BCC Minutes 06/24/2008 R
June 24, 2008
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, June 24, 2008
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such
special district as has been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
Tom Henning
Donna Fiala
Jim Coletta
Fred Coyle
Frank Halas
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
Sue Filson, BCC Executive Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Derek Johnssen, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
and
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB)
0,-,,\1//1,
,r?T~
r '
( ". '. "'"
Jf ." \
AGENDA
June 24, 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."
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
Page 1
June 24, 2008
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBA TIM 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 A V AILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Pastor Randal Holdman, Parkway Community Church
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 27,2008 - BCC/Regular Meeting
C. May 30, 2008 - Value Adjustment Board
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
A. 20 Year Attendees
1) David Becker, EMS
2) Franklin Chain, Road and Bridge
3) Harry Chancy, Building Review and Permitting
Page 2
June 24, 2008
4) Chartchai Isaroskul, Road and Bridge
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation to recognize the men and women who participated in the
Brotherhood Ride to raise donations for those who lost family members in
Charleston, SC. To be accepted by Fire Inspector Jeff Morse, North Naples
Fire Control Rescue District, Fire Chief Mike Brown, North Naples Fire
Control and Rescue Dist., Captain Jamie Cunningham, NFD, Pres. of North
Naples Professional Firefighter's Union Firefighter Christopher Spencer,
NNFD, V.P. of North Naples Professional Firefighter's Union, Sheriff Don
Hunter, Collier County Sheriffs Office, Robert Metzger, Fire Chief of
Golden Gate Fire District, Deputy Dan McDonald, C.C.S.O. (Brotherhood
Rider) Fire Chief Rita Greenberg, representing Big Corkscrew Island F.D.,
and Fire Chief Robert Null, representing East Naples Fire Department, Jim
Squittieri, Golden Gate Fire District. (Companion to Item 5A)
B. Proclamation to recognize the residents and emergency responders of the
800 acre fire May 29th & 30th. To be accepted by Golden Gate Estates
Community Emergency Response Team, Florida Alert Response Team,
Collier County Domestic Animal Services Department, American Red
Cross, Collier Area Transit Bus, Collier County District Schools, Collier
County Sheriffs Office, Collier County Emergency Management
Department, Collier County Emergency Medical Services, The Salvation
Army, FL Division of Forestry, Collier County Purchasing Department,
Collier County Department of Health Florida Division of Emergency
Management, Florida Highway Patrol Florida Power & Light, Sprint,
Walmart, JW Kraft, Immokalee FD, East Naples Fire Department, Big
Corkscrew Fire Department, Golden Gate Fire Department, Ochopee FD,
North Naples FD, Isles of Capri Fire Department, City of Naples Fire
Department, Marco Island Fire Department, Bonita Springs Fire
Department, San Carlos Park Fire Department, Iona Macgregor Fire
Department, Estero Fire Department, South Trail Fire Department, Fort
Myers Beach Fire Department, Lehigh Acres Fire Department, and Lee
County Port Authority Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting.
C. Proclamation recognizing and congratulating Stan Chrzanowski for being
honored by the Florida Engineer Society Calusa Chapter as Government
Engineer of the Year.
Page 3
June 24, 2008
D. Proclamation recognizing Recreation and Parks Month. To be accepted by
Barry Williams, Director of Parks and Recreation.
5. PRESENTATIONS
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public petition request by Michael Sorrell to discuss "Do Not Respond"
order.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 n.m., unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item to be heard at or about 1:00 p.m., followin!!: Item 12B. This
item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure
be provided bv Commission members. PUDA-2007-AR-l2322 Livingston
Professional Center LLC, represented by Robert L. Duane, AICP, of Hole
Montes, Inc. is requesting an amendment to the Hiwassee PUD to revise
existing development standards, transportation requirements and property
ownership information. The +/ -12.52-acre subject property is located 1400
feet north of the intersection of Eatonwood Lane and Livingston Road, in
Section l3, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
B. This item to be heard at 4:30 p.m. Adopt a resolution amending the Collier
County Water-Sewer District Impact Fee Rates established by Ordinance
No. 2007-57. (This item to be heard following Item #10G)
C. This item to be heard at 4:30 p.m. Adopt a resolution amending Schedules
One and Four through Seven of Appendix A to Section Four of the Collier
County Ordinance No. 2006-27, titled The Collier County Water-Sewer
District Uniform Billing, Operating and Regulatory Standards Ordinance;
This amendment included proposed rates for water and wastewater services
with effective dates of October l, 2008 and October l, 2009 for Schedule 1
of Appendix A of the Ordinance; and provides for an effective date of
October 1,2008 for Schedules Four through Seven of Appendix A of the
ordinance. (This item to be heard following Items #10G and #8B)
Page 4
June 24, 2008
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of member to the Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development
Agency.
B. Appointment of Citizen Members to the Value Adjustment Board.
C. Commissioner Henning item for discussion.
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 11:00 a.m. Essie Serratta, the Executive Director
of the Collier County Housing Authority requests approval of deviations
from the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) through the Site
Development Plan (SDP) approval process in order to rehabilitate dwelling
units structures within the Farm Workers Village pursuant to a 9.2 million
dollar Federal Grant on property located in Immokalee and for the BCC to
review and determine if the requested deviations are warranted while
ensuring that the community's interests are maintained and health, safety
and welfare standards are upheld.(Susan M. Istenes, AICP, Director, Zoning
and Land Development Review, CDES)
B. This item to be heard at 2:30 p.m. Recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners determine whether Tourist Development Funds may
be used to fund additional erosion control structures at Hideaway Beach by
making a finding as to whether funding these erosion control structures is in
the publics interest as required by the Tourist Development Tax Funding
Policy. (Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management Director)
C. Recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing the condemnation of fee
simple interests and/or those perpetual or temporary easement interests
necessary for the construction of six-laning and associated improvements to
both Collier Boulevard (from south of Davis Boulevard to Golden Gate
Main Canal- Project No. 60001) and Davis Boulevard (from Radio Road to
Collier Boulevard - Project No. 60073). Estimated fiscal impact:
$l,776,200.00. (Nick Casalanguida, Transportation/Planning Director)
D. This item to be heard at 4:00 p.m. Recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners provide the County Manager, or his designee, with
guidance relatingcto the relocation of water and wastewater utility lines, and
Page 5
June 24, 2008
associated impacts to Orange Tree Utility customers, resulting from the
widening of Oil Well Road. (James C. French, Operations Manager, CDES
Office of Operations and Regulatory Management and Executive Director,
Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority, CDES)
E. Recommendation to conduct the Conservation Collier Annual Public
Meeting to provide the Board of County Commissioners and public with an
update on the Programs past activities, and to solicit proposals and
applications for the current acquisition cycle. (Alex Sulecki, Senior
Environmental Specialist)
F. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners provide staff
direction related to the Countys ability to process conveyance bonus credit
applications specified by the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sub-District to the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), while retaining the
Countys ability to address transportation improvements designated within
the Countys Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). (Mike Bosi, Planning
Manager, Comprehensive Planning, CDES)
G. This item to be heard at 4:30 p.m. Recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners adopt the 2008 Collier County Water and
Wastewater Master Plan Updates, dated June 24, 2008, Projects 700703,
730663, 75007l, and 750072. (This item to be heard before Item #8B and
#8C) (Jim DeLony, Public Utilities Administrator)
H. Recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing the condemnation of
those perpetual and temporary easement interests necessary for the
construction of stormwater improvements know as Phase 1 B North of the
Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project (LASIP). (Capital Improvement
Element No. 29l, Project No. 5llO l). Estimated fiscal impact:
$l,266,250.00. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation Services)
I. Request that the Board of County Commissioners approve a Resolution to
oppose the leasing of the Alligator Alley toll facility. (Norman Feder,
Transportation Services Administrator)
J. Recommendation to award Bid #08-5065 for the Installation of "Immokalee
Beautification Phase IV Street Lighting Renovation Project - JPA FM
#407977 to Bentley Electric in the amount of$l,l76,060.87. (Diane Flagg,
Page 6
June 24, 2008
Alt. Trans. Modes Director)
K. Request for the Board of County Commissioners to authorize the acquisition
of auditing services to determine if the Clerk of Courts has adhered to the
Boards direction, concerning interest income, as defined in Resolution 2007-
257, adopted in September 2007. (Jim Mudd, County Manager)
L. This item to be heard at 1 :30 p.m. Review Clam Bay Restoration and
Long Term Management Plan Permit Compliance issues and obtain
direction from the Board of County Commissioners on how to proceed.
(Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management Director)
M. This item has been continued to the Julv 22, 2008 BCC Meetin!!:. Review
the Port of the Isles boat launch facility purchase proposal and obtain
direction from the Board of County Commissioners on how to proceed.
(Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management Director and Barry Williams,
Parks and Recreation Director)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 12:00 noon. Notice is hereby given that pursuant
to Section 286.0ll(8), Fla. Stat., the County Attorney desires advice from
the Board of County Commissioners in Closed Attorney-Client Session on
TUESDAY, June 24, 2008, at a time certain of l2:00 noon in the
Commission conference room, 3rd Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building,
Collier County Government Center, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples,
Florida. In addition to Board members, County Manager James Mudd,
County Attorney Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, and Assistant County Attorney
Jacqueline Williams Hubbard will be in attendance. The Board in executive
session will discuss: Settlement negotiations and strategy related to litigation
expenditures in the pending litigation cases of Lucky, M.K., Inc. v. Collier
County, et aI., Case No. 07-0958-CA, now pending in the Twentieth Judicial
Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida.
B. This item to be heard at 1:00 p.m. For the Board of County
Commissioners to provide direction to the County Attorney's Office as to
settlement negotiations and strategy related to litigation expenditures in the
pending litigation case of Lucky, M.K., Inc. v. Collier County, et aI., Case
Page 7
June 24, 2008
No. 07-0958-CA, now pending in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for
Collier County, Florida.
C. This item to be heard at 3:15 p.m. Request that the Board of County
Commissioners provide direction to Staff and to the County Attorney,
whether to commence a civil lawsuit, or in the alternative, a code
enforcement proceeding, against Milano Recreation Association, Inc., for
violating PUD Ordinance No. 03-54 (The Royal Palm Academy PUD),
relating to failure and refusal to allow residents ofImperial Golf Estates to
construct a road (Marquis Boulevard) over portions of the Milano
subdivision to access Livingston Road, contrary to commitments made
during the PUD rezoning process.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
A. This item to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Presentation of the comprehensive
annual financial report for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2007.
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 that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
Satisfaction of Lien, related to impact fees, due to the cancellation of
the building permit for the proposed home.
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve 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
Page 8
June 24, 2008
Program and the County-wide Impact Fee Deferral Program, as set
forth by Section 74-201 (g) and 74-40l of the Collier County Code of
Laws and Ordinances.
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Fiddler's Creek, Phase 3 Unit l.
4) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water utility
facility for Southwest Boulevard at Treviso Bay.
5) To accept final and unconditional conveyance of the water utility
facility for The Rookery Golf Course Maintenance and Golf SchooL
6) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway and drainage
improvements for the final plat of Tract 9 at Olde Cypress (Olde
Cypress PUD), roadway and drainage improvements will be privately
maintained.
7) This item continued from the April 22, 2008 BCC Meetin!!:.
Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Reflection Lakes at Naples
Phase lA (Walnut Lakes PUD) with the roadway and drainage
improvements being privately maintained.
8) This item continued from the April 22. 2008 BCC Meetin!!:.
Recommendation to grant final approval of the landscape and
irrigation improvements for the final plat of Reflection Lakes at
Naples Phase lC (Walnut Lakes PUD) with the landscape and
irrigation improvements being privately maintained.
9) This item reQuires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv
Commission Members. Should a hearin!!: be held on this item. all
participants are reQuired to be sworn in. This is a recommendation
to approve for recording the final plat of Mockingbird Crossing,
approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security.
10) This item reQuires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv
Commission Members. Should a hearin!!: be held on this item. all
participants are reQuired to be sworn in. Recommendation to
Page 9
June 24, 2008
approve for recording the final plat of Ave Maria Unit l8, Hampton
Village Townhomes.
11) This item reQuires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission Members. Should a hearin!!: be held on this item. all
participants are reQuired to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Cobblestone Cove, approval of
the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and
approval of the amount of the performance security.
12) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Cedar Hammock Unit 2
with the roadway and drainage improvements being privately
maintained.
13) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Cedar Hammock Unit 4
with the roadway and drainage improvements being privately
maintained.
14) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Cedar Hammock Unit 6
with the roadway and drainage improvements being privately
maintained.
15) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners affirm staffs interpretation of the proper disposition of
revenue generated from the sale ofCDES Fund l13 surplus goods,
and provide direction to staff that all revenue generated from the
surplus sale of such capital goods originally purchased within Fund
ll3 be returned to Fund l13 capital reserves.
16) Request approval by the Board of County Commissioners for a Land
Development Code (LDC), Special Amendment 2008 Cycle 2a, to
address an urgent amendment to the Land Development Code in
response to the Opinion and Order of the U.S. District Court (filed
February l3, 2008) which declared sections of the Collier County
Sign Code unconstitutionaL (Companion item to #l6A17)
Page 10
June 24, 2008
17) Request approval by the Board of County Commissioners for a
Budget Amendment, to obtain professional services for the revision of
the sign code section of the Land Development Code in response to
the Opinion and Order of the U.S. District Court (filed February 13,
2008) which declared sections of the Collier County Sign Code
unconstitutional and to obtain expert testimony and litigation support
pertaining to the Plaintiffs damages claim. (Companion item to
#l6A16)
18) Request that the BCC consider the requests of the Public Vehicle
Advisory Committee (PV AC) to (1) initiate review of taxi rates; and
(2) amend the Public Vehicle for Hire (VFH) Ordinance (No. 200l-
75), by changing the time frame for expiration of Driver Identification
(ID) cards to every two years rather than annually; changing the
expiration date of Certificates to Operate (CTO) to November 30th
annually; and adding a section to the VFH Ordinance relating to
Specialty Vehicle for Hire services.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to Award Collier County Bid #08-5074 Single
Engine Street Sweeper Truck to Environmental Products of Florida,
Corp. ($37l,980.00)
2) Recommendation to approve Change Order #5 to add $357,971.20 for
continuing Inspection Services for Aim Engineering & Surveying,
Inc. under ITN 04-3583 CEI Services for Collier County Road
Projects for Project No. 6305l Vanderbilt Beach Road from Airport
Road to Collier Boulevard.
3) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to approve
a budget amendment to transfer funds from the Traffic Calming
Project within the Transportation Supported Gas Tax Fund (313)
Project No. 60 l631 to the PUD Monitoring/Traffic Counts Project in
the amount of $l 00,000.00 for Project No. 69l242.
4) Recommendation to approve Change Order #1 to add $434,779.47 for
continuing Inspection Services for Johnson Engineering, Inc. under
ITN 05-3583 CEI Services for Collier County Road Projects for
Project No. 6506l Collier Boulevard Six (6) Laning Project from
Page 11
June 24, 2008
Golden Gate Blvd. to Immokalee Rd.
5) To address a neighborhood association generated request that the
Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approve the
establishment of a Neighborhood Traffic Management program
(NTMP) traffic calming project, for Cardinal Street, from North Rd,
to Flamingo Drive approximately 1,400 feet.
6) To recognize the remaining dollars awarded to AM356 Section 5303
Transit Planning in the amount of $95,754 and closeout project
#35083 in Fund 126 and move residual budget to Fund l28 project
#35084 in the amount of $34,347.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation that the Board approve a budget amendment in the
amount of $255,000.00 to fund the continuing litigation and
professional support services related to the case known as Collier
County and Collier County Water-Sewer District v. Metcalf & Eddy,
Inc. and Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America., Project
700751.
2) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution approving Special
Assessment Hardship Deferrals for certain Sewer Special
Assessments for the 2008 tax year.
3) Recommendation to approve an amendment of Contract No. 05-3831
FEMA Acceptable Monitoring Disaster Debris Management with
R.W. Beck Inc, Post, Buckley, Schuh, Jernigan Inc. and Solid
Resources, Inc to delete language under Section 19. Offer Extended to
Other Governmental Entities, to comply with FEMA 325 Debris
Management Guide (July 2007).
4) Recommendation to award Contract #08-5080 to BQ Concrete, LLC
and Design Build Engineers & Contractors for the construction of
hammerheads on dead-end streets in Collier County. ($215,358.66)
5) Recommendation to reject the petition from Waste Management Inc.
of Florida for reimbursement of unusual and unanticipated increase in
cost for soil used for odor control measures at the Collier County
Page 12
June 24, 2008
LandfilL
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve a grant application for the United States
Department of Housing and Human Development with Economic
Development Initiative (EDI) funds in the amount of$147,000 for
improvements to South Park in Immokalee.
2) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$20,913 to recognize revenue received from the collection of co-
payments from the Collier County Social Services Program.
3) Recommend approval of Category A Tourist Development Fund 183
Grant Applications for Beach Park Facilities in the amount of
$803,100.
4) Recommend approval of Category A Tourist Development Fund 195
Grant Applications for the City of Naples, The City of Marco Island
and Collier County in the amount of$3,623,l60 for FY-08/09.
5) Recommend approval of Category D Tourist Development Grant
Application for the Naples Pier Annualized Repair and Maintenance
with the City of Naples in the amount of$l8,000.00 for FY-08/09.
6) Recommendation to approve budget amendments in the amount of
$l15,586 to ensure continuous funding of the Alzheimers Disease
Initiative grant.
7) Recommendation to approve budget amendments in the amount of
$706,644 to ensure continuous funding of the Community Care for the
Elderly grant.
8) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$7,813 to ensure continuous funding of the Home Care for the Elderly
grant.
9) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with
Armandina Campos (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier County
Page 13
June 24, 2008
impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at
Lot 8, Liberty Landing, Immokalee.
10) 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
FY08.
11) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Loudney
Cenozier and Marie C. Cenozier (Owners) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 34, Trail Ridge, East Naples.
12) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Laurette
Archange (Owner) for deferral of lOO% of Collier County impact fees
for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 199,
Trail Ridge, East Naples.
13) Recommend approval of Work Order CPE-FT-3902-08-02 under
Contract 06-3902 with Coastal Planning and Engineering in the
amount of$295,185 and a Budget Amendment totaling $295,185
from 195 Reserves. (Cape Romano sand search)
14) Recommendation to approve budget amendments recognizing the
Fiscal Year 2008-09 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) entitlement funding, and State Housing
Initiatives Partnership Program (SHIP) allocations.
15) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Peter
Hartman Jr. (Owner) for deferral of lOO% of Collier County impact
fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Vista III
at Heritage Bay, Unit l504, North Naples.
16) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes its Chairman to sign, a Subrecipient Agreement
providing Supplemental Disaster Recovery Initiative (DRI) funding in
Page 14
June 24, 2008
the amount of $60,000.00 to St. Matthews House, Inc. for hurricane
hardening of its shelter.
17) Recommendation to approve the submission of the 2008 State of
Florida Challenge Grant application to the Department of Community
Affairs Office On Homelessness.
18) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes its Chairman to sign, a Subrecipient Agreement
providing Supplemental Disaster Recovery Initiative (DR!) funding in
the amount of $500,000.00 to Greater Immokalee Southside Front
Porch Community, Inc.
19) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Odelin
Betancourt (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact
fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Vistas
III at Heritage Bay, Unit l405, North Naples.
20) Recommendation to award Contract(s) #08-5068: Physical and
Biological Monitoring for Collier County Coastal Zone Management
Projects for Coastal Zone Management to Coastal Planning and
Engineering, Inc.; Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc.; and
Humiston & Moore Engineers.
21) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, an Amended and Restated
Affordable Housing Bonus Density Agreement (AHDBA) to increase
the number of affordable units from thirty-two dwelling units to forty-
four dwelling units for the Workforce product types for owner-
occupied affordable housing located in the Cirrus Pointe PUD
development.
22) This item has been continued to the July 22. 2008 BCC Meetin!!:.
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes its Chairman to sign, a Subrecipient Agreement
providing Supplemental Disaster Recovery Initiative (DR!) funding in
the amount of$300,000 to I HOPE for infill in order to support the
construction of housing units.
Page 15
June 24, 2008
23) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes its Chairman to sign, a Subrecipient agreement
providing Supplemental Disaster Recovery Initiative (DR!) funding in
the amount of$57,000 to the Shelter for Abused Women and Children
for the purchase and installations of hurricane proof windows, exterior
doors and roofing materials for four homes.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve Amendment No. 03 to the Agreement
with Collier County District School Board for the Driver Education
Grant Program.
2) Recommendation to approve an amendment to the Collier County
Driver Education Grant Program.
3) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase
with Stiffler Specialties, Inc., for 1.l4 acres under the Conservation
Collier Land Acquisition Program, at a cost not to exceed $l8, 700.
4) Recommend approval of award of Contract #07 -4160 to EMC
Corporation for Information Technology Service Management
software and related professional services. ($164,593.00)
5) Recommendation to approve Addenda A to the contract with Coastal
Training Technologies, Corporation in the amount of $2l ,500 for
additional courses to Collier County's existing online safety training
program.
6) Recommendation to approve a Statutory Deed for the conveyance of a
GAC Land Trust Reserved List Parcel to the Conservation Collier
Program that will provide revenue in the amount of $ll6,9l4.00 for
the GAC Land Trust Fund.
7) That the Board of County Commissioners approves the First
Amendment to Contract No. 08-5012, Cellular Communications
Services and Equipment, and authorizes the Purchasing/General
Services Director to sign the Amendment.
Page 16
June 24, 2008
8) Recommendation to approve a Final Management Plan for the Logan
Woods Preserve under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition
Program.
9) Recommendation to approve a Lease Agreement with Lams
Properties, LLC, in order for the Sherriff's Office to consolidate two
existing leases at a first years rent of $42,837.36.
10) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment transferring funds
from the FY08 Information Technology budget to the Emergency
Services Complex construction budget to equip office space for the
Information Technology Department.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Approve budget amendments.
2) Recommendation to approve a grant application for the United States
Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services (COPS) Technology Program in the amount of$350,738.
3) Recommendation to adopt the Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan for Collier County and its Municipalities.
4) Recommendation to approve the negotiated annual contract with The
Ferguson Group for federal lobbying services.
5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
and forward a letter and resolution to the Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services in support of repairs to the Immokalee
Farmers Market.
6) Approval of a resolution to supersede Resolution 06-200, which
directed the County Manager to establish a Floodplain Management
Planning Committee, to add two additional positions for practicing
civil engineers.
7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the award of contract for the Immokalee CRA Master Plan Update &
Related Services in the amount of$386, l75 and approve all necessary
Page 17
June 24, 2008
budget amendments. (Companion to Item #l6GI0).
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency to
approve the relocation of the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA office,
approve new office lease with Palmyra Club Investors, LLC
(landlord) and authorize the Chairman to sign the lease agreement.
(4069 Bayshore Drive) (FY08 Fiscal Impact $3,696)
2) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners approve a budget amendment increase in the amount
of $46,000 for general consulting services up to September 30, 2008
required to support on-going projects at the Immokalee Regional,
Marco Island Executive and Everglades Airports.
3) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners approve a budget amendment increase to the Airport
Authority's Capital Fund in the amount of$192,000 for the
construction of an aircraft apron expansion at the Immokalee Regional
Airport.
4) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$l5,000 for engineering services required for the completion of a
United States Department of Agriculture Rural Business Enterprise
Grant application for the Immokalee Regional Airport.
5) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissions approve and authorize its Chairman to execute a letter
of commitment for funds in the amount of $1 ,000,000 to leverage a
Rural Business Enterprise Grant (RBEG) from the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) in the amount of $495,000 and a
Resolution authorizing the Collier County Airport Authority to apply
for the $495,000 United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Rural Business Enterprise Grant (RBEG) and authorizing the
Authoritys Executive Director to sign all related documents to
consummate the RBEG for an eligible RBEG project at the
Page 18
June 24, 2008
Immokalee RegionaL
6) Recommendation that the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) direct staff to draft a resolution to
designate the property located at 4315 Bayshore Drive and the three
adjacent parcels owned by the CRA as a Brownfields Area, and to
direct staff to ensure public hearings are conducted in accordance with
Florida Statutes in order to achieve Brownfields Area designation.
(43l5 Bayshore Drive and three adjacent parcels.)
7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves
an after-the-fact acceptance of the attached Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) grant offer for $20l,875 for the design,
permitting and bidding of a taxiway and aircraft apron south
expansion at the Marco Island Executive Airport, and associated
budget amendments.
8) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners approve the acquisition of 2.73 acres of land, known
as Tract Q, adjacent to the Marco Island Executive Airport for
$250,000, plus associated real estate transactions fees not to exceed
$lO,OOO, and associated budget amendments
9) Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
to approve the purchase of a commercial property located in the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area; authorize the CRA
Chairman to execute the real estate contract; approve payment from
and authorize the Executive Director to make a payment from Fund
(187) in the amount of $750,000 plus cost and expenses to complete
the sale of subject property. Site address: 4315 Bayshore Drive
($750,000)
10) Recommendation that the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
approve the award of contract for the Immokalee CRA Master Plan
Update & Related Services in the amount of$386,175 and
recommend the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approve all
necessary budget amendments. (Companion Item #l6F7)
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Page 19
June 24, 2008
1) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Attended the Southwest Florida
Transportation Initiative Legislative Luncheon (SWFTI) on June 6,
2008. $35 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
2) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Participated as fellow speaker at the
Urban Land Institute of Southwest Florida Fellow Tour on 6/11/08.
$l5 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
3) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Attended the EDC Post Legislative
Reception on May 2l, 2008. $20 to be paid from Commissioner
Coletta's travel budget.
4) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Attended the Southeast Regional
Director's Institute Conference on 5/19/08. $25 to be paid from
Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
5) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a valid public purpose.
Attended the Marco Business After Five on June 18,2008 at Marriott
Vacation Club, Crystal Shores on Marco Island, FL. $5.00 to be paid
from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
6) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Will participate as a guest speaker at
the Kiwanis of Naples on September 16, 2008. $l4 to be paid from
Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
7) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Participated in the National Day of
Prayer Proclamation Reading and Luncheon on May l, 2008. $l 0 to
be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
8) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Attended the EDC VIP Benefactor
Foundations and Premier Member Breakfast at Naples Grande on
May l, 2008. $28 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel
Page 20
June 24, 2008
budget.
9) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Attended the Ave Maria University
Commencement Ceremony and Luncheon 5/1 0/08. $20 to be paid
from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
10) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. Attended the Seminole Casino
Immokalee Vegas Style Slots Pull Luncheon on 6/12/08. $20 to be
paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Items to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of May 3l,
2008 through June 06, 2008 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
2) Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners designate the
Sheriff as the official Fiscal Year 2008 Applicant and Program Point-
of-Contact for the United States Department of Justice, Bureau of
Justice Assistance, Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant
(JAG) Program, accept the grant when awarded, approve applicable
budget amendments, and approve the Collier County Sheriffs Office
(CCSO) to receive and expend the payment of 2008 JAG Grant
Funds.
3) To present to the Board of County Commissioners the State Revenue
Sharing Application for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 and to obtain approval
for the Chairman to sign the application.
4) Request that the Board of County Commissioners accepts and
approves capital asset disposition records for time period October 1,
2007 through March 31, 2008.
Page 21
June 24, 2008
5) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of June 07,
2008 through June 13,2008 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to authorize an Offer of Judgment for Parcel 124 by
Collier County to property owners, Jeannie and Donald Fields in the
lawsuit styled CC v. Pacal J. Murray, et aI., Case No. 07-4784-CA
(Santa Barbara Extension Project No. 6009l )(Fiscal Impact: If
accepted, $l68,803).
2) Request by the Collier County Educational Facilities Authority for
approval of a Resolution authorizing the Authority to issue revenue
bonds to be used to finance educational facilities for Ave Maria
University. ($17,000,000)
3) Recommendation to approve settlement at mediation prior to trial in
the lawsuit entitled Leticia Rocha as the Personal Representative of
the Estate of Diana Lopez, Deceased, et. aI, vs. Collier County, filed
in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida,
Case No. 07-359-CA, for $llO,OOO.OO.
4) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of$57,850.00 for Parcell28FEE in the lawsuit styled Collier
County v. Carlos Alvarez, et aI., Case No. 07-2882-CA (Oil Well
Road Project No. 60044). (Fiscal Impact $l3,950)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Page 22
June 24, 2008
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. A resolution approving with conditions petition CCSL-2008-02/AR-l2877
requesting a variance from the Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) to
allow widening of the existing boardwalk and add a roof structure over the
boardwalk, all of which are located on the property known as Ritz Carlton
Hotel with a street address of 282 Vanderbilt Beach Road and more
particularly described as Parcel 2.l, located in Section 32, Township 48
South, Range 25 East, Collier County Florida.
B. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation that
the Board of County Commissioners approve Petition SNR-2008-AR-l2854,
by Christian Spilker of Hamilton Harbor Marina, Inc, requesting a street
name change from Fern Street to Hamilton Avenue, located within Section
23, Township 50 South, Range 25 East.
C. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members: PUDZ-2006-AR-9l43
Standing Oaks, L.L.C., represented by Dwight Nadeau, of RWA, Inc. and
Richard D. Yovanovich Esquire, of Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson,
Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., requesting a rezone from Rural Agricultural
(A) to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to be known as
Standing Oaks PUD. The 41.1 acre Rural Agricultural zoned site is proposed
to permit l64 single and multifamily residential dwelling units at a density
of 4 units per acre. The subject site is located at 6473 Standing Oaks Lane,
6400 Standing Oaks Lane, and 6565 l4th Avenue N.W., in Section 3l,
Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
D. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members: SV-2008-AR-l2943
Woolbright Development, Inc., represented by Glen Weldon of Glen
Weldon & Associates, LLC, of Anderson, South Carolina, requesting six
variances. The first three variances are from the Land Development Code
(LDC) Section 5.06.04 C.l. which requires a minimum separation of l,OOO
lineal feet between signs to allow a sign separation of 70 feet, 705 feet and
775 feet. The fourth variance is from LDC Section 5.06.04 C.1. which
permits a maximum of two pole signs per street frontage to permit a
Page 23
June 24,2008
maximum of three signs along a street frontage. The fifth variance is from
LDC Section 5.06.04 C.l6.b.i. which allows a maximum sign area of 12
square feet for an off-premise directional sign to allow a 76 square foot off-
premise sign. The sixth variance is from LDC Section 5.06.04 C.16.b.ii.
which allows a maximum sign height of 8 feet for an off-premise directional
sign to allow a maximum sign height of9-foot 4-inches. The subject
property (Collection at Vanderbilt) is located at the northwest corner of the
intersection of Airport Road (CR 3l) and Vanderbilt Beach Road (CR 862),
in Section 35, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
E. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. CUE-2008-AR-13066:
Dieudonne Brutus, of the Tabernacle of Bethlehem, represented by David
Sneed, Kuhlman Engineering, Inc., is requesting a one-year extension of a
Conditional Use approval for a church granted in Resolution No. 05-134 in
the Village Residential (VR) Zoning District, pursuant to Subsection
10.08.E.3 of the Land Development Code. The 0.69 acre subject property is
located at 305 3rd Street South (Immokalee), in Section 4, Township 47
South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida.
F. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt an
amendment to the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance to
remove an obsolete reference to the Capital Improvement Element in the
Use of Funds provisions in order to maintain the internal consistency of the
ordinance, as recommended by the County Attorney and consistent with the
prior direction of the Board of County Commissioners.
G. Recommendation to adopt an amendment to Ordinance No. 97-33 Collier
County Cross Coimection Control Ordinance.
H. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2006-60,
which created the Haldeman Creek Maintenance Dredging Municipal
Service Taxing Unit, to increase the boundaries of the unit to add 5 parcels
and canal section adjacent.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 24
June 24, 2008
June 24, 2008
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good morning. Welcome to the
Board of Commissioners' meeting. Today is January 24,2008.
The County Manager would lead us in invocation.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I'm just going to ask one thing
before we stand up. Pastor Randal Holdman was supposed do it today
but he had jury duty, okay. And by chance, did he get released by
jury duty and is he here to help us pray?
(No response.)
MR. MUDD: Okay. Without that, I'm a poor stand-in, and I'll
do my best, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You do well, thank you.
MR. MUDD: Would you please stand. Let us pray. Oh,
Heavenly Father, we ask your blessings on these proceedings and all
who are gathered here. We ask a special blessing on this Board of
County Commissioners, guide them in their deliberations, grant them
the wisdom and vision to meet the trials of this day and the days to
come.
Bless us now as we undertake the business of Collier County and
its citizens, that our actions will serve the greater good of all citizens
and be acceptable in your sight.
Your will be done, amen.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioners, Lenny and Austin
are going to lead us into the Pledge of Allegiance. So if we'd all rise
and salute the flag.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
MR. MUDD: Good job.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thank you, Lenny and Austin,
for leading us in this great day of -- here in Collier County as we do
the public's business.
Page 2
June 24, 2008
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
And now the County Manager's going to walk us through the
change list.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Change -- agenda changes, Board of
County Commissioners' meeting, June 24, 2008.
Item 3A, David Becker, EMS; Harry Chancy, Building Review
and Permitting; and Chartchal Isaroskul, Road and Bridge, will not be
present to accept their service awards today, so we'll have one.
Item 4B, also accepting this proclamation would be the Collier
County Water Department, and that correction's at staffs request.
For some strange reason, and I'll find out why, items 5A and 5B
were not on your agenda but they are in your packet.
Item 5A was omitted from the printed agenda index. It's a
presentation by Senator Burt L. Saunders regarding a tribute
recognizing the Brotherhood Riders, a group that dedicated their
600-mile journey in honor of nine firefighters who perished while
fighting in Charleston, South Carolina.
5A is associated with 4A, and while that group is up here, it
would be good if we did both proclamations, the one from the Board
of County Commissioners and the one from Senator Saunders.
The next item is 5B, which was also admitted ( sic) from the
printed agenda index. It's a posthumous presentation of the Advisory
Committee Outstanding Member Award to Kevin G. Kacer for his
work on the Collier County Land Acquisition Advisory Committee.
To be accepted by Mrs. Kevin Kacer.
Next item is to move item 16A15 to ION. It's a recommendation
that the Board of County Commissioners affirm staffs interpretation
Page 3
June 24, 2008
of the proper disposition of revenue generated from the sale of
Community Development's Environmental Services' Fund 113,
surplus goods, and provide direction to staff that all revenue generated
from the surplus sale of such capital goods originally purchased from
fund 113 be returned to fund 113 capital reserves. That item is being
moved at Commissioner Henning's request.
The next item concerns item 16D16, 16D18, and 16D13. The
following changes have been made to each subrecipient agreement:
Section three, time of performance section should read: The effective
date of the agreement between Collier County and the DCA shall be
May 14, 2008, and the services, and it goes on. And I go on to read,
and, in quotes, "In any event, all services required hereunder shall be
completed by subrecipient prior to May 13,2010," end of quotes.
In the -- the "witness thereof section," it should read, "In witness
thereof, the parties hereto have caused this 23-page agreement to be
executed by their undersigned officials as duly authorized by the
agreement between Collier County and the DCA effective the 14th
day of May, 2008," end of quotes.
All corrections are on page two and page 16 of each agreement
and have been made to the original documents. That direction's at
staff s request.
Next item is to withdraw item 16D20. It's a recommendation to
award contract number 08-5068, fiscal and biological monitoring for
Collier County Coastal Zone Management projects for Coastal Zone
Management to Coastal Planning and Engineering Inc.; Coastal
Engineering Consultants, Inc.; and Humiston & Moore Engineers, and
that item is being withdrawn at staffs request.
Next item is to move item 16E4 to lOP, and that's to recommend
approval of award of contract number 07-4160 to EMC Corporation
for information technology services management software and related
professional services. It's for $164,593, and that item is being moved
at Commissioner Coyle's request.
Page 4
June 24, 2008
The next item is to move item 16F6 to 100. It's approval ofa
resolution to supercede resolution 06-200, which directed the County
Manager to establish a floodplain management committee -- excuse
me -- floodplain management planning committee to add two
additional positions for practicing civil engineers. That item is being
moved at Commissioner Fiala's request.
The next item is item 16G 1. The second page under
considerations should read, more professional setting rather than
stetting, and -- too many T's in that sentence. And that correction is at
Commissioner Fiala's request.
Next item is 16G6. The second paragraph under background of
CRA catalyst project should read, storage tanks that stored leaded
gasoline from 1969 to 1980, and what it had there, it said, instead of
1980, it had 1970. So it's from 1969 to 1980, and that correction is
also at Commissioner Fiala's request.
The next item is to withdraw 16H5. Commissioner Fiala requests
board approval for reimbursement regarding attendance at a function
serving a valid public purpose, attending the Marco Business After 5
on June 18,2008, at Marco Vacation Club, Crystal Shores, on Marco
Island, Florida. Five dollars to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's
travel budget. Again, this is a withdrawal at the request of
Commissioner Fiala.
