or against, purely on emotional bases that are not
supported by the code and by law.
And if it's happening, you want to know about it. I think I would,
too, you know, because it would help me decide the next time I get
ready to make an appointment to a board somewhere whether or not
the people that are on that board are making decisions that are
consistent with our law.
So I agree with what Mr. Weigel is saying, but I understand
where you'd like to go, and I think I agree with you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, good.
Mr. Nelson, I apologize. Did you want to say something?
MR. NELSON: I'm not sure, but I'd just -- I'd just like to leave
you with something here. Having a reason doesn't necessarily mean
you're wrong, and in this case this board was wrong. They were
wrong to deny this petition. I wouldn't be here if I didn't think they
were wrong.
This was a reasonable request, and they did not respect their own
criteria. The record is clear that the motioner did, for his own reasons,
made the motion. And the record is clear on that. We've went
through our -- went through this process.
This is an expensive process to put somebody through to build a
boat dock and yet my applicant here, my client, has done this. We've
met the criteria. We went through it.
You are our appeal, and if you don't feel comfortable making the
decision, I understand that. And I can tell you what that -- the zoning
board or the board of adjustments is going to say. They're going to
say, well, we did it, what criteria did we use? Well, let's pick one.
We'll put a criteria down there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Nelson, our Planning
Commission members, individually and collectively, are well
respected up here and they usually make great, great
Page 126
March 25-26, 2008
recommendations. It's just, I think on this one, we probably agree
with you, but we want to know more factual information from our
Planning Commission members.
MR. NELSON: Thank you. Thank you for your consideration.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Real briefly, ma'am. One minute.
Your name, for the record.
MS. KOENDARFER: Saundra Koendarfer. I just -- I was told
that everything was met prior to for the first meeting. And I guess I
have a question of, why does a neighbor carry more weight than a
person who lives there and has followed everything?
And like he said, it's expensive to go through all this, and it's
time. How does that happen? I guess I'm looking for an answer.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You'll have to ask the Planning
Commission members.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We won't know that until--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're not -- we're not judging your
petition right now.
MS. KOENDARFER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Because we would want more
explanation from our Planning Commission members --
MS. KOENDARFER: Because I asked that when I came back
from my funeral up north. I said, why -- why did -- why was it
denied? And they said, your neighbor was just so upset about the
view, you know. And I'm thinking, why do they carry so much weight
when we've -- you know, we've handled everything the way it was
supposed to be, and it all came back.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We won't know that until we get
the report from the Planning Commission.
MS. KOENDARFER: All right. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what we're trying to do;
we're trying to find out why. And I'll tell you a story, very briefly. I
don't want to take up a lot of time.
Page 127
March 25-26, 2008
Many, many years ago a lady invited me to come to her house to
see how her view was blocked. I went in the home, had a beautiful
glass wall in the back, wide open beautiful bay, and over on the
kitchen side was a small window. And she says, here, look through
this window and look out through there, and I can see the boat.
This is -- these are places with docks on the back. I can see the
boat, and I've lived here for 12 years and I've never been able to see a
boat out this window. That was my boat, okay?
Now, I just want to tell -- we're interested in getting to the bottom
of the issue, and we can't answer your questions until we find out what
the Planning Commission did.
MS. KOENDARFER: Well, when I moved in, the people next
door had a huge houseboat parked there. I never thought to ever say,
you know, gee, I have to look sideways and look at that boat because
my view, I paid for this one.
And so that's what I'm concerned about, and I thought they would
be concerned the same. But again, they don't live there. That's the
biggest deal.
But I appreciate your interest, and I hope it will work out very,
very soon.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. KOENDARFER: Before I have to have it cleaned again.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item is--
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, before you -- can I just get a date
when this is going to come back? The planning Commission doesn't
meet -- they don't meet on a regular meeting until the 3rd of April. In
order to get that in your packet, that would have to be back and get
published for the 22nd of April. So I'm asking the board to continue
this item per se until the 22nd of April so that the Planning
Commission can give the reasons, and then it could be put together in
a packet that could be published in your agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that fine? Okay.
Page 128
March 25-26, 2008
MR. MUDD: Thank you, sir.
Item 8A
RESOLUTION 2008-74: A RESOLUTION APPROVING WITH
CONDITIONS PETITION CCSL-2008-01lAR-12598
REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE COASTAL
CONSTRUCTION SETBACK LINE (CCSL) TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION FOR SEVEN PICNIC SHELTERS, SIX
CHICKEE HUT CONCESSION STANDS, REPLACEMENT AND
EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING PARK ENTRANCE
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, AND PAVED DROP-OFF LANE
ADDITION TO THE PARK ROAD, ALL OF WHICH ARE
LOCATED ON PROPERTY KNOWN AS DELNOR- WIGGINS
PASS STATE PARK WITH A STREET ADDRESS OF 11135
GULFSHORE DRIVE NORTH AND MORE P ARTICULARL Y
DESCRIBED AS THAT FRACTION PART OF LOTS 1 & 2,
LOCATED IN SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA APPROVING THE
STATE'S PETITION AND WORK WITH THE COUNTY
REGARDING INCREASING PARKING AND ATTENDANCE -
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Next item is 8A. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
commission members. It's a resolution approving, with conditions,
petition CCSL-2008-01lAR-12598, requesting a variance from the
coastal construction setback line, CCSL, to allow construction of
seven picnic shelters, six chickee hut concession stands, replacement
and expansion of existing parking entrance, administrative office, and
a paved drop-off lane in addition to the Park Road, all of which are
located on the property known as Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park
Page 129
March 25-26, 2008
with a street address of 11135 Gulfshore Drive North, and more
particularly described as that fraction part of lots 1 and 2 located in
Section 20, Township 48 south, Range 25 east, Collier County,
Florida.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. All people wishing to
participate, please rise and be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and responded in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great.
MR. SCRUGGS: Is there a mouse for the computer?
MR. MUDD: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We'll get to you in just a minute.
Commissioner Coletta, do you have any ex parte communication
on this item?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I do. I've had meetings,
correspondence, and email, and I've talked with staff.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've spoken to staff and I've
had emails.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I've spoken to staff and had emails
also.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I've had meetings with the
superintendent of the park, I've had emails, and I've also had phone
calls, and I met with staff on this also.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no disclosure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sir, state your name for the record.
MR. SCRUGGS: Thank you, sir. My name is Lew Scruggs. I'm
a planning manager with the Division of Recreation Parks, Offices of
Park Planning. We have with us our district bureau chief for this
district of the park service, the assistant park manager from the park,
and the architect that's on the project.
Page 130
March 25-26, 2008
But I'd like to go through a very brief slide presentation to give
you the outlines of the project, and then we're here to answer your
questions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
MR. SCRUGGS: The Division of Recreation and Parks has a
dual mission to preserve, restore, and interpret the natural and cultural
resources in the state parks while providing resource-based outdoor
recreation.
And our application for variance stems directly from this dual
responsibility to restore natural and cultural resources while providing
the maximum public recreation that can be allowed on an individual
state park.
Delnor- Wiggins State Park is about 166 acres. It's been in the
park system since 1970. Facilities were developed in '77 and '82, so
they're over 30 years old now, approaching 30 years.
It is classified as a state recreation area, which is our highest
visitation classification. We have over one mile of very excellent
beach for recreation. Our attendance has averaged around a half
million persons per year for the last several years.
The management plan for this state park was last updated and
approved in 2000, and that's our plan that we take to the governor and
cabinet with their approval. We're authorized to continue
operating/managing the state park and developing the facilities that are
proposed in the management plan.
The approved management plan that we have, these are the basic
goals and objectives of the park. The number one resource
management goal is to remove exotic plants and animals from the
park, most specifically the Australian pines.
Our goals and objectives also include construction of up to six
picnic shelters and concession facilities. This is the conceptual land
use plan from that approved management plan. It locates in
conceptual terms shelter locations and other improvements.
Page 13 1
March 25-26, 2008
These are just some aerial photographs, or photographs of the
park over time. The top view is from the 1980s, and you can see the
Australian pine infestation along the entire shoreline of the park.
1990s, viewing from the middle of the park looking north. And in
1999, a view of area five, and you see the tall trees that are Australian
pmes.
Those are primarily gone now, because our park staffhave
worked very hard to eradicate exotic species in the park like they're
supposed to do. This is -- these are photographs from about two years
ago, and I don't know that you can see it there. If you have screens in
front of you -- the fuzzy vegetation that you see in the -- at the edge of
that hammock are the Australian pines that remain.
The reason those pine trees are still there is that we have had --
when we've gone to remove those, we've had real protest from the
park users saying, this is the only shade that we have in the park. This
is our -- these are our picnic areas. There are scattered picnic tables
under each of the areas where a few pines remain.
The proposal to include picnic shelters is our concept for going in
and removing these remaining Australian pines and building shelters
there so that we provide shade for our users, and we provide a refuge,
a respite for sudden thunderstorms that come up.
It's -- a lot of it has to do with health, safety, and welfare. We've
got older visitors. We need to be able to get them -- let them get out
of the sun when they need to.
Except for where the Australian pines sit in the park, the rest of
the park is recovering restored maritime hammock or beach dune
vegetation. And we've analyzed this very carefully, and if -- to move
landward from the locations where the pines are, we will be into
removing vegetation to build the facilities.
This is the overall site plan. You have this in our application
package. The -- there are actually three elements to the variance
application. The shelters, six locations; some chickee-type concession
Page 132
March 25-26, 2008
stands, seven locations. Might be seven shelters and six chickees, in
addition to the park office, which is a funded project now.
We have completed construction drawings. We're in the process
of going through the county permitting process, and that's why we're
here today. When we talked with your staff about the variance
application for this, they said, you know, anything that you have in
your long-term plan for the park that's going to require a variance, you
ought to bring that to the board at the same time, so that's why we're
here with the other unfunded projects, the chickees and shelters.
The park office is a 30-year-old structure. It's obsolete for today's
management of the park. It's this small building here. It has some
administrative office above, and then the toll collection point down
below.
As you all know, we have a real -- a traffic congestion problem at
this park. And one of the ways -- there are several measures that
we've discussed with county staff on addressing that problem. One of
the ways is to be able to move people and cars more quickly through
this access point to the park.
So the proposal for the additional building for the park office --
this is the existing building -- we're proposing elevated, approximately
600-square- foot building in the median in the middle of our Park Road
that can relocate all the administrative functions out of the tollbooth
area and free that up so that we can bring in a pedestrian bicycle
access point, service cars, and organize the movement of traffic
through that area. That is a funded project now. We have allocated
funds from last fiscal year to build that if we can get permits to do it.
The idea for the picnic shelters; this photograph is a shelter in the
maritime hammock, tropical hammock at McArthur Beach State Park
over in North Palm Beach, and the photograph below is a location
where we would like to place something like this. And part of that
project would be to remove the Australian pines, construct the shelter,
and then come in with native plantings to restore the maritime
Page 133
March 25-26, 2008
hammock and bring the tree line up around the shelter, stabilizing the
area, defining the paths for circulation for park visitors to get to it,
having a few scattered tables outside and the shelter, all of it
connected with boardwalks to provide universal accessibility. We feel
this would be a very fine improvement to the park. We've got a mile
of beach. The only shade you can get to is in our rest rooms or under
the Australian pines.
Concessions have been a request for -- from our park visitors for
many years. They're out, you know, at the end ofa road. If they want
a cold drink or sun screen, they would like to have a way to get the
service and goods they might need while on the beach at the park.
It's a mile-long park. To establish one central concession
building doesn't really suit the needs of the people because of the
distance they would have to walk.
We had struck on the idea that Collier County has implemented
at Barefoot Beach Preserve county park, just north of the inlet from
the state park, where they located a small 10- foot by 10- foot thatched
roof chickee for concession services out on the beach at the end of the
boardwalk at Barefoot Beach. We'd like to use that idea and place
those sorts of structures at several locations within the state park.
Your package has four enlargements that show the locations that
we're discussing here; the yellow rectangular symbols are the existing
bathhouses, and the yellow lines are the boardwalks. The bright pink
symbols are the shelters and chickees that we're proposing.
The white line on these drawings is the county's coastal setback
line. And as you can see, that is located on the road or along the edge
of the road in the parking areas the whole length of the state park. So
we have very little room to work with.
Even -- we really analyzed this and tried to find locations that
would be behind the faces of the existing bathhouse structures,
because we know that's one area that you are allowed to grant a
variance, if you stayed behind that line.
Page 134
March 25-26, 2008
But getting behind that line gets us into some high-quality native
vegetation, and we feel like it would be a better job to remove exotic
trees, build the structures, and then restore that hammock vegetation
behind it.
The idea for the chickees, in all cases, they're located not on the
beach, but back either associated with a bathhouse or with the existing
boardwalk system.
In this top photograph, the location of the chickee would be right
here, if you see where I'm pointing with the cursor. Right along that
fence at the entrance to the bathhouse. And these are two of the
locations for the -- that we're proposing for shelters. You see the
Australian pines. We would take those down, construct the shelter,
connect it to the boardwalks, and restore native vegetation.
I just have two of the enlargements here. Again, the existing
structures, the proposed structures, and photographs showing this
being a chickee location near one of the bathhouses. This being an
area that has been used for picnicking and is without vegetation now
where we would provide a structure and connect it with boardwalks,
manage the traffic flow, the circulation of people, so that we can
restore the environment.
If you see in this photograph, if you see that post right there, we
went through and found with the GPS unit the line that connected the
faces of the existing building. So we're proposing to put a shelter in
this area. We're that far in front of the existing line of construction, all
of which is seaward of the county's setback line.
Weare here to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions, Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's it? Coyle? Commissioner
Halas?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll just state my opinion, and that is,
I realize that they're in a coastal setback -- a conser -- coastal
Page 135
March 25-26, 2008
conservation setback line, and yet at the same time we're not talking
about any electricity or wires or anything like that. We're talking
about shelters. They already have picnic benches and things there. I
think it's a really smart thing to do, quite frankly.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Refresh my memory on the
difference between the CCCL established by DEP and the coastal
construction setback line established by Collier County. Who can do
that for me?
MR. SCRUGGS: If I understand it correctly -- and perhaps
Summer can fill in my blanks -- the white line on my drawing is the --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I know where it is. I just
want to --
MR. SCRUGGS: That's the current county coastal setback line.
That was the original DNR coastal construction control line. DNR
moved those lines landward statewide several years ago, and some
possibly concurrently, without the county, passed an ordinance
establishing the old DNR line as the county setback line.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And what -- which line takes
precedence as far as our regulations are concerned? Which lines are
we applying?
MS. ARAQUE: The county line is a prohibitory line.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your name for the record.
MS. ARAQUE: I'm sorry. Summer Araque, environmental
servIces.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Go ahead.
MS. ARAQUE: And the state line is a regulatory line.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Which line is being used to
justify denial of some of the chickee huts?
MS. ARAQUE: The county coastal construction setback line.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if the county coastal
construction setback line was the same as the state coastal construction
Page 136
March 25-26, 2008
setback line, there would not be a violation; is that correct?
MS. ARAQUE: Can you repeat that question?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. You've got two setback
lines. One is further to the west.
MS. ARAQUE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's the DEP line, and the county
line, which is closer to the beach. If the county line were to match the
DEP line, would there be any violations?
MS. ARAQUE: I wouldn't use the term violation, but currently
this doesn't -- what's being proposed does not meet the county Land
Development Code in regards to our -- to the county's line.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Does the county Land
Development Code apply to temporary structures?
MS. ARAQUE: If it's something that's being put out during the
day and removed at night, then no. Like if somebody's going to put a
tent out on the beach, they would have to remove that at night, if that's
what you're asking.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'm wondering what the
intent was of the regulation. Was it to keep people from building
permanent structures, or was it okay if you built a temporary structure
that could be removed fairly easily and with low expense if it became
a problem?
MS. ARAQUE: In regards to intent of the code, I believe that
would be to protect the dune and vegetation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you've got picnic tables already
there and there's no vegetation being removed by the temporary
structure -- and by the way, I consider chickees to be a temporary
structure. You can go in and take it out in a day. You don't do that
because there's no reason to, but it's not like building a hotel, and I
think there is a difference between using this code and applying it to
the construction of an apartment building or a hotel or a parking
garage and applying it to a temporary-type chickee hut. I think there's
Page 13 7
March 25-26, 2008
a substantial difference.
MS. ARAQUE: I can have other staff come up to define
structures, but it's my understanding that these would be considered
permanent structures with a concrete base as shown. And by our Land
Development Code, they would be considered permanent structures
and, therefore, under this code that I reviewed, then they would not --
we would not be able to recommend approval. And I'm simply going
by the code.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Or your interpretation of the code,
right?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I went out to the site and I
looked at what was there, and I really felt that some of these chickee
huts, especially the ones that were going to be used to sell ice cream
bars, popsicles, et cetera, those could probably be moved to the east of
the coastal setback line, construction line.
We, as the county, when people come before us, we try to make
sure that they adhere to our codes, especially when you have, I think,
15 different variances totally that you're looking for.
And you're a government identity, and we wouldn't treat the
government identity any different than if we, the county, was going to
build something. In fact, we're in the process of building some new
facilities, bathroom facilities, very -- right next door to the state park,
and we had to adhere to our code, all of our codes, and so those
bathrooms are beyond the coastal construction setback line.
So -- and then we've had other people who've come before us that
wanted to put up chickee huts and et cetera, and we've had some very
warm discussions in regards to that. And I believe some of my
commissioners feel that the chickee hut may be something that can be
taken down rapidly. My understanding, that these were going to be
designed and built in such a way that they were going to be permanent
structure on that premises, and also the chickee huts. Am I right in my
Page 138
March 25-26, 2008
MR. SCRUGGS: Our picnic shelters would be difficult to
dismantle.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They would be permanent, right?
MR. SCRUGGS: They would.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They're going to have concrete
pads; is that right?
MR. SCRUGGS: Not necessarily.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. SCRUGGS: We can build elevated decks rather than slab
on grade.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Now, would you also have
to be under the requirements of FEMA in regards to building
something that would be considered permanent? Would you have to
meet the FEMA requirements?
MR. SCRUGGS: We do have to meet FEMA requirements. I
don't believe the storm elevation, floor elevation requirement applies
to these non-habitable structures. You know, the bathhouses, if we
replaced our bathhouses, they would have to be built at elevation.
Generally FEMA does not, you know, require that of things like
picnic shelters.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. SCRUGGS: In could make one mention, the state park,
the county park, these are very unique management situations. They
-- and this is the reason we all have variance processes in our
regulatory systems.
The state park is there to perform a very important public service,
service a lot of people. You all had wanted more and more visitation
to be allow at the state park, and we've done what we can by
increasing our carrying capacity by about a thousand persons per day
the last time we did this management plan.
Weare not a commercial developer, we're not even a private
Page 139
March 25-26, 2008
resident. We're an agency that is tasked with restoring and protecting
the natural resources while providing recreation. To do that we have
on-site management staff that are there every day. We have biological
specialists. We have construction specialists, architects, and
engineers. And we can apply the resources that are needed to build
structures, provide for the public while improving and protecting that
beach habitat.
To do that, we need to be able to get that native vegetation
restored and to eliminate the pig trails, I call them, pathways that
people have made through the -- through the dune vegetation. We're
trying -- we're trying to get your approval for this vision for the park if
you'll let us do that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, like I said, when I went out
there, it looked like some of the areas that were set very close to the
beach, that violated the coastal construction setback line some
distance. It looked to me as though if you moved that almost to the
edge of the parking lot, that you could accommodate a lot of the issues
like the chickee huts that you wanted to put up for dispensing of cold
drinks and things of this nature.
MR. SCRUGGS: Certainly we could. I think in all case --
because we have studied it very carefully -- that would require us to
remove mature hammock vegetation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. I'm talking right at the edge of
the parking lot. Where the parking lots are, if you went to the edge of
the parking lot, that you wouldn't really be involved in taking away
any vegetation.
MR. SCRUGGS: I'm sorry I couldn't join you on that trip when
you were there. If that's so, we'll certainly look at that and see which
ones --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I pretty much made that a point of
concern when I was out there with Mr. Steiger, and I said that I
thought that there was areas, if a little -- a little out-of-the-box
Page 140
March 25-26,2008
thinking, I think there's some of the areas that could be addressed in
that manner.
In fact, there was some scrub vegetation that was on the east side
of some of the parking lots that I thought could accommodate maybe
what you were trying to accomplish without violating the coastal
construction setback line.
MR. SCRUGGS: The other side of the parking lots from the
beach?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. Just right near those
turnaround and things of this nature. There was some areas there that
MR. SCRUGGS: So the park visitors would have to cross park
traffic to get to the concession?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, the park -- no, they wouldn't
have to be crossing the road. They would be just crossing that parking
lot that was -- would accommodate the cars that are parked there.
MR. SCRUGGS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We still have staffs report, too. I
mean, I don't want to -- take your time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I won't be too long though.
Sir, in may. A couple things. The improvements you're going
to make to the park, are they going to increase the carrying capacity?
MR. SCRUGGS: No, sir. What's needed to increase carrying
capacity is more parking spaces. And, unfortunately, our parking is
built from the hammock line to the mangrove line, and there's -- there
is not space there to do that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So that's kind of the limiting
factor of the park itself?
MR. SCRUGGS: Yeah. The parking is a limiting factor. And
Page 141
March 25-26, 2008
we have had discussions with county staff. Of course, there's been the
suggestion to build a parking garage, which would be the very first
parking garage in a Florida state park.
We have suggested a shuttle bus system that brings people to the
park. We've got an excellent transportation loop here, just not enough
parking. If we could bring people in by bus, we could bring a lot more
people to the park.
Even at today's visitation levels, we are concerned about the lack
of shade and the lack of shelter in this state park. With more people,
that concern is even greater.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, going back to the
FEMA rules and regulations, my concern is, is that I know that if we
don't comply as a county with the FEMA regulations, it can greatly
affect our ability to be able to get flood insurance in the future.
Is there anything that you're doing that will impede our ability to
be able to meet FEMA requirements countywide?
MR. SCRUGGS: I don't -- I don't believe so, sir. I believe
FEMA looks at state facilities separately from local facilities. I don't
know that they combine the two.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there somebody here from
staff that could confirm that?
MR. WILEY: For the record, Robert Wiley with your
engineering services department. They will have to fully comply with
FEMA. We've already talked to FEMA about this. And, yes, they'll
have to comply in its entirety.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So nothing that we do here
today is going to lessen that requirement for them to comply with
FEMA?
MR. WILEY: Well, they have not come in to ask you for a
variance from FEMA, but if they were to do so, we would be strongly
recommending denial. That's a separate issue, what you're asking for
here, in this variance.
Page 142
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, sir. That's very
important to know.
I agree with Commissioner Fiala. I see this as a needed
improvement for public use. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We have staffs presentation,
unless the board wants to just go to public petition -- or public
comments? Nope, okay.
Ms. Brown? I'm sorry.
MS. ARAQUE: For the record again. Summer Araque. We
don't -- staff doesn't have a presentation, just that we've recommended
denial and approval as you've seen, and we have used the Land
Development Code and applied the Land Development Code.
If you have any more questions, I can answer.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? Commissioner Halas, and
then I have a question.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Could you clarify approval and
denial? Can you state on the record which ones that staff believes that
they could be in compliance with or that they could get a variance
with, and then the ones that you feel are egregious?
MS. ARAQUE: Yes. And we simply used the Land
Development Code section 9.04.06. That would be letter B, which
specifically states that any structure 150 feet landward of the mean
high water line or less than 75 feet of the landward line of the
vegetation line is -- are the numbers that we were using in our
application of the Land Development Code.
To simply state what the recommendation for denial and
recommendation for approval is, I could do that for you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MS. ARAQUE: Okay. The four -- there are four encroachments
there are consistent with the Land Development Code, that includes
the new administrative office, two of six, 1 0-by-1 0 chickee-style
concession stands, and the paved drop-off lane addition to the Park
Page 143
March 25-26, 2008
Road.
There were 11 encroachments that were not consistent, as they
were less than 150 feet landward of the mean high water line or less
than 75 feet landward of the vegetation line.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do you -- can I ask you this
question? It says under recommendations, the staff recommends
denial for shelters 1,2,3,4, 5A, 5B north, 5B south, and chickees 1,2,
3, 4B, and a variance for -- those are the ones you deny, and you
approve the drop-off lane -- let's see -- two chickee-style concessions,
including chickee 4A and 5; is that correct?
MS. ARAQUE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And a paved drop-offlane
additional to the park for a variance petition of the CCSL line subject
to the following conditions.
MS. ARAQUE: Yes. And I simply -- if you look at the chart on
page 3, you can see the numbers and how that came to be. It was
simple numbers -- just looking at the numbers to come up with which
ones met the Land Development Code and which ones did not.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's actually a map in our packet
MS. ARAQUE: Yes, that too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- that's quite detailed. It's on page 16
of23. Outlines what shelters they are and the size of them, if that
helps you out, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good. Is there any other questions?
MR. SCRUGGS: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there any other questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, there is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, I don't have any.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. Forgive me.
Page 144
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I didn't mean to speak out of
turn. I thought you were talking generally to the commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Go ahead, and then I can go
after you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. You can go first. I'll follow
you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I noticed a number of these
shelters that they had that aren't in compliance. I don't know how you
could ever move them back without impacting the whole working
order of the park. I think it's an unreasonable requirement that we'd be
putting upon them.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have a question for our staff.
Summer, is it customary that you -- any structure seaward of the
coastal setbacks, that you would recommend denial based upon our
Land Development Code?
MS. ARAQUE: I couldn't really answer that because we haven't
done a CCSL variance, I believe, in five years.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. ARAQUE: SO to answer that question directly, I don't really
have an answer. Maybe Barbara would be able to answer the
question.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. BURGESON: For the record, Barbara Burgeson with
engineering and environmental services division, or department.
I've been with the county since 1989, and of the CCSL variances
that we've issued, on average, we've had a very few number, anywhere
from one to five a year and many years we've not had any. And I can
only think of maybe one or two that were requested that were either
denied or that parts of those were denied. Almost every variance that
we've submitted to the Board of County Commissioners has been a
Page 145
March 25-26, 2008
recommendation for approval.
And we've worked -- usually work with the applicant. That's not
to say that the application that comes in would not have initially been
denied. Usually we work with the applicant, as we did with this
applicant, and requested that these structures be moved back so that
we could support approval of all of the structures as opposed to just
the ones that we were able to approve through the Land Development
Code application.
We had explained that the removal of Australian pines closer to
the beach and revegetating that with coastal dune vegetation is more
appropriate and provides more shoreline protection for not only the
beach, but for the structures that are -- that are at the park, and that
even though moving them back they would be removing native
vegetation to put them further back, that's a more appropriate location
because it doesn't -- it does not -- it is not impacted by shoreline
erosional issues. It provides more protection for the structure to be
back that distance, and that's really the critical issue here is the
protection here of the structure. So the health and safety issues also
are applied by moving those structures further back.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
MS. BURGESON: But answering your question quickly, most
of the time these are recommended for approval.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Summer, you viewed this application,
correct?
MS. ARAQUE: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You're the planner on this?
MS. ARAQUE: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And there are several structures, and
the main objection is going past that coastal construction line; is that a
fair assessment?
MS. ARAQUE: Well, in using the application of the Land
Development Code section that discusses placing a structure within a
Page 146
March 25-26, 2008
certain amount of feet of the mean high water line and the vegetation
line, so we use those criteria as well.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Use CCSL and the vegetation line?
MS. ARAQUE: Correct. I can cite for you here what the Land
Development Code says in regards to the use of the vegetation line
and the mean high water line.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang on.
MS. ARAQUE: Any construction line established hereunder is a
minimum of 150 feet landward of the mean high water line or 75 feet
landward of the vegetation line, whichever is greater. And so we use
those numbers to evaluate. Those structures that I cited that we were
recommending denial are seaward of that 75 feet and 150 feet.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So that's --
MS. ARAQUE: SO they're closer to the vegetation line, or the
dune, and the mean high water line. So they're more exposed to the
elements, to hurricanes and so forth.
Another thing that's also used is looking at the contiguous -- or to
structures on adjacent properties, and here you don't have anything.
Anything to the south, they're redeveloping -- they're staying behind
the CCSL, and then within this property, all of the ones that we've
recommended denial for are being proposed to be built seaward of all
the structures that currently exist on the site. That's another criteria
that has generally been used throughout many years is, are there
structures along this area that currently exist where they're being
proposed. And all of these structures would be well forward of the
existing structures.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And any structure beyond
those lines would have to be -- would that have to go through your
department?
MS. ARAQUE: That's what this application is. For the variance,
yes, and then for a building permit, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Fiala and
Page 147
March 25-26, 2008
Commissioner Halas; do you have something?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. You mention so often that
we're using Land Development Code to judge this, but I think we also
need to use a little common sense here also and realizing this is a
beach, and it's not like we're building a house here, we're not building
a big structure. We're building beach places for people to seek shelter
for -- and especially for health and safety.
