BCC Minutes 06/10/2008 R
June 10, 2008
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, June 10, 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:
ACTING CHAIRMAN: Donna Fiala
Tom Henning (via speakerphone)
Jim Coletta
Fred Coyle (via speakerphone)
Frank Halas
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
Sue Filson, BCC Executive Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Court
Derek Johnssen, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
and
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB)
AGENDA
June 10,2008
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
June 10, 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 IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE 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 Michael McKellar, Naples Church of God
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. May 13,2008 - BCC/Regular Meeting
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
A. 35 Year Attendees
1) David Sanchez, Road and Bridge
B. Advisory Committee Service Awards 10-Year Recipients
1) Alice Carlson - Industrial Development Authority
Page 2
June 10, 2008
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating June 10, 2008 as Youth Leadership Collier Day.
To be accepted by Donna MacNiven.
B. Proclamation designating June, 2008 as Homeownership Month. To be
accepted by Marcy Krumbine, Frank Ramsey, Lisa Carr, Priscilla Doria,
Kathy Patterson, Russell Smith and Carol Yates.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Collier Boulevard improvements from US 41 to Davis Boulevard - widening
from existing 4-lane to 6-lane divided roadway, drainage improvements,
lighting, bike lanes, sidewalks and pathways.
B. Recommendation to recognize Scott Holtrey, Tradesworker, Parks and
Recreation Department as Employee of the Month for May 2008.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public petition request by Jay Bowerman to discuss clearing of property at
1107 Sanctuary Road.
B. Public petition request by Reverend John Bex to discuss waiver ofpennit
fees.
C. Public petition request by Michael Urbanik to discuss designation of the
former Copeland Road prison site.
D. Public petition request by Jay Temkin to discuss medical impact fees for
non-invasive medical consultation offices.
Item 7 and 8 to he heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m., unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. At the petitioner's reQuest. this item is continued to the Julv 22. 2008
BCC Meetin!!. This item must be heard BEFORE item PUDZ-2006-AR-
Page 3
June 10, 2008
10875 and requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure
be provided by Commission members. PUDA-2007-AR-11734 KRG 951
and 41, LLC, represented by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, ofQ. Grady Minor
and Associates, P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire, of Goodlette,
Coleman, and Johnson, P.A., is requesting an amendment to the Artesa
Pointe PUD to remove a +/- 0.88 acre parcel ofland and add it to the
proposed Tamiami Crossing CPUD abutting its northern boundary. The
subject property is located approximately 1/4 of a mile south of the
intersection of Collier Boulevard and US 41, in Section 3, Township 51
South, Range 26 East of Collier County, Florida (Companion item to PUDZ-
2006-AR-10875).
B. At the petitioner's reQuest. this item is continued to the July 22. 2008
BCC meetin!!. This item must be heard AFTER PUDA-2007-AR-11734
and requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. Petition: PUDZ-2006-AR-10875, Q
Grady Minor, representing KRG 951 and 41, LLC, has submitted a PUD
Rezone for Tamiami Crossing CPUD. The applicant proposes to rezone the
A (Agricultural), C-2 (Commercial Convenience), C-4 (General Commercial
Zoning) Districts and Artesa Pointe PUD to Commercial Planned Unit
Development (CPUD) zoning district. This is to allow development of
commercial land uses with a maximum of 235,000 square feet. The property
consists of +/- 25.45 acres and is located in Section 3, Township 51 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida (Companion item to PUDA-2007-
AR-11734).
C. This item has been continued indefinitely. Recommendation to adopt an
Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 92-60, which created the Immokalee
Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit, to increase the boundaries of
the unit to add approximately 3002+/-acres.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Environmental Advisory Council.
B. Appointment of member to the Collier County Code Enforcement Board.
C. Appointment of member to the Contractors Licensing Board.
Page 4
June 10, 2008
D. Appointment of member to the Immokalee Beautification Advisory
Committee.
E. That the Board of County Commissioners assigns a qualified staff member
to attend and participate in the Management Plan Advisory Group public
meeting and working group providing input regarding the Picayune Strand
State Forest 10 Year Management Plan. (Commissioner Tom Henning)
F. Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
adopt a Resolution supporting the ongoing operations of Everglades
National Park Boat Tours, Inc., founded in 1959, and owned and operated
for 49 years by Mayor Sammy Hamilton. (Commissioner Jim Coletta)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. Recommendation to approve proposed
changes to repeal and replace the Animal Control Ordinance (Ordinance No.
93-56, as amended), to strengthen the section pertaining to dangerous dogs,
to provide a uniform method for revision of fees, to provide for mandatory
spay/neuter of animals upon return to owner after impoundment, and to
more clearly define leash law and the affidavit of complaint process, and
direct staff to advertise ordinance changes to be approved by the Board at a
future meeting. (Amanda Townsend, Interim Director, DAS)
B. Provide the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) a summary of Collier
County Productivity Committee (PC) and Planning Commission (CCPC)
review of the Seasonal Population Study conducted on the April 16 and
April 17, 2008, respectively. The Seasonal Population Study was directed by
the BCC at their November 5, 2007 Workshop for components of the
Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) on Public Facilities as
provided for in Chapter 6.02.02 of the Collier County Land Development
Code. (Mike Bosi, AICP, Community Planning and Redevelopment
Manager, Comprehensive Planning, CDES)
C. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners provide staff
direction related to the Supplemental Agreement with South Florida Water
Management District on the Temporary All Terrain Vehicles (ATV) site.
(This is a companion Item to #12B) (Barry Williams, Director, Parks and
Recreation)
Page 5
June 10,2008
D. Obtain direction from the Board of County Commissioners in response to
item 6B from the May 27, 2008 Board of County Commissioners meeting, a
public petition request by Mr. Vann Ellison to discuss relief of an existing
impact fee deferral in the amount of$178,149.72 for Wolfe Apartments.
(Marcy Krumbine, Director, Housing and Human Services.)
E. This item to be heard at 11:00 a.m. Recommendation to consider adoption
oflocal vendor preference policy. (Steve Carnell, Director of Purchasing)
F. Provide results of the Rental Registration Investigation and to receive
guidance for the collection of the 2005, 2006 and 2007 registration renewal
late fees (Michelle Arnold, Director, Code Enforcement, CDES)
G. This item to be heard at 11:45 a.m. Recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners direct the Collier County Supervisor of Elections to
take appropriate action with respect to the Collier County School District's
Resolution 08-05, which seeks to place a millage referendum on the August
26, 2008 ballot for the scheduled primary election. (Jim Mudd, County
Manager)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 2:00 p.m. That the Board of County
Commissioners considers a proposal from the Developer of Pebble brooke, to
be memorialized in a Developer Agreement, to buffer and otherwise mitigate
the impact of the two-story building on the adjoining residential
neighborhood, in exchange for resolving any dispute the County may
presently have with respect to both this building and the Stevie Tomato
lawsuit.
B. Reject the proposed Modification of Agreement between Board of Trustees
of the Internal Improvements Trust Fund, the South Florida Water
Management District (Big Cypress) and Collier County, Florida. (This Item
to follow Companion Item #IOC.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
Page 6
June 10, 2008
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
1) Recommendation to adopt a resolution designating 3,699.00 acres in
the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay (RLSA) as Alico
SSA 11, approving a credit agreement for Alico SSA 11, approving an
easement agreement for Alico SSA 11, and establishing the number of
Stewardship Credits generated by the designation of said Stewardship
Sending Area in response to an application by Alico, Incorporated.
2) Recommendation to extend the expiration date of the ad hoc Rural
Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Review Committee.
3) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfactions of Lien for
payments received for the following Code Enforcement actions.
4) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Mediterra Phase Three East-Unit 2.
5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Mustang Island, Phase II.
6) This is a recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway
(private) and drainage improvements for the final plat of Masters
Reserve, (Lely Resort PUD). The roadway and drainage
improvements will be privately maintained.
7) This item reQuires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission Members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
Page 7
June 10,2008
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of McDonalds at Gulf Gate Plaza.
8) This is a recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway
(private) and drainage improvements for the final plat of Masters
Reserve, Phase Two (Lely Resort PUD). The roadway and drainage
improvements will be privately maintained.
9) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of da Vinci Estates (da Vinci
Estates PUD), the roadway and drainage improvements will be
privately maintained.
10) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Pelican Marsh Unit
Twenty - Five (Pelican Marsh PUD) with the roadway and drainage
improvements being privately maintained.
11) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
and authorize its Chairman to execute an amendment to the Interlocal
Agreement, related to impact fees, between Collier County and the
Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, in order provide
consistency with the updated Fire Protection Impact Fees.
12) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorize its Chairman to sign, a Satisfaction of Lien due to a
change in qualified applicant and the subsequent recording of a new
impact fee deferral agreement and lien in accordance with the
Immokalee Residential Impact Fee Deferral Program and the County-
wide Impact Fee Deferral Program, as set forth by Section 74-201 (g)
and 74-401 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve the Agreement for the Freedom Park
(Gordon River Water Quality Park) Aquifer Storage and Recovery
(ASR) Well within the City of Naples.
2) Recommendation to award Bid #08-5084 Airport Road (US 41 East to
Cougar Drive) Roadway Grounds Maintenance to Commercial Land
Page 8
June 10, 2008
Maintenance, Inc. in the amount of $160,808.00 (Fund 111, Cost
Center 163866).
3) Recommendation to approve a Resolution of the Collier County
Board of County Commissioners (BCC) authorizing the submission of
the Transportation Disadvantaged Trust Fund Trip/Equipment Grant
Application with the Florida Commission for the Transportation
Disadvantaged (CTD).
4) Recommendation to approve the Treviso Bay Water Management
Agreement allowing for coordination between Treviso Bay
Development, LLC and Collier County to complete the design,
permitting, and construction of the two components of the Lely Area
Stormwater Improvement Project located within Treviso Bay
Development, Project No. 511011, for a total FY 08 and 09 estimated
cost of$2,560,898.
5) Recommendation to approve projects utilizing Federal Transit
Administration 5316 & 5317 Program Grants.
6) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to approve
a budget amendment to move landscape funds in the amount of
$303,706.63 from Fund 111 to Fund 112 Immokalee Road (1-75 951)
Project #66045 for median work required for landscaping.
7) Recommendation to award Bid # 08-5052 including alternates 1 and 3
for construction of Palm River Estates Unit 4 North/South Stormwater
Improvements Phase 2, Project No. 511411, to David Foote
Environmental Construction Inc. in the amount of$354,763.25 plus a
ten percent contingency, and to approve the necessary budget
amendments.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners direct staff
to develop an amendment to the Collier County Non-Residential
Recycling Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2004-50) by 1) modifying the
title of the Ordinance to provide a clearer definition; 2) changing the
applicability of the Ordinance to also apply to the incorporated areas
of Collier County; 3) requiring recycling at temporary and special
Page 9
June 10, 2008
events and venue facilities; 4) including multi-family properties
serviced as commercial accounts; and 5) including enforcement
provIsIons.
2) Recommendation to award Bid No. 08-5044R to Professional
Services Industries, Inc. (PSI), to sample, analyze and report data
collected for the Golden Gate Groundwater Baseline Monitoring
Project in the amount of$75,193.20.
3) Recommend approval of the award of Bid #08-5064, Manhole and
Lift Station Rehabilitation, and standard agreement between Collier
County, Chaz Equipment Company, Inc, and Paints and Coatings Inc,
in the estimated amount of $500,000 annually, project 73050.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
for operational readiness a format and process for the development of
inter-local agreements between Collier County and the governing
boards of the incorporated areas within Collier County, the District
School Board of Collier County, and other agencies as requested for
debris removal operations in the aftermath of a severe weather event.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommend approval of Amendment Number Two to the 2006-2007
City of Naples/Collier County Tourism Grant Agreement covering the
North Jetty Doctors Pass Rehabilitation Project providing for a one (1)
year extension to April 1, 2009 and; approval of Amendment Number
One to the 2007-2008 City of Naples/Collier County Tourism Grant
Agreement covering the North Jetty Doctors Pass Rehabilitation
Project providing for a one year extension to September 30,2009.
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes its Chairman to sign, a Sub-recipient Agreement
providing Supplemental Disaster Recovery Initiative (DRI) funding in
the amount of $300,000.00 to Immokalee Non-Profit Housing, Inc.,
for repairs and a hurricane hardening project at the Community Center
at Edenfield House, also known as Timber Ridge Recreational Center,
in Immokalee.
Page 10
June 10, 2008
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Jairde
Jesus Toro Gomez and Elizabeth Diaz de Toro (Owners) for deferral
of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied
affordable housing unit located at Vista III at Heritage Bay, Unit
1610, North Naples.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Ernest
Terisma Etienne and Dina Etienne Lindor (Owners) for deferral of
100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable
housing unit located at Lot 114, Liberty Landing, Immokalee.
5) Approve a Limited Use License Agreement Between the Board of
County Commissioners and the Naples Junior Chamber of Commerce,
Inc., approving use of specified county-owned property for
conducting a July 4th Fireworks Festival. ($25,000)
6) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Mireille
Louisjene Guerrier (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier County
impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at
Lot 36, Trail Ridge, East Naples.
7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Myriam
Gustave (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees
for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 44, Trail
Ridge, East Naples.
8) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Patricia
Horton Penteado (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier County
impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at
Lot 45, Trail Ridge, East Naples.
9) Present to the Board of County Commissioners a summary of the
Impact Fee Deferral Agreements recommended for approval in FY08,
including the total number of Agreements approved, the total dollar
amount deferred and the balance remaining for additional deferrals in
Page 11
June 10,2008
FY08.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Report and RatifY Staff-Approved Change Orders and Changes to
Work Orders to Board-Approved Contracts.
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.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) To approve and execute a Sweat Equity Grant Agreement(s) between
the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency and a Grant
Applicant(s) within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community
Redevelopment area. (2524 Lee Street) ($1,000)
2) To approve and execute a Sweat Equity Grant Agreement(s) between
the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency and a Grant
Applicant(s) within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community
Redevelopment area. (3388 Captains Cove) ($1,000)
3) For the Community Redevelopment Agency to declare a valid public
purpose for CRA staff attendance of Building Strong Neighborhoods
Workshop: Brownfields Redevelopment in Undercapitalized
Communities in Tampa on March 19,2008 and authorize
reimbursement for the associated seminar registration and travel costs
from the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Trust Fund. (Fund 187).
4) Approve a budget amendment for $23,710 to increase budgeted
revenues and budgeted expenses for the sale and purchase of aviation
fuel at Everglades Airpark.
5) Recommendation to the Community Redevelopment Agency to
authorize the commitment of $600,000 for infrastructure for the
Page 12
June 10,2008
affordable housing development Esperanza Place in Immokalee.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the Southwest Florida Transportation Initiative Post-Session
Legislative Event on June 6th, 2008 at the Bonita Bay Club in Bonita
Springs, FL. $35.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel
budget.
2) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the ENCA Luncheon on May 15,2008 at Carrabba's in
Naples, FL. $21.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel
budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Items to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners designate the
Sheriff as the official applicant and program point -of-contact for the
United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
Bureau of Justice Assistance Edward Byrne Memorial Competitive
Grant Program: National Initiatives - Collier County Sheriffs Office
Civil Citation Program Grant, to submit the application in the Federal
Grants Gov System, to accept the grant when awarded, and approve
budget amendments.
2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of May 17,
2008 through May 23,2008 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
3) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of May 24,
2008 through May 30, 2008 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
Page 13
June 10, 2008
4) To obtain Board approval of year two auditing services according to
agreement #07-4152 with Ernst and Young LLP, and authorize
execution of an official engagement letter and budget amendment for
services in the amount of $609,000.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment for Parcels
140 and l40B in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Edward Stanley
Sanditen, et a!., Case No. 02-5165-CA (Immokalee Road Project No.
60018). (Fiscal Impact $ 19,991)
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Approve
the Proposed Joint Motion for an Agreed Order Awarding Costs
Relating to Parcel 1 69RDUE in the Collier County v. Jose Munoz, et
aI., Case No. 07-2823-CA, Oil Well Road Project #60044. (Fiscal
Impact: $3,800.00)
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Approve
the Proposed Joint Motion for an Agreed Order Awarding Costs
Relating to Parcel 183RDUE in the Collier County v. Jorge B.
Echezarraga, et a!., Case No. 07-3278-CA, Oil Well Road Project
#60044. (Fiscal Impact: $3,800.00).
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals execute the attached Resolution for the
expansion of the Golden Gate Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses,
Inc. church to memorialize the decision the Board of Zoning Appeals
made at its April 22, 2008 meeting to accept the recommendation of
the Special Magistrate pursuant to the Florida Land Use and
Environmental Dispute Resolution Act (FLUEDRA).
5) Recommendation to authorize an Offer of Judgment for Parcel 214 by
Collier County to property owner, Rodolfo Mayor in the lawsuit
styled CC v. Jose Munoz, et a!., Case No. 07-2823-CA (Oil Well
Road Project No. 60044)(Fiscal Impact: If accepted, $32,200).
6) Recommendation to approve settlement in the lawsuit entitled
Travelers Indemnity Company a/s/o Mitchell & Stark Construction
Co., Inc., v. Collier County, filed in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in
Page 14
June 10,2008
and for Collier County, Florida, Case No. 07-0l39-CA, for
$15,000.00.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item reauires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. CUE-2008-AR-12775,
Collier County Zone Management, represented by Johnson Engineering, is
requesting a one-year Conditional Use Extension for Goodland Park. The
subject property is located at 750 Palm Point Drive, in Section 18, Township
52 South and Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida.
B. This item reauires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. CUE-2008-AR-12816,
Collier County Public Utilities Engineering Department, represented by
Larry R. Harris of Agnoli, Barber and Brundage, Inc., requesting a one year
conditional use extension from April 26, 2008 until April 26, 2009 for a
pump station located south of Immokalee Road less than 1/2 mile west of
Wilson Boulevard, in Golden Gate Estates, Unit 20, in Section 28, Township
48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida.
C. This item reauires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUDZ-2007-AR-
12581: Florida Non-Profit Services, Inc. and The Empowerment Alliance of
Southwest Florida Community Development Corporation represented by
Heidi K. Williams, AICP, Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., request a
PUD rezone from the Rural Agricultural (A-MHO) Mobile Home Overlay
Zoning District to the Residential Planned Unit Development Zoning
Page 15
June 10,2008
District, to be known as Esperanza Place RPUD. The 31.63 acre site is
proposed to be developed for a maximum of 262 dwelling units; and
consideration and approval of an Affordable Housing Density Bonus
Agreement. The subject property is located on the north side of Immokalee
Drive, approximately 1/2 mile west of Main Street (SR-29), in Section 32,
Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Immokalee, Collier County, Florida.
D. Recommendation to amend Collier County Ordinance No. 72-1, as amended
(The Collier County Lighting District) by amending Section One, Area
Established, to add: The Jaeger Commercial Industrial Center and all of the
lands lying within the boundaries ofthe plat of Majestic Pines to the Collier
County Lighting District; Providing for the inclusion in the Code of Laws
and Ordinances; Providing for conflict and severability; and Providing an
effective date.
E. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
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 16
June 10, 2008
June 10, 2008
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. And the meeting
for Collier County Board of Commissioners is open today on the June
10th date.
I'm delighted to see the audience full of young people. That's--
boy, you don't see that very often. And you've got kind of a reduced
county commission sitting at the podium, but we'll have a couple of
the commissioners joining us by telephone just a little bit later. And I
just want to welcome you all for being here and welcome the whole
audience.
With that --
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, just so you know, the young folks here,
they're part of the Youth Leadership Collier Class, okay. If you could
just raise your hands if you're in that class.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Youth Leadership Collier.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Wonderful.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is this sponsored by the Chamber of
Commerce?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's wonderful, thank you.
Chamber, thank you for doing such a great job. We appreciate
that.
And with that, we're going to stand and say a -- have -- let's see.
MR. MUDD: Pastor--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Pastor Michael McKellar from the Naples
Church of God. Is he here?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, then we'll have our own Jim Mudd
say a prayer for us, and then we'll all say the Pledge of Allegiance led
by Commissioner Coletta.
Page 2
June 10, 2008
MR. MUDD: Please bow your heads.
Heavenly Father, we come to you today as a community
thanking you for the blessings that you have so generously provided.
Today we are especially thankful for the dedicated elected officials,
staff, and members of the public who are here to help lead this county
as it makes the important decisions that will shape our community's
future.
We pray that you will guide and direct the decisions made here
today so that your will for our county will always be done.
These things we pray in your holy name, amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
And to our young leaders for tomorrow, let me just say that this
is Commissioner Coletta, and he's the county commissioner for
District 5. This is Commissioner Halas. He's the county
commissioner for District 2. I'm Donna Fiala. I'm county
commissioner for District 1.
And we're all elected by our own districts rather than elected
countywide, and so it makes it a different kind of election. Whereas,
the school board is elected countywide. Just to give you a little bit of
information on us.
And with that, Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, agenda changes, Board of Commissioners,
June 10, 2008.
Item 3A, David Sanchez will be receiving his 30-year service
award rather than his 35th year, and that correction is at staffs request.
We're going to withdraw item 6D. It was a public petition
request by Jay Temkin to discuss medical impact fees for non-invasive
medical consultation offices. That item is being withdrawn at the
petitioner's request.
Item 9E, the resolution for this item is an add-on backup -- is an
add-on backup material. Copies of the resolution have been distributed
Page 3
June 10, 2008
and made available for review. This particular correction's at the
county attorney's request.
Next item is item lOG. A replacement resolution for this item is
being provided due to the school district's decision to move the
referendum from the August 26, 2008, primary election to the
November 4, 2008, general election ballot.
The title should read, a resolution by the Board of
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, directing the Collier
County Supervisor of Elections to take appropriate action with respect
to a resolution by the Collier County school district which seeks to
place a millage referendum on the November 4,2008, general election
ballot.
Also provided for the record is correspondence and proposed --
and the proposed resolution from the school district that contains the
final revised ballot question language, and I'd also like to make a note
that this item will be heard at 11 :45 today.
The next item is item 16B4, and it's moved to lOR. Item 16B4,
moved to 10H. This is a recommendation to approve the Treviso Bay
water management agreement allowing for coordination between
Treviso Bay Development, LLC, and Collier County to complete the
design, permitting, and construction of the two components of the
Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project located within Treviso
Bay development. Project number 511011 for a total FY-'08 and
FY-'09 estimated cost of $2,560,898. This item is being moved -- is
being asked to be moved at Commissioner Henning's request.
The next item is 16B5. It's continued indefinitely. It's a
recommendation to approve projects utilizing Federal Transit
Administration 5316 and 5317 program grants. This item is being
continued at staffs request.
The next item is item 16C 1. It's moved to 101. It's a
recommendation that the Board of Commissioners direct staff to
develop an amendment to the Collier County Non-residential
Page 4
June 10, 2008
Recycling Ordinance, ordinance number 2004-50 by, number one,
modifying the title of the ordinance to provide a clear definition;
number two, changing the applicability of the ordinance to also apply
to the incorporated areas of Collier County; number three, requiring
recycling at temporary and special events and venue facilities; number
four, including multifamily property serviced as commercial accounts;
and number five, including enforcement provisions. This item is
being moved at Commissioner Coyle's request.
And I mentioned before that the school item for the general
election ballot is at 11 :45, and that's item lOG.
You also have a number of other time certain items. Item lOA to
be heard at one p.m. It's a recommendation to approve proposed
changes to repeal and replace the animal control ordinance, ordinance
93-56 as amended, to strengthen the section pertaining to dangerous
dogs, to provide a uniform method for revision of fees, provide for
mandatory spay and neuter of animals upon return to owner after
impoundment, and to more clearly define leash laws in the affidavit of
complaint process and direct staff to advertise ordinance changes to be
approved by the board at a future meeting.
The next time certain item is item 10E to be heard at 11 a.m., and
it's a recommendation to consider adoption of the local vendor
preference.
And the final time certain item is item 12A to be heard at two
p.m., that the Board of Commissioners considers a proposal from the
developer of Pebblebrook to be memorialized in the developer
agreement to buffer and otherwise mitigate the impact of the two-story
building on the adjoining residential neighborhood in exchange for
resolving any dispute the county may presently have with respect to
both this building and the Stevie Tomato's lawsuit.
That's all I have, Madam Chair, Commissioners.
Page 5
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
June 10. 2008
Item 3A: David Sanchez will be receiving his 30-Year Service Award (rather than 35-Year.) (Staff's request.)
Withdraw Item 6D: Public petition request by Jay Temkin to discuss medical impact fees for non-invasive
medical consultation offices. (Petitioner's request.)
Item 9E: The Resolution for this item is add-on backup material. Copies of the Resolution have been
distributed and made available for review. (County Attorney's request.)
Item 10G: A replacement Resolution for this item is being provided due to the School District's decision to
move the referendum from the August 26, 2008 Primary Election to the November 4, 2008 General Election
ballot. The title should read: "A Resolution by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida
directing the Collier County Supervisor of Elections to take appropriate action with respect to a Resolution by
the Collier County School District, which seeks to place a millage referendum on the November 4, 2008 General
Election Ballot." Also provided for the record is correspondence and proposed resolution from the School
District that contains the final revised ballot question language. (Staff's request.)
Item 16B4 moved to 10H: Recommendation to approve the Treviso Bay Water Management Agreement
allowing for coordination between Treviso Bay Development, LLC and Collier County to complete the design,
permitting, and construction of the two components of the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project located
within Treviso Bay Development, Project No. 511011, for a total FY 08 and 09 estimated cost of $2,560,898.
(Commissioner Henning's request.)
Item 16B5 continued indefinitelv: Recommendation to approve projects utilizing Federal Transit Administration
5316 & 5317 Program Grants. (Staff's request.)
Item 16C1 moved to 101: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners direct staff to develop an
amendment to the Collier County Non-Residential Recycling Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2004-50) by 1)
modifying the title of the Ordinance to provide a clearer definition; 2) changing the applicability of the
Ordinance to also apply to the incorporated areas of Collier County; 3) requiring recycling at temporary and
special events and venue facilities; 4) including multi-family properties serviced as commercial accounts; and
5) including enforcement provisions. (Commissioner Coyle's request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 10A to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. Recommendation to approve proposed changes to repeal and replace the
Animal Control Ordinance (Ordinance No. 93-56), as amended), to strengthen the section pertaining to
dangerous dogs, to provide a uniform method for revision of fees, to provide for mandatory spay/neuter of
animals upon return to owner after impoundment, and to more clearly define leash law and the affidavit of
complaint process, and direct staff to advertise ordinance changes to be approved by the Board at a future
meeting.
Item 10E to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. Recommendation to consider adoption of local vendor preference policy.
Item 10G to be heard at 11 :45 a.m. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners direct the
Collier County Supervisor of Elections to take appropriate action with respect to the Collier County School
District's Resolution 08-05, which seeks to place a millage referendum on the August 26, 2008 ballot for the
scheduled primary election.
Item 12A to be heard at 2:00 p.m. That the Board of County Commissioners considers a proposal from the
developer of Pebblebrooke, to be memorialized in a Developer Agreement, to buffer and otherwise mitigate the
impact of the two-story building on the adjoining residential neighborhood, in exchange for resolving any
dispute the County may presently have with respect to both this building and the Stevie Tomato lawsuit.
June 10, 2008
Item #2A and #2B
APPROVAL OF TODA Y'S CONSENT AGENDA (ITEM #16) -
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W /CHANGES
MINUTES OF THE MAY 13,2008 - BCC/REGULAR MEETING-
APPROVED AS PRESENTED; W / APPROV AL OF THE
REGULAR AGENDA - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED
W/CHANGES
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. And we don't
have any declarations anything -- well, I guess there would be on the
consent and summary agenda, wouldn't there be?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am, you normally ask if the attorney has
any changes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. County Attorney, do you have any
changes?
MR. KLATZKOW: No changes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. I'd like to add something
right this very minute. We had a sad report that one of our
Conservation Collier Committee members has left this earth, and his
name is Kevin Kacer. He passed away May 20th. And I just wanted
to make mention that it's a sad time for all of us here in Collier County
to lose such a wonderful human being. Thank you.
And with that, we have the approval -- no, we're going to the ex
parte disclosure on the summary agenda.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner
Fiala.
On the consent agenda, I have no dis -- no disclosures to make.
On the summary agenda, 17 A, I've received emails.Andon17C.I.ve
had meetings, correspondence, emails, and phone calls, and I have no
Page 6
June 10, 2008
other changes to make to the agenda. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, Madam Chair.
On the summary agenda, I have no ex parte, nor do I have any ex
parte to disclose on the consent agenda.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I do have -- on the consent agenda, I
have spoken with the -- one of the owners of McDonald's at Gulf Gate
Plaza and also his representatives and I've had a meeting with them.
And then on the summary agenda, I have disclosure on 17 A,
which has to do with Collier County zone management. I met with
Sandy and Ohannon (phonetic) Combs, Marla Ramsey, Barry
Williams on May 6th.
And then also on the summary agenda, 17B, I have no
discI osures.
And just in case you guys don't understand what we're doing,
you've heard us mention now consent agenda and summary agenda. A
consent agenda -- gee, I don't think I -- mine is back here. I'm going to
show you what a consent agenda looks like.
This is our consent agenda, and this is what we have to read
before we come into the county commission meeting. And these are --
right now we're going to vote on this entire agenda with one vote and
say, yes, we agree with everything on here.
And those -- there are a couple items that some of the
commissioners wanted to talk about, so they've pulled it off and put it
on the regular agenda. Also the summary agenda in here pertains to
land use issues. And so we have to declare if we've spoken to anyone
about those land use issues so that it can be a part of the public record.
Just so that you understand what we're doing.
Okay. And with that --
Page 7
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to make a motion that
we approve today's regular, consent -- consent and summary agenda
as amended.
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: With respect to summary agenda, some of
these items require four votes. So if we can wait on the summary
agenda until we get one of the commissioners call in.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So we'll put the summary agenda
vote aside then until --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just the consent.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, and just vote on the consent
agenda.
MR. KLATZKOW: Thank you, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good. Thank you so much --
thank you for alerting us.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And I amend my motion
to that effect.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I have a motion to approve the
consent agenda and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, you normally -- you normally say that
you're approving today's regular, consent, and summary. We're going
Page 8
June 10, 2008
to hold off on the summary. So you're basically setting the agenda, so
you have to have a vote that talks about the regular. You said consent.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: I'd ask you for another vote for setting the regular
agenda.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And also for the minutes for the
May 13th meeting?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll make that motion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So I have a motion to approve
today's regular agenda and also the minutes for the May 13th meeting.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. We move on to the service
awards.
Item #3A
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARD: 30 YEAR MEMBER-
PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. The first -- the first service award is
for 30 years, and that's for David Sanchez for Road and Bridge.
Mr. Sanchez, come on forward.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Hi. Thank you so much for being with us
30 whole years.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations.
Page 9
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The next 30 will be a lot easier.
MR. SANCHEZ: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let's see. This is for you from us. I had
to open it because I think it's just a marvelous give from all of us here
at the county for -- isn't this beautiful.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Beautiful, yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: For all of your hard work. Thank you,
David.
And would you do me a favor and turn around so we can take a
picture of you with all of us. Thank you again.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #3B
ADVISORY COMMITTEE SERVICE AWARDS: 10 YEAR
ATTENDEE-PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: The next award is for Advisory Committee
Service Awards, and this particular recipient has done 10 years on the
Industrial Development Authority, and that's Ms. Alice Carlson, if you
could please come forward.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: For all that volunteer work, thank you so
much.
MS. CARLSON: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to proclamations.
Item #4A
Page 10
June 10, 2008
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JUNE 10, 2008 AS YOUTH
LEADERSHIP COLLIER DAY - ADOPTED
Our first proclamation today is designating June 10,2008, as
Youth Leadership Collier Day. To be accepted by Donna MacNiven.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, Donna. Are you --
would you step up here. And maybe we ought to just bring all the
children up. Have them all come up here.
MR. MUDD: All the young adults.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: All the young adults, yep.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Don't forget to wave for Mom.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning. How are you?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I figured you'd be the leader of
this.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm so glad you guys are here.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning. Good to see you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for being here this
mornmg.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good to see you again. All these years,
huh.
Hi, how are you?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's a real privilege to read this
proclamation this morning for all the youngsters, or all the young
people here. Let me start off by saying:
Whereas, the Youth Leadership Collier Program was inspired by
a group of committed chamber business members and community
leaders under the guidance and tutelage of the Leadership Collier
Foundation; and,
Whereas, Youth Leadership Collier seeks youth of Collier
County with leadership qualities, concrete, illusive, obvious and subtle
but for the sake of developing ethical leaders committed to active
community involvement; and,
Page 11
June 10, 2008
Whereas, through the process programming and community
experience and several unique environments, program participants are
ignited to become passionate and involved citizens who are concerned
about community improvements; and,
Whereas, participants in the program are members of their junior
class preparing to embark on their senior year in high school; and,
Whereas, Youth Leadership Collier empowers those students to
become effective leaders, showcases Collier County, and encourages
students to consider coming back to their community to begin their
careers and families; and,
Whereas, Youth Leadership Collier instills the values and
importance of community stewardship, helping youth to create a
network of resources within their own community that will encourage
involvement.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that June 10,2008, be
designated as Youth Leadership Collier Day.
Done in this order, the 10th day of June, 2008, Board of County
Commissioners, Tom Henning, the chair.
And Madam Chair, I make a motion for approval of this
proclamation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I second the motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second, of course.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All those in favor, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Page 12
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Could I -- somebody take this out
in the very front. The person that's probably right in the center. If you
would be so kind as to hold that up so we can take a picture.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to recognize the
Leadership Collier Alumni for raising the funds for this particular
endeavor.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, that's great.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for being here.
Item #4 B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JUNE, 2008 AS
HOMEOWNERS HIP MONTH - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, the next proclamation is
designating June, 2008, as Homeownership Month. To be accepted by
Marcy Krumbine, Frank Ramsey, Lisa Carr, Priscilla Doria, Kathy
Patterson, Russell Smith, and Carol Yates.
Please come forward.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is definitely a subject that's
very, very close to the hearts of all the commissioners and quite a few
of the members of the community, and it's my pleasure to be able to
read this today.
Whereas, homeownership is a key component of the American
dream, stabilizing neighbors, producing healthy communities, and
helping families build economic security; and,
Whereas, the purchase of a home is the largest financial
investment most home -- households make, building wealth, providing
a tangible asset, and strengthening personal responsibility; and,
Whereas, homeowners work to maintain their home, create a
Page 13
June 10,2008
great -- greater concern for their neighborhood, and make them
stakeholders in the community; and,
Whereas, Collier County's affordable housing -- housing partners
are working together to increase homeownership opportunities for the
people of our county by providing housing counseling, down payment
assistance, and federal and state grant assistance so more citizens can
experience the joy and sense of community that comes from owning
their own home; and,
Whereas, hundreds of families have become homeowners
throughout our partnership with the Collier County Loan Consortium;
and,
Whereas, since October 1, 2007, the department of housing and
human services has assisted 121 families achieve the dream of
homeownership; and,
Whereas, Homeownership Month provides opportunities for the
potential first-time homebuyer to learn more about owning a home of
their own.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that the month of June, 2008,
be designated as home ship month (sic).
Done and ordered this, the 10th day of June, 2008, and signed by
our chairman, Tom Henning.
And I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Motion to approve and a second. All
those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. Thank you very much.
Page 14
June 10, 2008
Thanks for all your work.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Somebody would like to say a
couple words?
MS. KRUMBINE: For the record, Marcy Krumbine, Director of
Housing and Human Services. Our department works with individuals
and families to become homeowners from the very beginning of
prequalifying them and helping them get ready to buy a home, to
providing partnerships with the Collier County Loan Consortium,
down payment and closing costs assistance, to even providing rehab
and -- through our single-family rehab program and our disaster
recovery initiative to help families stay in their homes.
And our success is really predicated in the partnerships we have
with community members, and I'd like two of our community
members that are here today to share a few words. Carol Yates, a
local Realtor, and Russell Smith from Lennar Homes. Carol?
MS. YATES: Good morning. I was here a few weeks ago; I
don't know if you remember. But I want to thank you for your
continued support in the programs that we have in place.
I know this is a hard time because of budget crunches, but this is
so important to stabilizing our community. I feel very passionate
about that. And I get to see the faces of the buyers over and over
again. It's so exciting in the joy that they have owning their first
home. It wouldn't happen for a lot of those people without this
program.
And I want to say a special thanks to the staff. I think that we
take them for granted. They do their job, they do their job, they do
their job, and they are so hard working. We couldn't do it without
them. So Lisa and Buddy and Marcy and everybody that I've
forgotten, I just want to say thank you. It's been wonderful working
with them.
MR. SMITH: Well, good morning, Commissioners, and thank
Page 15
June 10, 2008
you for the proclamation. I think it's very important to get the word of
workforce housing and affordable housing out there.
Together, Collier County and Lennar have formed an important
partnership directed at increasing the availability of quality affordable
homes in our community.
We recently had a ribbon cutting at our community, the Vistas of
Heritage Bay. Commissioner Coletta was kind enough to attend and
to say a few words. And the purpose of the event was to
commemorate the completion of our first two buildings and to
recognize our first group of residents.
The Vistas will have 190 townhomes for families earning less
than 80 percent of the median income. To date, we've closed 14 of
these homes, and our homeowners are thrilled to be part of this great
community.
And our efforts, combined with the dedicated efforts of the men
and women of Collier County Government and staff are making the
dream of homeowners hip a reality for the citizens of our community.
So thank you once again.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Quick question, if I may.
MR. SMITH: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What is the price of these homes
for those people that do qualify? And who does qualify?
MR. SMITH: Well, those in the 80 percent and below median
income category qualify to purchase a home in there under the
affordable housing program. The prices, with all of the incentives that
get put together, SHIP down payment assistance, impact fee deferrals,
all of the great things the county has done for us, can get down into
the 130s.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Wow.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's quite remarkable.
MR. SMITH: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And to live in such a quality community,
Page 16
June 10, 2008
wow.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, quality community.
MR. SMITH: And it's because of the -- you know, once again,
it's because of the combined efforts of your impact fee deferral
program and the things we're doing together on top of -- you know,
you've got the loan consortium that you've put together to help us out.
It really is a combined effort.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And you even got a special on
the homeowner's insurance or something, I understand, too, or --
MR. SMITH: They may, I don't know.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. In any case, all they have
to do is contact Lennar Homes or the real estate agent down there if
they fall within that 80 percentile. Tremendous opportunity.
MR. SMITH: Yep. And you know, even if you don't fall within
the 80 percentile, maybe if we don't put you in the Vistas, we can put
you somewhere else.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. We appreciate very
much what you've done.
MR. SMITH: Thank you very much.
Item #5A
COLLIER BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENTS FROM US 41 TO
DAVIS BOULEVARD - WIDENING FROM EXISTING 4-LANE
TO 6-LANE DIVIDED ROADWAY, DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS, LIGHTING, BIKE LANES, SIDEWALKS
AND PATHWAYS - PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to presentations.
The first presentation is on the Collier Boulevard improvement from
U.S. 41 to Davis Boulevard, widening from the existing four-lane to
six-lane divided roadway, drainage improvements, lighting, bike lane,
Page 17
June 10, 2008
sidewalks, and pathways, and Mr. Jay Ahmad, your Director of
Transportation, Engineering and Construction, will present.
MR. AHMAD: Madam Chair, Commissioners. Good morning.
My name is Jay Ahmad, for the record. With me this morning is
Robbie Powell with Better Roads Construction, and he will present the
status of the project, the Collier project.
MR. POWELL: Good morning, Commissioners.
Currently, the project is running at about 29 percent complete in
29 percent time. If you're looking at the information you were given
before, I'd like to clarify just briefly so that you understand the
percentages.
The original contract amount was for just under $25 million.
This $25 million also accounts for $3.7 million in allowances should
the project have any major problems or need any change orders.
So your actual work performed is going to be somewhere around
the $21.2 million mark. Of that $21.2 million, we've completed a little
over $6 million, making up 29 percent of the contract work. Along
with that, the time elapsed is also approximately 29 percent of the
work. So currently, looking at the percentages, the project is right on
time.
One of the biggest reasons Better Roads feels that this is capable
and we've been able to do so well in this project is the project team
that gets put together.
Collier County's Project Manager is Tad Pluc. The engineer on
this project is Casey, CS, typically represented by Tray Barclay.
Better Roads representative are Mr. Vic Holcomb and Mr.
Richard Ucob (phonetic), our Project Manager and Superintendent.
And these gentlemen work together very closely to make sure this
progress moves quickly and stays at the lowest level of decision
making.
The few things that we want to point out is that the project is
somewhat split into two parts, but it is obviously one contract.
Page 18
June 10, 2008
Roadway portion of the project is moving ahead of our original
schedule. If all things go well and the weather is good to us, we
anticipate on moving traffic over in the early fall year.
Unfortunately, the pathway portion of this project is behind and
delayed slightly due to another contract and contractor working for the
utility department to get utilities done. Be that as it may, we will be
working with Collier County to expedite anything that we can.
The last thing I wanted to point out is just a little bit briefly of
what I said before, is that I think this project has a very good team,
and I think that we'll be continuing forward with any and all issues
that may come up, and they will be resolved by the project team.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Questions, Commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you.
MR. POWELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
Item #5B
RECOMMENDATION TO RECOGNIZE SCOTT HOL TREY,
TRADESWORKER, PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
AS EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR MAY 2008 -
PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, our next presentation is to
recognize Scott Holtrey, Tradesworker for Parks and Recreation
Department as Employee of the Month for May of2008.
Mr. Holtrey, if you could come forward, please.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Scott is responsible for most of the maintenance at
the Collier Water Park, Sun-n-Fun Lagoon. This includes
Page 19
June 10, 2008
preventative maintenance to pumps and filters, chemical balances in
the pools, and basic repairs.
In the absence of a full-time maintenance worker at the facility,
Scott is also responsible for the landscape and general maintenance of
the park. His hard work and dedication to the county is one of the
reasons that Sun-n-Fun Lagoon is often complimented on overall
appearance and cleanliness.