The next item is item 16Kl, continued to July 22nd, 2008,
meeting. It's a recommendation to authorize the offer of judgment for
parcel 124 by Collier County to property owners Jeannie and Donald
Fields in the lawsuit styled CC, Collier County, versus Pacal 1.
Murray, et ai, case number 07-4784-CA, Santa Barbara extension
project number 60091. Fiscal impact if accepted is $168,803. That
item's at staffs request.
The next item is item 17 A. The street address for the
Ritz-Carlton Hotel should be 280 Vanderbilt Beach Road, rather than
282 Vanderbilt Beach Road. That correction's at staffs request.
Page 5
June 24, 2008
Now, we have a series of time-certain items today, and I'm going
to shorten at least the subjects up a little bit because every one of these
time certains are in the printed agenda index and they're all itemized
that way. But just so we get it out to folks so that they understand in
case they haven't seen the index, here we go.
Item 8A to be heard at or about 1 :00 p.m. following item l2B,
and this item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by commission members.
This is a PUDA-2007-AR-12322, Livingston Professional
Center, LLC, represented by Robert L. Duane, AICP, of Hole Montes,
is requesting an amendment to the Hiwassee PUD to revise existing
development standards, transportation requirements, and property
ownership information.
The next time certain item is item 8B to be heard at 4:30 p.m.
8B, 8C, and lOG, all have to do with the water and wastewater master
plan, the water and wastewater rate study, and the water and
wastewater impact fee study. Those three items will be heard at 4:30
p.m. And those items are again, item 8B, 8C, and lOG.
Next item, item lOA to be heard at 11:00 a.m. Essie Serratta, the
Executive Director of the Collier County Housing Authority requests
approval of deviations from the Collier County Land Development
Code LDC through the Site Development Plan approval process in
order to rehabilitate dwelling units, structures, within the Farm
Worker's Village pursuant to a $9.2 million federal grant on property
located in Immokalee.
The next time certain item is item lOB to be heard at 2:30 p.m.
It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
determine whether tourist development funds may be used to fund
additional erosion control structures at Hideaway Beach.
The next time certain item is item 10D to be heard at 4:00 p.m.
It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
provide the County Manager or his designee with guidance relating to
Page 6
June 24, 2008
the location of water and wastewater utility lines and associated
impacts to Orange Tree utility customers resulting from the widening
of Oil Well Road.
The next time certain item is item -- and I've already mentioned,
lOG.
The next time certain item lOL to be heard at 1 :30 p.m. It's to
review Clam Bay restoration and long-term management plan permit
compliance issues and obtain direction from the Board of County
Commissioners on how to proceed.
The next time certain item is item 12A to be heard at 12 noon.
It's a, notice is hereby given that pursuant to section 286.011(8),
Florida Statutes, the County Attorney desires advice from the Board of
County Commissioners in closed attorney-client session on Tuesday,
today, June 24,2008, at a time certain of noon in the commissioner's
conference room.
And the subject of this closed-door meeting will be the pending
litigation case of Lucky M.K., Inc., versus Collier County.
The next item that -- with the a certain is item 12B to be heard at
one p.m. And after the board normally comes out of shade session
they go back into the sunshine and give direction to staff. And, again,
that will happen at one p.m. under item 12B for the Board of County
Commissioners to provide direction to the County Attorney Office as
to settlement negotiations and strategy related to litigation
expenditures in the pending litigation case of Lucky M.K., Inc., versus
Collier County.
The next time certain item is item 12C to be heard at 3:15 p.m.
It's a request that the Board of County Commissioners provide
direction to staff and to the County Attorney whether to commence a
civil lawsuit or, in alternative, a code enforcement proceeding against
Milano Recreation Association, Inc., for violating the PUD ordinance
number 03-54, the Royal Palm Academy PUD, relating to failure and
refusal to allow residents of Imperial Golf Estates to construct a road
Page 7
June 24, 2008
which is Marquis Boulevard, over portions of the Milano subdivision
to access Livingston Road contrary to the commitments made during
the PUD rezoning process.
And the last time certain item is item 13A to be heard at 10:00
a.m. It's a presentation of the comprehensive annual financial report
for the fiscal year ending December 30,2007.
Mr. Chairman, that's all I have.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Wow. Let's see if Commissioner
Coletta could be shorter than that.
Commissioner Coletta, do you have any changes, any further
changes or any ex parte on today's consent agenda or summary
agenda?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If! may, sir, I'd like to go with
the ex parte first, then I've got a comment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In the ex parte under 16A9, I
had meetings, correspondence, emails, and calls. And on the -- let's
just see. On the summary agenda, item C, I've had meetings,
correspondence, and anyone that wishes to see any -- oh, also, too, on
item D, 17D, I had correspondence; and on 17E, I had
correspondence, emails, and phone calls, and I have everything in my
file if anybody would like to see it.
Also, sir, I'd like to ask this commission to give due consideration
to item 10M, which is being asked to be continued. There's a time
element that's entering in with our long recess that's coming up that
the -- there is some new information that came forward on this that is
very, very interesting. It's almost a deal that's too good to be true -- of
course, I'm sure we'd get a lot better -- that would involve little as far
as the county's funds. Most of it would be financed by the owner.
I think it's a tremendous opportunity, and I'd like to see ifmaybe
we could bring this item forward and consider spending the $20,000 to
do the appraisal to try to keep it going forward. This has to do with
Page 8
June 24, 2008
the boat ramp facility at Port of the Isles.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner, let me tell you
why we continued it. The County Manager has concerns about this
item, and instead of, you know, talking about those -- and I know -- I
mean, we have a very difficult agenda, and I know that yourself and
Commissioner Halas is going to be leaving early.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I'm not, sir. I'm here for the
duration.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, all right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If! may, sir?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. I mean, that's -- I mean, I don't
have a problem if you're going to stay, but --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think if you check with the
County Manager, they -- he was concerned about the freshwater flow
as being an essential part of this marina to be able to maintain the
water level. I think since then, at least I hope he did, he's found out
that this is a tidal basin and it's not affected by the freshwater
discharge; is that correct, sir? Was that your concern?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I haven't been able to ascertain yet
from the documents that we've been reviewing from the South Florida
Water Management District what impact not having any freshwater
going into that basin will do as far as the levels are concerned. But it
is a tidal basin, sir. I'm not arguing with that. And if the freshwater is
completely reduced, then it will be nothing but a tidal basin.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If! may, sir, in order not to
delay this thing and keep it going forward, due diligence could be
done first to be able to explore that fact, and then they could do the
appraisal. There's going to be plenty of time between now and our
next meeting into July, and then that will enable us to be able to pick
up the pace so that -- August, of course, we're not going to be meeting.
So I'd like considering to keep that on the agenda, and I promise you
that we'll keep it very short.
Page 9
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, Commissioner Fiala, if
you -- do you have any problems with that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not at all.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have any ex parte
communications?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: On the consent agenda, I have none.
On the summary agenda, I have 17C; I've had meetings with Bob
Mulhere, and that's it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No other further changes?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No other further changes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't have any problems with
Commissioner Coletta's request since he's going to stay here today.
Ex parte -- actually, I do have one item that I would like to put on
the regular agenda, and that's 16 David 21, Cirrus Pointe. And ex
parte communications, 17C from the -- talked to the residents,
received correspondence from residents in the area. I talked to the
owner of the property and received correspondence from our staff.
16-9A (sic), I do have correspondence on that, and I take it that's
staying on the agenda today?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. That's all I have.
Commissioner Halas, do you have any -- you okay with
Commissioner Coletta's request for --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm sure it's going to be discussed
probably later on toward the end, so I'm not sure if I'll be here at that
point in time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But ifhe'd like to discuss it, fine,
that's okay with me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have any ex parte
communication?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I do. On the consent agenda,
Page 10
June 24, 2008
item 17 A9, I had a constituent that called me in January of this year
regarding the final plat. And also I had a meeting on 1/29/08 in
regards to this same item.
As far -- that's the only thing I have to bring forth on the consent
agenda. On the summary agenda, I do not have any disclosures.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have any changes?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No changes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, do you have
any concerns any Commissioner Coletta's request?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The only concern I have is that it
has indicated as being continued, and whether or not it will be
misleading to the public that we, in fact, do consider it now is the only
concern I have. I'd be happy to discuss it otherwise, if it -- if there is
no problem with disclosure and advertising on this subject, then I don't
have a problem with that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: If you wish to hear it, you may hear it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then I don't have any
problem with that. I have no further recommended changes to the
agenda. And I have one ex parte on item 17C of the summary agenda.
I have met with the petitioner's agents, Mr. Bob Mulhere and Rich
Y ovanovich, concerning the Standing Oaks PUD.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And I failed to recognize the
County Attorney. Do you have any words of wisdom or any changes
for today's agenda?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, sir.
MR. MUDD: Just for clarity, sir, 16D21 will be lOQ.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: lOQ. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: On my ex parte, I forgot to mention
that I met with Rich Y ovanovich and Bob Mulhere on 17C.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Entertain a motion to approve
Page 11
June 24, 2008
the agenda as amended with the comments of the County Manager
and Commissioner Coletta's wishes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion to approve. Second by?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: By Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Page 12
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
June 24. 2008
Item 3A: David Becker, EMS; Harry Chancy, Building Review and Permitting; Chartchai Isaroskul,
Road and Bridge, will not be present to accept their service awards. (Staff's request.)
Item 4B: Also accepting this proclamation will be the Collier County Water Department. (Staff's
request.)
Item 5A was omitted from the printed aQenda index: Presentation by Senator Burt L. Saunders
regarding a tribute recognizing the "Brotherhood Riders", a group that dedicated their 600 mile
journey in honor of nine firefighters who perished while fighting a fire in Charleston, South
Carolina. (Staff's request.)
Item 5B was omitted from the printed aQenda index: Posthumous presentation of the Advisory
Committee Outstanding Member Award to Kevin G. Kacer for his work on the Conservation Collier
Land Acquisition Advisory Committee. (To be accepted by Mrs. Kevin Kacer.)
Move 16A15 to 10N: Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
affirm staffs interpretation of the proper disposition of revenue generated from the sale of CDES
Fund 113 surplus goods, and provide direction to staffthat all revenue generated from the surplus
sale of such capital goods originally purchased within Fund 113 be returned to Fund 113 capital
reserves. (Commissioner Henning's request.)
Items 16016. 16018 and 16023: The following changes have been made to each Subrecipient
Agreement: Section III, Time of Performance section should read: "The effective date of the
Agreement between Collier County and the DCA shall be May 14, 2008, and the services. . ." And,
"In any event, all services required hereunder shall be completed by the SUBRECIPIENT prior to
May 13, 2010." In the "IN WITNESS THEREOF" section should read: "IN WITNESS THEREOF, the
parties hereto have caused this 23 page agreement to be executed by their undersigned officials as
duly authorized by the agreement between Collier County and the DCA effective the 14'h day of May
2008." All corrections are on page 2 and page 16 of each agreement and have been made to the
original documents. (Staff's request.)
Withdraw Item 16020: Recommendation to award Contract(s) #08-5068: Physical and Biological
Monitoring for Collier County Coastal Zone Management Projects for Coastal Zone Management to
Coastal Planning and Engineering, hic.; Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc.; and Humiston &
Moore Engineers. (Staff's request.)
Move Item 16E4 to 10P: Recommend approval of award of Contract #07-4160 to EMC Corporation
for Information Technology Service Management software and related professional services.
($164,593.00) (Commissioner Coyle's request.)
Move Item 16F6 to 100: Approval of a resolution to supersede Resolution 06-200, which directed
the County Manager to establish a Floodplain Management Planning Committee, to add two
additional positions for practicing civil engineers. (Commissioner Fiala's request.)
Item 16G1: The second paragraph under "Considerations" should read: ".. .more professional
setting" (rather than "stetting"). (Commissioner Fiala's request.)
Item 16G6: The second paragraph under Background of CRA Catalyst Project should read:
".. .storage tanks that stored leaded gasoline from 1969 to 1980" (rather than 1970). (Commissioner
Fiala's request.)
Withdraw Item 16H5: Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement regarding
attendance at a function serving a valid public purpose. Attending the Marco Business After five
on June 18, 2008 at Marriott Vacation Club, Crystal Shores on Marco Island, FL. $5.00 to be paid
from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget. (Commissioner Fiala's request.)
Item 16K1 continued to the Julv 22. 2008 meetinq: Recommendation to authorize the Offer of
Judgment for Parcel 124 by Collier County to property owners, Jeannie and Donald Fields in the
lawsuit styled CC v. Pacal J. Murray, et aI., Case No. 07-4784-CA (Santa Barbara Extension Project
No. 60091) (Fiscal Impact: If accepted, $168,803). (Staff's request.)
Item 17 A: The street address for the Ritz Carlton Hotel should be 280 Vanderbilt Beach Road,
rather than 282 Vanderbilt Beach Road. (Staff's request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 8A to be heard at or about 1 :00 p.m. followinq Item 12B: This item requires that all participants
be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUDA-2007-AR-12322
Livingston Professional Center LLC, represented by Robert L. Duane, AICP, of Hole Montes, Inc. is
requesting an amendment to the Hiwassee PUD to revise existing development standards,
transportation requirements and property ownership information. The +/-12.52-acre subject
property is located 1400 feet north of the intersection of Eatonwood Lane and Livingston Road, in
Section 13, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
Item 8B to be heard at 4:30 p.m. Adopt a resolution amending the Collier County Water-Sewer
District Impact Fee Rates established by Ordinance No. 2007-57. (To be heard following Item 10G.)
Item 8C to be heard at 4:30 p.m. Adopt a resolution amending Schedules One and Four through
Seven of Appendix A to Section Four of the Collier County Ordinance No. 2006-27, titled The Collier
County Water-Sewer District Uniform Billing, Operating and Regulatory Standards Ordinance; This
amendment included proposed rates for water and wastewater services with effective dates of
October 1, 2008 and October 1, 2009 for Schedule 1 of appendix A of the Ordinance; and provides
for an effective date of October 1, 2008 for Schedules Four through Seven of Appendix A of the
ordinance. (This item to be heard following items 10G and 8B.)
Item 1 OA to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. Essie Serratta, the Executive Director of the Collier County
Housing Authority requests approval of deviations from the Collier County Land Development Code
(LDC) through the Site Development Plan (SDP) approval process in order to rehabilitate dwelling
units structures within the Farm Workers Village pursuant to a 9.2 million dollar Federal Grant on
property located in Immokalee and for the BCC to review and determine if the requested deviations
are warranted while ensuring that the Community's interests are maintained and health, safety and
welfare standards are upheld. .
Item 10B to be heard at 2:30 p.m. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
determine whether Tourist Development Funds may be used to fund additional erosion control
structures at Hideaway Beach by making a finding as to whether funding these erosion control
structures is in the public's interest as required by the Tourist Development funding Policy.
Item 10D to be heard at 4:00 p.m. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
provide the County Manager, or his designee, with guidance relating to the relocation of water and
wastewater utility lines, and associated impacts to Orange Tree Utility customers, resulting from
the widening of Oil Well Road.
Item 10G to be heard at 4:30 p.m. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt
the 2008 Collier County Water and Wastewater Master Plan Updates, dated June 24, 2008, Projects
700703,730663,750071,750072. (This item to be heard before Items 8B and 8C.)
2
Item 10L to be heard at 1:30 p.m. Review Clam Bay Restoration and Long Term Management Plan
Permit Compliance issues and obtain direction from the Board of County Commissioners on how to
proceed.
Item 12A to be heard at 12:00 noon: Notice is hereby given that pursuant to Section 286.011(8), Fla.
Stat., the County Attorney desires advice from the Board of County Commissioners in closed
attorney-client session on Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at a time certain of 12:00 noon in the
Commission conference room, 3'd Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building, Collier County Government
Center, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida. In addition to Board members, County Manager
James Mudd, County Attorney Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, and Assistant County Attorney Jacqueline
Williams Hubbard will be in attendance. The Board in executive session will discuss: Settlement
negotiations and strategy related to litigation expenditures in the pending litigation cases of Lucky,
M.K., Inc. v. Collier County, et al., Case No. 07-0958-CA, now pending in the Twentieth Judicial
Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida.
Item 12B to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. For the Board of County Commissioners to provide direction to
the County Attorney's Office as to settlement negotiations and strategy related to litigation
expenditures in the pending litigation case of Lucky, M.K., Inc. v. Collier County, et al., Case No. 07-
0958-CA, now pending in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida.
Item 12C to be heard at 3:15 p.m. Request that the Board of County Commissioners provide
direction to staff and to the County Attorney, whether to commence a civil lawsuit, or in the
alternative, a code enforcement proceeding, against Milano Recreation Association, Inc., for
violating PUD Ordinance No. 03-54 (The Royal Palm Academy PUD), relating to failure and refusal
to allow residents of Imperial Golf Estates to construct a road ("Marquis Boulevard") over portions
of the Milano subdivision to access Livingston Road, contrary to commitments made during the
PUD rezoning process.
Item 13A to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Presentation of the comprehensive annual financial report for
the fiscal year ended September 30,2007.
3
June 24, 2008
Item #2B and #2C
MINUTES OF THE MAY 27,2008 - BCC/REGULAR MEETING;
MINUTES OF THE MAY 30, 2008 - VALUE ADJUSTMENT
BOARD - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
I'll entertain a motion to approve May 27,2008, BCC regular
meeting and May 30 Value Adjustment Board meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
Now we're going to go to service -- in the front for the service
awards. It will only take --
MR. MUDD: You only have one, sir, so you might want to take
it from where you're sitting if that would be okay.
Item #3A
SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD
MEMBERS): 20 YEAR ATTENDEES
MR. MUDD: We have one service award. It's a 20-year
Page 13
June 24, 2008
attendee, and that's Franklin Chain for Road and Bridge.
Franklin, could you come forward.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. He's a big guy; maybe we
should stay up here.
Congratulations, sir.
MR. CHAIN: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Franklin, thank you so much for
your servIce.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This is for your years of service.
MR. CHAIN: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. Let's get a picture,
Frankie.
(Applause.)