You're talking about a place, if a storm picks up, you at least
have a shelter to run to that's close to the beach. You don't want to be,
you know, running quite a distance away; not only that, but people are
there to enjoy the beach and picnic there, rather than picnic in the
parking lot. You can do that at home.
And no one lives there. It's not like anybody's living there and
we're going to hurt anybody. I'm having a real problem. I really -- I
really am having a problem with not understanding why we're not
usmg more common sense.
MS. ARAQUE: I think in my position I have to use the Land
Development Code. That's my job. So that's why we're here before
you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang on. You'll have time to rebut
after the public speakers, and we're asking for staffs presentation.
Now we're doing questions of staff.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I assume that staff has gone
through this at some length to make a determination, not only in
regards to providing adequate shelter, but it's amazing, I was -- when I
was out to the park, I found that these particular trees that we have out
there, those Australian pines, really didn't offer that much shade, that I
found that some of the other vegetation, such as the sea grape that was
fairly high, offered better shelter than what they're -- what they want
to remove anyway.
Page 148
March 25-26, 2008
And I feel that staffhas done due diligence on this. I'd like to
make a motion that we approve staffs recommendations for approval
of the items that they brought forth to us and that we deny what staff
has recommended as far as the denial.
Now, do you want me to read in all the denials and then all the
approvals, or does staff -- or does the Board of County Commissioners
what (sic) we are at right now?
And I think where we are -- what this means is that we'll approve
the new administrative offices and also open up the primary entrance
area. I think that's a big concern there. And then the two style --
chickee concession stands that include chickee hut 4A and 5, and as I
already covered, the drop-off area for this petition of the
CCSL-2008-01lAR-12598. And that's my motion, to approve what
staff recommends.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Wouldn't you like to hear from the
public before we make motions? Or do you want to just go ahead and
-- do you want me to go ahead for -- if there's a second to your motion
before the public speaks?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a second to the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, although I don't agree with it,
I'll second it because this is Commissioner Halas's area, but just for the
sake of discussion right now. I don't know if that's the right thing to
do, to second it for sake of discussion when I don't agree with it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, it's--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It probably isn't, huh? Looking at
that look, I'll say okay, never mind.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So I guess --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I always look like this.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I just -- I just thought that,
you know, for the sake of discussion, I would -- I would let it stay on
the table. We can vote against it, but it's on there, but -- oh, I know.
Page 149
March 25-26, 2008
That sounds so wishy-washy, doesn't it?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. It's up to you, Commissioner.
Whatever you want to do, you know. It's -- I would like to hear from
the public myself.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So my second will stand
temporarily.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion to approve
staffs recommendations by Commissioner Halas and a second by
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Can we hear from the public --
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, I have three speakers. The first
speaker is Lew Scruggs.
MR. SCRUGGS: That was me.
MS. FILSON: Okay, thank you. Valinda Subic.
MS. SUBIC: Those are all us. They said we had to sign in.
MS. FILSON: Oh. And Hubert Baxter.
MR. BAXTER: That's me.
MS. FILSON: Okay. That's it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, great. We settled that.
Is there -- well, we've heard from the public now.
Lew, would you like to say anything in closing?
MR. SCRUGGS: Just a few things. I've been in park planning
and design for 24 years now, and I really -- I wish it was as simple as
applying a set of numbers in determining that that's the best location
for something that the people are going to use. That doesn't work.
The strict application of the Land Development Code that is
devised to regulate commercial and regulation development at a
county level does not apply well to the mandates of a Florida state
park and to the expectations that you and your constituents have of
this state park.
To locate facilities that are a long distance across parking lots
Page 150
March 25-26, 2008
away from the beach and expect people to use them is not logical in
my mind, and I have been studying it for about 24 years now.
The staffs recommendation allows us to build the office, which
we very much need to do, two concession chickees, but provides no
shelter close to the beach where people need it.
To go into the existing high-quality maritime hammock which
we have created in this park by the stewardship activities that we have
done over the last 30-plus years, to go into those hammock areas that
are overstory trees, understory trees, shrubs and ground covers and
eliminate one- or two-thirds of that vegetative suite of species so that
we can use the overstory trees for shades for facilities destroys that
area of that hammock.
What we would like to do is put shade structures in the areas that
people are using that are shaded by Australian pines, remove those
Australian pines, and bring native vegetation up as closely to the
edges of those structures as we possibly can.
Regarding FEMA. Hubert Baxter, the architect on the project,
informed me that as long as a shelter structure, as long as the
horizontal member, which is the roof, is above the 100-year flood
elevation, FEMA does not have a problem with it. As long as the roof
is up above that storm surge elevation, they have no problem.
We have -- as you know, we have picnic shelters in every beach
park in the State of Florida, except for this one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are we ready for discussion on the
motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, I have some discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, wait a minute. On the motion? I
was going to close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I got one question I'd like to ask the
gentleman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And then maybe I can shed some
Page 151
March 25-26, 2008
light here for my fellow commissioners.
If you look at where the parking lot is located, there are some
areas where these structures can be put just about on or just in back of
the line right near the parking lots, if you can see. And in reality,
you're only looking at maybe 30 feet or 40 feet from where the
particular structures they want to put in.
So as I went out there, I brought this to the attention of the
superintendent of the park. I said, you know, you could really use a
little bit of ingenuity here and place this right at the edge of the coastal
construction line instead of trying to even build even farther seaward
of that coastal construction line. So I just want to bring that to the
attention. I spent over an hour there.
MR. SCRUGGS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Should I close the public hearing, or
we got more questions of the public --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't have any questions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- petitioner or --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just with us.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I'm going to close the public
hearing. And who wants to go first?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let Commissioner Coyle, I'll
follow him.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, then
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm ready to vote.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand Commissioner Halas's
interest in preserving the area to the extent possible, but I would like
to discourage you from considering any kind of concession stands or
anything else near those parking lots. There are going to be a lot of
kids running around there and people backing out of parking lots --
parking spaces. It's going to create a very unsafe condition.
Frequently you can't tell what's behind you, particularly if it's
Page 152
March 25-26, 2008
only three feet tall. And it's a very, very bad place to put any kind of
facility that's likely to attract children or families.
The other thing is the discussion about common sense. I think --
the staff is right, they've got to abide by the code, but let's talk a little
bit about common sense.
There -- I count nine, eight or nine, existing structures that are
seaward of our coastal construction line. You can see it on this picture
in front of you. It's little yellow dots. They're lined up right along the
beach.
Our code specifically says, if in the immediate contiguous or
adjacent area a number of existing structures -- and there are eight or
nine -- have established a reasonably continuous and uniform
construction line closer to the line of mean high water and it is a
reasonably consistent line closer to mean high water, then said -- and
said structures have not been unduly affected by erosion -- they
apparently haven't or they wouldn't still be there -- that a new
proposed structure may be permitted along such line if such proposed
structure is also approved by the BCC.
That's not a stretch for me. That's very clear. That's common
sense. And I -- our purpose is to serve the public, and we've been
trying to get more and more people on the beaches. And yes, this
particular act will not increase carrying capacity, we've been told.
But I would suggest to you that if you have better facilities,
you're going to get more people. They're going to find ways to get
there, whether they're going to get dropped off and take a shuttle down
to the end or whatever. They might not be able to park their car there,
but I think you're going to get more people and you're going to open
up more beach access for the public.
And so I would say, let's -- you know, what is it we're trying to
preserve? If we're trying to preserve beach vegetation and sand dunes,
then Heaven forbid that we should ever have considered going to
Keewaydin Island and taking people over there and dumping them to
Page 153
March 25-26, 2008
go to the beach.
So I think that we should approve this because it's a service to the
public, and I don't see -- I don't see the damage here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just don't see what harm is done.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And pretty soon we should really
call for the vote because I can see how we're all lining up anyway.
But I would love to throw something in that we have not mentioned at
this point in time, other than just glossed over it, and that is a parking
garage. Maybe a parking garage is needed on this site, and maybe by
-- once we have the facilities to accommodate these people, then a
parking garage -- it would be nice to be the first one in the State of
Florida to have one, and we can lead the way for the other parks then.
And so I would like to throw that in as something -- I mean, we
can't condition this vote on that but, but we can certainly strongly
suggest that it's desperately needed.
MR. SCRUGGS: The management plan for this state park is due
to be updated in the next two years. We will be back here working
with your staff, holding public workshops, presenting a draft plan, and
parking garage definitely needs to be something that we discuss.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Very good. I'm glad to hear that.
MR. SCRUGGS: Let me add to that, our division director
doesn't see parking garage structures as part of the original natural
Florida. It's a little bit of a leap --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Maybe we need to go visit that
person.
MR. SCRUGGS: -- that some of us have to make. But we'll--
we had an excellent meeting with your assistant -- or the deputy
county administrator, Mr. Ochs, and Summer, and many people back
in June. We outlined several things that we want to work together on,
and solving the traffic congestion problem out in front of this park is
something that's been on our agenda a long time.
Page 154
March 25-26, 2008
This management plan that was approved in 2000 tried to address
that by increasing the number of people we could allow in the park by
about a thousand per day. Unfortunately, the parking is not there for
that number of people, okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, you want to
say something?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, please. Thank you. Ijust
want to say, I couldn't agree more with Commissioner Coyle. What
he stated basically is that what we're looking at here is an imaginary
political line, and we're supposed to be the people that have that
discretion to be able to judge what's the public good of staying this
side of the line or not. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I just want to also -- I know
where this is going, and I'm not going to approve any additional
variances other than what staff has recommended. But we've had --
I've had long discussion with the park superintendent in regards to
increasing the usage of that park by the ability of either letting more
people use that facility by parking their cars at the Connors Beach
parking area, or could we, as the county, drop people off as a shuttle?
And we were basically told, no, we have a load carrying
capacity, and that's it. So I can assure you that we are looking for
avenues of increasing that load carrying capacity to where we could
have shuttles go down there and drop people off, because in the past
when I've brought this up with the park superintendent, we didn't get
anywheres at all and -- basically said, I have a load carrying capacity,
and that's it. Okay?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: First of all, I need to ask my
colleagues, that really has nothing to do with the item on the agenda,
but we can definitely discuss it if you want to.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would you want to discuss it now?
Page 155
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, let's discuss that now
about capacity of the park. Who wants to go first?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let her.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, I'm sorry. State your name for
the record.
MS. SUBIC: Valinda Subic. I'm the district bureau chief for
Southwest Florida, Florida state parks.
And Commissioner Halas, I don't know if that conversations with
Bob Steiger had taken place before or after last June. We did have a
big meeting with Mr. Ochs, Gary McAlpin, people from planning and
zoning and the parks department, and one of the big issues we were
going to look at was transportation and how to get more people into
the park.
I think in conjunction with the facility that's going up right
outside our park gate, we were looking at doing a study to determine
what would -- what we could do to increase the visitation by having a
roundabout drop-off or even look at shuttling them down into any of
those parking areas so that they could use the new facilities.
This is something that we both agreed, the department as well as
the county, that we wanted to work on together.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas, and then
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just to carry through. We basically
acquired the land for the turnaround from the developer of the
Vanderbilt Beach property, okay. So we have asked a number of
times, I have asked a number of times, and I've had staff present, for
participation by the state park in regards to giving us support, whether
it be in funds or whether it be in personnel or addressing the impacts
that are placed upon the residents around that area.
And we were told -- we were told basically that it was our
Page 156
March 25-26, 2008
problem and not yours and so, therefore, we had to provide the sheriff
deputies on high weekends, which came out of our ad valorem tax
dollars to take care of the residents there, because what was told to me
-- and there was also the county -- assistant county manager was there
-- that it was not your problem.
MS. SUBIC: Right. And I believe that that took place before
June, because I think that that came up during the course of our
meeting last summer.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. That took place about two
years ago when we had -- and I had to come before the board and ask
them for funding to take care of the problem that you were creating,
you, the park, was creating, and wouldn't address or even step up to
the plate for a partial involvement in taking care of that issue.
So -- and we also talked at that time about the possibility of
dropping people off, probably about three years ago, and we were
basically told that we have a load carrying capacity and we're not
going to carry -- we're not going to take on people that walk into the
park. If we got a -- if we got a number of people that come through
our turnstiles and we don't have a number of people that exited our
turnstile, that the park was going to be cut off, okay?
MS. SUBIC: Right, yeah. I understand that conversation did
take place.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, it did.
MS. SUBIC: And then the county put the -- also put the traffic
sign out to help so that people would know the park was full before
they got down to that intersection, and the county did fund that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right. Because we asked you to
fund that and you wouldn't again, so we then had the transportation
department build that sign to put it out there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Commissioner Halas is
absolutely correct about this. And there really is no point in approving
Page 157
March 25-26, 2008
more facilities unless you're going to have more people using them,
okay?
MS. SUBIC: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I don't know where we can go
with respect to establishing contingencies or obligations on the
approval, but clearly the intent of developing more and better facilities
is to be able to serve more of the public.
And I don't -- I don't recall seeing that beach any more crowded
than the beach in Naples around the pier. And if the beach near the
pier can support the densities that they support, it would appear to me
that you can support higher densities in your park.
I don't know how the carrying capacity was established. But if
we're not going to be -- if somebody's going to come up with a number
and say, only this number of people can get into that park regardless
of how many facilities we build, then I'll withdraw my motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You don't have a motion.
MS. SUBIC: Yeah, currently --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Well, I thought about a
motion.
MS. SUBIC: Currently--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Does that count?
MS. SUBIC: -- the park is not at carrying capacity. It's -- we
still are allowing people to walk in on the beach, there's just no
additional place to park the cars. If we were to look at some type of
transit system that would drop people off and have a turnaround, we
could take additional people.
Do you remember the percentage?
MR. SCRUGGS: About a thousand per day more.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MS. SUBIC: Yeah. We did increase the capacity by a thousand
per day.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, could we reach agreement
Page 158
March 25-26, 2008
that you would permit a county bus to enter the premises to drop off
people?
MS. SUBIC: That is one option that we were looking at.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Can we get some
reasonable assurance that you will investigate that and permit us to do
that?
MS. SUBIC: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Because that's one of the reasons
that I'm supporting the additional structures is so you can provide
services to more people.
MS. SUBIC: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I know that's Commissioner
Halas's interest here. He's been fighting for that for years. So --
MS. SUBIC: Yeah. That is one option that we were looking at
wanting to be able to do, because there is no more parking. And with
the development -- and outside, the plans that we saw initially did
show a turnaround to be able to drop buses. When we met with
county staff, we even discussed bringing the buses further down and
dropping them off at either one of those five parking areas.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Well, I understand the
limitation on parking in the park. You've got so much space and that's
pretty much it. You can't fill in the lagoon, you can't fill in the ocean
and build more parking spaces, but we can certainly work out ways to
get more people into the park by extending the bus route if we have to.
MS. SUBIC: Correct. And we agreed with your staff that that
was something that we wanted to do in June.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: June of this year? That's something
you're going to do in June of this year or --
MS. SUBIC: No. We agreed to it last June.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Last June.
MS. SUBIC: And then since that time we've been working with
the county staff to bring this site plan forward.
Page 159
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So we're moving toward
finding ways to accommodate more members of the public?
MS. SUBIC: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are we still on the topic about--
what, the motion or the --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There is no motion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're talking--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There is a motion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're talking about increasing
carrying capacity. The other thing that I -- when I was out there -- if I
can just have 30 seconds.
One of the things that I found that -- when I was out there is that
you have some great parking areas, and I think that if you increase that
parking area vertically, by one story, that you could double the
amount of people that you can put in each one of those parking areas,
and that wouldn't be obtrusive to the surrounding area; it wouldn't be
that high. Just one more story. You've got the lower deck where
you've got people parking now, and then just raise it up about eight,
nine feet, 10 feet, whatever, so that SUVs can get in there and park on
the very top. One story would double your parking.
MS. SUBIC: And since we've been working towards this in
June, you know, we had indicated that we would discuss any methods
brought forward, so that is something that we would consider and take
a look at.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: When could we get a definite
answer on it?
MS. SUBIC: When we get a formal proposal.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: When you look at something,
sometimes that's as far as it gets. There's nothing -- there's no feedback
saying, I think we can do this or here's why we can't do it, so we --
MS. SUBIC: Correct.
Page 160
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Instead of -- you need to have a
definite answer one way or the other, not a definite maybe.
MS. SUBIC: Right. Ifwe could get a formal request in writing
from the county that -- you know, for whatever structure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Great.
MS. SUBIC: Yeah, then it would also -- as Lew just reminded
me, we are working towards unit management plan update, which
would take place in two years. Any facilities that are not on our
current management plan would have to go through that process. And
so that would run through that unit plan process.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Do you want to get back on
the motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is there -- has the -- second still
stands or --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know what, the second's going
to drop off.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's no motion on the
floor. I'll entertain a motion at this time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve -- motion to
approve the request from the park services for the administration
office, the park's primary entrance, the additional Park Road, for the
chickee huts and the shelters with the understanding that they will be
working with the county to provide increased parking.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion by
Commissioner Fiala to basically give the request of the petitioner,
which is the State of Florida, second by Commissioner Coletta.
Now we're going to get into discussion on the new motion.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You say increased parking. Could
Page 161
March 25-26, 2008
I encourage you to consider increased attendance?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, yes, you can, so that we can
have shuttles and forth.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The second agrees.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So that you can have a range of
things, okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Very good.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Including parking.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I would like to change the
motion to reflect that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Do you have any questions on
the motion?
MR. SCRUGGS: I was going to make that point.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, good. And I'm glad that we're
there. You know, everybody knows that I have a five-year-old son,
and one thing he does, what he has learned to do, is to make sure he
holds the hands in a parking lot, and that's automatic. That's just what
he does all the time.
And I just couldn't imagine any child playing next to a parking
lot or a driveway. How can you -- how can we suggest that? And
then something happen to a child.
So I'm glad we're in an area of providing to the public, and I want
to thank staff for their presentation. They've done their job. They
went by the rules.
Any other discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 162
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-1, Commissioner
Halas dissenting in the motion.
MR. SCRUGGS: Thank you all very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
We need to take a 10-minute break for our court reporter. Do
you want to be back here at 3:27; is that okay, Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it is.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Which item do we want to do next?
MR. MUDD: Well, that's a good question, sir. Do we want to
continue with land use or do you want to go to the time certain items
of lOD or lOE?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What's the pleasure of the board?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Go to the time certain, since we
told people --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I won't be here tomorrow morning,
so if we have land issues, we probably ought to get those off the
books, especially if they take a 4-1 vote.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I'm in favor of that. I don't
want to lose Commissioner Halas's input on land use items.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2008-16: AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A JOB
RETENTION INVESTMENT PROGRAM AVAILABLE TO
Page 163
March 25-26, 2008
TARGETED, HIGH WAGE LOCAL COMPANIES IN ORDER TO
PRESERVE THE EXISTING TARGETED WORKFORCE AND
ENCOURAGE THE EXPANSION OF ADDITIONAL HIGH
WAGE JOBS; THE ORDINANCE HAS BEEN PREPARED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUEST BY THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF COLLIER COUNTY AND THE
PRIOR DIRECTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS - ADOPTED EXTENDING PROGRAM TO
2013
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item is, what is it, 8B?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, it's 8B. I'm not too sure this needs
a supermajority vote, but it's a recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners consider adopting an ordinance to establish a
job retention investment program available to targeted high-wage
local companies in order to preserve the existing targeted workforce
and encourage the expansion of additional high-wage jobs; and the
ordinance has been prepared in accordance with the request by the
Economic Development Council of Collier County and the prior
direction of the Board of County Commissioners.
Ms. Tammie Nemecek, the director of the Economic
Development Council, will present.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your name, for the record.
MS. NEMECEK: Tammie Nemecek, Economic Development
Council of Collier County. Thank you, Commissioners, and much,
much thanks for allowing us to go at this point in time.
Based on direction from the board based on the meeting from
January 29, 2008, we have worked with county staff and the County
Attorney's Office to craft this ordinance here which would provide for
a business retention program to help assist companies that are
participating in the economic stimulus program to not only be assisted
for the new jobs created, but to also be assisted for the jobs that they're
Page 164
March 25-26, 2008
retaining in the community as well.
And this was based on a project that was coming forward, Inovo,
which is a medical device manufacturing company that was looking to
incorporate a company from California into the facility here, was
considering moving out of Collier County, moving out of the State of
Florida actually, to either California or to North Carolina.
And as an additional benefit for not only the new jobs created,
was requested by the company and supported by the EDC and
requested by the Board of County Commissioners at that point in time
to go ahead and create a retention ordinance that would allow the
company to receive $1,000 per job -- existing job retained within the
community.
The ordinance that you have before you today is very specific in
the types of companies that can participate in the program. The
company would also have to qualify for the State of Florida Qualified
Target Industry Tax Refund Program, making this program a much
more strict criteria than our existing programs that are in place right
now from a job creation standpoint.
We did that in part because we did not want to have the program
being used just to go over county lines. In order to qualify for the
state program you actually have to demonstrate that you're going to
leave the State of Florida. So we didn't want this to be a county by
county within the state competition, but really this is a competition
between maybe a national or international community that this
company would be leaving Collier County.
We've seen a lot of companies move over the last couple of years
related to a number of issues; cost being the primary one. Cost of fees
that are associated with being in the community, cost of housing. We
have had a lot of companies move up to the North Carolina,
Tennessee, Georgia area, and so this company -- this program, we
believe, will be an added benefit to help retain those companies here
in Collier County.
Page 165
March 25-26, 2008
Weare requesting that the program be available through the year
2013. The existing programs will sunset in October of2008, but we
are in the process of preparing to bring those back to extend those for
another five years. I do have some stats on the existing program, if
you'd like me to review those with you. But we hope that the program
itself is -- addresses the needs of the existing businesses but also is
restrictive enough that we can make sure that it's used properly with
the proper companies.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the board?
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. One thing -- '08; that
would not work at all, would it? In other words, to have the thing
sunset in '08?
MS. NEMECEK: Right. I mean, it may even preclude Inovo,
depending on when the jobs are retained to participate in the program.
So our anticipation is to allow to have the ordinances in place.
They are contingent upon funding by the board, so every year funding
has to be approved by the Board of County Commissioners.
We were just hoping we didn't have to go through the creation of
the ordinances over and over again, that the programs are tied to when
the funding is actually available.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. But whatever, if we
approve this program, it's subject to funding availability every year?
MS. NEMECEK: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: With that, I'll make a motion for
approval till the year 2013.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coletta to approve the ordinance changes, extend the
program to 2013, depending on funding.
Is there a second to the motion?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm going to second the motion for
discussion.
Page 166
March 25-26, 2008
Commissioner Halas, do you have questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I have a couple of questions,
I'd like to ask Tammie. One is, if we approve something like this, let's
say there's a company that wants to expand and they're thinking about
moving out of Collier County and they have 300 employees. And so
he says, I want to expand my business by 200 people, and I want to
get some satisfaction that you're going to give me a thousand dollars
per employee. That's $300,000.
MS. NEMECEK: What you find with the economic impact from
those, say, they're 300 existing jobs and 200 additional jobs, that's 500
jobs in Collier County. I think the negative of that company moving
out of the community is much greater than $300,000.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We don't have the money.
MS. NEMECEK: Well, again, it's based on -- it's subject to
funding availability. And these programs, again, are performance
based, so we go in and actually audit the records of the company to
verify that the jobs are actually in place and that the wages are
maintained.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. When I -- when I look at
what we have that's put in place so far for EDC incentives, we have
fee payment assistance, tax stimulus package, job creation, and
broadband assistance. Is there any of these that you would want to
trade off in -- for this particular new ordinance that you're bringing
forth?
MS. NEMECEK: Well, I -- again, I think that the opportunity
for us when these programs were first put in place in 2003 was to be
able to have flexibility in the programs that are -- that are out there.
Two of the programs are an either/or program, so really you have
three programs, and this would be a fourth one added to it. The
property tax stimulus and the fee payment assistance program are an
either/or. You can't participate in both at this point in time.
So what we've found is with the companies that are participating
Page 167
March 25-26, 2008
in the incentive programs at this point in time is that, you know, the
companies are providing an added benefit to the community, not only
in a direct and indirect economic impact of over $44 million as far as
the impacts from that -- those companies with only less than $2
million investment by the county.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But when we're looking at the big
picture here down the road, I'm trying to figure out, everybody wants a
piece of the pie, but the pie is getting smaller. And so that's what I'm
concerned about. I don't want to make any promises that I can't fulfill.
And I'm not sure where we're going in this budget cycle. And I
understand what you're saying, if the fees are available.
MS. NEMECEK: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But I'm sure that somebody will
come before us and say, well, you've got an ordinance in place, you've
got to come up with the funds. And I don't want to be put in that --
myself, I don't want to be put in that position.
MS. NEMECEK: Right. And we work with the companies for a
long time before they actually come before the Board of County
Commissioners trying to figure out how we make it work. We have a
company right now that wants to create an additional 500 jobs in the
community in the biomedical industry and trying to figure out, okay,
how do we make sure that that's done here and not done elsewhere.
They could easily do it in California.
So I say, in my professional opinion as an economic development
professional, keep the flexibility in there, we can work with them and
work with county staff and work with you to better understand, you
know, how much is going to be available and how that is going to
apply to these companies.
The marketability of the program far exceeds the actual
participation in the program. The fact that we have incentives -- and
this is something we discussed back in 2003 when we're in the site
selection process, that we can put the check in the box that says we
Page 168
March 25-26,2008
have local incentives, keeps us in the game. If they're not there,
there's the potential that you're completely marked off before you even
get a chance to talk to the company.
So once we sit at the table and start the negotiations with the
company, we can explain what the funding availability is. And keep
in mind that this program, retention-wise, is being leveraged with state
dollars. The state will pay 80 percent from the QTI program, and
local community only has to pay 20 percent.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to make sure that if
there's a company that feels that they can now leverage money from
us that somebody comes in to us and said, hey, I would like to expand
my operations an additional 200 employees, but I've got 300
employees and I want to have a guarantee that they're going to get a
thousand dollars each so we can retain those jobs or I'll move out,
okay? And if you have a thousand dollars times 300, that's $300,000.
MS. NEMECEK: Right. And that would be subject to funding
availability, which is putting a disclaimer that we put on the front of
every incentive matrix that we do.
Yeah, and all of these come back before you for final approval.
And so none of these actually, where the company -- it's not an
administrative approval. It's approval by the Board of County
Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. So the state pays 80 percent of
this program?
MS. NEMECEK: The QTI program that this is coupled with.
The QTI program provides $3,000 per job. The state pays 80 percent
of that and the local county pays 20 percent of that, so this would be
funding that would be added to that $3,000 per job.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do we have any public speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anything else? Commissioner
Page 169
March 25-26, 2008
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Just want to draw a
parallel. Right now we're talking about subject to funding. We also
have an affordable housing criteria whereby we're trying to make the
money go as far as we can, that 3 percent of the impact fee. We know
we're going to run out and we're telling everyone down the line.
We're keeping track of it as we go. They understand what it's all
about. You can only deal with the money you have at hand. You
can't create money. You can't -- we're not the federal government; we
can't print it. However, maybe that's an idea.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that's a great analogy, really. I
mean, you put it in perspective. Everybody knows up front you have
limited funds.
Any further discussion on the item?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MS. NEMECEK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Item #10D
RESOLUTION OF DENIAL 2008-75 THE COUNTY'S POSITION
ON LANES 5 AND 6 ON INTERSTATE 75 AND REQUESTING
Page 170
March 25-26, 2008
THAT THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA EXPRESSWAY
AUTHORITY (SWFEA) CONDUCT A STUDY TO REVIEW
ALTERNATIVE ROADWAYS TO I-75 THAT PROVIDE
MOBILITY BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND LEE COUNTY
- MOTION TO DENY ANY MORE SUPPORT OF THE SWFEA,
SUPPORT STAFF IN THEIR PURSUIT OF ALTERNATIVE
OPTIONS REGARDING I-75 AND TO CONTINUE WORKING
WITH THE REGIONAL MPO AND FDOT - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our time certain
item, one of our time certain items. This one was to be heard at 2:30.
We're a little late. It's to provide the Board of County Commissioners,
the BCC, a resolution defining the county's position on lanes five and
six of Interstate 75 and requesting that the Southwest Florida
Expressway Authority conduct a study to review alternative roadways
to I-75 to provide mobility between Collier County and Lee County.
Mr. Nick Casalanguida, your director of planning for the
transportation division, will present.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
Typically this would be a straightforward item. You've asked us to
provide a resolution through the County Manager's Office, and we
would do that.
Things have changed since that meeting date, and we just want to
bring you an update as to what's going on.
We brought that resolution with some discussion to the
Expressway Authority meeting that took place on March 12th. The
Expressway Authority concurred with Commissioner Coyle's
comment and staffs comment that they're not in the business of
studying alternative corridors, and that that should be better left up to
the local jurisdictions, and we agreed with that.