In addition to these duties, Scott is also involved with many
contractors and subcontractors who perform repairs at the park. He's
often recognized for his efforts to complete work ahead of expected
time frames on repairs and other tasks and is willing to come in or take
calls on his days off to ensure that everything is completed and
running smoothly.
Scott is known for always going the extra mile and is a great
example of other employees. He's truly deserving of this award.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to present to you Scott Holtrey,
public parks and recreation Employee of the Month for May of2008.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Somebody's joined us.
And Scott I'd like to give you a letter from our chairman, Tom
Henning, on behalf of all of us congratulating you on being our
Employee of the Month. And here's a plaque for your office or your
home, wherever you want to hang it, and also a little check from all of
us at Collier County --
MR. HOL TREY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- for all of your hard work. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Somebody's just joined us, right, on the
phone?
(Commissioner Henning is now present via speakerphone.)
MS. FILSON: Yeah. Commissioner Henning?
Page 20
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, Commissioner Henning.
Oh, great. Would you like us to do that summary agenda right
now?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think you need to make a motion to allow
Commissioner Henning to join us first.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay, fine.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion that
Commissioner Henning, who is on a phone because of the fact that
he's had an operation, he's home recuperating, has joined us.
MR. KLATZKOW: And you find that those are extraordinary
circumstances?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And you find that to be an extraordinary
circumstance.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And you second the motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And welcome, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We're glad that you could join us today.
How are you feeling?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: With my fingertips.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You walked into that one.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a typical Henning response, isn't it?
Page 21
June 10, 2008
Item #2A
SUMMARY AGENDA - MOTION TO APPROVE TODA Y'S
SUMMARY AGENDA (ITEM #17) - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, now you need to take a motion, if you
would, for the summary agenda, but you also have to ask
Commissioner Henning if he has any ex parte disclosures on the
summary agenda because he just joined us, and you have to vote on
the summary agenda because you need a vote of 4-0 on that one.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning, we
weren't able to vote on the summary agenda, because we need four
votes on that, earlier, so we've all declared our ex parte. Do you have
any ex parte on the summary agenda?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, ma'am, I do not.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. And with that, I'd like to
accept a motion to --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve today's
summary agenda.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner
Henning, for joining us. We're glad you're here.
Page 22
June 10, 2008
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY JAY BOWERMAN TO
DISCUSS CLEARING OF PROPERTY AT 1107 SANCTUARY
ROAD - DISCUSSED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that would bring us to public
petition section -- the public petition section of our agenda, and it's
6A. A public petition request by Jay -- by Jay Bowerman to discuss
clearing of property at 1107 Sanctuary Road.
Mr. Bowerman? If you could just state your name for the record,
SIr.
MR. BOWERMAN: My name is Jay Bowerman. First of all, let
me say I really appreciate the opportunity to come and speak before
the commission.
I saw that June is Homeownership Month and, really, that's what
I'd like to talk about here because the situation that I find myself in
and my friends, Mr. and Mrs. Dickout, is really an issue of
homeownership and trying to help them be able to live on the property
that they have purchased.
Just to give you a little background, Mr. and Mrs. Dickout are
close friends of mine. I owned a property that I sold them. That's
why I'm coming before you because some of the work performed on
the property was actually work that I performed.
I bought the property back in 2004. It's two-and-a half acres. It's
zoned with the use of ago It's not classified agricultural yet. We're
working on that. But it's able to be zoned ago
And what we did is we cleared exotic species off the property,
Melaleuca, pepper trees, so on, so forth.
And in the process of trying to obtain a building permit, we were
told that we had to come up with a replanting plan.
Now, just to give you some more background, it turns out that
Page 23
June 10, 2008
there was also wetlands on the property, so DEP got involved, and
DEP -- we've already paid a lot of those fines and we've apologized
for destroying their wetlands, and DEP basically told us, you don't
have to replant because they see that it was all Melaleucas. So I guess
what I'm asking is, can we rectify what DEP is saying with what
Collier County Development Services is saying in regards to
replanting?
I do have some aerial -- I've got an aerial photo showing that it's
clearly Melaleuca trees. At one point Mr. and Mrs. Dickout said, well,
why don't we just go ahead and replant trees? We don't mind trees.
We thought it would be maybe a couple thousand dollars worth of
trees, but it's going to turn out to be about $15,000. That's just for the
materials to come into compliance with this replanting.
So that's really, you know, the presentation that I bring before the
commissioners, just to try to get some clarification. If it is -- if they
are Melaleucas, do we then have to replant native species when
everything was basically Melaleucas in the first place? And, you
know, can we rectify that with what the DEP is saying?
I've got an email from Angelina Davis, who was working on the
DEP side of it, and she clearly says that she did not require any
replanting because the majority of vegetation was invasive exotic
species category one, mostly Melaleucas.
So I'm really just appealing to the commissioners and county
staff for some help here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioners Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. And this does give me
great concern over where the fairness and the balance may be here. I'd
like to hear from county staff on this if we -- if they could reply to
this.
MS. MASON: Good morning. For the record, Susan Mason,
Engineering and Environmental Services Department.
This -- I'm going to put a little kind of bullet point on the
Page 24
June 10, 2008
visualizer that outlines a lot of the significant issues on this property.
The property is zoned agricultural, but it does not, like he had
said, have the property appraiser's designation on there. They have
constructed or are in the process of constructing a home on the site. It
is a relatively small property, just under two-and-a-half acres, so the
majority -- half of the site is a little pond that they dug for fill for the
house and also the house itself.
So -- and part of the conversations that the applicant had had with
us when we were reviewing the building permit was exactly what
areas needed to be mitigated and what needed to be replanted.
They did bring up the discussion of bringing some cows on there.
When I -- I did talk to, in addition to the reviewer, talk to the
applicant, their representative, about it, just stating that if you wanted
to clear more for agriculture, you'd need to demonstrate how it could
be commercial agricultural use on a very small piece of land, because
that's one of the requirements.
And also in terms of the vegetation that was on the site prior to
the work, the property owner did hire Ramsey, Incorporated, to do a
replanting plan for it. It's part of both the DEP mitigation and also
accepted by the county. And their own description of the vegetation
on the site prior to the disturbance was palmetto, which is native
upland, a pine and Melaleuca upland, and also wet prairie, which is
DEP wetlands. And there were a fair amount of exotics invading into
that wetland.
They did have to keep the property maintained from the exotics,
not only by the DEP order, but also by county codes. Once you
develop and impact a site, you have to keep it free from the exotics.
The DEP permit allows them to go for a period oftime in the
wetlands. That's the only part that they had any mitigation for, that
they don't have to replant, and -- but if adequate native recruitment,
native plants don't show up on their own after one year, they will have
to restore the area by putting in plants.
Page 25
June 10, 2008
The county code doesn't allow for long extensions like that for
native recruitment; however, we did give credit for any native plants
that had showed up. And the inspector also would, once they were
called for the inspection to see that the mitigation was completed,
anything that shows up on its own is certainly going to be given credit.
And the way the violation is being handled now is that there --
they did get their building permitted issued because the replanting
plan was approved, and there's a CO hold put on that building permit.
So once the inspection or the installation is in, they can get their
inspection and then move into the home.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm not too sure I understand.
Exactly what are they -- they've agreed to replant or to plant, I
understand, is that correctly (sic)?
MR. BOWERMAN: Yeah. We agreed to replant based on the
assumption that it would be a couple thousand dollars. And then --
and subsequent, you know --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So it's a dollar issue. Of course,
most things are in this world.
MR. BOWERMAN: Yes, sir, yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And so your agreement was
before you knew what the cost was?
MR. BOWERMAN: Yes, sir. Yeah, because the permit was
held up. Mr. and Mrs. Dickout have spent approximately two years
trying to resolve this, believe it or not. He's in the audience.
Has it been about two years between when this --
MR. DICKOUT: A year and four months before we got our
permits from the time the builder applied for permits.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And sir, I'm going to
have to -- it's very hard to address somebody from the audience
because no one can pick it up on the public record. But if I could, just
to try to understand better.
We had a clearing take place. You offered to mitigate the
Page 26
June 10, 2008
clearing by planting the trees and do that. You found out the cost was
more than you anticipated after you made the agreement.
And just for reference -- although, you know, when you make an
agreement to do something, normally you're expected to follow
through.
MR. BOWERMAN: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Due diligence should be done
before you make the agreement as far as the cost goes.
What is the cost? I have no idea what we're talking about.
MR. BOWERMAN: It's 15- to $20,000 just for the trees. Part of
where there was some confusion is, even in the first letter that Mr. and
Mrs. Dickout sent, there was always the intent to use this property for
agricultural purposes. And there is an exemption from the Collier
County LDC for bona fide agricultural. And we have somebody that
we work with -- I've got some property on Sanctuary Road that will
lease cows to you. As long as you have the fence around there, they
rotate their cows from --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Rent a cow.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Rent a cow, yeah.
MR. BOWERMAN: Exactly. And it works out for the people
because they, you know, don't have to own all this land.
So that was really our initial intent. But as she stated, there was
-- there was some confusion in whether it would be bona fide
agricultural. We've looked into it, and it is absolutely bona fide. If we
have a lease --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So now the issue has to
do with determination of agriculture. And forgive me for bringing this
out for just a few minutes.
I'm not too sure if our county attorney is up on it, but I
understand there's a special classification for agriculture. Not that I
agree with it. I think they should do away with it. But since it exists,
maybe you might be able to take advantage of it, where if you own X
Page 27
June 10, 2008
number of goats, X number of chickens, even on a small lot, you have
an exemption as far as taxes go.
Now, I don't know how that all works. Are you up on that
particular thing? I know I've had people qualify for this in the past.
MS. MASON: Yeah. I know a bit about it. I do -- I have seen
appraisals where the property appraiser will actually split the property,
that this portion is still taxed as residential because that's its use, and
this portion that's in ago will be taxed at a lower rate, or if it's all 100
percent agricultural, they'll --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, obviously it's not going to
100 percent agricultural. He's going to build a house on it.
The whole thing is, there's some questions here I just don't
understand. And I'll be honest with you, if I had it under my authority
to do so, I would do away with this one exemption. I think it is
absolutely ridiculous in this day and age when we're no longer in an
agriculture society that people, just by harboring a couple of animals
on their property, get a tax exemption.
However, with that said, we also have some other extremes like
the Hussey property where we did not give them what they wanted,
and now they cleared the land for grazing, and all that
environmentally sensitive land was lost, and now we have
two-and-a-half acres where we're playing with the issue of -- over
what the fairness is and what the law is.
I think that whatever it is, the county attorney and hopefully your
department goes through it and clarifies the fact that this is within the
law, that we're asking from the county's end, as far as them required to
be able to plant and bear that expense, falls within the parameter, and
agriculture does not make it an exemption.
I would just ask that you do that and make sure that that's all
clear and well defined so there's absolutely no questions in your mind
about that. And if you look into the other one, do it quickly, because
if! have my way, I'll eliminate it tomorrow. This rent a cow business,
Page 28
June 10, 2008
especially, that has to go. I mean, it's a terrible misuse of the public
trust.
MR. BOWERMAN: Okay. Well, it's -- of course, whoever
owns the cows has to show that viability, and that's why, you know, if
you lease it's pretty well established.
But I guess our main question is then, as far as the rural fringe
district which allows for certain percentages of clearing, if we show
and can prove that it's bona fide agricultural and we have this lease,
are we then going to be -- come out of these requirements. And I've
got a sheet from the county that I picked up, and what it talks about is
different percentages of receiving land, neutral land, Belle Meade, and
we're in what's called the neutral area. We're exempted from these
requirements as long as it's bona fide agricultural, so that's --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Go ahead, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I think we're losing traffic
of -- track of what really took place here. And correct me if I'm wrong
-- and I'm going to ask staff for some assistance on this.
It's my understanding that this land to start with was illegally
cleared without any type of permit; is that correct?
MS. MASON: Yes, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So I mean, this is the start of this
whole charade, if you want to call it that, whereby somebody came in
there and started clearing land. And it's my understanding, it wasn't
just Melaleuca and pepper trees. It was also pine trees and other
upland stuff; is that correct?
MS. MASON: Yes, it is. I can put some photographs up on
here.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So right now what this
individual is here for is trying to find an easy way out after, first of all,
they cleared the land illegally, and now they realize that they have an
obligation here of planting trees -- to replant the trees that were taken
out, and obviously they've destroyed some wetlands, and now we've
Page 29
June 10, 2008
got a home building site on here, and now they're trying to get this one
acre of land designated as agriculture; is that correct?
MS. MASON: I believe that their ultimate hope is that they
could get it classified as agriculture, and there would be a --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So they can get the cheaper taxes;
is that correct?
MS. MASON: Well-- and there would not be a requirement if
they did come in for a -- it would have to be after the fact, but an
after-the-fact clearing permit for agriculture use; they would be
exempt from the county's preservation requirements, but also we
couldn't even issue that permit until both the DEP and the Corps also
accepted the mitigation and -- for the permit that the DEP had issued
for the wetland impacts. So we couldn't issue a permit until those
issues were reopened and either mitigated off site or whatever their
restoration was going to be at that point.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But the bottom line is, they
illegally cleared this land, didn't think they were going to get caught at
it, and they got caught. And so now they have to pay restitution to
restore this land; is that correct?
MS. MASON: They did clear without permits, yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. BOWERMAN: Well, excuse me, if! may. You are
allowed to clear Melaleucas --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But you cleared other than that.
MR. BOWERMAN: -- without a permit.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Let us hear from the county
attorney, please.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. This isn't really, in my opinion, the
proper forum for this type of discussion. If the public petition can't
resolve the issues with staff, staff will eventually take it to the Code
Enforcement Board, and code enforcement board can hear all these
Issues.
Page 30
June 10, 2008
At that point in time, everybody will be sworn, they'll have the
evidence presented, they can make whatever ruling they want, then
there's a process after that where they can appeal if they don't get the
decision they like or the county can appeal if we don't get the decision
we like. This is just the wrong forum for this discussion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Okay, so then --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do we need a motion to ask --
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. I'm sorry, Commissioner Henning,
please,
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. I just have a couple
questions for county staff, if you don't mind.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, please go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. The -- was there an
application for a building permit?
MS. MASON: Yes, there was. That's why county staff had gone
out from my department. We review the building permits for
single-family homes when they're in the rural fringe area in order to
make sure that the site plan complies with the Growth Management
Plan requirements for preservation. Now when that staff member did
the site visit, that's when they observed that there had been clearing
and filling on a large portion of the property, and that's why --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do they have a CO for any
structures on the property?
MS. MASON: Not at this point, no. I believe they got a fence
permit, which may have a CO, but not for the house that's under--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I haven't heard anything about
the existing exotics on the property. Is there a requirement to remove
those? Was that a stipulation?
MS. MASON: Well, the requirement for the exotic removal is--
Page 3 1
June 10, 2008
that inspection is done prior to CO for the house, and it is a
requirement in perpetuity at this point on this property.
I know that they removed a vast majority of the exotics that are
on the site; in more recent site visits and photos, it doesn't appear to be
significant, but they may have to do a few pick up before they can get
aCO.
MR. BOWERMAN: So we've got to actually remove more of
the exotic species from the property before CO is what you're saying?
MS. MASON: Right. Prior to CO, all the prohibited exotic
vegetation needs to be removed from the site.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Can I finish my
questions, please?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Please.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- what would be the best
public benefit, to remove the exotics or restore the existing
vegetation?
MS. MASON: Well, the exotic removal is already required by
the code for any homeowner. The restoration of the vegetation that
was removed above and beyond what's permitted by the Growth
Management Plan in the LDC by replanting the natives, that half acre
of natives that need to restore, that would be consistent and, I would
imagine, is a benefit to the county as a whole as well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ms. Mason?
MS. MASON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What would be the benefit to
the public, remove the exotic vegetation or restore the native
vegetation?
MS. MASON: I believe -- my opinion they both are.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So there's no clear answer to my
question?
Madam Chair, I would like to bring this back. The -- here's the
issue. The people can be allowed to do agricultural under their Right
Page 32
June 10, 2008
to Farm Act. You're not going to get any taxes on that. I'm not sure if
that's really what the property owner wants to do. I think that we
should direct staff to work with these people to find a resolution to it
before bringing it back to the Board of Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Is that in the form ofa motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, it is.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll tell you, normally I'd second
something like this, but in this case here we've still got a process that
we have to go through, and the due process is to be able to go through
the code enforcement board, to have the peers of this gentleman be
able to listen to the case and to be able to weigh all the circumstance
and come up with a ruling.
Meanwhile, if the man's within his rights under the present laws
the way they exist, I'm sure due process will bring that forward and
justice will be served. If we take this one isolated case and make it a
special issue to bring before the commission, we're going to have to do
it with every single other case out there --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and then I'm not too sure
where we're going to go with it. So I don't think we're going to get
there. All we're going to do is delay the eventual outcome, and we
need to get this into the system. We also need to have a clarification
done of what is agricultural and what isn't.
I mean, if the gentleman definitely falls within the realms of
agriculture by the laws -- and I'm not going to try to decipher that up
here during a public petition. I'm sure our county attorney will be
looking into that with the greatest of gusto and come up with some
firm decisions on it, and they'll be able to go through the process.
I did want to get the gentleman before us today under public
petition because that's the right of every citizen to be able to appeal
directly to the lawmakers that set the laws.
Page 33
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So I have no second on the
motion, so that motion dies.
And what we're going to ask you to do is take it to the Code
Enforcement Board and work through it that way. And if the results
from that are not to your satisfaction, then you can always bring it
back to us.
MR. BOWERMAN: Okay. Well, it sounds like I got the answer
that I wanted in that she said, as long as we are ag., then we are
exempt. So that's -- I'll just work with her. And, you know, that was
our intent, so --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good.
MR. BOWERMAN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And thank you for being here today.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY REVEREND JOHN BEX TO
DISCUSS WAIVER OF PERMIT FEES - MOTION TO GRANT
PETITIONER TWO-14 DAY PERMITS FOR A COST OF $400 -
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next public petition is a request
by Reverend John Bex to discuss waivers of permit fees. Reverend?
Just state your name for the record, sir.
REVEREND BEX: Name is John W. Bex. Excuse me. I
appreciate this opportunity. Good morning, each and every one of
you.
My name is Reverend John Bex. I'm a founder and pastor of the
Hyways and Byways Ministry and New Testament Church. I've been
a resident of Immokalee, Florida, for 47 years.
Now, the reason for this meeting or attending today is to ask for
the fee for permitting to be waived or reduced for our street ministry.
Page 34
June 10, 2008
Our mission for the past two years is to help feed, clothe,
minister to the needs of the migrant and the homeless people of
Immokalee. Now, bimonthly we feed 3- to 500 people. We show
human love and compassion to them. We provide clothes, shoes, and
toys for the children. We also give bread, pastry, which we receive
from Publix and Winn Dixie, and various Bealls stores provide us the
clothes and the shoes that we give away. Now, we meet the spiritual
needs and offering them salvation through Jesus Christ.
We now have a home-based mission house in Immokalee where
we're endeavoring to open a Harry Chapin food bank and USDA. Our
only holdup at the moment is adequate storage for the food and the dry
goods. Maybe you would have some ideals (sic) or solutions for
storage units in our area.
In today's economy, homeless and street people, migrant people,
are not the only people that are hurting or having a hard time feeding
their families. Now, once we get the food bank open, we will be able
to help people who are trying to work to pay their mortgage, rent, car
payments, and utilities, and they need food during the month. They
can't afford and they don't qualify for food stamps.
It is our mission in the future to help all classes of people in their
time of need to better survive and not go to bed hungry. Currently it
would cost our ministry $5,000 a year for temporary use permits to
give away bimonthly $5,000 worth of food and clothing. We do not
sell anything. What is given to us we give back to the community.
Sirs, ma'am, we ask that you would waive this fee so that we may
continue to help and assist the people in our community and others. I
also have an accompanying DVD, if it would be possible to play that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta, did you have a
question?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I have a question, if I
could, sir. What you're talking about is a tent, right, that you put up
on a location?
Page 35
June 10, 2008
REVEREND BEX: Yes, sir. Actually we have a food tent that
we set up. We prepare food, we give to the people. It's in an area
where most of the people are on feet, you know, they walk, you know.
It's congregated migrant workers, homeless people, just people that
need a helping hand.
So we go out, we clear this property that we're on, we maintain it,
mow it, keep it clean, and we have permission. We have insurance
upon the property, liability to cover us while we're there. We set this
tent up, and actually we -- we've been doing it for two years, and we
didn't realize we were -- needed to have a permit to do this, so we had
to start issuing a temporary use permit, which is costing us $200, you
know, to go and get this. I mean, that's the main issue, I guess.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know where you're coming
from.
REVEREND BEX: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I used to be in the business. At
one point in time, in my many different endeavors, I rented tents and
used to set them up, and in some cases the permit fee costs more than
the tent rental itself. It's an exorbitant amount of money. You set up a
tent that's fire treated, meets all the safety qualifications, it goes up in
the exact same spot, you probably put the stakes in the same hole each
time, and you draw the tent tight, you use it and then you take it down,
and then another time you set it up to be able to meet the needs of the
poor of Immokalee.
REVEREND BEX: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm really lost on this. I know
there's ways that we can do it differently. We have done it with other
groups, and I'd like to address this directly to the county attorney. I
don't mean to ignore you, Susan. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. I was going to call on Susan because
possibly -- I noticed she was conferring with the county attorney.
Susan?
Page 36
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, okay, fine. I didn't realize
that, but I know the county attorney has some solutions to this. Go
ahead.
MS. ISTENES: Susan Istenes, Zoning Director, and I have some
solutions, too.
The way the fee code reads right now, this gentleman would be
obligated to pay $200 per event. What we have done in the past and
what you all have endorsed in the past, is the possibility -- and let me
back up real quick. As a nonprofit, they do get two free permits a
year. You all passed that in a fee amendment probably three or four
years ago, so they do get two free permits that's nonprofit.
As an option, you could possibly issue two 14-day temporary use
permits for $400 total but allow sequential use of the 28 days total. So
in other words, he wouldn't be charged per event. He would just pay
$400, and he would have 28 events.
Another option is he could add additional dates to the two
one-day permits already approved with no fee for a nonprofit
organization, and --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't mean to interrupt you,
but to add days, you're talking about adding days to follow right after
the day that he needed it, or could it be days off in the future?
MS. ISTENES: Days in the future.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, okay, please.
MS. ISTENES: And this would cost the applicant nothing. And
essentially you could endorse it and approve it without restrictions or
permits or you could stick with the way we apply the fee code. So
there's four options for you.
My recommendation would be the first, to at least allow the
department to collect at least -- or recoup at least some of the cost in
issuing and monitoring the permits.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And--
MS. ISTENES: And that would be for a total of $400,
Page 37
June 10, 2008
Commissioner, for 28 days, and he could use those 28 total,
nonsequentially.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I respond?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And I understand what
you're doing. I think it's absolutely wonderful that we've taken this
step forward. I still think it's a baby step.
I -- my own personal experience is, what you get for the service
you pay for is next to nothing. Quite often no one even shows up on
the site. There's very little reason to do so. These tents are fireproof
for the most part. They're not an engineered structure that poses any
great danger to the public.
I'm at a loss why we even have to charge that much. I personally
would like to see a $200 fee to cover the whole year, recognizing 25
times that they could use it. That would be my own personal view on
this thing. Or the $200 would be a token fee that he'd be paying for
the inspections that he may get someday, but he probably won't.
That's my own personal feelings.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. You were saying, Reverend
Bex, that you've been in the ministry for 47 years; is that correct?
REVEREND BEX: Oh, no, sir. I've been a resident of Collier
County and in Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And how long have you
been in the ministries?
REVEREND BEX: I've been in the ministries for 16 years.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is there -- do you have a church
building?
REVEREND BEX: Yes, sir. We now -- just -- it's a mission
house in Immokalee. We've opened -- how this all came about,
different people, Everglades City come to do this. I'm not funded by
no big organization. People, just like various any ones of you, could
Page 38
June 10, 2008
come and help participate or donate money, just people that care. I
have people from LaBelle.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is this -- is there -- where your
parish or your church is, is this where you set up a tent, or is it
someplace else?
REVEREND BEX: No, sir. It is -- we're on Highway 29,801
North 15th, which is across from the post office in Immokalee, but we
go into the -- I would say the rougher area of town, 4th Street and
Boston where most of the people are on foot. I mean, we're -- you
know, we're accessible by foot where we're at, but it's -- we try to get
to the most people. There's 3- to 700 people that are walking in that
area.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm just trying to make it easier for
you.
REVEREND BEX: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: If you could set something up on
your grounds, possibly you wouldn't have to pay anything then.
REVEREND BEX: Yes, sir. I could, but the availability of
reaching the people, we have to kind of go where, you know, where
they're -- they're not going to walk a mile --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How far away is --
REVEREND BEX: Okay. I'm possibly --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- this from where --
REVEREND BEX: I'm probably a mile and a half probably
from where actually -- and it's the double Highway 29. I mean, it goes
through there, so --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I'm trying to --
REVEREND BEX: I understand.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I thought if you could set this
up where your church is located, then obviously you wouldn't run into
any additional expense and the problem would be taken care of.
REVEREND BEX: Yes, sir. That would work, but we actually
Page 39
June 10, 2008
need to get to where the people are that are in the most need for them
to have to -- you know, have to walk to where we're at.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Do you own that property
then?
REVEREND BEX: No, sir. I have a written permission to use
it, and we maintain it, we clean it, we mow it, keep insurance on it so
we can have use of it. And it's about 25 times a year that we do that.
We do it --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'd be in favor of what Susan
Istenes brought forth, and that's number one where you get a permit
and -- it's what, two permits, 28 days or whatever?
MS. ISTENES: Correct, Commissioner. The total would be
$400.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And you can use those days
however you want then, use the days. It would be for 28 days through
the whole year.
REVEREND BEX: So in other words, I would have 28 set-ups?
Because we're only there like five hours in actual days, so 28 times
during the year?
MS. ISTENES: Twenty-eight annual days, 28 during the
calendar year.
REVEREND BEX: I mean, I really have no problem with that.
It's like I'm saying, whatever we -- it's a money issue. Like you said,
most things are that come before the board, that we don't have a lot of
money, and what we have comes in goes straight out. I take nothing
for what I do. I'm still working.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That seems fair enough to you?
REVEREND BEX: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I make a motion that we--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let me just ask Commissioner Henning if
he has something to say.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I don't.
Page 40
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Susan, did you have anything
else to say?
MS. ISTENES: No. Thank you, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Then I make a motion that we
allow him to have a permit for 28 days, and he can use the days
however he sees fit for that year's time for set-ups.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Of course I'd like to see
it cheaper, but since everybody seems to be in agreement to it. I
wouldn't mind seconding it, but are we within the boundaries of what
we can work with, Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, we are, and that would be a $400
payment for the 28 days, my understanding?
MS. ISTENES: It would be two 14-day permits, technically
speaking, and it would be for a total of 28 for the remainder of the
year.
REVEREND BEX: So I want -- I come one time to get it. I
don't have to keep continually coming from Immokalee?
MS. ISTENES: Exactly. We could issue you two permits at the
same time, so when you come in once, pay your $400, and then you
don't have to come back.
REVEREND BEX: I appreciate it. I mean, we just want to be
able to -- you know, that cuts us down $4,600 in the year, so that's a
great help. I mean --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
REVEREND BEX: -- pay for the paperwork.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second the motion that
accepts the planning director's recommendations.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Actually Commissioner Coletta
said he wouldn't mind seconding it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I did.
Page 41
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And that was a real second, right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But thank you for your second. We'll
take it as a third, Commissioner Henning.
Any further comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All those in favor, signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
REVEREND BEX: So we don't need the video then, okay. All
right. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You're all set.
Item #6C
PUBLIC'PETITION REQUEST BY MICHAEL URBANIK TO
DISCUSS DESIGNATION OF THE FORMER COPELAND ROAD
PRISON SITE - DISCUSSED; PETITIONER TO FORM AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND
CONTINUE THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next public
petition, which is 6C, and that's a public petition request by Michael
Urbanik to discuss the designation of the former Copeland Road
prison site.
Page 42
- ------r-- ~~ ~ --
June 10, 2008
MR. MUDD: Just state your name for the record.
MR. URBANIK: Mike Urbanik, for the record. Good morning,
Madam Chair, Commissioners.
I have a small PowerPoint I'd like to start with, if I can, which
shows you what we're talking about, the location, the remoteness of
the site, and the isolation of the site.
So how do I do it?
MR. MUDD: You got it plugged in?
MR. URBANIK: Yeah. They installed the disk.
REVEREND BEX: That's my DVD.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's a better one.
REVEREND BEX: You want me to go ahead and take it out?
MR. URBANIK: They said my name would come up.
MR. MUDD: There it is, right there. Middle of the page.
MR. URBANIK: Okay. And I use this to advance. And I'm in
technology, too. I'll tell you.
Okay. We're talking about the former prison site at Copeland. It
has two important features. One is location, the other is isolation.
Now, I advance it by--
MR. URBANIK: You can see that the site is located in a very
remote area of the county. If you zoom in satellite, it barely becomes
perceptible. It's in a very isolated location. It's surrounded either by
state or federal lands. There's the site just on the left side of Route 29.
Okay. I've got photos of the former prison site next. The
buildings date back from 1953. There are paved roads and parkways,
you know, and parking lots throughout the site. It's highly urbanized
and disturbed. Housing was set up and facilities were set up for 124
inmates and staff.
There's a wastewater treatment plant, a freshwater pump station,
a small electric generating plant, and truck and repair and maintenance
shop on site.
There's a prison kitchen and cafeteria facilities. You can see
Page 43
June 10,2008
that's a very developed site. Paved basketball court, outdoor facilities
for visiting families. No one visits there anymore but me.
We did a homeland security training episode at -- on site where
we had hostage negotiation training, sniper training, building
breaching, Simunitions training, and flash bang and smoke grenade
training. We did this at no costs to the Sheriffs Department of Lee
County .
We used Glock pistols with Simunitions ammo, which you need
to have helmets and riot gear to protect yourself because it's live
ammo. We used hostage negotiations. We had hostages. One,
unfortunately, got killed. Sniper training and various training of
breaching. There was a 35-crew SWAT team on site to get this
training.
The training was provided by Fakahatchee Trace, LLC, which
owns the company. I'm the manager of the -- which owns the
property. I'm the manager. And myself and seven other people were
played Al Qaeda members, and we were in an Al Qaeda cell. We did
a kidnaping.
There's other possible training uses for property. CS and tear gas
training. We put a rappel tower in if we can, if we can. There's
extraction training for the fire department, bomb squad training, which
most likely they could use live bombs if they wish because of the
remoteness of the site. Rifle and pistol range for the Sheriffs
Department if he chooses to use this site. Shoothouse, shoothouse
training.
The location and isolation and the on-site infrastructure that's
there now make this a very cost-effective choice for doing any kind of
training for law enforcement and homeland security.
The roadblock to doing this kind of training there in a
cost-effective way and in a timely way right now is the fact that the
site has been inappropriately overlaid with a conservation easement.
I spoke to DEP, wanted to talk to John Idelheit, who is the district
Page 44
June 10, 2008
director of our region. He was on travel. He assigned one of his
people to call me back. And that was Gordon Romeese (phonetic).
He's very familiar with the site. He has done a lot of fieldwork in the
area in the vicinity, and he said that the state would have no objection
to doing this down there. And in fact, he suggested that we do tear gas
training down there and CS gas training because the department, the
DEP, has had complaints about tear gas training in and around his
district where the population was getting tear gas -- getting tear
gassed. So he suggested that that would be a good site to do the
training.
The Florida Division of Parks has no objection. They own the
land in the surrounding portion there. And the Fish and Wildlife
Commission would like us to do this because they have no place in the
area for their hunter safety programs, so they would like to have
in-class teaching down there as well as range time for shooter safety.
That's about it. So my request is that you remove the
conservation overlay for this 55-year-old grandfathered site and
replace it with an urban overlay so that this kind of training can
proceed without so much cost that it just will knock it out of the box
and we wouldn't do it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas, Commissioner
Henning, and Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. How long has the
conservation overlay been put on this property?
MR. URBANIK: I don't know. I suspect since '91, but I'm not
sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So when did you purchase the
property?
MR. URBANIK: In '05.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So you -- did you realize that there
was a conservation overlay at the time?
MR. URBANIK: No, sir, I didn't. When I went to the county
Page 45
June 10, 2008
before we purchased the property and asked what the zoning was, we
were told that it was ago
Now, this was owned by the State of Florida, this property.
Before they conveyed it to Fakahatchee, LLC, they asked me what we
were going to do with the property, and I said, we're going to do the
homeland security training and other kind of law enforcement
training. They thought that would be an appropriate use for the
property.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But the question I asked you at this
point in time, that this conservation overlay was put on there a number
of years before you purchased the property. So it wasn't done while
you're the owner of the property?
MR. URBANIK: I think that's correct, sir, but I'm not sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The other thing is, I think you got a
pretty good idea here. My concern is, maybe what you need to start
with is to establish or see if you can get an interlocal agreement with
the sheriffs office in regards to being an essential training area, and
then I think you might be on the road to being able to break down
some of the roadblocks. But I think that's the first thing you need to
do is see if you can get an interlocal agreement with the sheriff in
regards to a -- training facilities of this nature.
MR. URBANIK: My intent, sir, is to not do this unless I do get
that agreement.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I think that's where you've
got to start.
MR. URBANIK: Yeah. And I've had several meetings with the
undersheriff on this, and he's inclined, I think, to do something here.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. But I think that's your first
step, okay, to get that established so that you've got something, and
then there may be the possibility that there can be some change in the
zoning, but I'll have to revert back to staff and ask them what type of
guidance that you're going to need in order to accomplish the task that
Page 46
June 10,2008
you're trying to do here, okay?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I have no problem
bringing it back.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I think it's appropriate to
bring it back, because I really do think that the Sheriffs Department's
in need of this particular range. The present one that they have off of
Oil Well Road is coming to the end of its life expectancy, and I don't
see anybody from the Sheriffs Department here? No. But when it
comes back, we can hear from them at that point in time.
My understanding is that they're going to need to close it out.
Mr. Urbanik has a unique opportunity for when they close out that
range to be able to help us mitigate a tremendous expense that we're
going to endure as a county entity due to the fact it's been a range, and
the soil banks that are there have collected tons of lead over the years
and the process to clean it is extremely expensive, and Mr. Urbanik
has offered to have that removed to his site to use as a bank there. So
we could see a possibility of a tremendous savings. I'd like to hear
more about that when it comes back.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I do not believe that the EP A is
going to let you take contaminated soil and put it into another area,
especially with an overlay at this point, and to contaminate that area. I
think you've got a real problem there. Maybe the county attorney can
chime in on this.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, if you can get a permit, he'll get a
permit, but I sort of agree with you. I think it will be a difficult task at
best.
MR. URBANIK: Okay. Can I just address that, Commissioner
Halas?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Page 47
June 10, 2008
MR. URBANIK: I do have a permit to do that already by way of
an email that instructs me on how to do it, and I do not need to further
communicate with the DEP to do it. And I think you have a copy of
that email. And this email is something that is not done ever, but I
was able to get this agreement with the DEP in concert with the EP A
for several reasons, which I won't go into it now because they're kind
of complicated, but I will be able to move the contaminated dirt from
the existing sheriffs range to this range.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know, I think that this is a very -- a
big subject and we need to bring it back for discussion.
Joe Schmitt, did you want to say something before we vote to
bring it back?
MR. SCHMITT: For the record, Joe Schmitt, your Administrator
of Community Development/Environmental Services Division.
We've been communicating with Mr. Urbanik for several months
over this. In fact, we have two different letters where we've made
some preliminary determinations.
This is in the area of critical state concern, the Big Cypress area
of critical state concern, it has a special treatment overlay. It's been
designated as such. The reason that the facility exists now and can be
used is because it was deemed an essential service.
The issue here -- and I'm not sure what you want us to bring
back, because if this is going to be operated as a private range, as a
private entity, then the only recourse would be to amend the
comprehensive land -- the Future Land Use Map and the Future Land
Use Element.
If -- and I've told this to Mr. Urbanik. If it is deemed an essential
service, if there -- as Commissioner Halas brought up, there's some
common agreement that clearly identifies this as a training facility for
the sheriff, deemed to be a principal training area for the sheriff, we
would be able to legally deem it an essential service.
The portion that becomes in difficulty is if he wants to conduct
Page 48
June 10, 2008
some of this other training, weapons training, weapons familiarization
training, all great things, everything he showed certainly are valid
needs, and this is the place to do it, but he would have to then come in
through public hearing and do a conditional use to identify the
conditional use.
Even to the point if he were to move the materials -- and I
explained this when we met. Even -- I know he has a letter from the
DEP, but given that this is in an area of critical state concern, he'll
probably have to do an EIS and do an environmental impact analysis
or an environmental impact statement to determine the environmental
impact of moving this contaminated material, contaminated material
with lead.
But I'm not -- what I'm trying to tell you is there -- these are all
good things that he brought up, but there's a way to get there, and the
way to get there is, number one, get the agreement from the sheriff.
That clarifies and that legitimizes what we can do from the standpoint
of the GMP.
He can proceed with trying to develop that site as a sheriffs
training site. If he wants to do additional weapons training or
familiarization training for the public, those kind of activities, we will
then need a conditional use, and that goes through the public hearing
process because there's going to be -- certainly going to be other
conditions placed on that type of training, hours of operation, and any
other environmental concerns, so that goes through the public hearing
process.
Hopefully I answered all your questions. So I'm not sure what
you want us to bring back other than we would explain just what I
clearly -- or at least I attempted to clarify in my short presentation.
(Commissioner Coyle is now present via speakerphone.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think Commissioner Coyle has just
joined us. Welcome, Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good morning, Madam Chair.
Page 49
__.,..__..'..__m
June 10,2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I would like to say that you are
joining us by phone today because you are unable to be here in person
because you are out of state on a family emergency; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I needed to state that for the record.
County Attorney, do we need to state anything else?
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, you need to make another motion to have
him join the particular --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion that
Commissioner Coyle, due to extenuating circumstances, is out of state
and at the present time would like to join us.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Welcome, Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you for being here, sir.
And Commissioner Halas, did you want to say something, and
then Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that that's what I've tried to
convey to Mr. Ubik (sic) there, that he needs to go before the sheriff
and get that interlocal agreement for this essential service, and then I
think he can move on from that point.
So there's really nothing to bring back other than the fact that he
now has the opportunity to go to the sheriff and get that letter.
MR. SCHMITT: And with that, he would come back, go through
the application process, go through the conditional use process, and
Page 50
I --.--...----.-.--
June 10, 2008
then we identify all the requirements.
Now, unfortunately he will have to go through the site plan
development processes and other type of things as well. This is not
going to be just -- I'll use the word -- wave of the magic wand. There
are certain things that he has to do in accordance with our code unless
you all summarily just want to waive all those requirements.
He would have to go through the site plan, at minimum a Site
Improvement Plan, but most likely a Site Development Plan to
identify the services on site, those kind of things that are normally
done as part of the review process.
And those are the kind of things we would discuss during a
preapplication meeting. And certainly, if there are situations or there
are -- he believes that these things are show stoppers, he certainly can
come back and petition you in regards to whether these things can be
waived. I don't have the authority to waive those.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Mr. Schmitt.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just to summarize it up. All he
has to do is go to the Sheriffs Department, get that letter, and then that
would start -- that would remove the object -- the objection of the
conservation easement --
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- so that he could go forward
with that part of the effort. Meanwhile, he's going to have to start the
regular process to be able to come under plan review.
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Which may be a little bit
involved, but still, it's a process you can go through and identify and
be able to move forward.
And then as a separate issue, he can come back and ask for the --
whatever it is that we need to give him so that the public could also
Page 51
June 10, 2008
use the range at a future time.
MR. SCHMITT: Well, it would be a conditional use. We'd have
to determine whether -- and I believe David just told me that, in fact,
based on the compo plan, he would need a conditional use regardless
based on -- to use it as the sheriffs training site as well, so that puts it
in the public hearing process.
And that's our -- that's our process. We need to advertise it, do
the public -- the neighborhood information meeting, those kinds of
things. Of course, nobody's out there, but we have to notify the folks
in Goodland or -- I'm sorry -- in Copeland, that this site is going to be
opened, what it's going to be, and so certainly the citizens that may
believe -- or believe that they may be impacted by this, certainly
they'll have every right to present their points of view as well. That is
our process.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning, did you have
anything to add?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I didn't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. And as can you, Mr.
Urbanik, we all feel that this is an essential service that you are going
to be offering to our homeland security as well as to our law
enforcement, and we are solidly wanting to help you along. But I
think you've got some marching orders right now.
MR. URBANIK: Yes. Commissioner Fiala, one last point. This
is not a moneymaker for anybody. There's going to be very little funds
for landscaping and other improvements that are just ancillary to the
goal of creating a homeland security training site and someplace for
the sheriff to move to.
I think the benefits you derive from having this site available to
you will be so significant that I think you can most likely find a
compromise in what I would have to do to make this site acceptable to
the county.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, a bunch of landscaping certainly
Page 52
June 10,2008
doesn't help when you're trying to conduct war games or whatever.
Our homeland security guy is Commissioner Halas. The guy that's --
the commissioner for that district is Commissioner Coletta. And you,
of course, are in my district. So we're all going to be here for you. If
you need any help or you have any concerns, please don't hesitate to
contact anyone of us.
And so I say with that, thank you very much for being here.
MR. URBANIK: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And good luck on getting that thing done
pretty quickly and a lot of compromise from our staff as well.
And right now I'm going to say that we're going to take a break
for 10 minutes.