Item #4A and Item #5A
PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE THE MEN AND WOMEN
WHO P ARTICIP A TED IN THE BROTHERHOOD RIDE TO
RAISE DONATIONS FOR THOSE WHO LOST F AMIL Y
MEMBERS IN CHARLESTON, Sc. TO BE ACCEPTED BY FIRE
INSPECTOR JEFF MORSE, NORTH NAPLES FIRE CONTROL
RESCUE DISTRICT, FIRE CHIEF MIKE BROWN, NORTH
NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DIST., CAPTAIN
JAMIE CUNNINGHAM, NFD, PRES. OF NORTH NAPLES
PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTER'S UNION FIREFIGHTER
CHRISTOPHER SPENCER, NNFD, Y.P. OF NORTH NAPLES
PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTER'S UNION, SHERIFF DON
HUNTER, COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, ROBERT
METZGER, FIRE CHIEF OF GOLDEN GATE FIRE DISTRICT,
DEPUTY DAN MCDONALD, C.C.S.O. (BROTHERHOOD
Page 14
June 24, 2008
RIDER) FIRE CHIEF RITA GREENBERG, REPRESENTING BIG
CORKSCREW ISLAND F.D., AND FIRE CHIEF ROBERT NULL,
REPRESENTING EAST NAPLES FIRE DEPARTMENT, JIM
SQUITTIERI, GOLDEN GATE FIRE DISTRICT. (COMPANION
TO ITEM #5A) - ADOPTED
PRESENTATION BY SENATOR BURT L. SAUNDERS
REGARDING A TRIBUTE RECOGNIZING THE
"BROTHERHOOD RIDERS", A GROUP THAT DEDICATED
THEIR 600 MILE JOURNEY IN HONOR OF NINE
FIREFIGHTERS WHO PERISHED WHILE FIGHTING A FIRE IN
CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA (COMPANION TO ITEM
#4A- PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to proclamations.
4A, as I mentioned before, and 5A are basically thanking the same
group, and we'll try to do those at the same time, and I'll read them
both.
4A. It's a proclamation to recognize the men and women who
participated in the Brotherhood Ride to raise donations for those who
lost family members in Charleston, South Carolina, to be accepted by
Fire Inspector Jeff Morse, the North Naples Fire Control Rescue
District; Fire Chief Mike Brown, the North Naples Fire Control and
Rescue District; Captain Jamie Cunningham, NFD, president of the
North Naples Professional Firefighters Union, Firefighter; Christopher
Spencer, North Naples Fire District, VP of the North Naples
Professional Firefighters Union; Sheriff Don Hunter, Collier County
Sheriffs Office; Robert Metzger, Fire Chief of Golden Gate Fire
District; Deputy Dan McDonald, C.C.S.O., Brotherhood Rider; Fire
Chief Rita Greenwood (sic), representing Big Corkscrew Island Fire
Department; and Fire Chief Robert Null representing the East Naples
Fire Department; Jim--
Page 15
June 24, 2008
MR. SQUITTIERI: Squittieri.
MR. MUDD: Help me?
MR. SQUITTIERI: Squittieri.
MR. MUDD: -- Squittieri -- Golden Gate -- thank you very
much -- Fire Department. And this is, again, a companion item to SA,
and SA I will read.
It's a presentation by Senator Burt L. Saunders regarding a tribute
to recognize the Brotherhood Riders, a group that dedicated their
600-mile journey in honor of nine firefighters who perished while
fighting a fire in Charleston, South Carolina.
Now, all those people that I just mentioned, come on up.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And stand right in front of the dais to
the Board of Commissioners.
MR. MUDD: And it isn't time to be shy.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do we have everyone now? Then I
will read this proclamation.
Whereas, 19 local firefighters and representatives from Collier
County Sheriffs Office rode bicycles over 600 miles to honor nine
firefighters who lost their lives in Charleston, South Carolina; and,
Whereas, beginning last year, North Naples firefighters initiated
the idea of forming a Brotherhood Ride to honor families who lost
loved ones in a tragic warehouse fire in Charleston; and,
Whereas, Inaugural Brotherhood Ride traversed three states on
bikes connecting communities and honored their fallen brothers on
each day of the nine-day journey. They also gathered more riders
from other states such as Texas and Ohio; and,
Whereas, Brotherhood Ride raised over $30,000 to help
firefighters' families in Charleston who lost their loved ones so
suddenly; and,
Whereas, their difficult journey represents the sacrifices each
firefighter, police officer, and EMS member endures as he or she
arrives for duty each day; and,
Page 16
June 24, 2008
Whereas, the ultimate sacrifice of the Charleston nine was
memorialized from the dedicated efforts of these Brotherhood Riders;
and,
Whereas, the spirit of brotherhood triumphed over the heat
adversities and elements of this arduous trek; and,
Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners would like to
recognize the men and women who participated in this Brotherhood
Ride as goodwill ambassadors of Collier County, to demonstrate
sincerity and charity throughout the journey while bonding together to
help others along the way.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that June, 2008, be
designated as Brotherhood Ride Month.
Done and ordered this 24th day of June, 2008, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning, Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we accept this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Fiala, to move this proclamation.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
MR. MUDD: Senator Saunders?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Senator Saunders?
SENATOR SAUNDERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and
Page 17
June 24, 2008
Commissioners. It certainly is an honor for me to be here today on
this very special occasion.
Public safety, as we all know, is the most important function of
government, and we're here to say thank you not only to the riders that
participated in the Brotherhood Ride, but to all of the public safety
personnel, all of the first responders that keep us safe. So we want to
say thank you to these folks, but as well, we want to say thank you to
all the people that keep us safe in this community.
I have a Senate proclamation, a tribute recognizing the
Brotherhood Riders. And Mr. Chairman, it will just take me just a
moment to read it.
Whereas, the Brotherhood Riders was the inspiration in 2007 of
the North Naples Firefighters to form the Brotherhood Ride in honor
of nine firefighters who lost their lives in a warehouse fire in
Charleston, South Carolina; and,
Whereas, the Brotherhood Riders consist of 19 local firefighters,
law enforcement officers, and emergency medical personnel who rode
their bicycles from Naples, Florida, to Charleston, South Carolina;
and,
Whereas, the Brotherhood Riders offered financial and emotional
support for the families of the nine firefighters who died in Charleston,
South Carolina; and,
Whereas, the Brotherhood Riders raised over $30,000 for the
families of the Charleston nine; and,
Whereas, the Brotherhood Riders rode over 600 miles and
achieved victory in their quest to reach Charleston safely; and,
Whereas, the Brotherhood Riders' nine-day journey culminated
in goodwill, charity, and compassion for their fellow man; and,
Whereas, the Brotherhood Riders dedicated each day of their
journey to one of the Charleston firefighters.
Now, therefore, the Florida Senate does hereby proclaim that the
Brotherhood Riders be recognized for honoring their fellow
Page 18
June 24, 2008
firefighters.
Mr. Chairman, that is the Senate proclamation. And Mr.
Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
SENATOR SAUNDERS: I do have specific proclamations for
certain individuals, and I have enough of these proclamations for all
19 people that participated in the ride.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's great. Well, would you all rise
and let's recognize the proclamations.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Actually I misspoke, recognize these
gentlemen who took a hard road up to North Carolina. What a great
accomplishment.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And ladies, too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And ladies.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we're going to present these to
you one at a time. I think I have enough for everyone. But who wants
the master? Okay, there you go.
Ladies and gentlemen, as I shake your hand, I'll give you a
proclamation. Thank you very much. If there's more than 19 of you,
we're going to have to make copies. Who's next?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thanks for a good job.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for your service.
Appreciate what you did.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good morning. How are you?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It was fun?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Who's next? Those are the only
two I've got. I have 19.
MR. MUDD: One more group picture. Okay. Group picture.
Page 19
June 24, 2008
Now put on your best smiles if you can. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You got it, Jerry? You want to say a
few words?
MR. MORSE: Gentlemen, Commissioners, Senator, from the
bottom our hearts, we'd just like to thank you for the proclamations
and the well wishes that you have bestowed upon us today.
We -- the Brotherhood Ride represented firefighters, police
officers, EMS. And like we have said, we rode nine days; each day
being dedicated to one of these Charleston, South Carolina,
firefighters that died in that tragedy June 18th last year.
The Brotherhood Ride not only represented North Naples, but it
represented a lot of your local community firefighters from Collier
County. We had firefighters from Big Corkscrew Island, Golden Gate
Fire Department, North Naples, East Naples Fire Department, the
Collier County Sheriffs Officer, and we had a medical doctor with us
also along the ride. So we represented three branches of your public
safety.
As Senator Saunders so eloquently said, it wasn't just what we
did, it was what firefighters, police officers, EMS people do every day
on the street.
These nine firefighters went into work that day to a normal work
day. When they, unfortunately, got that assignment of the warehouse
fire, they would handle it just like any other firefighter you see in this
room would handle it. We all know as we come on the job the first
day when we go to fire school, they teach us our job description, and
it's protection of lives and property. It's one sentence and it's instilled
in us and it's that simple, protection oflives and property.
That day those guys got their assignment; they knew it was going
to be a big fire, and they would handle that fire just like any of us
would in this room. We'd surround and drown it, we'd stand back, and
we'd put it out and not endanger our lives.
But on the route there and when they arrived at the scene, they
Page 20
June 24, 2008
were told there were citizens inside that building; at that time they
changed their tactics. They went in, instead of protecting property,
they went in to protect lives, and that's when, unfortunately, they
succumbed and nine firefighters died.
But what's important to realize is that at that fire, they made two
successful rescues. They made (sic) two civilians out of that building
and they're alive today because of the actions of the Charleston Fire
Department.
So when we talk about the Brotherhood Ride and we talk about
these proclamations, like Senator Saunders said, it's every day these
firefighters, police officers, and EMS people are on the streets. It's
what we do for a living.
Thank you for your efforts.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE THE RESIDENTS AND
EMERGENCY RESPONDERS OF THE 800 ACRE FIRE MAY
29TH & 30TH. TO BE ACCEPTED BY GOLDEN GATE
ESTATES COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM,
FLORIDA ALERT RESPONSE TEAM, COLLIER COUNTY
DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT, AMERICAN
RED CROSS, COLLIER AREA TRANSIT BUS, COLLIER
COUNTY DISTRICT SCHOOLS, COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFFS
OFFICE, COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT, COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES, THE SALVATION ARMY, FL DIVISION OF
FORESTRY, COLLIER COUNTY PURCHASING
DEP ARTMENT, COLLIER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH FLORIDA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY
Page 21
June 24, 2008
MANAGEMENT, FLORIDA HIGHWAY PATROL FLORIDA
POWER & LIGHT, SPRINT, W ALMART, JW KRAFT,
IMMOKALEE FD, EAST NAPLES FIRE DEPARTMENT, BIG
CORKSCREW FIRE DEPARTMENT, GOLDEN GATE FIRE
DEPARTMENT, OCHOPEE FD, NORTH NAPLES FD, ISLES OF
CAPRI FIRE DEPARTMENT, CITY OF NAPLES FIRE
DEPARTMENT, MARCO ISLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT,
BONITA SPRINGS FIRE DEPARTMENT, SAN CARLOS PARK
FIRE DEPARTMENT, IONA MACGREGOR FIRE
DEPARTMENT, ESTERO FIRE DEPARTMENT, SOUTH TRAIL
FIRE DEPARTMENT, FORT MYERS BEACH FIRE
DEPARTMENT, LEHIGH ACRES FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND
LEE COUNTY PORT AUTHORITY AIRCRAFT RESCUE AND
FIREFIGHTING - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next
proclamation. In a very similar vein, but right here in Collier County,
this is a proclamation to recognize the residents and the emergency
responders of the 800-acre fire May 29th and 30th. To be accepted by
the Golden Gate Estates Community Emergency Response Team, the
Florida Alert Response Team, Collier County Domestic Animal
Services Department, American Red Cross, the Collier Area Transit,
Collier County District Schools, Collier County Sheriffs Office,
Collier County Emergency Management Department, Collier County
Emergency Medical Services, the Salvation Army, the Florida
Division of Forestry, the Collier County Purchasing Department,
Collier County Department of Health, Florida Division of Emergency
Management, Florida Highway Patrol, Florida Power & Light, Sprint,
Wal-Mart, lW. Kraft, Immokalee Fire Department, East Naples Fire
Department, the Big Corkscrew Fire Department, the Golden Gate
Fire Department, the Ochopee Fire Department, the North Naples Fire
Department, the Isles of Capri Fire Department, the City of Naples
Page 22
June 24, 2008
Fire Department, Marco Island Fire Department, Bonita Springs Fire
Department, San Carlos Park Fire Department; Iona-McGregor Fire
Department, Estero Fire Department, South Trail Fire Department,
Fort Myers Beach Fire Department, the Lehigh Acres Fire
Department, and the Lee County Port Authority Aircraft Rescue and
Firefighting, and the Collier County Water Department.
We have -- we have some folks that are -- represent those
particular agencies to come forward, but individuals accepting on
behalf of the agencies that I've been notified of are Daniel -- Donald
Adams, Senior, from the Lely Area Fire Department and Rescue;
Sandra Betts from the Collier County Sheriffs Office; Jerry Kraft of
J.W. Kraft. He's the president and he also has one guest; East Naples
Fire, three members will be here to represent them; Fire Chief Rita
Greenberg, Big Corkscrew Island Fire and Rescue; Victor Hill, PIO
for the Golden Gate Fire Department; Deborah Horvath, CEO of the
American Red Cross; Fire Chief Edward Howell of the Southwest
Florida International Airport Lee County Port Authority; Scott
Johnson, Purchasing; Richard Lipman, Sprint Nextel; Paul Mattausch,
your Director of the Water Department; Mario Menendez, the Collier
County Fleet Maintenance Supervisor; and Fire Chief Bob Metzger
from the Golden Gate Fire Department.
All those people, and anybody else I didn't mention, please come
forward.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, please. Also, too, I'd like to
have the homeowners association of Golden Gate Estates -- we have
today with us their chair -- their Chairperson, Linda Hartman, and a
board member, Pat Humphrey in the audience. They raised $20,000
also to aid in this effort. So would you come up, please, too, up front.
Please, gentlemen, ladies.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Everybody that was mentioned,
come on down.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Everyone. Mentioned or
Page 23
June 24, 2008
unmentioned that we might have overlooked who played a role in the
fire.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How about our water department.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Hey, watch that.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He wanted to be you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's a lofty goal.
Whereas, what started as a sunny afternoon in Golden Gate
Estates, Thursday, May 29, 2008, quickly turned terrifying for many
local residents; and,
Whereas, the severe lack of rainfall provided a source of fuel for
an 800-acre fire that grew significantly and took the better part of two
days to contain; and,
Whereas, neighborhoods were evacuated and roads were closed;
and,
Whereas, the fire destroyed three homes and damaged seven
others; and,
Whereas, emergency responders faced extremely hazardous
conditions, placing their lives on the line to protect our well-being;
and,
Whereas, it was only through the gallant efforts of the emergency
responders that no lives were lost and property damage was limited;
and,
Whereas, residents of Golden Gate Estates and Collier County
are extremely grateful to the emergency responders who came from
around Southwest Florida to defend and protect lives and property;
and,
Whereas, it is appropriate for all Collier County citizens to join in
this tribute to our residents and emergency responders.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida on behalf of the citizens of
Collier County, that all residents and emergency responders are
Page 24
June 24, 2008
hereby recognized for their tremendous courage and commendable
action during the time of great need.
Done and ordered this, the 24th day of June, 2008, signed by
Chairman Tom Henning, and I'd like to make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Halas to move the proclamation.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could you hold that in the
front? And I have extra copies for just about everybody here.
MR. KRAFT: Could I get everybody to -- you guys move in
front here so we can get a group picture.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Gentlemen, come on up.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Whatever you want Jerry. We're
here for you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If you're real short, step to the
front.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Shows that mutual response does
work.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Very much so. They're very
well organized when it comes to pictures, too.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much.
Residents of Golden Gate Estates are extremely grateful. It's very
Page 25
June 24, 2008
much appreciated.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good to see you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Really appreciate what you did.
Hi, how are you?
MR. POTTEIGER: Commissioners, congratulation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're congratulating you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good seeing you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you so much for all your
work.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Last but not least, Mr.
Summers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I personally signed every one of
those so--
,
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But he didn't sign his name.
CHIEF METZGER: Commissioners, if I might steal a couple
minutes.
As a self-appointed representative of all these fine organizations
that responded to that emergency, we'd like to thank you for the
recognition.
I would like to point out that successful suppression of that fire
wasn't an accident. It resulted obviously from the courageous and
coordinated efforts of all those participating entities.
But the fact remains that out in the Golden Gate Estates area,
which is a large, large area, we still have conditions that are ripe for a
similar kind of disaster. I think we all recognize that. And we hope
that people will understand that in spite of the fact that we've resolved
this issue for the time being in this particular area, the hazards remain
in other areas, and we hope that the public recognizes that there are
things they can do, that they need to do, to try to mitigate the potential
for the future.
The only other thing I'd like to say is that the efforts -- you all
know I'm the new face in the community in terms of suppressing these
Page 26
June 24, 2008
kind of fires, and I've learned a lot, and I was extraordinarily
impressed with the cooperation extended to the Golden Gate Fire
District and the Department of Forestry in helping us suppress this
fire. I'd like to give a personal thanks to everyone that was involved.
The list is too long to enumerate, but they know who they are.
In particular, I want to recognize the City of Naples, which
seemingly is far removed from the Golden Gate Fire District. The
City of Naples water department stepped up in an extraordinary way
for the Golden Gate Fire District in making an emergency tap of a
water source out there that contributed in a tremendous way to our
ability to suppress that fire, and I want to thank them and recognize
them and ask them to please consider keeping that a permanent
resource for us out there because of the reasons that I expressed earlier
for the potential that remains.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for the recognition,
and we stand by to be of service at any time in the future.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Chief.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next
proclamation -- you okay?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, it just must make
Commissioner Coyle proud of the City of Naples, being a former
councilman and representative of the area, participation from the City
of Naples.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm proud of all of them. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
Item #4C
PROCLAMA nON RECOGNIZING AND CONGRA TULA TING
ST AN CHRZANOWSKI FOR BEING HONORED BY THE
Page 27
June 24, 2008
FLORIDA ENGINEER SOCIETY CALUSA CHAPTER AS
GOVERNMENT ENGINEER OF THE YEAR - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, our next proclamation is
recognizing and congratulating Stan Chrzanowski for being honored
by the Florida Engineer Society Calusa Chapter as Government
Engineer of the Year.
Mr. Chrzanowski, if you could please come forward.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hi, Stan.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's a real pleasure to read this
proclamation. This gentleman is an outstanding citizen and is an
outstanding employee of the county.