They've also heard that you've -- have no support for tolling lanes
five and six or any activity that goes with tolling lanes five and six,
Page 171
March 25-26, 2008
and they've acknowledged that as well too. We've recommended that
they wait until the Florida Turnpike study is completed this August
and determine what comes out of that study to be reviewed, and they
acknowledged that as well too.
One thing they are looking at, and it's fairly consistent with what
this board has always said, alternate solutions that don't include tolling
lanes five and six. The Expressway Authority has put a proposal
together to look at a reversible lane seven, and right now that's the
only action they're looking to take forward at this time.
We do think it's viable -- reasonable to look at alternative
corridors, but we do that as part of our long-range transportation plan.
What we don't do is analyze the costs of competing facilities in a toll
structure, which may be required for 951.
Weare in the process of doing our buildout study for the county,
which is tied to Lee County. Those model plans are tied together. So
we will look at all facilities there.
What we're trying to determine is, if one is tolled and one is not,
whether it be 951 or I-75, what would that do as a competing facility?
So we've suggested to the authority that that would be better
served, done through their long-range transportation plan update and
done with more of a toll feasibility structure and review.
The Expressway Authority does have a service to provide. If it's
brought forward that additional lanes could be added or 951 could be
incorporated in this, they could provide that service. We recommend
staying engaged.
We also agree with one of the comments in the past. We've
provided enough money proportionate to what they -- the scope of the
project. So we feel no more money should be put forward, but
providing in-kind support services like we've done in the past, taking
meeting minutes, providing some advertising support.
So based on the March 12th meeting and what's come out of that
meeting with the Expressway Authority, staff has provided an
Page 172
March 25-26, 2008
alternative recommendation to you, and I'm here to answer any
questions with regard to that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I don't have any questions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do we -- we have public speakers on
this, and then we have two that is to ask for additional times and they
have residents to yield their time, and that's Gary Eidson and Gina
Downs. And it's probably appropriate at this time for them to speak.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Mr. Chairman? The chairman of the
Expressway Authority would like to put something on the record, if
possible, as well too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Mr. Barton?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good afternoon, Mr. Barton.
MR. BARTON: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. For the record, I am Bill Barton, chairman of the
Southwest Florida Expressway Authority.
Thank you for allowing the Expressway Authority, once again, to
be part of your busy agenda. Will not take much more of your time
today.
Commissioners, the Express Authority has, over the past two
years, given serious study to the needs of I - 7 5 looking forward into the
future and has studied multiple solution options. This should come as
no surprise as we're dealing with a very complicated issue that is of
significant importance to the welfare of Southwest Floridians, and
we're considering these options in the framework of a dynamic
changing society.
Weare keenly aware that some of this commission and others in
the community have disagreed with some or even all of the options
that have been considered, and we certainly respect those differences
of opinion.
As we look forward we must recognize what appears to be a
Page 173
March 25-26, 2008
significant slowing of the projected regional population growth caused
by ongoing negative real estate and economic conditions.
In light of this truism, the Expressway Authority has determined
to study an additional potential solution, that being the construction of
a reversible lane seven. Such a solution, in addition to substantially
reducing construction costs which would be reflected in reduced toll
rates, employing the seventh lane in the direction of the peak morning
and peak traffic flows would provide us with an effective eight-lane
facility. We intend to request an additional loan from the Florida
Department of Transportation revolving trust fund to pay for this
study.
If the funding is approved by the FDOT and the study results in
compelling evidence that traffic conditions will demand such facilities
within the -- demand such facility within the
design/permit/construction time frame, that is to say the period of time
that it would take to design, permit, and construct such a facility, and
that the seventh reversible land is a viable option to satisfy those
demands, then I would expect that the Expressway Authority would
strive diligently to see such project implemented.
However, if our study concludes that a reduced population
growth and associated traffic conditions on I-75 are such that the
six-lane configuration of which we will have when FDOT finishes
their current project, will maintain acceptable levels of service well
into the next decade, then I personally would be in favor of taking a
close look at placing the Southwest Florida Expressway Authority in
hibernation for several years, with the time of hibernation controlled
by actual population growth.
Our future congestion problems on I-75 are not going to
disappear, and the means to fund them are unlikely to improve, but
current economic conditions may, and I emphasize that word, may,
have bought us a few valuable years to observe growth rates and chase
funding opportunities.
Page 174
March 25-26, 2008
We would expect results from our study to be available in the
August to September time frame, and the Expressway Authority, of
course, will then take a hard look at that data and make decisions on
how it moves forward.
If there's any questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them. And
I appreciate, once again, the opportunity to bring you up to speed on
what the Expressway Authority's trying to accomplish.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta has a question.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Just so everybody
understands, Bill, the loan that the Expressway Authority is attempting
to get, will that obligate the counties in any way?
MR, BARTON: No, no. That's strictly between the Expressway
Authority and the State of Florida Department of Transportation.
County's not involved at all.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I don't know which --
MR. BARTON: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- which -- thank you. Gary, if you
want to go first or Gina, Gina Downs.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, I have a total of 13 speakers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MS. FILSON: The first batch are eight, and seven are going to
cede their time to Gina Downs. Do you want me to read their names?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, and they would have to stand
and state that they're waiving their time to Gina Downs.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Phillip Morganti?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You want to speak?
R. MORGANTI: No, I yield.
MS. FILSON: Mike Buckley?
MR. BUCKLEY: I yield to Gina Downs.
MS. FILSON: Irene Francoeur?
MS. FRANCOEUR: I yield my time.
MS. FILSON: Arthur Shanklin?
Page 175
March 25-26, 2008
MR. SHANKLIN: I yield my time.
MS. FILSON: John Hickey?
MR. HICKEY: I yield my time.
MS. FILSON: Darlene Morgan?
MS. MORGAN: I yield my time.
MS. FILSON: And Don Quinn?
MR. QUINN: I yield my time.
MS. FILSON: Okay. That's the first batch.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good morning, or good afternoon.
MS. FILSON: And 15 minutes?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
MS. DOWNS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Fifteen.
MS. DOWNS: You've heard from Citizens Transportation
Coalition our evaluation of the toll road probably more than once.
Where do we go for other input as to the evaluation of this
project? One place that you turn to is your MPO, the Metropolitan
Planning Organization. You all sit on the MPO along with other
officials from the city and the county, engineer and planning
professionals, people from the transportation department and from
community development; I think there are over about 50 people who
have input into the MPO.
One of the duties of the MPO -- and it's not on the screen yet.
MR. MUDD: On your screen.
MS. DOWNS: Okay. One of the duties of the MPO is to
develop the long-range transportation plan 25 years into the future.
They've done that. It was recently adopted on January 12th of2006,
26 months ago.
Federal guidelines require and direct all MPOs, as I'm sure you
know. The guidelines are laid down according to federal
transportation policy. The current transportation policy is called
Safety-Lu. Some of the tenets ofSafety-Lu include supporting the
Page 176
March 25-26, 2008
economic vitality in the area. Charging people several thousands of
dollars to use a toll road for their transportation needs does not serve
the economic vitality of the area.
Another tenet is to increase the safety, increase the security,
increase accessibility. Safety is not served by having people weave
into a toll lane from the high speed lanes of our interstate and then
leaving the toll lanes again weaving into the high speed lanes of our
interstate.
Increase security. By not offering alternative routes into and out
of the county, I don't see how you can say we're increasing security.
Increase accessibility for both people and freight. That may be
true for the people and the freight that can either absorb the costs or
pass those toll costs along to their customers.
On so many fronts, this plan does not meet the tenets of the
federal Safety-Lu program.
Part of the long-range transportation plan includes financial-- a
financially feasible plan and a long-range roadway needs plan.
Now, the 2030 -- the 2030 long-range plan specifically identifies
three segments on-75. Nowhere in the 2030 plan does it identify six
tolled lanes and four free lanes as a viable project. It does not identify
a reversible lane. The county needs are not met by the SWFEA
program.
Additionally, in the long-range program, the long-range needs
plan -- I forget the exact number -- there were 59 or 69 segments of
roads identified in Collier County to be addressed by 2030. The total
needs plan funding needed for those 59 or 69 roadways it $2.7 billion.
The estimated ticket for tolling lanes in Lee and Collier County,
almost $2 billion. Our cost share of that $2 billion can better be used
within our county.
Here's where our funding has been spent so far by the toll
authority. These are the financial records ofSWFEA as of March 6th
this year.
Page 177
March 25-26,2008
State funding, about a million $400,000. State funding. That's
still our tax dollars. It's tax dollars being depleted out of the national
and state transportation funds. That money was supposed to build and
maintain roadways and bridges, not study, study, and study toll
authorities.
County funding. We have almost a million dollars between our
two counties. So far Collier County has loaned, loaned, $150,000 for
this project. This is public funds of almost two and a half million
dollars. What has that gotten? Engineers have received about a
million and a half dollars to study, study, and restudy. Now we're
going to invite the state to give us more funding to again study the
feasibility of one lane.
A public relations firm has received over $150,000 to convince
us of the convenience, wisdom and virtues of supporting toll roads.
We have an expenditure of over $2 million for a project that is
not slated to open for seven more years. How many more millions of
dollars will it take to support this start-up toll authority in the next
seven years?
Additional consultant reports and massive attempts at swaying
public opinion will never alter the fact that this is poor public policy.
You should not be putting all of our transportation dollars into one
basket. It's an extraordinarily expensive basket. It will not hatch out a
sensible and cost-effective transportation plan. It's time to erase
SWFEA from tolling our interstate.
Staff is recommending in-kind and transfer of $300,000 to
continue studying north/south corridors. That's exactly what our MPO
does, study our alternatives. Stop spending public funds in-kind or
outright for this project.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Gary Eidson, and there's a
total of four speakers for this one, and I'll call their names.
Page 178
March 25-26, 2008
Gene Nordell?
MR. NORDELL: I'll yield to Gary.
MS. FILSON: Betty Hull.
MS. HULL: Yield to Gary Eidson.
MS. FILSON: Jim Burke?
MR. BURKE: I yield to Gary.
MS. FILSON: Okay, that's it. And how long do you want, Mr.
Eidson?
MR. EIDSON: I'd like to have seven minutes.
MS. FILSON: Seven.
MR. EIDSON: I'll try and be shorter than that.
MS. FILSON: Okay.
MR. EIDSON: Thank you for the opportunity to speak today.
My name's Gary Eidson. I'm the Chairman of the Citizens
Transportation Coalition.
Today you're making an important vote regarding the future of
the Southwest Florida Expressway Authority here in Collier County,
and a no vote will mean that Collier County doesn't want to support
another layer of government and no vote's going to mean that
commuters won't have to pay outrageous toll charges and a no vote
will mean that Collier County will have dollars available to work on
their roads and to finish and fund the projects that are in place and to
just meet payrolls in these difficult times when the state is trying to
diminish home rule.
The toll authority is not about doing studies for Collier County.
It's about creating a toll authority. That's been established. According
to NBC2 report, the funds that you're being asked to give SWFEA are
there to keep the doors open.
And what has SWFEA produced for the millions of dollars to
date? Well, we just saw that; exaggerated studies and questionable
focus group conclusions.
In January, SWFEA told -- in January, SWFEA told us we need
Page 179
March 25-26, 2008
to have 10 lanes, then it went to eight, and now it's down to seven.
Ever-changing information, ever-changing road designs.
Now at a recent SWFEA meeting it was suggested that a tolled
seventh lane would enable people to get used to tolling. Well, I'm
familiar with tolling. I'll bet you are too, and thank you very much.
We all know what tolling is. It never goes away. And the nice thing
about it is it grows larger over time.
Bear Stearns just collapsed in part because their collections didn't
meet their projections. Well, this is what we're looking at here in
Collier and Lee County. Projections that are unreliable at best and
anticipated collections based on usurious charges to those who can
least afford it, collections not likely to materialize at the level
suggested and the county will be the victim.
SWFEA makes this whole exercise sound like a carnival
experience. Hurry, hurry, hurry. Step right up, get your tollway while
you can. Do it today or be condemned to eternal gridlock.
Norm Feder has built an entire network without using tolls. I was
here in 2000, we were with -- virtually without a road system, and
today we have a working grid.
The commission prudently enabled transportation to do their job,
and they did. Now you're being told that there is this pot of gold at the
end of the rainbow and it's supposed to give us all the money that
we're going to need. Well, we know the Bear Stearns types won't be
filling that pot.
The Feds can fund the war, the Feds can fund a mortgage bailout
overnight, but we are told that they can't fund a highway. I don't get
it. It's time for the Feds to reprioritize. It's time for the Feds to ensure
that we have a safe and viable interstate highway system.
There can be funds for a highway bailout, but we have to put the
pressure on, and that's the job of legislators. In the meantime, you do
not need to support a complicated road system that requires extra
layers of cost and extra layers of bureaucracy. Let's build what we
Page 180
March 25-26, 2008
can afford in places where we need them where some authority does
not -- not where some authority thinks we need them.
If Collier County needs to be at any table, it's at the joint MPO
table, and that is where we can find reasonable solutions to serve our
common concerns and do it in the sunshine.
Today we are asking you to close this chapter of the toll book by
saying no to SWFEA. You will send a resounding message to other
counties along the I - 7 5 corridor. These roads belong to the people,
and a better way must be found to more evenly distribute the costs to
improve them. We can start by using the talent we have available
in-house.
I thank you for giving us the time today to make this
presentation, and I sincerely hope you will vote no.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Mr. Edison.
Next speaker?
MS. FILSON: Yeah. I have five more speakers, Mr. Chairman.
Nancy Payton. She'll be followed by Bruce Anderson.
MS. PAYTON: Good afternoon. Nancy Payton represented by
-- representing the Florida Wildlife Federation.
I'd like to speak a little bit about 951 -- because it does keep
coming into the discussion -- and refresh your memory just briefly,
that the Expressway Authority legislation initially included 951, and
there was a great deal of opposition to that, and Representative Mike
Davis withdrew that legislation and re-filed it next year (sic) with a
very specific clause in there saying the Expressway Authority was to
have nothing to do with 951. They were two different tasks.
The PD&E modeling for 951 was based on 10 lanes of 9 -- on
I-75. During the three-year PD&E process, conservation groups
continuously asked, what is the need for 951? Maximize I-75, and
then deal with the need for 951.
At the end of the three-year PD&E process, Florida Wildlife
Federation, Audubon, the Conservancy, and seven other groups
Page 181
March 25-26, 2008
conceded that the 951 road was needed in addition to and after the 10
lanes were built. And I want to emphasize, after the 10 lanes were
built. And then we issued a conditioned agreement for supporting
951.
Now there seems to be an effort to use the 951 as a solution or
alternative to not building the 10 lanes on I-75. It's our position that
the authority should concentrate on their I - 7 5 mandate and build the
10 lanes or whatever they feel are needed to accommodate our
population, and then revisit 951 separately from the Expressway
Authority as to whether it's needed or not, because there are changes
in our population.
But I just want to emphasize that 951 is a very different effort
than the I-75, and the modeling for 951 was based on 10 lanes, and in
some cases 12 lanes I-75. So you're kind of playing maybe a bit with
951 and the work that's gone into it thus far.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bruce Anderson. He'll be
followed by Donna Reed Caron.
MR. ANDERSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name
is Bruce Anderson. I'm one of your representatives on the
Expressway Authority.
I just wanted to cover something that wasn't mentioned, is that
the staff proposal was brought to the Expressway Authority at their
last meeting. By the staff proposal I mean, not to loan any money
now, to simply provide administrative support services, like Collier
County and Lee County had both done initially. We were very well
served by the staff, and that is principally what our real need is at this
time.
That's all I have to say.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Donna Reed Caron. She'll be
followed by Brad Cornell.
Page 182
March 25-26, 2008
MR. CORNELL: I waive.
MS. CARON: I waive also. My name was in for Mr. Eidson.
He usually needs more time.
MS. FILSON: Brad, did you say you waive?
MR. CORNELL: I do.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Nicole Ryan?
MS. RYAN: I waive.
MS. FILSON: And that's your final speaker, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Pleasure of the board?
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Obviously, I think that my fellow
commissioners know where I stand on this issue for some time. I find
that it -- to be very interesting that it was like we had to have a crash
program to get 10 lanes built, and my recollection of the cost was
about $2 billion, and it was -- had to be done overnight.
Then all of a sudden, as the economy changed, then it went down
to eight lanes, and now we're down to seven lanes.
I think that at this point in time, that I look at this as another way
of growing government, and a motion was made, or not a motion, but
a statement was made that staff, all we need to do now is just have our
staff support the SWFEA effort.
I've got problems with that. Staff is money. When our staff takes
their time to address issues with SWFEA, that's money -- taxpayers'
money in Collier County that's going to this effort.
I look at tolls as a regressive tax, and I've got -- it's a regressive
tax. Also, some of the ideas that came forth about how we were going
to collect tolls on I-75, whether it's 10 lanes, eight lanes, or seven
lanes, was that we were going to have the highest tolls placed upon
this road when it had the most activity of people going from Lehigh
Acres down here to Collier County because, of course, the housing is
so expensive, or vice versa, going back home to their families in the
evemng.
Page 183
March 25-26, 2008
I find that these people are not paid high wages. These people
are trying to figure out the best way that they can meet the needs of
their family plus provide the gasoline to drive back and forth to work.
So therefore, I just as soon see this thing put in hibernation for a
number of years until such time as it's really needed. So that's my two
cents worth.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, then
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've made lots of notes, so here
we go.
First of all, I've never liked tolls. I said right from the start. In
fact, I was the first one to vote against it and the only one initially. I
do not like tolls.
I had a huge amount of pressure from Gary Eidson and the CTC
and from all of their friends saying, you know, have the courage to
vote against this and so forth. You know, that's the way I feel. It
doesn't take any courage to do the right thing. It's been very difficult to
try and stay at the table, to tell you the truth. And the only reason I
wanted to stay there was to make sure that as we were walking away,
we didn't get stabbed in the back. That's what I was worried about. I
have not been in favor of tolls, and I'll say that one more time.
I really like the idea of taking the money and using it -- the
$300,000 that we were talking about, and giving it to Norm Feder and
have him study our roads. I'd like to very, very much. I think that's
the right thing to do, and I think we should definitely be considering
that.
I like the idea of putting this into hibernation and just not having
it sit around again at all. And so I checked with our county attorney,
with a county attorney and with a staff member and with
transportation, and they all -- they all understood why I felt we should
stay at this table to protect our -- protect ourselves not because we
wanted this, but just to protect ourselves.
Page 184
March 25-26, 2008
And some of the recommend -- one staff member even
mentioned something about, you know, driving a stake into this whole
thing. But -- and I agree with that. But if it -- if they're ready to let it
just go into hibernation, so am I, and I think that's a great idea.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'd like to ask Mr. Feder
some questions, if I may.
Of course, the intentions of this whole thing, it was going through
a long period of discovery, $300,000, what will that buy you, Mr.
Feder?
MR. FEDER: Okay. For the record, Norman Feder,
transportation administrator. What we propose in the alternate
recommendation is that will allow us to do a toll feasibility on 951, to
look at any other alternate corridors as part of our coordinated plan
updates with Lee County besides 951 as well.
You heard from Ms. Payton that the feeling was that if you 10
lane the interstate, then they were agreeing on a PD&E to a 951.
What we're looking at is, it's a matter of timing. And some of our
concern from the start on this from your county transportation has
been the idea -- even at the time when 10 lanes looked like a need
before the slowdown -- of having 10 lanes try to be addressed by all of
your east/west roadways when you have just one point source of that
level of impact.
And that's why we felt, looking at a diversion of some of that, by
moving -- whether it's 951 or to another north/south facility, that
allowed you to disperse that traffic demand along the east/west
facilities, whether they be Immokalee, Pine Ridge, Golden Gate and
on down, is to an advantage.
So that's what we would use it for is to particularly look at the
toll aspects of 951, to look at other alternate corridor alignments, and
under the initial concept we have, and recommendation, to help pay
Page 185
March 25-26, 2008
for support staff to stay at the table and work with the Expressway
Authority, not necessarily to do some of the expanded studies that
they're doing, but rather to keep the process going if they don't go into
full hibernation, but to make sure we stay engaged in the process.
Again, consistent with the understanding the fifth and sixth is not to be
tolled.
Does that answer your question, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, pretty much so, Mr.
Feder. That $300,000 is not something that's going to go to the tolling
authority --
MR. FEDER: Recommendations only.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- to be able to use on 75; is that
correct?
MR. FEDER: That is correct. Our recommendation is we not
provide any additional dollars towards the authority until we get after
the turnpike's recommendations, our long-range plans updated in both
Collier and Lee, and our look at alternate corridor options, including a
toll feasibility on 951.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there a possibility that the
study may come back and show that it's just not feasible, period, to do
75 at this time?
MR. FEDER: I think that already you have issues on that.
You've got five lanes -- six lanes, excuse me, on 75, you'll have very
shortly. We have been adamant about not tolling the fifth and the
sixth lanes, and I think their numbers, even when they were assuming
much more rapid growth than we're experiencing right now, at least
what I heard initially, was that you couldn't toll seven through 10
when you had six free lanes relative to meeting your toll revenue
process. I don't know if that's changed. But, again, we're waiting for
the turnpike authority study, which I think is going to be a good
answer to that question.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Gary Eidson mentioned
Page 186
March 25-26, 2008
the fact that you built an unbelievable road system in a very
reasonable period of time, and you did a remarkable job. Where did
you get the money for that?
MR. FEDER: That money was from this board both bonding of
our gas tax revenue, gas taxes, impact fee revenue, and some ad
valorem.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can you go back and do that
again the next five years, same thing?
MR. FEDER: Give me the money.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, get the money for us. Can
you bond the gas tax some more?
MR. FEDER: The gas tax is fully bonded out to 2023. Our
impact fee revenues are down, and ad valorem is tight.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do you see this turning the
corner, maybe in the next two years, where we're going to have an
abundance of funds again like we had in the past?
MR. FEDER: No, I do not. I think we'll be a little while before
that turns, if we don't have some other funding source.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Or course, the federal
government, they've got an endless pot of money out there. Could we
go to them and pull out enough money to be able to meet the needs for
either 951, 75, or some of our own internal roads?
MR. FEDER: I think we need to push that hard both in
Tallahassee for state monies, as well as the federal monies, and I think
we need to do better on both of those accords. We're still a donor
county within a donor district within a donor state.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But realistically, what do you
think's going to happen?
MR. FEDER: I think we need to keep pushing on that. I think
realistically we're going to be at a time of reduced revenues and
having to respond accordingly. At the same time that our need for
maintenance both resurfacing bridges and other issues, are increasing,
Page 187
March 25-26, 2008
so we will have less capital projects we'll be pursuing, unless the
funding scenario changes significantly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Have you heard any of our
congressmen or representatives make promises to the fact that they'll
have the money here for us when we need it?
MR. FEDER: I've had us knocking on their doors, and where we
have, we've gotten some monies, whether it be for a new interchange.
Being there are not many dollars, I think we're making some inroads.
So I want to be optimistic on that front, but in answer to your question,
I don't think that's going to solve our problem overnight.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Feder.
You've been most helpful.
MR. FEDER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Don't believe that -- this
business about not being able to build the road without the money. If
you offer six -lane Feder a chance to build a road, he'll get it if you
have to take up collections at the intersections.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: A boot drive.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. He'll have boots out
there at every intersection taking up a collection. He gets his kicks
from building six-lane highways, right, Norm? Okay. Enough of that.
But look, I'm not interested in giving our transportation
department $300,000 to study a toll on 951.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that's what everybody's
saymg.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, no.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what they're saying.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, no, no.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So, you know, we just talked about
not spending money for a toll on I-75. Why would we want to give it
Page 188
March 25-26, 2008
to transportation people for evaluating a toll on 951 ?
Secondly, we're involved in transportation planning every single
day. We're involved with the MPOs in transportation planning. The
state is part of that process. We do transportation planning without
any additional money.
Why do we believe that we can't get our job done through the
MPO and the state department of transportation working jointly with
the Lee County MPO? That's what we do, and money is provided for
that planning. It's already there.
We're constantly looking for other avenues to move traffic. Staff
is right now in the public information phase of gathering public
opinion about another north/south road east of I-75. Okay? I don't
know that you asked us for any additional money for that. I hope you
didn't, because that's your job. That's what you've been doing. That's
in your budget.
So can we get away from this idea that we've got to throw money
at something to develop a plan for alternate transportation routes?
Those two guys know what the alternate transportation routes are
right now. You don't have to pay them a penny, okay?
Now, once you identify the routes and you say, here's what it's
going to cost to build this route, now we're talking money. But you
don't need to spend any money to study this issue. We know where
the alternate routes are likely to be. We're just trying to get public
input about some of them right now.
Mr. Barton and the people on that SWFEA board have worked
hard. It's been frustrating, I am sure. It's been a moving target for
them, just like it has been for us.
I think he's absolutely right. Things have changed to the point
that it's almost impossible to predict what is likely to happen in the
next 10 to 15 years, but we do know that our projections are likely to
be revised downward.
So why don't we recognize that and declare a timeout for a while
Page 189
March 25-26, 2008
until things settle down, we can get our bearings, we know what we'll
want to do. We will have identified some more routes. We will have
worked through the MPOs to try to find out how they can be funded
and when.
We've got the structure to do that, and I think we just ought to
use our structure and proceed.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you want to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Make a motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you want to continue this
indefinitely?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What I -- I think hibernation is a
good thing. You could disband it, but maybe one day you might like
to have it back. But I'll tell you what I really think's going to happen is
that when it comes feasible to toll the highway, the Florida Tollway
Authority's going to take it. It won't be us.
And so I don't think there's a downside risk that is substantial
whether you just let it die or whether you let it hibernate, but I don't
think we should spend any more money on it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's explore that line of thought
as far as hibernation goes or what. But you're absolutely correct, there
will always be some entity to step in at some point in time that will
pick up when the need is there for it. I have no doubts about that.
Mr. Feder, in that particular line ofthought, you're pretty familiar
with the enabling act of the authority. What's the possibilities of
putting something like that in hibernation? Or is this something you
have to take back to the state legislative body to do it? I'm not too
sure how all that works.
MR. FEDER: I won't profess to give you legal advice here.
What I'll tell you is my reaction is that obviously it's set up in two
counties, requires the approval of the county. I think we can
recommend hibernation relative to Collier County.
Page 190
March 25-26, 2008
The Expressway Authority, I guess, could still try to work with
Lee County would be my assessment on that, and I'll defer to legal.
I do want to also respond a little bit. Commissioner Coyle made
some very good points. We do have the MPO process. Weare
working well with the Lee MPO. We have the expressway -- the
turnpike authority study which we mentioned we should wait for, as
well as the update of our long-range plan.
What I was talking about is a portion of that 300,000, and I think
I got some of my answers, so I'll just respond back now, what --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you going to address the boot
drive?
MR. FEDER: Yes. No, the boot drive is what I do next week --
is essentially looking at 951 which got raised when you asked about
alternatives last time and the emphasis seemed to be on 951 as one of,
if not the most viable alternative.
Realistically, construction of951, because a lot of the
environmental concerns, what you'd need to do to make sure we
maintain the slough and other issues would be a very expensive
project. At least we've been looking at, the prospects are, it would
have to be tolled to come about.
If you start tolling 1-75, its viability diminishes or, in fact, you
might have a provision that requires no other competing toll route,
parallel route.
So one of the things we wanted to look at is if you tolled 951
first, especially when we're trying to disperse that point source impact,
is why we're asking. Because while the MPO process studies
corridors, they don't do feasibility studies, and the funding that we do
have in PL (sic) and other funding really doesn't cover that kind of
detailed analysis, so that's what I was speaking to at that time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What does the board want to do with
this item? You want to approve the item, not approve it or further
conditions? Commissioner Coyle?
Page 191
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I'm not sure we got a clear
answer to Commissioner Coletta's question, and maybe it's best
addressed to our attorney.
What is the practical and legal difference between hibernation
and dissolution, David? What can you tell us?
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. Well, hibernation is really not too
different from what, in fact, Ms. Nemecek was talking about in regard
to the other ordinance you were considering, and that is, you can have
something in place and have it inactive subject to be utilized when you
want to without -- without a new enactment process, whatever that
may be at that point in time.
Now, the structure you have in place right now you could make a
determination that you are just not, as a policy determination, you're
not going to go forward with it. And without looking at it further, I
think that you could make that decision, and you have not dismantled
any operational ordinance or other type of mechanism that you have in
place at the present time.
Other than that, without a little further study, I'd probably want to
get back to you a little more -- a little more formally. But I hope I've
tried to answer your questions.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, that helps. Then, Mr.
Chairman, if you're ready for a motion, I'll try to make one. And let
me preface it by saying that I do think it's better to keep options
available for us than it is to close out the possibility. So from that
standpoint, I prefer the term hibernation rather than dissolution.