MR. URBANIK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
Item #8A, #8B and #8C
THIS ITEM MUST BE HEARD BEFORE ITEM PUDZ-2006-AR-
10875 AND REQUIRES THAT ALL PARTICIPANTS BE SWORN
IN AND EX PARTE DISCLOSURE BE PROVIDED BY
COMMISSION MEMBERS. PUDA-2007-AR-11734 KRG 951
AND 41, LLC, REPRESENTED BY D. WAYNE ARNOLD, AICP,
OF Q. GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES, P.A. AND
RICHARD D. YOV ANOVICH, ESQUIRE, OF GOODLETTE,
COLEMAN, AND JOHNSON, P.A., IS REQUESTING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ARTESA POINTE PUD TO REMOVE A
+/- 0.88 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND AND ADD IT TO THE
Page 53
~-~r~ .-~---~--
June 10, 2008
PROPOSED T AMIAMI CROSSING CPUD ABUTTING ITS
NORTHERN BOUNDARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS
LOCATED APPROXIMA TEL Y 1/4 OF A MILE SOUTH OF THE
INTERSECTION OF COLLIER BOULEVARD AND US 41, IN
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (COMPANION ITEM TO PUDZ-
2006-AR-10875) - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO JULY 22, 2008-
APPROVED
THIS ITEM MUST BE HEARD AFTER PUDA-2007-AR-11734
AND REQUIRES THAT ALL PARTICIPANTS BE SWORN IN
AND EX PARTE DISCLOSURE BE PROVIDED BY
COMMISSION MEMBERS. PETITION: PUDZ-2006-AR-10875, Q
GRADY MINOR, REPRESENTING KRG 951 AND 41, LLC, HAS
SUBMITTED A PUD REZONE FOR TAMIAMI CROSSING
CPUD. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REZONE THE A
(AGRICUL TURAL), C-2 (COMMERCIAL CONVENIENCE), C-4
(GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING) DISTRICTS AND
ARTESA POINTE PUD TO COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) ZONING DISTRICT. THIS IS TO
ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL LAND USES
WITH A MAXIMUM OF 235,000 SQUARE FEET. THE
PROPERTY CONSISTS OF +/- 25.45 ACRES AND IS LOCATED
IN SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (COMPANION ITEM TO PUDA-
2007-AR-11734) - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO JULY 22, 2008-
APPROVED
RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 92-60, WHICH CREATED THE
IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIP AL SERVICE
TAXING UNIT, TO INCREASE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE
Page 54
June 10,2008
UNIT TO ADD APPROXIMATELY 3002+/-ACRES - MOTION
TO CONTINUE INDEFINITEL Y - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, there -- sometimes we do it at the
beginning, but in this particular case, because we had commissioners
coming in on the phone -- Commissioner Henning, are you on the
phone right now?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, I am.
MR. MUDD: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm here.
MR. MUDD: Okay. This is -- this is paragraph 8 in your
agenda. Both 8A, 8B, and 8C are all requesting continuances, so I
need a motion, ma'am, because these were all advertised, to continue
these particular items, and if I could --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to continue.
MR. MUDD: -- get them one at a time.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to continue and a
second. I'd like to make a comment with regard to the Tamiami
Crossings. That was 8A and B, I believe, and what we're hoping to do
is just continue that, but we want it to go back to the Planning
Commission because they have redesigned the whole site, and
Planning Commission wants to see it again. But there's going to be
some conflict with times, and this is an important -- an important
project. We're hoping to see it back. In fact, I'd like to see it back on
the July meeting, the July 22nd meeting, I think it is.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, that's what the petitioner's basically got a
request, for July 22nd.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I'm just going to put that on the
record just so we have it stated. Okay. I have a motion on the floor
and a second. Somebody's radio is going. There.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Keep your phones on
Page 55
June 10, 2008
mute when you're not going to talk. We won't pick up the background
noise and you won't be embarrassed.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All those in favor, signify saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Now we move on to item 9.
MR. MUDD: Okay. So that was -- that vote was to continue,
was for 8A, 8B and 8C?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's correct.
MR. MUDD: Okay. Thank you.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2008-174: APPOINTING NOAH STANDRIDGE
AND QUIN L. KURTH FOR THE ALTERNATES (TECHNICAL
MEMBERS) AND DARRIN S. BROOKS AS THE (NON-
TECHNICAL) MEMBER TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL
ADVISORY COUNCIL - ADOPTED
That brings us to 9A, which is appointment of members to the
Environmental Advisory Council.
MS. FILSON: And Commissioners, on this item I have the
executive summary to appoint two alternate members and the alternate
members are required to be technical; however, in the interim I had
one person resign. And Mr. Darrin Brooks had applied, and he was
Page 56
----T
June 10, 2008
told that he didn't meet the criteria because he was nontechnical.
Their guidelines indicate that there should be six technical and
three nontechnical members on the committee, and he's a
nontechnical, so he would be eligible for appointment if you wish to
appoint him. And I did call him, and he is still interested.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And you're talking about the seat that has
just been vacated for the -- because of the resignation; is that what
you're saying?
MS. FILSON: Yes, that's correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So we're actually looking for two
alternate members and one --
MS. FILSON: And one regular member who is nontechnical.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And that's Darrin S. Brooks; is that
correct?
MS. FILSON: Darrin S. Brooks, and I did phone him. He is still
interested.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Because it said he
withdrew, but --
MS. FILSON: He withdrew because we were looking for two
technical alternate members
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, got it. Okay. At that, I'll
make a motion that Noah Standridge and Quin L. Kurth be elected on
the technic -- as alternate members on the technical side, and that
Darrin S. Brooks be nontechnical, and presently he will be established
on the --
MS. FILSON: As a regular member.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- as a regular member of the
Environmental Advisory Council.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Halas and a second.
Page 57
June 10, 2008
Any comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All those in favor, signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Moving on.
MS. FILSON: Is that a 5-0?
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a 5-0.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Are the other two on?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. Commissioner Coyle and
Commissioner Henning, you were voting in favor.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2008-175: APPOINTING ROBERT F. KAUFFMAN
TO THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD -
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Brings us to 9B, which is appointment of member
to the Collier County Code Enforcement Board.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion we appoint Robert
F. Kaufman to sit on that seat.
Page 58
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I'll second that motion.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Got your motion, Commissioner
Henning.
Okay. All those in favor signify by saying aye, and we did that.
That was a 5-0 vote.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2008-176: APPOINTING LES DICKSON TO THE
CONTRACTORS LICENSING BOARD - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. Brings us to 9C, which is
appointment of a member to the Contractors' Licensing Board.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner Henning, if you'd
like to make a motion, that's in your district.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Make a motion that we appoint
Les Dickson.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Halas to
appoint Les Dickson as -- on the Contractors' Licensing Board.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Page 59
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. That passes, 5-0.
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2008-177: APPOINTING MARIA (LUCY) V.
ORTIZ TO THE IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: We go to 9D, which is appointment of a member
to the Immokalee Beautification Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to make a motion to
appoint Lucy Ortiz.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And both of you on the phones,
Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner Henning, you voted in favor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I did.
Page 60
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. We hear somebody's radio in
the background.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, I think that's cross talk. That
might be cross talk from the -
Item #9E
RESOLUTION 2008-178: THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS ASSIGNS A QUALIFIED STAFF MEMBER
TO ATTEND AND PARTICIPATE IN THE MANAGEMENT
PLAN ADVISORY GROUP PUBLIC MEETING AND WORKING
GROUP PROVIDING INPUT REGARDING THE PICAYUNE
STRAND STATE FOREST 10 YEAR MANAGEMENT PLAN -
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 9E, that the Board
of County Commissioners assign a qualified staff member to attend
and participate in the Management Plan Advisory Group public
meeting, and working group providing input regarding the Picayune
Strand State Forest 10-year management plan.
This item is brought forward by Commissioner Henning, and Mr.
Klatzkow has had some correspondence with the folks that are in
charge of this particular issue to determine if a citizen would be
acceptable.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. And by this resolution, they would
accept a citizen member.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And let me jump in here for just a
moment and say that as long as our meeting is going to be ending
early today, I volunteered to go to this meeting this evening, and as
well I can -- could go to it tomorrow morning. I cannot attend
tomorrow afternoon, so that then they would have a commissioner
there if anybody would like me to do that.
Page 61
June 10, 2008
Yes, Commissioner Halas, then Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I think that -- I understand
where Commissioner Coletta is on this, but I believe that somebody
from the board should probably go to this meeting. And I recommend
that since you're the acting chair, that you should be at this particular
meeting because I think you would voice the concerns of this board
more so than the feeling of someone who's out in the general public.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well-- and I don't mean to be
disrespectful, but there's an issue here that goes way beyond that. This
. .
IS an access Issue.
One of the concerns that has to do with the Picayune State Forest
is the rights of access for those people that want to do all different
pursuits, including hunting, and that's something that I feel extremely
strong about.
And, you know, I have represented this commission on different
other boards such as this to make sure that the access rights were
preserved for the people that are -- that use those forests.
And, you know, if you feel-- if you feel like you're capable of
doing that and you understand what the issues are, I say go for it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I put this on the agenda. May I
speak?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Please do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. There was
agreement between the Board of Commissioners and South Florida
Water Management. Part of the agreement, that the commissioner of
the district shall be the representative on this work group, this
committee.
I don't know why the state bureaucrat kept on emailing me
Page 62
June 10, 2008
demanding that I be there. You know. I get a lot of demands, but I
only take direction from my wife and Sam.
But it's really, in my opinion, according to the agreement, is up to
Commissioner Coletta, the commissioner of the district, who
represents him as the commissioner district.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I see. I didn't even realize that that was a
qualification. So you say that the commissioner of that district is the
one that is to be there?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's what I read. And of
course, Jeff Klatzkow can clarify anything further. But that's clearly
what the agreement says.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. That's what the agreement says. This
was the agreement -- the initial agreement we had when we vacated
the roads in the Southern Estates, and it specifically provides that the
commissioner of the district of the Picayune Forest shall be sitting on
this MPAG.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I see. I thought they were just looking for
a commissioner, and I was just jumping in to kind of save the day. I
didn't realize. Can you be there, Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, here's the whole problem.
We don't know what time this meeting's going to end today. And if
we don't --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We'll end in time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, that's right, you're chair. I
forgot for a moment.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Of course we will. If I can
attend, I'd love to attend, but I would still like to have Brian, who's
been a person that I greatly respect and has been on many committees
that we've had here before, be designated as we legally can, and then
I'd be more than happy to go, too, in can get off. But I'd hate to make
a commitment and then find out that for some reason we're still here or
Page 63
June 10, 2008
we might be here tomorrow. We hope that we're going to end today.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that's the only reason why
we were asking to put him in place there. I'd like to put it this way. I'd
like to have him as the designee for the commission, and if we get
through in time and I can make it and if we don't have a meeting
tomorrow, I'd like to be there also.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I see.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But I just want to make sure
we're covered. I'd hate to have this meeting take place without
someone that can, in some way or form, be able to represent the
various interests of Collier County.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning, do you have
anything to say on that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I think that Jeff Klatzkow
wrote a resolution that adds that designation. I'm sure that the
committee will recognize Commissioner Coletta and Brian McMahon
if that's the wishes of the board.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I was going to say, if -- I
think Commissioner Coletta then, in this case, should be at this
meeting, and I feel that hopefully we'll get done in time, and maybe he
should be the design -- because I think somebody from the Board of
County Commissioners should represent there as the person
designated as the commissioner off of this dais.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make a suggestion?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why don't we just change the
language ever so slightly that in lieu of the county commissioner not
being able to attend because of other duties, that Brian McMahon
would be our designee?
Page 64
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Could I just ask?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't know him.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure, that's why we're here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: He's going to be representing my voice,
and I -- and if you're recommending him, I'm sure he's a fine quality
person, but I don't know how he feels about the environment.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, very concerned about it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah? And I really don't know him. I've
seen him in the audience. How do we know he's going to represent
what we think --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- without you being there? You know
how we all feel about it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Very much so. And I can tell
you that my viewpoints and Brian McMahon's viewpoints on the
subject matter are one in the same, if that's any help. I really can't get
into the mind of each commissioner, but I know Brian McMahon, and
I -- I would trust him very much to represent me on any personal
matter.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I'll tell you, I don't know
anything about hunting or --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, that's good.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- or any of that stuff. I know that that's
something that you're intent on. I, in turn, am really in tune with the
environment and I want to see that protected as well, not to the
detriment of our citizens, don't get me wrong.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And so I just hope that he can -- I hope
that you'll be there, really.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I hope so, too, but--
Page 65
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll get you out of here in time to be there,
okay? That's a promise. I'll get you out of here in time to be there,
and tomorrow morning, then our schedules have all been held for
tomorrow, but we're not going to have tomorrow, so you can be there
tomorrow morning. You have to be here in the afternoon though.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. But once again, I'd rather
-- the motion as made and as seconded by Commissioner Henning, I'd
like to keep it intact so that I've got all cards covered on this so I don't
run into a problem if something terribly goes astray, and we've already
ruled on this and we passed it, and we've got no representation there,
that would be beyond anything I could ever accept. That's the only
thing. But I'll make every effort to be there. The only thing that
would prevent me from doing it would be a commitment through this
commiSSIOn.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. County Attorney, can you
state what the motion was made so that I have a clear clarification?
MR. KLATZKOW: My understanding is that the motion is to
approve the resolution, all right? There was some talk about amending
the resolution.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I thought there was an amendment
to that.
MR. KLATZKOW: There was some talk about amending the
resolution, but I will tell you the resolution does not need -- does not
need to be amended because it already says what you've been
discussing. It's a fail-safe mechanism. It only takes effect if
Commissioner Coletta cannot be there.
And, quite frankly, if Commissioner Coletta cannot be there
because of business of the board, no other commissioner can be there
either. So it's a fail-safe mechanism. If Commissioner Coletta cannot
be there, Brian McMahon will show up.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's my hope, too, if I am there --
and I'm going to make every effort to be there -- I hope Brian
Page 66
June 10, 2008
McMahon still shows up so that I can get his input.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Go ahead. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, yes. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I understand what the county
attorney has told us, if Commissioner Coletta cannot be there today,
no county commissioner can be there today because Commissioner
Coletta's reason for not being there is because of this particular
meeting.
I feel uneasy about appointing someone from the general public
to represent county commissioners at a meeting of this type. I believe
that the board is supposed to be represented in those meetings, and if a
commissioner can't make it, then we should have another
commissioner who can.
But just like Commissioner -- with respect to Brian McMahon's
position, if he is there, he will provide guidance and input and public
input to guide the commissioner representative. But since the chair
has said she is going to assure that she could be there, I don't
understand why Commissioner Coletta can't be there.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I couldn't hear the last of his --
Commissioner Coyle, what's happening is as you're talking, there's
something -- some kind of noises that are going on --
MR. MUDD: Feedback.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- that are drowning you out. Are you
there?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I'm here. Is this better?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, much better.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is this better?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, there you go.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
Page 67
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Could you -- I couldn't even hear the last
few sentences.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, if you have said that the
meeting is going to end today in sufficient time for Commissioner
Coletta to be at this meeting, why are we having a problem?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Because we don't know that for
absolute gospel truth, and we don't know that we're going to have to
not come back on Wednesday morning, in which case the whole
episode will go through without any representation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But if we're out of here, you'll be there; is
that correct?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So I think you just
answered my question. If we're finished with this meeting on time,
Commissioner Coletta will be there?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What's that time, hopefully--
okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We'll get you out of here by five so you
can get there by six, okay?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay? That means we can't talk too long.
Okay.
MR. MUDD: And ma'am, just for the commissioners that aren't
here in the room and for the commissioners on the dais who might not
know, there is a public workshop tonight to hear public comment on
the lO-year plan for the Picayune Forest from six o'clock to nine
o'clock followed by a workshop with this group of people to represent,
i.e., it was supposed to be the commissioner from District 5, and goes
from nine o'clock tomorrow to four o'clock in the afternoon, okay.
Page 68
June 10,2008
If the board meeting doesn't go over, then the morning, tomorrow
morning is free; however, at one o'clock tomorrow afternoon you have
the post-legislative workshop with our Florida delegation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And we have to be here for that, right?
So Brian McMahon could take over then from noon on in your stead,
if that --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would that work?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Where's the meeting? Anybody
know offhand?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, it's out at the --
MR. MUDD: University extension.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- extension.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So I need an -- I need an
hour and 15 minutes travel time. Yeah, okay. It works fine. I just
can't miss the post-legislative session either.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Great, okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So if you leave there at, say, 11:30 or 12
o'clock, you could be back here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good. So now I think we
need to have that motion read back. Can anybody read this motion
back to us so that we know what we're voting on?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think it's basically just the --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: To approve this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- to approve it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: The resolution, right?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I thought there was some -- I
thought there was an amendment with one or two words that we
discussed earlier on.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's already in there.
Page 69
June 10, 2008
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think you need the amendment.
That's what I'm saying. I don't know what the amendment does.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think you need the amendment. I
think the resolution already takes care of it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So I amend my motion just to
recognize the resolution. And Commissioner Henning, you agree?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, to move the resolution.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any further comment?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I have ayes from the two phone
commissioners?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay with me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good. With that we have a
5-0 vote to approve.
Item #9F
RESOLUTION 2008-179: A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE
ONGOING OPERATIONS OF EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK
BOAT TOURS, INC., FOUNDED IN 1959, AND OWNED AND
OPERATED FOR 49 YEARS BY MAYOR SAMMY HAMIL TON -
ADOPTED W /CHANGES (RECOMMEND THAT AN
Page 70
June 10, 2008
ESTABLISHED LOCAL BUSINESS BE CONSIDERED)
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, next item is 9F, and this is a
recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners adopt a resolution supporting the ongoing operation of
the Everglades National Park Boat Tours, Inc., founded in 1959, and
owned and operated for 49 years by Mayor Sammy Hamilton, and this
is a Commissioner Coletta item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. And I thank you very
much for allowing me to bring this forward.
Recently the Collier County Commission -- in fact, we'll be
seeing it back here today -- is coming out of (sic) support for the local
businesses with the local business preference.
This is just one more step to try to preserve something that's
unique for Everglades City and an employment base in Everglades
City that offers steady employment over 40-some years to the
residents of Golden -- excuse me, of Everglades City. I said Golden
Gate. I stand corrected.
And I could go on for all sorts of time to explain why, but I'm
pretty sure you've read the resolution. But Mayor Sammy Hamilton is
here today, and I would like for him to be able to come forward and
speak a couple words, if I could.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. Is he the speaker?
MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
MAYOR HAMIL TON: Good morning, Madam Chairman and
Commissioners. And for the record, my name is Sammy Hamilton, Jr.
I am the concessionaire of Everglades National Park Boat Tours, the
Everglades City Gulf Coast Ranger's Station, and I've come in front of
you people many times asking you for a lot of favors and -- but it was
never one for me. I always ask for something for the city or to help
somebody else. Today I'm here to ask you to help me.
Page 71
- _~"'"'^I_ _m
June 10, 2008
And if this was a new concession, like something just came out
new, even if it was in Everglades City or my front yard or whatever, if
it was a new concession, I wouldn't be here in front of you today,
because I think everybody should have a fair, equal chance to vote on
that concession.
But this here, I started it before it was even a national park in
Everglades City. One little drug store, no airboats, no hotels, no
nothing.
I bought the school boat that I went to school on from
Chokoloskee Island to Everglades City. I bought that after I got out of
the service.
I went in the army very young, joined the 11 th airborne
paratroopers, wound up in the fourth infantry 71 st division, and I got
out very, very young. And I was a commercial fisherman all my life.
My dad raised four children, did a goodjob. But, you know, I just
didn't want to do that for life.
And I decided I wanted -- I was always dreaming. I always -- I
said I had 90 days left in the army. I was laying on the bunk. I
thought, you know, I'll start a sightseeing boat. Well, when I started
that, everybody in town laughed at me. I went to my dad and said,
well, I tell you what. We're not going to feed him. My dad said, well,
nobody's ever fed a Hamilton yet, so we take care of our own. But
there for a while, I did think I was crazy.
I went along for about a year and a half. Nobody showed up.
And finally, one or two people started coming in. Then I got it filled
up. Then the national park came in, closed me down. It wasn't even
national park I found out later.
And I just got a house -- when I say how I got this house, the
people's in the service were going to say, boy, he was back in a long
time ago. But when I got this home on the GI loan -- and this guy was
called Mr. Knickbocker. If it hadn't been for him -- I went 18 months
behind on a house payment. I had two little kids, a boy and a girl, and
Page 72
June 10, 2008
he kept helping me out.
And the park service kept trying to freeze me out. Finally I got
back in as a concession, and they gave me a 60-day permit and telling
me to go out and buy all kinds of boats. Well, I didn't have $2.
So then it went on and on and on for years and years like that.
And finally I got the long-term contract. Then for the last 16 years I
have not had a contract. It's just been one year at a time, and that was
the only time that's ever happened to anyone.
And so I mentioned it to him and wrote a little letter to them, and
so then all at once they decided to put this back out real quick like.
The 28th of July is the deadline. I mean, that's all you can do on the
prospectus is turn it in, and that's the end of it. The winner is the
winner.
So I'm here today and I'd really appreciate if you would sign and
do a resolution for me and -- or Sammy Hamilton, Jr., and I'd really
appreciate it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. And it's my pleasure to
make that motion. And I want to remind the commission that we have
no authority to be able to direct any federal entity; however, we can
certainly lend our support at this time to a local resident that has done
much good for Everglades City and is one of the major employers in
that area.
And I received emails and phone calls in support of this from the
Chamber of Commerce and all the different businesses in Everglades
City who have felt threatened to a large degree by the National Park
Service for many years, and they all stand behind Sammy Hamilton.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did you second that, Commissioner
Henning?
MR. MUDD: No. Commissioner Henning has a question,
ma'am.
Page 73
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. Yes, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, do you
know if there's any other local businesses who put a bid on this
contract?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That I wouldn't be able to
answer. Mayor Hamilton might be able to.
MAYOR HAMIL TON: I can. Not no local. There's a couple
local. Well, actually not. The one is Guest Service and the other one
is called Hornblower, which is pretty powerful people. And they just
run the ferry boat from New York to -- one of the places out there.
They run two of them. They're very powerful people.
And there was another one called Emark, Air Mark, and they are
very powerful, and they are -- what happened, really, I was supposed
to -- when you get the lO-year, 15-year -- 10- to 15-year contract, I did
-- not supposed to have to do anything to Flamingo, but now they had
a bind down there at Flamingo that throws another little bind on me a
little bit, which I can handle, and -- but the thing is, we got to take a
five-year term down there to accept, or a 1 O-year term in Everglades
City. So it makes it a little rough, but I mean --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did that answer your --
MAYOR HAMIL TON: -- I worked for that. I mean, I earned
that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning, did that answer
your question?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, I don't think
so. But I went online to the national park site, and what I interpreted
the -- the Flamingo operation is separate from the Everglades
operation.
But if we're going to support local business, I thought that -- I
think that would be a much preferable resolution to send to the state
instead of -- again, we don't know if we have other locals.
But if Sammy Hamilton is the only local, that resolution would
Page 74
June 10,2008
fit the needs of Commissioner Coletta and Sammy Hamilton's wishes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And so let me clarify that again,
Commissioner Henning.
Mr. Hamilton, did you say that there are no other local businesses
competing with you for this permit?
MAYOR HAMILTON: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You did not say that or you --
MAYOR HAMIL TON: No. I did say that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You did say that.
MAYOR HAMILTON: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: There aren't any local --
MAYOR HAMIL TON: There's no local.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So is that then your second,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, not the way it is, not the
way the motion is now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How would you like to see the
motion worded to be able to assure fairness?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if we allow fairness, then
it's a local preference, we just send a resolution stating that we prefer
that the -- the national park system awards the lowest and best bid that
is a local business.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas has
something, and maybe that will help us a little bit.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I understand what we're
trying to do here, but I'm concerned that we're getting ourselves on a
slippery slope.
I believe that free enterprise system works out through all of the
kinks, and I believe that if it's a free bid for everyone, whether it's
local or outside, that the end result should be that it's a benefit to all
Page 75
------r--------.---..-------
June 10,2008
citizens whether they live in Collier County or the State of Florida or
any part of the United States that use this venue to go out and observe
parts of the Everglades and parts of the Ten Thousand Island area.
I feel that this is a private matter between the park and Mr.
Hamilton, and I wish him very well. But I believe that it has to be a
fair and just bidding service, and I believe that there's probably more
to this than meets the eye in regards to the service provided; and if
there's any health, safety, or welfare issues, that might also come into
play.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, did you have
something to say?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I do. I agree with -- with both
Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Halas.
Here's my concern. We are talking about fair -- fairness in
competition. I am concerned that sometimes these competitions are
not fair. The federal government has, throughout the history of
Everglades City, interfered in the ability of the people in Everglades
City to earn a living. They have removed opportunity after
opportunity from the people of Everglades City, forcing them to
change their lifestyle and seek out other ways of making a living.
I really do think it's good for us to support local businesses. I
think it is setting a bad precedent, however, when we select the local
business to support to the potential detriment of other local businesses.
And I would be happy with a resolution which said that we
encourage the park service to select an established local business, not
some company from New York who comes down here and establishes
an office here just for the purpose of bidding on this contract, but
some established local business would be our preference.
I am just concerned that we should not select the local business
that should get this contract, because there might be other local
businesses now or in the future who want to get into this kind of
Page 76
June 10, 2008
business, and I think fair competition is always a good thing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, Commissioner Coyle, I
appreciate your input on that, and I do -- I do agree with you. How
about if we use it -- we word the resolution here so that it says that --
to support local businesses, and then maybe as a reference say, such
as, and then refer to the airboat business, or the boat business that
exists now, and then that would -- that would leave it open for other
people to be able to come into it that are in Everglades City that may
wish to bid into the process, and it would be able to keep the status
quo intact.
Would that be something you could agree to?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm only concerned with the
precedent it might establish. The next person who wants to bid on this
might demand that we do the same thing for them, and we'll have then
several local businesses that we're supporting. But that certainly
removes our concern or my concern, and I think the other
commissioners' concerns that we are discriminating against other local
businesses if we select one to recommend.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Could you make a
motion? I know you will -- you put these things together in such an
elegant fashion, and I'd like to follow your lead, if you don't mind, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Flattery will get you anywhere.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I kind of hope so.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. My preferred motion would
be that we send a resolution to the National Park Service
recommending that an established local business be selected for these
park tours.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Henning.
Do we have any further discussion?
(No response.)
Page 77
-.."1.....
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Halas.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner Halas? I'm
sorry .
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I just -- as I said earlier, that
I think it should be a fair bidding process for not only local, but
anyone else that can meet the criteria, and so I'm a little reluctant to
vote this because I think what we're going to do is open up the
opportunity for everybody to come in here and say, hey, I think we
only should be looking at local and not looking outside the area.
I think what you do then is you are more confining in regards to
who locally is going to bid on it and you may end up not getting the
biggest bang for your buck. So that's my only concern on this, the
way the motion is made at the present time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I say that I agree with
Commissioner Halas. This is an unusual circumstance, and we are
certainly going to get into a position at this meeting today where we
are likely to take contradictory positions on this kind of issue.
It is a difficult thing to do, but my only justification for
suggesting this is that Everglades City is a special situation where the
livelihood of people there should be protected. We're going to get into
a debate later today about whether or not we should have vendor
preferences.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. That's coming up next.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. And I'll tell you right
now I am conflicted about this. But under vendor pro -- vendor
preferences, we're talking about benefits to the government and the
taxpayers.
In this particular case in Everglades City we're talking about
benefitting the people of Everglades City. And in view of the
Page 78
June 10, 2008
problems they have encountered with the federal government in the
past with respect to pursuing their livelihoods, I think we need to bend
a little bit to give them a break.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Commissioner Coyle.
And with that, I'll call for the vote.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And all those opposed, like sign?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have -- and Commissioner Henning,
you voted in favor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, ma'am, I did.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's a 4-1 vote. Thank you very
much.
MAYOR HAMILTON: Thank you.
Item #10E
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF LOCAL
VENDOR PREFERENCE POLICY - MOTION TO TABLE ITEM
UNTIL APTER LUNCH - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our 11 o'clock
time certain. This is a recommendation to consider adoption of local
vendor preference policy.
Mr. Steve Carnell, your Director of Purchasing, will present.
MR. CARNELL: Good morning, Madam Chairman, members of
the board. This is a follow-up item to your previous discussion on
June the 10th (sic) regarding the implementation of a local vendor
Page 79
June 10, 2008
preference policy.
This morning we want to follow up with the issues that the board
had given staff direction on to do some additional drafting and
clarification to the language, and we need to discuss that this morning,
and the board needs to make a decision if, in fact, it wishes to proceed
with this local preference policy, how to implement it, because there
are two options that we're going to discuss.
Before we get to that part of the discussion, I will tell you that we
have also made some other changes to the language to clarify and
make consistent the use of terminology throughout the existing policy,
tie it to the new proposed policy.
And we've also had to address a couple of statutory issues. There
is state law, Chapter 287, that has a subsection to it that says when a
local government has tie bids that you are to break the tie by selecting
the vendor who has a drug-free workplace. And that, in our view,
county attorney's view and my view, that would take precedence over
the local vendor policy that we might adopt here.
So in the event we had a tie bid, which is entirely possible if we
go to some type of best- and-final offer or right-to-match process, we
are will need to go to the state law first in terms of that statutory
procedure. So we've modified the policy to address that and
encompass that.
We've also added a sunset provision for the policy in followup to
the discussion from the board that the interest of the board in
implementing this policy was tied to and pertaining to current
economic conditions in the fact that our local economy and other
economies are suffering right now and our vendors are suffering and
struggling financially in many instances, and we're trying to target that
situation with this preference policy.
But we recognize that as economic conditions change, this
preference policy would need to be revisited. So we've added some
language to make sure that happens over the next two years.
Page 80
June 10, 2008
All right. With that in mind, I want to digress for a moment
because the original draft policy that was discussed on June 10th was
not fully vetted with county.
I've had the opportunity now to do that since the previous
meeting, and I wanted to share two specific things with you, and our
policy -- the language in the proposed policy actually addresses this,
so we're good in terms of language, in terms of the issue I'm about to
touch on.
But it's more the effect that I want you all to be aware of. I
alluded to part of this briefly in our last discussion two weeks ago, but
I really have come to a more full understanding since then of a
potential problem that we could have here.
Mr. Mudd, if you could place that for me.
We have -- I'm putting on the screen here just some summary of
notes on some contracts that are in place now that will be -- eventually
will be affected by this preference policy. And the simple thing you
need to understand is, I'm talking about two things. The purchase of
goods in an emergency situation. And when I say emergency, I'm
talking about natural disaster, either preparation for or recovery from
thereafter where we would need to make emergency purchases.
In our present scenario and policy we have a series of open
contracts, some of which are targeted. They're disaster-related
contracts. They're for the purpose of disaster response and recovery,
but we have many other contracts that are for regular day-to-day
business that also will get used in an emergency situation.
Now, if you'll remember, the policy as drafted does provide for
exemptions for federal and state grant-funded purchases. In this case
I'm not talking about federal and state grant-funded purchases. I'm
talking about FEMA reimbursement.
FEMA has restrictions and limitations on what it will reimburse.
And unfortunately, FEMA does not have a cut-and-dry standard.
They are not telling us that they flat out will not reimburse purchases
Page 81
June 10, 2008
that are made under a contract that was done by local preference, but
they are saying that they might not. It's a very ambiguous and not
clear response as to whether FEMA would, in fact, reimburse for
purchases that we make under contracts that were procured through
local preference.
And that's where we are right now. I don't know any way of
really clearing that up for you. All I'm saying to you is, we are
potentially at risk if we purchase off contracts that were procured
through local preference to be denied reimbursement by FEMA, if
those purchases were made in response to a hurricane or a brush fire,
whatever the case may be. So we are at risk and we need to be aware
of that.
The second issue -- and by the way, I'm listing some contracts
here that are contracts we frequently use in connection to disaster
response but are not disaster response contracts. It's supply contracts
for bottled water, ice, electrical parts, roadway signs, rental
equipment, general contractor day-to-day services, fixed-term
agreements. These are just examples. There's more potentially where
this could be a problem.
Now, there'll be essentially two ways to deal with this in terms of
implementation. One, your staff could recognize in advance when we
go to bid that this is a contract that is used in either grant-funded or
emergency situations and thereby we could recommend to you that we
exempt or waive the local preference rules so that that contract is
clean, if you will, and there's no issue with FEMA.
And we could do that on a contract-by-contract basis where we
need to. You already give us the capability in this language to do that
with grant issues -- where grant revenues are at stake and we have
federal and state grant-fund issues.
So that's one way of dealing with it. The other way is to buy -- to
create separate contracts that are not local vendor preference for the
same thing. I don't recommend doing that. I think it's redundant. I
Page 82
June 10, 2008
think it's counterproductive, but that's how some of the other entities
that have local preference have dealt with this issue. They've actually
bid the same thing twice, one with local preference, one without. I
don't believe that's the best use of your staff's time or the best way to
entice competitive pricing. But those are kind of your two options if
you want to go forward with this and deal with the risk of FEMA
reimbursement being in question.
Another issue is that we have departments that are largely funded
by grants, and probably the simplest example I can give you is the
Metropolitan Planning Organization. And in the case of the MPO,
they are 100 percent grant funded.
And transportation staff has advised us that they are not going to
be able to buy off of any county contracts in the future that have a
local vendor preference provision. They're under a different set of
grant rules than what you look at in the FEMA reimbursement area,
and it's more cut and dry to the point. I've seen the language, and it
flat out says, they will not allow you to procure under contracts that
had local vendor preference as part of the evaluative process.
So the MPO -- what we're going to do with the MPO is -- the
MPO is like any other county department. They buy supplies, they
buy phones and cell phone service, they buy paper, they buy products.
We're going to have to buy everything separate for them because of
these restrictions and limitations.
And I don't know if we're going to face that with other
departments. We will face it with specific projects, say, within the
transportation division. There are in -- upwards of seven or eight
grants that transportation has now that -- all of which prohibit the use
of local vendor preference.
So if we go to buy something specific under that grant through
the sealed bidding process, we're going to have to exclude local
vendor preference.
Now, again, your policy as drafted covers that situation. We
Page 83
June 10, 2008
don't really have to change the language necessarily, but I just want
you to be aware of the risks that we're in here.
And going back to the FEMA situation, our other option would
be, as I said, to have a separate bidding process. That gets you into a
potential Catch 22 with FEMA. And if you may remember Hurricane
Katrina three years ago. Katrina, and then Wilma that followed in
2006 -- actually, I'm sorry, 2005 -- both of those storms, Collier
County came out smelling like a rose contractually. I don't know if
you remember this, but we had the audit by FEMA. We were
basically state of the art, folks, in terms of how we had procured our
servIces.
We had disaster relief contracts and monitoring and
accountability contracts in place in advance. We had very robust,
healthy competition.
You may remember after Katrina, the State of Mississippi took a
lot of bad press because they awarded contracts without competition
for cleanup in response to the hurricanes, and the State of Mississippi
had to do that because they had nothing else in place at the time.
We had our stuff in place. And what I'm telling you is, if we
have to go and buy -- if we have to create new contracts because we
can't use the existing ones because they have local vendor preference,
then we potentially could get in a little bit of a State of Mississippi
situation where FEMA looks at us and says, this isn't reactive, this
isn't competitive, you waive competition, you should have had
competition and planned ahead for the stuff you were buying.
Now, again, I want to keep the perspective here. The big stuff,
the really big stuff that we're going to do with FEMA, we will contract
for in advance and we'll continue to do business as usual, the most
critical stuff.
But there are some things like contractor services, general
contractor services. We have an open term contract we use for that
now. We're intending at this point to apply local vendor preference to
Page 84
June 10, 2008
that. And when we do that, that's going to, in effect, if you'll pardon
the expression, contaminate the contract in terms of FEMA
reimbursement. I'm not going to be able to necessarily run that
through for FEMA reimbursement. I'm going to have to price it
separately under different conditions. And if I'm doing it after a
hurricane and I'm running around having to do an emergency process
without proper advertising and so forth, then FEMA looks at me and
says, man, you didn't follow your regular procurement procedure. So
that's the potential Catch 22 we could be in.
All right. In summary, let me get back to the issue that I need
direct guidance from you all on this morning. If you'll remember, you
had a discussion about the two methodologies of how you can modify
your bidding process for local vendor preference. And there's two
options out there.
One is to use what we call a right to match process where if a
local bidder falls within lO percent of a nonlocal bidder, that you
would give the nonlocal bidder -- I'm sorry, the local bidder who has
come in second, if you will, in the bidding process, an opportunity to
match the price offered by the apparent low bidder, just a straight
match. And kind of a yes, no thing. Are you going to match it, yes or
no?
The second option was to have, same scenario, at least one local
bidder falls within lO percent of the apparent low bidder who's not
local, and what you would have is a -- what we call a best and final or
a second round of competition.
Now, this one could include more than two. You might have four
bidders who fall within lO percent, and three of them are local. So
you could have all three of those locals get a second chance, along
with the apparent low, to bid the contract a second time, and then the,
essentially, low bidder wins in that second round, but you've given
your local contractors a second bite at the apple, if you will.
Now, we need to decide which of the two processes the board
Page 85
June 10, 2008
wishes to implement if, in fact, you do want to proceed with this
procedure.
The -- if you saw the county attorney's comments in the
executive summary, the right to match process, neither his staff nor
mine could find any precedence for it anywhere in local government.
We couldn't find anybody doing this right now.
And the BAFO process is precedented. It's used in the federal
government, not for local preference purposes, but it is used as a way
of refining and adding to the competition in certain federal purchases,
and there's some precedent use for it in local government, and
particularly the Broward County local preference ordinance uses this
best and final offer approach.
So I'd like to just, first of all, field any questions about anything
I've said regarding my prior concerns, and secondly, if you wish to
follow -- proceed forward with the policy, get direction from the board
as to which of the two options you would like to see us implement.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let me try and do this, because I'm going
to try and move this along as much as I can. We have two speakers.
Let me call the two speakers first, then I'm going to call on
Commissioner Halas because he was instrumental in this. Then I'm
going to call on Commissioner Halas -- I mean -- I'm sorry,
Commissioner Henning first, Commissioner Halas second,
Commissioner Coyle third, and then --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm District 5, so give me fifth.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, I'll give you five. All right, fine.
So first we'll call on the speakers.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Kevin Barnhill. He'll be
followed by Dale, and it looks like Hannula.
MR. BARNHILL: Good morning. My name is Kevin Barnhill,
and I am the Chairman for the Southwest Florida Regional
Technology Partnership. I've put our flier up there just so you can see
our logo.
Page 86
June 10, 2008
As a regional partnership created to promote and advocate for the
local technology cluster here in Southwest Florida, we see the
importance of supporting local businesses. It is because of this that
we support the Board of County Commissioners in an effort to create
a local preference program.
The RTP supports the program that allows a local bidder the right
to match the lowest bid. We do not support the best and final offer
program because we feel that it's not a true local preference program
and, plus, it will create additional work on staff.
A local preference program will facilitate strategic alliances
which provide enhanced expertise and capabilities for our local
companies. It also allows services provided to the county to be
focussed on local priorities by the local company leadership.
We commend the Board of County Commissioners for taking a
proactive and pro-business stance for Collier County as well as other
counties throughout the state.
Thank you for your time and dedication to the sustainability of
the economy of Southwest Florida.
MS. FILSON: Dale Hannula. Are you finished, sir?
MR. BARNHILL: I am.
MR. HANNULA: Good morning. My name is Dale Hannula. I
represent Hannula Landscaping. I'm a landscape contractor in Bonita
Springs, Florida.
I'll read a letter that I directed to Mr. Henning a day or two ago.
Dear Mr. Henning and Board of County Commissioners, Hannula
Landscaping and Irrigation has competitively bid on and been
awarded projects in Collier County since 1992.
During that time we have performed landscaping site work and
irrigation construction and maintenance services for well over 25
miles in medians and right-of-ways. We have met all contractual
obligations and professional requirements in order to be considered
qualified to perform work in accordance with the expertise and
Page 87
June 10, 2008
professionalism required by Collier County.
During the past 15 years we've been in business, I've witnessed a
concentrated effort to secure competitive bids from outside the local
area in order to curtail high prices by local contractors and along with
maintaining a sense of competitiveness within specific vendor
category .
This practice has helped keep project budgets in line and insures
that the projects can be implemented for the benefit of the community.
The following items are essential in determining whether to
approve the local vendor preference policy. What criteria qualifies a
vendor as a local vendor? Specific requirements must be established
in order to clarify -- or in order to clearly define a local vendor.
Will Collier County reciprocate with Lee County, adjoining
counties, or those designated as Southwest Florida counties? If
reciprocation is implemented, are the qualified vendors within those
counties to be considered local vendors?
Many of the businesses performing services for Collier County
have locations in Lee County with a number of their employees
residing in Collier County. Consideration should be given to the
effect the implementation of a local vendor preference policy will
have on the livelihood of those businesses and the security of
employment for those employees.
Qualified vendor contractors. Collier County has implemented a
contractor prequalification form requirement that will be required on
future bids. The contractors are assigned the rating based on their
qualification. Will this qualification take precedence over a local
vendor who scores lower on the prequalification?
If a local vendor is not prequalified, will their bid be considered?
Are the prequalification ratings to be made public? Consideration
should be given to the sensitive information required in this brief
qualification procedure.
Bidding procedures. At present it is recommended that all future
Page 88
June 10, 2008
bids are to be submitted online through automated bidding procedures
established by Collier County purchasing. Once a bid is submitted,
including the results, including unit prices, it becomes published.
It is stated in both the local right to match and the best and final
offer that local bidders will be given an opportunity to match the
nonlocal bidder's price or enter into a second round of competitive
bidding.
Public advertisement of a vendor's prices in order to secure a
more competitive bid is a deterioration.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Finish that paragraph, and then we'll --
MR. HANNULA: Okay -- is a deterioration in the sense of fair
bidding.
We have based our values on -- deterioration of the fair bidding
we have based our values on in our local government.
In neither of the two policies -- if either of the two policies are to
be implemented, it is essential that the bid amounts and percentages
are not published to the competitive bidders. At most, they should be
notified that they are in the second round of competitive bidding and
are to be given their next best price without any disclosure of the other
contractor's prices or percent differences.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. HANNULA: I guess the last -- just read the last statement
here.
We ask the commissioners consider and approve a reciprocal
agreement with the local communities before implementing a local
vendor preference policy.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you --
MR. HANNULA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- Mr. Hannula. We appreciate that.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, thank you, Madam Chair.