Whereas, it is hereby noted that Stan Chrzanowski has been
selected as the 2008 Government Engineer of the Year by the Florida
Engineer Society, the Calusa Chapter; and,
Whereas, it is duly noted that during his tenure with the Board of
County Commissioners and more specifically with the engineering
services department and later the engineering and environmental
services department, that Stan is being recognized for honorable
service to the development industry and to the citizens of Collier
County;
Whereas, over the last year, Stan has faithfully and honorably
served to exemplary residential, commercial review standards and
governmental oversight of the development and the building industry,
and in doing so, promoted harmony between the industry and the
citizens of Collier County contributing immeasurably to the
enhancement of the community development, quality of life, and
community character of the county; and,
Whereas, it is reported that every day he works diligently,
enthusiastically, and always displays a positive can-do attitude
throughout the workday, and in doing so, fosters a harmonious
Page 28
June 24, 2008
relationship between the county staff and the development industry;
and,
Whereas, Stan professionally and proficiently enforces the
dictates of the Board of County Commissioners, Collier County
Growth Management Plan, and the Land Development Code; and,
Whereas, given his laudable contributions to the economic,
social, cultural well-being of the citizens of Collier County, it is fitting
that we recognize Stan as the Government Engineer of the Year as
awarded by the Florida Engineer Society, Calusa Chapter, and that we
publicly thank Stan for his dedicated, faithful service to the Board of
County Commissioners and to the citizens of Collier County over the
past year.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Stan Chrzanowski be
recognized, congratulated for his outstanding work in the engineering
field.
Done and ordered this 24th day of June, 2008, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning, Chair.
And, Chairman, I make a motion that we approve this
proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Halas,
second by Commissioner Fiala to move this proclamation.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
Page 29
June 24, 2008
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Congratulations, Stan.
MR. MUDD: We want to take your picture first before you say a
couple words.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Kind of embarrassing.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: Show your presentation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Be nice to the engineer.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, good morning. Those first two
proclamations are tough acts to follow.
I've been blessed. I was blessed to have worked under Tom
Kuck for a decade and a half, I've been blessed to work with a bunch
of real professionals in and out of the county, I've been blessed to have
Jim Mudd and Leo Ochs and Joe Schmitt in my chain of command,
I've been blessed to have a wife that understood the demands of the
job when she had to, and mostly I've been blessed that you all have
allowed me to work for the citizens of Collier County for the last 17
years almost. Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
Item #4 D
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING RECREATION AND PARKS
MONTH. ACCEPTED BY BARRY WILLIAMS, DIRECTOR OF
PARKS AND RECREATION - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next proclamation is
recognizing the Recreation and Parks Month, to be accepted by Barry
Williams, Director of Parks and Recreation, but I don't think Barry's
alone. All of those folks in those green shirts come on up.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you going to telling us who your
friends are with a few comments?
Page 30
June 24, 2008
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So nice to see fresh young faces
here.
Proclamation: Whereas, public parks and recreation systems are
dedicated to enhancing the quality of life for residents of Collier
County through recreational programming, leisure activities and
conservation efforts; and,
Whereas, parks and recreation activities and leisure experiences
provide opportunities for young people to live, grow, and develop into
contributing members of society; and,
Whereas, parks and recreation activities create lifelines and
continuous life experiences for older members of the community; and,
Whereas, parks and recreation activities and leisure experiences
generate opportunities for people to come together and experience a
sense of community; and,
Whereas, employees and local supporters organize youth
activities and provide educational programming on nature, health,
nutrition, safety, and first aid; and,
Whereas, employees and local supporters advocate for more open
space and better trails and ensure parks and recreation and facilities
are safe and accessible places for all citizens to enjoy; and,
Whereas, all residents and visitors alike are invited to enjoy all
our community has to offer by taking part in their favorite sports,
visiting the outdoors, and spending time with family and friends or
just relaxing.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the month of July be
designated as Recreation and Parks Month.
Done and ordered this 24th day of June, 2008, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning, Chairman.
And Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to approve this
proclamation.
Page 31
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by Commissioner Coletta to move the proclamation.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Okay. When you hold that presentation --look it,
when I looked at all of you, the folks that work for Collier County in
this, they're all smiling, and all of you young adults are all frowning.
This is a happy day, okay? So smile for the picture, please.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I guess we need to smile, too.
We okay? Got the picture? Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you so much. Have fun in
the parks, guys.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your name keeps on falling off.
We're going to have to nail that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Maybe that's a sign from God.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Congratulations. Are you
volunteering or working? Volunteering? Just all over the parks.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hi, hello.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Having a good time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good handshake, by the way,
fellow.
MR. MUDD: Thank you very much. Good morning.
Good morning, thank you.
Page 32
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How you doing?
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Chairman, if I may just say a few words.
For the record, Barry Williams, Parks and Recreation Director.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, I just wanted to thank for your
proclamation, our preparation for observing Parks and Recreation
Month for July, and I'd like to thank you for recognizing the vital
contributions of our staff.
And today I brought with me our leadership team for parks and
rec, but I also brought our junior leaders, and we debated whether to
show you something that we were taught by Commissioner Coletta
recently. We were talking about doing the wave, and Mr. Mudd's, you
know, over there shaking his head, so we thought maybe not a good
thing to do.
But we do appreciate Mr. Mudd and Mr. Coletta. Mr. Mudd
came and did some inspirational words for our junior leaders, and
they're out there in our summer camps this summer doing very good
work for us, and so we appreciate them.
We also wanted to let you know, too, briefly that we have a
number of activities that we have planned for July for Parks and Rec
Month, and we encourage the public to come out and visit us. In
particular, July 26th at Sugden Regional Park, we have our ice cream
social, and we hope that you all come out and enjoy and help us
celebrate Parks and Rec Month.
Commissioners, thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissions Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What Barry was referring to
when, they had the volunteer dinner and all the young people were
there, before I knew Mudd was going to speak, our County Manager,
so I got all the kids together and I said, pretend he's a rock star. And
Page 33
June 24, 2008
so when they introduced him, they went absolutely crazy. We had a
good time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's better than mooning.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think they know what it
means.
Item #5B
POSTHUMOUS PRESENTATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE OUTSTANDING MEMBER A WARD TO KEVIN
G. KACER FOR HIS WORK ON THE CONSERVATION
COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION ADVISORY COMMITTEE -
PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to presentations, and
we have -- and we have one today. It's a posthumous presentation of
the Advisory Committee Outstanding Member award to Kevin G.
Kacer for his work on the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition
Advisory Committee, to be accepted by Mrs. Kevin Kacer. And with
our sympathies.
Ma'am, if you could please come forward to receive this award.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ms. Kacer, may I give you this
plaque in honor of your husband's dedicated service and volunteer
(sic) to Collier County citizens and the Conservation Collier Program.
Thank you so much. He was a very valuable input from what I
understand from our staff and his colleagues.
MS. KACER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sorry for your loss.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Thank you.
Commissioner, the next item is -- and that finishes presentations.
Page 34
June 24, 2008
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY MICHAEL SORRELL TO
DISCUSS "DO NOT RESPOND" ORDER - CODE
ENFORCEMENT TO HANDLE REPEAT COMPLAINTS AND
"FLAG" PROPERTIES AS NEEDED
MR. MUDD: It brings us to our one public petition. It's a public
request by Michael Sorrell to discuss do-not-respond order. Mr.
Sorrell?
MR. SORRELL: Good morning, Commissioners. I'd like to
thank you for your time, with such an agenda today, that I have my
few minutes to speak in front of you.
The situation I have started about a year ago in February, and it's
escalated, and in my opinion, the county's being used to harass myself
and several of my other neighbors.
We've got -- right now I have no open code enforcement or
Animal Control issues. Animal Control's been called to my house
more than 60 times since last year. I've had one ticket; that was it.
Last month they were brought five times to my house for dead
animals. And it's one particular neighbor that seems to have an axe to
grind with me. He's called Children and Families, the Sheriffs
Department has been there.
And as I was looking through trying to decide, even some of the
Animal Control officers were advising me that I should seek a
do-not-respond order, they didn't -- weren't able to tell me how to do
that.
So I came before you guys. You hold in your power today to
deem me as a do not respond. And it's been a huge waste of taxpayer
money. Five times last month they came to my house alone.
Yesterday code enforcement was at my house to animals that I have,
Page 35
June 24, 2008
which I passed. That case has been closed.
I've been ticketed for -- or warned for things even as ignorant as
my barbecue grill, I was sent a registered letter saying that I was
illegally storing my barbecue grill. It had to be put in an enclosed
structure. Well, that's against state fire code. I got that sent to me in a
certified letter from code enforcement.
Most of the code enforcement officers have been very
understanding and we came to know each other fairly well over the
last year. So I came here before you guys today to seek a do not
respond and stop the harassment and the waste of taxpayer money.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. And I asked Mr. Sorrell to
be here today because, in my prior life from being a commissioner, I
had a similar experience with my business where I was unfairly
preyed upon by another neighboring business who wanted to seek
revenge on me for whatever reasons, who knows, but it was a daily
occurrence with the code being called, and it went on continuously for
a long time.
Very aggravating. Finally they got to the point that they were
polite to the people -- the person that was calling in the complaint, but
they stopped responding and took it on themselves to do so because
there was nothing to it. And it's -- first it was very concerning. Later
it just became an aggravation.
I don't know what we've got within the county that we can use to
remedy these kind of situations. And once again, too, you know, we
don't really know all the facts at this point in time.
Possibly we could hear from staff on this particular issue, maybe
some suggestions?
MR. SORRELL: I do know Children and Families, they have a
law that says if you make three false complaints, the state attorney
picks up that. He's made two, and he's been warned ifhe does it
again, the state's attorney will pick up the prosecution.
Page 36
June 24, 2008
So they won't even respond to him calling at my house. My kids
have been rousted out of the house, safety inspections. I've had the
sheriffs department take me out, give me a sobriety test in front of my
kids at 10:00 o'clock at night.
And you know, this is not just code enforcement, Animal
Control, it's been the Sheriffs Department, Children and Families.
Anybody he can call. Business licensing has been to my house. It's
just a horrendous waste of taxpayer money, and every day -- yesterday
I gave code enforcement carte blanche to go onto my property and
close the case against me because I didn't want to come here today
with an open case. And the case was, I had too many birds. Well, they
were just there checking my animals.
January they were there checking the tags on my vehicles. They
were there again in June checking the tags on my vehicles. And, you
know, it's -- there's been one ticket issued and that's because my horse
and my mule got out. A tree fell on the fence and knocked it down
and I got a ticket like that because they were already irritated at me.
And I'm afraid at some point -- you know, if they come there and
something would happen to die -- you know, my daughter has a
chicken, it's seven years old. At some point it's going to die.
If they come here and I have a dead animal, you know, I could
face a third-degree felony, and I've been told that. And they've
actually, in my opinion, tried to extort the animals from me, and said,
you know, you get rid of the horse and the mule, your problems will
go away.
And I got rid of the horse and the mule. And the last thing that
they had was, the horse was cribbing, which is a process of -- they
chew the wood. We went on -- they cited me for that. I went on the
Internet and found two pages that are written why horses crib. It has
nothing to do with a deficiency or any problem or worms or anything
else. It released endorphins when they bite on the woods.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Sorrell, I think Michelle Arnold
Page 37
June 24, 2008
is going to answer Commissioner Coletta's question, so if you don't
mind.
MS. ARNOLD: For the record, Michelle Arnold, Code
Enforcement Director.
It's not recommended that we issue a no-response order just
because there may be some issues that are there to respond to. We
have had cases and have had some duplicate complaints registered at
this particular property over the last couple of years, but there has
been some violations found in some of our responses to the property.
So it's not recommended for a carte blanche do-not-respond order.
There may be incidences where Mr. Sorrell is not aware of what
the codes are. So it's kind of left up to code enforcement to respond
and educate the citizen and identify when there are violations out there
that need to be corrected.
We can do something about flagging this particular property so
that if someone is constantly calling in the same violations over and
over again, we can stop it and not go out and respond over and over to
the same particular thing.
So that would be my recommendation that we call -- we flag this
particular property, staff would be aware that the caller would have to
leave their name and number, and we then would advise that particular
person whether or not there's a violation out there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But, Michelle, you heard that --
about family -- Children and Families how they have it set up where if
there's so many complaints that are false and without meaning, there's
a way to be able to bring action against those people that are
disrupting the life of somebody without just cause. Do you think
there's something like that we could ever come up with within the
county to be able to protect?
Is there anything in anybody's codes and ordinances that gives
that kind of protection to our residents, that could give that protection?
MS. ARNOLD: I'm not aware of anything that we've done over
Page 38
June 24, 2008
the years where we've brought suit against -- or brought anything
against a particular person that keeps calling in unfounded violations,
other than us telling them, sorry, we're not going to respond or this is
not a particular violation by flagging the property. I don't know if the
County Attorney's Office is aware of anything, but we don't have
anything similar to Children and Families.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: We don't have that, but it doesn't mean we
couldn't have it if that's the direction from the board.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to look at it in the near
future because I mean, our residents out there have the right to
reasonable enjoyment of their property. Of course, they have to obey
the laws and codes that are within the county.
But still, there should be a reasonable expectation of privacy.
And this is -- sounds like an intrusion, to me, upon this man's privacy.
And I'd like to be able to deal with it in some way, be able to come up
with something where if someone's going to continuously come up
with false accusations against their neighbors for whatever reason,
then some sort of action could be brought against them, possibly on
the county level.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, I'll call it the boy-who-cried-wolftype
of thing. I mean, at this board's desire, we can work with staff, we'll
go through, see what other jurisdictions do, and come back with an
executive summary to give you options.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, Michelle is absolutely
right. This is something that should be left to code enforcement.
They can exercise discretion. They know better than anybody else
whether or not there are things going wrong here.
To put the Board of County Commissioners in the position of
arbitrating between what citizen is being unreasonable in reporting
things to the Code Enforcement Board is going to be a terrible burden,
Page 39
June 24, 2008
and we will not have the information or expertise to make the
decisions. Code enforcement does that.
I think you leave it the way it is. Let code enforcement exercise
some discretion, and if they feel it's not worth going out there, then
they shouldn't go out there. If code enforcement, on the other hand,
fails to perform their duties, that's something we need to get involved
m.
But to try to micromanage the decisions made within code
enforcement, I think, is an incorrect method of trying to solve this
problem.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, Commissioner Coyle, the code
enforcement, from what I'm told, they have to respond to these
complaints to see if they're valid or not.
I can tell you what this example -- I've ran into it at least two
times to where somebody has made allegations. And, in fact, I have
one constituent who enjoys taking pictures and videos of his
neighbor's property.
And see, these people that come from up north, they don't
understand what the laws are and they don't like living in an area that's
not deed restriction, and they expect the county to enforce their
expectations.
I think it is reasonable to have the county staff look into this if
the State of Florida is doing it for complaints to children's family and
services (sic). I think it's reasonable for us to initiate something.
What will happen from this, if we can, those constantly -- people
that are whining, it will take staff less -- less of a time to -- if they're
going on false calls all the time, then it's going to take less of their
time. It's no different than the false alarm ordinance that we have
where we fine somebody for not maintaining their equipment on those
false alarms.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I -- I don't disagree with
anything you've said, but my concern is asking us to issue a directive
Page 40
June 24, 2008
to not respond to the code enforcement department is the wrong way
to handle that problem.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No -- yeah. And I think we're saying
the same thing. And they can't.
Michelle, is that correct, do you have to go on all calls if there's a
complaint?
MS. ARNOLD: Well, we do have to respond to complaints that
come in. I think that the requirement to leave a name of somebody
that's repeatedly calling over and over again kind of deters that caller
from calling over and over again, and sometimes we have that person
call multiple times in a day about the same violation.
So if that's -- that requirement to leave their name there, it tends
to cut back the number of calls when we flag the property.
So that's kind of one way that we can help to, you know, prevent
this reoccurring harassment, so to speak, of a particular property
owner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, again, I think the best way to
handle it is merely to instruct the code enforcement officer to use
some discretion and to record the person who is calling in the
complaint.
I have a constituent who's here almost every meeting -- you all
know who it is -- for the past eight years complaining about the same
things over and over and over and over again. There's no way you're
ever going to solve that person's problem. Let's have a no-respond
policy with that one, too, and I'll probably vote for it.
But I just don't want to see the commissioners get involved in
micromanaging the dispute between a couple of neighbors. I think
code enforcement is much better qualified to deal with that because
they have on-the-ground experience with what's going on out there.
You are obviously reluctant to have us do that because you have
found some violations in this case, but this man should not be
harassed. And the person who makes the calls, if they continue doing
Page 41
June 24, 2008
it, should have some action taken against them.
MR. SORRELL: As far as the complaints--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was going to say, if we could
move this along. If we have sufficient interest in bringing this back to
be able to see what can be offered, I think we ought to do it at this
time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm in favor ofleaving this up to
code enforcement. I think they do an outstanding job.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, they disagree with us.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I guess it's a 3-2, Commissioner
Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But in any case, I think the good
part of this is the fact that we have brought this up, code enforcement
is aware that there's concerns not only on your part, but on the part of
commissioners. And every one of the commissioners has expressed
some concern over what took place. It's how we're going to handle the
ultimate problem in the end.
Meanwhile, I'm going to be monitoring what takes place out
there so that if something does not correct itself in the near future, I'll
bring it back to this commission again.
MR. SORRELL: I would like to say something, two things, one
of them is, the neighbor across the street, they're doing the same thing
to him. I couldn't get him to come in today because he doesn't speak
enough English, was not comfortable, and that came from Michelle
Scavone, code enforcement, said they're doing the same thing to the
guy across the street from me.
And as far as infractions I've had, I've had a vehicle with no tag,
Page 42
June 24, 2008
which I corrected, I had a -- put a wood roof on a chicken coop, okay,
therefore I had a structure. I had to take the wood roof off and put one
of the blue hurricane tarps on it.
I have had infractions. They're all medial. You know, the last
thing that came through, there were six cases against me called in
within two days. Two different officers were there. Somebody living
in a travel trailer, which is untrue. It's 95 degrees out there. Nobody's
going to live in a motor home parked out in the sun. A vehicle with
no tag. I had painted a boat trailer. The tag was laying in the boat.
And Michelle came back the very next day and took that off my
record.
The infractions are not that I have rubbish all over the yard or
that I'm a slob. It's that I want to live in a place that's zoned residential
agricultural. I moved there so I could have animals. And I don't even
know what the problem the neighbor has because it's been an unkept
kids' pool. You name it, it's been turned in.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, he needs to go live in a gated
community --
MR. SCHMITT: Well, I suggested he move back to Naples
Park, but that didn't work, so.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Sorrell.
MR. SORRELL: Once again, thank you for your time.
Item #13A
PRESENTATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 2007 - PRESENTED BY TOM BRADLEY WITH
ERNST & YOUNG; MOTION TO ACCEPT REPORT-
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our time certain
Page 43
June 24, 2008
item, which is 13A. It's at 10:00 a.m. It's a presentation of the
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for fiscal year ended
September 30,2007.
And Mr. Derek Johnssen, from the Clerk's Office, will present.
MR. JOHNSSEN: Thank you, County Manager.
Commissioners, Derek Johnssen from the Clerk's Office. Today
we are pleased to bring you the Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report for the fiscal year ended September 30,2007.