So with that, I would say that I would propose that we let the
Expressway Authority go into hibernation, that we provide no more
funding for the Expressway Authority, and that we work more
vigorously through the Metropolitan Planning Organization in Collier
and Lee with the state department of transportation to plan alternative
routes as well as to plan improvement to 1-75, which very well might
include reversible -- a reversible lane unto lIed, and continue our
Page 192
March 25-26, 2008
efforts with our federal legislators to get the necessary funding for
continued expansion ofI-75.
Those are the avenues that we can work through right now and
those are the avenues which have gotten us this far on 1-75, and I think
there's opportunity to proceed.
So that's -- that's my motion. To repeat it in -- or summarize it,
let the Expressway Authority go into hibernation, no more
expenditures to support the Expressway Authority, direct staff to
continue looking at alternative routes of transportation and, thirdly,
renew our efforts through the MPO and state department of
transportation and our federal legislators to get funding for 1-75 and
other roads.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second your motion, but I
wanted to make a comment too. When I serve on the Expressway
Authority, I serve at the pleasure of this board, and whatever the
direction of this board is what I'll carry out when I go there.
County Manager, you have some guidance for us?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I'm not -- I think you can
recommend that the Expressway Authority go into hibernation, but
you can't tell it to go into hibernation. I believe it's a state -- it's been
state initiated and established. So there's some more formalities that
need to transpire, but I think you can recommend that it goes into
hibernation, and all the other things that Commissioner Coyle and the
second basically said is fine, but you've got to be -- I think you can
recommend hibernation, but --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whatever we can legally do is what
I intended.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Teach is going to tell us that.
MR. TEACH: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I caught the question
upstairs. I ran downstairs so I could advise the board.
The legislation has a natural sunset provision, that is if the
authority doesn't do anything for a 12-year period, they would expire
Page 193
March 25-26, 2008
on their own if they don't do any studies or things of those sorts. But
there's nothing expressly that would empower this board to order them
to hibernate.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Put it to sleep.
MR. TEACH: Put it to sleep, yes. Euthanasia, I guess.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's it. That's the word.
MR. TEACH: But in any event, certainly they cannot take any
activity of their -- of their duties within Collier County without this
board's authority. So you can make that recommendation and
certainly go along with -- if the course of the board is that they do not
wish to do any further work within Collier County, you certainly have
control over that. And I would suggest that your motion be directed
more toward that type of an angle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then my motion is so modified.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Please clarify it one more time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Are you sure?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'm keeping him busy.
Trying to tire him out.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. The motion is that for
Collier County, that the -- this Expressway Authority will not
undertake any additional projects or not continue the evaluation ofthe
tolling ofI-75.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What about the word
hibernation?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We didn't have to use that. All we
had to do is to say that they will not take -- undertake any other
projects in Collier County, including the tolling oflanes on 1-75 and
that we will continue our efforts through the existing agencies, the
Metropolitan Planning Organization and Department of
Transportation.
COMMISSIONER COLETT A: You're missing the point.
Page 194
March 25-26, 2008
You're saying just Collier County. I think the direction everybody
was going was Lee and Collier County.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no. Scott was very clear when
he said that we only have authority to suspend whatever's in Collier
County .
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Right?
MR. TEACH: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So that's what I'm trying to
do. I'm trying to deal only with that portion of their authority in
Collier County.
If Lee County wishes the Expressway Authority to continue
doing things for Lee County, they have every right to ask them to do
that and, of course, they have the obligation then to provide the
funding to do that.
If we come up with something where we believe that the
Expressway Authority can do something for Collier County which we
deem of value, then we can step up to the plate and say, hey, here's
some money. Will you do this for us, as long as it's in their charter.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does your second still stand?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It still stands. I still have other
questions, but go ahead.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas, you had
some questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have a question, and I'm glad that
Scott Teach is down here. Hopefully he'll give me some guidance.
My concern is that each time I hear some advocate of the
Expressway Authority, they'll say, well, we might want to get
involved in exploring the possibilities of tolling this road or
possibilities of tolling that road.
I believe right now they only have the ability for doing tolling on
1-75.
Page 195
March 25-26, 2008
MR. TEACH: That's--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My concern is, how can we make
sure that their role does not expand?
MR. TEACH: Well, it's in the legislation itself. Their role is
limited to additional lanes on 1-75 and appurtenant facilities, is the
exact language. And picking up where Ms. Payton spoke a little while
ago about 951 and that as an addition, the legislation specifically
provides that the authority of the Expressway does not extend to 951.
That's express language. So they're rather limited by their controlling
and enabling authority.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Ifwe put this in hibernation or we
say that we don't want to continue on supporting this at this point in
time, does that overrule our ability to make sure that they don't try to
get additional legislation put in place to expand their role?
MR. TEACH: Sir, I'd have to look at that. They'd certainly have
to go back and go through the legislative process to expand their
authority, and certainly this board could take whatever action it
deemed with our various advocates to try to limit such a change.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And would we still have a control
that's at that or not since it's been put into hibernation or --
MR. TEACH: Well, I think -- and the hibernation is, this board
is expressing an intent to no longer --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Support.
MR. TEACH: -- support the authority, and I think that's the
correct view of this and my understanding of what the board intends to
do.
Now, if the board wishes to go a step further and admonish any
further activity, whether it be in Lee County, that's an expression of
the board. But certainly we can control our own house here in Collier
County and what we wish to do with our funding.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
Page 196
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETT A: Yeah, I just wanted to mention
one fact that I don't know if you're aware of or not. Lee County has a
tolling authority separate from the joint authority they have with us,
and they -- just to mention it. Of course, that would --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's right, they do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We'd have no jurisdiction over
that in any way.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right, okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And just one final observation. It's
something that continually concerns me, I don't think we have any
control over it, but the business about whether or not something about
change about the Expressway Authority without our approval.
The legislature can do whatever they want with that anytime they
wish, and that's why I'm suggesting to you that it makes no difference
what we do, whether we support it or whether we don't support it. If
the legislature decides that they want to do something different with
1-75, they can change that legislation and do it whenever they wish to.
And so I've reached the conclusion that it serves no purpose to
worry about that because it's just like saying if we pass an ordinance
here, that some future board won't reverse it. That's just the way it
works, and so we have to get used to it, and I wouldn't try to make my
decision based upon worrying about how that's going to take place.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, as far as anything
negative that they mayor may not do on the Authority, you do have
representation from Collier County. I know I'll follow the directive of
the board, and I'm pretty sure you're going to find that the other people
from Collier County will at least give us their ear.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion on the
motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
Page 197
March 25-26, 2008
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Now we have a four o'clock time certain?
MR. MUDD: We have a three p.m. time certain. Yes, sir, we
have a four o'clock time certain. You're absolutely correct, and that --
you have a three o'clock and you have a four o'clock. The four o'clock
one has to do with Cocohatchee settlement, and that's item 12A.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ifwe do the four o'clock time certain,
will the three o'clock time certain go away?
MR. MUDD: No, sir, I don't think so.
MS. FILSON: No. We have speakers for that one, six.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What's the pleasure of the board? We
have --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Go with 3E (sic). What is it?
MR. MUDD: I will tell you, Commissioner, you need a
supermajority vote, I believe, on 12A, so whatever the pleasure of the
board is. That's really a zoning action based on a policy that the board
adopted a while ago.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That was previously (sic) to going
into this agreement. I guess we'd have to have the county attorney
clarify that. But when we entered into that resolution, it was prior to
the agreement for Cocohatchee settlement.
Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: Are you asking now? No, I think -- I think this
one does take a four vote.
Page 198
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. All right. Which one are we
doing?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Better take on the four.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Four o'clock.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, the four vote,
supermajority.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Supermajority.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's do that one now.
Item #12A
RECOMMENDA TION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS CONSIDER APPROVING A SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT AND RELEASE WITH LODGE ABBOTT
ASSOCIATES, LLC (OWNER OF THE COCOHA TCHEE BAY
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) TO SETTLE ALLEGED
CLAIMS, INCLUDING AN ALLEGED BERT HARRIS ACT
CLAIM PURPORTEDLY ARISING FROM DENIAL OF AN
AMENDMENT TO THE COCOHATCHEE BAY PUD TO
MODIFY THE BALD EAGLE MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND
LODGE ABBOTT ASSOCIATES, LLC V. COLLIER COUNTY,
CASE NO. 05-962-CA, NOW PENDING IN THE TWENTIETH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AS WELL AS AMENDED COCOHA TCHEE BAY
PUD DOCUMENT WITH ATTACHED BALD EAGLE
MANAGEMENT PLAN - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE
APRIL 22, 2008 BCC MEETING - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So that's the last thing on our
agenda.
MR. MUDD: It's 12A. It used to be 16K5. It's a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners consider
Page 199
March 25-26, 2008
approving the settlement agreement and release with Lodge Abbott
Associates, LLC, owner of the Cocohatchee Bay planned unit
development, and to settle alleged claims, including an alleged Bert
Harris claim purportedly arising from denial of an amendment to the
Cocohatchee Bay PUD to modify the Bald Eagle Management Plan
and Lodge Abbott Associates, LLC, versus Collier County, case
number 05-962-CA, now pending in the 20th Judicial Circuit in and
for Collier County, Florida, for -- as well as the Cocohatchee Bay
PUD document with attached Bald Eagle Management Plan.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I pulled this from the
agenda, and let me give an explanation to my fellow commissioners.
This item has been in District 2 and it's been an ongoing process
probably since I've been in regards to being on this board as a
commISSIOner.
I have some very strong concerns about the chairman pushing to
get this on the consent agenda whereby it wasn't fully vented by the
process that I felt should be taken, and that is that all the
commissioners -- as you recall, we had a time here when we had the
petitioner here -- had worked with the petitioner in trying to come up
with a resolution back in December, '06.
We felt that we had something that was viable, but then as the
attorney started working through this process, there was some flaws.
It came back before the Board of County Commissioners, and I
believe that Commissioner Coyle made a motion and I seconded it,
that this should go to the Planning Commission to be vented to make
sure that we covered all avenues in regards to this.
As -- just so that you have an understanding of the effort that was
put into this, this is the meeting minutes of the Planning Commission,
and I don't think any of you had any knowledge of the effort and time
that's gone into this, and I felt that instead of putting this on the
consent agenda, that it should be brought forth so -- for discussion.
One of the things that needed to be addressed as the Planning
Page 200
March 25-26, 2008
Commission was basically coming to a completion, a close on this,
was that the site development plan had to pass muster with the
planning department, and this was not done until, I believe, this past
Thursday, late Thursday, early Friday morning.
And I didn't get the plans in my hand until yesterday late
afternoon. And I really believe that -- so that this is aired out in the
public, I believe that you should have the ability to read what went
through all of the -- the process so that you have a full understanding.
I think that the settlement is good, but I believe I need time to go
through it because I haven't even been briefed by staff in the full
presence of this thing, since it's in my district, okay?
So at that I'll turn it over to the attorney there.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I think we understand that, Mr. Halas,
and we understand your request. And we don't have an objection to
continuing this matter till the April 22nd agenda, which will hopefully
give us adequate time to make sure you're properly briefed on the
details of the agreement.
And if you want to provide copies of the minutes of the CCPC
meeting to your fellow colleagues, that's fine with us. We did spend, I
think it was close to 20 hours in front of the Planning Commission to
hash out the details, and I do think it's a good, detailed settlement
agreement.
But if there needs to be additional time for you to be properly
briefed by your staff and hopefully by us as well to go through the
details, we would request a continuance till the April 22nd meeting, if
that's convenient for the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion that we continue
this till the April 22nd meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Halas to continue this to April 22nd, seconded by Commissioner
Fiala.
Page 201
March 25-26, 2008
I want to have discussion. I want -- Commissioner Halas said
that the SDP has to be approved prior to the agreement. I would like
to know if that's true or not.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is it -- the Site Development Plan
did get approved as far as I know as of either late Thursday or early
Friday, and I didn't get that plan into my hand until late yesterday
afternoon.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Was it the understanding of the
recommendations by the Board of Commissioners that the Site
Development Plan be approved prior to it coming back?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: What happened through the discussions
with the Planning Commission was, since the settlement agreement
was contingent upon the approval of the Site Development Plans, is
that we would track the two together, that staff would review the Site
Development Plans to be able to say to the Board of County
Commissioners, if it approves the settlement agreement, the Site
Development Plans are already to be approved, so everything would
happen right away so there wouldn't be a lag time between the Board
of County Commissioners' approval of the settlement agreement and
then the actual implementation of that settlement agreement, which
was the SDP approval by staff.
So the Planning Commission recommended that they track
simultaneously, and that's where we are. I believe staffs had an
opportunity to review everything, had to determine that the SDPs are
consistent with the settlement agreement, consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, consistent with the Land Development Code.
And if the board does approve the settlement agreement, I think they
would be in a position to then finally sign off on the SDPs.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. What I see in the settlement
agreement, that the Site Development Plan be fast tracked.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Which it has been, and to the point where
it's ready to go.
Page 202
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: How can you fast track if you don't--
if we don't approve the settlement agreement? That's my point. I
mean --
MR. MUDD: Yeah. Commissioner, the SDPs were submitted to
us about a week or two weeks ago.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: The revisions, based on the development.
MR. MUDD: The revisions based on the settlement agreement.
And Mr. Schmitt's staff has reviewed those SDPs to make sure that
they're in keeping with the settlement agreement. That's as far as
we're gone (sic) with that thing. There's been no approval of the SDP.
Can't do it unless this board approves this agreement.
All we've done is reviewed them to make sure that they're in
concert with the settlement agreement as being proposed to you today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right, but that could be -- that could
change.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. The board could change whatever they
want in that agreement, and then we'd have to go back and review
those --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, Commissioner Coyle says -- or
Commissioner Halas said is the SDPs had to be approved before the
settlement agreement is approved.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, I said the SDPs had to be
approved by -- they had to be followed -- be approved by community
development. Planning had to stamp this to say that this is in con --
it's concurrent with what was discussed at the number of meetings that
took place with the Planning Commission.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Then we don't need the language that
it needs to be fast tracked in the agreement then.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Well, hopefully that language will
become not necessary if the settlement agreement does get approved.
But if at the settlement agreement, there's revisions that the board
asked for in the settlement agreement, we would still need that fast
Page 203
March 25-26, 2008
track provision so that we can submit those revisions to staff, have
them review them and approve them. But if you do approve the
settlement agreement as currently written, you're right, we wouldn't
need that language.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, Commissioner Halas, I
don't think your statement is correct. My understanding from
Planning Commission members, they did what we asked them to do,
and I asked it be on the agenda. It is in your district --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's exactly right, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- but the exposure to the taxpayers is
$240 million to all the taxpayers; $240 million to all the taxpayers in
Collier County. I've always been concerned about that.
Now, if we want to change that to be just a District 2 exposure,
I'm fine with that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. This is not just -- first of all, I
think you're off track here. First of all, what we're interested in, all of
us are interested in getting this out. What I'm concerned about is
where somebody was putting undue pressure on the county attorney to
put this on the consent agenda, while I think that I've been working
with these --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This is the second time that you have
said something about my performance. So I want to settle this right
now. I would like the county attorney to tell us the pressure that I put
on him, was it undue?
MR. KLATZKOW: David, I'll take this.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Go ahead, Jeff.
MR. KLATZKOW: I was asked by the chairman to put this on.
I spoke with the county manager. County manager said, put it on. It
was not undue pressure.
The agenda is controlled by the chairman and the county
manager. This is ripe to be heard now if the board wants to hear it
now. This could be heard two weeks from now when the Site
Page 204
March 25-26, 2008
Development Plans are fully vetted by the board just as well.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I feel that since this was put
on the consent agenda, I had no time, and I don't think the rest of these
commissioners had time to understand the full impact of this
agreement that we should have the time to, at least me, since it's in my
district, to be properly -- basically briefed on what took place and how
we came to the conclusion. That's all I'm asking.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I'm okay with continuing it, but
you're continuing to make statements about my performance as chair,
and I don't think it's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can we end this and call the
question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, that's fine. But, you know, I
don't -- I'm going to defend myself.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand, but call the
question.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. I'm going to call the vote.
Any more discussion on the motion? Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I was out apparently when the
motion was made. What was the motion?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're going to continue this item to
the second meeting in April.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
Page 205
March 25-26, 2008
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What about the speakers; were
there any?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm sorry.
MS. FILSON: No speakers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No speakers.
Item #lOE
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC)
EVALUATED AND CONSIDERED PROPOSALS FROM THE
VARIOUS GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES THA T HAVE
EXPRESSED INTEREST IN POTENTIALL Y MANAGING AND
ACCEPTING TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR)
SEVERED RURAL FRINGE MIXED-USE DISTRICT (RFMUD)
NORTH BELLE MEADE (NBM) SENDING LAND PROPERTIES
IN A FEE SIMPLE CONVEYANCE PROCESS AS VIABLE
ALTERNATIVES IN JUXTAPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (CDD)
CONVEYANCE ARRANGEMENT PRESENTED TO THE
BOARD - MOTION TO APPROVE A TEMPORARY
PERMITTING USE ON GREEN BLVD - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us back to our time
certain at three p.m. This item -- this is a recommendation that the
Board of County -- and this is 10E.
It's a recommendation the Board of County Commissioners
evaluate and consider proposals for the various government agencies
that have expressed interest in potentially managing and accepting
Page 206
March 25-26, 2008
transfer of development rights, severed rural fringe mixed-use district
North Belle Meade sending land properties in a fee simple conveyance
process as viable alternatives in juxtaposition to the proposed
community development district conveyance arrangement presented to
the board.
Mr. Joe Thompson, senior planner of comprehensive planning
department of community developments, and Alex Sulecki, your
project -- your program coordinator for Conservation Collier
Administrative Services, will present.
MR. BOSI: Good afternoon, Board. Mike Bosi with
comprehensive planning. Unfortunately, Joe Thompson had a
prearranged flight at seven o'clock and he -- unfortunately, he couldn't
wait around. I'm going to pinch-hit for him.
On February 22nd of this year, the BCC, under the county
manager's item 10C, heard issues germane to the North Belle Meade
area in the TDR conveyance bonus credit eligibility.
Staff presented the issue as a policy question as to whether a
community development district, a CDD, would be a governmental
entity that could receive conveyance of property within the rural
fringe TDR program.
Specifically the board asked staff to go look at what other
government entities would be available for a conveyance purpose
within the TDR to evaluate whether the CDD option was the only
viable option out there.
The board specifically asked staff to contact all the agencies that
would be interested to participate in the program to come to speak to
the issue as to whether they would or would not be available to receive
TDR credits, and those entities are Conservation Collier, Collier Soil
and Water, and Big Cypress Basin of the South Florida Water
Management District.
All agencies are represented here today and, I believe, are willing
to speak on the item, as well as Mr. Lewis, an applicant for a property
Page 207
March 25-26, 2008
owner within the North Belle Meade area who originally asked the
Board of County Commissioners to consider the question of whether a
CDD could be an eligible receiving agency within the TDR program.
Basically that is the framework of the global policy issues that
are contained within the rural fringe program, and I think specifically
Mr. Lewis will be able to address where -- where he and his clients are
in relationship to the specific request for the CDD to convey the -- to
receive the property as well as potential discussion with the other
receiving agencies involved.
And with that, I would open up myself to questions and also ask
Ms. Sulecki if she would have anything to add that maybe I hadn't
covered within the presentation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the board members?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ms. Sulecki, do you have anything
further?
MS. SULECKI: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. I don't have anything globally to add to that, but I do
have a few things to say about -- from the Conservation Collier
perspective.
Okay. There we go. Sorry about that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would you like us to call public
speakers while you're getting -- setting up?
MS. SULECKI: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, that's fine.
MS. SULECKI: Getting things up here is just not my best suit.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there any public speakers?
MS. SULECKI: But I'm almost there.
MS. FILSON: I have seven public speakers, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Do you want to --
MS. SULECKI: I'm there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Page 208
March 25-26, 2008
MS. SULECKI: I'm awfully sorry about that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's all right.
MS. SULECKI: And I really just have one picture to show you
there. But based on your comments on and direction at the February
26th meeting -- and I'm sorry. For the record, I'm Alex Sulecki with
Conservation Collier.
We've brought forward the draft resolution as backup for your
executive summary today to show you how Conservation Collier
intends to address TDR conveyances.
And since that February meeting, Conservation Collier has met in
subcommittee and also in the full committee to look at the Caloosa
Reserve properties brought to you on the 26th, and to -- and has also
reviewed the draft resolution that they kind of -- we had in our back
pocket to make sure it fit with those.
And we met for the first time, I would add, with the Caloosa
Reserve folks. We had not been approached previously by them, and
we have received an application from them for conveyance of the
properties. And these are the properties that are up on the picture here
today and that -- you can see a large-scale version with them within
the sending areas, the rural fringe, and these are them here. And here
is a close-up. It's 110 acres, and a number of scattered parcels, 13
scattered parcels.
Several points very quickly I'd like to make to you today. We are
breaking new ground here. We are setting policy, and we want to
carefully evaluate unintended consequences, and that's one of the
reasons why we brought you this resolution as a backup item so you'd
have a chance to look at it and tell us if you're satisfied and happy
with this way of going forward.
Also I'd like to tell you that the committee has expressed some
concern about accepting scattered isolated parcels in terms of
providing efficient and cost effective management. That's the level
required by the LDC. And also, they're concerned about the difficulty
Page 209
March 25-26, 2008
of public access to these parcels.
We, your staff, are willing and able to accept these conveyances,
but I shouldn't sayable because we're unsure we're adequately staffed.
As management of scattered parcels which are isolated and difficult
to reach, it looks like it -- the management of them to the LDC
standards could be very time-consuming. Even if these actions are
funded, we believe we would need to add another property manager
were we to take on this responsibility.
And then finally, I would like to say that I've spoken with
Clarence Tears about the importance of this area in water basin
planning and management and want to tell you on the record that
Conservation Collier has no inherent problems with or restrictions
against placing low berms at the edges of these project areas to contain
surface water flow to preserve lands and to restore hydro periods to
North Belle Meade lands if this is approved under a restoration
management plan. So we are willing to move forward.
If you have any comments on the resolution, we'll appreciate
them today. If you approve of that, I can bring it to you at your next
meeting and we will move forward with Conservation Collier
evaluating the application for these TDR conveyance lands.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Public speakers, please.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Dennis Vasey. He'll be
follow said by Nancy Payton.
MR. VASEY: For the record, I am Dennis P. Vasey, Collier Soil
and Water Conservation District supervisor 3. On behalf of our
chairman, Stan Weiner, I'd like to thank you for allowing us to appear.
I'm here today to tell you in person what we've told the county in
writing. We're prepared to accept approved TDR three lands. Where
this conversation got divergence was at the last meeting. There are no
approved TDR three lands yet. Consequently, no government agency
needs to step forward because TDR four will not be assigned until
Page 210
March 25-26, 2008
there is an approved TDR three.
Why should you use Collier Soil and Water Conservation District
as your land manager? First of all, we do it right now. We have 212
acres of property that we manage in Picayune, and we've done it since
2005.
Second, we own property in Winchester Head. We just acquired
two properties in Horse Bend Strand, and we're going to acquire two
more at the end of the month.
We're negotiating to manage a preserve in North Belle Meade,
the sending area. In January, we submitted a draft interlocal
agreement to Conservation Collier to manage the land they already
have, and we also recently just sent a letter to the chairman asking him
ifhe would join us in the effort to perform the ordinance requirements
of floodplain stormwater and watershed management, which are
currently not being done.
We currently have hands-on experience on the ground evaluating
specific areas. We also have been told by the staff that it is not
satisfactory to manage these lands to the Florida natural area
inventory. And this is very important because the staff has said they
want a more site specific review, which means the kind of work that
we do right now, and that's with a wetland -- excuse me -- with a
vegetative study with the uniform mitigation assessment and also with
a FLUCCS, or Florida Land Use Code Cover and Concealment Study.
From that you develop what the potential is for the land. In other
words, you design a treatment, a monitoring, and other methodologies
to actually accomplish the approved restoration management plan.
One of the things you should be very concerned about is that the
Land Development Code that they're trying to use does not specify
where you'll restore this property to. In other words, it is inconclusive
or it's left up to anyone's opinion.
My question is, do you really want to bring on more people in
Conservation Collier or in the county to manage land? Currently the
Page 211
March 25-26, 2008
ordinance does not provide for land management.
Well, what would be required? Right now you set aside 15
percent of all monies. That's up front. And so far, it takes about that
much to manage it. But we've got real numbers and we know that
that's not even close to what you need to manage that property to any
restoration management level, much less the Land Development Code.
Who benefits from Collier Soil and Water Conservation District
efforts? Well, this year we're going to put about a million and a half
dollars back into the economy.
Admittedly some of it's your tax dollars that have gone to federal
agencies, but we're putting them back in. Some of our farmers and our
ranchers are going to get $730,000 this year. We're putting back in
161,000 in the Horse Pen Strand conservation area. We put in
annually $240,000 worth oflocal salaries into this economy. And in
addition to that, we have other studies that are in progress.
In short, land management needs to be performed uniformly and
at a minimum cost. Collier Soil and Water Conservation District is
doing it now and we're ready to do it for you. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Mr. Vasey.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Nancy Payton. She'll be
followed by Will Kriz.
MS. PAYTON: Good afternoon. Nancy Payton representing the
Florida Wildlife Federation, and we're here to recommend
Conservation Collier be approved as a governmental agency to accept
and manage North Belle Meade sending lands.
The North Belle Meade overlay and subsequent TDR bonus
amendments were adopted to create a program that would allow for a
comprehensive management strategy for the North Belle Meade
sending lands. Not a piecemeal, parcel-by-parcel approach.
The executive summary states that Soil and Water Conservation
District proposes to submit site specific management plans and
references identifying the exact composition of a property.
Page 212
March 25-26, 2008
We're just not clear what that means and ultimately what Soil and
Water District's intentions are for lands that are fulfilling a settlement
of an administrative challenge dealing with Collier County and
wildlife habitat.
It is our position that you cannot do effective restoration without
an overarching plan that ensures the long-term environmental integrity
of those sending lands.
Based on the goals of the North Belle Meade overlay, the need to
continue to fulfill the final order mandate and the lack of a
comprehensive plan, Florida Wildlife Federation cannot support Soil
and Water as a potential recipient of sending lands.
There's certainty for all in the Conservation Collier program.
Initially, Conservation Collier will receive scattered parcels, but think
of those parcels like Caloosa Reserve as priming the pump for
thousands of additional acres.
There are several landowners who own significant tracts of
sending lands, including Bonita Bay, Florida Rock, and the East
Naples Land Company. Eventually those and other parcels will be
forthcoming, creating a large contiguous area to restore both
hydrologically and for wildlife habitat. Management will include a
range nature-based recreational opportunities open to all.
Under the TDR programs, land can be conveyed to Conservation
Collier with restoration money so the restoration can be economically
and effectively done in the future on those large assembled parcels.
Funding for a manager should be considered when Conservation
Collier accepts those lands and the moneys that should accompany
them.
In addition, the Federation endorses the specific proposal offered
by Caloosa Reserve with a clarification that Conservation Collier
cannot commit today to accepting lands until the lands are evaluated
and approve.
But we understand that Conservation Collier can meet Caloosa
Page 213
March 25-26, 2008
Reserve's timeline. In fact, we're told today that Caloosa Reserve has
already filed their nomination papers.
The Federation, in closing, urges you to identify Conservation
Collier as a government agency to accept TDR sending lands in the
fee simple conveyance process and to place the Conservation Collier
TDR resolution on your next agenda.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Will Kriz. He'll be followed
by Doug Lewis.
MR. KRIZ: Good afternoon. I'm Will Kriz. I am the vice chair
of Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee.
I would just like to point out that the resolution that we had
proposed calls on -- whoever strips the development rights and takes
them away is still obligated to do a -- an environmental assessment, to
remove exotics, remove waste.
So they can't just take their TDRs and run; they must do some
other things, plus they have to put up some money for maintenance. It
will not come out of the 15 percent that Collier -- Conservation Collier
takes. So it's a separate dedicated fund that they would have to put up.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Doug Lewis. He'll be
followed by Nicole Ryan.
MR. LEWIS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Doug Lewis. I'm an attorney with the law firm of Roetzel & Andress,
and I'm here today representing Caloosa Reserve, LLC, on this item.
I'd like to thank the board for its direction and leadership at the
last meeting. Also would like to thank members of the environmental
community and also staff and the various agencies for their efforts.
Since that February meeting we've seen some progress with
Collier Soil and Water with Conservation Collier in efforts to garner a
state agency that's willing and able to take these sending land parcels,
Page 214
March 25-26, 2008
so we'd like to acknowledge the efforts that we're making.
We heard some comments today about the concerns that
Conservation Collier has about isolated parcels and access and things.
Weare hopeful with the direction which they're taking, other agencies
are taking, but we certainly need some certainty in the program.
That's really why we're here, to make sure that the TDR program is
viable and it functions.
The program is really designed to allow voluntary submission of
these lands, voluntary conveyance. They're not being condemned, so
you have to deal with individual owners who own sending lands
wherever they own those sending lands.