I did have a correspondence with Mr. Hannula. I did look up the
Page 89
June 10, 2008
information that -- he sent me a bid that he bid on, which he did not
obtain, but the bids were very close.
The local -- his concerns in this particular bid, the local
preference still would not apply to this bid because none of the top
bidders was in -- within the 10 percent. There was not a local
company.
But I also said, if he had an occupational license in Collier
County, that he would have received the bid.
The only reason I'm bringing this up now is because the
information he provided me is different than what the board approved.
In other words, the information he provided me, the lowest bid was
not on the board's agenda. So, therefore, I will request for the county
manager, a public records request in that complete file.
But I have some questions for Mr. Carnell.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Carnell, did you say that
this has an automatic sunset provision?
MR. CARNELL: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That isn't what we
requested. What we requested is to bring it back for the
commissioners to consider a sunset within two years.
MR. CARNELL: Yes, sir. It has a one-year review and a
two-year review by the board.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. It has a review by the
board for sunsetting.
The next thing, you talked about the FEMA and the grants. I
provided some information, or Sam did, to the county manager, which
he could provide on the viewer, is what I had in the policy that was
removed, and that is on the policy, page 5. It's page 10 of34 in the
commissioners' agenda, item C, tie bid.
And would that language provide the comfort level for -- in case
we have a grant funding that prohibited such type of local policy?
Page 90
r--.
June 10, 2008
MR. CARNELL: Yeah, I understand your question. It's a good
question.
The answer is that there's not a universal response because each
grantor has different requirements. But I can tell you from talking to
the transportation division it would not help any, because in the
transportation division, the grants that they're under now, particularly
the lP A grants, specifically say local vendor preference will not be
considered. It has nothing to do with tie bids. It just says, you flat out
cannot use it in the process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So those that the MPO uses
would not apply to this? They would not apply to it?
MR. CARNELL: The MPO would not be able to use any county
contracts that have local county preference in them. They would have
to procure everything separately.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm glad you clarified that
for the MPO.
The second thing -- or the third thing is, this would apply to the
$50,000 that -- bids that do not come to the Board of County
Commissioners?
MR. CARNELL: No, sir. It only applies to the formal
competitive bid process and the RFP process exclusive of the CCNA.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you not applying the bid
process for bids up to $50,000?
MR. CARNELL: No, sir. We were never asked to do that. The
language that was taken from Broward County and the language we
drafted talks about the formal bidding process, which is purchases
over $50,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I understand. I understand what
you're saying, but -- so you can award any kind of amount of money
to people up to $50,000 without going out to bid?
MR. CARNELL: Without going out to formal bid. We go out to
informal bid. It's not advertised. We get three quotes as a rule, or we
Page 91
June 10, 2008
attempt to get at least three quotes. That's what happens at $50,000 or
below.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Carnell, can you tell the
board what -- how many -- the dollar amount, annual dollar amount,
of informal bids that you do for Collier County?
MR. CARNELL: I don't have that standing here right now. I
would expect though that most of the dollars occur above 50,000 -- for
transactions above $50,000 that are formally competed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now below -- $50,000 and
below are not competed --
MR. CARNELL: Not formally competed. They are -- we call it
informal competition. We don't post or advertise and we don't contact
every possible source that we're aware of. We contact three sources
and get a price.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. If I remember right, the
information you provided me, it was over a hundred million dollars.
Does that sound right?
MR. CARNELL: No, no. I don't have that standing here right
now.
The -- again, I would -- I don't have the breakout for you. I can't
credibly speak to what the breakout is below 50,000 versus above
50,000 right now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, you know, I would
like for it to apply to the informal bids also.
But, you know, the county manager at the last hearing, he had
several concerns such as C that is -- it hasn't been addressed, I don't
think, and also he had some issues with the numeration of the policy,
and I don't see any difference in the numeration. Have you addressed
the county manager's concerns?
MR. CARNELL: You mean -- the numeration; you mean the
numbering of the articles?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
Page 92
June 10, 2008
MR. CARNELL: Yes, we found that -- the numeration, we
checked it yesterday, again, our staff, and we found there was one
citation on page 14 that was incorrect. It should have read section 11
and it reads section 12, and that's the only citation that we found that
was incorrect.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: On page 11?
MR. CARNELL: Page 14.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 14.
MR. CARNELL: It reads -- on section 12D, there's a cross
reference to 12A, and that's how it should read. It says 11A. It should
say 12A.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So that's the only
correction you have in there, and apply the local preferences to all
bids that Collier County does?
MR. CARNELL: No. There was no direction from the board to
do that previously.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, that's my
preference, and it's also, Madam Chair, my preference, the -- like the
first speaker, the local preferences would really apply to the 10
percent, that the local would get a chance to get at the lowest bid ifhe
so -- he or she so desires, and that's all I have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Commissioner Henning.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Steve, you brought up some
interesting facts here in regards to FEMA contracts and how it would
play into this and that it would put additional work on staff in regards
to making sure that the FEMA contracts were handled in such a
manner so we could get our money back.
The other concern I have is that your department's downsized
quite a bit and the additional workload.
I think it's imperative that, God forbid, if we have some type of a
natural event, that we end up and put the citizens here in jeopardy as
Page 93
June 10, 2008
far as getting services back up and running because we run into
contract problems.
How do you best feel that we need to address this manner so that
the citizens here are taken care of as far as health, safety, and welfare?
MR. CARNELL: Well, Madam Chairman, Commissioner Halas,
what -- if the board proceeds with the implementation of this policy,
what we'll do are essentially two things; one, we will -- in instances
where we have a contract that we think is FEMA reimbursable or the
kind of thing that FEMA -- I'm picking on FEMA but I'm not limiting
myself to FEMA.
Anybody who will be -- and I'm distinguishing reimbursable
grant activity where we're getting emergency assistance in
reimbursement. In those instances, if we know in advance that there's
a likelihood we'll use that contract in the event of a natural disaster,
we will ask the board to exempt the award of that contract from the
local vendor process -- the vendor preference process at the time. If
you do that, you keep that language out, then things remain clean and
you don't have an issue that I'm talking about here.
Now, there's going to be a certain amount of guesswork, going
back to your point about the staffload on this. We're not always
going to know which contract's going to be used in -- immediately
prior to a hurricane or immediately after.
We have a pretty good idea, and we'll try to pick the ones off that
we think have significant dollar impacts so that we can preserve our
maximum position for reimbursement as best we can. But that's going
to be a human judgment process, and we may not bat a thousand doing
that in terms of our efforts.
The only other thing I can -- that I am aware of, what other
entities do that have a local preference is that they -- they will do
duplicate bidding and they will bid a contract for people subject to
local preference and a contract not subject to local preference. The
same -- the exact same widget of service.
Page 94
June 10, 2008
I don't recommend doing that. That's clearly going to create
duplicate effort. But -- so that's what we're going to do with that in
terms of how we would manage it if the policy's implemented.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Couple of questions I have.
Is the system broke as it is today? Do we have something in the
contracts or do we -- I mean, yeah. Do we -- are we very open with
local businesses in regards to being able to bid for jobs here in Collier
County?
MR. CARNELL: Well, we believe we are. We have -- and we
believe local vendors, as I said two weeks ago, have some inherent
advantages being local in terms of their ability to mobilize and provide
resources to the county.
What we have in place right now, at least what the evidence
indicates is, that over the last two years, local vendors have won a
majority of the formal bids that we've competed and awarded. And in
instances where they didn't win, in many of those, there were no local
competitors.
There aren't that many instances over the last two years where a
local has competed and lost in the formal bidding process, relatively
speaking. It's a small minority. So I think locals have been getting
their share of the work particularly in some of the bigger-dollar items,
construction contracting, for example -- being one example. And I
think we've been open and receptive and had a process that they were
able to take part in.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So you're saying basically that we
have a process in place today that basically addresses the issues that
have been brought before the board in regards to local business and
making sure that we address the concerns of local business and that
they do have an upmanship as far as getting contracts?
MR. CARNELL: And we'd be willing to go further. We'd be
willing to do an awareness campaign with our local vendors where we
do some additional training and opportunities to explain how the
Page 95
10.---.-----.
June 10, 2008
county does business and how they can compete for future
opportunities as well.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My concern is that we want to
make sure that the taxpayers receive fair value for their tax dollars and
that everyone should be included in the bid process. That's part of free
enterprise.
And who else but local government or local people understand
this county more because they live here, work here. And so therefore,
if they have the upper hand because they know the lay of the land,
kind of speaking -- so I really don't think we've got a real problem
here.
And my concern is, if we lock ourselves into something, then we
may end up putting a burden not only on the staff here in the county
but a real burden on the citizens in regards to when it comes to time of
emergency and we need to make sure that we take care of what needs
to be addressed to take care of health, safety, and welfare of the people
here in Collier County and to make sure that the taxpayers are getting
the best bang for their buck.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, do you have any
comments? Commissioner Coyle? I guess he doesn't.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm here. Can you hear me?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are we okay now?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I feel very uneasy about this
preference process. I can recall a time just a few years ago when we
didn't have enough bidders locally. We even had contracts where we
couldn't get bidders or we only got one bidder for a contract at
exorbitant prices.
I think our first obligation has to be to keep the interests of our
taxpayers in mind. I, like Commissioner Halas, believe that a local
Page 96
June 10,2008
vendor has an inherent advantage. And if they submit a competitive
bid, they have a very good chance of being selected.
I find that it's going to be very difficult to define what is a local
business. If we're going to shut out everyone outside of Collier
County, I think we're going to find that we don't have enough bidders
to do the work that we need to have done in Collier County.
And if we agree to extend the definition of what is local beyond
Collier County, how far do we extend it? I just think that this is an
issue that can get us into a lot of trouble and can have substantial
unintended consequences, and I would prefer to focus on making sure
that our bidding process is clear, as easy as possible for the bidders to
deal with, and fair, and let anyone who is qualified bid on these
contracts.
So I would prefer not to pursue this local vendor preference
policy.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Commissioner Coyle.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I appreciate the
opportunity. Boy, this is definitely an interesting subject.
Mr. Carnell, if I could, please, one of the things I really like is
your offer to be able to hold local seminars for local businesses, how
they can get into the process and how they can make it work. That's
absolutely wonderful. I don't think any commissioner here is going to
ever argue with that part.
First question I have for you is, I have heard from different
vendors out there that say that there's other places in the area that also
have vendor preferences, and they were concerned that we don't and
they're at a disadvantage. Can you tell me who those areas are?
MR. CARNELL: Sure. Yeah, Commissioner Coletta, the -- if
you look around the total landscape of local government, it's a mixed
bag in terms of who has it and who doesn't. Lee County government
has it, I believe the City of Fort Myers has it, City of Naples and City
Page 97
June 10, 2008
of Marco Island do not, Collier County schools does not. They're
prohibited from having it.
When you go into -- I believe Charlotte County does not. You
go on the east coast, Broward County government does, City of
Hollywood does, and I think there's one other municipality in
Broward.
There are roughly 30 municipals in Broward County, and the
count I got just a few weeks ago indicated that about 25 of them don't
have it. Broward Sheriff's Department does not have it, Miami-Dade
County has it, their regular county government. I'm not sure about
their sheriff, but it's a hodgepodge.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It is. But in any case, what's
happening is, some of our local vendors are exclude from competing
in those markets, or at least they're limited in their ability to be able to
go into those markets. But people from those markets can come into
Collier County and freely mix it up. It's a disadvantage -- if we were
to have something in place that we might be able to come up with
through the EDC or the Chamber of Commerce, some sort of
cooperative deal to be able to remove some of these barriers in the
future.
And so I am supportive of this. I think it's a great thing. I don't
know how much of a difference it's going to make, but it shows a part
-- it shows something on the part of government itself willing to be
able to take care of those people that we represent.
I don't collect tax money from people in Broward County or Fort
Myers. I collect the tax money to make this government work from
people that live within Collier County and make their businesses
work. Why would I not want to support local businesses? This is a
concern.
However, with that said, too, can you explain to me how we can
do this so we'll have some real meaning, so it wouldn't be just a
feel-good operation, that somebody wouldn't come in here and just
Page 98
I"---..,----~-~_._-
June 10, 2008
open up a shell office where they'll have their phone calls and their
mail forwarded to their regular office. They'll say, yeah, we're in
Collier County, here's my address or call my local telephone number,
and I'll answer the phone. It might be my cell phone, I might be in
Colorado skiing or whatever, but I'll still answer the phone and I'll still
answer your mail.
How can we be sure that if we put this through that we can
protect the local businesses so that it would be an effective ordinance
to come up with?
MR. CARNELL: Well, I share your concern about that. What
we would do is, if you take the language that's in the policy, it talks
about having a local address and it talks about having an occupational
license for a period of time prior to bidding, and it references also that
the business would have a meaningful economic impact upon Collier
County.
Now, that's good, sir, in the sense that that gives you at least the
beginning of something substantive. That's getting at what you're --
we're wanting to get at, which is, you really are doing business in
Collier County and impacting our local economy.
It's good in the sense that it points you in that direction, but it's
not so good in the sense that it's pretty broad and ambiguous and
there's not really a strict defined definition of what constitutes
economic benefit.
So what I could see happening is you could have a business that
had an address in Naples or Collier County, could potentially be a
situation you're talking about or something maybe not as extreme but
who comes in and makes an argument that could be a pretty esoteric
argument about why they think they're benefiting the community, and
it would become very subjective in terms of us trying to sort through,
are you, yes or no?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I heard both Commissioner
Halas and Commissioner Coyle express misgivings about the fact that
Page 99
, ~
June 10, 2008
we just came -- we're at an economy downturn for the moment. It
won't last forever. But before this we were in a tremendous robust
economy. You couldn't get enough vendors sometimes to reply.
Do we have the ability by this particular ordinance under certain
circumstances, like suppose we get one bid and we think that bid
might be too top heavy, way above all estimates, it's a local bid, to be
able to put it back and drop the vendor preference for that particular
item?
MR. CARNELL: Yes, sir. The language, the way it's written,
would allow you to waive local vendor preference in those and other
scenarios as well.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And I think that's
important because while we do want to make sure that our local
businesses thrive, we also want to make sure we don't put something
in place that will hinder our ability to get a fair price for the taxpayers
we represent.
MR. CARNELL: And that's a very real possibly. We could have
a situation where we're going out to bid and we only know of one
local source, and know going in we're not going to have a competition,
at least -- unless somebody comes out of the woodwork, which, I
guess, is always a possibility, so that's a very possible situation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We're getting close to noon. We
still have an 11 :45 time certain that we haven't addressed. I still want
to make a comment. I see Commission Halas wants to make a
comment, I'm sure Commissioner Henning wants to make a comment.
I don't know whether we should just come back after lunch and finish
this subject then but take care of the school board issue right this
moment so we can let our school board members go.
But I would like to say, on this particular subject -- you like that
idea?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I like that idea.
Page 100
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, that's good. Then I'll come back
and say my piece when we come back. And right now we're going to
MR. MUDD: Ma'am--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You've got to table this.
MR. MUDD: -- take a vote to table this particular item, okay,
and then let's proceed to the time certain at 11 :45, if that's the board's
desire.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion that we table this
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- until after lunch.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion and a second on
the floor.
Any comments from our phone commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All those in favor, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Item #10G
RESOLUTION 2008-180: DIRECT THE COLLIER COUNTY
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS TO TAKE APPROPRIATE
ACTION WITH RESPECT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY
SCHOOL DISTRICT'S RESOLUTION 08-05, WHICH SEEKS TO
PLACE A MILLAGE REFERENDUM ON THE NOVEMBER 4,
Page 10 1
June 10, 2008
2008 GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT FOR THE SCHEDULED
PRIMARY ELECTION - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to the time certain
item at 11 :45. That's a recommendation that the Board of
Commissioners direct the Collier County Supervisor of Elections to
take appropriate action with respect to the Collier County school
district's resolution, 08-05, which seeks to place a millage referendum
on the November 4th -- I want to make sure I read it correctly -- they
place it on the November 4th general election ballot.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Coletta. Want to
thank you for a fine presentation.
Are you Mr. Withers?
MR. WITHERS: I am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I have a comment from
Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, one question. Does this meet
the criteria established by the Supervisor of Elections?
MR. WITHERS: Yes, it does.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
MR. WITHERS: We've got the Spanish translation here as well,
too, as well, so.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I want to recognize that we have
two school board members in our office -- in our chamber right now.
We have Linda Abbott and Steve Donovan. I want to thank you both
for being here. I'm going to ask if either of you have a comment to
Page 102
June 10, 2008
make.
Okay. Steve, motioned no.
MS. ABBOTT: I just wanted to say thank you. We're sorry that
we didn't meet those requirements last time, but we're glad to have the
second chance because I think it's actually improved, and we're
delighted to have been able to talk with each of you, and thank you for
your help.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much for coming up.
Okay. And with that, we have no further comments. All those in
favor --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: None from me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: None from me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine, Commissioner Henning.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And that passes with a 5-0. Thank you
very much for being here today.
And we will see you after lunch at one o'clock.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seat.
Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Commissioner, your basic -- your choice at this juncture. You
have a one o'clock time certain, which is lOA, or do you want to
untable the local preference issue, or how do you want to go about
Page 103
June 10, 2008
that? You've got a one o'clock time certain and you have a two
o'clock time certain that you're looking at.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Uh-huh. Let's just finish the one that we
started. We're pretty close to completion, I would think. Yes.
MR. MUDD: Okay. Commissioner, you need to take a vote to
untable that particular item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to untable.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to untable and a
second. Are Commissioner Halas (sic) and Commissioner Henning
with us?
MR. MUDD: Commissioners Coyle and Commissioner
Henning.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, yeah. You're here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Henning's here.
I'm not sure if Commissioner Halas is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We can see him but we're not
sure either.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's the second time I did that today,
huh?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Coyle?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning is with us,
so we have four here presently.
MR. MUDD: And you took the vote to untable, ma'am?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. Commissioner Coyle, is that you?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I'm here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Now we have five people
present. We have a motion on the floor to untable --
MR. MUDD: lOE.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- 10E, and a second to that motion.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Page 104
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
Item #10E
RESOLUTION 2008-l81: ADOPTION OF LOCAL VENDOR
PREFERENCE POLICY - ADOPTED W/CHANGES (LOCAL
RIGHT TO MATCH ALL BIDS: COMPETITIVE (FORMAL) AND
NON-COMPETITIVE (NON-FORMAL))
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good. So we're back onto
10E.
MR. MUDD: And that is a recommendation to consider
adoption of a local vendor preference policy. And Mr. Carnell was
presenting.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. And we had a couple people yet to
talk. I wanted to weigh in about that and just say that I feel that our
vendors should have the same opportunity as vendors in Lee County
and Broward County and Dade and -- Dade County and -- but because
they have such an option here, that our people don't have that same
option in their counties.
And so I'm inclined to -- I'm actually not inclined. I'm going to
vote for this -- for this amendment.
Okay. Now, I think Commissioner Halas, you had something
else to say, and then we had Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. Again, I have been talking
with some of the staff members during our lunch break to get better
Page 105
, -".----
June 10, 2008
clarification of where we're going with this, and I just want to reiterate
that I think that we have policy at the present time that, I believe,
benefits the local people.
And my biggest concern is, if we have to go out and do two bids
in regards to storm-related problems -- and I believe we saw what took
place down in Mississippi during the storm events there. And there
was a time when there was a huge holdup. And then, of course, trying
to get our money back from FEMA, I think, is crucial.
So I feel that what we have in place today is adequate, and I
believe that it's part of the free enterprise system. I believe that the
local vendors basically know the lay of the land here, so they
automatically have, I believe, the ability to be very competitive.
When we look at -- a couple examples ofWal-Mart versus
Sunshine Hardware, which is a local group, and normally Wal-Mart
runs the hardware stores out of business. But obviously here, what we
see is that Sunshine Hardware has been able to be very competitive
and, if anything, they kill you with customer service.
So I'm just using that as an example. And that's where I stand.
And I can't vote for this amendment the way it is today.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I just wanted to respond. The
way I understand it -- and if I'm wrong, please tell me, but I don't
think this prevents anybody. This is free enterprise. Anybody can
bid. Not only that, but if their bid is lower than the 1O percent that any
of our local people get, they would get it anyway, so it isn't like it's
preventing anybody from bidding, and we do have to adhere to things
like the MPO rules and so forth. So I'm still in favor of this.
And Commissioner Henning, did you have any final words?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I did, before I make a
motion.
First of all, I'm a little concerned about the misunderstandings
and the misstatements that have been made.
This local preference does not increase the cost to the county
Page 106
, .. ----_._--_..--.._.--..~"_...._.+"_.__.-
June 10, 2008
taxpayers. It is applied where a local business can get the bid at the
lowest bid now.
The second thing, on page 26 of 23 (sic), it says emergency
purchases where it gives the county manager and the purchasing
director authority to purchase goods under emergency. And I --
Commissioners, I never would have brought this forward if I thought
that local vendors had more business or more -- more of a fair share.
Sam got some information from the purchasing agency and
supposedly gave it to the county manager for you to view on the
visualizer, and that's a spreadsheet.
County Manager, you have a spreadsheet?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am -- yes, sir. It's on the -- it's on the
visualizer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. You see, it is not that the
local vendors are getting the majority of the contracts. Look at the
percentages. You know, it's not bad, but we can do better.
And the good thing about this policy that we're about to adopt,
the purchasing department or the county manager's going to come
back to us in another year and tell us how it's working. In another two
years, we get to -- another report, and if it is affecting the taxpayers,
according to the experts in county government, then we can kill it.
So with that, Madam Chair, I'm going to make a motion to
approve, and the preference would be the local right to match and not
to -- and that is for all bid purchases this would apply to, the local
preference, and it would adhere to all laws and all grant conditions.
And that's my motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I'll second that motion. And
one of the things we've never even said during this entire meeting is
all of the monies that local companies earn in our community is then
spent in our communities and their taxes are paid in our communities.
They're not taken over the Collier County border to other communities
to be spent there, and I think that's an important thing we must
Page 107
r ..-.-,----
June 10, 2008
consider as well.
Okay. We have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Henning
and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, what was your
vote?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My vote is no.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. We have a 3-2 vote.
Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner Halas dissenting. Thank
you. That passes.
And we go on now to our time concern one o'clock, which is --
MR. CARNELL: Yeah, ma'am, excuse me. If I could, there's
just one clarification.
Commissioner Henning's motion said to apply this to all county
purchases. There's been absolutely no consideration given to that
prior to today.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, all bids. I -- excuse me.
To clarify that, that was all bids.
MR. CARNELL: Okay. All right. So per the language that's in
the proposed policy change?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, all bids.
MR. CARNELL: Okay. That would be all bids, correct, yes,
competitive bids.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, all bids.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What he's talking about is even those that
Page 108
June 10,2008
are $50,000 and under; is that correct?
MR. CARNELL: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
MR. CARNELL: Okay. Then we're back to all purchases again.
And my point is, that's going to have a much more dramatic effect if
we have to go get preference papers from everybody for every $5,000
order, every $4,000 order. We're now talking about thousands of
transactions, not hundreds of transactions.
So you're talking about a much greater impact, and particularly if
we have to go through some kind of certification process to verify per
the way the policy's written. The policy is not written -- it does not
say what the motion said.
The other thing is, I want to be clear. Does everybody
understood (sic) we selected to right to match option? That's--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are we going to move on?
MR. CARNELL: Well, I want to be clear about that. That's the
option the county attorney indicated to you had some question, legal
aspects.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioners, before we move
on, you better make sure you have a full understanding of what Steve
Carnell told you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, the way I understand it -- and
you're right about that. The way I understand it, Steve, is when you
have a $50,000 or less bid, you ask three vendors. I would guess now
that you ask three vendors that are local or at least two that are local
and somebody that's not local, but give them all an opportunity to be
the bidder rather than just select three that might not be here at all.
And it might give some of these people who have never bid before an
opportunity to do that locally.
MR. CARNELL: Okay. But again--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is that the way --
MR. CARNELL: -- the language you approved doesn't say that.
Page 109
June 10, 2008
We're going to have to amend the language to get you to all purchases,
and there's going to be more administrative issues in the language that
are going to have to be addressed.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. And remember one of the
things we were talking about earlier is in order to be able to -- local
preference to be able to work, it's going to be an educational outreach
where you're going to have to hold seminars for these people to be
able to understand how it works and what the advantage is.
Once again, I think Commissioner Fiala hit the nail right on the
head. These are people that pay the taxes in Collier County. Why
shouldn't they benefit whenever possible from the sales or purchase of
services?
MR. CARNELL: Okay.
Item #10A
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE PROPOSED CHANGES TO
REPEAL AND REPLACE THE ANIMAL CONTROL
ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE NO. 93-56, AS AMENDED), TO
STRENGTHEN THE SECTION PERTAINING TO DANGEROUS
DOGS, TO PROVIDE A UNIFORM METHOD FOR REVISION
OF FEES, TO PROVIDE FOR MANDATORY SPAY /NEUTER OF
ANIMALS UPON RETURN TO OWNER AFTER
IMPOUNDMENT, AND TO MORE CLEARLY DEFINE LEASH
LAW AND THE AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLAINT PROCESS, AND
DIRECT STAFF TO ADVERTISE ORDINANCE CHANGES TO
BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD AT A FUTURE MEETING -
APPROVED W /CHANGE
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our one o'clock
time certain, and that's lOA, and it's a recommendation to approve
Page 110
--~.._--
June 10, 2008
proposed changes to repeal and replace the animal control ordinance,
ordinance number 93-56, as amended, to strengthen the section
pertaining to dangerous dogs, to provide a uniform method for
revision of fees, to provide for mandatory spay/neuter of animals upon
returns to owners after impoundment, and to more clearly define leash
law in the affidavit of compliant process, and direct staff to advertise
ordinance changes to be approved by the board at a future meeting.
Ms. Amanda Townsend, your Interim Director of Domestic
Animal Services, will present.
MS. TOWNSEND: Thank you. Good afternoon,
Commissioners. Wanted to run through quickly a few statistics about
animals, particularly dogs, in Collier County, and then briefly an
overview of the proposed changes to the ordinance.
Based on some national statistics that you'll see up on the
PowerPoint there, we estimate that there are probably about 80,000
dogs in Collier County and 95,000 household cats.
When we start to talk about dangerous dogs, to put things in
perspective, within the last calendar year Domestic Animal Services
has made 63 investigations into dogs that were involved in, generally,
bite cases to see if there could be a determination that a dog could be
declared dangerous; 21 of those dogs that were investigated were
declared dangerous. Of those, seven have been returned to the
owners, and that is to say that the owners have complied with the
ordinance as it now states. They have paid a $300 annual registration
fee. They have provided a proper enclosure for that animal. That
animal is to be muzzled when it is off property, et cetera. Two of the
declared dangerous dogs are currently in DAS custody, and 12 have
been euthanized.
Proposed changes to the ordinance that have to do with
dangerous dogs include the following: We have added a definition of
proper enclosure. The ordinance previously referred to improper
enclosure and state statute defined proper enclosure. We've
Page 111
"---r---.-'
June 10, 2008
incorporated that language from the state statute into your local
ordinance.
We have given DAS authority to impound an animal that is under
investigation if DAS determines that the owner of that animal is
unable or unwilling to securely define -- confine the animal, excuse
me, while it is under investigation.
We have allowed DAS to have some recourse when an animal
owner, a dog owner, fails to reregister the animal. This is something
that has been very problematic for us at DAS. We've had dog owners
who have complied with the ordinance, paid their $300 annual
registration fee, and the next year we never hear from them. So we've
provided DAS with some recourse to go back to those animal owners
and give them either a certain amount of time to either come into
compliance or forfeit the animal, if it should come to that, excuse me.
We have added, again, some language that was included in the
state statute but was not included in the local ordinance that will
define the proper housing and handling of the animal. That is, again,
that proper enclosure definition as well as specifications on muzzles
and muzzle type, et cetera.
We have provided, again from state statute, penalties for second
offense. That's the animal that has been declared dangerous and,
again, is involved in some kind of incident. We've allowed, again, a
series of steps that DAS can go through to continue to either fine or
request the forfeiture of that animal should a second offense occur.
We have added a provision that the name and address and a
photograph of dogs that are declared dangerous that have been
returned to their owners will be included in the DAS website, and we
have added a provision that an animal that is declared dangerous is
required to be spayed or neutered.
We have proposed a series of additional changes to the ordinance
outside of the section that deals with dangerous dogs, and you'll see,
again, a summary of what those are. The first is, as much as anything,
Page 112
-. ------r--'--~
June 10, 2008
a housekeeping issue, and that is that we're proposing to strike any
fees that are listed in the ordinance and be able to establish and revise
those fees by resolution instead of in the ordinance, and that will give
us some flexibility for updating fees as the economy changes, et
cetera.
We've refined the definitions of at large and direct control. This
will help us enforcing our leash law. The language now about a leash
is a dependable leash of suitable strength. We've changed the
language to read from direct control of a responsible person to a
competent person. lust some little changes in the language that I think
will help us enforce the leash law a little better.
We have proposed mandatory spay or neuter of all animals upon
return to owner after impound. This is something that the Domestic
Animal Services Advisory Board supported. Staff had proposed this
language to them as a change upon the second -- as a mandatory
spayed/neuter upon second impound. The Domestic Service --
Animal Services Advisory Board chose to propose that as upon first
impound.
We've added language to link the issue of a county license to
rabies vaccination. That is -- the language now says that we can deny
a license to someone who does not have proof of rabies vaccination.
We've clarified the affidavit of complaint process. Again, this is
just changing some language to more align the language with the
intent, and that is to say that two neighbors can independently write
affidavits of complaint, and those can be reviewed by an animal
control officer, and the animal control officer can, if he or she finds
sufficient cause, cite an animal owner based on those two affidavits of
complaint.
And finally, we have provided recourse for a citizen who would
falsify information on an affidavit of complaint. If you recall, we had
a public petition a few weeks ago where the complainant felt that that
had happened, and our ordinance did not at that time provide any
Page 113
- ------r--.... -. -
June 10, 2008
recourse to us if someone should falsify an affidavit. So we've added
that language, that that's a violation of the ordinance and can be cited.
That's a summary of the proposed changes to the ordinance, and
I'll be happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, let us go on to'the speakers first.
We have two speakers,
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mrs. Chairman. We have Desta Benjamin.
Come on up. You can -- either one.
MS. BEN1AMIN: Well, I wanted to pull a picture up first.
MS. FILSON: Okay. She'll be followed by Perla Angulo.
MS. BEN1AMIN: How do you -- documents, programs. I'm
trying to find my flash drive. Oh, there it is. Okay.
MS. FILSON: You can speak from over there if you'd like.
MS. BEN1AMIN: Where do I begin?
MR. MUDD: State your name for the record.
MS. BEN1AMIN: My name is Desta Benjamin, and this is a
very emotional time.
I applaud Ms. Amanda Townsend for taking the initiative to take
a look at some of the ordinances for animal control, but I don't think
it's enough. The picture you see is my mother, died May 26, mauled to
death by dogs.
Some of these same laws for the owners of those dogs were
asked to abide by many of these rules and did not.
Fees? Can we put a fee on death? I don't know. Ask me and I'll
tell you no. Can we? Can we -- what can we do to enforce these
compliances, I think, is the bigger question. Having the law on the
books is one thing. Enforcing them is another. The -- what we heard
constantly was the manpower. We don't have it.
Dangerous dogs should not be the only language in your
ordinance. Vicious should also be part of that, for the dogs that killed
my mother were vicious. They were known to be vicious, not just
dangerous. A bite where one can walk away from, my mom did not
Page 114
I ~-_.
June 10, 2008
have that opportunity.
I don't know how many of you are grandparents, but when you
have to talk to the granddaughter -- when I have to turn to my
daughter to say -- for her to look at me and say, who is going to be my
grandma now? What do you say? There's nothing to say because
there's nobody else that can replace her. Her name is Carsheena
Benjamin, an upstanding citizen who had --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Somebody's got a phone ringing in their
home. Would you please turn that off'?
MS. BEN1AMIN: -- who wanted desperately to move to an area
that was safe, secure, serene. It was a place of retirement where she
would die peacefully, not in this manner.
Receiving that call that Saturday was the most devastating thing I
had ever heard. Ms. Amanda Townsend and to the commissioners,
before this amendment goes into place, I ask to send Ms. Amanda
back to seriously take a look at that language some more.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Besides adding vicious, is there anything
else you feel needs to be added?
MS. BEN1AMIN: There's so much that needs to be looked at.
Because I looked at the laws, I looked at the Florida laws, and it's a lot
that needs to be reviewed.
(Commissioner Coyle is present via speakerphone.)
MS. BEN1AMIN: Many of the ordinances that are on -- that she
indicated fees, are there a stipulation to fees? Do we say, pay $10,000
if a person is dead? Whom does it go to?
If someone is injured, those fees can be covered by -- they can
cover the hospital fees, the insurance can cover, but what covers the
death? Am I asking for funeral costs? You know, I'm not so sure
where we're going to go with that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, maybe we can have you work more
with them. We need to get to our next speaker, but my deepest,
deepest sympathies to you. I'm so sorry.
Page 115
June 10, 2008
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Perla Angulo.
MS. ANGULO: Hello. My name is Perla Angulo, and you may
not understand what I say because I'm hearing impaired and I have a
broken English.
My neighbor across the street, in December, 4 of 19, '07, 2007,
was talking to me across the street when I was taking the garbage out,
and I told her I cannot hear her, so she crossed the street with her big
German shepherd.
And when they crossed the street, the dog start biting me in the
leg. And he left me with -- he left me with that hole. That's from
December.
And they've been harassing me. They refuse to tie the dog --
they tie it up during the day. But after six o'clock when they know the
dog service will not come around, they let the dog loose, even
yesterday. And they only do it when they think some officer is going
to come around.
I had to put a fence on my property so I can be on my yard. But
when I go out, I have to open the gate, to take my car out, get back in
my car, pull my car out, and then get off the car to close the fence, the
gate, and it's very dangerous because I'm very afraid of him and he
know it. And dogs sense when you are afraid of them.
But they will not -- they tie him during the day and try let him
out for some time. But it's not fair to the neighbors. When some
neighbor go for a walk, they have to walk with a bat or a stick in their
hand. That's it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you for coming to us today.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The ordinance that's before us
today may have some areas that need to be addressed. My biggest
concern is, how are we going to enforce this ordinance? That's the
biggest thing.
I don't think we have the manpower when we have almost 2,000
Page 116
-----T"--...-
June 10, 2008
square miles of Collier County. And there's an awful lot of people that
have dogs, animals, that live not only in the urban area, but also in the
rural area.
And so no matter what we put in an ordinance, how are we going
to enforce it? That's the question.
MS. TOWNSEND: Of course it's a challenge for us,
Commissioner. We have 11 animal control officers to cover the
county. We do have one officer on call every evening. We have one
officer who works all day on Sunday.
The officers do respond to priority calls first, so often they'll
respond to a bite case for example or a stray animal holding where
someone's waiting to go to work because they've been a good
Samaritan and they've contained an animal until we can come and get
it.
And often the stray roaming type situation is the very most
problematic for us, not dissimilar from Ms. Angula's difficulty
because we encourage the members of the public to call us when
there's a stray roaming animal, but the likelihood that the animal's
going to stay put and wait for the officer to come pick it up is -- but it
poses a big challenge to us.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You know, I'm not trying to put a
guilt complex on you or the staff. I'm just trying to figure out how
we're going to address this, because the end result is that if people do
not adhere to the leash law, then the end result is somebody's going to
get hurt. And it will be -- they'll be bitten, and then we'll go out there
and respond to it.
And I don't know whether at that point in time we destroy the
dog after it bites somebody and maybe get the message across that
way. What you're providing here today, excuse me, is basically you
put the dog in quarantine, and then the dog is turned back, you neuter
it and then you turn it back to the owner.
Is this going to be a fix-all, or is this just a feel-good thing that --
Page 117
June 10, 2008
so that the dog -- you feel that the dog's not going to be vicious again?
MS. TOWNSEND: No, sir. It won't -- it won't fix anything, but
it's also not a feel-good solution.
The changes we've proposed here will help DAS very much,
particularly when you have an uncooperative animal owner. The
changes that we've proposed here give DAS a lot of recourse to seek
forfeiture of an animal that we've never had before, and that's going to
really, really help us.
The other -- the other component that we discussed the last time
there was a public petition from Mr. Summers is an education
component. And as we develop our marketing plan, we're certainly
going to do that, because we need to reach out to the public and let
them know how unacceptable it is to allow an animal to roam at large.
Number one, it's dangerous for the animal, and number two, it's
dangerous for the public, or maybe the other way around.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The other way.
MS. TOWNSEND: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I don't know why it is
that we have the vast majority of these taking place in District 5
except the remoteness of the area.
I think residents just assume that it's all right for their animals to
roam free. There is some tragic stories out there. You just heard two
of them. I can tell you another that recently -- well, go all the way
back. Remember the Larry Parks episode in the fact he had two
bulldogs that weren't being fed and they were preying on other
peoples' pets and domestic animals?
The neighbors were absolutely terrified by it, and that went on
for years, and we went and strengthened the ordinance. And then
again we had other instances come forward.
And recently we had a case where a gentleman was attacked.
Page 118
June 10, 2008
The dog really tore him up quite a bit. Another case where a man
going down the highway, and this dog was not a vicious dog but he
was just loose, in the highway, and he mistakenly figured he was
going to avoid the dog and he tried to do a maneuver to avoid the dog.
He rolled the car over and his wife is now permanently disabled.
He identified -- he called me one day, it was late in the evening.
I forget where I was at the time. But he says, I found the dog. He
says, I was going -- coming home and there was that dog again, and I
traced it back to my neighbor's house. And he said, I'm over at my
neighbor's house now and my neighbor says, I'm not obligated to keep
my dog tied up. I'll do what I damn well please.
I said, put your neighbor on the phone. The guy wouldn't talk to
me, so I called the Sheriff's Department and asked them to go out
there. They went out, too, and I think they probably filed a complaint.
But let's look at the situation. This ordinance is absolutely
wonderful for dealing with the after-the- fact issue of dogs biting
people and attacking people, being vicious. And once again, it's not
the damn dog's fault. It's the owner's fault, and they're the ones that
should be put into the kennels rather than the dogs, but we're not going
to get to that.
So how do we get to the point where we can avoid the first
occurrence? That's where we're coming from. You avoid it by, one,
coming up with an ordinance that is extremely imposing upon those
people that allow this practice to happen. And I'm not just talking
about vicious dogs. I'm talking about people that think they have the
right to let their dog roam free.
And you have the way to be able to respond, or we need to be
able to find a way to be able to respond in a meaningful fashion.
We're never going to be able to get to the point we've got enough
animal control officers out there. I mean, 11 of them divided over
what, three shifts, and they work five days a week? That comes out to
probably one out in the field at anyone point in time to cover a county
Page 119
June 10, 2008
that's the biggest county in the State of Florida. It don't work.
Somehow we got to some come up with something. This is
separate from this ordinance, because this ordinance does have some
wonderful teeth in it. It takes care of after-the- fact bites, but we have
to come up with, one, an educational program that's going to be
non-relenting and tells people up front, and if anybody ever comes
forward and says, well, it's my right to do it, say, you live in the wrong
county. You need to move.
You've got no right to let your animal run free to endanger the
public out there. You have every right to own an animal, but it's your
responsibility to make sure it's taken care of.
And we need a fast response team. We're never going to get it
with what we've got here at the county. I don't give a darn if we
double your budget. You're not going to have enough people to be
able to respond.
Let's be honest about it. You're not at fault. You're working with
a limited resource. You need to be able to involve the Sheriff's
Department as a first responder on this. These men come prepared.
They carry guns. And if they see an animal that's extremely
dangerous and threatening, they know how to safely dispatch that
animal and make it safe for the public. They need to be the first
responders.
Now, when we get through doing this today and we pass this
ordinance and we say, well, we did what we could do, we need to go
to the next step. The educational program that's going to be ongoing
to continuously changing the format, the messages going out on a
continuous basis. And number two, bringing the Sheriff's Department
and their guns in as the first responders.
MS. TOWNSEND: Yes, sir. I completely agree. And, in fact,
we have had initial talks with the Sheriff's Office, particularly with the
Golden Gate Estates branch. And we are starting to develop some
training so that we can help those deputies understand how to respond
Page 120
June 10, 2008
to an animal call, and we're going to be working closely with them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Before I call on Commissioner Henning
and Commissioner Coyle, in case one of them wants to say something,
I just want to -- I note as we're talking here today, it seems that the
dangerous dogs happen to live with dangerous owners. And it seems
that's where the fault lies.
And Commissioner Halas made an extremely important point in
that unless there's some type of enforcement, the dangerous owners
are going to keep their dogs in a dangerous way. And so I just -- I
don't know what you can do to further that, but I can see that you're
going to have a lot of support from this dais.
Commissioner Henning, did you have anything to add?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: lust a question. Is it -- is the
proposal for mandatory spayed/neutering if the dogs are picked up?
MS. TOWNSEND: There are two proposals in the -- two
proposed changes that we've discussed today. One is mandatory
spay/neuter of dogs that have been declared dangerous. The second is
mandatory spay/neuter of dogs upon return to owner after
impoundment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, the dangerous dog
one, it sounds good to me. The other one, it seems to be like too much
government. I wouldn't want to -- I wouldn't know of any person that
would like to have that done personally if government picked them up.
But that's my preference.
You know, you can't regulate stupidity. You really need to hit
these people in the wallet. I think that probably is a little bit more
effective than taking it out on the poor dog.
That's all I have. I mean, I'm in favor of the dangerous dog is,
you know, mandatory castration, as some call it, and the other
proposed changes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you.
Page 121
June 10, 2008
And Commissioner Coyle, is there anything you'd like to add?
Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nothing to add. I am in support of
the amendment as it is now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good, so may I --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion to approve from
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second from me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And a second from Commissioner Halas.
Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: As the amendment is written
today?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: As -- could we add the word vicious?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, yeah.
MS. TOWNSEND: Yes. We can add the word vicious. In the
area that defines a dangerous dog, we can add the word vicious, yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Please, please. I'm sorry I
overlooked that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. So that the
motion maker says yes and second --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- says yes. Okay.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 122
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. We're going to take just a
five-minute break.