The finance department would like to express our appreciation
for the cooperation that we received during the audit process.
The fiscal year 2000 (sic) audit was performed by Ernst and
Young. Tom Bradley, the partner in charge to perform the Collier
audit is here to walk you through the audit process and how it went
from their standpoint.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
MR. BRADLEY: Super. The technology is working.
Good morning. I'm Tom Bradley. I'm a partner with Ernst and
Young. I'm the partner on the Collier County audit. And it's very nice
to be here today to talk to you about the results of our audit.
One person I'd like to introduce who's with me is Claudia Dixon.
Claudia's one of the senior managers that works on the engagement.
So we have a very short presentation today to just walk you
through a couple of high spots on the audit, the results of that audit
and some required communications that we have.
So with that, I will go through the presentation.
And what I'm first going to do is go to page 3, which discusses
the reports -- excuse me -- the reports that we've issued. And there are
several different reports. I know that you've seen the Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report, which is this large book. As you know, it's
quite comprehensive.
So let me just run down through the opinions and reports we've
issued on the Comprehensive Annual Report.
Page 44
June 24, 2008
The first is the opinion on the financial statements, and I'm very
happy to say that it's an unqualified opinion or what's called a clean
opinion. So what it says is that the financial statements fairly present
the county's results of operations and the financial position as of
September 30,2007.
There are several other reports that we've issued, which are
required under government auditing standards. Those are reports on
internal controls and also on compliance with laws and regulations.
We also issued a single audit, and that's a report on the grant
funds that the county receives, both state grant funds and federal grant
funds.
We've issued a management letter, and also included in this
report are financial statements of all the constitutional officers, and
we've also issued clean opinions on each of those financial statements.
There are a few other financial statements that we -- or I'm sorry,
attestation reports that we do that are just minor, so I won't go into
those now. We also issue an opinion on the water and sewer fund, and
that is in process and is about to be issued.
Just very briefly in terms of a few financial results. And one
thing I want to point out here, too, is that this book, the
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, is the responsibility of the
county. And we, as auditors, we don't keep the books and records.
The county keeps the books and records. We come in and perform an
audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards.
So a few items that I'd like to bring to your attention. This slide
just shows, on a countywide basis, if you look at the entire county,
what is your financial position as of the end of your last fiscal year,
which is September 30,2007.
And the thing I'd like to point out to you is your total net assets
down at the bottom of this page, is two million -- or I'm sorry -- 2.2
billion approximately, and that's up from 1.9 billion the prior year. So
your net assets or your equity went up about 15 percent from the prior
Page 45
June 24, 2008
year.
Turning to the next page, this shows the revenues of the county
on a consolidated or a combined basis. And, again, if you look at the
bottom of this page, you'll see that your revenues, the revenues of the
county, went up 9.2 percent from 2006 to 2007.
And then this next page shows the total expenses, and your total
expenses went up by 7.8 percent. I'm looking at the farthest right
column, from 2006 to 2007, and your net assets, which is your equity,
increased by $281 million during the fiscal year ended September 30,
2007, which was a 12 percent increase. So the county is in a strong
financial position.
Okay. In terms of required communications. We as auditors,
under generally accepted auditing standards, are required to
communicate certain things to governing boards, and so I'm going to
quickly go through these required communications.
The first is on our responsibility which, as I said, is to do an
audit. The county's responsible for keeping the books and records,
and we did issue a clean opinion on the financial statements.
We also look at significant accounting policies and we make
judgments about whether those accounting policies -- because the
county could select several county policies where appropriate. And we
believe that all the accounting policies were appropriate.
Where there are judgments involved, we also look at those
judgments. And, again, that's a major part of our audit, and we believe
that all the judgments the county made are appropriate.
There were not any significant unusual types of transactions with
unusual accounting that we encountered during the course of our
audit, any controversial or emerging areas that we need to bring to
your attention.
There were many audit adjustments that were recorded as a result
of our audit. In other words, when we did our procedures, if we had
findings where we felt that adjustments should be made so that the
Page 46
June 24, 2008
financial statement fairly presented the financial position of the county
and its results of operations, those were recorded.
There were also some amounts that were recorded which were
restatements of the prior yearend financial statements, and those are
reflected in the current year, as of the beginning balance.
There were also some unrecorded audit differences, and we've
communicated these with management. Management is of the
judgment that these are not material to the financial statements, and
we concur with that determination so that they were not recorded.
In terms of fraud and illegal acts, an audit is not designed to catch
all instances of fraud or illegal acts. We do try to design our audit to
look for material instances of fraud, and we did not note any fraud
during the course of our audit that's material to the financial
statements.
There were some material weaknesses that were identified as part
of our audit, and those are listed on the slide here.
There was -- there were also some noncompliance matters that
were raised in our single audit related to certain audit programs, and
those are reported in our findings.
We do review all the information that's included in the
Comprehensive Financial Report that we're not providing an opinion
on, and there's nothing there that we believe is materially misstated.
We did not have any disagreements with management while we were
performing the audit or about significant difficulties with management
and, in fact, our -- there were no limitations on the scope of our work,
and everything we wanted to look at we were able to look at.
Also no major issues discussed with management. And prior to
the time we were hired -- in other words, we didn't agree to a certain
accounting principle prior to the time we were hired, we're also not
aware of any consultation with other accountants. And we are
required to be independent and we believe that we are independent of
Collier County.
Page 47
June 24, 2008
And then lastly, we're also required to discuss with you the work
that we've done under government auditing standards. The scope of
the work that we've performed is as I described to you previously, and
there are other procedures that we could perform, for example, to give
an opinion on internal controls and opinions on compliance which we
haven't performed, and that was part of the scope that you always had
your audit performed under.
So the other information that's in the book, I'm not going to go
through that now. There are a couple of appendices in the back. One
talks about fraud, one talks about governmental required
communications, and the other one says when we're supposed to
discuss with you these various different required communications, and
we've met all of those requirements.
So that's the end of our presentation that we wanted to make. I'd
be happy to answer any questions if there are any.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? I have one. Is there any
recommendations of -- by your department of, you know, ways to
increase sufficiencies (sic) or ways to count the beans differently?
MR. BRADLEY: Differently, yes. We did have -- we issue a
management letter, and that management letter's included in the
report. It's on -- I believe it starts on page 1 --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I -- you know, I got this, I
think, Friday when -- after I was not in the office, so I haven't had time
to read it.
MR. BRADLEY: Right. There's quite a bit of information in
there. But we did make some recommendations regarding grant
accounting, accounting for fixed assets, several different accounting
areas. Not really in the area of efficiencies, but mostly in improved
accounting and controls.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And you're going to respond
to that probably in a memo or something to the board?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, in every one of those cases, we'll
Page 48
June 24, 2008
go after them because every one of those comments gets tracked the
next year, okay, and they basically -- you have to report what actions
you took and it gets reported in the report. So it keeps trailing with
you as you move along.
What I can tell you is, this is the first year since I've been the
manager with Ernst and Young. I will tell you, it's good to have a
fresh set of eyes take a look at your books, okay? And this way -- and
so you don't get that repetition that we had -- for five years we had the
same auditor. This year we had a different one. And it was different,
all right, and it was refreshing in order to get there.
I will tell you they're very diligent, they're very detailed, and
Claudia doesn't mess around. She gets after it, okay, and that's good.
I will tell you the one thing we could get better at with our
auditing, last year you had this report in July. This time you're getting
it in June. Next year we need to get it in March, because if we've got
corrections that we need to do and we find out about them in June, we
only have three months to try to get them done before the next audit
starts, which is looking at the year that you're trying to correct them.
So it -- you're really a year and a half away from getting the
correction that's made that's identified. And so if -- the earlier we get
it, the better we're going to be in order to make the corrections that we
need to make for this county and for the taxpayers.
I will tell you, Ernst and Young, in my opinion, has done a very
good job and they've been very detailed, and I thank everybody in the
county, from all the constitutional officers and from my county staff
for their participation, and I believe that document is quite helpful for
Collier County to become a better place.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great, great.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, simple question. Can you tell
me what kind of things were not recorded? I didn't understand that
part. It says --
Page 49
June 24, 2008
MR. BRADLEY: Sure. The things that, at the end of year, were
not recorded? There was -- the largest item has to do with the county
self-insurance program, and it was really a judgmental difference.
There's -- and it's approximately $2 million, but the county uses
actuaries. We had an actuary review. There's some differences of
opinion about what it should be.
And, you know, based on the materiality of the county taken as a
whole, the county felt it's not material and we concurred with that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay.
MR. BRADLEY: It's that, and you know, some other -- that was
probably the largest item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just wondering what kind of
categories, that was all.
MR. BRADLEY: Right. And believe me, if it was something
that we felt needed to be recorded in order to make the financial
statements correct, we would make sure that it did get recorded.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Very good. Thank you.
MR. BRADLEY: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do we need a motion to accept the
report?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to accept.
MR. MUDD: That would be helpful.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Fiala to
accept the financial report.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 50
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Would you like us to send these
down to the County Manager's Office?
MR. MUDD: You can keep them, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think he has a copy of that.
MR. MUDD: Yes, I do. But if you don't want to use yours
anymore, I can always use them so I don't have to make other copies.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's probably appropriate at this time
to take a ten-minute break and be back at 10:35.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Item #9 A
RESOLUTION 2008-197: APPOINTING KITCHELL T. SNOW TO
THE IMMOKALEE ENTERPRISE ZONE DEVELOPMENT
AGENCY - ADOPTED
Commissioner, that should bring us to item 9, and it's
appointment of a member to the Immokalee Enterprise Zone
Development Agency.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. In may, I'd like to make
a motion that we approve Mr. Snow -- oh, I'm sorry. Did I get the
right one?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Snow.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Halas to appoint Kitchell Snow to the
Page 51
June 24, 2008
Immokalee Enterprise Zone.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: (Absent.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 4-0.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2008-198: APPOINTING GAIL MEINCKE AND
JAMES MOON (AL TERNA TE) OF CITIZEN MEMBERS TO THE
VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9B. It's
appointment of the citizen members to the Value Adjustment Board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to nominate Gail Meincke
for citizen member and James Moon for an alternate member.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala. Is
there a second to the motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Halas.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Page 52
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously 5-0.
Item #9C
CONCERNS REGARDING THE SUNSHINE LAW; COUNTY
ATTORNEY IS TO MEET WITH ALL COUNTY LIAISONS TO
REVIEW THE SUNSHINE LAW ON AUGUST 18, 2008-
CONSENSUS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, next item is 9C, and it's your item
for discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. I'm a little concerned, and we
need to try to find ways to protect our advisory board members of
potential Sunshine Law violation.
As you know, the last meeting, there was an item on
miscellaneous correspondence. In that was the Pelican Bay Services
District, and in the backup material was a correspondence memo from
Gary McAlpin stating a meeting took place in Fort Myers where two
members of our Coastal Advisory Committee attended that meeting in
Fort Myers that was not noticed. Those members are David Buser and
Jim Burke.
I did receive an item through Sue Filson stating that the Coastal
Advisory Committee does not hear items of Clam Bay permitting but,
in fact, they did at their last meeting.
And I also have concerns about staff creating advisory boards.
Advisory boards can only be -- in the county be approved by the
Board of Commissioners. This is not an official advisory board. It
has to be official if it is approved by ordinance and resolution. I
Page 53
June 24, 2008
would hope that the County Manager would be more cautious of
appointments of members.
I've been to one of those meetings. It was -- it was held just on a
-- just like any regular appointments. It was not a citizen's group
coming together and sharing ideas. There was actually a board
created. And I think that we need to give direction to the County
Attorney to certify that board liaison members are (sic) and
understand the Sunshine Law.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think this was well vented (sic) in
the paper, and I believe it was also well vented by the County
Attorney. And I personally didn't see where it was a Sunshine
violation.
And one of the people that was -- that attended that meeting, I
questioned -- in fact, two people that I know that attended that meeting
said that there was no Sunshine violation. And there might be
something as far as the perception, but I really don't believe that there
was a violation of the Sunshine.
And I feel that we just need to drop this matter. We have a hard
enough time getting people to step up to the plate to volunteer their
time to get involved with an advisory commission -- advisory groups.
And I have some concerns that sometimes we are overly protective or
will want to -- not say overly protective, but micromanage these
groups.
And I feel that in my mind there wasn't anything that -- there
wasn't any violation of Sunshine Law. I think that the people that
attended this meeting, I believe that they will make sure there's due
diligence, that there isn't any such thing.
There was, about a year ago or so, we were accused of
congregating in Washington, D.C. on some items, and I can tell you
that the Sunshine -- there was no Sunshine violations at that time
either. But, again, it's the perceived notion that happens.
Page 54
June 24, 2008
And it's amazing how this county reacts to things like this, and
yet other areas and other counties, they realize that there -- they have
problems with meeting transportation requirements and so on, and
they don't seem to have a real problem like we have. So that's my two
cents worth.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. For the most part, I agree
with Commissioner Halas on what he said; however, with that, I do
think it would be prudent on our part to have the County Attorney
brief any committee, real, imaginary, or anyone that does anything
with the county, advise them on what the law is and what the
perception may be of the community and how they act so that they're
well aware what their actions may bring.
And I agree with Commissioner Halas, we have a situation
coming up even today where we have a Florida Association of
Counties meeting, and Commissioner Halas and I are both going to
attend it. Because of the perception element, we are going to be
forced to drive two cars and burn extra gas. There will be other
county employees going, but because of the perception angle of the
whole thing, we're forced to do that so we don't bring attention to
ourselves. And, you know, there's got to be a point in time when we
have to say what's realistic and what's real.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, and I agree with both
Commissioner Halas and Commissioner Coletta, and I had a similar
experience when I'd first become a commissioner, and I went to --
Pam Mac'Kie was giving a speech over at the Conservancy and she
was talking about an ACSC. I asked what an ACSC was, and the next
day in the newspaper it said I was violating the Sunshine Law.
And, you know, I didn't realize that that was communicating with
another commissioner. I was just trying to find out what I was even
listening to.
Page 55
June 24, 2008
So, you know, a lot of times people venture in completely
unknowing and would never violate the Sunshine Law. And I'm sure
that on this slow news day they had nothing else to report, so all of a
sudden they perceived that there could have been.
But I totally agree with Commissioner Halas and Commissioner
Coletta.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think we need to clarify
the rule a bit. There is absolutely nothing wrong with two
commissioners or two members of an advisory board being at the
same meeting, advertised or unadvertised, at the same time.
The real prohibition is that they cannot engage in a debate or a
discussion about an issue which is likely or could possibly come
before the Board of County Commissioners for a decision.
But I would like to support Commissioner Henning's interest in
getting the County Attorney to maybe conduct a review for our
advisory boards because this is an important and sometimes a
confusing law, and it is -- it's easy for a new advisory board member
to run afoul of the law, and it might be good that we have a review of
that for some of the advisory boards to make sure that they avoid even
the appearance of conflict of interest or a violation of the Sunshine
Law.
But in this case, based upon what we have been told, they did not
discuss or debate issues that are likely to come before them in an
official capacity for decision making. But I do believe a review is
appropriate.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. I mean, I'm not going to get
into the backup material and the merits of whether somebody violated
the Sunshine Law. That isn't my point.
I want to make sure that our advisory board members are
protected through the liaison. Mike Sheffield does an absolutely
wonderful job with the Productivity Committee. In the contract with
Page 56
June 24, 2008
the County Attorney it says that he will conduct Sunshine Law
meetings for our advisory board members. But it doesn't say anything
about liaison for the advisory board members.
Now, if it's clear that those liaisons -- maybe this wouldn't be an
issue. But I can tell you, I met with Jim Burke, and he told me he met
with the chairman of the CAC, Commissioner Halas, Gary Buser, and
a member of the County Manager's Office to discuss Clam Bay in
Commissioner Halas' office.
It's very concerning to me when things are discussed in meetings
where the general public is not allowed.
But I would like to give that direction. I think we need to give
that direction for the County Attorney to hold a Sunshine Law session
for those staff members who are a liaison to the county -- or our
advisory boards. Does anybody have a problem with that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think they already do that, don't
they? At the beginning of each new year?
MR. KLATZKOW: We do talk to the liaisons, but we have on
August 18th an ethics training for the new committee members. If the
liaisons could attend that as well, it's already set up for this room, and
we can kill two birds with one stone that way.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager, you have a problem
with that direction?
MR. MUDD: No, that's fine, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Thanks for your time.
MR. MUDD: That's August 18th?
MR. KLATZKOW: August 18th, 10:00 o'clock, this room.
Item # roc
RESOLUTION 2008-199: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
CONDEMNATION OF FEE SIMPLE INTERESTS AND/OR
THOSE PERPETUAL OR TEMPORARY EASEMENT
Page 57
June 24, 2008
INTERESTS NECESSARY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SIX-
LANING AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS TO BOTH
COLLIER BOULEVARD (FROM SOUTH OF DAVIS
BOULEVARD TO GOLDEN GATE MAIN CANAL - PROJECT
NO. 60001) AND DAVIS BOULEVARD (FROM RADIO ROAD
TO COLLIER BOULEVARD - PROJECT NO. 60073).
ESTIMATED FISCAL IMPACT: $1,776200.00 - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 10C?
MR. MUDD: No, we're not there yet. Brings us to 10C, and
that's a recommendation to adopt the resolution authorizing the
condemnation of fee simple interest and/or those perpetual or
temporary easement interests necessary for the construction of
six-Ianing and associated improvements to both Collier Boulevard
from south of Davis Boulevard to Golden Gate main canal, project
number 60001, and Davis Boulevard from Radio Road to Collier
Boulevard, project number 60073.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by Commissioner Halas, and Jay Ahmad needs to say
something for the record.
MR. MUDD: You have to on a condemnation.
MR. AHMAD: Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. I appreciate the time you've given me here to state
certain things that must be on the record for this condemnation
resolution.
This is, again, a condemnation resolution for the Collier and
Davis project. Essentially most of these properties on Collier and
back, there is intersection right-of-way that needs to be corner clips for
Page 58
June 24, 2008
Davis and Collier.
This board must consider certain factors before it acts on this
resolution. It must consider environmental factors, cost, long-range
transportation planning, and public health, safety, and welfare in their
deliberation before the approval.
The condemnation is our last resort. We hope to negotiate most
of these parcels and the acquisition of them. But if we must, we must
condemn them and move forward with this project and hope to be in
construction next year.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. No questions of the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #10E
RECOMMENDATION TO CONDUCT THE CONSERVATION
COLLIER ANNUAL PUBLIC MEETING TO PROVIDE THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND PUBLIC WITH
AN UPDATE ON THE PROGRAMS PAST ACTIVITIES, AND TO
SOLICIT PROPOSALS AND APPLICATIONS FOR THE
CURRENT ACQUISITION CYCLE - MOTION TO ACCEPT
REPORT - APPROVED
Page 59
June 24, 2008
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 10E. It's a
recommendation to conduct a Conservation Collier annual public
meeting to provide the Board of County Commissioners and public
with an update on the program's past activities since its elicit proposals
and applications for the current acquisition cycle.