So as you have participation, you have landowners who are
participating, and on an aggregate, you acquire more lands and you fill
in the gaps as time goes on, but you have to deal with landowners who
own those parcels.
Based on the progress that we've made based on the agencies, the
two agencies, I think we would be inclined to work with any of those
agencies. We would find -- our client would find either of those
agencies acceptable.
Weare, for the record, willing to withdraw our request at this
time that the board consider this other vehicle, namely the transfer of
these sending lands to a community development district. We'd be
willing to withdraw that request at this time based on the progress
we're making; however, in the event that we can't get an agency lined
up to take these properties, then we would like to reserve the right to
bring this question back before the board at some future point.
In addition, we would like to note that we would like to involve
the CDD for purposes of providing a funding mechanism to allow
these sending land parcels to be held in fee and managed by another
local government agency, such as Conservation Collier or Collier Soil
and Water Conservation District.
This could be handled by way of interlocal agreement. We could
Page 215
March 25-26, 2008
provide away, a mechanism in which these costs for restoration and
maintenance could be financed.
And so with that, that's really all I'd like to say at this time. If
you have any other questions, I'd be happy to take those.
MS. FILSON: Nicole Ryan. She'll be followed by Brad Cornell.
MS. RYAN: Good afternoon. For the record, Nicole Ryan here
on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. And the fact that
this issue has come before you with a real project trying to convey
their lands, while I know it's painful for the project to the developers
and their staff, it really illustrates that there's a shortcoming in the
TDR program and it highlights ways that we can improve the program
and bolster it and make it work. So we appreciate this opportunity to
try to work through this first of the conveyances.
The Conservancy supports Conservation Collier as the most
appropriate governmental entity and program for conveyance of these
North Belle Meade sending lands.
We also support the resolution that's before you, and we ask that
if it can't be approved today, that it be brought back at the next
meeting so that the process for these parcels to be offered, reviewed,
and approved by Conservation Collier can be moving through the
process.
We see this as a positive and appropriate step for the
Conservation Collier program. Conservation Collier is approaching
the time where a lot of their acquisition funding is gone. And if the
Pepper Ranch is purchased, which we hope that it will be,
Conservation Collier is going to have to look at reinventing itself, so
to speak, and what it can be in the future.
And we see this as a very positive step for being the holder and
the manager of these TDR North Belle Meade lands. It seems like a
really ideal fit. It would also provide the opportunity for the TDR
program, which is complicated, to be made a little bit easier so that
especially the small landowners are able to work through that system.
Page 216
March 25-26, 2008
We think that could be a tremendous bolster for the TDR program and
hopefully get it off of the ground even more.
For North Belle Meade, this resolution speaks about a template
for the restoration and management plan. And I think that's a good
idea, but I'd also suggest, as this moves forward, that an overall
management plan for all of North Belle Meade be put into place so
that the template can be used on an individual basis, but property
owners don't have to go out, hire a consultant, and do their own plans.
That way you can do some overall restoration, you can tie in all
the wildlife habitat management. It will be a really solid, good,
consistent program and plan.
As sending lands are considered as a target protection area within
the Conservation Collier program, we believe it's consistent with the
mandates of Conservation Collier. Access can be looked at and the
overall management plan should be established as appropriate in the
future.
And we want to make sure that the funding that is needed and
endowment, so to speak, to make sure that those lands are properly
managed. If that means additional staff for Conservation Collier,
which it probably will, that that is put into place, because we don't
want this to be a burden for taxpayers.
So the county really needs to be a bit visionary about this as you
were visionary in putting the TDR program in place. This isn't just a
scattering of parcels. This is the beginning of what we believe to be a
really good program for creating a consistent compilation of a bunch
oflands that are going to be a tremendous benefit to the county.
And to conclude, in the future the county may want to look at
conveying these lands to the Big Cypress Basin if that would be
appropriate. We see this as a lot of possibilities in the future, and we
ask that you move forward with Conservation Collier as the
governmental entity.
Thank you.
Page 217
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Brad Cornell. He'll be
followed by Kris Van Lengen.
MR. CORNELL: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Brad
Cornell and I'm here on behalf of Collier County Audubon Society.
And we, too, do support Conservation Collier as the most
appropriate agency to receive these TDR sending lands in donation. I
want to emphasize that the proposal, the procedure that is outlined in
the resolution, would require sufficient endowment funding, sufficient
management money that comes with that land. I think that's an
important aspect that should not give you concern that we're going to
be dumping land on Conservation Collier without the ability to
manage it or the staff to manage it. That obviously has to be assessed
as sufficient, and ought to be done when it is donated.
I think Conservation Collier provides a number of advantages
over other agencies. It's an established program with an excellent
track record, and obviously well supported by the public and
yourselves. You've seen some great results from that program and
from the staff that run it, Alex Sulecki and her staff.
Under the -- it would be underneath your authority; the board has
authority over Conservation Collier land and the management, and
that would not be so with the other agencies. It would be compatible
with the rest of Conservation Collier purchases throughout the county,
especially those in the rural fringe mixed-use district and the North
Belle Meade.
And public access is definitely a good possibility. And I want to
point out that in the North Belle Meade there are road easements
throughout that area. And so we can craft and we can work with a
management plan that can provide for sufficient public access,
effective public access.
Therefore, Collier County Audubon Society recommends that
you approve at your earliest opportunity the resolution that's under
Page 218
March 25-26, 2008
discussion in your package, which is the policy for Conservation
Collier to accept the conveyed TDR sending lands. And we believe
by doing so, you're going to be fulfilling an obligation and a very
important part of the rural fringe mixed-use program that you very
wisely established five years ago. And this is the -- this is an important
aspect that has not been fully implemented, and you have the
opportunity to do that now. And we urge you to do that.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Kris Van Lengen.
MR. VAN LENGEN: Good evening, Commissioners. Kris Van
Lengen with the Bonita Bay Group.
I just wanted to -- first of all, I agree with everything Brad,
Nancy, and Nicole have said. I just wanted to emphasize a couple of
points and also to applaud you all getting directly involved at this
point in time and also for Conservation Collier basically advocating
their own program and stepping forward into this area.
I just wanted to bring up a couple of points that may not have
caught your attention in the way that they strike me, and one is that
the North Belle Meade area, unlike other areas of sending lands, is an
area of about 10,000 acres, which is roughly one-twentieth the size of
the entire rural lands area. And in that particular area, there are no
fewer than a thousand different properties.
At least half, more than half of those properties are of the
five-acre variety. So 98 percent of them are the legal non-forming
five acres. Those five-acre properties come with -- coming with those
five-acre properties are a development right.
So owners have an economic calculation to make. Are they
going to sever, enter the program, or are they going to basically keep
that right and development sometime in the future?
I think it's a very delicate balance, and I guess what I would urge
you to do is think in terms of a program that is simple to use for
people to encourage their participation and that has some assurance of
Page 219
March 25-26, 2008
outcome, because it's a challenging program. It's going to be
challenging for those individuals to determine whether or not they
have sufficient incentive.
A particular point here is that -- and I think Nicole may have
touched on it. To use a -- in time to develop a master plan for an area
is much, much more effective, and it also advances those values of
simplicity and certainty of outcome, because for an individual sending
land owner to bear the cost of a CDES review fee, the time that that
takes, the uncertainty that entails with that, is just one more factor that
they're going to have to consider.
So again, an overall plan is probably, I think, what we want to
head for. It can be a combination of different agencies, it can be one
agency. And just to give an example, Bonita Bay in 2006/2007 did
achieve the third and fourth TDR simply by conveying property to
CREW. These were properties in the northernmost region of sending
land adjacent to the CREW lands.
They evaluated those lands, but -- the receiving agency is the one
that evaluates them. They evaluate them to determine what the cost is
of the restoration and what the cost of a perpetual maintenance fee is.
So that's the kind of review that needs to take place. I would
avoid too much staff review, if at all possible, and it's not always
possible. They certainly need to keep an eye on it.
One last comment, if I might. North Belle Meade is one piece of
the puzzle. South Belle Meade is another. Fortunately South Belle
Meade does not have the complexity of problems that North Belle
Meade does; fewer landowners, larger area. It's all within the
acquisition area of the Picayune Strand --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Could you wrap it up, please?
MR. KRIZ: I certainly will. I would simply encourage you to
encourage and empower staff to approve that management plan.
Everything's ready to go. DEP, Division of Forestry, ready to make
title and manage those lands. It hasn't happened yet. I think it should
Page 220
March 25-26, 2008
happen soon, and I hope that you'll encourage your staff to do so.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
What's the pleasure of board?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have a couple questions, if you
don't mind.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And this is to the county attorney.
Who wants to take this on?
MR. WEIGEL: Jeff will.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Jeff, what is the form of the
authorization for an organization to do this? Is there a contract? If
we're selecting Conservation Collier, they're a part of Collier County
Government, and I understand they might be treated somewhat
differently. But let's suppose we're not selecting Conservation Collier.
How do we do this?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, if you were going to use a different
government entity, you'd probably want to do an interlocal agreement
with them. You could do it that way.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And how do you assure
performance to the standards that we desire?
MR. KLATZKOW: You could never assure a better
performance than if you own the property yourself, sir. I mean, if
what you're looking for is absolute control, then you want to use
Conservation Collier as your vehicle. If you want to be -- if you don't
want to be responsible for maintenance costs, then you want to be able
to use somebody else to own the property.
It's a difference of ownership really. If you own it, you've got to
maintain it, but it's yours and you'll have many things you can do with
it in the future. If you don't want to go through the ownership costs,
then you look for other entities.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What's wrong with having more
Page 221
March 25-26, 2008
than one entity to do this?
MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do you think that the competition
between two entities would encourage a higher level of performance
in maintaining the property?
MR. KLATZKOW: If it was the private sector, I would say yes.
We're dealing with the public sector. I don't think so, to be perfectly
honest.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I think if the roles were
reversed, I would argue that the private sector can do a better job than
government can.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, that's what I'm getting at, yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if -- I think ifI -- ifI had that
choice, I'd rather go that way, ifI had a proven entity that was capable
of doing it, but I'm not sure we do.
So what you're suggesting is that if we -- if we select one of the
governmental agencies to do this, that we would have to draft a set of
performance criteria; of course, they would have a maintenance plan,
but are there other criteria that we should be establishing to assure
appropriate performance?
MR. KLATZKOW: You'd have to have some sort of stick
involved if they didn't do it. I don't know if you'd be wanting to bring
a government entity involved for the Code Enforcement Board, for
example. I mean, enforcement with another government entity is a
very difficult thing and becomes a political thing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So that's another reason for using a
governmental entity that we control?
MR. KLATZKOW: There's a lot of good things to say about
control, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Except for the fact we sometimes
don't do a good job of controlling the things that we control?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, we should do a better job at that, quite
Page 222
March 25-26, 2008
frankly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. KLATZKOW: And that's our own fault.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Will this -- will the
funding be enough to hire a land manager?
MR. BOSI: The LDC is specific to that point in that it requires
that the -- there is a bond placed within the agreement when the
conveyance occurs, and that bond is specifically for the funding of the
maintenance of the land in perpetuity.
And a point of clarification for the board. The board is not being
asked to specifically name a single entity to be the conveying agency
within the TDR program. This question was raised because -- because
an applicant had indicated that they were having trouble finding a
conveying agency. They had thought that the creation of a CDD was
the agency to fulfill that purpose.
What the board has found out through this discussion is that there
are a number of recognized state land managing agencies that are
willing to accept conveyance. I don't think the board -- the board is
being asked to select one individual. I think it's on a case-by-case
basis that the individual property owner would find, whether it's
Conservation Collier or whether it's Soil and Water, would be the
appropriate agency for the conditions of that individual land.
And the base -- and the arrangement for the perpetuity and the
funding of the maintenance of that property would be arranged by a
bond and would have to be agreed upon by the individual agency as
well as the owner.
So the board's not being asked specifically to name one -- one
receiving agency for the TDR program. The board -- the board is
being -- was being asked this specific question, whether the CDD was
an appropriate receiving agency. And as we've found, that there are a
Page 223
March 25-26, 2008
number of agencies that are willing to accept these sending lands
within the TDR program. I think that's an important clarification that
the board has to consider as you're making your evaluation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The Land Development Code is clear,
it just needs to -- it gets extra credit if they give it to a government
agency.
MR. BOSI: Yes, you're correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And, you know, I know the
environmental community wants Conservation Collier to take it over.
That isn't what the Land Development Code says. I'm glad that
Conservation Collier is interested in it. That's just one more tool in
the toolbox. I'm not sure if we really need to do anything on this item,
do we?
MR. BOSI: The question that was being asked originally was,
was the CDD the -- an appropriate government agency. Mr. Lewis
had conveyed that he's willing to withdraw this, or not withdraw it, put
it in hibernation, going with the course of -- the tone of today's event
-- put it in hibernation to make sure that his client's conversations with
Conservation Collier will come to fruition.
If that would not, then he would -- then -- I'm not going to speak
for his actions, but that's what's being really -- the question today --
and it seems like there has been an appropriate governmental agency
that's been identified in the CDD -- would be something that the board
is not being asked at this time.
But I'll defer to Mr. Lewis in terms of his --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The only thing he said is that he
wanted to hold his rights to argue for a CDD. That's all. But my
question is, do we really need to take any action under this item?
MR. BOSI: Based upon -- based upon the discussion today, I
would suggest no, that you wouldn't, that the agency -- that a
governmental agency has stepped forward, has begun negotiations
with Mr. Lewis and his clients, and that the only time -- the only
Page 224
March 25-26, 2008
reason you would see this before is if Conservation Collier and the
applicants have come to an agreement and they have hammered out a
resolution for you to approve the conveyance and the details of those
conveyances.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I -- this executive summary
says that we should evaluate and consider proposals from the various
governmental agencies about doing this. If -- why do we want to
consider proposals if we're not going to make a decision, or a
selection? I don't get it.
MR. BOSI: And I think the -- and I apologize for the way that it
was phrased. I think we wanted just to convey to the Board of County
Commissioners that you should evaluate the proposals of these
agencies of being willing to accept -- to accept land within the TDR
program.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Let me go back then to
some questions that I was asking earlier. What you're saying to us
right now is that the problem is potentially solved because there are
some agencies willing to step forward and accept ownership and
maintenance of these properties?
MR. BOSI: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And so the landowner is
reasonably happy at the present point in time because he's got
somebody who can take these things. There's no reason that he can't
choose which agency he wants to work with; is that correct?
MR. BOSI: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now our obligation, of
course, is to make sure it's done correctly, whoever does it. What is
the mechanism for accomplishing that if it's not an agency that we can
direct?
MR. BOSI: The requirements that -- the one that the
maintenance and restoration plan gains approval from the
Page 225
March 25-26, 2008
environmental staff within CDES, and then also the funding
mechanism has been identified by the interlocal agreement to -- and
the bonding capacity has been provided to provide for the
maintenance and the perpetual --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And it becomes a code
enforcement issue at that point in time; is that what you're saying to
me?
MR. BOSI: Yes, correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I don't have a problem with
that. I see some difficulties down the road, but I don't see a better
solution. So I agree with you, Commissioner Henning. I don't know
that we need to do anything.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So we don't have to do anything on
this item.
MR. BOSI: I would say, recognize that there -- other than just
recognize that there are agencies in this -- there may be an opportunity
if the -- the issues related to the -- to the agreements related -- the
necessary agreement, but other than that, I would say that the question
has been satisfied.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You mean the interlocal agreements?
MR. BOSI: Well, there would be -- well, they're proposing an
interlocal agreement between the actual -- the actual conveying entity
-- the conveying entity and the receiving entity.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But the conveying entity is going to
be responsible to maintain that property in perpetuity. That's what the
Land Development Code pretty much states, that, you know, you get
that last TDR to -- if you give it to a government agency in, you know,
clean condition. Kind of like washing the outside and the inside. And
then it's up to them to -- to make sure that they keep it in perpetuity.
MR. BOSI: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't know if we have to do
anything on this.
Page 226
March 25-26, 2008
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, little bit concerned, you
know, that if we don't direct that one direction, that we may not have a
unified plan, and also, too, I recognize Conservation Collier as the one
that's come across with access on a continuous basis. And this is --
you know, it's a -- I kind of wonder if maybe we shouldn't help to
direct it though.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We need to do a Land Development
Code change because it doesn't state county government, it states
government. I mean, to get that extra TDR, you got to convey it to
government, state agencies, things of that nature.
But if you want to direct it to Conservation Collier from the
North Belle Meade, then we need to do a Land Development Code
amendment. You know what I'm saying? Or maybe Mr. Bosi can
help me.
MR. BOSI: No, that is correct. If you wanted that level of
specificity as to a specific agency being the primary agency to receive
the lands within a specific geographic area, it would require --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I know -- I don't know if
everybody agrees with me, but I would like to see that take place. I
really think that our best bet is Conservation Collier in the long run.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, ifI may suggest
something, is to get the advice from Conservation Collier Advisory
Board whether we should do a Land Development Code as the agency
to receive these severed TDRs in the North Belle Meade, and then that
property would go to Conservation Collier for maintenance in
perpetuity. Is that what you would like to see?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Whatever mechanism will get
us there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coyle and then
Commissioner Fiala.
Page 227
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There's a lot to be said for having a
unified plan and uniform maintenance of property within certain --
certain areas, but the problem is that that's not the way the government
entities have acquired the property.
The Soil and Water Conservation District owns property, I think,
in the North Belle Meade area and in Winchester Head, so do we. So
if we designate an area to be managed by a certain governmental
entity, are we going to take away the responsibility from the people
who already own it and are maintaining it? That's problematic, I
think.
The overall goal is sound but, I don't know how you go about
doing that. Are you going to tell Mr. Vasey that the property he owns
he can't maintain because we've designated that area for maintenance
by Conservation Collier?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think that was ever the
intent. We already recognized the fact that he's -- represents an
agency that's a legit agency. The property he's taking care of, isn't that
what is part of the -- well, yeah. I take it back.
Some of the land could be -- under the TDR could be directed to
him. Meanwhile, why not anything new that's coming up and
anything that's out there, put it with an entity that we know will allow
public access.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, Soil and Conservation (sic)
will do that. So I just don't know how we deal with the other agencies.
And take Winchester Head as an example. We bought some property
out there, Conservation Collier has; so have Soil and Water
Conservation District. It makes sense to have all of it maintained by
one entity under one unified plan. But how do you force that when
you've got different governmental agencies involved? I don't know
how you do that, and I don't know if Soil and Water Conservation
would permit that.
Page 228
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. One of the things that just
occurred to me is if we have Conservation Collier -- and it looks like
we're heading that way -- but is there enough funding to take care of
these lands in perpetuity?
The taxpayers have funded Conservation Collier for just so long,
and that's for purchasing land and then money set aside to manage the
land that they've purchased. But what about this other one? Will
these CDDs -- say, for instance, we get into a TDR program this way,
will the CDDs pay for these things forever?
I think that has to be something that we incorporate into whatever
plan. I don't even know how Soil and Water is funded. So maybe --
maybe there's a simple answer. But whatever is handling this must be
able to have funding to manage these lands forever.
MR. BOSI: As part of the stipulation, within the conveyance
agreement, the private property owner who's conveying to the state --
or the agency has to provide for bonding for the necessary perpetual
maintenance of the area, so that question is satisfied by the
regulations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You asked about Soil and Water
funding. Dennis Vasey is here, could answer that. Would you like to
have that answered?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Vasey?
MR. VASEY: Thank you, Commissioner.
When we receive land, we have to do -- although it was stated
here that we don't know what these studies are, before we accept
property, we have to know what's out there.
Under the earlier county plan, they used Florida natural area
inventory. And what it meant was that everything that could possibly
be ever was there, so that's really a -- not a good economic way to do
Page 229
March 25-26, 2008
it.
What we do is, after the restoration management plan is approved
by the county, whatever that is, the accepting government agency will
take that restoration management plan, and they have the option of
either accepting it or declining it. It would be foolhardy for any
agency of the government to accept a burden forever with limited
up- front funding or with, really, just a general idea.
When the Conservancy was here, they said, hey, it would be
great for the small guy to have a plan. We tried that. We spent two
years with staff working on a small-guy plan. All they had to do was
put the property appraiser PID there. They had the Florida natural
area inventory, which is what the staff used. It was good to go. They
just had to approve it, and they wouldn't do it.
They sent it back with a letter -- it was signed offby the county
manager -- that said, you must have a site specific plan. In other
words, FNAI doesn't work. We know it doesn't work. What we want
to know is exactly what's out there.
And what you've heard from two people say is, it costs money to
get there. Well, how much money does it cost? Until you go out on
the property and look at it, you have no idea.
But let's take the problem you're creating. If Soil and Water
manages the property, you don't have a conflict. The conflict is that I
agree, after dealing with the sender, to an amount of money. I have to
invest that money, and I have to make sure that I don't show back up
on the taxpayer's door with another dollar request.
And so far we have funded the ROMA program in our area of
Picayune Strand State Forest, which is the first affordable housing
project ever, and we did it without asking for taxpayer dollars. We
sold mitigation credits.
We've asked for an expansion of our service area so that we can
sell more mitigation credits. So what those mitigation credits do for us
is they allow us to fund the maintenance that's required on those
Page 230
March 25-26, 2008
properties.
This year alone we're going to spend a hundred thousand dollars
because we have a contract with the Department of Forestry in
Picayune Strand State Forest that is being monitored by DEP. No
matter where you go in this county, you're monitored by DEP, Corps
of Engineers, and South Florida Water Management District and Big
Cypress Basin. Everybody has a requirement.
I fund these things, Commissioner Fiala, by evaluating the land
and by coming to an agreement with the senator on the amount of
money we believe, based on our estimates, it will take to enter into a
restoration management plan and to handled the initial treatments and
follow-up treatments forever.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Did that answer your question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, he just sparked another one.
He said -- did you say in Picayune Forest you've got a mitigation plan
and you're selling affordable housing units in Picayune Forest?
MR. VASEY: We're selling to residential property owners
mitigation credits at $31,000 a credit. That's about half the price that
you have to pay right now for mitigation. And if you build in certain
areas that are not serviced by South Florida Water Management
District water permit, DEP requires that you mitigate. And to mitigate
that construction, you must have a mitigation credit, and by those,
who sell those. And we have 29.3 remaining mitigation credits.
So far the credits that we've sold for residential home ownership
mitigation credits, we have been able to fund a little more than a
quarter million dollars worth of that program activity.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Now, you said largest affordable
housing --
MR. VASEY: This is the single residential low-cost mitigation
option available in the State of Florida.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: In the Picayune Forest?
MR. VASEY: We have 212 acres.
Page 23 1
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I thought that was protected land
that you can't build in.
MR. VASEY: Well, what we did was DEP and DOF said you
can use this area. We want it restored to its base natural condition, so
we entered into a contract to do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, just to help just a little bit. Let me see if I
can get into this, and you can tell me if I'm off, okay --
MR. VASEY: I wouldn't do that.
MR. MUDD: I'm going to give a different -- I'm going to give
you a different turn.
They've got a ROMA that's set up so if they have Estates
properties that have single-family, want to build a home, and they've
got wet area in there, well, they've got to mitigate for that wet area.
They're basically going to put fill in there in order to put the house
pad, but it used to be a wet -- and it was -- not a single-family home
that was platted in the Estates.
They need mitigation credit. That agency that Mr. Vasey
represents went -- and they were going to try to do it in the North
Belle Meade and it didn't work, but they went to the Department of
Forestry and they basically said, don't you have some state land that's
got exotics on it that needs to be maintained to get those exotics off
and to make sure it never happens again?
They said, yep, but we don't have money in order to do that. And
he basically said, well, if you let me get mitigation credits, okay, I can
get you the money so I can maintain that state land to get it where it
needs to be back in in pristine condition.
And they were able to make that agreement with the state
agencies in order to let that happen. So they have a certain number of
mitigation credits that have been given to them by the state that they
can sell so that they can bring those monies back so they can help
maintain state lands.
Page 232
March 25-26, 2008
That's exactly what he's talking about.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, I know this is a conversation
for another time, and we'll do that. You say fill in wetlands and yet
we've got all of the ATV'ers off of that land because we're trying to
get it all wet again, and now we're filling them in to build affordable
housing to --
MR. MUDD: Different lands, ma'am. It's the Estates lands that
are north ofI-75 that can -- that are platted -- they're already platted
for single-family homes. And when that happens, that's exactly what
he's talking about, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I need to have a conference
sometime and understand what all we're talking about here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I understand what we're
talking about, and it's a wonderful thing. It's brought down the cost of
mitigation out there in the Estates when people used to build houses
out there. Of course, that day's gone for a while.
What I'm concerned about, Mr. Vasey, is the access to land.
Now, Collier Conservation's got land. They come up with a
management plan that allows for access, anything from -- depending
what it is. You can't expect these real small lots sometimes to have
anything meaningful.
But there's some times when lands acquired that's of some size.
Everything from hiking trails to hunting, fishing, depending on the
size of the land, scout activities, all sorts of activities take place.
Now, this is one of the reasons why I had a problem with like
CREW taking over the land. They have a very limited amount of
public access.
One of the things that Conservation Collier has been doing very
well is coming up with public access. A lot of it's taking place in the
future, but they've got their plan together; they'll handle that. How do
you plan to deal with that? That land belongs to the people of this
Page 233
March 25-26, 2008
county .
MR. VASEY: Thank you very much. Actually it belongs to the
State of Florida and the people.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We are the people of the state.
MR. VASEY: The North Belle Meade sending area actually did
make provision for recreational uses. One of the most important things
you have to remember about a restoration management plan is that the
initial analysis is going to show you some habitat.
The idea that we want is to protect habitat, and the hope is that by
restoring it to some condition, we will encourage habitat's return.
As far as people, people -- there are no restrictions to that land
unless there is a public health hazard, and that would be the public
health department's determination. But as far as the lands that we
intended to bring in the North Belle Meade sending area, the plan that
we offered to the county staff, it made provisions for all of those.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Your plan has provisions for
public access?
MR. VASEY: It has not only provisions for public access, it has
provisions for recreational purposes and other uses. Every activity
that can be enjoyed by a citizen of Collier County, by a citizen of the
State of Florida is available under the plan we offered.
And it is the Soil and Water Conservation District's policy and
has been since we were constituted in 1984 to make not only lands
available, but to enhance the habitat.
And to give you an idea of the extent that we went to, recently
we discovered some problems with the Melaleuca. After we had the
crown fire in Picayune Strand State Forest, we sent letters out to the
Conservancy, the Audubon, we sent them out to Florida Wildlife
Federation, we sent them out to Florida Gulf Coast University, and we
invited them to come out and actually see the shortcomings and the
academic work that they've done because we had the conditions and
we were able to fill in the blanks in what they estimated might be out
Page 234
March 25-26, 2008
there. We're hoping they'll come forward and take a look at this
project.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'd like to see your
enabling documents that take you to that direction when you get a
chance, sir.
MR. VASEY: It's on the website. It's called the ROMA, and it's
been there since 2005.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure. Send me a link to it,
please.
MR. VASEY: I will.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I have plenty of time to
read every web site out there.
MR. VASEY: I think I'll have the county manager come and
summarize it. He did an excellent job. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I still maintain we don't have to do
anything on this item. What's the pleasure of the board?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Don't do anything.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle says don't do
anything.
Commissioner Halas, do you have an opinion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I was leaning towards
Conservation Collier on this item. I guess what I need is some
additional information. Right now, I've got to sort out what was
brought forth by the Conser -- or the Coyle -- or the Soil and Water,
and then I got to figure out what Conservation Collier can really do for
us.
This gentleman here -- I forgot his name -- but said that there's
funding that would be there in perpetuity, and I want to make sure that
I got a full understanding if that's correct, okay, other than the one
TDR that we were talking about that would be severed for just the
conservation of the lands that the TDR came from.
So at this point in time I think I need to digest what was
Page 235
March 25-26, 2008
discussed because this wasn't that -- covered that much in our -- in our
agenda package.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you're -- you may be in favor of
doing a Land Development Code to designate it to one agency; is that
what you're saying?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: At this point in time I'm not saying
anything of that nature. I'm just trying to figure out -- digest all the
information that was brought forth today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'm in favor of taking this
particular parcel right now, being that it's on the table, and directing it
toward Conservation Collier. I like the idea of, number one, keeping
that within the government, that we have control of, but secondly,
because we get regular reports from them and we know what they're
doing at all times and we can weigh in on that. I like that
transparency, and I think everybody in the county also sees what
they're doing. I like that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'll be honest with you,
my direction as far as Soil and Water is modified considerably. You
know, I see some benefits to it; however, with that said, I know what
the product is with Conservation Collier, and so I'm inclined to stay
with that. Other than that, I might accept a hybrid whereby we might
be able to consider some lands that are not conducive to Conservation
Collier going towards Soil and Water. That's about as far as I --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well-- Commission Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You like it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just a question. Do we have the
right to prohibit any other governmental agencies from participating in
this program?