(A briefrecess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Mr. Mudd.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot
mike again.
Item #lOB
A SUMMARY OF COLLIER COUNTY PRODUCTIVITY
COMMITTEE (PC) AND PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC)
REVIEW OF THE SEASONAL POPULATION STUDY
CONDUCTED ON APRIL 16 AND APRIL 17,2008,
RESPECTIVELY. THE SEASONAL POPULATION STUDY WAS
DIRECTED BY THE BCC AT THEIR NOVEMBER 5,2007
WORKSHOP FOR COMPONENTS OF THE ANNUAL UPDATE
AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) ON PUBLIC FACILITIES
AS PROVIDED FOR IN CHAPTER 6.02.02 OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE - MOTION TO
APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS - APPROVED
And this brings us to lOB, which is to provide the Board of
County Commissioners a summary of the Collier County Productivity
Committee and Planning Commission review of the seasonal
population study conducted on April 16th and April 17, 2008,
respectively.
The seasonal population study was directed by the BCC at their
November 5,2007, workshop for components of the Annual Update
and Inventory Report, the AUIR, on public facilities as provided for in
Page 123
June 10, 2008
Chapter 2.02.02 of the County Collier Land Development Code.
Mr. Michael Bosi, Community Planning and Redevelopment
Manager, Comprehensive Planning, will present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve staff's
recommendations.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Second. There's a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning to approve staff's recommendation, and a
second by Commissioner Fiala.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I just want to make this clear
for the audience out there, that on category A, that's controlled by
population and that's a state statute, and on Category B we can do
pretty much what we want to do in regards to meeting the
requirements of the AUIR.
So I just want to let people out there understand what this is all
about. And I hope -- did I clear that up?
MR. BOSI: Yes, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, good.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Mike, it was such a sterling presentation.
MR. BOSI: I was informed to be brief, brilliant, and be gone,
and hopefully I succeeded.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do we have any comments from
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I should have known.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I presume that the motion is
designed to approve our interest in having the CCPC conduct another
review of this in lune and luly, let's say, within the next month; is that
true?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That is correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then I support it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine.
Page 124
June 10, 2008
Any further comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We still have 11 minutes till the
two o'clock time certain.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. We're going to cover two items, I
hope.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good.
Item # lOC
STAFF DIRECTION RELATED TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL
AGREEMENT WITH SOUTH FLORIDA WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ON THE TEMPORARY ALL
TERRAIN VEHICLES (ATV) SITE. (THIS IS A COMPANION
ITEM TO #12B) - MOTION TO WORK THROUGH A
SETTLEMENT RESOLUTION AND TO BRING ISSUE TO AN
AGREEMENT (OTHER POTENTIAL LAND - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Okay. They're 10C and they're 12B, okay. lOC.
It's to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners
provide staff direction related to the supplemental agreement with the
South Florida Water Management District on the temporary all-terrain
vehicle ATV site. This is a companion item to 12B.
And in this particular item on 10C, Mr. Barry Williams, your
Page 125
June 10, 2008
Director of Parks and Recreation will present.
MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioners, good afternoon. Barry
Williams, Parks and Recreation Director.
Commissioners, you have in the agenda packet the update of the
A TV park and where we are with status in the temporary site. As
you're aware, we have encountered some environmental issues with
the temporary site, and subsequently that site is not able to be opened.
We did have Clarence Tears with South Florida Water
Management here this afternoon, and we wanted him to speak about
the potential options that were available.
So in may, let me just turn the presentation over to Mr. Tears.
MR. TEARS: Good afternoon. Clarence Tears, Director of Big
Cypress Basin, South Florida Water Management District.
In the past we talked about trying to find a temporary site in the
short-term, and we actually had a site selected. It was called the Alico
property, and we'd actually had a lease in place for over a year.
And what we were trying to do is use this site for a temporary
site. We went ahead, looked at the site, we worked with county staff.
We went out, mowed the site, we ordered bay hail or hail -- hay bails,
and we even ordered some ATVs for, you know, some of the park
rangers to take a look at the site, and we moved forward with a
conditional use permit.
However, through the process, we actually funded some funding
to the county to hire a consultant to do an environmental assessment
of the site. And caracara was identified on the site. Originally there
was an inactive caracara nest, and then that caracara nest was active.
So then we looked at, well, what would it take to get this site up
and running as a temporary site? And at that point it was roughly
about an 18-month process to take what they call an incidental taking,
and then you had to get an additional permit. And we only had this
temporary site for two years.
So basically we met with county staff, discussed it, and we
Page 126
T .---',
June 10, 2008
looked at the time frame, and it actually took us beyond that two-year
period, and it didn't make sense to pay an additional year lease and not
be able to use the temporary site.
Then we looked at Lake Trafford. Well, we said, well, what if
we shut down the Lake Trafford restoration? We've removed about
three-quarters of the material. We still have about 750,000 cubic
yards to go. So then we had a study done by Florida Gulf Coast
University that's looking into sustainability of the lake.
And they said, it's really extremely important to finish the littoral
zone because that's where the native fish breed.
In addition, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
said it's imperative to remove the material from the littoral zone. So
we said, well, all right. Then we need to try to finish this project.
And this is probably the last time we'll be able to finish the project
because we may lose the site where we're disposing the material.
Based on that, we looked at, well, what if we downsize the
containment site to two cells and use one of the cells as a temporary
A TV site? So based on that and some of the concerns we had in the
past with arsenic on some of the core samples in the lake exceeding
the standards for ORV use, I hired a consultant to take a look at the
site, and I said, I want you to ensure the safety of anybody riding on
this site and tell me what we need to do to ensure the safety of the
public based on the contamination of the soil. So we went out and
looked at that.
As part of the boring locations, this is the cell I'm talking about.
It's roughly 140 acres. And they took all these samples. And these are
locations of the grids. And based on the grids, they have to take a
certain number of samples within each grid.
What they found out is that arsenic concentration in the surface
sediment ranged from below detection limits to detection limits higher
than right around seven parts per million, which was a little bit higher
than the standards for A TV usage.
Page 127
1'-'~-"'-------
June 10, 2008
Then what they do is they use 95 percent upper confidence limit.
Basically it's a statistical means, and they take all the sites and
statistically come up with a one in a million chance that you'll exceed
the concentration required for that group. And then based on all that,
looking at that, they determine what methods could be used to clean
up the property.
Some of the other things we looked at was geotechnical
concerns. One of the challenges we had is once you get below two
feet on the surface, it's still pretty much a pudding consistency. So the
soil is pretty unstable at this point in time. So to try to use that as a
temporary site makes it extremely challenging.
The conclusion of that report -- you know, it's really a large
document but, you know, I tried to minimize the presentation and just
give you the key points.
There is an elevated arsenic risk, and it would have to be dealt
with. And the instability of the sediments, you know, cost cell one,
you know, is probably -- it's not the best of that cell for an OHV
temporary site.
And cells two and three were not at this time tested, because
we're still using them for the rest of the restoration. However, cell two
and three were used at the beginning, and it's possible the
concentrations could be a little bit higher because they were the first
cells that were used to dispose of the material.
We looked at the alternatives of, you know, what could we do to
get this one cell in working condition to create a temporary ORV park,
removal and replacement of the upper two feet, capping the
impoundment with a geo grid and two feet of clean fill, mixing
chemical ground improvement where you mix lime with the material
to reduce the concentration and it settles it out a little bit. Complete
removal of all the dredge material.
What you can see is that first alternative costs around 12 to 14
million just to create a temporary site. The second alternative,
Page 128
---,------
June 10, 2008
capping, impoundment, geo grids, a little bit cheaper, but 10 to 12
million. A third alternative, trying to mix and dilute the soil, is about
4 to 6 million, but then they recommend doing a test pilot to ensure
that it works.
A complete removal of all the dredge material. Well, this was the
reason why we originally created a disposal site, because we knew the
cost of hauling this material was so expensive. And to remove all that
material in that one cell would be 18 to $20 million.
The other things that we've been looking at is different land
options throughout Collier County. I've been sending letters to
different individuals looking at possibly trading this site because, you
know, it's the intended use that's the issue. It's not really the soil itself.
So we looked at swapping the land and -- you know, with one
landowner, and he came back with some enormous numbers for the
swap and trade, which really doesn't make it very practical.
In addition, we're looking in Northern Belle Meade. I've sent out
some letters and initial discussions with some landowners to see if
they have interest.
So far I haven't found a party interested in providing us a
temporary use site for A TV s or somebody that would like to trade
land or sell their parcel, and so it's been extremely challenging. Every
time I think I have a solution, I seem to have another roadblock.
And that's all I have, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have two speakers. Did you want
to talk before they speak, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I would, because I think it
might help the direction the speakers would want to go.
This has been extremely troubling between God or the act of
Gods and the incompetency of government to work in whole or in its
parts. Weare no better off than we were back in 2003 when we first
reached an original agreement.
And Clarence, I don't blame you personally. I think that you
Page 129
r ,..-.,.."..----
June 10, 2008
personally thought this was all going to work out. Back then I
mentioned the fact that I didn't think any land in Collier County would
ever be environmentally to the point where we'd be able to do this.
At that point in time I didn't really believe it when I said it. But
now looking back at that point in time, I feel like I'm a prophet, you
know, the fact that it's happening just about the way I mentioned at
that time.
There is -- no matter which way we go, we fail. Even back with
Mike Davis when I was working with him and we thought we had
something worked out with the Picayune and got Forestry aboard.
Then U.S. Fish and Wildlife came in and said, no, that would be
totally unacceptable. Can't be done. Every time we take that one step
forward, we find there's always some obstacle there to stop us.
I'm very disillusioned. There's a good number of people out in
the public that put their trust in us that are very disillusioned.
What I'm thinking about -- and this is a proposal I'm going to
make to my commissioners -- and maybe after we hear from the
speakers maybe we can discuss it more.
Government failed here, and I can't see us continuously to spin
our wheels in directions that are going to continue to fail; however,
with that said, there's an obligation. The obligation can probably be
translated to money in some degree.
What that money amount is, I wouldn't even begin to address at
this point in time. Between the time when we originally agreed to 640
continuous acres to today, there's been all sorts of changes in the
valuation of lands that are existing in forests, wild lands, disturbed
croplands, or whatever that's out there that would be -- some day could
be used for this purpose.
I think we need to have an independent task force separate from
the county that is free to act on their own to be able to study all
alternatives that are out there to be able to have the interplay of expert
water management, the county government, different state agencies
Page 130
June 10, 2008
come in and answer questions to look at the possibilities of what can
be done, if not in Collier County, maybe Hendry County, Lee County,
or even over the borderlines of Broward County.
I don't have any confidence left in our ability as government, the
federal, state, or local, to be able to come up with an answer to this
problem. That's where I am at this point in time.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner
Coletta.
Our speakers, please.
MS. FILSON: leffMoscardelli. He'll be followed by Ralph
LaPierre (sic).
MR. MOSCARDELLI: leffMoscardelli, for the record.
Mr. Dunnuck (sic), you've repeatedly failed. I've never seen
someone so bad in my life. I mean, I've seen Southwest Florida Water
Management District drag their feet here continuously. It's like
watching a slow moving elephant going nowhere but in circles just so
they can get nothing done and drag someone in circles.
It's really gotten to the point where, you know, I'm almost happy
that the 700 gallons of diesel fuel that I heard about last week got
stolen from South Water Management District.
You want to put us all the way out in Immokalee out by Lake
Trafford. There are other areas. It doesn't have to be hundreds and
hundreds of acres. I mean, you can take this all the way up to West
Palm Beach. I mean, I could care less about anybody up in West Palm
Beach, but you came down here, you pulled a bait and switch,
shystered us like gypsies out of nowhere and screwed people over, and
you walked away grinning and laughing.
Most people now have to go all the way on up to Bonita Springs
to go off-roading, and I'm not talking A TV riding. I'm talking dirt
bikes, go camping, go with their truck, just so they can get away from
most of the mess that our local governments tend to make around here
to get some peace and quiet.
Page 131
June 10, 2008
And the site that you've taken, otherwise known as the man-made
mess, the South Belle Meade property, that was otherwise known to
locals around here as Bad Luck Prairie. What you stole was part of
us.
As far as I'm concerned, I hope someone steals everything they
can get from you in life.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Ralph LaPierre.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's good, too.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've never seen that door slam
before. How'd he do it?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: He was very impressive, wasn't he?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, he was.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm sure that he'll get a lot of positive
response.
MR. LAPRAIRIE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Ralph
Laprairie with Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
Clarence asked me to just stop in today and give you folks a little
bit of information on what we as biologists feel is important for Lake
Trafford in the method of continuing with the restoration that needs to
go on with that.
I understand that these problems that have been generated,
particularly with the A TV issue, are serious concerns for you folks
and for the water management district. It's not something I'm directly
involved in myself. But for the Lake Trafford work that we're doing,
like that, we want to make sure that you understood that the littoral
zone dredging is a vital part of that. We appreciate your past
assistance and the county's support for that dredging work that's gone
on in Lake Trafford through the number of years.
I know I first started working Lake Trafford in '92 like that, so
I've seen all the problems that come through since that point in time
like that.
And we're making progress with it at this time, but it's important
Page 132
'--~-r
June 10, 2008
that we continue on and get the littoral dredging complete, that -- the
littoral area is the significant portion of the lake where most fish
reproduction occurs, where most of your fish go to seek food as young
of the year fish, like that, and that's only a quarter of the way done.
So we can look at the lake as having been completed in the
middle, but without the littoral zone completed and finished like that,
we're losing a significant vital portion of the lake that will be really
important for the ongoing benefit of that lake system.
And I thank you and I hope that you'll continue to support what
we've done there, and God willing, you'll find some way to solve the
A TV problem as well.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta's really worked
hard at trying to solve that problem, I know.
Do we have any comments from our commissioners on the
phone? Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I don't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I have a few comments.
I happen to agree with Prophet Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, my son.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That I don't think this is ever going
to get done. I really don't.
When we first began this, I thought there was some hope. I
thought we had a reasonable solution, but there just are too many
governmental agencies involved in this process. I don't think we will
ever resolve all of their problems.
And I really do believe there are people in those governmental
agencies who do not want to have this process resolved. And we will
just keep -- or they will just keep dragging their feet year after year
after year, and nothing is ever going to happen here.
I think that the best we can do is to seek some legal conclusion to
Page 133
June 10, 2008
this which might include those other governmental agencies paying
Collier County for their failure to live up to their end of the bargain.
And I would like to see our county attorney evaluate ways in which
we can get that accomplished.
With money, we might be able to do something if we can locate
some land. I think that's even a stretch, but it's better than nothing at
all. And we're just wasting our time dealing with all these other
agencies who are really accomplishing nothing.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Commissioner Coyle.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I think Commissioner Coyle
and Commissioner Coletta are on the right track here. I really blame
this on South Florida Water Management and I also blame it on
Tallahassee whereby the people on South Florida Water Management
are appointed and not elected.
If they were elected by the citizens, I'm sure that this problem
wouldn't be dragging on like it is now, that they would be able to
solicit to the people that were on this board and say -- and really get
across the point, the importance of finding an area that needs to be
addressed by people that are involved in A TV s and other off-road
vehicles.
So I'm not sure what the -- where we're going to go with this, but
I do believe that if there's compensation, the compensation isn't going
to be like 2- or $3,000. Compensation's going to be very high in this,
because obviously we're going to have to go out and see if there's any
land available.
And I'm tired of where we're at at the present time. I've felt that
South Florida Water Management was going to really get behind this
effort and they were going to look for places and get it done -- but I
don't believe -- and I have to agree with Commissioner Coyle that I
believe that this government body, being South Florida Water
Management, is dragging their feet on purpose and hoping that this
Page 134
June 10, 2008
goes away instead of addressing the problem and getting after it. And
now you're coming up with little solutions here and there, and that's
not going to get the job done.
So I'm not blaming you, Clarence, but I'm blaming the
organization that you're affiliated with because I just don't feel that
they're doing justice for the people here, not only in Collier County,
but all of Southwest Florida that would like to recreate in this manner.
MR. TEARS: Commissioner, actually, blame me because I truly
have been the one trying to resolve this issue, and I've tried to come up
with short-term solutions and long-term solutions. It's just, every
corner I turn and every rock I turn over I'm met with additional
challenges. Blame me because I --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm not going to blame you. I'm
blaming the people that you work for.
MR. TEARS: I understand, but --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- that are appointed by the people
up in Tallahassee, the governor, okay?
MR. TEARS: I've personally been working really hard to resolve
this issue, so -- thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I saw that Representative Matt
Hudson walked in, and I think you have an interest in this particular
topic as well. If you'd like to come up and say a few words.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON: Thank you. For the record,
Matt Hudson, State Representative, District 101.
I was down in my office and watching you on TV -- yes, people
do watch you on TV -- and listen to you by phone, for Commissioner
Coyle and Henning who are out there.
A couple of things struck me. First of all, everyone affected by
this, I represent, for all intents and purposes, as my district stretches
across the street and incorporates all of the Everglades and so forth.
And as a resident of Golden Gate Estates, this has been the
ongoing saga that just won't die. I'm very concerned that this has been
Page 135
..- r
June 10, 2008
the textbook case of when government disenfranchises the people that
they're supposed to support.
I hear Commissioner Coletta discussing the idea of bringing all
the parties together to discuss, to talk, to put together the coalition of
coalitions, if you will. I hear Commissioner Coyle discussing the idea
of, quite honestly, just bringing about legal action to kick them in the
-- kick them in the tail and make them actually act.
I think it's time that probably some of the talking in the nice way
is actually done. You can only ask nicely so many times. I do believe
that it's time to kick somebody in the tail and make them do what
they're supposed to do. We all have an obligation as public servants to
represent the people that sent us here.
The water management district, unfortunately, by virtue of the
fact that they are appointed, certainly do not have that same
motivation that we do. And while I respect tremendously Clarence
Tears for his knowledge and his understanding of our community, I
believe that the problem probably goes a little higher than that and that
it's a fundamental divide between what the water management districts
believe and what they actually do oftentimes in terms of usage
regarding public lands. It's a deeper problem just the -- to be able to
use lands that are purchased with public dollars.
And to that end, I believe that perhaps we need a little hybrid
between the two approaches, between Commissioner Coyle's approach
and Commissioner Coletta's approach. I don't ever believe that in the
realm of diplomacy you can stop talking. At the same token, I believe
that they need a swift kick in the butt.
And right now, they're just not getting the job done. So I'm
happy as your representative to be able to facilitate or coordinate any
of those efforts between my office and the county, water management
district, whatever partners you see fit to bring to the table, and I'm
happy to provide that steel-toed shoe to give them that kick in the butt,
if need to, Commissioner Coletta. But I do believe that we should
Page 136
June 10, 2008
talk, but we should also take action and get strong with them.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Representative Hudson.
And Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is there any way that you could
propose some legislation for the upcoming session so that maybe we
can get this addressed through the legislative process up in
Tallahassee?
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON: Well, we're going to have our
legislative workshop tomorrow, which was advertised, and hopefully a
few people will be in attendance as well. We meet from one to four
tomorrow. My shameless little commercial for tomorrow. However, I
would tell you that this year there was some proposed legislation that
was trying to aim for just what I was saying, providing more public
access to water management districts as a whole to the lands that they
own.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's where I was going to go.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON: That was proposed this year.
It did not go particularly far. It was tied to a funding mechanism. It's
not to say that it's not a good idea. Don't misunderstand me. I'mjust
letting you know there is some track record to be doing some of that
action.
I think that it's certainly worth pursuing and certainly something
we should look at. It would probably be a good idea for us to
coordinate some of our efforts with other counties and other water
management districts to identify problems and issues that might be in
those, because as you're filing legislation, you're not affecting one part
of Florida, you're affecting all of Florida, so we want to make sure that
we're applying the fix evenly and appropriately.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think you read my -- I think you
read my mind because that's exactly what I was going to say before
you addressed that issue, was there's got to be issues in other water
districts that are similar to what we're experiencing here.
Page 13 7
June 10, 2008
But I think with your leadership we -- you could propose some
legislation, and I'm sure with our local lobbyists and also with this
Board of County Commissioners, that maybe all of us can work
together. When I say all, you, included and the rest of the legislative
body, and this will be something that we'll discuss.
But maybe if we get everybody on board, hopefully we can really
make a push here. But I think it's going to have to come -- go all the
way up to Tallahassee, and then I think we can get some leverage to
take care of the issue down here.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON: Well, like I said--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chairman?
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON: -- I'm happy to work together.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chairman, I would just like
to direct a couple things to Representative Hudson.
Representative Hudson, you're a breath of fresh air. Rather than
playing the games that some politicians seem to play to keep from
getting something done, your approach is very direct, and I appreciate
it, and I appreciate your support in trying to get this problem solved
rather than trying to avoid it.
So thank you very much for your willingness.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON: Thank you, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. That echo kind of
throws me off. Sometimes I think it's either God or Commissioner
Coyle. Can't tell the difference.
But if I could, Representative Hudson?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You being the prophet.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And me being the prophet.
Representative Hudson, is there a possibility -- and I know this is
going to be like a mortal sin as far as some members of this state
cabinet are going to be concerned -- that we could ever give some due
Page 138
"---T-..-------'
June 10, 2008
consideration for some of water management's vast land holdings to
be able to be dedicated to some of these purposes?
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON: Well, I think that's the--
whether it's dedicated or whether it's a public use issue, that's where
some of the issues come into play.
Our water management districts, for very good reason in most
cases, have done a very good job, yeoman's job of preserving a lot of
our natural resources to make sure that we have one of life's
sustainable resources, water.
I mean, there's certainly a fundamental position there that -- I
mean, we can't not have water obviously. At the same token, I think
there are probably many opportunities for us to be able to use those
public lands in an outdoorsman type of way that would be still
consistent with what the water management district's trying to do.
I know that they will, from time to time, acknowledge that they
do that, but I would say that it's more of the exception than the rule,
and I think that while certainly not every parcel that they own would
be appropriate because we certainly have environmentally sensitive
areas that we do need to be respectful to, I do believe that there are
lands, that we have to remember who paid for those lands. We have
to remember that our citizens come first, and I think we need to
address that issue.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Amen, brother.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So now what staff is asking from
us on this particular item is for direction. Do you have any direction,
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I still feel that we need to
involve a user's group out there to be able to see if they can come up
with something that's unique. There may be opportunities that are
right in front of us and we're just blind to it, such things as water
management land, such things just outside of Collier County, some
regional effort with some other county to be able to do it. There's an
Page 139
June 10, 2008
ongoing effort now to see what can be done with lands around the
airport that exist right at the Collier County/Dade County line. There's
talks in the process at this point in time going forward on that.
However, it doesn't mean that they're not going to go through the
whole process and find the Fish and Wildlife will step back in and put
the kibosh on that too.
But there's a lot of efforts going on. I would just feel a lot more
comfortable if we had a user -- an independent user's group step
forward, not under county sanction, that could get involved in this
process, then report back to us what their findings are, and I would
want them to be outside of the county process so that they can be
independent and it won't be a matter of trying to select who's going to
be on it and there won't be the sunshine laws to comply with.
I think Commissioner Coyle would be able to add something to
that one.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine, thank you.
And we have our County Attorney, Ellen Chadwell, here. Did
you have some comments?
MS. CHADWELL: Yes, I did. I came here today -- I was
prepared to give you the whole history and give you some of your
legal and equitable remedies because of some of the problems with
this agreement.
We did meet with Clarence Tears and lacqueline Hubbard and
leffKlatzkow from our offices and Marla Ramsey yesterday, and
spoke with Mr. Tears about some of our concerns and issues.
He had spoke with the attorneys for the district. As you mayor
may not know, there is pending litigation. An inverse condemnation
suit has been filed by a plaintiff called Vibid Group, Inc. alleging that
they've been deprived -- or that their access has been taken or their
property's been taken by virtue of the vacation of those roads and that
project, the restoration project.
And Mr. Tears has reported to us today that after speaking with
Page 140
June 10, 2008
the attorneys that there is a desire for them to cooperate with the
county in that litigation. Currently there were -- we -- or Ms. Hubbard
had filed a third-party complaint to bring both the state and the district
into the lawsuit. And they had filed motions to dismiss.
If I understand Mr. Tears correctly, they're willing to defend --
cooperate with the county in the defense of that lawsuit and to
renegotiate -- negotiate some satisfactory resolution, final resolution,
of the supplemental agreement, meaning a cash buy-out of some
nature.
So it appears that everybody is willing to sit down and meet what
I hear some of this board's wishes to be, and that is to recognize that
the land transfer is probably not going to happen adequately under the
terms of this agreement, and that the -- but the parties are willing to
discuss potentially swapping a monetary equivalent of that 640-acres
obligation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have Commissioner Halas and
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think since listening to what you
brought forth to this board, I think this is the manner in which we
ought to go after.
I hate to get into litigation, but it seems to me this is our only
option and maybe this will force the issue to the point where either
land will be found or there will be a substantial monetary settlement in
regards to this. But I would hope that the end result is that we can find
some land that the people can use to recreate on.
So I think if I hear you straight, what you're asking is that you
want to go forward with litigation; is that true? .
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner, I don't think we're going to
need litigation. I think, from what I understand, the water district
desperately wants out of this. They're willing to pay us something.
The issue's going to be whether or not it's an acceptable amount.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. But do we need to make
Page 141
June 10, 2008
sure that there's somebody that's going to follow up on this so that it's
going to be beneficial for the people that have been waiting since
2003?
MR. KLATZKOW: Sir, if it's the will of the board that we
negotiate a buy-out of that 640 acres, we'll come back to the board
with a proposal, and you can either accept it or not, and then at least
you'll have control of the money at that point in time. And if you
wanted to go out and buy land with that money, you don't have to deal
with them anymore.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: lim Mudd, can you eliminate that
background noise?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How about -- how about making
sure that -- obviously South Florida Water Management has a lot of
land, and I'm not sure if they've explored all possibilities.
MR. KLATZKOW: Sir, I don't think you'll ever get their land
approved as an A TV site. I think it's too environmentally sensitive.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So you're thinking the best
way is to get something -- monetarily get something out of this that
way?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's one approach, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You haven't had a chance to
speak yet, Commissioner Fiala.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's all right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. You have a lot of background noise
through your phone, Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How about now?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. May I make a
suggestion? When you're not on your phone, would you please mute
it, and you can be able to still hear everything that's taking place.
Page 142
June 10, 2008
Then when you're ready to talk, unmute it, because we're getting back
feed (sic) there that's really irritating.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's the prophet speaking.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. How do you hear me now?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You're good.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Great.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. One thing I think we should
consider as we're going through these negotiations to decide what is a
fair settlement, we need to have input from people about what they
need and what might be available.
And if we take Commissioner Coletta's approach and my
approach with respect to the legal settlement, as Representative
Hudson has suggested, it might work pretty well if we do them
concurrently.
So if we can get some members of the public who are familiar
with the areas, who know what their requirements are, who can begin
making recommendations to us about what land might be acceptable,
we can weigh the cost of that land against the adequacy of the legal
settlement that we would be considering.
If we -- if we make a decision concerning a legal settlement and
then find out that it's going to cost us two or three times as much
money to get the land, then we really haven't gotten anywhere.
So I would suggest we pursue this on a parallel course so that
when the time comes to reach agreement, we will have as much
information as we can possibly get.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I'd like to basically second
what Commissioner Coyle just made the motion for. I think that his
direction is the way to go, and we'd have to, of course, bring it back
for further discussion. We're never going to settle this in one meeting.
However, I just want to mention one thing. And Commissioner
Page 143
June 10, 2008
Halas has mentioned it, I think everybody has dwelled on that one
fact. The answer's not just transferring money from one government
entity to another. This is all taxpayers' money in the end. It doesn't
matter what pot -- what pot we take it out of; it's all out of the pocket
of the taxpayer.
So we need to be able to make sure we're not directing it, just to
take it from water management or some other entity and put it in the
county treasury just to be able to bring down our millage by a small
fraction of 1 percent.
The idea of this money is to try to make the A TV riders out there
whole at some point in time in the future. And what we have to base it
on is the original agreement with 640 acres. What's 640 acres worth
today that could provide this kind of enjoyment if we're going to work
for a cash settlement?
You are -- I am correct, Commissioner Coyle, that you did make
a motion and I did second it?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He must be really far away for
that time delay to be so long.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, it took me a long time to turn
off the mute button.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: He may be far away, but, boy, he's bright.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He is. He's quick.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I think we're going in the
right direction here. My biggest concern is that whoever this group is
that is going to be put together, there has to be someone that
understands land usage so that if something is found, we can figure
out, or at that point in time before we go much further, we can figure
out what type of hurdles we've got jump through, because obviously
this is not going to be an easy task.
So I think if there is a work group put together of people, there
Page 144
---~.._._._.__..,-_.+_._-_..,.~--
June 10, 2008
has to be someone that understands zoning and everything else in
regards to this so we don't end up spinning our wheels so they can
make a quick assessment of whether that land is a great area to
recreate in.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That would be in your motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. Well, basically you've
got it. What I'm looking for is, even though water management may
be in an adversary position with a possible lawsuit, I'm hoping that
they'll still make available staff as requested as long as with the county
parks and rec. or whatever department that we have involved that may
be able to guide, and we'll get the state involved where they want to,
to basically get this task force together, show them what the resources
are, tell them what the problems are we've endured, and then let them
start to say which way they would like to go, and then they can report
back to us. I can almost assure you they'll come up with an answer a
lot quicker than we're ever going to come up with one.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a question.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mrs.--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: When we put this task force together, are
we going to have to go through this whole process where everybody
submits --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- their names and they go out and then --
you know, that's a three-, four-, five-month's process.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. My whole ambition with
this thing is to remove government from it just about as much as
possible, make this task force be something that's self supporting.
They have their own initiative start-up. They wouldn't be of any
government authority as far as being able to come up with a final
decision that would be binding on anybody, but they would be able to
do all the research and come to some sort of basis of understanding
Page 145
June 10, 2008
with all their members of what would be the best way to be able to
take care of this problem.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And you'll be involved in that process?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think I've been drafted.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner -- I'm sorry. lim
Mudd?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd just like to raise a couple of
points of caution. We don't -- I don't think we want to appoint a
member of the commission officially as part of that particular group. I
think Commissioner Coletta is right about letting the citizens form
their own group.
There are some sportsman's organizations there that I think could
form the nucleus of a similar group. And so if Commissioner Coletta
could merely encourage them to form this group, they could begin to
evaluate some potential sites.
lust to make it easier for us -- and I'm being somewhat facetious
-- but it would be good if they could identify a site that has no plants,
no water, no living things on it; otherwise, somebody is going to find a
plant or a fish or a snail or bird that will keep them from doing
anything, and that's exactly the problem that we have now.
So we're going to have to find a spot that is not environmentally
sensitive.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Commissioner Coyle, you
just described the moon.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They should be able to help us with
that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It would be the moon, would be
the only place I could think of that would fit that description.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I know.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: lim Mudd?
Page 146
June 10, 2008
MR. MUDD: Commissioner -- and Commissioner Coyle hit
upon it, and I was just thinking about, would the Golden Gate Estates
Civic Association take on the endeavor of making a subcommittee of
these interested people in the sports group in order to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Golden Gate Estates Civic
Association is geographically bound and would be the wrong one for
it.
MR. MUDD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They can serve a lot of
purposes. But in this case here, I know of no one here that has a
strong interest in the subject matter.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, we have a motion on the
floor and a second.
Our last comment would be from Clarence Tears.
MR. TEARS: Yes, Commissioners. I just want to assure you
that the district is here to bring this to resolution and we're here to
work with the county. In addition, we will work with the county on
this current lawsuit that you heard from Ellen Chadwell, and we're
here committed to work together as partners and try to bring this to
resolution.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Great.
MR. TEARS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Clarence.
Commissioner Henning, did you want to say anything before I
call the vote?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, I do. Donna, you're doing
a fine job. You just need to figure out how to get the other two sitting
next to you to shorten their comments.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. Thank you. I'll get a timer out here.
Thank you, Commissioner Henning.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 147
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. That passes 5-0.
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioners, 12B.
Item #12B
RE1ECT THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL
IMPROVEMENTS TRUST FUND, THE SOUTH FLORIDA
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (BIG CYPRESS) AND
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. (THIS ITEM TO FOLLOW
COMPANION ITEM #10C) - MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S
RECOMMENDATIONS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: You have a companion item, and I know we've got
a time certain, but this one should be short. And this is 128. This is
to reject the proposed modification of agreement between the board of
trustees of the Internal Improvements Trust Fund and the South
Florida Water Management District, Big Cypress, and Collier County,
Florida.
And Ms. Ellen Chadwell is going to present.
MS. CHADWELL: Yes, Commissioners. This is a companion
item because it relates to the same supplemental agreement as parts of
the interim site and the permanent site, they -- the district had
requested and the county had agreed to modify some of the obligations
regarding the maintenance of the road.
As a requirement, the state was to sign off consenting to that
Page 148
June 10, 2008
modification, because as you recall the original agreement was a
three-party agreement, so no two parties can modify the obligations of
that third party without its consent.
The modification that's been presented to me is insufficient in my
view. They've -- the state, although they've signed a document that
says they have no problem with you taking the district out of that
obligation, they won't reaffirm their own obligations vis-a-vis those
roadways.
So -- and with the current discussions about renegotiating that
entire supplemental agreement, I also understand that the district
counsel has indicated they're willing to remove and agree to go back
to the original terms of the original agreement, so this may be a moot
point in a few weeks as well.
But my request today is that you simply -- they presented this
modification for your execution. I would request that you reject that
and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve staff's
recommendations.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor from
Commissioner Henning to approve staff recommendation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: A second from Commissioner Halas.
Any further comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
Page 149
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That is a 5-0. Thank you.
MS. CHADWELL: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We're going to take our two o'clock.
We're going to take that until three o'clock, then we're going to give
our court stenographer a break at three o'clock whether we're finished
with that item or not.
Item #12A
THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
CONSIDERS A PROPOSAL FROM THE DEVELOPER OF
PEBBLEBROOKE, TO BE MEMORIALIZED IN A DEVELOPER
AGREEMENT, TO BUFFER AND OTHERWISE MITIGATE THE
IMPACT OF THE TWO-STORY BUILDING ON THE
AD10INING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, IN EXCHANGE
FOR RESOLVING ANY DISPUTE THE COUNTY MAY
PRESENTL Y HAVE WITH RESPECT TO BOTH THIS
BUILDING AND THE STEVIE TOMATO LA WSUIT -
DISCUSSED; MOTION TO CONTINUE ITEM - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Okay, Commissioner. The next item is a time
certain. It's 12A, that the Board of County Commissioners consider a
proposal for the developer of Pebblebrook to be memorialized in a
developer agreement to buffer and otherwise mitigate the impact of
the two-story building on the adjoining residential neighborhood in
exchange for resolving any dispute the county may presently have
with respect to both this building and the Stevie Tomato lawsuit.
MR. KLATZKOW: Since the proposal's from the developer, I'm
going to ask the developer to make the presentation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And then we'll hear from staff
after. Very good. Thank you, sir.
MR. PICKWORTH: Thank you. Good afternoon,
Page 150
---r---'--'--""""" '-....----.
June 10, 2008
Commissioners. I'm Don Pickworth. I represent DAD Development,
which is the developer of the shopping center and the owner of the
two-story building which is one part of this issue.
I have with me lohn Deangelis, one of the principals of DAD
Development, and also Christian Andrea, our landscape architect so
that -- I mean, I know there's obviously the Stevie Tomato's issues that
are involved in all of this. That is a separate issue from what we're
here to talk about.
Stevie Tomato's is our tenant. Unless and until it's judicially
determined otherwise, they're not in violation of the lease they have
with us, so we -- obviously they have rights as a tenant, so we're not
here to deal with that.
Weare here to -- and I think probably the best way is, we -- some
of what we're talking about, what you're looking at right now, you've
seen before. This is the proposed improvements in landscaping and
wall improvements at the building.
As you recall from when we discussed this before, we attended a
meeting out at the neighborhood, and certainly one of the concerns
was the visual impact of the two-story building. The building was
lawfully constructed and permitted in accordance with the PUD. It's
there, but it obviously is deemed to be or thought to be impactive by
persons in the neighborhood, and so we are proposing to do what we
can reasonably do to minimize the visual impact of that building. And
you'll see by the drawings what we're proposing, the plantings we're
proposing to do, and the wall improvements we're proposing to make.
Subsequent to that meeting on February 26th, the county called a
meeting that was held -- I think it was March 24th -- out at North
Naples Regional Park. A group of the residents appeared at that
meeting. We presented the same plans to them and, you know, had a
fairly extensive discussion.
It's probably fair to say at this point that -- that there is somewhat
of an acceptance or an agreement as to the reasonableness of these --
Page 151
June 10, 2008
of these proposals. I don't think too many people are objecting. It's
really more an issue of, well, what else are you going to do kind of
thing, and we'll talk about that in a minute.
But I think most recognize at this point that that's probably, you
know, the most reasonable thing you can do to really ameliorate the
visual impact of the building.
Couple things have happened since then. As I say, one is the
meeting that we went to out there on March 24th. Following that, at
the suggestion of the county attorney, we prepared a developer
agreement which pretty much set forth what we would do and what
we would expect the county to do to resolve this matter.
And I think we and the County Attorney's Office are pretty much
in agreement on the terms of that developer's agreement except for one
issue, which we'll talk about in a moment.
The -- you know, in the time since this matter first came before
you several months ago, I think that, you know, certain information, if
you will, has pretty well crystallized to the point where I think it's
been generally acknowledged that the errors that led to these problems
were not the result of any kind of intentional or fraudulent or
misleading conduct on the part of the private parties involved in this,
be it either DAD Development, which was a purchaser after all of this
zoning activity took place and had no knowledge of any of this, or
even, for that matter, the original applicant who, I think, has been
recognized, was not really aware of what had happened with regard to
those recommendations.
And -- but notwithstanding the fact that -- all of that, DAD
Development is committed to spending about 150,000 -- or actually
over $l50,000 in making these improvements for the simple reason
that we believe that it makes a lot more sense to make some
improvements to help ameliorate the situation rather than get involved
in litigation, which we think we'd win anyway, but -- and as a result of
that, the neighborhood gets nothing. So that doesn't -- has never
Page 152
June 10, 2008
appeared to us to be a very intelligent way to proceed on this.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You were mentioning some other things
that you wanted to present as well?
MR. PICKWORTH: Yes, yes. There is a couple of other things
though. What we get to is -- because this kind of brings you to the
fact that since that last meeting, the county has filed a lawsuit
primarily against Stevie Tomato's, but DAD Development has also
been joined as a defendant in that lawsuit, and that is a major problem
for DAD Development.
The notion that we would spend $150,000 to ameliorate a
situation and then still end up in litigation with the county as a
defendant is just not something that can be swallowed very easily.
And so one of the things we have asked for in the developer's
agreement is that the county dismiss us as a defendant in that lawsuit,
so that's one of the things that's -- we haven't talked about here before.
The other is when we went to the meeting out in North Naples,
there are some other issues brought up by neighbors, some of which I
think we can maybe address and do something about.
One of these was the location of the dumpster. One of the
drawings you got there has got the current location. We would
propose to move it about 1O0 feet north. To do that, what we -- we'd
need a little help from you in two respects. One is the requirement
that this be some kind of concrete enclosure would need to be relaxed
so that we could enclose it with a chain link fence with vinyl slats or
something like that.
It's a cost issue, plain and simple. You know, DAD Development
is right out there to the point where, you know, the litigation option is
starting to look better. And, you know, the fact that these dumpsters
are going to be opposite the preserve and not really, you know, within
anyone's sight lines, you know, I think makes that, we believe, a
relatively harmless concession.
The second would be, in order to make that dumpster location
Page 153
June 10, 2008
work with the correct distance you need for the trucks to service it,
we'd need to get -- to go into the setback some so that they can be
located -- you can see that on the drawing there.
Again, given the particular location here, we don't think that's a
harmful concession and we do think it would certainly address some
of the concerns of the folks in the neighborhood. So, you know, I
mean all of us are going to have to give a little on some of these things
to make all of this work.
A second thing, one of the concerns has been motorcycle parking
back there in the area, and you'll see on that second drawing a bunch
of striping. We're proposing to basically make that a no parking area,
and that's been a little bit of a thorn in the side for some, and it's been
mentioned at two or three of the meetings, so we can -- we can do that.
One of the things that's been mentioned is back yard flooding
during rainy season. On that, it's hard to really get a handle on that. I
mean, the -- with the water management system out there, it's
designed, it's reviewed by the county, it's constructed, it's inspected to
make sure it's -- it's been constructed in accordance with the reviewed
and approved plans. As far as we know, it has been.
And I guess there, if -- you know, if it's determined by the county
that it's not been constructed and there's a responsibility on our part, I
mean, we're -- we'll take a look at that. But, you know, right now it's
pretty hard to make any commitment on that because we -- we don't
think there's anything wrong, at least on the DAD part of this.
One of the other issues that's come up, one of the concerns of
folks in the neighborhood has been that the south -- the south facing
second story windows would prevent -- would allow view lines into
residences along there.
We had proposed in the developer agreement that we would put
an opaque film on these windows until such time as the landscaping
grew up. I think Commissioner Henning, representatives of DAD,
county attorney, did a site visit out there, and I think the suggestion
Page 154
June 10, 2008
was, instead of the way we wanted to do it, which would be to remove
that opaque film after the landscaping grew up, that instead it would
be permanently installed up to a height of seven feet. And I think I've
got that the way they were talking about it, but Commissioner
Henning may correct that, and we're certainly agreeable to doing that.
A couple other issues that we probably ought to talk about. Light
trespass has been mentioned with regard to the two-story building.
We have had shields for the lights fabricated. There's no tenants up
there now. But as we get tenants in there, they -- those shields will be
installed.
There's been comments a couple times in the meeting about the
lights in the parking lot. Those lights are, you know, pursuant to
county foot candle standards. They're less than the public shopping
center and, you know, I think that -- I don't think that's going to --
they're going to change.