Ms. Alex Sulecki, Senior Environmental Specialist will present.
MS. SULECKI: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
I'm here for two reasons this morning. First is to provide you with an
update on our programs' past activities and -- for your acceptance and
to solicit proposals and applications for our sixth acquisition cycle
with a deadline for submittal by August 15th.
The Conservation Collier Committee and staff have completed
five selection and approval cycles. We have purchased 1,184 acres in
16 different locations. And we'd like you to look at the Conservation
Collier report submitted for a full report of current and past activities.
On June 9th, the Conservation Collier Committee recommended
forwarding this report to you. And these are the things that we have
accomplished.
We have some objectives for our sixth cycle. We were -- would
like to continue to evaluate and select properties and projects, continue
to secure grant funding wherever we can, conduct more public
meetings for ongoing development of our final management plans,
working with neighborhoods surrounding our properties.
We would like to continue developing public access for our
properties, to work with other county departments to coordinate
conservation land purchases with other public needs, to work
effectively with the transfer of development rights program and offsite
preserve program, and also to finalize a program manual.
And I'm here and also our vice-chairman, Will Kriz, is here to
answer any questions that you may have.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala has a question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, just -- is Pepper Ranch
Page 60
June 24, 2008
figured in anywhere in these calculations, or do we have enough -- I
notice that we're still going to be a little bit short and thinking of
loaning. Have we considered Pepper Ranch in that?
MS. SULECKI: Pepper Ranch has not been considered in the
material that you have today other than it's on our plate and it's
upcommg.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, because I didn't find it in
here. I just wanted to ask that question.
And also, just to throw into the pot, I know that we're trying to
buy urban land and I'm still hoping that maybe in this cycle you'll
consider that piece of property that's for sale right now on Airport and
Estey. Nice urban piece of property.
MS. SULECKI: In order to consider, someone would need to
nominate it for us, and then I would send a letter to the owner and see
if it's for sale.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I'd like to do that.
MS. SULECKI: Forward me the information on the parcel.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Alex, real quick, when are you going to come back
to the Board of County Commissioners with the offer on Pepper
Ranch?
MS. SULECKI: Well, as you know, we have the appraisals back
for Pepper Ranch, and we -- because there is at least a million dollars
difference in the estimate that we gave you and those appraisal values,
we would be going back to our Conservation Collier Committee in
July to get approval to make the offers or recommendation to you, and
then to you on July 22nd for approval to make that offer. We also have
some other complications with the ranch that we're working on right
now, and we'd like to bring an entire package to you at that time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion to accept the
Page 61
June 24, 2008
report.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to accept.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commission Coyle,
second by Commissioner Halas to accept the report.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
MS. SULECKI: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We've got one more?
Item #10H
RESOLUTION 2008-200: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
CONDEMNATION OF THOSE PERPETUAL AND TEMPORARY
EASEMENT INTERESTS NECESSARY FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF STORMW ATER IMPROVEMENTS KNOW
AS PHASE 1 B NORTH OF THE LEL Y AREA STORMW ATER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (LASIP). (CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT NO. 291, PROJECT NO. 51101).
ESTIMATED FISCAL IMPACT: $1,266250.00 - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: I don't think you'll be able to do F. Let's try to do
that condemnation ifit would be okay, 10H, and that's a
Page 62
June 24, 2008
recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing the condemnation
of those perpetual and temporary easement interests necessary for the
construction of stormwater improvements known as Phase IB north of
the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project, LASIP, capital
improvement element number 291, project number 51101, estimate
fiscal impact $1,266,250.
And Mr. Norman Feder, your Administrator of Transportation
Services, will present.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Halas,
second by Commissioner Fiala to approve the staffs recommendation.
Mr. Feder?
MR. FEDER: Yes, very quickly. Just for the record, you've had
many years of developing the plans and the specifications for the Lely
Area Stormwater Improvement Program, or LASIP, as it's known.
There's a technical memorandum by the consulting firm of AB&B that
supported most of that design work and the future -- and the ensuing
permits.
This is part of the process of the phased construction to meet the
provisions of that permit that was needed because of the flooding
being experienced in the Lely area, and we recommend that you do
approve our efforts to go forward and secure this right-of-away and
continue the proj ect.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 63
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
MR. FEDER: Thank you.
Item #10A
COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY REQUEST OF
DEVIATIONS FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) THROUGH THE SITE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (SDP) APPROVAL PROCESS IN
ORDER TO REHABILITATE DWELLING UNITS STRUCTURES
WITHIN THE FARM WORKERS VILLAGE PURSUANT TO A
9.2 MILLION DOLLAR FEDERAL GRANT ON PROPERTY
LOCATED IN IMMOKALEE AND FOR THE BCC TO REVIEW
AND DETERMINE IF THE REQUESTED DEVIATIONS ARE
WARRANTED WHILE ENSURING THAT THE COMMUNITY'S
INTERESTS ARE MAINTAINED AND HEALTH, SAFETY AND
WELFARE STANDARDS ARE UPHELD - MOTION TO
SUPPORT DEVIATIONS WITH STAFF'S
RECOMMENDATIONS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our time certain
item of 11 :00 a.m., and this is Essie Serrata, the Executive Director of
the Collier County Housing Authority, requests approval of deviations
from the Collier County Land Development Code, LDC, through the
Site Development Plan, SDP, approval process in order to rehabilitate
dwelling unit structures within the Farm Workers Village pursuant to a
9 million -- a $9.2 million federal grant on property located in
Immokalee and for the BCC to approve and determine if the requested
deviations are warranted while ensuring that the community interests
Page 64
June 24, 2008
are maintained and health, safety, and welfare standards are upheld.
Ms. Susan Istenes, your Director of Zoning and Land
Development Review from Community Development, will present.
MS. ISTENES: Good morning, Commissioners. I wanted to just
briefly give you an outline of what we discussed in front of you on
February 12th and then kind of give you a summary of where we are
today and then ask for your recommendation or approval, what have
you.
On February 12,2008, Essie Serrata appeared before the Board
of County Commissioners asking for relief from LDC requirements in
order that she may improve or make improvements to approximately
150 dwelling units out of 611 units using a 2006 $9.2 million grant for
the Farm Workers Village in Immokalee.
As you recall at that meeting, we discussed some of the
difficulties associated with improving just a portion of the subject
property as the provisions of the LDC don't address phased or
incremental improvements in this type of situation. In sum, the LDC
requires that you bring the entire site up to current standards at one
time.
My understanding at that meeting of the board's direction was
that we were to bring this item back at a future time so that you could
get more information and details on what the petitioner is requesting
and to figure out a way to move this proj ect forward so that the needed
improvements to the site could be accomplished in a phased and
expeditious manner.
At that meeting, the plan agreed upon was for Essie and her
engineering team to meet with CDES staff and identify specific code
issues that need to be either deviated from or just to present to you,
and that needed to be resolved, and then to bring that back before you,
and that's where we are today.
In the interim between February and today, we did meet with
Essie and her staff in which her staff presented and we did a
Page 65
June 24, 2008
conceptual review of her plans, and we have summarized in the
executive summary a list of the deviations that we and her team
identified as part of this conceptual review based on the plan set that
they submitted.
And we've identified those in your executive summary, and
beside those deviations are also staffs recommendations.
Since this item was published in your executive summary, we
have met with the County Manager, Essie, myself, and Joe Schmitt,
and we've agreed upon some changes to your list based on some
further discussion with Essie.
And I want to go ahead and summarize those today. But before I
do, please understand that if you approve these requested deviations,
you are granting a variance essentially through a site plan review
process, which is something that's not addressed by our LDC.
And I also wanted to make sure that you understood that there is
really no disagreement between staff and Essie regarding the fact that
we need an alternative process, if you will, through our LDC to be
able to use these available monies to improve the living conditions and
address the health, safety, welfare issues that may exist on the subject
site; however, one of the larger issues that staff identified through this
process was -- and this is something that we aren't necessarily
addressing directly today -- is the fact that there are some existing
commercial uses on the site which are in conflict with the current
residential zoning district of the site and possibly the comprehensive
plan.
And these issues really have not been flushed out and the extent
of these issues haven't been flushed out at this point in time. All I can
tell you is that there's a residential zoning district on the site and
there's uses that are not consistent with that zoning district.
That's something that really needs to be investigated and flushed
out, and I have a proposal or recommendation to do that as well,
generally speaking.
Page 66
June 24, 2008
What I believe we agreed upon, with your approval, we are
suggesting that the board -- to address not only these requested
deviations today, but possibly the use and comp plan issues. We're
suggesting that the board impose a three-year time limit on the
applicant to legitimize the requested deviations that are before you
today because, again, as I mentioned, we don't normally do this
through the site plan process. We normally handle these deviations
through a PUD rezone.
That they would be given a three-year time frame or reprieve, as
you will, to essentially rezone the property to planned unit
development and/or address any comp planning issues during that
time as well, so whatever they needed to do to address that, they
would have that time to do that.
And that way they would bring forward and legitimize the
requested deviations that are being heard today.
I'd also mention that if during this time frame that something with
respect to the zoning or the comp plan issues precludes the applicant
from accomplishing this rezone or as there's something that changes as
a result of us digging down and drilling down deeper into the history
of this project and the history of the zoning and the comp planning in
the area, that we would come back before you and kind of bring those
issues to light and discuss it with you.
And if that would impact that three-year time frame, then we
would let you know, I guess at that point and try to come up with
some alternatives or another suggestion or tell you that it didn't need
to be done. I don't know at this point.
I do know that Essie does have some concerns with the history of
approval of the uses on site and the history of the zoning and comp
plan changes in this area, and we do all recognize that this is an older
development and, perhaps, some of the history might be difficult to
uncover.
But nevertheless, we need to try, and it really will be her
Page 67
June 24, 2008
responsibility during this time frame to initiate that use and comp plan
issue to try to flush those issues out so we can figure out exactly what
happened, why the site's currently zoned residential and how the uses
got to be approved on the site that are inconsistent with today's zoning.
And I'm sure we can do that. We may not get all the answers, but
we will probably come to -- at least be able to come to some
conclusions as to how things got to where they are today, and that's
fine. We just need time to do that.
With that introduction or summary, I guess, I'll go ahead and
jump right into the requested deviations. And as I mentioned earlier,
after this was published, we did meet with Essie and the County
Manager and Joe Schmitt and I and walked through and had an
explanation of some of these deviation requests, and I can move this
along simply by going right to the deviations that are requested where
staff is recommending denial.
And if you'll go -- flip to the second page of the chart, the chart in
your executive summary, the second item down where it says
irrigation, and staff is recommending denial, the applicant has
requested a deviation for -- or from providing irrigation in existing and
new construction areas.
They have agreed to install landscaping but they do not wish to
install the irrigation. Our position was that all new landscaped areas
need to have irrigation in order to ensure viability.
Essie has pointed out that she has agreed to maintain the planted
landscaping, and that would include hand watering where necessary. I
think they were going to try to do some xeriscaping, which still
requires water but to a lesser extent. And she has agreed that they
would take over the responsibility for maintaining that without the
need for irrigation.
I think her concern was maintenance costs and the fact that there
are a lot of children in the area and that they probably would be
consistently -- or constantly replacing irrigation heads and broken
Page 68
June 24, 2008
pipes, whatnot, to a great cost, and she can elaborate on that if she
wishes; or if I'm not speaking correctly, she can certainly correct that.
Staff has acquiesced, we're okay with that, we're willing to give it
a try, and she does recognize that there's a landscaping replacement
requirement. So if new landscaping is installed and it dies, then by
code they're going to be required to replace is to keep it up to current
code standards, and she understands that risk is enhanced by not
putting in the irrigation, but she's willing to do that, and so we're
willing to come away from that denial and we can just see how that
goes, I guess, in a sense. So that should kind of take care of that issue.
Down on that same page where it says allowable uses, again, this
was the uses issue that I described earlier and we -- and our
recommendation at this point is to allow them for a -- to come back
within three years and address the requested deviations and the use
issues through a rezoning likely to PUD. But again, that's to be
determined in the future. So that issue somewhat goes away at this
point.
On the next page, on page 3, again, we have the use issue.
Again, we've agreed that this three-year time frame and rezone
possibly should address that.
Further on down, the sidewalks and bike lanes portion of that,
staff recommended denial. LDC provides for the requirement of one
or the other. That means either sidewalks or payment in lieu of.
She is asking for a deviation from this. If she has a further
explanation, I think I'll let her do that.
I guess historically we have not approved a deviation. The
applicants have either done one or the other. She can still address this
through a PUD rezoning. I'm kind of on the fence on this one, and I'll
leave my recommendation at that.
This is a special circumstance, no doubt, so there may be some
room here for allowance of a deviation from this standard.
On the next page, page 4, again, we get into the use issue, and
Page 69
June 24, 2008
this issue would become moot if you agreed to allow them the
three-year time frame to rezone.
And the final issue was -- I'm sorry, there's two remaining issues.
I apologize. I skipped one. Back on page 3. It's at the bottom of the
page. The roadside lighting issue. Basically what this is saying is that
staff is recommending that the site come up to current code with
respect to the existing streetlighting requirements.
And staff believes this is a health, safety issue. Obviously there's
a lot of pedestrians in that area. And at a minimum we would
recommend that the intersections and the sidewalks -- or the
pedestrian crosswalk areas be lighted. And I think Essie may agree
with that, but I'll let her speak to that. I think there was some
confusion upon what the staffs recommendation was requiring, and I
do have -- Nick Casalanguida is here as well, so he could certainly
answer her questions.
But that we identified as a health, safety, welfare issue, and we
believe that that lighting should be installed per the Land
Development Code.
Lastly, there was a building separation issue on the very last page
of the chart. We discussed that with Essie, and we figured out that we
don't believe there's an issue based on what she told us as far as how
the buildings are going to be constructed. She understands that there's
a building separation requirement for fire code and she will abide by
that.
But as far as the setbacks, we believe at this point -- again, we've
just conducted a conceptual review of the plan -- that there is no
building separation issues.
So with that, I guess the only outstanding issue would probably
be the lighting. Essie may want to speak to that. She may not believe
it's an issue anymore, I don't know.
And so we would recommend approval of all the deviations and
we would also suggest that you approve a three-year time frame to
Page 70
June 24, 2008
allow the use issues to be handled either through the appropriate PUD
rezoning and/or any comp plan issues that might exist as well.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions for the zoning director?
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Actually it wasn't for the
zoning director though. It was for Essie, or just even to weigh in.
You said the landscaping. They are going to install landscaping
there, I mean, at least the trees so that there's some shade trees in this
place?
What I'm concerned with is scraping the ground clean and then
there's no trees, and I feel that that's terribly important for a
neighborhood to be a neighborhood, to have trees there, and not only
that, but to give the appearance of a neighborhood rather than a
project. You don't want it to look like a project if you can help that.
That was one of my concerns.
You answered another one as far as --
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, can we take them one at a time--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
MR. MUDD: -- and let Essie tell you about trees. You got any
oaks and stuff you're going to plant in the landscaping plan, Essie?
MS. SERRATA: Okay. For the record, Essie Serrata, Executive
Director of Collier County Housing Authority.
We're not scraping any trees. We're actually going to be planting
some additional landscaping as required by the code. We are asking
for partial deviation from all landscaping requirements. But no, we're
not getting rid of any other trees.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So you'll be planting the trees
according to code?
MS. SERRA T A: Partial.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't know what partial means.
MS. ISTENES: I can try to explain it. They are requesting a
deviation from the addition of canopy trees. So that, to me, sounds
Page 71
June 24, 2008
like you're not going to add any more canopy trees. But I -- in
summary, I think you feel that there -- there are many existing trees on
the site which will be preserved whenever possible and you feel you
may already meet the requirement, but you're going to do a tree
survey?
MS. SERRATA: Based on the recommendations from my
engineers, yes, we have a lot of trees on the site. As provided by the
aerial, we don't feel that we need any additional canopy trees. We'll
preserve what's there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I wanted to go out and see, and I'm
sorry that I -- we didn't find an opportunity to do that, but I will go out
and see, because I think that's important for a neighborhood. And if
Essie says -- when it says, when possible, that really -- you know,
many times they say nothing was possible, so I would be concerned
about that. That was one of my concerns.
You've answered my concern about irrigation and about the
three-year time frame, but I had sidewalks. Maybe just one side of the
streets have sidewalks. You've got a neighborhood filled with
children, filled with kids playing on bikes and cars going through
there, there needs to be a safe avenue for children to walk on and to --
even to play on, hopscotch or whatever it is, and I think no
neighborhood should be without sidewalks, let me say that.
Lighting. I don't care what neighborhood, lighting is important,
but especially in a neighborhood that's teeming with children. And
you want -- you are concerned with their safety. Safety first. There
must be lighting there, so those are my comments.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, Essie. Would you answer
Commissioner Fiala's concerns, please?
MS. SERRATA: Right, thank you. Farm Worker Village is, like
I said, in phases, and the section that we're talking about, there is a
circular road that goes around the whole parameter of section A, and
Page 72
June 24, 2008
then there's cul-de-sacs. And throughout the property, there is a
pedestrian's path. Weare going to be putting sidewalk on one side of
the road. We don't feel that we need two sidewalks on each side of the
road. We're agreeable to do one side.
We don't have any issues, as Susan said, regarding the lighting. I
think we'll be okay with the recommendation staff is making.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In may, on the sidewalks. It's a
little bit different type of a community. You don't have the kids
limited to the sidewalks. They range through the yards and everyplace
else. The sidewalks are a nice little convenience, but I don't think it's
necessary to have it on both sides, you know. We're talking about a
very limited amount of funds, and we'd like to really get these units
built up to standards. We don't want to have to cut back on any of
them to be able to put in some amenities that really aren't needed at
this point in time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just concerned with one side.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Go ahead, and then I have a question.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, I'm going to
make a motion to support this petition with staffs recommendations.
If you need them enumerated, I'd be happy to do that, but otherwise,
they're on the record.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to second that, but first
I'd like to ask Essie if she has any reservations about the agreement
that's been worked out?
MS. SERRATA: We don't. I mean, we still have some
concerns, as Susan said, to flush out on the allowable uses. And I've --
even when we discussed it when we met with the County Manager,
there was some uses there that were listed. One was our main office,
which serves as the property management where our residents pay the
rent.