MR. KLATZKOW: You have the right? This is your program.
Ultimately, if that's what you want to do, you could do that. That
Page 236
March 25-26, 2008
would require an LDC change, I believe, but it's your program.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. But it's not specific about
what governmental agencies you turn it over to.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you turn it over to a government
-- that could be the state, it could be the --
MR. KLATZKOW: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- to the federal government. Are
we now saying that if someone turns the land over to the federal
government, that -- that the only people who can manage it would be
Conservation Collier?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, the federal government would manage
that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. You see, but that's the point.
If this gentleman here who represents the people that owns the land
wants to go to Soil and Conservation (sic) and say, here, I want to
transfer this to you for management, he's got every right to do that no
matter what we say.
MR. KLATZKOW: Right now, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So what I'm suggesting is,
we can't just say, here, we want you to go to Soil and -- we want you
to go to Conservation Collier. He can go to any governmental agency
he wants to, and what we say here is not going to stop that unless we
want to change the program. And, you know, that's going to take
some time and that's going to delay him any further, much further.
So I just want you to keep that in mind. I don't see how we can
make a decision that says, you have to go to this particular agency and
that's your only choice.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I think we've talked about this
enough. Unless somebody wants to say anything else, I'd like to move
on.
Page 237
March 25-26, 2008
MR. MUDD: Just one point of clarification.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure, go ahead.
MR. MUDD: And I just want to make sure that we're square.
Last time you had a CDD come forward to you and ask you, that they
were going to manage the lands and they considered them -- and they
gave you -- and they gave you this piece of paper and they said, we
are an agency that has the power in order to manage these lands with
TDRs that are not adjacent to the properties, and the board said, we're
not comfortable with that, and you just wanted to make sure -- and I
think they alluded to the fact that there wasn't any government agency
jumping up to help them.
The board said, please come back and let's see if there's any
government agencies that are out there that would be willing to do
this. And I think today this board got that accomplished. You had
two agencies come forward to say they could do it and they would be
more than willing to do it.
If it's chosen to be Conservation Collier, or in any particular
action that has to do with this in the future, we will come forward to
the Board of County Commissioners with a set of policies that you can
approve so that we're in keeping with your guidance with
Conservation Collier.
That's all I need to say. Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you want to move on?
MR. MUDD: Absolutely, sir. Sir, that brings us to 9A, which is
appointment of members to the Environmental Advisory Council.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You ready for a break? Has she
had a break yet?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You ready for a break?
THE COURT REPORTER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We'll have a break, okay. Here's what
we need to do is, there's, you know, residents here that we need to take
Page 238
March 25-26, 2008
care of, then we need to discuss whether we're staying tonight and
finishing it or coming back tomorrow morning, okay?
So if you can find out what items that we need to go to, and then
MS. FILSON: 10F I have one speaker; lOJ I have two speakers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, that pretty much settles
that. And then we need to discuss whether we're going to stay tonight.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have to leave at six o'clock for
a meeting I got going on in Golden Gate Estates up by Orangetree.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've got to go.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's two of us.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've got to leave, too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So why don't we just adjourn.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: Could we do one item, please--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
Item #9C
CONTRACT EXTENSION FOR DAVID WEIGEL, COUNTY
ATTORNEY - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: -- before you adjourn, and that has to do with the
extension of the county attorney's contract, please, because it affects
all board members, and I know that Commissioner Coyle will not be
here tomorrow morning, and I've had one other commissioner say that
that might be an issue, Commissioner Halas.
So -- and I know that affects all five commissioners. If we could
get that done before you continue this meeting till tomorrow morning.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle. Is
Page 239
March 25-26, 2008
there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Which item are we on?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're on--
MR. MUDD: 9C, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 9C.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's an add-on item. Here it is right
here, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I got it, okay.
MR. MUDD: 9C is a contract extension for David Weigel, the
county attorney.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Until?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's until the successor to the county
attorney, unless the amendment is amended to extend, or renegotiated
at that time.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, but the termination date is extended
through March -- from March 22, 2008, through the day immediately
prior to the first day of employment of a successor county attorney,
unless this agreement, as amended, is extended or renegotiated.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further questions on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-1, Commissioner
Halas dissenting.
Page 240
March 25-26, 2008
That's it. We're recessed until tomorrow morning at six o'clock--
no, nine o'clock.
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was recessed by order of the Chair at 5:53 p.m.
Page 241
March 25-26, 2008
TRANSCRIPT OF THE CONTINUED MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, March 26, 2008 (Day 2)
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 district as has 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 members present:
CHAIRMAN: Tom Henning
Donna Fiala
Jim Coletta
Fred Coyle (Absent)
Frank Halas (Absent)
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo Ochs, Deputy County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 242
March 25-26, 2008
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good morning. Welcome to the
continuance of the Board of Commissioners' March 25, 2008,
meeting.
Deputy County Manager is assisting the Board of Commissioners
in today's items.
MR. OCHS: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the
board.
Mr. Chairman, a couple of items to start off the morning. We
had a request last evening to hear item 10J because there were a
couple of attorneys representing that firm that were here yesterday,
and they have an early morning flight.
Item #10J
GUIDANCE TO STAFF REGARDING THE RECENTLY
RECEIVED APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR
THE INSTALLATION OF TWO SIGNS FOR A COFFEE SHOP
BUSINESS LOCATED AT 6345 NAPLES BOULEVARD, PINE
AIR LAKES PUD - MOTION TO ISSUE PERMIT - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: So with the board's indulgence, if we could take 10J
first on the agenda this morning, and then move to lOF, which is the
item on Green Boulevard, since we have some members of the public
we have an interest in that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Is it okay with the board
members?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great, thank you.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Schmitt, good morning.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, good morning. Joe Schmitt, for the
Page 243
March 25-26, 2008
record, community development/environmental services division
administrator.
This morning before you is an item we're bringing to the board
for guidance. This is a result of a February 12th -- at the February
12th Board of County Commissioner meeting where there was a
discussion on the use of what was deemed to be prohibitive words for
an establishment requesting a sign permit.
That company came in for a sign permit on March 3rd, and
before we issued that permit, I asked the board at least to review to
make sure that we're not moving against your direction. The--
basically I'm prepared to issue the permit immediately. It is our belief
that there is nothing that would prohibit us from doing so, but we do
not want to issue this permit if it, in fact, is against your policy
guidance.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You're asking to approve?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Approve the issuing of the
permit.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala. I have some questions.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your first statement said it was
prohibited words. Is it prohibited under the Land Development Code?
MR. SCHMITT: No, sir; no, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: The discussion was around the word that was
used and that it was believed that it would be -- could be deemed a
prohibitive word. It's basically our assessment and the county attorney
Page 244
March 25-26, 2008
that it is not -- we believe there is nothing that prohibits the use of the
issuing of this sign permit, but there was some issues as regards to
5.06.06, prohibited signs that this board may feel that the use of -- or
issuing the permit for that sign may fall under the purview of that --
those prohibitions in the LDC. We believe it does not.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The -- and I understand that
this sign is similar to other signs where their symbol is, in this case,
using a donkey --
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- to bring the beans down from the
mountains --
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- in Hawaii.
MR. SCHMITT: I'll use the word, it's the Bad Ass Coffee
Company of Hawaii, and it is a registered trademark headquartered in
Salt Lake City. And there is basically, from our perspective, or at
least from our analysis, there is no reason to deny this permit.
I'm prepared to issue the permit. It's under our authority to issue
it. The board -- from your perspective you're not authorizing us
because we already have the authority, but I just don't want to issue it
in violation of at least your guidance, and I'll make that clear for the
record. So it's based on your interpretation as a legislative body as to
whether it falls under the prohibitions within the LDC.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. But I think everybody needs to
recognize that Commissioner Coyle brought up a very valid point.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But there's been some cases in the
courts about issues of this nature and the signs were deemed
appropriate; is that correct?
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir. I would have to turn to the county
attorney for any legal opinion. But I think from a perspective, at least
from community development perspective, I think it's best to let the
Page 245
March 25-26, 2008
public vote with their feet and with their dollars, whether they want to
patronize this establishment. And that's basically, I think, the best
way to leave it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. I'm sorry, Commissioner Fiala
has a question or comment, and then Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I think it's interesting,
it's a Hawaiian coffee company registered in the city of Salt Lake
which, by the way, is a Mormon city, and they don't -- and they're
very careful about the words they use, so it's kind of odd, isn't it?
And just because I won't -- I would probably never go there. It's
not something I would do. But, you know, we can't stop them from
doing something that isn't illegal, so --
MR. SCHMITT: That's right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- we have to --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But don't expect to see me there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I got to be honest with
you, I've been to the one in Naples. In fact, Mayor Barnett invited me
to go with him for a cup of coffee. And by the way, I paid for it. You
owe me one, Mayor.
And it's a wonderful establishment. The coffee was very good.
And the only thing we're doing by what we're doing here today is
advertising, and we should send them a bill for it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, $10,000, help to pay for
books in the library.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I support the motion, but we
do have public speakers. If there's no questions or comments further
from the Board of County Commissioners, I think it's appropriate to
go to the speakers.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just one. You may want to give
the speakers an opportunity just to waive so we don't change our
minds.
Page 246
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, I have two speakers. Connie
Alexakos.
MS. ALEXAKOS: I will waive and I will thank you for the
publicity.
MS. FILSON: Tom Garlick.
MR. GARLICK: No, I waive also. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion on the
motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor ofthe motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #10F
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC) TO
ALLOW THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY CONNECTIONS ON
GREEN BOULEVARD, THAT SERVE AS SECONDARY
ACCESS POINT TO THE RESIDENTS OF 15TH AVENUE SW,
TO REMAIN UNTIL SUCH TIME THE COUNTY IMPROVES
GREEN BOULEVARD TO A FOUR LANE URBAN CROSS
SECTION - MOTION TO APPROVE A TEMPORARY
PERMITTING USE ON GREEN BLVD - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, next item is lOF, to receive
Page 247
March 25-26, 2008
approval from the Board of County Commissioners to allow the
existing driveway connections on Green Boulevard that serve as
secondary access point to the residents of 15th Avenue Southwest to
remain until such time the county improves Green Boulevard to a
four-lane urban cross-section.
Norman Feder, your transportation division administrator, will
present.
MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, we have a
provision in our Land Development Code that's basically been in there
at least since 1982 that provides, when properties have dual access or
dual frontage, that they should secure their driveway access from the
local street rather than from a collector or an arterial roadway.
In this case we've got 12 driveways that have -- properties that
have both frontage on 15th Street and on Green Boulevard, basically
the section between 951 and Sunshine. And in this case, these 12
driveways, none of which are permitted, were cited, or at least some of
them I understand, by code as having illegal driveway connection to
Green Boulevard. They all do have permitted access from 15th.
We looked at the situation. I've got four lanes out in that section
on Green Boulevard, but it is not a typical cross-section. I don't have
swales. I don't have curb and gutter. And right now it is not
functioning as a major collector road even though it's in our
long-range plan to be developed and to become part of that network in
that manner.
We also had some concerns. The fire chief felt that the access to
the Sunshine and Green Boulevard fire hydrant provided a backdoor
entrance for these driveways to allow for fire control.
Taking those issues into account, looking at the 12 driveways,
they not posing a problem for us today on Green Boulevard, we're
recommending that, in fact, we not pursue code citation on these but
rather we had recommended putting on notice -- and I'm going to turn
it over in a second to our legal -- that once we get to the point of
Page 248
March 25-26, 2008
expanding the roadway and bringing it to its status as a major collector
roadway with a four lane cross-section between 951 and Santa
Barbara, at that time that we would not allow those driveways to
remaIn.
And I think that the attorney's office, rather than us just sending a
notice to this effect, if the board gives that approval, wants to actually
set up a form of a temporary driveway permit that makes it clear that
it's only to be in effect until that time so, therefore, the action is not a
sanctioned exception or violation, if you will, of the Land
Development Code as exists today.
If there are any questions, I'll be happy to answer them, but I
think the item is fairly clear. Oh?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, this is just not Green Boulevard. I
had asked our staff to look at this through aerials, and this is all over
the Estates as well where people have multiple driveways where
they're both on local roads, and they're on what are going to be
arterials roads or major collector roads down the line. So it's just not a
Green Boulevard problem. It really is a countywide issue.
The intent of the Land Development Code is that we wanted to
preserve the functionality of the arterials and the collector roads so
that we're trying to get access to the local roads and keep them off
these roads.
The issue really is though at this point in time, a lot of these roads
aren't functioning as true collector roads. They're still functioning as
local roads because we haven't built out yet.
And I don't want to establish a right for all these unlawful access
points that have been, for many, many years, active. Some of these go
back 20, 25 years and even more, so that I would like a board
direction on this.
We would recommend a policy that when we find someone who
has an access on one of these collector arterial roads that are not
permitted, that we go to them, and if it's functioning as a local road,
Page 249
March 25-26, 2008
make it into a temporary use agreement with us, we allow them the
access, but they agree that when it comes to the point in time when
transportation deems it no longer safe for the public to have this
access, that they close the access down at that point in time, and this
way we won't have to go around writing everybody up with code
enforcement violations, at the same time we're preserving our rights to
the arterials.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Y es. Wonder if they're already
permitted to have access to both roads.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, they're not.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I mean, not on Green, but you're
talking about the Estates.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nobody is.
MR. KLATZKOW: Nobody is. It's -- I mean, for many, many
years people did what they wanted to do out in the Estates, and it was
a looser -- laxer time. As we're getting to buildout, we're getting more
and more into people living on top of each other and more and more,
you know, complaints and whatnot.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, Golden Gate Estates is a place
where you live and let live.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You said there's other examples that
your staff has looked at. Can you provide the Board of
Commissioners of those examples?
MR. KLATZKOW: I can give you aerials if you'd like, yes. I
didn't want to create codes cases, so I -- I did not want to create
additional code violation cases.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I understand, but -- I understand.
What roads we talking about other than Green Boulevard where they
have dual access that is deemed to be a collector road or an arterial
Page 250
March 25-26, 2008
roadway?
MR. KLATZKOW: Everglades, DeSoto, Golden Gate, Randall.
It's fairly commonplace throughout the Estates.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm not going to question you, but
driving those roads, I see a lot of properties only have one access, their
legal access. But we need to make sure that we, like you said, preserve
our rights in the future.
MR. FEDER: Yes. And Commissioner, you're correct, there are,
even on Green, specific access points where individuals have only
access to Green and not to another roadway, in this case 15th, as an
example, and those driveways are permitted and remain, as there are
on other roads that were noted.
But the issue where there is access through that provides dual
access, both to a local street as well as to a future collector or arterial,
those are supposed to take their access off of the local street by the
Land Development Code.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And use their legal access?
MR. FEDER: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I think we need to clarify
so people don't think we're taking away something that's their absolute
right.
This has to do with the way that you set up the main roads, the
arterials, is the fact that you've got limited access to them to be able to
justify the speed limits and what's out there, and that's the reason why
people are supposed to use access off the residential streets.
MR. FEDER: Yes. Basically it's not technically limited access,
but controlled access, and you have access controls, yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And is -- there been any kind of,
what do you want to call it, any kind of objections to this from Green
Boulevard where we're talking about specifically at the moment?
MR. FEDER: No. You do have one of the residents here today
Page 251
March 25-26, 2008
that I think was on your public petition. They pulled the public
petition based on the recommendation we're bringing to you today.
I will tell you that obviously all of them would like to be able to
get permitted access to Green for the future, but they also understand
that we're trying to work with them and not trying to enforce the Land
Development Code today when that need isn't there and the facility's
not functioning as a major collector.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So we're talking about
continuing this same effort throughout all of Collier County, mainly
the Estates, for such roads as Randall where they're going to be under
construction in the future?
MR. FEDER: Mainly in the Estates, and it would be when those
facilities are brought up, much as we're saying here with Green, to the
real status. Right now Green, some of these others, serve as, pretty
much as local streets, even though they've been in long-range planning
to be improved in the future and to become part of the arterial or the
collector system.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So just so nobody
misunderstands, those people that do have legal access to roads such
as Green or Oil Well or Randall, that's not going to change?
MR. FEDER: That is not going to change. And if their only
access is to those facilities, they have to be provided reasonable
access.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Feder.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can we go to the public speakers,
please.
MS. FILSON: Barbara Sagua (sic)?
MS. SEGURA: Segura. That's okay. It's hard to say.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Up to the mike.
MS. SEGURA: Hi.
Page 252
March 25-26, 2008
MR. OCHS: Just state your name for the record.
MS. SEGURA: My name is Barbara Segura, and I live on 15th
Avenue with access to Green Boulevard. This came up because most
of the houses that are on Green Boulevard were built in the late '70s.
Some of the driveway accesses have been in existence for 29 years.
Everybody was using them. There are benefits for us to use them.
And the reason -- and I went to Commissioner Henning and
requested this. Obviously we would like to permit them. Having
talked with Mr. Feder about the long-range plans for Green
Boulevard, I totally understand the county's position and that that isn't
very viable at the time that Green Boulevard would become a cross --
an urban cross-section feeder; is that right? Okay. Kind of a --
COMMISSIONER COLETT A: You could work for
transportation.
MS. SEGURA: There we go. And so I think that, you know,
that certainly gives all of us time to, you know, kind of reorganize and
regroup and rethink, you know, our original issues with the street.
Myself, personally, I bought the property specifically because I
could get onto Green Boulevard. There's a number of safety issues.
One, there's a fire hydrant sort of right behind my house on Green
Boulevard. That's a huge advantage for me because, otherwise, the
other fire hydrant's way down at the post office, okay.
In fact, we did have a fire in our back yard, and the fire
department was able to easily drive in and put it out. And those are all
two-and-a-half-acre, about, lots or bigger. They're all wooded, of
course.
And we had a lightning strike that caught one of our palm trees
on fire. The fire department was easily able to come in, put out the
tree, and did not impact any of the other neighbors. And we all know
how those fires can rage out of control.
And the time it would have taken them to access a fire hydrant at
the post office, come in through the front of the property, we really
Page 253
March 25-26,2008
could have had, you know, significant property damage.
So based on that, Chief Metzger wrote me a lovely letter, you
know, with the fire department supporting the access to the back of the
property .
15th Avenue is impacted a little bit differently than some of the
other streets that have two accesses. At the end of 15th on 951, which
would be our normal road that we would turn onto, we have the
commercial post office, and we also have an FP&L substation.
So we are impacted traffic-wise, obviously, especially by FP&L
when all their trucks line up to go out. So that was another issue that
12 of us using Green Boulevard, you know, was an advantage for the
other residents on 15th Avenue.
As Mr. Feder stated, currently Green Boulevard's not very well
used. Our 12 little cars going out onto it are not any kind of an
impact.
So -- let me think. Oh, and one of the reasons I bought the
property is when my -- I have identical twin daughters that were
learning to drive at the time. I was much happier with them going out
onto Green than pulling out onto 951.
They're actually -- now have left and are driving, and so far so
good. But at the time that we were teaching them to drive, that was
certainly a benefit for me.
Is that like a time limit?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MS. SEGURA: Oh, my God. I feel like I'm at the academy
awards.
Okay. So with that, I've talked to all the neighbors that were
cited. I gave them all ofthe information that Mr. Feder generously
gave to me, explained to all my neighbors the situation, and
everybody in my neighborhood is fine with this. We understand we
can use it until such time that Green Boulevard becomes that cross --
urban cross feeder section.
Page 254
March 25-26, 2008
So I would appreciate a, yeah, we can still do it, it would be
great, and thanks. And if you have any questions, I'm here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala has a question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I just have one question, and
that's to Norman. As long as the fire hydrant is on her property --
MS. SEGURA: Well, it's not on my property.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I thought you --
MS. SEGURA: It's on Green. It's behind my property on Green
Boulevard. You'd have to see a map.
MR. FEDER: Yeah, it's just down from her property, a little bit
east of her property, but fairly close on Green Boulevard at about
Sunshine.
MS. SEGURA: It's one hose length. It's within hose distance, is
a better term for it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So at the time that we're discussing
that, that is going to be taken into consideration for the safety of the
residents surrounding that area; is that correct?
MR. FEDER: Yes. And Chief Metzger did write us as well. He
said it's preferable they can address it like they do all the other streets
off of 15th itself, but he would appreciate this added opportunity since
it exists. And since it doesn't pose a problem, that was part of our
evaluation and our consideration.
One thing I would add in your deliberations is just a refinement,
a clarification on Jeff, is hopefully as part of your motion you would
encourage us to formulate -- and, Jeff, make sure I use the right
terminology here -- but formulate a temporary right of use that makes
it clear that once -- in this case or in a specific case, that the facility
does function as a collector arterial, that the access, the legal access,
off of the local street would be the only access provided.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'll make that motion and
include the suggestion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And I'll second the motion.
Page 255
March 25-26, 2008
Just to clarify on this issue, it's my understanding that when that
section becomes curb and gutter.
MR. FEDER: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's correct?
MR. FEDER: When we go curb and gutter for four lane between
951 and Santa Barbara.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And I just want to recognize,
Mr. Feder got out in front of this. That is why Barbara pulled her
petition, and I just want to thank him for doing that. It's great.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I also like the fact that they're
going to be sending everybody letters and explaining what the
situation is well in advance so there's not panic at the last minute and
even telling them about the permitting, temporary permitting, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And ifI may also point out on--
bring something up, is the fact that public petitions do work. It's
because of the fact that it was going through the public petition case
that this got the exposure it needed, and it's a wonderful way for
people to bring items before their commissioners at no cost, to be able
to just get them up in front of us and give them a chance to weigh in
on them.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I agree with that, Commissioner, but
Mr. Feder had a solution even before the public petition was on--
posted on the Novis agenda, and that's what I'm recognizing is his
proactiveness in resolving issues.
After all, it's not about -- it's not about me, it's not about us. It's
about the public.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's exactly right, why we got
public petitions, but I still think they help to massage the system
along, I really do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Great believer in them.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any more discussion on the motion?
Page 256
March 25-26, 2008
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MS. SEGURA: Thank you. Thanks.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2008-76: REAPPOINTING JUDITH HUSHON,
APPOINTING ALLISON DELAINE MEGRA TH AND PAUL
LEHMANN AS REGULAR MEMBERS AND APPOINTING
SUSAN LEACH SNYDER AS AN AL TERNA TE TO THE
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us back to item 9A,
appointment of members to the Environmental Advisory Council.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, on this one, I -- we have the
recommendations. I would like a broad-based board. This board is
very important. And it appears that we have a lot of members from the
coast. Lee Horn resigned. So I'm going to make a motion -- we have
two appointments and two alternates?
MS. FILSON: No, sir. We have -- well, we have a total of four
appointments. And just to set the record straight, there is no
recommendation. This is a quasijudicial committee.
On the second page I put possible appointments because one
person is asking for reappointment, Alison Megrath, she currently
serves as an alternate member. She would like to be appointed as a
Page 257
March 25-26, 2008
regular member. And then we have two additional members -- two
additional applicants. One of those would have to be appointed as a
regular member and one as alternate member because the ordinance
states that alternate members must be technical members. So I'm
currently advertising now for a nontechnical member.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So today we're appointing a regular
one and an alternate?
MS. FILSON: No. You're going to appoint four. You're going
to appoint -- if you appoint Judith Hushon for reappointment, that's
one; Alison Megrath currently serves as an alternate. If you appoint
her as a regular member, that would be two. And then Paul Lehmann
and Susan Snyder, one of those would be an alternate and one would
be a regular.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I'm going to make a motion to
appoint Paul Leeberman (sic) and Alison Megrath as members, and
Susan Snyder and Judy Huchison (sic) as alternates.
MS. FILSON: No. We only need one alternate, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Judith Hushon is currently serving as a regular
member, so she would--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Judith Huchison (sic)--
MS. FILSON: -- be reappointed.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- as the alternate?
MS. FILSON: You're going to appoint her as the alternate?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Should I not?
MS. FILSON: No, that's fine. She's a regular member now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh.
MS. FILSON: And she's asking for reappointment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I'm going to
change my motion to Judy Huchison as the member.
MS. FILSON: So she would be reappointed, Alison Megrath
would serve as a regular member. She's now serving as an alternate.
Page 258
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MS. FILSON: Paul Lehmann would be serving as a regular
member, and then Susan Snyder would be the alternate.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Then I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's part of my motion.
Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
MS. FILSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. So we
reappointed three -- we appointed three members, regular members?
MS. FILSON: Yes. Well, yes. You appointed three regular
members --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: With one alternate.
MS. FILSON: -- and one alternate. And I'm advertising right
now for a regular member because that member has to be
nontechnical.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2008-77: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUPPORTING HOUSE BILL 965
AND SENATE BILL 1660, EXEMPTION OF CERTAIN
PERSONAL INFORMATION OF EMPLOYEES WORKING AS
PARAMEDICS AND EMTS - ADOPTED
Page 259
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Next item is 9B.
MR. OCHS: 9B, sir, is the resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners supporting House Bill 965 and Senate Bill 1660,
exemption of certain personal information of employees working as
paramedics and EMTs. And Commissioner Henning submitted this
item.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioners, it was a request that
the board send a resolution to our delegation and other members of the
legislation. I really don't like exemptions, but the fact is that the
police and fire department enjoy the anonymity of personal
information such as their home address and spouses.
My understanding of the bill, it doesn't exempt their -- how much
they're paid. It just exempts their personal information, social security
number and so on and so forth.
So I'm going to make a motion to approve this item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second the motion for a little bit
of discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Was -- did somebody ask you to put
this on here? Was it something that was a concern with them?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. This bill-- it's actually an EMT,
present EMT or a paramedic. I'm not sure his exact title.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This was on the legislative -- it was a
bill the previous year -- no, two years ago -- and the Board of
Commissioners -- Collier County Board of Commissioners sent up a
resolution supporting it at that time. From my understanding, Collier
and Lee is the one that has the highest number of paramedics and
EMTs ran by the county. And Lee County supports this bill also.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion?
Page 260
March 25-26, 2008
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, sir.
Item #lOB
THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY INSURANCE FOR THE
PERIOD APRIL 1,2008 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2009 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $3,571,427, A REDUCTION OF $510,262-
APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Next item is item lOB. That is a recommendation
to approve the purchase of property insurance for the period April 1,
2008, through March 31, 2009, in the amount of three million five
hundred and seventy one dollars -- excuse me -- four hundred
twenty-seven dollars, a reduction of $510,262.
And Jeff Walker, your risk management director, will present.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second.
Questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Page 261
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. WALKER: Thank you.
Item #10C
RESOLUTION 2008-78 A RESOLUTION (INITIATING
RESOLUTION) OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
PURSUANT TO PART II OF CHAPTER 171, FLORIDA
STATUTES (FLORIDA'S INTERLOCAL SERVICE BOUNDARY
ACT) TO COMMENCE THE PROCESS FOR NEGOTIATING AN
INTERLOCAL SERVICE BOUNDARY AGREEMENT
REGARDING 22.04 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS,
DESCRIBED AS THE SENIOR CARE SITE, PROPOSED TO BE
ANNEXED INTO THE CITY OF NAPLES - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: The next item is item lOCo That is a
recommendation to adopt a resolution -- actually an initiating
resolution of the Board of County Commissioners for Collier County,
Florida, pursuant to part two of Chapter 171, Florida Statutes, which is
the Florida Interlocal Service Boundary Act, to commence the process
for negotiating an interlocal service boundary agreement regarding
22.04 acres of land, more or less, described as the senior care site
proposed to be annexed into the City of Naples.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This is the county attorney's item?
MR. OCHS: Actually it was the county manager's item, Mr.
Chairman. The City of Naples had advised us that they had received a
request from the -- from the agent of the owner of this 22 acres of land
Page 262
March 25-26, 2008
to be annexed into the city.
As has been our routine over the past several requests that we've
received for annexation, we are asking for an initiating resolution to
allow us to begin the process of negotiating the impacts of this
potential annexation with the City of Naples. And not only are we
inviting the City of Naples to participate, but also the East Naples Fire
and Rescue Department.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would guess if they keep annexing,
especially the expensive tax areas into the city, pretty soon we're
going to be asking them for money for the parks instead of the reverse.
MR. OCHS: Good point.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's a very good point. I think
you're right on.
Anything else, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have a real concern about annexing
this property and for the use of. They want to use it for assisted living
facilities or an -- adult living facilities. To me that's not a proper use,
so I wish that you would convey that to the City of Naples.
This is adjacent to Naples Airport, this is adjacent to the zoo, the
Naples Zoo, and a residential project there will generate some
complaints from those two uses, those two existing uses.
You know how many complaints that we have about the airport
that's been here since World War II from communities that came in
after World War II. And, of course, we can't -- if it's annexed,
basically we have no say-so about what the uses is going to be on this
property .
But I think a residential property in any form is going to be an
inappropriate use next to it.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we're aware of the fact that
Page 263
March 25-26, 2008
our Growth Management Plan does not necessarily coincide with what
Naples has in mind.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that quite often, especially
commercial entities, will like to get into the city for the simple fact
that what the county doesn't allow, the city is much more tolerant of.