I guess, you know, to wrap it up, we got a list recently of
neighborhood demands. I'm not sure -- you know, it wasn't signed by
anyone. I don't know. It wasn't on the letter, it had a homeowners'
association. I'm not sure exactly whose demands they are.
We've looked at them. Some of the things have been
incorporated in what we've said here, some of them are just not
feasibly (sic) to be done. A l6-foot high wall extending the existing
eight-foot wall north all the way to the Publix shopping center. That
-- you know, that doesn't address the issue that we've set forth and
committed to address, and I don't think we can do that.
So that pretty much concludes our prepared remarks. Like I say,
we're here to answer questions. We -- you know, I think we need to
get some direction on the idea of the dismissal from the lawsuit
because that, obviously, is an absolute condition for DAD
Development on this, so --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much, Mr. -- Don
Pickworth. I was going to say Mr. Pickworth, but then I thought --
Page 155
.-..... T
June 10, 2008
well.
Commissioner Henning, I know that this is extremely important
to you, so at any time if you want to make comments. I was going to
call up staff next in case they have anything they want to put on the
record, then I was going to call the speakers up. We have seven. But
in case you want to say anything beforehand, please let me know.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm not sure if county staff
is involved in this.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that the County
Attorney, leffKlatzkow, is involved with this, and correct me if I'm
wrong.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- I had a concern that the
landscaping being proposed was not going to be adequate.
1 eff and I went out there. We -- with a measuring stick, an actual
stick, and went up and viewed the building from different distances.
The -- it appears -- and leff, you can help me ifI'm wrong. It
appears that it's going to cover the building. Also requesting to take
the landscaping and take it around the corner of the two-story building
to the second story or to the one-story.
Don, is that your understanding is what the proposed agreement
is?
MR. PICKWORTH: Yes, that's what we're going to do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The other thing about,
the flooding. It appears the way the -- there really is no retention pond
within that development. It's a conveyance bypipe and it's behind a
two-story building, but the outfall of it is -- it's close to the ground.
So under heavy rains, no question in my mind there's going to be
some effects to the neighboring properties. The -- if you take a look at
the -- when it does sheet flow into the preserves, you can definitely
see how it affects the land, so something has to be done with that
Page 156
June 10, 2008
within the agreement.
The second thing is locating the -- relocating the park. Don, is
that -- is that the parking that's approved on the PUD or the parking
illegally presently?
MR. PICKWORTH: Well, we're going to have enough parking.
We can eliminate those parking spaces around there in that corner.
That was the idea there. If it's -- if it's just not a parking area, then it's
going to eliminate or -- primarily eliminate putting the motorcycles
back there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's not designated
parking back there.
MR. PICKWORTH: No, no.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You have designated parking far
to the north. Are you proposing to remove that parking there?
MR. DEANGELIS: For the record, lohn Deangelis, Principal
with DAD Development.
Commissioner Henning, that's a good question. There currently is
not designated parking there. What we want to do -- and if we could
put that on the illustrator, we can show you if you're watching TV.
If you -- if you notice -- if you notice, in this striped area here,
we want to stripe all of that off and create a -- you know, a tow-away
zone in this area.
The current dumpster location is here. What we would like to do
-- there are actually two approved current dumpster locations. This is
how the SDP is approved currently, here and here for dumpster
locations.
What we'd like to do is -- if you've got that. What we'd like to do
is, we're able to move this dumpster about 100 feet to the north. We
could face it the other direction. And waste management has worked
with us a little bit. They have been somewhat difficult, frankly, to
work with.
But when we have mentioned you all and the county attorney,
Page 157
June 10, 2008
they have decided that they would pick up later. So they are picking
up later from what we're told. They used to pick up very early in the
morning, and now they're picking up later in the morning.
So we are able to get these two dumpster locations over here,
which would move that over about a 100 feet. That's really the only
place we could put them on the site plan that we could come up with.
We're really trying our best to eliminate this issue of parking.
You know, just some additional comments. I mean, I know the
residents are very frustrated with this, and we understand. We want
you to know that. But, unfortunately, we're -- we are purchasers of a
property that we bought that had vested rights, that had a PUD that
was approved.
We did -- we met and exceeded every requirement the county
asked us to do at every turn. We have -- we've done everything we can
to help the situation. We -- this is not this current developer's fault.
The reason that we're in this position right now is not because of DAD
Development, and that's -- we're doing the best we can, because we
want to have good relationships with everybody. We want to have a
good relationship with the residents, we want to have great
relationships with the county, so we're doing the very best we can to
the tune of over $150,000.
And that's not easy to come by in this market because, you know,
we are struggling to keep tenants in our building as well.
So we're doing all that we can. This plan, we think, will
drastically very much address the issue.
And just one final comment. The bottom line here with this
two-story building, Commissioners, it originally started off because
the sight lines. You know, we have a two-story building that's 29 feet
tall. Well, our PUD specifically says two stories not to exceed 50 feet.
Well, a single-story building is 35 feet, is the height limit, but
we're six feet below a single-story building. So the only complaint
should be, not the height of this, but the sight lines that these folks are
Page 158
r-
June 10, 2008
dealing with from people on the second floor, and we understand that.
So the way to address that really, would be an inexpensive way,
which would be to put window film on the windows that we
discussed, this opaque window film that creates a complete visual
barrier that you cannot see through.
Okay. So we've eliminated the issue completely that they could
have for a two-story building for -- which started off as the issue,
because we could have a single-story building six feet taller.
So anyway my point is, we're doing everything that we can
reasonably in our power to address the concerns of the residents.
We've met with them on several occasions, and we'll continue to do
so.
But the lawsuit is a big deal for us. We can't -- we can't bend
over backwards and fix something that we didn't create and still be
sued at the same time. You authorized a lawsuit against our tenant,
which is unfortunate, but you did not authorize a lawsuit against DAD
Development in your meeting, if you look back at the record. That
was never mentioned.
In fact, you complimented us at the last meeting. Commissioner
Coyle complimented us and said, you know, thanks for stepping up
and helping out, and we're happy to do it to maintain great
relationships.
But we turn around and the compliment turns into a lawsuit. So
we can't do both. We have to -- you know, we have to pick and chose
how we spend our funds. And so we're going to spend it on enhancing
the neighborhood and the center as best we can for the residents.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, may I continue?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: lohn, while you're up there,
we're still talking about putting the landscaping in as presented and
also the wall over to the -- how far to the north?
MR. DEANGELIS: A hundred and seventy-five feet.
Page 159
June 10,2008
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now, tell us about the --
when I met with you, I talked to you about some further requests from
the residents. The 16-foot wall, why can't you do the 16-foot wall?
MR. DEANGELIS: Well, it's really just a cost issue. I mean,
again, we told the county attorney at the residents meeting that, you
know, we'd be happy to provide the county access to come in and put
up a 16-foot wall if they so choose, but this eight-foot wall matches
the current wall that's there. It's concrete. It is a visual and sound
barrier, along with the landscaping. We just can't afford a 16-foot tall
wall.
We're doing everything we can to ameliorate the situation, but a
16-foot tall wall is just -- I mean, why not 30-foot tall? I mean, I don't
know, but we have to be reasonable, and we can't -- we can't just do
everything.
If the county would like to contribute to this issue, we'd be more
than happy to build a taller wall, a longer wall. But look, we've done
everything that we were told to do. We--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, you answered my
question. But just to finish on that, then I have another question. I'm
going to leave it alone then. I checked with staff, and you would need
a variance for a 16- foot wall.
But also there was a concern about the water, potable water
mechanism on the other side of the existing fence. Does the -- does
(sic) the proposal to match that with landscaping?
MR. DEANGELIS: That's correct, yeah. We're going to
landscape around that existing backflow preventer system and actually
put a gate around it, a visual fence, you know, with slats so that the
kids don't -- I think one of the concerns of the residents were the kids
were playing on it and jumping up on it, which we can't certainly
control, but we can put a little fence around it or something, but we
have to provide access for the utility department. That is in the buffer,
by the way.
Page 160
June 10, 2008
We do have a buffer agreement which addresses all of the
drainage issues, all of the landscape issues that is memorialized in an
agreement between the original developer and the master association
of common areas for Pebblebrook Lakes. So that really addresses all
of these drainage issues.
The master association, which we're a member of, is able and
responsible for that 30- foot buffer and can come in and re-grade or do
whatever they want. And if the county would come out and say, hey,
this is wrong in some way, then we can address it. But it was
designed, permitted, approved, inspected exactly as it is right now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning, did you have any
more questions, or shall we go on break now and then come back and
hear the speakers, and then you'll be the first to speak again?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I'm complete,
Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good. We're going to take a
10-minute break right now, then we'll come back and we'll call on our
speakers. Thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Madam Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
We're back in session, and we'd like to call on our speakers. I
understand we have seven speakers.
MS. FILSON: We have seven speakers. The first one is Adam
Cohen. He'll be followed Walter Brund (sic).
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And our speakers each have three
minutes.
MR. COHEN: And my name is Adam Cohen. I'm at 298 Spider
Lily Lane, and I'm just still very concerned about, you know, the
proposals that DAD Development has proposed here today, one of
Page 161
'"''
June 10, 2008
which is not unreasonable to have a 16- foot wall given that this is
about, I would say, about 15 feet from somebody's back yard, a man
named Peter Lutz.
This is looking from his back yard into Stevie Tomato's. And
this happens almost on a daily basis, people hopping that chain link
fence, and I understand they were going to continue that eight-foot
wall. But I submit to you that anybody that -- of reasonable athletic
ability could get over an eight-foot wall very, very easily in the same
manner, and we're just looking for a little bit of safety.
And you know, it was also proposed to have window film placed
on those rear-facing windows, and I just don't feel that it's -- any way
that DAD Development can guarantee that -- very easy to pick
window film off.
You know, the community presented a -- just, you know, opaque.
If they want the lighting inside, can't they just block it off like you
would in a bathroom.
That's basically all I have. I just really feel that, you know, the
privacy issue is really important. And it's very easy -- I mean,
anybody knows, you just peel it right off, and that's no way to
guarantee that somebody's not going to peel that off and deprive
people of their home and privacy.
Same thing with the wall. We just want to ensure that once this
is done, that we'd have the right type of privacy, that we don't have to
deal with this on a daily and a weekly basis. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, sir. Did you want to say
something?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I wanted to address one
situation. I'm sorry. I can address it with Don or someone. The
opaque business of the window, does it have to be a film or could they
take and sandblast it from the outside like they do with some of these
upscale type of windows in restaurant.
MR. DEANGELIS: Well, again, I guess -- again, lohn
Page 162
June 10, 2008
Deangelis. I guess anything is possible, Commissioner, but we're
trying to -- we're trying to do whatever we can within reason here for
everybody's --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand.
MR. DEANGELIS: We believe this film -- it's just like window
tinting. It is not easy to get off. I mean, you'd have to use a razor
blade to get it off, and if that happens, I can assure you that the
residents are going to see that the window film is gone and are going
to make note of it. I mean, then it becomes an enforcement issue.
But, you know, we think the window film is a very reasonable
solution here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, the windows, are they
fixed where you can't open them?
MR. DEANGELIS: You can't open them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, then why don't they put
the film on the outside of the windows?
MR. DEANGELIS: You can. It's just not -- it's -- I don't even
know if they make outdoor film. Maybe they do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't know, just --
MR. DEANGELIS: I mean, we could put it on the outside if
they make out -- you know, film that is designed to go on the outside
of windows. I just have never seen it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Not only that, but being that you are
going to rent these things to them --
MR. DEANGELIS: Right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- then in your rental agreement --
MR. DEANGELIS: Of course.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- there could be a stipulation --
MR. DEANGELIS: The blinds as well.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- that that film stays on the windows --
MR. DEANGELIS: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- and that they cannot remove it.
Page 163
----,------------_.-
June 10, 2008
MR. DEANGELIS: That's absolutely correct, yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you. Next speaker. Oh,
Commissioner Halas? I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: lust a question. Has the residents
worked with you in regards to some cost share of some of the items
that you're trying to address here?
MR. DEANGELIS: Oh, no, sir. That's never been a topic of
discussions.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I was just wondering,
especially when they're talking about a 16- foot wall --
MR. DEANGELIS: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- and all the additional engineering
that's going to go into that wall --
MR. DEANGELIS: You're right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- so that it doesn't blow down.
MR. DEANGELIS: That's right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So I kind of -- I have concerns that,
you know, eight-foot wall, I don't think somebody's going to scale it,
but I've got some concerns that putting the additional burden on you --
MR. DEANGELIS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- since you bought the property
and you weren't involved in the original PUD --
MR. DEANGELIS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- and then somebody's coming up
to you and telling you -- asking you to put an eight -- a 16- foot wall in
place.
MR. DEANGELIS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have some concerns that, you
know, if you want to cost share, fine.
MR. DEANGELIS: That's right. I appreciate that.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Walter Bruno. He'll be
followed by PJ. Obrecht.
Page 164
June 10, 2008
MR. BRUNO: Yes, Walter Bruno, 288 Spider Lily Lane. And
I'd like to just go back in, I believe it was December of 1997.
Commissioner Henning spoke with the neighborhood and said that no
serious negotiation would take place until the scrivener's errors in
place.
And at this time, you know, we have a proposal up here that, to
me, just doesn't seem to address a lot of -- the neighbors will be here
to address their specific needs.
And the other fact I want to bring forward, you know, the county
benefit and revenue from a two-story building that wasn't supposed to
be there, the developer will benefit, and the residents will be left with
basically -- and you'll hear again -- going to be unmarketable
properties. And we're just curious, has the tax appraiser even taken
this into account?
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: P.lObrecht. He'll be followed by Clay Brooker.
MR. OBRECHT: For the record, PJ. Obrecht. I live at 293
Spider Lily Lane, and I've been here before.
I'm going to playa short DVD. I guess it's already in. My
comments prior to playing that -- first -- I'll let it go ahead and play it,
then I'll make my comments.
(The DVD is now playing.)
MR. OBRECHT: This is just to remind everyone of who the real
victims are here and what we've been dealing with, and anybody
watching at home that hasn't seen what we've been dealing with the
past two years since DAD Development allowed this renter, which we
call -- we -- I think is a bar, not a restaurant, at least a good majority of
the time, to be put into their development 150 feet away from our
residence.
And the reason for a 16-foot sound-abating wall is to deal with
the dumpster noise, motorcycles, the bar, hopefully that won't be there
anymore, however, and any other things that might be going on on this
Page 165
June 10, 2008
property, which we were told from the very beginning, we wouldn't
see it, we wouldn't hear it, we wouldn't even know it was there. That's
what we were promised back in 2002. That was what was agreed to
by the Planning Commission and you, the Collier County
Commission.
We've been dealing with this for the last two years. Have not
been able to enjoy our lanais, our swimming pools, or our back yards.
Pressure washing, washing out the bar, the outside bar area.
Here's the shutters they put in. This is 1O o'clock at night.
Somebody decided they wanted to open them up. It's quiet now. It's
not football season. There's no real sports going on. Of course it's
quiet. That's what they're going to claim. Well, it's real quiet, the
shutters are doing a great job. Well, they're not going to do a good job
come next November when the football season starts up.
And they have a leaf blower cleaning off the property. Thank
you DAD.
That's what the bar looks like when they have the shutters open.
Again, it's not a high sports season. Here's the -- that's what it sounds
like with the dumpster being emptied at the other end of the building,
and that's why we want the wall to continue all the way down to the
other side of the building and the dumpsters area to be enclosed with
at least a 10- foot wall where the dumpsters actually get dumped from
as well.
And so we're the real victims here. Deangelis Diamond would
like to maybe sound like they're the victims. I do agree with him on
one point, the county needs to step up and they need to split the bill
for part of this. It's not the residents' responsibility. We were there
first. You guys messed up, you need to flip part of the bill with DAD.
We don't care who takes care of it, but somebody needs to -- the
residents certainly are not going to.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Excuse me. I wasn't here at
this time when this was approved, okay, so I didn't -- I wasn't part of
Page 166
-~_."-_._.._---"'_.-
June 10, 2008
the mess up. Okay?
MR. DEANGELIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to get that clear.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Clay Brooker. He'll be
followed by Angela loseph.
MR. BROOKER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Clay Brooker. I'm with the law firm of Cheffy Passidomo, here on
behalf of the Stevie Tomato's Restaurant.
I'd like to take a minute to review how we got here. Back in
2002 the Richland PUD was amended by the county. Apparently
there's some confusion about how tall buildings can be and what uses
are permitted in that PUD.
Stevie Tomato's had no involvement whatsoever back in 2002
regarding the rezoning process. They weren't even around.
Approximately two years later, Stevie Tomato's does come
around and inquires what DAD has as the leasing space in the center.
Ultimately a lease is signed.
Over the next year or so, Stevie Tomato's prepared plans for the
restaurant and the outdoor patio area, submitted those plans to the
county. The county reviewed them for consistency with the codes,
including zoning, and issued the permits.
In reliance upon those permits Stevie Tomato's has expended
over $1 million in buildout cost and business opening cost.
Time passes by, the restaurant is now open, and code
enforcement responds to some complaints from some of the residents
in the Pebblebrook Lakes community. Code enforcement suggests
that Steve Tomato's obtain a professional report on the level of sound
emanating from the outdoor patio area.
Stevie Tomato's agrees to do so, and the professional study
concludes that the sound emanating from the outdoor patio area does
not violate the noise control ordinance. Nevertheless, the study
suggests that a sound barrier would mitigate any impact on
Page 167
June 10, 2008
surrounding properties.
This issue first appeared before you, the BCC, back in September
of'07. Stevie Tomato's attended that meeting, presented a sound
study, and notwithstanding the sound study's undisputed findings,
Stevie Tomato's offered, in the spirit of cooperation, to install that
sound barrier consisting of a wall and shutters around the patio area.
In fact, Stevie Tomato's had already applied for and obtained the
permit from the county to install the wall and shutters at that time;
however, the county did not accept their offer. They remained silent.
The next month, October, 2007, BCC directed an outside
attorney to investigate the area. That's Mr. Farese's report. His report
concludes that Stevie Tomato's was properly permitted. Meanwhile,
the county's planning director conducted her own analysis and
investigation, determined that Stevie Tomato's use in the outside patio
are, in fact, permitted by the applicable zoning regulations.
Then the county attorney headed a neighborhood meeting in
lanuary of 2008. Stevie Tomato's, again, attended. And, again, we
offered to install sound barrier consisting of the wall and shutters.
Again, the county did not accept the offer.
The following month, February of2008, the matter appeared on
the BCC without any notice given to Stevie Tomato's.
The BCC at that point in time decided to file a lawsuit. Although
it felt it had been treated unfairly, Stevie Tomato's moved forward
voluntarily, without any similar mitigation action taken by the county
or DAD, to erect the wall and shutter sound barrier.
We understand that those shutters have since been opened by
patrons. Commissioner Henning informed me of that. I informed the
client. Locks have been installed, and I hope that those shutters aren't
opened any longer because they are closed at eight p.m. nightly.
It's an ongoing process. So if I hear about people opening, let me
know, and we'll try to do our best to take care of that. Locks have
been installed.
Page 168
June 10, 2008
As we sit here today, Stevie Tomato's has complied with all
county and state regulations yet is the only party which has taken real
physical action to mitigate the issue.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Thank you so much.
I wanted to ask you one question. Why would they ever install
shutters that are movable if they're supposed to eliminate sound? This
allows them to be open. First of all, they should be nailed shut. They
shouldn't just be locked. They should be nailed shut. And second of
all, they should have some kind of sound attenuation added to them to
absorb the sound, so --
MR. BROOKER: The shutters are designed and -- were
designed and manufactured to be sound attenuating.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: If they're closed.
MR. BROOKER: With regard -- well, with regard to them being
open and closed, they expended a lot of money to create the outdoor
patio area, which -- look, we came, we submitted the permits. This
wasn't -- we weren't trying anything underhanded. The county said
this is an accessory -- typical accessory use.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, these were just my comments. I
shouldn't say any more because --
MR. BROOKER: Well, that's why they're open. I was trying to
answer your question.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you. Let's get -- be realistic
about this. Stevie Tomato's is part of the community, and whether
they're in compliance with the existing sound ordinance or not, I think
that they have an obligation to try to work with the neighborhood to
make it as quiet as possible, to take care of it so that at 11 :57 in the
evening, residents don't have to put up with this noise.
And I'm not sure what Stevie Tomato's has to do to abide by this.
Because even though you might take sound measurements, it's still,
let's face it, at night sound carries -- is more prevalent at carrying at
night.
Page 169
June 10, 2008
So instead of where we are today, I would have thought that
Stevie Tomato's, instead of thumbing their nose at the residents, would
have tried to work with them, because obviously those residents
probably want to go over there and enjoy whatever, some food or
favorite libation, and all they're doing is causing a lot of problems. I
would hope that they would realize that they are part of the
community, that people have got to co-exist together, okay?
MR. BROOKER: If I may respond to that. When the issues--
when the complaints were first made, Stevie Tomato's actually hosted
several of the meetings at its establishment, inviting the neighborhood.
That's when the code enforcement actually attended to discuss these
Issues.
And we have been trying to -- you have to remember, we also are
a business, and that once you spend that money, yes, we are now
trying to resolve, in what we feel is a fair way, resolve the issue by
re-closing an area that we spent to open up in reliance on the county
regs.
And so we're doing what we feel is a compromised position.
Yes, we are part of the community, and these residents, some of them
will admit that they actually are patrons. Maybe not late at night, I
grant it that. But they do frequent the establishment.
And so we are trying to do what we feel is our fair share. I think
DAD has made a good proposal and that when you combine all these
things, you're going to have multiple layers of sight and sound
mitigation barriers.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yep. You've had -- you were a
three-minute speaker, and so I hate to cut you off, but--
MR. BROOKER: I was just answering questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know we asked you questions and we've
kept you up there, but we have to get on --
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Angela loseph. She'll be
followed by leri Buehler.
Page 170
June 10, 2008
MS. 10SEPH: Good afternoon. For the record, Angela loseph,
281 Spider Lily Lane.
I wish very much I had brought the pictures I have shown you in
the past of the view from my back lanai.
As I have stated before, I commend the efforts on the landscaping
renditions that they have proposed, but I ask you to consider
something, if you will. If you wouldn't mind the overhead scanning
over here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Take that -- take that microphone with
you, would you?
MS. 10SEPH: Yes, ma'am, thank you.
This is my home right here. And if you will, consider these
renditions. What would you say the view was from here, half a mile,
three-quarters of a mile?
As you stand on my back patio on the outside of my lanai, you
have to hug the railing to see the top of this building. The windows
look directly into my home. The film that was proposed at our
community meeting -- and DAD's attorney came to me specifically
and said he'd like to show me a sample. I've never seen a sample.
I'd like you also to consider that films of those types reverse at
night. What happens at night? My living room lights are on, their
lights are off, and that's a beautiful view. And yes, nobody should be
in there at night. I've worked overtime plenty. I worked at night, too.
You cannot tell a tenant they can't be in their offices at night.
I don't feel anything proposed in that gives me security from
those windows that look directly into my living room. Nobody has
that but me.
These aren't going to grow up for two years. When the building
began, I was speaking to a Realtor about selling my home. Oh, that's
going to cut your value drastically.
The only one here who's been in my back patio is Mr. Henning.
There's nobody, regardless of values of properties, if they go to a
Page 171
----.--T-------------.----
June 10, 2008
million dollars a home, if there's one other house for sale in my
neighborhood, will buy mine.
I'm looking to relocate. I can't sell my home. It's not even worth
putting out there because I couldn't cover the mortgage. But yet I
refinanced. But when I did, I still had $200,000 of equity in my home.
I can't do that. Somebody have suggestions? I don't?
Another item. The water pipes that are at the end of Sweetbay
Lane. Where are they on our side? Can somebody please realistically
answer that for me?
And I see kids climbing. And when they work on them, they're
in my back yard. And the landscapers when they work, are reaching
over my fence, petting my dogs, and having lunch in my back yard.
Please, somebody tell me how my life is going to change. How
can I have peace, security, financial security that I worked my butt off
to get. I didn't get that house through a divorce. I'm a single woman
who had nothing when she left her husband. I worked my butt off for
that, and I now I can't give it away.
What are my answers? Nobody has come to me. I've spoken to
Mr. Henning alone. He has seen it. But until you stand in my back
yard -- please, Mr. Deangelis, I invite you. Come have coffee with me
in the morning and see what it is, see what I'm looking at, because this
is what you see two blocks down the road away from my house.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much for giving us your
comments.
MS. 10SEPH: Thank you for your time.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is leri Buehler. She'll be
followed by Kim Kisa (sic).
MS. BUEHLER: Good afternoon. I'm leri Buehler and I live at
389 Sweetbay Lane. And as you all can see, we are very passionate
about this issue because this is our home. And I'm going to backtrack.
Mr. Halls (sic), is that how you pronounce your name?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Halas?
Page 172
June 10, 2008
MR. BUEHLER: Halas? Originally back in 2002 many of us sat
before the planning committee here in this very room, and we
discussed what it was that we expected you as commissioners to do.
It's my understanding that you're to make sure that our -- that
we're secure and that the right things are done.
We asked -- we didn't -- not even realize that this piece of
property, number one, could be sold, and when it was sold, it was
done so, in my opinion, very underhanded. The building was to be 60
feet from our lot line, the wall 30 feet from the lot line, a one-story
building, no bar and tavern, which it is a bar. Is there anyone I can
give this to?
MR. MUDD: Sure, right here.
MR. BUEHLER: There was to be proper landscaping done
immediately. There was a fence going from our subdivision to the
property. It was supposed to be set back from the gate for the
residents to have access into Pebblebrook, which was not done as they
said it was going to be done.
lohn, I did call you. lohn Buehler did call you. When those
footings went in originally, we -- I want you to know we all sat in the
meeting. Mr. Henning was there. We had a state trooper in our
clubhouse because there was so much anger and passion going on with
what was going on in this subdivision unlike any other subdivision
I've ever seen.
Mr. Henning was there. He was supposed to support us. We
received no support from you, Mr. Henning. None.
lohn, I did call you. I came to your office. lohn Buehler called
you. I asked your superintendent to stop. I said, what are you doing?
I said, oh, is that where the building's going? No, this is a lot line. I
said, what do you mean the lot line?
I'm sorry. I fail to understand the whole thing. I'm really
confused. I do have a piece of paper here from my Realtor stating
their professional opinion that the office/retail complex immediately
Page 173
June 10, 2008
adjacent to my property on the north -- northern boundary has -- is a
negative impact marketable for a price recommendation for a purpose
to attract a buyer.
I, too, want to sell my house. It is so negative. When I have
people come down to my house, friends or anyone, they go, oh, my
gosh, leri, what is that building right in your back yard?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MS. BUEHLER: I'd like to give this to you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. Next speaker, please?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Kim Kish.
MS. KISH: I feel like a teacher. I've got handouts, all kinds of
cute things. Here's some photographs for you. This is also a list of
proposals -- it's not demands -- of what we presented and what we
want. We felt that they were very, very fair.
These are some pictures that we want to show you of the ideas.
This is the wall that would move from the current six feet or eight feet
up to 16. That's what it would look like. It would give us some more
security.
lust another angle. This is from the corner of my home, and it
would totally cover that bar, give me great, you know, sound barrier.
This is another angle. This is from Ms. leri's home looking that
way, and that would also run behind Ms. Ingle's house, the one that is
really affected.
This is looking down the street as you come down Sweetbay,
looking directly. That would give us -- pretty much cover the lighting.
Again, the second-story windows are still viable to look at -- you
know, into the community.
And this is just photographs that we brought to show you a
16-foot wall, that it is viable. It is something that really, really needs
to be considered in our situation. I think just a couple more. You can
just do those real quick.
MR. MUDD: Last one, ma'am.
Page 174
June 10, 2008
MS. KISH: And we're pushing for the Pelican, too.
I just want to say in conclusion, first of all, the film is
unacceptable if you read through there, okay? This is a security issue,
okay. On a second story we are asking for glass block windows. This
is very doable. The fact that you are going to allow a tenant to have
the ability to tear this off, remove it, et cetera, is unacceptable.
This entire project, this entire effort has been so boggled and it's
such a mess that we are really not going to accept anything that allows
anybody the ability to change anything.
Now, we have -- you have pedophiles' files, we have whatever,
the ability to look into our homes. That's not acceptable.
The wall issue, we've had a breach of our community three times
already with two lockdowns from sheriffs coming through. We could
not leave our homes until the perpetrator was caught.
As far as the bar, there's absolutely no way you could possibly
separate Deangelis Dia -- or DAD and Stevie Tomato's. They knew
exactly who was coming into that space in 2002 when they presented
the thing -- the whole community selling off. They made the
comment right then and there in 2002.
I implore you to stick up for the residents. There's 230 of us that
you have impacted, and we really -- we voted for you, we pay your
salaries. I really would appreciate it that you stand in our corner.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That's your final speaker, Madam Chairman.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. I have a few comments, if
nobody else minds. Okay. One of the things I think would be good to
be planting along any wall is nice, thick Bougainvilleas. It really does
deter anybody wanting to climb on any walls.
I wanted to know also, you were mentioning about the taxpayers
paying for the 16-foot wall or helping. I would think that you would
want Stevie Tomato's, who created the need for the wall in the first
place, to pay for the wall, not the taxpayers, and possibly not you, but
Page 175
June 10,2008
Stevie Tomato's.
How long is their lease?
MR. DEANGELIS: Ten years.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Ten years. And how long have they been
in there, two?
MR. DEANGELIS: I believe so. I'm not exactly sure the exact
time. I believe it's been a couple years.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: They can pay it off in eight years, yeah. I
think that they should do that.
And then I've already asked the question about -- about the noise
wall and why they put shutters in there.
And you asked about the noise factor with the dumpster area.
You said chain link rather than cement. Well, noise carries anyway,
as we heard.
Now, I think our people -- and we've got a guy back here that can
possibly get that dumpster to be picked up at, say, nine o'clock or even
two in the afternoon. So we can change that around a little bit, but I
do think that we -- and we can work with you, and he will.
MR. DEANGELIS: Yeah, I believe that's gotten a lot better
actually, the timing of the pickups.
But can I just comment on that film? Because one of the
residents made a comment about the window film and how it's -- you
can see in at night but not during the day. That's a reflective. If it was
reflective film, it would be reversed day and night, but this is actually
an opaque film. It's the same during the day and the night. So that
was just maybe a misunderstanding.
MS. 10SEPH: It was never presented to me, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine.
MR. DEANGELIS: And I can give you a sample. I'm sorry that
you didn't get a sample of that. I'll leave this with you so you can see
how that completely blocks out --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could you pass that around?
Page 176
June 10, 2008
MR. DEANGELIS: Sure, yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, Commissioner Henning,
would you like to take over from here?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, yeah, I'd like to hear from
Commissioner Coyle, but I would like to say, I think there's a
confusion -- I think I recognize the confusion. What they have there is
a sports bar.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And what you heard was a
restaurant and outside seating. And the attorney representing that
sports bar said, well, you don't -- if the shutters are open, just give me
a call and 1'11 call my client. And can you -- he's a young man and I'm
sure he's going to be around for 50 years, but what are we going to do
afterwards when Mr. Brooker is not in the community? You know,
it's just simply not responsible.
But I understand -- if there's one person's confusion, I could
understand staffs confusion of the difference between a bar and a
restaurant. But I'd like to hear from Commissioner Coyle.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle, do you have
any comments?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, yes, I do. I think
Commissioner Henning has hit the nail on the head. I don't think that's
the right place for Stevie Tomato's. I don't think it should be there. I
don't think there is anything you can do that is going to make it
acceptable except to close that outside area.
I just do not believe that a sports bar is -- should be operated in
such close proximity to a residential neighborhood. I think there's
substantial compatibility issues there. And I think that Stevie
Tomato's should be looking for a different place to do their business,
quite frankly.
The other problems are a bit more complex, but I believe that
there is going to have to be some compromise on both sides of the
Page 177
June 10, 2008
issue about the second floor windows and that sort of thing.
The issue is, in my opinion, that there should not be a view or a
line of sight from those windows into people's back yards and/or
windows of their homes.
Now, if that can be solved -- and I would like to see it solved by
a combination of factors such as vegetative buffering and a wall and
the film on the windows if it's necessary. But once that's solved, I
don't -- I am not necessarily sympathetic to what seems to be the
opinion of some residents that you just need to tear it down. So I think
there has to be some compromise with respect to how that is resolved.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I'd like to see the
16-foot wall-- I don't know if it's doable. My concern with that is you
still need to go through the variance process, so it's going to delay any
relief that you have for the residents. You can't put the landscaping in
before you put the wall in. You've got to put the landscaping in after
you put the wall in. And then you know how long it takes to get
things to us. You don't know if it's going to die.
I think we need something real now.
Jeff Klatzkow and I went out there -- and Jeff, help me ifI'm
wrong. In my view the landscaping will take care of the problem.
There was a concern about, well, what happens if landscaping is
damaged? Mr. Deangelis is providing a filming that you can't see
through.
So, you know, the windows are there because our staff -- or not
our staff -- our code demands that. That's an architectural
requirement. So I can't say if the walls (sic) would be there if it wasn't
for our code, code requirement.
So, you know, we need to move on. We need to provide
whatever we can do, the best thing that we can get for the residents.
And I've heard so much reluctancy about putting the wall up there,
Page 178
June 10, 2008
16- foot wall, that I want to approve this agreement with some slight
modifications.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you like to make a motion,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's approve the motion
with -- and 1'11 need some help -- approve the agreement and the
caveat that the -- DAD will opaque the windows, move the dumpster,
strike the rear, and install no parking tow away zone signs.
Now, we need to address -- and maybe we just need to get our
staff to address the issue with the drainage out there. I think that's
probably the best way to do it, which is in the agreement.
Jeff, did I miss something?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think that's it, sir.
I'm taking a look at Mr. Pickworth; is that acceptable, sir?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Henning, is a
16-foot wall included in your motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, no, it isn't. I didn't hear
that DAD is going to accept the agreement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And also the fact is, it's going to
take a while before you can get the approval for it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, not only that, but the
engineering for a 16- foot wall is going to be very significant, and in an
area that is prone to hurricanes, I think it's going to be dangerous.
You would have to take up more room, it seems to me, to build a
support structure for that wall that would make it safe, and I'm afraid
that once that is done, it is not going to be acceptable to anybody.
I believe you're right, it would be better to do it in a combination
of an eight- or a 10- foot wall, perhaps, and then vegetation and the
film on the windows. And I think -- I think that's essentially what
your motion says, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's right. But also I need to
Page 179
June 10, 2008
cover the dumpster.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The relocation of the dumpster
is going to provide setback problems, so we need to deal with that, and
we don't want this to have to come back for a deviation. We need
some guidance from the county manager.
MR. DEANGELIS: IfI may, that is exactly what we're
proposing in the agreement is what he outlined, the eight-foot wall, the
landscaping, the window film.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Can you hear Mr. Deangelis?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I can, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. DEANGELIS: So we're prepared to move forward with the
agreement as it is outlined. In addition to that though, one of the
concerns of the residents, which we've tried very hard to address, is
the location of the dumpster. As Commissioner Henning said, it does
bring up a setback issue, which it's a preserve setback issue. It's not a
residential setback or anything like that, so it shouldn't be problematic,
but I just don't know what the process is of a variance and all of that
sort of thing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can tell you the problem. The
problem is that an accessory structure needs to be 10- foot away from
the preserves. That's where the problem is. That's why I'm asking the
county manager, if the board enters into this agreement, are we going
to have to have a deviation from the setback? Is there a county
manager there?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. He's thinking about it. He's coming
forward to the microphone, and everybody's talking to him.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, there probably would be a variance that
would have to come forward on this particular issue. You could --
you could, based on your agreement, say that you wanted the
Page 180
June 10, 2008
particular issues done, and staff will move forward with the variance
process back to this board as fast as it can through the CCPC and back
to the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, can we do a variance to
our variance, a variance to our code? I mean, this is ridiculous. It's
going to take a year to get to the Board of Commissioners with a
variance, besides the cost. Who's going to pay for the cost of the
variance?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, can we vote on something like that
right this very minute, to have him move that dumpster over to the
other side with the variance right now?
County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's an unusual request, but I understand it. I
think we can put it in the developer agreement and work it out. I think
we'll work it out.
MR. SCHMITT: That's what I would do, absolutely. Put it in
the developer's agreement as part of the proposal.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's not impacting on an adjoining residence.
It's just a preserve.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. You can do that.
MR. PICKWORTH: I guess from our standpoint, we'll do what
we said we'll do, but we will need whatever kind of permission,
whether you call it, variance, administrative, whatever. I mean, we
need that to make it work. If that happens, then the dumpster move
will happen.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We've just taken care of that.
MR. PICKWORTH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Is there anything else,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, yeah. DAD, I understand,
is not going to sign this agreement unless we remove them from the
lawsuit of Stevie Tomato's. Is that going to be a problem, Mr.
Page 181
June 10, 2008
Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't know. It could be. Ifa court were to
deem DAD to be an indispensable party, then the Stevie Tomato's
lawsuit would be subject to being dismissed. I don't know if a court
could do that or not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we can just go through the
court process and drag DAD along with this, and hopefully we'll get
some sort of settlement later on. Either we get a settlement now or we
get a settlement -- maybe a settlement later on.
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think we'll get a settlement later on.
I think DAD's position is that the monies they're transpending here is
in lieu of their litigation fees. This may be the best deal we get.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissions Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, thank you.
Okay. Right from the get-go, what's your recommendation is --
that we do to be able to move this thing forward? And, too, we've got
to be realistic about what our endeavors are, what we're going to do as
far as any kind of lawsuits go. I think -- what do you think?
MR. KLA TZKOW: I don't think I will ever get a better deal
with respect to the two-story building than you're getting today.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: Stevie Tomato's, that litigation may be
impacted. I don't know. But I will never get a better deal for you on
that two-story building. It's not coming down.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So what you're recommending
basically is to drop the lawsuit?
MR. KLATZKOW: We don't have -- drop the lawsuit as to
DAD. The Stevie Tomato's lawsuit would continue. We don't have a
lawsuit with respect to the two-story building yet.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So in other words, so that we understand
what you just said, there's a -- there are two lawsuits?
MR. KLATZKOW: There's one lawsuit.
Page 182
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: One lawsuit but two parties?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, because the lawsuit's against Stevie
Tomato's and then DAD, who's the owner of the property. Stevie
Tomato's is running the property. DAD is leasing it to them. So we
joined them together. I would remove DAD from the lawsuit against
Stevie Tomato's, continuing the fight against Stevie Tomato's. The
risk you're running is the Court saying you can't do that. I'm going to
dismiss the entire case.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'm sorry. The
background noise is getting a little confusing. But let me see if I
understand. What reason do we have to even continue the lawsuit if
we can get what we need to be able to make this thing work?
MR. KLATZKOW: This is not resolving your Stevie Tomato's
issue. This is resolving your two-story building issue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if! may help, please?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, approve the
agreement as amended, and we'll see if DAD signs it. At least the
board is trying to resolve it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But wonder -- would the Court then
release Stevie Tomato's from this lawsuit because we do this?
MR. KLA TZKOW: I don't know.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Are you still willing to do that,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I asked -- we got into
discussion about removing DAD from the pending lawsuit against
Stevie Tomato's sports bar, and that's not a part of the motion. So
what we have is an agreement that DAD probably won't sign and we
need to somehow release DAD of that court case.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. There's just a little
too much happening here for me to be able to get my arms around.
Why is it that we're still going to be in a lawsuit with Stevie Tomato's?
Page 183
June 10, 2008
MR. KLATZKOW: There are two issues with Pebblebrook. The
first issue was the two-story building. That's the issue which Mr.
Pickworth is here on, and he's trying to ameliorate the impact on the
community through the landscaping and the wall and everything else.
There's a second issue with respect to Pebblebrook that's apart
from the two-story building, and that's Stevie Tomato's. The staff has
taken the position that Stevie Tomato's is a restaurant with an
accessory use with the outdoor seating area.
The county attorney's taking the position that it's really two uses.
During the day it's a restaurant. At night it's a bar. And we're trying
to shut down the bar operation.
We brought suit against Stevie Tomato's to shut down the bar
operations only. In that suit, we sued both Stevie Tomato's, who runs,
obviously, the restaurantlbar as well as DAD, who's the owner and
lessor of it. And the reason we added DAD was because of my
concern that it could be that a court would hold DAD to be an
indispensable party, that they had to be in the litigation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Let me phrase the
question slightly different, if I may, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand what you're trying
to say. It's because of the fine line between a bar and a restaurant.
We're trying to determine what that is. The way our codes and laws
are written, do you feel reasonably well that if we stay in this
particular suit we're going to prevail?
MR. KLA TZKOW: No. At the time when I came before you, I
said it's a coin flip.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Say it -- coin flip?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's a coin flip.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You still feel that way?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, I do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So we're about ready to expend
Page 184
June 10, 2008
-- and if we lose this suit, we could also be held liable for the cost on
the other side for the -- bringing this up, the cost of their lawyers and
all that?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's a possibility. I don't think it's a likely--
I don't think that's likely though. I think our suit has merit. I mean,
you've seen the videos.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd like to ask a question
concerning the potential resolutions for the Stevie Tomato's problem.
The problem really is that we and the neighbors believe that the
outdoor dining/sports bar aspect of Stevie Tomato's is an incompatible
use. Why can't we make that decision and remove that use from Stevie
Tomato's? They can continue operation as they are as a restaurant that
serves alcoholic beverages with food, but they cannot have sports bar
activities in an outdoor setting.
It appears to me that we can make that decision, and then Stevie
Tomato's would either comply or they would have to file suit against
us. That leaves DAD out of this thing, I think.
What do you think of that, County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think that's -- I think the approach we
took by seeking injunction against Stevie Tomato's bar use was the
way to go, sir. I mean, it was the board that approved the PUD. Stevie
Tomato's is arguing that under the PUD they have the right to run this
business. Staff actually agrees with that.
So it's not an unsupportable position. And you know, this office
is taking the path that, no, Planning Commission said that there should
be no drinking establishments, and that's what you have out there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Well, I'm not -- I'm not
convinced by the staffs position on this issue, nor do I believe the
staffs position is legally binding on the decision that we make. It's my
Page 185
June 10,2008
opinion that the staff and/or the county commissioners were deceived
by Stevie Tomato's with respect to the type of business they were
actually operating there.
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think it was any deception, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I do, because I thought it was a restaurant.
If they say restaurant, it's a restaurant. But clearly, in taking a look at
it, it's a bar. They're selling liquor on the outside. It's a sports bar.
They have all of the sports televisions that's going. It doesn't even
look like a restaurant on --
MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, I agree with you except that when
you look at the site plans, it was a full bar with the TV s shown on it,
and that's what we approved.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think what need to do --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- is address the issue at hand, and
that's taking care of the issue that -- the motion that was made by
County Commissioner Henning, and address that, and then we'll just
let the chips fall where they may with Stevie Tomato's, with regards to
that court case.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now Commissioner Henning
wanted to say something and then Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, the -- I would
really like to continue this and seek some guidance from the county
attorney individually.
If we approve this agreement and not removing DAD from the
lawsuit, they're going to walk. They're not going to sign this
agreement.
If we -- if we don't -- if we do remove them, we're going to run
the risk of our biggest problem, and that's that bar over there that the
attorney wants a phone call when the shutters are open, and that's just
no resolution.
So I would like some time to consult with the county attorney
Page 186
June 10, 2008
and see what we can provide to the residents, the fastest and the best
solution.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Did we have a motion on the
floor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I did have a motion. I don't
think it was seconded.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But 1'11 tell you what,
Commissioner Henning, this is -- this is one you have worked
extremely hard on, and I can understand how you want to exercise
every bit of due diligence you possibly can. 1'11 support your motion
for a continuance.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: 1'11 second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So we've got a motion by
Commissioner Henning and support by Commissioner Coletta and a
second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That passes a 5-0 for continuation.
Thank you.
Item #lOD
OBTAIN DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS IN RESPONSE TO ITEM #6B FROM THE
Page 187
June 10, 2008
MAY 27,2008 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MEETING; A PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY MR. V ANN
ELLISON TO DISCUSS RELIEF OF AN EXISTING IMPACT FEE
DEFERRAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $178,149.72 FOR WOLFE
APARTMENTS - MOTION TO ACCEPT OPTION #1 -
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is 10D. It's obtain direction from the Board of County
Commissioners in response to item 6B from the May 27,2008, Board
of County Commissioners' meeting, a public petition request by Mr.
Vann Ellison to discuss relief of an existing impact fee deferral in the
amount of $178, 149.72 for Wolfe Apartments.
Ms. Marcy Krumbine, your Director of Housing and Human
Services, will present.
MS. KRUMBINE: Good afternoon, Commissioners, Madam
Chairman. I'd like to just spend a couple of minutes saying how we
got here today.
On June 12th of2002, St. Matt's House signed an impact fee
deferral agreement for the construction of 46 rental apartments then to
be called Wolfe Apartments, and the impact fee deferral amount was
for 178,149.72.
And on October 9th of 2007, they came before the board asking
that you waive the impact fees, that they were having trouble paying
for them, and they're coming due in June of2008.
At that time the board directed them to -- there wasn't enough
support on the board to really do anything for them, so then they came
back last week, or two weeks ago, May 27th, and also, again,
represented Wolfe Apartments and petitioned the board to either defer
them further or waive them at that point.
The commissioners, you gave us direction to come back with
some options on what they can -- or what you can possibly do to help
Page 188
June 10, 2008
them.
So we've presented you with five options, and I'd like to review
them with you.
According to Mr. Ellison, they do have $105,000 that they have
gathered for their payment. So option one is to accept that partial
payment from them at this time and then restructure the existing
agreement for repayment of the remaining $73,149.72. And you could
direct us on the length of that newly modified agreement. You might
want to do another four years, which would bring it to a 10-year
agreement, which is currently the policy.
Option two would be just a four-year agreement on the current
impact fee deferral agreement, give them time to gather the rest of the
money due. And according to our calculations, that would be a little
over $1,500 a month that they'd have to take in order to get to that
point.
Option three would just be a one-year extension.
Option four, you had asked if we have some money available on
our affordable/workforce housing trust fund. And although there is
$155,000 in that fund, the resolution that you passed in 2007 does not
permit deferral of rental impact -- impact fees for rental units as --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Could I ask them to be a little quiet back
there so we can hear? I'm so sorry. And these -- yep. Thank you.
MS. KRUMBINE: That doesn't -- that's not a permitted use. So
if you do want to access that money, what you'd have to do is direct us
to come back to amend that resolution and make that a permitted use,
and then -- and then work from that point.
And option five, of course, would be for you to not take any
action on this item at all and that they would be responsible for paying
the $178,000 that are due. The first payment would be due in June
and the complete payment would be due in August of this year, 2008.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. You know, in looking at all
Page 189
June 10, 2008
these different options, I feel that at this time what we should probably
do is collect the 105,000 that they presently have, and then give them
an option of additional four years to make up the 73,000.
So I make a motion that we accept the 105- that they presently
have and then give them four years to pay the other 73,000.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, I third.
Yes, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And I agree with you, go
ahead and take the money that they've collected. I think that's a
wonderful -- but why not give them the same consideration that we
have given the -- as we got the new modified agreement that we have
together for the other ones with a 10-year deferral?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's what they're going to have,
10 years.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you
said four years.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, it's going to be -- that's going
to carry it out to 10 years total.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let me ask you --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's from 2002.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Option one, when you said 10
years, that was 10 years from today's date going forward or 10 years
going from the first date?
MS. KRUMBINE: Of the first day, because the current -- the
current ordinance says that we're giving people 10 years to defer their
rental impact fees. So their first one was 2002, so it's been six years.
So if you extend it four years, then it's 10 years just like the other
agreements.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So that's option one?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
Page 190
~,
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do we have any other comments
from any commissioners?
Okay. All those --
MR. MUDD: Any speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor of Commissioner
Halas's motion with a second by Commissioner Coyle and a third by
Commissioner Fiala, say aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a 5-0, thank you.
MS. KRUMBINE: Thank you.
Item #10F
RESUL TS OF THE RENTAL REGISTRATION INVESTIGATION
AND TO RECEIVE GUIDANCE FOR THE COLLECTION OF
THE 2005, 2006 AND 2007 REGISTRATION RENEWAL LATE
FEES - MOTION TO INSTATE $80.00 MAXIMUM (RETRO FOR
2005,2006 AND 2007 REGISTRATION RENEWAL LATE FEES)
AND CODE ENFORCEMENT TO BRING BACK FIGURES
REGARDING OUTSTANDING AND PAID FEES OVER THE
$80.00 MAXIMUM - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next -- the next item on the
agenda is lOF. It's provide results of the rental registration
Page 191
June 10, 2008
investigation and receive guidance for the collection of 2005, 2006,
and 2007 registration rental late fees.
Ms. Michelle Arnold, your Director of Code Enforcement, will
present.
MS. ARNOLD: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm here to--
I'm here to get direction from you all with respect to the late fees for
the years 2004 -- I mean, 2005 through 2007.
Let me just refresh your memory. This item was before you in
October, and at that time the late fees was discussed, and there was
some concern about the amount of the late fees and the amounts that
were collected altogether.
The concern with regard to the late fees is that there was some
negotiated fees on the part of staff. And the county manager at the
time asked the board to defer any discussions on the collection of late
fees from 2005 to 2007 until an investigation can be concluded by the
State Attorney's Office. That was to assure that there was no illegal
activity that occurred with the negotiations on the part of staff.
The request was forwarded to the State Attorney's Office, which
was then passed off to the Economic Crimes Unit with the Sheriffs
Office. They conducted an investigation and prepared a report, and the
report is attached to your executive summary. The report concluded
that there was no illegal activity that was conducted but probably a
policy violation.
Weare here today to ask you all to accept that report.
At the meeting in October, you all asked us to come back, and
then after consideration of that report, determine what you would do
with the fees for the years 2005 through 2007.
It's very difficult for us at this point to tell you exactly what the
amounts are that should have been collected without doing a full
accounting of the -- all the registration program and looking at
whether or not an individual owed multiple years for multiple units.
And as a part of our recommendation, if that's a desire for the
Page 192
June 10, 2008
board to get a full accounting, we would request that that be done, we
hire an independent consultant to conduct that full accounting.
Regardless of what that amount is, it's staff opinion that the
amounts that could be owed by some of these property owners is
excessive for the crime, so to speak. For example, if an individual
failed to register for two years, they would be required to pay in
excess of$7,000 for a $20 renewal.
It's staff recommendation that you all adopt your current policy,
which was approved in October of '07, which would max out the late
fee penalty at 80 per registration and apply that to all those property
owners that failed to register for multiple years. So in my example of
a two-year late registration, that individual would be paying $160 late
fee.
That's all I really have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have -- Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In the executive summary it says
that there was an internal investigation and that the late fees could be
in excess of a million dollars. So it could even be higher than that; is
that correct?
MS. ARNOLD: Yeah, there's that possibility. The -- the number
that excess of a million dollars was based on, a legal opinion that said
that the late fees should have been calculated per unit per day. And
it's my opinion when we adopted that per-day late fee, it was supposed
to be per day, rather than per unit per day.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And I think what we found
-- when it was finally brought to the board, I think what we found was
that the original ordinance that was passed had this on each unit and
not just on the particular property, and I think this is what really
caused the wrench to be thrown in the works as far as the type of
penalty that was going to be paid by the individual owners; is that
correct?
MS. ARNOLD: Yes. The registration, when it was first
Page 193
June 10, 2008
adopted, was just a straight fee, and that's when you all went back to
per property. Then it was changed in--
MR. MUDD: Hang on for a minute.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, on the visualizer you'll see August
12,2004, and the registration per inspection of rental dwellings. And
what I asked Mr. Schmitt to do was lay this out so that we could get an
idea, kind of a time picture snapshot of what they were.
The fee for registration of rental dwellings prior to the change --
and again, October 12,2004 -- the rental registration fee was $30, the
annual renewal was $20, and the late fee was $10, just a flat $10 late
fee. The rental reinspection was $200 per unit, and the reinspection
fee was $50 per reinspection.
Now, let's move to November 16, 2004 when the change is made.
The registration of rental dwellings, the initial registration fee is $30,
the annual renewal fee is $20, the late fee is $10 per day. The rental
reinspection is $200 per unit, and the reinspection fee is $50 per unit.
Let's move to resolution 2007-309 which was in November when
the board said, okay, this is -- this is what we'll do from this point
forward. Initial registration fee was $30 per property, okay, not unit.
The annual renewal was $20 per property. The annual late fee is $10
per day per property up to a maximum of $80. And the term property
means a parcel with any number of rental units located thereupon. A
rental unit is any dwelling that is not owner occupied but occupied by
someone other than an owner for any portion of the calendar year.
Your rental inspections were $200 per unit. That pretty much
stayed the same, and the reinspection fee of $50 per reinspection per
unit. The specificity was put down as per property per unit on this
particular issue.
What came into being -- and I'm going back to November 16,
2004. When the late fee was $10 per day and the registration, there
was an assumption by staff and -- in some instances, and in some
Page 194
June 10, 2008
instances they mixed unit versus property from November 16,2004,
through the majority of the fiscal year 2007 or -- yeah, 2007 and when
you start taking it $10 per day.
Now, what I had staff do prior to this -- and I've shown you this
before but I'm going to show it to you again -- I had staff -- I called a
group together out of public utilities and out of community
developments (sic) and basically segregated what we could, and we
did a sampling. And here's the assumption. Based on the change in
November, 2004, for those years 2005, 2006, and the majority of
2007, if you make the assumption that the registration is by unit and
the late fee is $10 a day by unit -- we did a sampling of the 14,584
items.
There was a sample one that was -- basically talked about all
multiple units above a hundred, apartment complexes with a hundred
dwelling units. We sampled 65 in the record. Variances in that record
were 23, and the variances based on the assumption of the registration
fee by unit and the late fee by unit, $10 a day, what was not collected
was $1.4 million in that sample.
In sample number two, we looked at any record that had a
notation on it. There were a total of745 records that had notations on
it. And when we looked at those samples based on the assumption of
a registration fee by unit and a late charge, $10 a day by unit, they
undercollected $1.3 million.
Now, that total is not $1 million, it's about $2.8 million
undercollected, and we only really did a sampling of 810 records of
14,584.
Now, the issue at hand is -- was the document that I showed
before that had the -- that had the board-approved issue from October
12 through November 16th, that the question at hand is, did the board
-- because you don't see where it says -- it says rental dwelling as a
following, and it said rental dwelling above it, and it talks about when
we get to rental dwelling in the change in 2007, was -- is the board's
Page 195
,"'"-
June 10, 2008
intent to do it by rental unit and was the late fee per day by unit or by
property?
Now I'm going to show you another slide that you saw last
October, and I'm going to show you two cases. And this is a rental
registration number that I'm zooming in on, and this rental registration
unit, based on the sample, had 128 units to it. If it -- and you can see
as you go along the days that it's late. The date late, 6/30/2005, 2006,
2007 . You can see the amount paid, and you can also see at the bottom
the outstanding amount if it's by unit, okay, as far as the rental fee is
concerned, and the late fee is by unit by day, $10 a day.
If you do that in this particular case for this 128-unit rental
complex, their late fees come out to about $851,000, okay, for those
128 units.
Now I'm going to give an example of what happens when you do
it to a one-unit property, say a rental house. It could be in the Estates
or anywhere.
And in this particular case we have a rental dwelling, one, and in
this particular case we talk about days late versus amount paid, the
$20, and you get the amount. But they're 218 days late in 2006. That
218 days late equates to $10 per day, times -- if you assume it's per
dwelling unit, then that would be a total late fee of $2,180.
And they paid $80 as far as late fee was in 2005, so they owe the
county, based on the calculation if you assume that the registration fee
was by unit and the late fees were basically put on that unit, they
would owe the county $2,100 in late fees at this particular time.
And I've given you two examples. I showed you what happens
when you do a multiple unit. And that's an actual -- that's an actual
case. Both of these are actual cases. So we picked them so that you
would have an idea on the consequence, and we're looking for board's
guidance. And we'll go back out and collect what you want us to get.
But we need some -- we need guidance on what the board -- was the
board talking about late fees per unit or were they talking about late
Page 196
,-.--.-.-..--.-....-.-.-'--.
June 10, 2008
fees per property and some other particular issues at the time when
they passed that particular ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have some questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I've got Commissioner Coletta,
Commissioner Henning --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Me, too.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- and Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And me, too.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. And Commissioner Coyle, okay.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. Just to make sure
that the listening audience understands, this is not in lieu of taxes; is
that correct?
MS. ARNOLD: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I mean, they still pay property
taxes on the properties?
MS. ARNOLD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Now the main issue
we're discussing here today has nothing to do with the fee itself. It has
to do just with late fee; is that --
MS. ARNOLD: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- the one issue we're supposed
to deal with?
MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. What we do for those fees that were
uncollected the years 2005 through 2007.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. You know, and what
happens if the units haven't been renting out? It's been sitting empty
for the last six months? Does that still have to pay the fees?
MS. ARNOLD: Yes, because it's not based on occupancy. It's
based on the use. What's the intended use. You still have to register
your property.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if this commission has
Page 197
June 10, 2008
any kind of feelings for affordable housing, we have -- most of these
units, I imagine, probably fall within affordable housing range. Well,
probably just about every unit now in Collier County does, the way
things are at the moment.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You've got condos though on the
beach.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You do. And some of those
condos now are renting for prices that my people can move into, my
neighbors and friends.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We've also got a speaker, so we're going
to have to try and step this up a little.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But just one second, please. I
just wanted to make a point. I've never been supportive of exorbitant
fees. I think we've treated this darn thing like a cash cow for way too
long. If we do anything, it should be based upon the minimal amount
of $10 dollar day per the whole array. In other words for the -- in
other words, you treat that as an entity, that one complex, whether it
be two units or 20 units. Still, I mean, they failed one time to do it,
you do it. But even $10 a day, I think, is exorbitant, but that's my own
personal opinion.
MS. ARNOLD: Well, we're no longer collecting that. That's no
longer applicable. In October you all adopted a new late fee, so it's
$10 per day in excess of -- you know, no more than $80. So it would
be a maximum of $80.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right, okay. And so we're
talking about the money that was collected before?
MS. ARNOLD: Yes, where the -- where the--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The people that paid them.
MS. ARNOLD: The resolution said $10 per day, and that was
between 2005 and 2007, those --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And some people paid it and a
lot of people didn't, correct?
Page 198
June 10, 2008
MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. Some people paid some late fees, some
people didn't pay completely all that was due, and some paid none.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And I know it's going to
be a hell of a hardship in tough times like it is, but I'd be refunding it
based upon $10 a day right across the board. You know, there's just --
MS. ARNOLD: Based on the current -- are you saying based on
the current --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. Going back in time.
You know, we never gave it clear definition of what we were looking
to do, but I don't think this commission ever intended to extort that
kind of funds out of anyone. That's my own personal feeling.
Thank you for the time.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. The
recommendation is to go back and collect $80 if they were late for
those particular years. What is the proposal of people who paid more
than that $80? Are you going to refund the money?
MS. ARNOLD: If that's what the direction of the board is, that's
what we would do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, there must have been
some thought on this before bringing it to the Board of
Commissioners. What was the thought of refunding monies that was
overcharged? I mean, I seen one for $3,700; $3,650. Saxon Manor
Isle Apartments.
MS. ARNOLD: Well, there is -- well, Saxon Manor Apartments,
if the board wants us to refund that money, then we would have to
refund that money.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Where would you get it?
MS. ARNOLD: That's where you all would have to also direct
us to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have direction for that, but I
have several other questions.
Page 199
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Did you want to continue with
your questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you don't mind.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, the ordinance still
under effect partially -- by the way, Michelle, your web page is still
wrong, the application for renewal is still wrong, and it still needs to
be corrected.
But in the ordinance still in effect, it calls for the rental
registration procedures and the registration rental units required,
owner must rent -- it's per unit. That is what the ordinance says, okay?
Then you go on to the expiration. It is June 4th. Now it is
August -- or June 30th, now it's August 31 st.
Delinquent registration shall be the result of a daily penalty as
established by resolution of the Board of Commissioners. And I don't
know if -- who wrote these resolutions. That doesn't comply to our
ordinance, but it calls for a daily penalty. And who's in charge of
enforcing this ordinance, 2005-58?
MS. ARNOLD: The code enforcement department is in charge
of -- are you -- the property maintenance ordinance; is that the one
you're referring to?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
MS. ARNOLD: We are in charge of enforcing that ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So the ordinance can't be
enforced.
The last section, it calls for penalties, and I want to read it. This
is important. If any person or firm or corporation, whether public,
private, or any entity fails to refuse to obey the compliance of the
violation provided under the ordinance, such person or firm,
corporation or entity, upon conviction of offense, shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor and such punishment by a fine not to exceed $500 or
imprisonment of not to exceed 60 days in jail, or both at the discretion
Page 200
June 10, 2008
of the Court.
And it says, each violation of noncompliance shall be considered
separate and distinct.
Now, it says penalties, public or private. We had the public
violate our ordinance, and I think that we should send the county staff
involved in this to the courts and punish them and make them pay for
the action --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you have a solution here,
Commissioner Henning, or -- you know, I mean, something -- do you
have a solution to this or --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I think that we ought to
enforce the ordinance, get the county manager to enforce the
ordinance and take action against the employees that didn't enforce the
ordinance and didn't collect the monies or charged too much for it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Our -- next, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I think that -- I think we're
going down a wrong road here, and 1'11 tell you why. I believe that all
of us one time or another may have violated the county manager's
ordinance by directing staff, and I guess that's totally against the
county manager's ordinance where we as commissioners can direct
staff to do things, and unbeknownst to the county manager.
The other thing that concerns me is I believe that code
enforcement, Michelle Arnold, did come before the board to try to get
some direction in June of '05 and was told basically to handle it, that
you need to address what's going on.
And so I think they tried to make an effort, and I think that we as
the commissioners didn't listen to what their concern was, and now
we're -- we've got to figure out the best way to handle this. And I
believe that what we need to do is address the issue at hand in regards
to how we're going to work through the situation here with the rentals,
whether it's going to be single units or whether it's going to be on the
property .
Page 201
June 10,2008
And I thinks what we determined in the -- when we addressed
this ordinance before -- or the last time is that it was going to be based
on the property and not the units because we felt -- we found that there
was a huge mistake that was provided to us. And when this started to
fester to the point where we had delinquent property owners and then
they didn't want to address it also, didn't want to face this dilemma,
then it came in our lap.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And we capped it at $80. Okay, we have
Commissioner Coyle, and then we have a speaker.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. However this came about, I
believe that the staffs interpretation of how much of a fine should be
assessed was beneficial to us all because we never intended the
exorbitant fines be assessed against people providing rental units.
We wanted fines if they didn't comply with the law, but never
have we been supportive of exorbitant fines for people for relatively
minor offenses. So I would say that the staffs failure to collect the
exorbitant fines actually worked to the community's best interest and
our best interest.
So I would much prefer to be in a situation today where we did
not collect exorbitant fines than to be in a situation where we did
collect a lot of exorbitant fines and we should -- we have to return
them.
So the issue of staffs interpretation, I think, is fortuitous to us all,
but it is difficult to make a decision about whether we forgive fines in
the past without understanding how many fines were actually paid that
we have to refund. Somehow there has to be an accounting of that.
And before I would feel comfortable making a final decision on
that, I would like to see how -- to compare the fines that were not
collected with the fines that were collected that exceed the guidance if
this had not been interpreted as a per-unit fine.
So -- and then finally, I believe that the financial analysis that
indicates that some $2.2 million were not collected by staff, I think
Page 202
r""--P- '---"'-"-"-_~_-'
June 10, 2008
that's misleading because I certainly feel that we never directed staff to
collect those kinds of fines. We didn't want them to collect such
punitive levels of fines for these relatively minor offenses.
So basically that's where I am. I would like to see us just
continue this until staff can give us an assessment of how much we've
got to refund.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have many hands, but I want to
hear from the speakers, and then 1'11 -- then Commissioner Halas, and
then Commissioner Coletta.
Would you call the speaker?
MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am. I have one speaker, Abbie Russo.
MS. RUSSO: Hello. My name is Abbie Russo, and I was one of
those affected by this rental.
Now, I have questioned how much -- why the payments were so
high for a late fee. When it comes down to even when you have a
credit card, it's like 35, $40 a month, not per day.
And I agree with Mr. Coletta and Mr. Henning, that it does need
to be looked into. But why is there such a fee so high for such a small
infraction? I don't understand.
I only have one rental property, and when you have a rental fee
per property, it's such a small amount that you're asking, but if you get
hit with one of these during the five, six, seven era and you negotiate
the price down, it should be fair for everyone.
So I understand where Mr. Henning's coming from, and I'm glad
that he's there to play watchdog. That's basically all I have to say.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
And Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I understand your dilemma
there, ma'am. I guess we also have to figure out how we're going to
really handle this, and I'm just going to give you my version of where
we're at in this process.
Let's use the example of the IRS where the IRS has to collect
Page 203
June 10, 2008
taxes, and all of a sudden they find out that there has been a reduction
in taxes, and what we have here is a reduction in fees that was
implemented in 2007.
The people that already paid was under the guidelines of the old
ordinance that obviously had a flaw in it. And we as county
commissioners have to also take on that responsibility that we should
have looked more clearly or closely to that particular ordinance,
especially when it was based on $10 a day. There is people that paid.
So I think what we have to do is, where we had some exorbitant
amounts that were applied to properties and not just the units, I think
that what we need to do is try to sit down and negotiate a fair
settlement, whether it's -- if it's $800,000, then maybe it's like $1,000
or something of that nature.
What we've done now is we've relooked at the ordinance and
we've addressed the areas that were the biggest concern, and now we
have a limit of$80.
So I'm not sure if you're in the category of -- where you were
delinquent from 2005 to 2007. If you were, I'm surprised that -- and
I'm not trying to put the blame on you -- that you as an individual, or
anybody else that had rental properties, didn't address this in the
manner of either sending us email to the commission and say, hey,
guess what, whatever the case may be, I don't think it's done
internally, but I -- there might have been something where you or
anybody else might have been negligent if you were out of town,
person that lives out of town, and the rental agreement had come up in
regards to your license, and all of a sudden this started to get out of
hand to the point where I think we should have had some dialogue or
some feedback from the individuals that were being immediately
impacted so that we could address this right then.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Commissioner Halas. I think
we have to come -- you know, let's come to some conclusions here.
We're dragging this thing on and on.
Page 204
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And talking and talking. I think, first of
all, we know we've got a plan in place that we're using this year; $80
is the limit for late fees. We ought to go back -- that's what we should
revert to for the other years as well, and then we need Michelle to
come back with figures and tell us how much -- what is happening
with the rest that's out there that's been paid, and we have to make
decisions on those.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Make a motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- you're a lot -- you're closer to
it than ever. I'll tell you right now, ill-gotten gains have got to be
returned. It was never the intention of this commission to collect that
kind of a fee.
So to sit down and even think about negotiating something that
somebody overpaid, give me a break. I'd be knocking the door down
to get my money.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, and we don't even know what it is
we're talking about. We don't have the figures, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But -- I know we don't, but I
mean, we can get those numbers. But the end results is, is how can we
accept any money that we accepted in error?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's just morally wrong to do it.
And I don't know why we're dwelling on this to negotiate and to see
how much it is and everything. The truth of the matter --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What we're asking Michelle to do then is
come back with some figures for us at a future meeting. I don't know
what meeting you're going to be able to bring them back to, and tell
us, you know, after they've paid their $80 fee for the years 2005, 2006,
or 2007, what is outstanding, what they've paid extra, and then let us
make some decisions on that. And send us the figures beforehand.
Page 205
June 10, 2008
And I'd like to make a motion to that effect.
MS. ARNOLD: So it would be to recommended doing the $80
maximum retroactive for those years, but also get an accounting of
what fees were paid in excess of that?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, ma'am, that's exactly right. You said
it much better than I could.
Thank you. Yes, so that's my motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second your motion. Two
comments. You keep those guys in line sitting next to you; that's my
first comment. Second is, what are you going to do with the people
that paid over the amount of $80?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, I don't have an answer for that yet,
that's why need to see what we're even talking about. Are we talking
about one property, 400 properties? Are we talking about a thousand
dollars, a mill-two? You know, we don't know, so --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the county staff provided
me that information through a public records request. I guess I'll
provide you a bunch of information.
By the way, this is deja vu. We discussed this rental registration
issue a year after. So to say it was never our intent, I'll provide you
the minutes where the board said, leave it alone. We like it the way it
IS.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Maybe they didn't understand --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm in favor of the motion to
bring it back and get some more information.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good. And I don't think we understood
the full impact. You know, we do our best. That's all we can do.
When we stub our toe or even break a leg, we have to go back and get
it fixed because we come back again and make amends.
So with that, any further comments?
Page 206
June 10, 2008
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those if favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. Now we are going to take a
10-minute break. I'm sorry to do that to you sitting out there, but
we're going to take a 10-minute break.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can we -- how much more we got
to do?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Just a couple more.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Because maybe we could just go
ahead and get it done?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, it will take a minute, and someone's
got to go.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I mean take a break.
MR. MUDD: Ten minutes, ma'am.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much, and we will
resume our meeting now.
Item #10H
Page 207
June 10, 2008
TREVISO BAY WATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
ALLOWING FOR COORDINATION BETWEEN TREVISO BAY
DEVELOPMENT, LLC AND COLLIER COUNTY TO
COMPLETE THE DESIGN, PERMITTING, AND
CONSTRUCTION OF THE TWO COMPONENTS OF THE LEL Y
AREA STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT LOCATED
WITHIN TREVISO BAY DEVELOPMENT, PROJECT NO.
511011, FOR A TOTAL FY 08 AND 09 ESTIMATED COST OF
$2,560,898 - MOTION TO APPROVE AND FOR THE CLERK TO
VALIDATE AND REVIEW THE LOWEST BIDS AND PROCESS
PAYMENT ACCORDING TO AGREEMENT - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item lOH, which
used to be 16B4, and that is a recommendation to approve the Treviso
Bay water management agreement allowing for coordination between
Treviso Bay Development, LLC, and Collier County to complete the
design permitting and construction of the two components of the Lely
Area Stormwater Improvement Project located within Treviso Bay
Development, project number 511011 for a total FY-'08 and FY-'09
estimated cost of $2,560,898. This item was --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Commissioner --
MR. MUDD: This item was requested by Commissioner
Henning to be moved, and Mr. Jerry Kurtz from your stormwater
section will present.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, let me ask Commissioner Henning
why he wanted to pull this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you, Commissioner
Fiala. Very simple. The PUD provides for at cost reimbursement
Treviso Bay. That's bidded this -- or sent out bids for this project, and
that's the price, but we don't know if it's the lowest bid.
Mr. Kurtz explained to me, well, you know, the costs look in line
what we pay in the past (sic). Well, that's fine, but those costs are --
Page 208
June 10, 2008
there's profits within those costs. I would like to know the true cost by
the three proposals that was given to Treviso Bay.
And, you know, the board is required to accept the lowest and
best bid, according to the policy, except for staff doesn't know--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we ought to get those.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now, I did -- I did talk with Treviso Bay,
by the way, and they've sent me a statement, but before I go into that,
Jerry, do you have -- do you have a statement as far as costs and -- I
know that we've saved some money on this. Can you tell us about that,
please?
MR. KURTZ: Yes, ma'am. Treviso Bay bid the project three
years ago, and they included in that bid -- it was a bid for their whole
development, approximately $40 million project. Within that scope
they included constructing this LASIP canal, this one particular
LASIP canal.
So they did solicit bids from six contractors, they got four
responses, and they negotiated with the lowest two bidders.
So what I have here -- the last page, the second to the last page of
the item packet, which was 130, 129, page 129, had the cost,
breakdown of the cost, the unit prices for this canal. And what we did
is we compared the prices of what was included in the bid with some
other projects that we've had recently constructed in the area. And
that's how we evaluated the bid, the lowest bidder, and the negotiated
prices and realized the cost savings in economies of scale with that
project being included in the big project.
So this -- you can't see this very well, this schedule of values, so
I've blown up a few of the items, and I've got a comparison.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Excuse me. Sue?
MS. FILSON: There -- is Commissioner Coyle -- are you there
yet?
(No response.)
Page 209
.....'l ,-,
June 10, 2008
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
MS. FILSON: Okay.
MR. KURTZ: So if you go down through this list, you can see
that the range of prices for what we get for this type of work, the cost
of the prices that we're getting with this project is well within
acceptable ranges. In fact, it's on the lowest end of the ranges of these
items.
And, in fact, the first item that you look at in the first columns,
the price we're getting for excavation of the material, which is
approximately almost half the cost of this project, we're getting $2.19
cents a cubic yard, and there's 250,000 cubic yards involved. And the
next price in the range is a whole dollar or more higher than that. So
right there demonstrates a huge savings in having this tacked onto
their overall project with their -- using their contractor for the golf
course construction.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I've been very fortunate. I've been able to
sit in on some of your meetings with the developers, so I knew that
we, the county, the taxpayers, saved a great deal of money by having
this developer negotiate this agreement on his own and couple it with
many other things he was doing to get the lowest price, but
Commissioner Henning wasn't -- you know, wasn't in on any of those
talks, and I wanted you to state them on the record.
Commissioner Henning, do you have any other questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, yeah. You know, what's
wrong with providing the two lowest bids so that we know that we
have the lowest bid? Nobody has verified that. If staff has verified
the two lowest bids, the people who bid them, it is the lowest, I'm
satisfied with that.
MR. KURTZ: Nothing wrong with that at all, Commissioner.
Just got a -- found out about this issue yesterday. I was on the phone
twice with the developer yesterday. They're both out of town, the
Page 210
June 10, 2008
developer and the project manager, so we couldn't access the
information. But I don't see anything wrong with that.
When they get back in town, we can verify the information and,
as well, the unit prices that we're looking at here are significantly
lower than cost that we're paying on similar projects today in the area,
so --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And we've already put off paying them
for how much, over a year?
MR. KURTZ: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We've -- we should have paid them. We
haven't. They've been on the -- they've been on the hook for all of this
all of this time. They've saved us a great deal of money, and I don't
want to see this delayed any further, so I would like to make a motion
to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think we're going to have some
problems here. Can we pay them for the work that they have
completed today?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's what we're doing right now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, no. That's not true. The
agreement takes it out further. This is a $2.5 million agreement that
was, by the way, on the consent agenda.
They have performed the work. I do want to pay them for the
work. And I would hope that you would amend your motion to direct,
I guess the Clerk of the Courts, to take any work orders presented to
the county for this project by Treviso Bay, allow time to -- let's look at
these two lowest bids to make sure that we've got the true lowest costs
for this project.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Jerry?
MR. KURTZ: Commissioner, we've been in touch with the clerk
Page 211
June 10, 2008
throughout the whole process. In fact, I was -- I've been sending
emails back and forth with the clerk last week as well as this week on
how we will finalize the payment to the developer, and all the details
are pretty well agreed upon.
In fact, we have a window, a 30-day window. Upon ratifying the
agreement, we have a 30-day window to have all the paperwork
submitted, verified, and backed up so that we can make the first
payment for work done to date.
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner, for the record, Crystal Kinzel.
I've been reading some of the back and forth with Bonnie of our staff,
and we did have some outstanding questions. I can't confirm at this
point that those have all been answered, so I did just want to put that
on the record.
I know the emails have been going back and forth with our
office, but I believe that was in the question stage. So I'm not sure
that's been resolved at this point, and I just don't want you to
misunderstand that we've agreed to pay without the proper
documentation that we've reviewed. So we do have to see proper
documentation prior to payment.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And you have not received proper
documentation?
MS. KINZEL: Not yet, but I --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you have --
MS. KINZEL: They haven't submitted any paid. They're looking
for the agreement to submit the pay, but we haven't seen anything on
that yet.
MR. KURTZ: We haven't submitted any information, we're just
agreeing on the basis of how the pay request will be applied for and
reviewed, and it's going to be using all the standard county documents.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So Crystal, if they now, after this -- after
we vote on this today and then they submit this stuff, then is that --
does that meet your approval?
Page 212
t "_.._.',,..____."_".__m'____
June 10, 2008
MS. KINZEL: Well, we would have to look at the
documentation and validate it. You know, I can't say we would
approve it or we can't until I see the document that they're going to
provide.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And what document are you looking for?
MS. KINZEL: All of the pay information relating to how the
agreement's worded. I mean, we've been going back and forth on
some of the stipulations of the agreement and exactly what is required.
Commissioner Henning's question about the bid and was there a
bid and is it a low bid, and are there qualifying costs? And what we
try to do is compare the billings to the agreement. This is the
agreement. This is the first time it's come before the board. We're
working through all the details, but -- so I did want to put that on the
record that, as we work with any other payment --
MR. KURTZ: It will be processed the same way our CEI
inspector will verify the prices and the work. Our engineer of record
will verify the prices and the work. Everything will be date stamped
and signed off on, just per the same way we're filing pay requests on
all our jobs.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And does that meet your approval
then Crystal?
MS. KINZEL: We would process it the way we ordinarily
process a payment. I guess I'm just having a little difficulty. I don't
want -- I don't want there to be an interpretation that we would
approve the payment until we've seen that documentation and make
sure it is consistent. But if it is consistent, if it meets the agreements
and what's stipulated in all of the agreements, we would verify that,
and then we would make payment.
MR. KURTZ: And Commissioners--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? Oh, I'm sorry.
MR. KURTZ: I'm sorry. This is a recommendation to approve
the overall agreement. What we've been talking about is just the basis
Page 213
June 10, 2008
for the first reimbursement. The agreement covers a lot of ground.
We've been working on it for months. It covers quite a few other
things, addressing easements and just a whole bunch of other items.
So this is just one particular portion of what the agreement covers.
We can work out with the clerk's office and the developer this
reimbursement. But I believe it's pretty time sensitive to -- you know,
with the agreement being reviewed and hopefully approved today to
move the whole project forward.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Maybe if I can ask Crystal a
question it would resolve any concern that I have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A lot of that bantering back and
forth really didn't resolve anything in my mind.
But Crystal, the -- are you going to -- is the Clerk's Office going
to see that the -- of the two lowest bids, the lowest bid is the one that is
being applied?
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner, if that's your understanding of
what you're requiring of the vendor in those agreements and the
documents, yes. We would validate whatever the agreement
stipulates.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, can we put
that into your motion and into the agreement that --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- the lowest one would apply --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and then we can approve it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. Now, let me ask a couple more
questions, but first Commissioner Halas wants to ask something and
then --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I'm surprised that this was
Page 214
I' _m.__~_.__._____
June 10, 2008
put on the consent agenda. If the Clerk of the Courts had a concern
about this early on that it should have been collected, and in my visit
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And mine.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- with you -- at that point in time
this was never discussed as a potential problem. And so I'm
wondering why it even got this far on the agenda if there was some
questions by the Clerk of the Court's Office.
MS. KINZEL: Well, Commissioner, at the time I met with you,
we were working back and forth with emails --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But you didn't even --
MS. KINZEL: -- and I had hoped it would be resolved also, but
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But you didn't -- there was no
discussion that this was going to be resolved or that you were working
on a resolve. In past discussions with you, you've always been very
up front and said, hey, we've got some issues but we think we can get
them addressed before it comes before the board, and there was no --
no dialogue between you and I in regards to this particular item, and I
felt that it was clear.
MS. KINZEL: Well-- and I apologize if! should have
mentioned it. We work with staff routinely behind the scenes. I
would not have been aware there was a problem until I see how the
agreement's approved or not approved by the board. So we would
process the payment the way we process the other payments. And if
this is a back-up issue that the commissioner's requesting, then that
would be the stipulation we'd be looking for to validate.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't know what you just said.
MS. KINZEL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Say it again.
MS. KINZEL: Okay. In other words, we had some concerns
about what the costs were and how the payment was going to be
Page 215
--~_.'T---"
June 10, 2008
processed based on the language in this agreement. Staff was working
back and forth.
Until we get to this point and we see what the agreement is laid
out and these questions are asked, I'm not sure there's going to be a
problem. But if the commissioner's asking us to evaluate those two
bids, we would know that when we get the materials submitted to our
office and we would validate those. So -- I mean, I apologize if I
should have told you there were emails going back and forth. I'll be
glad to do that, but --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I've been working with them for a year
now, and I never knew that you had an issue at all. And so that's n
that really concerns me. Do we have all the proper validation, all of
the proper paperwork to submit?
MR. KURTZ: We will have all the proper paperwork to submit,
,
yes, ma am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I just knew that we were getting a
really reduced rate and that we demanded that they do it before they
could even move forward with their development, so they've been
held up by us all this time, and now we're going to hold them up some
more. So I just -- I am concerned about that.
So you're going to be submitting these things -- according to my
motion now you're going to be submitting these things to the Clerk's
Office. When they receive them and they're properly validated, then
they're going to be making the payment due, right?
MR. KURTZ: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is that's right, Crystal?
MS. KINZEL CLERK: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that including reviewing the
two lowest bids?
Page 216
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, that's going to be -- they're
submitting all of this paperwork. I don't know what you mean
reviewing the lowest bids.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The two lowest bids at Treviso
Bay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: The what?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The two lowest bids that
Treviso Bay received from outside contractors to --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you have those bids, Jerry?
MR. KURTZ: I don't have them today, but we can get them, and
we'll work with the developer to get them and review them. I'm
confident that when we look at the prices through the unit/cost
breakdown, it will come to the same conclusion that the prices are
very reasonable and definitely the lowest prices for the job as it was
bid, yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: This is -- this is not the first and only
thing we're doing with this project. We're also getting Sabal Bay to do
the same thing, plus we're having them do continuous work, so we
better get our act together and make sure that the Clerk's Office is
working with you guys, and you and the developer and I are working
together here so that we get this thing resolved, right?
MR. KURTZ: Yes, ma'am. It will be the same process for all
reimbursements.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. I have a motion on the floor
and a second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA:
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: (Absent.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
Page 217
, -- ,.- ,,~.~,....,~~..._---~
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's a 4-1 -- 4-0. Looks like
Commissioner Coyle is not here. Thank you.
MR. KURTZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And we go on to -- I think it's our last
item -- last item, which is 16C 1.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Coyle is trying to get in, okay.
We're working on it. He's going to call you, Sue, on the--
MS. FILSON: Well, he'll call and they'll ask him. He'll be
automatically -
Item #101
DIRECT STAFF TO DEVELOP AN AMENDMENT TO THE
COLLIER COUNTY NON-RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING
ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE NO. 2004-50) BY 1) MODIFYING
THE TITLE OF THE ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE A CLEARER
DEFINITION; 2) CHANGING THE APPLICABILITY OF THE
ORDINANCE TO ALSO APPLY TO THE INCORPORATED
AREAS OF COLLIER COUNTY; 3) REQUIRING RECYCLING
AT TEMPORARY AND SPECIAL EVENTS AND VENUE
FACILITIES; 4) INCLUDING MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTIES
SERVICED AS COMMERCIAL ACCOUNTS; AND 5)
INCLUDING ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS - MOTION TO
DIRECT STAFF TO FIRST NEGOTIATE INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT, W/CITY OF MARCO AND EVERGLADES CITY
AND THEN TO INCLUDE CITY OF MARCO AND
EVERGLADES CITY WHEN MODIFYING ALL AMENDMENTS
TO THE COLLIER COUNTY NON-RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING
Page 218
June 10, 2008
ORDINANCE CORD. 04-50) - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: All right. Commissioner, that brings us to item
101, which used to be 16C 1. It was a recommendation that the Board
of County Commissioners direct staff to develop an amendment to the
Collier County nonresidential recycling ordinance, ordinance number
2004-50, by number one --
(Commissioner Coyle is now present via speakerphone.)
MR. MUDD: -- modifying the title --
MS. FILSON: Is that you, Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's me.
MS. FILSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Coyle, this is your item on 101,
okay, which used to be 16C1. It's a recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners direct staff to develop an amendment to the
Collier County nonresidential recycling ordinance, ordinance number
2004-50 by, one, modifying the title of the ordinance to provide a
clear definition; number two, changing the applicability of the
ordinance to also apply to the incorporated areas of Collier County;
number three, requiring recycling at temporary and special events and
venue facilities; number four, including multifamily property service
that's commercial accounts; and number five, including enforcement
proVISIOns.