They seem to allow a larger growth. They're not concerned about the
arterial highways as much as we are; however, with that said, if they
did not go along with us, they still got a process they can go through
without us, and we're just not a player.
Maybe Mr. Weigel would like to add to that.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. Deputy County Manager Ochs has
explained the fact that with the recent legislation of two and three
years ago, this does allow the county to have a -- an interaction with
the city that previously did not exist.
And so to the extent that the board would endorse going forward
with the resolution and the ability for us -- for the county to interact
with the city, the county staff, from the county manager's side, and the
county attorney's side, certainly can report back to the board both
informally and formally in a very periodic way so that you would
know what was going on.
And additionally, this does give the county the opportunity in a,
I'll call it a semi-bargaining position, to explore the impacts of what
annexation would be relative to our potential loss of impact fees, you
know, consistent with whatever development may occur, looking at
road -- road issues. We sometimes have sanitation issues,
water/wastewater issues, et cetera.
So from that standpoint, this coming to you today is, I think, a --
we'll call it a good management opportunity to look at how this may
go forward. It may not prevent the annexation, but it does cause the
city to have to go a bit introspective and provide us an urban service
report that shows impacts both ways. So I hope I've answered your
Page 264
March 25-26, 2008
question.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I agree with Mr. Weigel. I
went through this last year with --
MR. WEIGEL: We sure did.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- the Commerce Park over
here. And at the time I went in with all sorts of misgivings, but I'll tell
you the concessions that were made back and forth was to the county's
benefit. But you can still reject the final deal that's put together.
That's always an option. But not to be a player at the table and allow
City of Naples to go forward on their own, I think, would be a huge
mistake.
So I'd make a motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll second the motion as long as the
concerns of the Board of County Commissioners are conveyed during
the negotiations, talks --
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- discussions.
MR. WEIGEL: You'll be assured of that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I'm not mistaken, won't
Commissioner Henning be at those?
MR. OCHS: Yes. We have usually one member of the board
that is invited to sit with us at the negotiations.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's you.
MR. OCHS: Typically that's the chair. So once we get those
meetings established, we'll get those on your calendar, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. Commissioner, the only
reason I said that is if the board doesn't share my concerns about the
use of the property, residential use, or the board doesn't -- or I -- the
board doesn't agree with Commissioner Fiala about the annexation of
high properties and the use of ad valorem dollars and so on and so
forth, then I have, in my opinion, no reason to bring it up.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can't see any problem,
Page 265
March 25-26, 2008
Commissioner Henning. You get on there, you -- we're not giving you
directions what to do or not to do. You know what's in the board's
best interest. It always has to come back to this board as a sitting
board to be able to make that final decision. I trust that you'll do well.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And you made some very
good points about the noise from the airport and the problems that
might follow once it becomes residential. Right now they're just
saying senior center, but that can change dramatically. It just is
highest and best use right now, which it could very well change, and
they might want other things as far as our road goes and road cuts,
lights and so forth, so we need somebody at the table to -- at the
bargaining table.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, unanimous.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
Item #lOG
RESOLUTION 2008-79: RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT
FINAL APPROVAL OF THE ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF
Page 266
March 25-26, 2008
OLDE CYPRESS UNIT ONE (OLDE CYPRESS PUD). THE
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE
PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED - MOTION TO RELEASE BOND
EXCEPT FOR $100,000 UNTIL BUFFER IS COMPLETE-
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, next item is lOG. This item was
continued from the February 26, 2008, BCC meeting. It was further
continued to the March 25, 2008, BCC meeting. It's a
recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway and drainage
improvements for the final plat of Olde Cypress unit one. The
roadway and drainage improvements will be privately maintained.
This item will be presented by Stan Chrzanowski, your senior
engineer from community development and environmental services.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Good morning, Commissioners. Stan
Chrzanowski with engineering review. This item was continued a few
times because there were outstanding issues that remained open.
Those issues have all been resolved. If anybody has any questions, I'd
be glad to answer them, but --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions by the board?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: None for me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I know you're looking at me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm going to make a motion to
approve, but I do have questions.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This has been on our agenda for two
or three months?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir, maybe two.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What was the issues of why it was
continued constantly?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Some of the estimates that were in the
Page 267
March 25-26, 2008
PUD document were still up in the air as far as Logan Boulevard.
Transportation had an issue as to the maintenance of that extension
road because Saturnia Falls to the north will probably use that road as
an entrance, and the heavy trucks will probably tear that road -- not
tear that road up, but the heavy trucks will abuse the road more than
vehicle traffic will, and there was an issue of who would actually be
responsible for the maintenance. And the issue has been resolved with
transportation.
And we had some buffer issues that have been ironed out and --
about it, I think.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The landscaping buffering?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There still is an issue with
landscaping buffering to the south between Vita Tuscana.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir. The landscaping is being
installed as we speak.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, there's an issue about that
landscaping, whether it's the proper one or not.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir. The PUD, Exhibit C, was a
drawing done by outside productions, and that is not the exact plan
that was approved by the county landscape architect who, after four
reviews, finally approved the plan done by Johnson.
Some people that have looked at it say it's a better, thicker buffer
than what was on the outside production plans, which was Exhibit C
to the PUD, but some of the residents don't think it is. I don't know
how that's going to be resolved.
We inspect -- engineering inspects by the approved drawing, not
by the PUD conceptual schematic plan, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that buffer -- that's a part oftract
R-3.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: It's -- I'm not sure the tract, but the
buffer sits partially on Vita Tuscana and partially on Olde Cypress.
Page 268
March 25-26, 2008
It's a 20-foot -- it's supposed to be a type D buffer for -- it's what they
call an enhanced type D buffer.
And I'm not sure, you know, when you have like a code type D
buffer, it's easy to review it because you're going off code; a concern
size tree every so many feet and a certain amount of shrubs. But when
they -- when they called for an enhanced buffer, you'd actually have to
have somebody from the landscape department to tell me what
enhanced means. We only go by the drawings we're given to inspect
by.
And it is heavily enhanced, but --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is this a part of tract R-3, this buffer?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: I don't know, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, I -- I don't know
whether I should keep my motion in. Well, here's a map right here.
And it is right against the -- Treeline Boulevard where this buffer's
supposed to go.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Part of the road sits against Treeline
Boulevard. Part of it sits against a golf course with some homes
behind it and the lakes.
The outside production drawing showed a 100- foot stretch of a
typical enhanced buffer that I guess was supposed to be repeated, and
they had a slightly different version that abutted the road as opposed
to the version that abutted the golf course, and the -- and the lake.
And the, I guess, point of contention is that the Johnson drawing
showed the entire strip, all the landscaping instead of just that 100-foot
repetitive piece. And the part near the -- it's roughly the same number
of trees, the land -- the Johnson drawing has five types of trees. The
outside production drawings has three types of three. The Johnson
drawing has eight types of shrub. The outside production drawing has
two types of shrub.
There are differences that you can see. But my understanding is
the end product is supposed to be such that it's a visual buffer, and I'm
Page 269
March 25-26, 2008
not sure how achieving that one way or another really does matter, but
I'm only an engineer. You know, to me an olive tree is an oak tree. I
mean, they basically hide things.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: One has fruit on it, one doesn't.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I -- that landscaping buffer is on tract
R-3.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: I believe it straddles the property line.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. I'm going to remove my
motion. I think we ought to continue this until we resolve this issue.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: IfI may, the buffer was supposed to
have been installed with the Olde Cypress PUD. That was supposed
to just be a type D buffer. The enhanced buffer was a commitment of
the H.D. Development PUD to the south. That's why they straddled it
onto the Olde Cypress property. The buffer really has nothing to do
with the Olde Cypress infrastructure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I looked at the PUD and it said
that each tract will be -- have a landscaping buffer. There never was
one on this tract to the south.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: There was a line of trees that, I think
one of the landscapers said, might have sufficed as the buffer. It was a
line of deciduous trees -- not deciduous, but non-palm trees that were
taken out at one point, I guess, after a hurricane, and then a line of
palm trees were put in, and that's what's being replaced with this
enhanced buffer that's going in along the south --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't agree the palm --
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: -- of Olde Cypress.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- the palm trees were there, but that
was the only thing there. Any of our landscaping buffers need to have
a hedge. There never was a hedge there that I know of, at least that's
what I'm told. There isn't one today, and I just have a concern about
releasing this bond and things are not done, and that's the whole point
Page 270
March 25-26, 2008
of the bond.
So we have a public speaker?
MS. FILSON: We have one speaker, sir. Keith Gelder.
MR. GELDER: Good morning. For the record, Keith Gelder,
Stock Development. I think it's important to make a point of
clarification. These infrastructure improvements are governed by an
escrow maintenance agreement, and to my understanding, I don't
believe landscaping improvements are included in that bond amount.
I don't believe that's correct.
I believe the landscaping buffers are part of the PUD, which are
PUD commitments, which we're continuing to meet throughout the
buildout ofOlde Cypress. Olde Cypress is not built out yet, and we're
going to continue to meet our obligations, you know, as Olde Cypress
continues to be built out.
And we will be pursuing a built-out agreement once all the units
are constructed in Olde Cypress. But from terms of this -- this bond
and infrastructure, it's limited to just that. I think we need to clarify
whether these landscaping improvements were included because I
don't think that's true.
I believe we've met all the criteria of the escrow and maintenance
agreement. I mean, these -- the infrastructure improvements have
been completed for a couple of years, and they've been inspected and
signed off on. So maybe I'm missing the point, but I don't think that
the landscaping improvements are included in that. So that's really my
only point.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, maybe we'll get a clarification
on that.
MR. GELDER: Okay, thank you.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: I don't have the agreement in front of
me, sir, but generally, as was stated by Dave Weigel earlier in one of
these other proceedings, these bonds and maintenance agreements
come with an engineer's estimate of costs, and the engineer's estimate
Page 271
March 25-26, 2008
of costs sums up how much road, how much utilities, how much
whatever.
I doubt if the cost of the landscaping was in that agreement. I can
go back and look. But if it was, it's only a small part of the amount
they want released. I can't tell you if it's in there or not right now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can we have a partial release?
Would that be appropriate?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Well, what if -- what if it's not in there?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, then we have to give them all
the money.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Should we --
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: We do that all the time. We do partial
releases all the time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I need some guidance on this. I want
to make sure that the commitments in the bond are done, and we don't
know if the landscaping is there.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. What about -- what about
going another avenue? The concern is the landscaping for tract three.
What about if this gentleman tells us and then puts in writing that
they will landscape this tract, so then that would be the last of the
concerns with the people. Landscape it to whatever level it was
supposed to be landscaped.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Once he's given his commitment
and puts that in writing, then release the bond and then we're done.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: I want to understand. This is the
landscaping on the south side of --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Tract R.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: -- Treeline and tract R?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, yeah. It's right in here --
Page 272
March 25-26, 2008
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: That butts between Vita Tuscana and
Olde Cypress where we're putting in an enhanced D buffer right now.
We don't put two buffers together, I don't think.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I know, I know, but the highlighted
area here is what I understand that we're releasing the bond. They're
supposed to have a perimeter buffer around there, and there's concerns
that it's not done. That's all.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir, but I think the Vita Tuscana
buffer that straddles the property line takes the place of this other one.
I know you're saying that in the Olde Cypress PUD it calls for a type
D buffer, but we don't put one type D against another.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Schmitt?
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, Commissioner, and I'm -- just to refresh
your memory, because I know this has come up before, but this is a
requirement of the Vita Tuscana PUD, and it's a PUD commitment
that was expressed clearly on the record, and we're holding Vita
Tuscana responsible for the installation of that buffer. That's the
enhanced buffer, in some areas almost up to 40 feet.
It did involve the removing of the cart path and some other items
that were part of Olde Cypress that encroached on the Vita Tuscana
property. That's all being dealt with. The buffer where -- again, we're
holding the responsibility to Empire now, who is the successor to the
RD. Development PUD, as it's officially called.
And the other -- the PUD for Olde Cypress, yes, it is residential
against residential. And I don't have my chart with me, but that's no
more than, ifI remember, Stan, 30-foot trees, 30 foot on center. And
this was a requirement to put an enhanced type D buffer based on the
public record and based on the PUD from Vita Tuscana, which, as you
know, is being input -- or being placed today.
But it's certainly your prerogative, if you want to hold off on this
until that is done. We know it's being put in. There are some issues of
whether the number of trees that were specified in the approved plan
Page 273
March 25-26,2008
were planted.
We have inspectors going out there again today. Normally we do
not inspect until after the project is completed. There have been some
concerns from the residents out there. Daryl Hughes, I think Daryl
went out there; did he not? Daryl went out there and he's out there
against this morning meeting with one of the residents reviewing the
landscaping.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you're telling us that Empire's
taking up Olde Cypress's commitment for a landscaping buffer?
MR. SCHMITT: The commitment on the record was Empire
would put that landscaping in on both sides of the property line, and
that was the plan that was approved. That was what was in the PUD,
and that is the PUD commitment for H.D. Development, and that --
that landscaping all the way down Treeline Drive straddles the
property line.
And H.D. Development was -- or is currently responsible for
putting the landscaping on both sides of that buffer, up to the point to
the end oftheir property. And then they have another -- I don't know.
We have the map here. But they have another parcel that belongs to
them that is part of -- that's a resi -- or it's an ago development. There
may be some dispute about the landscaping there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know what? Instead of
discussing this more, since it's unclear if the landscaping is within this
bond, I'm going to just make a motion to release the bond except for a
hundred thousand dollars until the landscaping buffer to the south
border is complete.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'll second the motion for
discussion.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Can I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Does that definition of complete have to
come back to the board, or do we determine when it's complete, or do
Page 274
March 25-26, 2008
the -- or who determines completion?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think it needs to come back to the
board, or could staff determine that it's complete? You have to sign
off on it, correct?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Maybe that's sufficient, Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: That can be, as you desire, either way.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I trust the landscaping expert
in the county to sign off on it that it is complete.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir. It won't be me. It will be the
county landscaper.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I apologize for that long discussion.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Item #10H
THE PURCHASE OF A 4.98 ACRE IMPROVED PROPERTY
(PARCEL NO. 147) AND A VACANT, 4.27 ACRE PARCEL
(PARCEL NO. 146), BOTH OF WHICH ARE REQUIRED FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT - APPROVED
Page 275
March 25-26, 2008
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, the next item is item 10H,
recommendation to approve the purchase of a 4.98-acre improved
property parcel number 147 and a vacant 4.2-acre parcel, parcel
number 146, both of which are required for the construction of the
Vanderbilt Beach Road extension project, project number 60168.
Fiscal impact, $1,977,600. Jay Ahmad, your director of
transportation engineering and construction management, will present.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, if I may?
MR. AHMAD: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sir, you're doing a wonderful
job. We appreciate the fact that we're moving expeditiously toward
purchasing all these lots with homes on it and relieving the owners of
the problems of what's going to happen next.
I -- my question is, before I make a motion for approval, how
many more are out there, homes, are you aware of that still have to be
purchased to be able to make the -- that area whole as far as the
residents go?
MR. AHMAD: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
My name is Jay Ahmad, for the record. I'm your director of
transportation engineering.
Out of the 13 parcels that were required for phase 1 from Collier
to Wilson, we have three remaining. Out of the seven parcels from
Wilson to DeSoto, for the whole take now, the property that is
required, residents in there or a whole take, we have three remaining.
So a total of six for the entire project.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's wonderful. And I'll tell
you, the people I've been talking to out there, they were very, very
apprehensive going through the process, but all of them afterwards
came forward. Everyone I talked to said that they thought they were
treated fairly, so compliments go to your department.
And with that, I make a motion for approval.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second.
Page 276
March 25-26, 2008
Discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So in here it says someplace that
you'll allow them to live there for one year. Do we really plan on
building the road in one year with our current economic situation, or
can we let these people, along with other people, stay there longer
until we have the funding in place to actually start construction?
MR. AHMAD: We allow them to -- you're correct,
Commissioner. The agreement is the access for a year, extended
possession, so they can plan their move, and that's what they
requested, and we granted them that as part of the agreement and the
sale price that we agreed on.
And the construction of this project is planned well ahead,
probably in the next five to 10 years. Weare proceeding with the
acquisition of the right-of-way so we can secure those properties up to
Wilson as per the gift and purchase resolution that you approved in
2006, and we're going to be proceeding with those acquisitions in the
next few years.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, but you didn't answer my
question.
MR. AHMAD: I'm sorry. The construction is five to 10 years.
It's not in our five-year ORC plan, but there are developments out
there that could possibly make this project -- large developments such
as Big Cypress, or somebody could -- once we secure the
right-of-way, somebody could get these properties and -- could get
this construction project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So in other words, even -- even
though the construction isn't started, the people must move anyway; is
that it? I'm just trying to understand.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can I -- may I --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
Page 277
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- help with this?
And you're right, I see what you're saying from that end, but
people want to get on with their lives. This one year gives them that
breathing space to be able to ride the market out, to be able to find out
what the options are out there.
To extend it past that, it probably wouldn't be advantageous
because somebody's got to maintain the property, somebody's got to
be able to take care of it, and it becomes a -- it becomes a liability to
the county because basically you're letting them stay for free.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And it could be a real problem
because, you know, people might get their lives together, might move
on, next thing you know you've got --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- other people living there and
they're renting it out.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Next?
Item #lOI
RESOLUTION 2008-80: TO AMEND AND CLARIFY THE
COUNTYS STORMW ATER FUNDING POLICY; FUNDING OF
Page 278
March 25-26, 2008
STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT; FINDINGS AND PURPOSE;
CAP IT AL AND OPERATING BUDGET; DEFINITIONS; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, the next item is lOr. That is a
recommendation to adopted a resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, to amend and clarify the
county's stormwater funding policy, funding of stormwater
management, findings and purpose, capital and operating budget,
definitions and providing an effective date.
Norman Feder, your transportation services administrator, will
present.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I had the opportunity to talk to Jerry
Kurtz on this item, and agree, and I'm going to make a motion to
approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay -- oh. Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Henning to
approve, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, ifI could, first of all, thank you,
and also I want to recognize Clarence Tears was here all day yesterday
in support of this issue, and I just wanted to recognize his effort. He
Page 279
March 25-26, 2008
wasn't able to be here today.
Item #lOK
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER A REQUEST TO MODIFY
HALDEMAN CREEK DREDGING MUNICIPAL SERVICES
TAXING UNIT ORDINANCE NO. 2006-60 BY ADDING 5
PARCELS AND MODIFY SECTION SIX-B TO ADD OR
OWNERS OF RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
MR. OCHS: Next item is 10K, and that was an item that was
moved off of the consent agenda. Formerly item 16B3. That is a
recommendation to consider a request to modify Haldeman Creek
dredging municipal taxing unit ordinance 2006-60 by adding five
parcels and modify section 6B to add other owners of residential or
commercial property.
Diane Flagg, your director of alternative transportation modes, is
here to present.
MS. FLAGG: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
This is an item at the request of the Haldeman Creek Advisory
Board to add five parcels. The five parcels are depicted here on the
map, here. And you see the -- well, it's hard to see, here.
The original MSTU boundary did not include these five parcels,
although they are on the waterfront. The reason being is that when
stormwater did their project for Haldeman Creek, the area of the
waterway in front of these five parcels were not included in the
stormwater proj ect.
On review, the MSTU Advisory Committee, they asked that
these five parcels, because they are going to benefit from maintaining
the waterway, that they also be included.
This -- the motion today is just to get your approval to amend the
ordinance, then the ordinance will be advertised and it will come back
Page 280
March 25-26, 2008
to you for an approval.
In addition, on the previous map, the area along Bayshore Drive,
which is that eastern boundary, has marinas and commercial property
owners, and there's been a request by several commercial property
owners that they have the opportunity to serve on the advisory
committee because they are within the MSTU boundary. So the other
part of the ordinance that we would seek to amend, with your
approval, is to give commercial property owners an opportunity to
serve on the advisory committee.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can you zoom in on that and show us
the commercial properties.
MS. FLAGG: This is Bayshore Drive right here, and this is the
waterway that would be maintained, and marinas on this side of
Bayshore are within the MSTU boundary.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: They are existing with the MSTU
boundary?
MS. FLAGG: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Now, which properties that --
commercial properties that you want to add?
MS. FLAGG: We're not adding commercial properties. The--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh.
MS. FLAGG: The five parcels that are being requested to add
are residential properties, and those parcels are right here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Now I understand. You -- the
ordinance probably states now that only residents can --
MS. FLAGG: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- sit on there? I see. Well, I'm going
to make a motion to approve. Thanks for your explanation.
MS. FLAGG: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
Page 281
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. Thank
you.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, that moves us to item 11, public
comments on general topics.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, I have no one registered for public
comment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Go to 12.
MR. OCHS: That item under 12A has been continued to your
April 22nd meeting.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Then we go to communications.
Always starting out with the county manager.
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir, thank you. We have three quick items this
morning under communications.
The first one has to do with the -- with item 6E that you heard
yesterday morning, and that was a public petition request from a
resident of the City of Naples regarding a request to have some county
funding for the City of Naples park system, and the board had directed
the staff to come back with a funding policy recommendation at the
next meeting.
Because of the size of that analysis, staff is asking if the board
Page 282
March 25-26, 2008
would allow us to come back at the second meeting of April because
this is a fairly substantial change in our policy and it will take some
time to complete the staff analysis, and we want to make sure that you
have the best information that we can give you so that you can make
the best informed decision and direct the staff accordingly. So we're
asking for a little bit more time to get that right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does any of my colleagues have a
problem with the request from the County Manager's Office?
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I have a little bit of a
concern. When we talked about it yesterday -- and it went pretty
quickly at the time -- but in thinking about it a lot deeper, what we're
actually talking about is funding more parks than we've ever funded
before, as we divide things up among all of the cities and -- which
then jeopardizes our park system; is that correct?
MR. OCHS: Potentially, yes, ma'am. It's basically what you
would call a zero sum game. There's a fixed amount of money, that
that money now goes into your county parks and recreation system. If
you reallocate some of those dollars to municipal park and recreation
systems, that obviously leaves less of that fixed amount of money to
fund your system.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. And then secondly -- and I'm
just going to talk about Marco Island now, and I would have to check
with them to make sure that what I'm saying is absolutely on target.
But I think they enjoy their parks tremendously and they would
not want to be beholden to us or our dollars because then we would --
we might have a say in what they're doing in their parks, because now
we begin to fund them. And I don't know if they'd really like that too
much.
But I would have to ask them for that because, just maybe --
because we do take care of our two parks on Marco as it is. And I
think we need to -- should do a more in-depth study of this because
Page 283
March 25-26, 2008
our park system is already suffering to some degree with lack of
funds, and now if we're spreading them further, that makes it really
tough.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, so you're in
agreement that, instead of bringing it to the next meeting, bringing it
to the second meeting in April --
MR. OCHS: Which would be April 22nd meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- so we can get more of that
information?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, you're absolutely right. And
you will check with them, right, or shall I?
MR. OCHS: We will.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, thank you. One of the
things we want to keep in mind, what we were talking about was
trying to come up with a prorated share for what -- the
non-municipality residents' use of the parks; in other words, county
residents that come from different parts of the county outside of the
municipality that don't contribute to the municipality's tax base.
And that's the whole nexus of what we're looking at. It's not just
an even share going to each park, but the City of Naples has the lion's
share. They have a large percentage of non-city people using the
parks.
Everglades City, they have a percentage, too, although their
needs are considerably smaller compared to like Everglades City. I'm
not too sure what happens when we get to Marco Island.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. You know, usually you don't
see county kids on Marco that much because it's a longer trip. They
usually stay within the park system. Like, for instance, the only kids
that would go to Marco would be East Naples kids, and they already
have the parks in East Naples. So I doubt that many ofthem would
Page 284
March 25-26, 2008
travel to Marco to use that.
And as I said, I don't know that Marco would really -- I mean,
they'll take any funding we would give them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, of course.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure. But I think that they like the
privilege of just overseeing their own parks and paying for their own
parks without us getting in the way.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have no problem with bringing
it back a couple meetings from now and be able to do an in-depth
study. It's an item that's worthy of consideration. It doesn't mean
we're going to, in the end, be able to do anything, but we certainly
have to know what the ramifications are.
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And maybe there could be different
levels. Maybe, for instance -- now we were just talking about
Fleischmann, then we talked about Pulling Park. Well, maybe there
aren't other parks in the city that are even concerned with this. Maybe
the city parks are used more by county kids than they would be on
Marco or Everglades City. I mean, I don't know anybody who would
drive from East Naples for an hour to get to Everglades City to go to
their park and -- but they -- you know, they might. You know, you
never can tell. But that's a long way to go.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: To answer your question, we have
unanimous understanding this is going to come in the second meeting
in April.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, sir.
The next item that we have is a -- just to inform the board that the
staff has asked the City of Naples ifthey would like to continue the
quarterly meetings with the Board of County Commissioners.
As the board will recall, you've had a quarterly meeting schedule
of -- the last quarter of '07 we did not meet. We were trying to work
with then City Manager Bob Lee on an agenda, he had asked for a
Page 285
March 25-26, 2008
little more time and, of course, he left.
So our staff has followed up with City Manager Moss. He has
sent back an email response that the Naples City Council does not at
this time wish to meet on a quarterly basis. They'd prefer to wait until
they have some what they described as more substantive items to talk
about. So I just wanted to let the board know that we have followed
up and we've attempted to try to set that meeting on the quarterly
schedule that the board had asked us to. But as of this date, the city
has respectfully declined.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we can't force anyone to
meet with us, that's for sure. But we may want to step back just a little
bit. I think to try to keep the contact level going, maybe just step
down a little bit and direct the chair to work with the county manager
to set up a meeting between the city manager and the mayor possibly
on a bimonthly basis to keep this contact going and the discussion
gOIng.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. If that's the pleasure of the board, we'll do
that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What's your recommendation? Is
there a need to do that or -- or as-need basis?
MR. OCHS: I would suggest on an as-needed -- on an as-needed
basis. That certainly seems to be the way that the city is asking to
proceed at this point.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think Commissioner Coletta's
recommendation has some merit based upon as-need basis.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, you know, who identifies
the as need? By having a regular meeting set up like every other
month, you can go ahead and start working an agenda towards it, and
if you don't have an agenda, you can cancel the meeting. But as an
as-need basis, it's going to take some outside force to be able to move
Page 286
March 25-26, 2008
it forward.
And with that said, I'm also curious if we're going to be able to
keep the dialogue going with the school board like we have for the
past year where the manager -- county manager and the chair was
meeting with the chair of the school board and superintendent.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: How often was that taking place?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, it was a monthly basis,
but then again, too, if we didn't have any subject material, we just
cancelled the meeting. They were most helpful.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We should probably do the same for
the City of Naples?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Well, you set it up and
then you can cancel it if there's no -- if there's nothing to discuss, you
know. Then you can look at your calendar way ahead and know it's
there and you've got that to be able to move items to it for discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then if the items are worthy of
a joint meeting, then you can go ahead and set that up.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Doesn't the county manager already
meet with the city manager? I mean, I've run across them in
restaurants on a Friday here and there.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. They had a monthly meeting, Mr.
Mudd and Dr. Lee. I don't know --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And he also met with Bill Moss.
MR. OCHS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. OCHS: I don't know ifhe's set those with Mr. Moss yet, but
he may have. I don't have access to that information right now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Nothing would be as important
as having the two elected officials that represent the county and the
city at those types of meetings.
Page 287
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETT A: You know, not that it's not
wrong (sic) with county manager and the city manager meeting
whenever they deem it's necessary, socially or for business. But I
really do think it's necessary to have officials there, for some.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I do think it's a good idea, and also,
I never even realized that we were meeting with the school board until
you just said that now, so we never even got a report back to tell us
about what was happening.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, you did.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, did we?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. There was different
items that came up. As they were moving forward, they came back to
the board here --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- for direction. It was all sorts
of thing. One in particular was how you handle the bus transfer area
for the school. A lot of that was discussed in the meetings with the
superintendent.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And then that information was
brought back to the board, and the board helped to direct which way it
should go.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see, okay.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, what our office may do, with your
permission, is contact the superintendent and the city manager and see
if they are amenable to that type of quarterly meeting with the
manager and the chairman or chairperson of the elected body, and we
could set those on a quarterly basis, but explain that if there's nothing
to discuss, we can just cancel that quarter's meeting --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
MR. OCHS: -- and move on to the next.
Page 288
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One further suggestion, if I
may. That -- so that it doesn't become so definite -- and our calendars
are absolutely atrocious -- that if the chair can't make it, that the
vice-chair could be able to take that position if a meeting's planned. In
other words, if you get your schedule, there's a meeting planned and
your schedule gets so that it's impossible for one reason or another,
personal or business, that the chair -- Commissioner Fiala would be
able to go from your place just so we have a representative there. Just
a suggestion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Now, correct me ifI'm wrong,
Commissioner. Those meetings took place on a monthly basis? Am I
correct on that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, with the school board.