You asked for this item to be moved to the regular agenda. And
Mr. Dan Rodriguez, your Director of Solid Waste, will present.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I guess I really need to
direct my first question to the county attorney. What is our legal basis
for being able to extend the applicability of our ordinance to the
incorporated areas of Collier County?
MR. KLA TZKOW: I don't know that we have one. I think we'll
need an interlocal.
Page 219
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then how can we approve
this changing the applicability of this ordinance to apply to
incorporated areas of Collier County, including enforcement
provisions, if we don't have an interlocal agreement?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: For the record, Dan Rodriguez, your Solid
Waste Management Department Director.
Commissioner Coyle, the intent of the language that I have in the
executive summary is to give the opportunity to the City of Marco
Island and the City of Everglades an opportunity to be included in our
ordinance, and that's exactly what we'd do. We would develop an
interlocal agreement. In fact, on Monday, Monday evening, I have a
presentation in front of the city council for the City of Marco Island.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. But my problem is, what are
you doing with the City of Naples?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Commissioner, as you know, they've
currently adopted a mandatory recycling ordinance which takes effect
October 1. The language n and I probably should have been a little
more specific. Our ordinance that we'll bring back to you will exempt
them from our ordinance because they'll already have one in place and
they're great supporters of recycling.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you know, this gets very
confusing to me. You're asking us to approve an amendment to our
recycling ordinance to apply to the unincorp -- the incorporated areas
of Collier County, and let's talk about Marco and Everglades City.
Including enforcement provisions by Collier County, I presume, how
can we do that if you don't yet have an interlocal agreement with the
incorporated areas?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Commissioner, actually the intent of the
executive summary is to gain direction from the board to pursue this
avenue and bring it back to you as a recommendation to approve.
Once we get the interlocal agreements in place, we'll bring it back to
the board for approval. Those details will be worked out.
Page 220
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I guess I wish that this thing
was worded to say that you're recommending that the Board of County
Commissioners direct you to negotiate interlocal agreements with the
incorporated area so they can be included in the nonresidential
recycling ordinance. Is that really what you're asking to do?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: That's correct. When we come back to you
with the recommendation, that language will be in place. This is
simply to gain guidance from the commissioners to move forward
with these measures.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would be willing to second or
make a motion to approve this if the recommendation is to provide
direction to staff to negotiate interlocal agreements with incorporated
areas of Collier County for the purpose of extending the applicability
of our recycling ordinance to the incorporated areas of Collier County,
modifying the title of the ordinance requiring recycling at temporary
and special events and venue facilities, including multifamily
properties serviced as commercial accounts and including enforcement
provisions. I would make a motion to approve that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We already have your motion on the
floor, Commissioner, Coyle, and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You don't.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Henning has a
question.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Henning has a question, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This ordinance needs to be like
our other ordinances. To give you an example, under the definition,
Page 221
June 10, 2008
county manager means county manager of Collier County or Collier
County -- or county manager's designee. We only have -- only the
county commission can designate a county manager. But I understand
the purpose of it, but it needs to mirror the other one within the meat
and potatoes, the county manager or his designee.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. You'll take that into--
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Absolutely, Commissioner. Dan
Rodriguez, for the record. We'll update the ordinance to comply.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any other suggestions, Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And it comes back to us for a
review and approval once these things have been done, right?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, there's no other way.
There's --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Staff can't make law.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not sure of that.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: That's correct, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's true.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Very good.
Any other comments or questions from the commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All those in favor signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
Page 222
. -,_._---_.-..._,...-....----_._~----
June 10, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. That passes 5-0. Thank you
very much.
Item # 11
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that ends our regular agenda per
se. We go to public comments on general topics at this particular
time.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Sue?
MS. FILSON: I have no one registered under public comment.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Then Mr. Mudd, do you have
anything?
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I have one item, and the one item I have
has to do with the Grider appeal, and I have a -- I have correspondence
from a Ms. Margaret Cooper who represents the Griders in this
particular case, and she's stating that she wants to have the appeal on
July 22nd.
I know for a fact that four commissioners will be here in person,
and I need to make sure that Commissioner Coyle will be -- will be
with the board vis-a-vis phone during this appeal.
The reason I'm trying to get some certainty on that fact is we'd be
ill-advised to only have four commissioners on the dais when we hear
this appeal because there is a probability, might be slim, but there is a
chance that this could be a tie 2-2, at which time there's no decision,
Page 223
June 10, 2008
and at that juncture the county could be in two lawsuits on both sides
and have to pay two sets of legal fees in this particular case if that
should show up as a 2-2 tie. It has happened one time in the past since
I've been the county manager.
I would -- I would ask the board that we not -- we always have at
least five commissioners on the dais when we do an appeal such as the
Grider appeal. And what I'm trying to ascertain at this particular
juncture, is Commissioner Coyle going to be available by phone on
the 22nd of July?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I certainly can make arrangements
to do so.
MR. MUDD: Then, Commissioners, I will tell you that I will
schedule the Grider appeal and we'll do a date certain. It will probably
be the next day, the 23rd, but we'll attach it to the 22nd July BCC
meeting, and I will get the specifics to Commissioner Coyle so that he
can -- that he can call in that particular time.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. Mr. Mudd, have you
checked all our calendars? I'm trying to get mine up right now to see
if it's available. You said one commissioner won't be here. Who's
that?
MR. MUDD: It's Commissioner Coyle, that's why he just
answered.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh.
MR. MUDD: He said he would be here by phone.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I take it you have checked our
calendars?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I have checked your calendars. I only
know of one commissioner that won't be here in person.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, great.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have one question. Do you
anticipate that this is going to turn into a circus like we had before
Page 224
June 10, 2008
where we had about three different attorneys representing different
groups? And how long of a time frame do you anticipate this to take --
it's going to take? Do you have any idea?
MR. MUDD: I'm going to -- I'm going to defer to the county
attorney.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm estimating four hours and, yes, it will be
a circus, but we'll contain it within four hours.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Will -- I hope that when we go
through this exercise that before we start the proceedings, that since
you're the new county attorney, hopefully that you will review what
took place a couple of years ago so that we can make sure that we
have good control and can move this along without what some of the
-- some of the things that took place back then.
MR. KLATZKOW: We're already in discussion with Joe's staff
to put together a very structured appeal for you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Because I don't feel that this
is a courtroom. We'll try to address the best we can, and if there -- if
the people on both sides of the aisle still do not feel that they've got
due justice, then obviously they can take it to a court, but we're not a
court or law.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're just here to look at this.
Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Ms. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have a question. I was originally
informed that this would be done on the Wednesday following our
second meeting in June. Is that now not true? Has this been
transferred from that meeting to the July meeting?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And let me tell you why. We have -- we
have two commissioners -- we have three commissioners that will be
unavailable the day after the 24th, so on the 25th of June.
Page 225
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: And we have at least one commissioner that's
leaving basically for the F AC annual conference at four o'clock, and
we have a memo that's been distributed to all the commissioners and
to me that basically states same.
Upon -- upon knowing that, I made contact through staff with
Ms. Cooper and told her of same. She said that the 24th -- or the 25th
of June was not a preferred date for her appeal, and she moved that
particular date to the 22nd July Board of County Commissioners'
meeting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any more questions?
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, that's all I have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: I have two matters. The first matter is we
have a pending litigation, Lucky M.K., Incorporated, versus Collier
County, where the defendants have made a settlement offer to us. I'm
seeking to try and settle the case. We've been seeking monies from
them. And I'd like to come to you in a shade session the next board
meeting, June 24th, at 12 o'clock. It will be Mr. Mudd, myself,
Assistant County Attorney Jacqueline Williams -- Jacqueline Hubbard
and -- to discuss the matter with you seeing if you want to accept the
monies or proceed with the case.
The second one is -- concerns the regional council. About a year
ago the state legislation created what's called a Criminal Conflict and
Civil Regional Council. It is an organization that does criminal work,
and public defender cannot do it.
We believe it's an unfunded mandate by the state. Several
counties are getting together to fight this. The Florida Association of
County Attorneys appears to be poised, ready to fight this. They've
asked everybody to join in on this.
With your permission, I'd like to join in on this unfunded
Page 226
June 10, 2008
mandate lawsuit. We could put a cap on our attorneys -- everybody
would kick into the attorneys' fees, the attorneys would be Nabors
Giblin, who represents us on a number of matters. I'd put a cap on it at
7,000, though I don't think it would be anywhere near that much. But
they've been very supportive for us in our clerks case, and I'd like to
return the favor on this one.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Definitely.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I hear three --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Especially with unfunded
mandates.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You've got four.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. There we go. So that's four.
MR. KLATZKOW: And that's it, yes. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just want to say that you did a very
good job, and thank you very much for your leadership today, and
have a good evening.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Coyle? Anything to say?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I think what we should do,
however, is we should bring back the timer for commissioners,
particularly the one sitting on your left.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: On my left? Okay.
Commissioner Henning, I want to thank you for this opportunity
today, by the way, to conduct this meeting.
And do you have anything -- any comments, closing comments?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I have a couple things.
Sue's going to assist me. The one question, we were talking about
Page 227
-------r----
June 10, 2008
June and July about this Grider case. Is it in June? If it's in July,
there's a problem with one of the property owners that I was informed.
Can anybody answer my question? Are we doing the Greider thing in
June or July.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: July. That's what we just said.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, there's a -- one of
the parties that is affected that's going to objecting -- object to that
date because they're going to be out of the country. And, you know,
so you're -- that could be a problem in the court is not providing
reasonable time for this affected property owner to be there. This is
what I understand, the Showalter people, the people that live next door
to it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why don't we move it to
September?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think that's one option,
but I can tell you that the F AC, the only thing going on on the 24th is
the executive committee meeting, and I don't know of any Collier
County Commissioners on the executive committee meeting. The
workshops and that take place the following day.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Are you talking the 24th of June?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But that's -- is that a commission meeting
date?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a commission meeting date.
That's when it was originally scheduled for by staff.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But the thing is, this is a -- we're guessing
a four-hour meeting. I don't know how we can fit a four-hour meeting
into a commission meeting.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've already made my motel
reservations. And also, I'm one of the -- on the board of directors, so I
think that that probably --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you on the executive
Page 228
June 10, 2008
committee, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm on the board of directors.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're not on the executive
committee --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have already made my plans,
thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I finish, Commissioner
Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I guess we need to move it to
September. Sometime we've got to do the public business, but July's
not going to work for one of the people affected.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would they -- maybe you could check
with them and see if they would like to send a representative in their
stead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I'm not going to check with
them. I'm sure they're going to find out of the change through their
attorney, they'll find out --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and I think we'll have to deal
with this in June, June 24th, which is not a problem either, right?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, it could be a problem. I guess we've
already spoken to their county -- to their attorney; is that what you
said?
MR. MUDD: I've told Mr. Brooker today. I said if! have five
board members here on the 22nd, that's when the appeal will be.
Now, this is an appeal by Ms. Margaret Cooper.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now, you're talking 22nd of July?
MR. MUDD: July, yes, ma'am. And the appeal is by the
Greiders.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. But Commissioner Henning is
saying he wants it in June.
Page 229
1'-'-""--"-'-----"'-'---
June 10, 2008
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Henning is saying that the
Showalters who own the next door property might not be available for
the 22nd of July.
MR. KLATZKOW: If they're not available, I don't want to do it
without them here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
MR. MUDD: So my recommendation then at this particular
juncture, Commissioners, is that we do this the first meeting -- we do
this the first meeting in September.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Maybe the day after that meeting?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Very good. Does that work for
you, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, it doesn't, but it solves the
problem.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The other thing, there was
miscellaneous correspondence that we approved today, and in there
was the Pelican Bay Service District's agenda with some minute
meetings, a meeting that took place in Fort Myers with staff and
advisory board members. I would like to have the public notice of
that meeting.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. I'll get that for you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The final thing is the -- Sue's
going to have to help me here. Met with a gentleman. I think he also
said he met with Commissioner Coletta about a boat ramp in his
district. The caveat is, the boat ramp facility is for sale. He would
like to offer it to the county.
The difference, by the time he went and met with Commissioner
Coletta, then myself, he has identified some Collier County properties,
surplus properties, that he would like to trade. So that's the difference
of it. I think on the visualizer Sue put the pictures of it?
Page 230
June 10, 2008
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And do we want to direct staff
to talk to the property owner to negotiate something and bring it back
to the board?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Hold on just a minute. We have
Commissioner Coletta, did you want to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, just -- yeah, the last thing
we were talking about is they were talking parks and rec. has been
working on it for some time to see what could be done. I mean, that's
a new development, surplus property. I'm sure that parks and rec.
might like to pick up on it. I have no idea what surplus property may
be.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Marla, would you like to comment.
MS. RAMSEY: Yeah. For the record, Marla Ramsey, Public
Services Administration. We've been working with the owners of that
for quite some time on a number of different things. I mean, it came
in originally at about $11 million for the entire marina.
And as we went through various scenarios, one of them was that
there was about maybe a half a million dollars worth of surplus lands,
which basically was like two lots that the county currently owns, plus
an additional dollar amount. Top of my head, I'm not remembering the
exact amount. Maybe three and a half to four million, I think, was the
number they wanted over and above for the facility that's outlined in
yellow on your visualizer right now, which is basically the parking lot
and the ramp that goes into that area.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Where is there?
MS. RAMSEY: This is Port of the Isles.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's a wonderful opportunity if
the numbers ever worked out in times that we're dealing with. I've
been down there a couple times talking to him, but it's been about
three months. I was waiting for due diligence to take place from parks
and rec.
Page 231
June 10, 2008
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioners, also they said
there's a good chance about deferring payment for, like, three years --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. They were talking to me
about that previously.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would like to give staff
direction to look at it and bring it back to the board for consideration.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Boy, we're always looking for places to
put boats into the water.
MS. RAMSEY: I can bring you the last recommendation that
they gave to us. Mainly we turned it down because we didn't have
funding sources. The impact fees just are not there for it, so we turned
them down at this time given the budget restraints that we have, but
we'll bring you the proposal they have, and you can look at it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what's the price on this right
now?
MS. RAMSEY: On that green space you're looking at right there
was a half a million dollars worth ofland, and then about another 3.5
to $4 million in cash, and then they were offering a deferral of the
interest for up to three years, but then payment of the interest after
that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You said something earlier about
$12 million worth?
MS. RAMSEY: They originally came in asking us to purchase
the entire marina and the ship store. That was about a little over $11
million for that.
And so what we've done is we've had a number of meetings and
we've come down to this particular scenario that we have on the
visualizer, which is just the parking lot and the ramp itself that goes in.
One of the reasons that we were unsure about it is it is a marina.
It's been just newly redone. There's a lot of money that's gone into
that. We didn't see it as something that was going to be immediately
Page 232
June 10, 2008
turned over into condos, so we thought it was pretty safe as far as a
public access point at this moment in time. But as, you know,
economy changes over the period, it might become more viable.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know, I agree with Commissioner
Henning. I'd love to see it brought back. I've said it before on the
record. I can kick myself again and again for not supporting
Commissioner Halas in his district, not once but twice, when he tried
to keep access to the Gulf of Mexico, and I was wrong, and I want to
make sure that I don't overlook a possibility in this instance. So I
would like to see it brought back as well.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I'd definitely like to see it
come back just to look at it, you know, see ifthere's any possible way,
especially if they want to make long-term arrangements for the
payment of it and try to also figure out what kind of revenues this
could generate to be able to offset the costs, too, as we're going into it.
Maybe that might be another answer.
MS. RAMSEY: We have all of those figures. We can share all
of that with you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Marla.
MS. RAMSEY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning, anything else?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, yeah, that -- you know,
that wasn't the direction that I asked. I asked to get together with the
landowner and bring it back. I think our county staff might be missing
some new details. That was the direction.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm sorry. Say that again.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Marla Ramsey said she
already has information. She'll bring it back to the board. I think
there's developing information that she needs to go out and seek from
the property owner, and then bring it back to the board.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I see. In other words, what -- if I'm --
am I interpreting you to say that new things have come to light that
Page 233
June 10, 2008
haven't been -- that Marla is not aware of and she should go back with
them and talk about this property?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, okay, rather than bringing it back.
That's what you were asking?
MR. MUDD: What he was basically asking, ma'am, is he's
basically asking for the board to direct staff to go out there and meet
with the owner and get the particulars of the particular offer that he's
willing to offer, and then at that particular juncture, bring that back to
the Board of County Commissioners for consideration.
Commissioner Henning, did I hit it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, that's right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, that's what I thought we
discussed.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's what -- I thought so, too.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I did, too. I didn't think there was
any question there.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, good. So we're all on the same
page then, okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And then just one other thing.
The Wiggins Pass Marina never was offered to the Board of
Commissioners. I know Commissioner Halas wanted it to, but it
never was offered to the Board of Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's all I have. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, let me clarify that there was
some marina operators that were very interested in acquiring that
property and they didn't have the opportunity.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Commissioner Halas.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, judging by the fact that
Page 234
June 10, 2008
Commissioner Coyle said I exceeded my time limits speaking today,
I'm not going to say anything.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, you can, but I know you have to get
going to your meeting. You're going to be late. I'm glad that Brian
McMahon is there substituting for you while we're deliberating.
I just have a couple things to read into the record. We got a note
from Commissioner Halas that said he wishes to inform us that he has
to leave for the legislative workshop tomorrow at 2:30 and he
apologizes for any inconvenience. I wanted to know if we can still
conduct without Commissioner Halas here. Okay, fine. Very good.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am, you can.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
Second thing, we got a letter from Mel Martinez. Thanking--
thank you for contacting me regarding the Collier County Transit Area
Project. Collier County has requested federal funds for this project for
fiscal year 2009, and I was glad to receive your letter of support for
the proj ect.
The Federal Appropriations Process is very competitive, and not
all worthwhile projects can be funded. I appreciate the hard work of
Floridians across the state to solve problems and confront challenges
through local efforts, and I look forward to working in the United
States Senate to seek the necessary resources for Florida projects.
Again, I appreciate your letter of support. If you have any further
comments or concerns, don't hesitate to contact me. Okay.
I just wanted to read that into the record. And finally, from the
City of Sanibel, Dear Elected and Appointed Officials, the Sanibel
City Council, at their regular meeting of June 3, 2008, unanimously
adopted a resolution urging the South Florida Water Management
District Governing Board to reconsider reverse its decision to halt
construction of the Everglades Agricultural Area Reservoir Al
Project.
A copy of resolution 08-069 is enclosed. This project was -- has
Page 235
"'
June 10,2008
overwhelming importance to the water quality in Florida bays,
estuaries, streams, lakes, and coastal areas of the Gulf of Mexico and
the Atlantic Ocean as well as preserving water released in -- as part of
the northern Everglades project.
We strongly support the construction of the Al project. We
recommend and encourage that you adopt a similar resolution and
reject any effort that falls short of the goal that should be of foremost
importance and that is -- and that is to maintain our water quality.
We should all keep in mind, Florida's economy depends -- keep
in mind that, I guess it's supposed to mean, Florida's economy depends
on the quality of our environment. Your support of this effort is
greatly appreciated. And this is from the mayor, Mike Denham. And
I didn't know if anybody wanted to act on that or not.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I guess I got the answer.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I don't think this board even
knows where that project is; neither do 1. And what I can do for the
board is I can get ahold of Lee County, because this is one of the
municipals within Lee County, and I can ask Lee County if this is,
indeed, important to their board, and if it is, I can -- with their
importance, then I can bring it back the next board meeting, okay, for
your adjudication on the particular item.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. I'll give you this letter, Mr.
Mudd. Thank you very much.
And with that, I want to thank everybody for your indulgence as I
chaired this meeting tonight on behalf of Commissioner Henning.
Commissioner Henning, thank you for the opportunity.
And with that, we are adjourned.
*****
****Commissioner Coletta moved, seconded by Commissioner
Page 236
"'--"1
June 10, 2008
Halas and carried unanimously that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas by separate motions be approved
and/or adopted ****
Item #16Al
RESOLUTION 2008-162: A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING
3,699.00 ACRES IN THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA
(RLSA) OVERLAY (RLSA) AS ALICO SSA 11, APPROVING A
CREDIT AGREEMENT FOR ALICO SSA 11, AN EASEMENT
AGREEMENT FOR ALICO SSA 11, AND ESTABLISHING THE
NUMBER OF STEWARDSHIP CREDITS GENERATED BY THE
DESIGNATION OF SAID STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA IN
RESPONSE TO AN APPLICATION BY ALICO,
INCORPORATED
Item #16A2
RESOLUTION 2008-163: EXTENDING THE EXPIRATION
DATE OF THE AD HOC RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA
OVERLAY REVIEW COMMITTEE - TO BE EXTENDED TO
APRIL 24, 2009
Item # 16A3
RELEASE AND SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN FOR PAYMENTS
RECEIVED FOR THE FOLLOWING CODE ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS AT A COST OF $10.00 PER RELEASE, TOTALING
$200.00 FOR RECORDNG - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16A4
Page 23 7
June 10, 2008
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR MEDITERRA PHASE THREE EAST-UNIT 2-
W/RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
(UPS)
Item #16A5
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR MUSTANG ISLAND, PHASE II - W /RELEASE
OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item #16A6
RESOLUTION 2008-164: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF MASTERS RESERVE, (LEL Y
RESORT PUD). THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED -
W /RELEASE OF ANY UTILITES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
(UPS)
Item #16A7
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF MCDONALDS AT GULF
GATE PLAZA - LOCATED IN SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 50
SOUTH,RANGE25 EAST
Item # 16A8
RESOLUTION 2008-165: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
Page 238
June 10, 2008
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF MASTERS RESERVE, PHASE TWO
(LEL Y RESORT PUD). THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED -
W/RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item # 16A9
RESOLUTION 2008-166: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF DA VINCI ESTATES (DA VINCI
ESTATES PUD), THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE PRIV ATEL Y MAINTAINED -
W /RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16AI0
RESOLUTION 2008-167: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF PELICAN MARSH UNIT TWENTY-
FIVE (PELICAN MARSH PUD) WITH THE ROADWAY AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING PRIV A TEL Y
MAINTAINED - W /RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE
SECURITY
Item #16All
AN AMENDMENT TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT,
RELATED TO IMPACT FEES, BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND THE GOLDEN GATE FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE
DISTRICT, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE CONSISTENCY WITH
THE UPDATED FIRE PROTECTION IMPACT FEES - TO
REFLECT THE UPDATES ADOPTED BY THE DISTRICT
Page 239
,-.---...... -'---'-~-
June 10, 2008
Item #16A12
A SATISFACTION OF LIEN DUE TO A CHANGE IN
QUALIFIED APPLICANT AND THE SUBSEQUENT
RECORDING OF A NEW IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL
AGREEMENT AND LIEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
IMMOKALEE RESIDENTIAL IMP ACT FEE DEFERRAL
PROGRAM AND THE COUNTY-WIDE IMP ACT FEE
DEFERRAL PROGRAM, AS SET FORTH BY SECTION 74-201
(G) AND 74-401 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS
AND ORDINANCES - FOR PERSONAL PROPERTY OWNED
BY MOISENA CHERY AND EAGLE RIDGE SUBDIVISION,
LLC AND WITH AN IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL IN THE
AMOUNT OF $15,932.58
Item #16B1
AN AGREEMENT FOR THE FREEDOM PARK (GORDON
RIVER WATER QUALITY PARK) AQUIFER STORAGE AND
RECOVERY (ASR) WELL WITHIN THE CITY OF NAPLES - TO
CAPTURE EXCESS WATER DURING THE WET SEASON AND
RE-HYDRATE THE WETLANDS DURING THE DRY SEASON
Item #16B2
AWARD BID #08-5084 AIRPORT ROAD (US 41 EAST TO
COUGAR DRIVE) ROADWAY GROUNDS MAINTENANCE TO
COMMERCIAL LAND MAINTENANCE, INC. IN THE AMOUNT
OF $160,808.00 (FUND 111, COST CENTER 163866) - FOR A
ONE YEAR CONTRACT WITH THREE, ONE YEAR
RENEWALS
Page 240
June 10, 2008
Item #16B3
RESOLUTION 2008-168: A RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC)
AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF THE
TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED TRUST FUND
TRIP/EQUIPMENT GRANT APPLICATION WITH THE
FLORIDA COMMISSION FOR THE TRANSPORTATION
DISADVANTAGED (CTD) WITH A GRANT MATCH FOR THE
TOTAL PROJECT OF 10%
Item #16B4 - Moved to Item #10H
Item #16B5 - Continued Indefinitely
PROJECTS UTILIZING FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION 5316 & 5317 PROGRAM GRANTS FOR
TRANSPORTATION PROVIDED BY CAT FOR "JOB ACCESS
AND REVERSE COMMUTE PROGRAM" AND "NEW FEEDOM
PROGRAM" - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16B6
A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO MOVE LANDSCAPE FUNDS IN
THE AMOUNT OF $303,706.63 FROM FUND 111 TO FUND 112
IMMOKALEE ROAD (1-75 - 951) PROJECT #66045 FOR
MEDIAN WORK REQUIRED FOR LANDSCAPING - TO
REPLACE EXISTING MATERIAL FROM 1-75 TO CR 951
Item #16B7
Page 241
,--
June 10, 2008
AWARD BID #08-5052 INCLUDING ALTERNATES 1 AND 3
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PALM RIVER ESTATES UNIT 4
NORTH/SOUTH STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENTS PHASE 2,
PROJECT NO. 511411, TO DAVID FOOTE ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSTRUCTION INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $354,763.25 PLUS
A TEN PERCENT CONTINGENCY, AND APPROVAL OF THE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS - FOR RELOCATION
OF AN EXISTING DITCH, INSTALLATION OF CULVERTS,
CATCH BASINS, GAB ION RETAINING WALLS AND A
MAINTENANCE PATHWAY
Item #16C1 - Moved to Item #101
Item #16C2
AWARD BID NO. 08-5044R TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
INDUSTRIES, INC. (PSI), TO SAMPLE, ANAL YZE AND
REPORT DATA COLLECTED FOR THE GOLDEN GATE
GROUNDW A TER BASELINE MONITORING PROJECT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $75,193.20 - LOCATED IN THE NORTHERN
GOLDEN GATE ESTATES AREA, EAST OF CR 951, SOUTH OF
IMMOKALEE ROAD, NORTH OF 1-75 AND WEST OF DESOTO
BLVD
Item # 16C3
AWARD OF BID #08-5064, MANHOLE AND LIFT STATION
REHABILITATION, AND STANDARD AGREEMENT
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY, CHAZ EQUIPMENT
COMPANY, INC, AND PAINTS AND COATINGS, INC., IN THE
ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $500,000 ANNUALLY, PROJECT
#73050 - TO ENSURE THE ADEQUACY AND AVAILABILITY
Page 242
----------.'T
June 10,2008
OF VIABLE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWERS AND MANHOLES
Item # 16C4
A FORMAT AND PROCESS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF
INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND THE GOVERNING BOARDS OF THE INCORPORATED
AREAS WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY, THE DISTRICT SCHOOL
BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY, AND OTHER AGENCIES AS
REQUESTED FOR DEBRIS REMOVAL OPERATIONS IN THE
AFTERMATH OF A SEVERE WEATHER EVENT - TO PRE-
ESTABLISH PROTOCOLS TO EXPEDITE RECOVERY
Item #16D1
AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO TO THE 2006-2007 CITY OF
NAPLES/COLLIER COUNTY TOURISM GRANT AGREEMENT
COVERING THE NORTH JETTY DOCTORS PASS
REHABILITATION PROJECT PROVIDING FOR A ONE (1)
YEAR EXTENSION TO APRIL 1, 2009 AND; APPRO V AL OF
AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO THE 2007-2008 CITY OF
NAPLES/COLLIER COUNTY TOURISM GRANT AGREEMENT
COVERING THE NORTH JETTY DOCTORS PASS
REHABILITATION PROJECT PROVIDING FOR A ONE YEAR
EXTENSION TO SEPTEMBER 30, 2009
Item # 16D2
A SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT PROVIDING
SUPPLEMENTAL DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE (DRI)
FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $300,000.00 TO IMMOKALEE
NON-PROFIT HOUSING, INC., FOR REPAIRS AND A
Page 243
June 10, 2008
HURRICANE HARDENING PROJECT AT THE COMMUNITY
CENTER AT EDENFIELD HOUSE, ALSO KNOWN AS TIMBER
RIDGE RECREATIONAL CENTER, IN IMMOKALEE -
INCLUDES THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF
REPLACEMENT WINDOWS AND EXTERIOR DOORS, AND"
REPAIRS TO DAMAGED WALLS, FLOORS AND ROOFING
COMPONENTS
Item #16D3
A LIEN AGREEMENT WITH JAIRDE JESUS TORO GOMEZ
AND ELIZABETH DIAZ DE TORO (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL
OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN
OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT
LOCATED AT VISTA III AT HERITAGE BAY, UNIT 1610,
NORTH NAPLES - IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL IN THE AMOUNT
OF $19,389.63
Item # 16D4
A LIEN AGREEMENT WITH ERNEST TERISMA ETIENNE
AND DINA ETIENNE LINDOR (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
114, LIBERTY LANDING, IMMOKALEE - IMPACT FEE
DEFERRAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,442.46
Item #16D5
A LIMITED USE LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE NAPLES
JUNIOR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC., APPROVING USE
Page 244
June 10, 2008
OF SPECIFIED COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY FOR
CONDUCTING A JULY 4TH FIREWORKS FESTIVAL. ($25,000)
- HELD AT SUGDEN REGIONAL PARK
Item # 16D6
A LIEN AGREEMENT WITH MlREILLE LOUISJENE
GUERRIER (OWNER) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER
COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 36, TRAIL
RIDGE, EAST NAPLES - IMP ACT FEE DEFERRAL IN THE
AMOUNT OF $19,372.46
Item # 16D7
A LIEN AGREEMENT WITH MYRIAM GUSTAVE (OWNER)
FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT
FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 44, TRAIL RIDGE, EAST NAPLES -
IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,442.46
Item #16D8
A LIEN AGREEMENT WITH PATRICIA HORTON PENTEADO
(OWNER) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY
IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 45, TRAIL RIDGE, EAST
NAPLES - IMP ACT FEE DEFERRAL IN THE AMOUNT OF
$12,442.46
Item # 16D9
Page 245
June 10, 2008
SUMMARY OF THE IMP ACT FEE DEFERRAL AGREEMENTS
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL IN FY08, INCLUDING THE
TOTAL NUMBER OF AGREEMENTS APPROVED, THE TOTAL
DOLLAR AMOUNT DEFERRED AND THE BALANCE
REMAINING FOR ADDITIONAL DEFERRALS IN FY08
Item #16E1
REPORT AND RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS
AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS TO BOARD-APPROVED
CONTRACTS - FOR THE PERIOD OF APRIL 24, 2008
THROUGH MAY 21, 2008
Item #16F1
RESOLUTION 2008-169: A RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS,
CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16G1
A SWEAT EQUITY GRANT AGREEMENT(S) BETWEEN THE
COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND A GRANT APPLICANT(S) WITHIN THE
BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AREA. (2524 LEE STREET) ($1,000)-
FUNDS ARE FOR MATERIALS FOR EXTERIOR SITE
IMPROVEMENTS AND DO NOT COVER LABOR CHARGES
Item #16G2
Page 246
1-""
June 10, 2008
A SWEAT EQUITY GRANT AGREEMENT(S) BETWEEN THE
COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND A GRANT APPLICANT(S) WITHIN THE
BA YSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AREA. (3388 CAPTAINS COVE) ($1,000)-
FUNDS ARE FOR MATERIALS FOR EXTERIOR SITE
IMPROVEMENTS AND DO NOT COVER LABOR CHARGES
Item #16G3
REIMBURSEMENT FOR CRA STAFF ATTENDANCE AT THE
BUILDING STRONG NEIGHBORHOODS WORKSHOP:
BROWNFIELDS REDEVELOPMENT IN UNDERCAPITALIZED
COMMUNITIES IN TAMPA ON MARCH 19,2008 AND
REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE ASSOCIATED SEMINAR
REGISTRATION AND TRAVEL COSTS FROM THE
BA YSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE TRUST FUND. (FUND 187)
- HELD AT THE RAGAN PARK COMMUNITY CENTER IN
TAMPA, FL
Item # 16G4
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $23,710 TO INCREASE
BUDGETED REVENUES AND BUDGETED EXPENSES FOR
THE SALE AND PURCHASE OF AVIATION FUEL AT
EVERGLADES AIRPARK - AN ADDITIONAL 8,000 GALLONS
ARE NEEDED FOR THE REMAINING FY08, AT $4.37 PER
GALLON
Item #16G5
THE COMMITMENT OF $600,000 FOR INFRASTRUCTURE
Page 247
----1
June 10, 2008
FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
ESPERANZA PLACE IN IMMOKALEE - TOTAL AMOUNT OF
COMMITMENT IS $1,202,000, TO BE PAID OVER 3 YEARS, AS
GAP FINANCING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS
Item #16H1
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE ATTENDED THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
TRANSPORTATION INITIATIVE POST-SESSION
LEGISLATIVE EVENT ON JUNE 6TH, 2008 AT THE BONITA
BAY CLUB IN BONITA SPRINGS, FL.; $35.00 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD
AT BONITA BAY LOCATED ON US 41 AND WEST TERRY ST.
Item # 16H2
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE ATTENDED THE ENCA LUNCHEON ON MAY
15,2008 AT CARRABBA'S IN NAPLES, FL.; $21.00 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET -
LOCATED AT 12631 TAMIAMI TRAIL
Item #16I1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR
REFERRED:
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
Page 248
- ---"-~----'----' T
departments as indicated:
June 10, 2008
Page 249
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
June 10, 2008
I. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Minutes:
I) Collier Countv Planning Commission:
Agenda of May 15, 2008.
Minutes of March 20, 2008; April 3,2008.
a") Growth Management Plan:
March 17, 2008; March 17, 2008 continuation; March 24, 2008;
March 28, 2008.
2) Contractors Licensing Board:
Agenda of May 2 I, 2008.
3) Historical/Archaeological Preservation Board:
Agenda of May 21, 2008.
Minutes of March 19.2008; November 21,2007"
4) Isle of Capri Fire Control District Advisorv Committee:
Agenda April 3, 2008.
Minutes of April 3,2008"
5) Land AClluisition Advisorv Committee:
Minutes of April 14,2008.
6) Ochopee Fire Control District Advisorv Committee:
Minutes of February 19, 2008; March 10, 2008"
7) Pelican Bav Services Division Board:
Agenda of May 21, 2008.
8) Public Vehicle Advisory Committee:
Agenda of June 2, 2008"
B. Districts:
I) Verona Walk Communitv Development District:
Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2008-09.
2) Ave Maria Stewardship Communi tv District:
Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2008-09.
C. Other:
I) Fire Service Steering Committee:
Agenda of May 22, 2008.
Minutes of April 24, 2008.
2) Code Enforcement Special Magistrate:
Minutes of May 2, 2008.
3) Domestic Animal Services Advisorv Committee:
Minutes of April 15,2008.
June 10, 2008
Item # 1611
DESIGNATING THE SHERIFF AS THE OFFICIAL APPLICANT
AND PROGRAM POINT-OF-CONTACT FOR THE UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF JUSTICE
PROGRAMS, BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE EDWARD
BYRNE MEMORIAL COMPETITIVE GRANT PROGRAM:
NATIONAL INITIATIVES - COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S
OFFICE CIVIL CITATION PROGRAM GRANT, SUBMITING
THE APPLICATION IN THE FEDERAL GRANTS GOV
SYSTEM, ACCEPTANCE OF THE GRANT WHEN A WARDED,
AND APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS - FUNDS NEEDED
TO CONTINUE THIS JUVENILE PROGRAM THAT PROVIDES
AN ALTERNATIVE INTERVENTION PROGRAM THAT
MAINTAINS THE INTEGRITY OF ZERO TOLERANCE
POLICIES WHILE BYPASSING FORMAL JUDICIAL
PROCEEDINGS
Item # 16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 17,2008
THROUGH MAY 23, 2008 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #1613
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 24, 2008
THROUGH MAY 30, 2008 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J4
Page 250
June 10, 2008
YEAR TWO AUDITING SERVICES ACCORDING TO
AGREEMENT #07-4152 WITH ERNST AND YOUNG LLP, AND
EXECUTING AN OFFICIAL ENGAGEMENT LETTER AND
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF
$609,000 - TO BEGIN THE 2008 AUDIT PROCESS, INCLUDING
INTERIM AUDIT SERVICES
Item #16K1
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT FOR PARCELS 140 AND
140B IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V
EDWARD STANLEY SANDITEN, ET AL., CASE NO. 02-5165-CA
(IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT NO. 60018). (FISCAL IMPACT
$ 19,991) - TO COVER EXPERT WITNESS FEES AND
STATUTORY ATTORNEY FEES, AND ADDITIONAL
COMPENSATION
Item # 16K2
PROPOSED JOINT MOTION FOR AN AGREED ORDER
AWARDING COSTS RELATING TO PARCEL 169RDUE IN THE
COLLIER COUNTY V JOSE MUNOZ, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-2823-
CA, OIL WELL ROAD PROJECT #60044. (FISCAL IMPACT:
$3,800.00) - TO COVER SURVEYING FEES AND COSTS
Item # 16K3
PROPOSED JOINT MOTION FOR AN AGREED ORDER
AWARDING COSTS RELATING TO PARCEL 183RDUE IN THE
COLLIER COUNTY V JORGE B. ECHEZARRAGA, ET AL., CASE
NO. 07-3278-CA, OIL WELL ROAD PROJECT #60044. (FISCAL
IMPACT: $3,800.00) - TO COVER ENGINEERING FEES AND
Page 251
June 10, 2008
COSTS
Item #16K4
RESOLUTION 2008-170: A RESOLUTION FOR THE
EXPANSION OF THE GOLDEN GATE CONGREGA nON OF
JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES, INC. CHURCH TO MEMORIALIZE
THE DECISION THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MADE AT
ITS APRIL 22, 2008 MEETING ACCEPTING THE
RECOMMENDATION OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE TED
BROUSSEAU PURSUANT TO THE FLORIDA LAND USE AND
ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION ACT (FLUEDRA)
Item #16K5
AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT FOR PARCEL 214 BY COLLIER
COUNTY TO PROPERTY OWNER, RODOLFO MAYOR IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED CC V JOSE MUNOZ, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-
2823-CA (OIL WELL ROAD PROJECT NO. 60044) (FISCAL
IMPACT: IF ACCEPTED, $32,200) - PROPERTY NEEDED FOR
AQUIRING RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG OIL WELL ROAD
Item # 16K6
SETTLEMENT IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED TRA VELERS
INDEMNITY COMPANY A/S/O MITCHELL & STARK
CONSTRUCTION Co., INC., V COLLIER COUNTY, FILED IN
THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, CASE NO. 07-0139-CA, FOR $15,000.00-
AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #17A
Page 252
June 10, 2008
RESOLUTION 2008-171: PETITION CUE-2008-AR-12775,
COLLIER COUNTY ZONE MANAGEMENT, REPRESENTED
BY JOHNSON ENGINEERING, REQUESTED A ONE-YEAR
CONDITIONAL USE EXTENSION FOR GOODLAND PARK.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 750 PALM POINT
DRIVE, IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 52 SOUTH AND RANGE
27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - THE EXTENSION IS
GOOD UNTIL MARCH 23, 2009 SO THAT THE PARK CAN
PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE GULF OF MEXICO
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2008-172: PETITION CUE-2008-AR-12816,
COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITIES ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY LARRY R. HARRIS OF
AGNOLI, BARBER AND BRUNDAGE, INC., REQUESTED A
ONE YEAR CONDITIONAL USE EXTENSION FROM APRIL 26,
2008 UNTIL APRIL 26,2009 FOR A PUMP STATION LOCATED
SOUTH OF IMMOKALEE ROAD LESS THAN 1/2 MILE WEST
OF WILSON BOULEVARD, IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES,
UNIT 20, IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #17C
ORDINANCE 2008-28: PETITION PUDZ-2007-AR-12581:
FLORIDA NON-PROFIT SERVICES, INC. AND THE
EMPOWERMENT ALLIANCE OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
REPRESENTED BY HEIDI K. WILLIAMS, AICP, Q. GRADY
MINOR AND ASSOCIATES, P.A., REQUESTED A PUD
Page 253
June 10, 2008
REZONE FROM THE RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A-MHO)
MOBILE HOME OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT TO THE
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING
DISTRICT, TO BE KNOWN AS ESPERANZA PLACE RPUD.
THE 31.63 ACRE SITE IS PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED FOR
A MAXIMUM OF 262 DWELLING UNITS; AND AN
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE
OF IMMOKALEE DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 1/2 MILE WEST
OF MAIN STREET (SR-29), IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 46
SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, IMMOKALEE, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA - W /CCPC STIPULATIONS
Item #17D
ORDINANCE 2008-29: AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY
ORDINANCE NO. 72-1, AS AMENDED (THE COLLIER
COUNTY LIGHTING DISTRICT) BY AMENDING SECTION
ONE, AREA ESTABLISHED, TO ADD: THE JAEGER
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL CENTER AND ALL OF THE
LANDS LYING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PLAT OF
MAJESTIC PINES TO THE COLLIER COUNTY LIGHTING
DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR THE INCLUSION IN THE CODE
OF LA WS AND ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT
AND SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 17E
RESOLUTION 2008-173: A RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING CARRY FOWARD,
TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE
Page 254
June 10, 2008
FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 ADOPTED BUDGET
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5:44 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPE~ST CTS ~NDER ITS CONTROL
TOM HENNING, Chair an
A TTES']:!~r' ./' }.
.'" - t
DWIGHt E. BROCK, CLERK
~~~~
utesta, .t.Q..Cbt1rt111l ,
~ \Q114bre 0111- t I
These minutes approved by the Board on 1- 2..L-{DB , as
presented -------- or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY
COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 255