We never set up a series of meetings with the City of Naples per se.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The school board was
monthly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It was monthly, but, once again,
those meetings didn't always take place.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If there was nothing to place on
the agenda to be able to discuss or there was no business that would be
between the two bodies, then the meetings were just cancelled.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And you're suggesting to do the same
thing this year, carry on that policy?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think it's a wonderful idea to
have that contact, and then all sorts of ideas can come forward. Of
course, final discussions can never be made in that particular meeting,
but they can be brought back to the respective board to be acted on.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right, okay.
MR. OCHS: I was suggesting quarterly, but if you'd prefer to set
them on a monthly basis, I'll communicate that to the other
jurisdictions.
Page 289
March 25-26, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. I think it's a great idea. Let's
be consistent.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thanks to Commissioner Coletta.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, the final item that -- last evening
we got a communication after the meeting from the Naples Daily
News that they had failed to place an advertised -- an advertisement
that relates to an item that was approved under your summary agenda
yesterday morning, and that item was 17B. It was a recommendation
to adopt a resolution approving amendments to fiscal year 2007/2008
adopted budget.
Because that does require a public advertisement -- and I'll look
for county attorney to help guide me on this -- but I believe because
we're still in session, you have the ability to reconsider that item. And
if you do, we would ask for a motion to reconsider that item followed
by a motion to continue that item to the next board meeting to allow
us to meet the advertising requirements.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. Leo's absolutely on target there in
regard to procedure, two procedures there. One, a motion to
reconsider, which is being taken during the course of the same
meeting, and then the motion to continue.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Entertaining a motion to
reconsider --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved.
MR. OCHS: 17B.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- 17B. There's a motion by
Commissioner Coletta second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 290
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
Entertain a motion to continue 17B to a future agenda.
MR. WEIGEL: I would recommend a specific agenda;
otherwise, you'll have a problem with the advertisement.
MR. OCHS: It could make the April 8th agenda, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to continue item 17B to the
April 8th BCC meeting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Thank you very much. That's all we have, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Two things, looking
back over the meeting, and one is, in regard to the discussion
concerning municipalities and potential funding assistance from the
county, part of yesterday's discussion did revolve around that
$700,000, which I think reportedly was set aside and is different than
ongoing revenues that might be spent.
And so I think that when the county manager comes back to you,
they'll be talking about that particular $700,000 that had a particular
Page 291
March 25-26, 2008
earmark, if you can still use that term, relating to the City of Naples.
Additionally, you just took action a few minutes ago relating to
the Haldeman Creek MSTU, and the County Attorney Office will be
reporting back to you in the course of that agenda item in a similar
fashion as we will be reporting to you relative to yesterday's item for
the Immokalee Beautification MSTU in the sense that both items
concerned with the addition of property within the MSTUs as they
currently exist.
And we mentioned yesterday, and I guess we would be remiss
not to mention today, that with the last year's Property Tax Reform
Act, which intends to provide -- in one case it reduces home rule, of
course, but additionally it attempts to provide a status quo relative to
property taxes.
I expect that our report in both of those will talk about the fact of
an incremental increase in property tax through an MSTU, it may
provide a very tiny incremental decrease in property tax to the county
residents generally. So just to let you know that that's part of what
will come back with the Haldeman Creek MSTU ordinance as well for
you to consider.
And other than that, it's nice to be back. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's good to have you.
Commissioner Coletta, do you have any communications?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, two things, please.
Jay Ahmad, would you come up here, please, and brief the
commission and the audience about tonight's meeting on the -- or
would it be Mr. Feder?
MR. AHMAD: Mr. Feder.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. We'll get Mr. Feder to
the mike. This is an extremely important meeting, not only for all of
Collier County, but particularly for the Estates, Immokalee, anyone
out in Belle Meade.
Mr. Feder?
Page 292
March 25-26, 2008
MR. FEDER: Yes, Commissioner, appreciate that. This evening
from five to seven, I think it's St. Agnes Church right at the northeast
corner of Vanderbilt and 951, Vanderbilt Beach Road and 951, we
will have a public meeting, we'll have the plans and issues out for a
Wilson Boulevard extension or corridor.
Basically what we're looking at is from Golden Gate Boulevard
where Wilson Boulevard exists today on down to approximately
Landfill Road, the prospects of going over the interstate, something --
an alignment parallelling 951, some said Benfield, but we've got a
wide corridor, so we're looking at all issues in that area, down to 41 as
a new north/south corridor for the future here in the county.
Again, this is long-range planning. This is not something that we
have funded anytime soon in our program, but, nonetheless, trying to
define the corridor, having an understanding of what the options are
and what will be required in the future, and work with the community
both in defining the corridor, and then, if we're able, to define one to
work with them to preserve that corridor for the future.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much, Mr.
Feder.
MR. FEDER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the other item is, I just
want to compliment everyone here, especially the chair, for an
excellent meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, thank you. Yeah, it seems like
when the board gets shorter, we kind of tend to move business, and
I'm sure the same case if I wasn't here either. Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, kind of on the same note, the
three of us ran together for office eight years ago, and here we are all
working together still, and we worked together even in our private
lives before then in one way or another, and here we are all running
for office again. It's kind of an interesting thing, the Three Musketeers
Page 293
March 25-26, 2008
just keep working together. That's all.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I agree with that. It works out
very well when we do that.
And also today, recognizing the commissioners, Commissioner
Coletta having issues on the agenda that was important to him and also
in your agenda (sic) and my district, and referring to that,
Commissioner, works well.
Is there anything else?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The -- there's one thing, and it's --
several people have brought it to my attention, and I don't know if
they have to others.
We have several advisory boards that have certain tasks, and we
depend on our advisory boards for proper guidance on those tasks, but
it appears that some are deviating from that and making
recommendations that doesn't pertain to that task.
And it's a little concerning to some. Let me give you an example.
It was discussed at one of the Planning Commission meetings that the
EAC voted to deny a project, not because of environmental concerns,
but the way the project was laid out. And the Planning Commission
discussed that quite a bit.
Also another committee was talking about the operation of code
enforcement yet they have nothing to do with code enforcement. And
it's very concerning to me, and I think it's appropriate for those -- for
all of our advisory boards to stay on track of what it says in the
ordinance to create the advisory boards. So I just want to get the
others' opinions on that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Actually, I'd heard a little bit about
that myself. And you can understand that -- their exuberance on some
of the issues, but I think that they should be focusing on the thing that
they're created to do, because they're -- that's where their expertise
lies, and somebody else has expertise in another area, and the two
Page 294
March 25-26, 2008
could be very confusing when they come to us if they're diluted. I
agree.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I think you're on target.
Although with that said, I do think that the advisory boards, if they're
not too sure of the direction and need a redefinition from the
commission of what they're doing, they could always say -- send an
appeal to us asking if they're on the right track or if a particular subj ect
item could be broached by them. Who knows? There's all sorts of
possibilities.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Or possibly we could send them a
message just to reiterate what their purpose is, what their mission is so
that everybody knows what we're expecting them to do in their
volunteer position.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But also, they do have a direct
line back to us through their chair to be able to direct him to be able to
write us a letter, be able to make an appeal for a particular item to be
discussed that might be out of their normal purview. Who knows? I
want to leave all options open, although I agree with you, you can get
into subject matter sometimes which isn't your expertise, it muddies
the waters, and the decisions that come down --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Confusing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- aren't always as clear as they
could be.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: May I make a suggestion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That -- direct the chairman to ask the
advisory boards to give us guidance on what their charter is under the
ordinance, but also encourage them to communicate to the Board of
Commissioners; if they see that they need to expand their charter, to
please let us know.
Page 295
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I make one suggestion on
that?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree with you, but I'd feel a
lot more comfortable if we had two other commissioners here with
this discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Get their feedback on it. Ifwe
could have it come back as an item possibly under Board of
Commissioners for discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That would --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Ochs, do you have anything on
that?
MR. OCHS: I just wanted to make sure I understood the
direction. You wanted a future board meeting agenda item under item
9 --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MR. OCHS: -- for discussion?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Or communications; would that work
also?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Not as well. I think it should be
a regular agenda item in case there's someone that -- from one of the
boards that wants to get up there and give us a piece of their mind and
some good advice.
Item #18
ADJOURN - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Absolutely, absolutely. We only
have one more item on the agenda, and I think that's 18. I need a
Page 296
March 25-26, 2008
motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do you need a second?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You got it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
****Commissioner Fiala moved, seconded by Commissioner
Coletta and carried unanimously that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Item #16Bl
AGREEMENT TO ACCEPT DONATED PROPERTY FOR USE
AS RIGHT -OF- WAY ON THE SANTA BARBARA BLVD.
EXTENSION, PROJECT #60091 (POTENTIAL FISCAL IMPACT:
$132.00) - PARCELS 129FEE AND 123TCE
Item # 16B2
AWARD COLLIER COUNTY BID #08-5050 DIESEL POWERED
REFUSE LOADER TO WALLACE INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS
- IN THE AMOUNT OF $184.983.00
Item #16B3 - Moved to Item #10K
Page 297
March 25-26, 2008
Item #16B4
GRANTING SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SHORES OF
BERKSHIRE LAKES CONCERNING THE COMMUNITY'S
REQUEST TO PAY THE COUNTY'S NOISE WALL
CONTRACTOR ON THE SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD
PROJECT, TO CONTINUE INSTALLING THE WALL ALONG
RADIO ROAD AND TO THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE
COMMUNITY (FISCAL IMPACT: $0.00) - CONTRACT
WIDURATEC
Item #16B5
INTERIM IMPACT FEE FOR NEW DRY STORAGE
CONSTRUCTION AT CALUSA ISLAND MARINA UNTIL AN
APPROVED ALTERNATIVE IMPACT FEE STUDY IS
COMPLETED AND THE APPROPRIATE FEE IS DETERMINED
- FOR AN INTERIM IMPACT FEE OF $441.00 PER DRY
BERTH, ONLY UNTIL AN AL TERNA TIVE IMP ACT FEE CAN
BE DETERMINED
Item #16Cl
AWARD BID #08-5039 FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ONE
FUEL TANK FOR THE CARICA REPUMP STATION IN THE
AMOUNT OF $218,839 TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES, INC.-
LOCATED ON GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD
Item # 16C2
AMENDING AWARD OF BID #07-4181 FOR LANDSCAPING
MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION FACILITIES
Page 298
March 25-26, 2008
RESCINDING THE AWARD GIVEN TO FLORIDA LAND
MAINTENANCE AND A WARD IT TO AMERA TECH
INCORPORATED IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $142,312
- AFTER FURTHER NEGOTIATIONS WITH AMERA TECH
Item #16C3
RESOLUTION 2008-67: SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN FOR SOLID
WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY
HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED
IN FULL FOR THE 1993, 1994 AND 1995 SOLID WASTE
COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT; FISCAL IMP ACT IS $48.50 TO RECORD THE
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN - FOLIO #68342480003
Item #16C4
AMENDMENT #7 TO CONTRACT #03-3517 WITH GREELEY
AND HANSEN, LLC FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES FOR WATER MAIN PROJECTS IN THE AMOUNT
OF $230.520 - CR 951 PROJECTS #70151 AND #70152
Item #16Dl
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE A COMPUTER AND
ADDITIONAL OPERATING SUPPLIES AND APPROPRIATE
$4,000 OF RESERVES FOR THE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION
TRUST FUND - TO ENHANCE THE MASTER GARDENER
PLANT CLINIC AND FOR A NEW SEA GRANTIMARINE
SCIENCE OUTREACH PROJECT
Item #16El
Page 299
March 25-26, 2008
A SOUTH FLORIDA PROGRAM GRANT PROPOSAL TO THE
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS) FOR $19,384 (OF
WHICH $8,400 WILL BE REIMBURSABLE) TO FUND A
NATIVE PLANT RESTORATION PROJECT AT THE
CONSERVATION COLLIER OTTER MOUND PRESERVE - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 16E2
A BUREAU OF INVASIVE PLANT MANAGEMENT (BIPM)
GRANT PROPOSAL TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (FDEP) FOR $132,000 TO
FUND AN INVASIVE EXOTIC PLANT REMOVAL PROJECT
AT THE CONSERVATION COLLIER RAILHEAD SCRUB
PRESERVE - FDEP WILL PROVIDE $102,000 FOR
CONTRACTOR SERVICES AND THE COUNTY WILL
PROVIDE A CASH MATCH IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,000 FOR
THE MAINTENANCE OF THE PROJECT
Item # 16E3
A BUREAU OF INVASIVE PLANT MANAGEMENT (BIPM)
GRANT PROPOSAL TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (FDEP) FOR $150,000 TO
FUND AN INVASIVE, EXOTIC PLANT REMOVAL PROJECT
AT THE CONSERVATION COLLIER! CORKSCREW
REGIONAL ECOSYSTEM WATERSHED TRUST STARNES
PROPERTY - FDEP WILL PROVIDE $125,000 FOR
CONTRACTOR SERVICES AND THE COUNTY WILL
PROVIDE A $25,000 CASH MATCH TOWARDS THE
MAINTENANCE OF THE PROJECT
Page 300
March 25-26, 2008
Item #16E4
AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROUP HEALTH
AND FLEXIBLE REIMBURSEMENT INSURANCE PLAN,
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 31, 2008, TO RECOGNIZE THE
VOLUNTARY SEPARATION INCENTIVE PROGRAM - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16E5
RESOLUTION 2008-68: (COMPANION TO ITEM #16G3; MUST
BE APPROVED PRIOR TO ITEM 16G3) STATUTORY DEED
FOR THE CONVEYANCE OF COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY
TO THE COLLIER COUNTY CRA TO IMPLEMENT
PROVISIONS OF THE BA YSHOREIGA TEW A Y TRIANGLE
MASTER PLAN AND THE BA YSHORE NEIGHBORHOOD
FOCUS INITIATIVE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF QUALITY
HOUSING WITHIN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA AS
PART OF A CRA RESIDENTIAL IN-FILL PROJECT - SITE
ADDRESS 2605 V AN BUREN AVENUE (NO FISCAL IMP ACT
TO THE COUNTY MANAGERS AGENCY)
Item # 16E6
RE-ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT #05-3826, "FURNISH AND
DELIVER EMULSIONS POLYMER AND TO #06-3898,
"CHEMICALS FOR UTILITIES" FROM CALCIQUEST, INC., TO
CARUS PHOSPHATES, INC. AND TO RELEASE CALCIQUEST,
INC., FROM LIABILITY AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF
THE BOARD'S CONSENT - DUE TO CARUS' SUCCESSION OF
CALCIQUEST. INC.
Page 301
March 25-26, 2008
Item #16E7
AWARD RFP #08-5019 AND AGREEMENT BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND BUILDING SYSTEMS EVALUATION,
INC., DBA FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS COMPANY, DBA BSE
FOR FIRE SPRINKLER AND ALARM TESTING, INSPECTION,
MAINTENANCE, AND INSTALLATION FOR AN ESTIMATED
ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $165.000 - FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD
Item #16E8
AWARD A CONTRACT FOR VOICE AND DATA CABLING
AND COMMUNICATION RELATED SERVICES TO CW
SOLUTIONS; SECONDARY - DURA TECH SYSTEMS;
TERTIARY - OSP MANAGEMENT AND QUATERNARY TO
AZTEK COMMUNICATIONS
Item #16Fl
RESOLUTION 2008-69: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS
OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FY 2007-08 ADOPTED
BUDGET FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 1, 2007 THROUGH
DECEMBER 31, 2007 - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Item # 16F2
BUDGET AMENDMENT FROM OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL
DISTRICT RESERVES IN THE AMOUNT OF $55,000 TO
PURCHASE EQUIPMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF BRINGING
Page 302
March 25-26, 2008
AN EXISTING FIRE TRUCK UP TO FULL ENGINE
SPECIFICATIONS AND MAKE A MID YEAR ADmSTMENT
TO ROUTINE OPERATIONAL BUDGET LINE ITEMS TO
ADDRESS MINOR SAFETY AND COMPLIANCE ISSUES AS
REQUIRED BY THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION
ASSOCIATION AND THE INSURANCE SERVICES RATING
ORGANIZATION
Item#16F3
RESOLUTION 2008-70: SUPPORTING PROPOSED
LEGISLATION (HB 525) ADDRESSING LOSS OF FEDERAL
ENTITLEMENT BENEFITS FOR INMATES WHICH WOULD
ADOPT THE POLICY THAT THEY WOULD REMAIN
ENROLLED IN MEDICARE OR MEDICAID ON A SUSPENDED
STATUS IF INCARCERATED LESS THAN A YEAR-AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16F4
RESOLUTION 2008-71: SUPPORTING AND ENCOURAGING
ENACTMENT OF SENATE BILL 1634, WHICH REQUIRES
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (DEP)
NOTIFICATION TO COUNTIES AND CITIES WITHIN A FIVE-
MILE RADIUS OF A W ASTEW A TER FACILITY IN
VIOLATION OF PART 1, CHAPTER 403, FLORIDA STATUTES,
AND IDENTIFICATION BY THE DEP THE SOURCE OF
SEWAGE CONTAMINANTS WHICH RESULT IN HEALTH
ADVISORIES PROHIBITING SWIMMING IN WATERS ALONG
FLORIDA BEACHES
Item #16Gl
Page 303
March 25-26, 2008
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $54,083 TO
FUND ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL AND
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR ADDITIONAL WORK FOR
THE MITIGATION PROJECT AT ROOKERY BAY NATIONAL
ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE REQUIRED BY THE
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND
THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMITS REQUIRED FOR
THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT
Item #16G2
THE PURCHASE OF A RESIDENTIAL (MOBILE HOME) LOT
IN THE BA YSHORE AREA OF THE CRA, AS PART OF A CRA
RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECT; APPROVE PAYMENT FROM
AND AUTHORIZE THE CRA CHAIRMAN TO MAKE A
PAYMENT FROM THE BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE
CRA FUND (187) IN THE AMOUNT OF $65,000 PLUS COST
AND EXPENSES TO COMPLETE THE SALE OF PROPERTY AT
3105 KAREN DRIVE ($65,000) - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16G3
CRA RESOLUTION 2008-72: (COMPANION TO ITEM #16E5)
CRA ACCEPT CONVEYANCE OF COUNTY OWNED LAND
LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE
BA YSHOREIGATEW A Y TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY AND DIRECT CRA STAFF TO RECORD THE
EXECUTED STATUTORY DEED FROM THE COUNTY TO
IMPLEMENT PROVISIONS OF THE BA YSHOREIGA TEW A Y
TRIANGLE MASTER PLAN AND THE BA YSHORE
Page 304
March 25-26, 2008
NEIGHBORHOOD FOCUS INITIATIVE PROVIDING
CONSTRUCTION OF QUALITY HOUSING WITHIN THE
COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA AS PART OF A CRA
RESIDENTIAL IN-FILL PROJECT FOR PROPERTY AT 2605
VAN BUREN AVENUE. (FISCAL IMP ACT $3.000)
Item #16H1
COMMISSIONER HALAS' REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER ATTENDED THE 4TH ANNUAL
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS LUNCHEON AT NAPLES HILTON
ON WEDNESDAY, MARCH 12,2008. $30.00 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER HALAS' TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT
5111 TAMIAMI TRAIL N.. NAPLES
Item #16H2 - Withdrawn
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER ATTENDED THE MARCO YMCA
STAN'S ROAST ON THURSDAY, MARCH 20,2008 AT MARCO
MARRIOTT RESORT & SPA; $150.00 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT
400 S. COLLIER BLVD.. MARCO ISLAND
Item # 16H3
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER ATTENDED THE CHARLES
COLLIER LUNCHEON AND PRESENTATION THURSDAY,
Page 305
March 25-26, 2008
MARCH 6, 2008 AT THE BELLASERA HOTEL; $30.00 TO BE
P AID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET -
LOCATED AT 221 NINTH ST. SOUTH, NAPLES
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER ATTENDED THE 6TH ANNUAL
WOMEN IN HISTORY LUNCHEON FRIDAY, MARCH 14,2008
AT HILTON NAPLES; $75.00 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT
5111 TAMIAMI TRAIL N.. NAPLES
Item #16H5 - Withdrawn
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER WILL ATTEND THE GRAND
OPENING CELEBRATION OF THE ISABEL COLLIER-READ
MEDICAL CAMPUS, MARCH 18,2008; $23.95 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET -
LOCATED AT 1441 HERITAGE BLVD. IMMOKALEE
Item #16H6
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER ATTENDED THE PHYSICIAN'S
REGIONAL - COLLIER BOULEVARD "HOSPITAL CHECK UP"
COCKTAIL PARTY AND PRESENTATION, MARCH 20,2008;
$25 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL
Page 306
March 25-26, 2008
BUDGET - LOCATED AT 8300 COLLIER BLVD. NAPLES
Item #16H7
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER ATTENDED CHIEF DONALD
PETERSON'S RETIREMENT CELEBRATION, MARCH 9, 2008;
$14.88 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S
TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT V ANDERBIL T COUNTRY
CLUB CLUB. 8250 DANBURY BLVD.. NAPLES
Item #16H8
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING CONNIE MACK IV AND
THANKING HIM FOR HIS EXTRAORDINARY SERVICE TO
COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16I1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED ANDIOR
REFERRED:
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 307
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORESPOPNDENCE
March 25, 2008
I. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Minutes:
I) Citizens Corps:
Minutes of January 16,2008; Agenda of January 16,2008.
2) Code Enforcement Board:
Minutes of January 24, 2008.
3) Development Services Advisorv Committee:
Minutes of February 6, 2008.
4) Domestic Animal Services Advisorv Board Committee:
Agenda of February 19, 2008; Minutes of December 18, 2007.
5) Emergencv Medical Services Advisorv Council:
Minutes of January 30, 2008; Meeting Schedule for 2008; January
28, 2008.
a) Emergencv Medical Services Advisorv Council Subcommittee:
Minutes of January 30, 2008, January 28, 2008.
6) Environmental Advisorv Council:
Agenda of March 5-6, 2008; Minutes of January 7, 2008.
7) Fire Service Steering Committee:
Agenda of February 28, 2008.
8) Fire Review Task Force:
Minutes of February 8, 2008; February 15, 2008.
9) Floodplain Management Planning Committee:
Minutes of January 7, 2008.
10) Hispanic Affairs Advisorv Board:
Minutes of November 29, 2007.
11) Isle of Capri Fire Control District Advisorv Committee:
Minutes of February 7, 2008; Agenda February 7,2008.
12) Land Acquisition Advisorv Committee:
Agenda of March 10, 2008.
13) Parks and Recreation Advisorv Board:
Minutes of January 16, 2008.
14) Pelican Bay Services Division Board:
Agenda of January 9, 2008; Minutes of January 9, 2008; March 5,
2008; Minutes of November 27,2007.
a) Pelican Bay Services Division Board Budget Committee:
Minutes November 27,2007.
b) Pelican Bay Services Division Board Municipa] Services Taxing
and Benefit Unit:
Agenda of March 5, 2008.
]5) Planning Commission:
Revised II Agenda of March 6, 2008; Minutes of January 3, 2008;
2007 Cycle 2 LDC Minutes of January 9, 2008; LDC Minutes of
January 11,2008; Special Session Minutes of January 11, 2008;
Regular Session Minutes of January 17, 2008.
16) Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee:
Minutes of February 5, 2008.
17) Water and Wastewater Authority:
Minutes of January 28, 2008.
B. Districts:
I) Cow Slough Water Control District:
Annual Financia] Report & Budget of September 30, 2007.
C. Other:
I) Special Magistrate:
Minutes of February 15, 2008.
March 25-26, 2008
Page 308
March 25-26, 2008
Item # 1611
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 1, 2008 TO
MARCH 7, 2008 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE OFFICIAL
RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 08, 2008
THROUGH MARCH 14,2008 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16K1
OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT, ROSE SOMOGYI,
FOR PARCELS 123 AND 823 IN THE AMOUNT OF $47,499.00
IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. JOHN J
YAKLICH, ET AL., CASE NO. 03-2259-CA, GOLDEN GATE
P ARKW A Y PROJECT #60027 (FISCAL IMPACT: $45,405.00 IF
OFFER IS ACCEPTED)
Item #16K2
TWO SETTLEMENTS FOR ROAD RIGHT -OF- WAYS FOR THE
CONDEMNATION TAKING OF PARCELS 112FEE AND 116FEE
IN COLLIER COUNTY V. LUZ MATLIN, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-
2850-CA OIL WELL ROAD PROJECT #60044 (FISCAL IMPACT
$15.057.00)
Item #16K3
SECOND OFFER OF JUDGMENT FOR PARCELS 838A AND
Page 309
March 25-26, 2008
838B BY COLLIER COUNTY TO PROPERTY OWNER, NANCY
L. JOHNSON PERRY IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED CC V. NANCY
L. JOHNSON PERRY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SUCCESSOR
TRUSTEE, ET AL., CASE NO. 03-2373-CA (GOLDEN GATE
PARKWAY PROJECT NO. 60027) (POSITIVE FISCAL IMPACT
OF $9000. IF ACCEPTED)
Item #16K4
RESOLUTION 2008-73: AUTHORIZING PALM BEACH
COUNTY TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS FOR THE CHILDREN'S
HOME SOCIETY OF FLORIDA, INC. TO FINANCE OR
REFINANCE CERTAIN PROJECTS IN SEVERAL FLORIDA
COUNTIES, INCLUDING COLLIER COUNTY, AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE COLLIER COUNTY INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH PALM BEACH COUNTY -
FOR SERVICES SUCH AS EDUCATION AND SUPPORT
SERVICES TO TEEN AND FIRST TIME MOTHERS, SINGLE
AND STRUGGLING PARENTS, INTERGENERA TIONAL AND
EXTENDED FAMILIES, RUNA WAY AND THROWAWAY
TEENS, AT RISK CHILDREN AND DEVELOPMENT ALL Y,
EMOTIONALL Y AND MEDICALLY CHALLENGED
CHILDREN
Item #16K5 - Moved to Item #12A
Item # 16K6
FOUR SETTLEMENTS FOR ROAD RIGHT -OF- WAY PARCELS
ACQUIRED THROUGH CONDEMNATION FOR THE OIL
WELL ROAD PROJECT (OIL WELL ROAD PROJECT # 60044).
Page 310
March 25-26, 2008
(FISCAL IMPACT $19,207.00) - FOR PARCELS 149RDUE,
154RDUE. 159RDUE AND 186RDUE
Item #16K7
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $284,906.36,
AND DIRECT STAFF TO DEPOSIT THESE FUNDS INTO THE
COURT REGISTRY, IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE A
NOVEMBER 22, 2006 ORDER OF INTER-PLEADER AND A
FEBRUARY 15,2008 ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT RELATING TO THE REDEMPTION
OF TAX CERTIFICATE NO. 98-5482 (TDA #11983) AND
SUBSEQUENT CONFLICTING CLAIMS FOR SURPLUS FUNDS
Item # 16K8
RETENTION AGREEMENT WITH THE LAW FIRM NELSON
HESSE, LLP TO PROVIDE SPECIALIZED LEGAL COUNSEL
TO THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER AND WASTEWATER
AUTHORITY RELATING SPECIFICALL Y TO ORANGE TREE
UTILITY COMPANY'S PETITION FOR LIMITED PROCEEDING
RATE INCREASE - FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 19,2008
THROUGH JUNE 30. 2008
Item #17A
ORDINANCE 2008-15: PETITION SE-2007-AR-12229, AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 07-34, FOR
THE KAICASA RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (RPUD), TO INCORPORATE THE
INADVERTENT OMISSION OF SECTION 5.6.E AND SECTION
5.8.C-G THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
Page 311
March 25-26, 2008
COMMISSIONERS ON MARCH 27, 2007 AND THEREFORE
CONSTITUTES A SCRIVENERS ERROR. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF 100 ACRES, IS LOCATED
ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE ROAD 29, EAST OF
VILLAGE OAKS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND IS
APPROXIMA TEL Y 2 MILES EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF
STATE ROAD 29 AND COUNTY ROAD 846
Item #17B - Continued to the April 8, 2008 BCC Meeting
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD,
TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO FISCAL
YEAR 2007-08 ADOPTED BUDGET - MOTION TO
RECONSIDER APPROVED; MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE
APRIL 8TH BCC MEETING - APPROVED
*****
Page 312
March 25-26, 2008
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:30 a.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALSIEX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
TOM HENNING, Chairman
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
These minutes approved by the Board on
presented or as corrected
, as
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 313
March 25-26, 2008
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:30 a.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIA~STRI TS u:mER ITS CONTROL
TOM HENNING, Chairm
I f
ATTEST: "
DWIGll,T E. BROC~, CLERK
These minutes approved by the Board on ~\ 211 flJO 'if , as
presented V or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 313