Page 73
June 24, 2008
I think the uses that are specifically -- that they're talking to about
the day care and a store and laundromat facility that's on the site that
was built as part of the development in 1974.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. But they're allowing
three years --
MS. SERRATA: For us to be able to provide the status of those
uses, correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can you live with that?
MS. SERRA T A: We're agreeable to that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In that case, I second the
motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I have a question. What was
the authority, the board members', recommendations on this item?
MS. SERRA T A: They're in full support of it. In fact, when -- my
board chair is here and he can answer.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. I take your word for it. You
voted on it?
MS. SERRATA: Yes. They have to do it by resolution to apply
for the funds that we apply to USDA for the rehab funds, and through
that resolution, I have the authority to be here today asking for
approval.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So they take (sic) action long
ago on this.
MS. SERRATA: This was taken back in 2006.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. And they gave you authority
for these deviations --
MS. SERRA T A: I have datum at every board that I have on the
deviations and my actions to be here at public petition today, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Under that resolution, they have the
authority -- and they gaven (sic) you their -- they delegated their
authority for you to be here and ask for these deviations?
MS. SERRATA: Yes, sir.
Page 74
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, great. And you understand
what the zoning director said, we need to resolve this; within three
years it might take a zoning or rezone --
MS. SERRATA: I understand.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- from your zoning today to maybe a
PUD.
MS. SERRATA: I understand. Everything in three years.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And that's a process you need to go
through.
MS. SERRA T A: I understand.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So we have three speakers.
I'm in support of the motion.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Essie Serrata.
MS. SERRATA: Which is me.
MS. FILSON: The second one is Penny Phillippi. She'll be
followed by Brenda Talbert.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ms. Serrata, do you have anything
further to say, or are you complete?
MS. SERRATA: I believe I'm finished. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. PHILLIPPI: For the record, Penny Phillippi. I'm the
Executive Director of the Immokalee Community Redevelopment
Agency. And what I'm here -- I'm here today representing the CRA
Advisory Committee and the Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning
Committee.
And this issue has been discussed for several months at our
monthly meetings, and these committees are asking that we support
these deviations because these are the kinds of things we're working
toward in the entire urban area.
And one other side issue of my own that I wanted to bring up. I
do -- I've historically done a lot of green-housing construction, and
one of the things that the Florida Green Building Coalition suggests is
Page 75
June 24, 2008
that if you put in some landscaping, put in an irrigation system that
can be pulled once it's established.
So the entire trend right now is not toward heavily landscaping
an area, but Florida friendly landscaping that can live on its own, you
know, without a lot of irrigation. But on behalf of the advisory
committee, we're recommending, and I believe you have a letter from
Mr. Fred Thomas stating their support of the deviations to the Land
Development Code. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: And your final speaker is Brenda Talbert.
MS. TALBERT: I waive.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. ISTENES: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion on the floor and a
second.
MS. ISTENES: Before you take your motion, if you don't mind,
may I just clarify? We did a very conceptual review of this plan, and
this looks like a lot of work and it is. But there still needs to be a site
plan submitted and the nitty-gritty details, so I don't want you to walk
away thinking that issue's resolved, problem solved.
Yes. I mean, we identified these deviations, and I'm confident
we probably won't find any more or a need for any more, but I just -- I
don't want to leave you with the impression that you'd probably never
hear back from us again, because if we uncover some issues or there's
alternatives like, for example, the day care really could be approved
through a conditional use in this zoning district.
So that's an alternative, but we need to look at it holistically to
figure out how to resolve the use issues and comp plan issues. And so
at this point, we're going to kind of leave it at that and just recommend
that these likely will be addressed for a rezoning or -- and/or any comp
plan changes that are necessary in the future, and that's why the
three-year time frame.
Page 76
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I think we all recognize your
willingness to work with the Farm Workers Village, and it is
appreciated.
MS. ISTENES: Thank you, certainly.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I recognize that, you know, the
devils are (sic) in the details and you don't have the devil yet.
MS. ISTENES: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You haven't looked at the devil.
MS. ISTENES: Thanks for recognizing that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But Commissioner Coletta has
something to say.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just one question. And is there
any way that the Immokalee Master Plan Committee could address
this in the overlay that they're working on?
MS. ISTENES: Certainly. In fact, I would encourage that. I
understand they may have a contractor board who has planning staff,
and I would certainly encourage them, if that's the case, to use those
resources to help them to address that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The easiest possible way we can
get there is how we have to do it.
MS. ISTENES: Definitely.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would like to add to that
just a sense of the motion maker, that this is a special situation and I
would encourage that we be as flexible as we are permitted to be
under the law to assist them in accomplishing the renovations that
they're looking for.
So I fully expect that there will be further questions, but I would
hope that we would interpret them in a way which is flexible and
constructive for the purpose that is envisioned here.
MS. ISTENES: Understood. Thank you for saying that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
Page 77
June 24, 2008
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
Boy, we're really cookin' today.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, we are.
MR. THOMAS: Thank you all very much, Commissioners.
Thank you.
Item #10F
STAFF DIRECTION RELATED TO THE COUNTY'S ABILITY
TO PROCESS CONVEYANCE BONUS CREDIT APPLICATIONS
SPECIFIED BY THE RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE SUB-
DISTRICT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (FDEP), WHILE RETAINING
THE COUNTY'S ABILITY TO ADDRESS TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENTS DESIGNATED WITHIN THE COUNTY'S
LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN (LRTP) - MOTION
TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: The next question -- the next item is 10F. It's a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners provide
staff direction related to the county's ability to process conveyance
bonus credit applications specified by the rural fringe mixed-use
subdistrict to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
while retaining the county's ability to address transportation
Page 78
June 24, 2008
improvements designated within the county's long-range
transportation plan.
Mike Bosi, Planning Manager, Comprehensive Planning,
Community Development, will present.
MR. BOSI: Good morning, Board of County Commissioners,
Chairman. Mike Bosi, Comprehensive Planning.
As you -- what you see on the visualizer right now is the rural
fringe mixed-use district. Of course, you know the rural fringe
mixed-use district came about as a portion of the final order basically
designed -- a program designed to direct development to
non-environmentally sensitive lands and preserve environmentally
sensitive lands.
Within the TDR program -- originally there was one -- there was
one TDR that was granted per five acres.
2005 it was recognized that there was needed a shot in the arm to
the TDR program. The board adopted three additional provisions, so
now the four credits that are available to each parcel of record of five
acres is a base credit and early entry credit.
Those two credits, every applicant who has sought to receive
those TDR credits have received them. What we're here to talk about
and what we're seeking guidance from the Board of County
Commissioners today are the two remaining credits. They're the
restoration and maintenance credit, and that's a bonus credit when you
have an approved restoration and maintenance plan approved from the
environmental services department. And then the fourth would be a
conveyance bonus, and that's conveyed to a local, a state, or a federal
agency to perform the actions contained within that restoration and
maintenance credits.
Now, these last two bonuses really are the ones that take the
environmentally sensitive lands to the place that the TDR program is
built upon, the programmatic goal, meaning the long-term
management and care for -- of these properties.
Page 79
June 24, 2008
And what I'm here to do today is to kind of highlight the three
issues that we are trying to, as a staff, to rectify to allow for these
property owners within these sending areas to be able to take
advantage of the last two of four TDR programs. And hopefully it
will be straightforward.
The three issues that are preventing the utilization of the TDR
bonus is -- firstly it lies with the State of Florida and how they acquire
property. The State of Florida will acquire property through the DEP,
through a screening process, convey it to the board of trustees, but
they require that the property is fee simple and that it's unencumbered.
Well, by nature of the TDR program, we place a limitation of
development rights on the parcel. We say, okay, listen, you can't
develop on this parcel of land so we're going to attach -- it's not a
full-blown easement, but we're going to attach a restriction of those
rights because you're taking that TDR and you're going to be able to
spend it somewhere else in the county.
So we want to maintain that you have a -- that we have assurance
that that property is going to remain restricted from the developments
that we're looking for.
Currently right now the State of Florida originally said, well, we
can't accept these properties because there's that encumbrance upon it
and our policy doesn't allow us to accept those. Well, through diligent
work of our County's (sic) Attorney's Office, Marjorie Student has
specific -- she crafted a potential agreement with the State of Florida,
and what we're saying through this agreement is, we will take the
interest that we have within this limitation of development rights, and
we'll grant it to the State of Florida, but we're also going to obligate
the State of Florida that you have to maintain these restrictions on the
property.
Right now we've sent a draft of that assignment and assumption
agreement to the Florida DEP. Their attorneys have looked at it.
They've provided some comments back to Margie and Margie is in the
Page 80
June 24, 2008
process right now of trying to rectify those last issues.
Once we get an agreement upon the easement issue, then the
Florida DEP feels they will be ready to accept -- to accept properties
for conveyance.
The second issue is related to the approval of the Picayune Strand
Management Plan. Well -- and I think I've gotten ahead of myself.
Just to show you why we want to be able to convey it to the State of
Florida, especially within the South Belle Meade area is, if you look at
this map, the green area is -- are parcels of land that have been
acquired by the State of Florida as part of the Florida Forever
program. That almost encompasses 75 percent of -- 75 to 80 percent
of the land within that sending area has already been acquired by the
State of Florida as part of the Florida Forever program and as part of
the extension of the Picayune Strand State Forest.
So the programmatic goals of what the rural fringe regulations
are stating must certainly be furthered if we can overcome the
obstacles and be able to convey these properties to the State of
Florida.
This second map has the same exhibit towards -- where it has the
individual properties or -- the properties that have been acquired by
the state in green, but then you have the properties that are in red,
orange, and in blue. Those are the properties of the individual owners
who are currently in negotiation with the State of Florida to convey
their properties.
So these are the subject -- these are the subject properties that the
staff is trying to overcome the obstacles to be able to allow to be -- the
State of Florida to be able to receive these parcels and have the
property owners receive the two final TDR programs -- or bonus.
Second is the approval or the Picayune Strand State Management
Plan. And I know Commissioner Coletta has been attending -- or this
past month attended a public -- a public meeting towards -- where
they're talking about potential modifications to that plan. But right
Page 81
June 24, 2008
now we're currently in the process of reviewing the state management
plan, and I received an email from Laura Royce of environmental
services just this morning, and she had indicated that hopefully within
the next couple weeks, that she was going to be able to have the final
sign-off on that plan. And the last bit of clarification she was looking
for was over temporary harvesting called for by the plan and making
sure that that -- that was in concert with environmental regulations on
the book.
But she felt confident within a few weeks that the second pro --
the second obstacles could be overcome.
The third obstacle that, right now, is preventing the conveyance
of properties within the sending land is the uncertainty associated with
the Wilson Boulevard/Benfield Road extension. The current --
corridor study is currently underway to determine the alignment of
that road, and it's being influenced by the environmental sensitivity of
the land.
The issue right now is the study area that we have that you'll see
on the visualizer encompasses the entire sending area. And at this
point, I'm going to defer to Nick Casalanguida who will be able to
speak a little bit on the issue and some of the -- and some of the
strategies that we're currently developing to try to rectify this final
issue associated with it.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good morning. For the record, Nick
Casalanguida with Transportation Planning.
Just for -- as a correction, I don't think we're holding up any
conveyances right now. Any property that can be conveyed over to an
entity -- like Conservation Collier has an exceptional benefits
ordinance, and we haven't really set anything into this stage that says
we're not recommending conveyance.
There's been a question of -- that's come up as to if there would
be a reverter clause in the conveyance that we sent to the state. The
roadway has been identified to go through certain parcels; will they be
Page 82
June 24, 2008
willing to convey the land back to the county?
At this point in time we haven't gotten clarification from the state
on that. So our position is we'll work aggressively over the next
couple of months while the County Attorney's Office and Mr. Bosi are
clearing up the other problems to resolve that issue with the state.
We have a corridor study that's been pointed out that's very large.
We have preliminary alignments that we've just received maybe three
or four weeks ago that are going through the process of being
evaluated for sensitivity for archeological, environmental, business
impacts, residential impacts and such.
And within the next three or four months, even less, we're going
to refine that study area. One recommendation is maybe we take that
refined area to the board and eliminate a lot of the areas that are in
question right now early.
But I don't want to do any predetermination. Part of that study is
to say we've looked at everything. And once we've done that, we can
come back and say to the board, we've refined it to these 12
alignments, and therefore, this land would no longer be impacted.
So I think part of what Mike is trying to convey is, okay, what
we're going to do is the next two or three months, while they're
resolving these other issues, staff will work aggressively to meet with
the state and the applicants and figure out what these conflicts in
conveyance are, maybe have a memorandum of understanding with
the state, and also maybe come back to the board with an alignment
review and say, we're going to discount or remove a large portion of
that big block from the study area to continue further, and now we're
eliminating that cloud -- conflicts with roadway networks.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Mr. Bosi, you're complete?
MR. BOSI: Just -- I wanted -- one other thing to point out to the
board, to their attention, and this relates to a petition that was in front
of you in April where an individual petition -- the property owner had
asked the board to recognize the CDD as the governmental entity to
Page 83
June 24, 2008
take advantage of the conveyance bonus.
At that point in time, Conservation Collier had stood up and said,
we are willing to stand as a local agency willing to accept these
properties. And if you look on the visualizer, the two -- the Calusa
Reserve parcel, which was subject -- was the public hearings that I
spoke about, and the Benfield Road group are currently, right now, set
to go before the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Committee in
July for recommendation of whether those properties should be
conveyed.
And at that point in time, those property owners would be able to
take advantage of the final two conveyance bonuses.
Other than that, we're just -- as Nick had said, we're just asking
for the board to direct staff to undertake every effort to really expedite
not only the issues associated with the State of Florida, but the Wilson
Boulevard/Benfield Road extension and also to expedite the review of
the Picayune Strand State Forest Management Plan, which are all the
three things that we need to happen so that we could allow for these
property owners to take advantage of the program that the board
adopted.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think Commissioner Fiala, did you
-- no, it was Commissioner Coletta had something.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Then I want to go.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I tell you, there's three elements
we're trying to achieve. One, we want to protect the integrity of the
property owners out there to make sure that they're going to be able to
get a fair deal when that time does come. And this commission has
been very good in that particular direction over all the years we've
been working on this.
Number two, we want to make sure that in no way we give away
our rights to be able to build that Wilson Boulevard extension down
through there. And we have to protect the integrity of that. And
Page 84
June 24, 2008
number three, which is the whole reason why this is going forward,
the environment, to be able to make sure that there's reasonable ways
to be able to protect these lands and preserve them into the foreseeable
future.
And with that in mind, I'd like to make a motion to approve staff
recommendations as they are written in the summary agenda.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta to
accept staffs recommendations, second by Commissioner Coyle.
Mr. Bosi, I have a couple questions.
MR. BOSI: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The state is looking -- they don't want
restrictions on the land that they're going to receive.
MR. BOSI: Their official position is they need a piece of
property to be free of any encumbrances, and the limitation that they
can't build houses is being viewed as problematic on the portion of the
State of Florida.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Really?
MR. BOSI: Well, at the surface of the conversation. Now,
they're willing -- they've indicated that they're willing to accept the
interest from the county to the state and maintain that limitation. So
their position has softened since the conversation has started back in
April with the state.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, these are the same people that
approved our plan.
MR. BOSI: I wasn't involved -- I wasn't involved in the
discussion in 2005, but it was indicated that DEP was on board with
the conveyance bonus at that time and that has caused actual number
of the property owners to be somewhat concerned that we are now
facing this issue. And answers to those concerns, I can't explain.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And these are the same people that
convinced us to enter in an agreement for the roads in the Picayune
Page 85
June 24, 2008
Strand, too.
So they want to put restrictions on us about uses in the Picayune
Strand but they don't want us to put restrictions on them.
The -- one other thing. The language about restricting -- well, or
stating that government does not own any TDRs on property.
MR. BOSI: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that still in the -- that's in the Land
Development Code, right?
MR. BOSI: Yes, it is, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, I only found one place
where it referred to TDR program, and that's in the Coastal
Conservation Element of the GMP, and it says that TDR program--
well, I'm not going to read -- well, let me -- incompatible uses are to
be directed away from the rural fringe mixed-use district sending lands
through the incentive-based TDR development of transfer --
development right program that allows landowners in these sending
lands to be transferred -- their residential density out of the sending
land into the rural fringe mixed-use district.
But when we restrict government, that's contrary to the Growth
Management Plan because it says that it allows landowners. Now,
government is a landowner, so why are we restricting one sector of
owners versus other sector owners. It just doesn't make sense, and I
think it was a mistake in the adoption into the Land Development
Code.
And, you know, a landowner is a landowner, and I think that all
TDRs should be recognized in the sending area for all landowners
including government.
And I would ask the motion maker to add that -- give that
direction to staff to make that -- recognize that government does have
those rights.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, in may. May I? I
probably can support it, but I'd like to hear from the County Attorney.
Page 86
June 24, 2008
I'm sorry, Jeff. I -- you probably weren't expecting this. I know
you like to be forewarned, but --
MR. KLATZKOW: No, that's all right. You're going to have to
take an LDC amendment, aren't you, for something like this?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. BOSI: The -- and not being part of the adoption of the
Growth Management Plan amendments that adopted the rural fringe, I
would have to make sure that we also -- that that provision that
governmental entities are not entitled to the TDR program, I would
have to make sure that that wasn't within the Growth Management
Plan as well. But, yes, if it was in the GMP, it would be a GMP
amendment and it would require an LDC amendment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, if it's in the GMP amendment
that recognizes that government does not have the right, then that was
the intent all along. But I just haven't found it. I mean, I searched all
weekend and I haven't found where it says that government doesn't
have the same right as other property owners. But if it does, let's keep
it as it is. But if it doesn't, let's give that direction.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I think I understand what
you're saying. So in other words, this is contingent upon what the --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Bosi's discovery is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I have no problem
including it, Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're saying if it does provide the
stipulations that you are suggesting, then we leave it unchanged, but if
it does not have that, it's going to have to come back to us for a
decision on what we do, I believe?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Through the Land Development Code
amendment.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, yes, then I can support that,
too.
Page 87
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We have two speakers?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. Caroleen Dineez. She'll be followed by
Kris Van Lengen.
MS. DINEEZ: Good morning, Mr. Chair and Commissioners.
My name is Caroleen Dineez, for the record, from Broad and Cassell,
Orlando, Florida, and I'm representing Naples Reserve, LLC, who's
one of the property owners who is currently in the process of
conveying their property to the State of Florida.
Naples Reserve owns the south half section of -- south half of
section 31, which is property that they're obligated to convey to the
State of Florida. They have been working since they purchased the
property a little over two years ago to complete the conveyance
process according to this obligation. They have expended significant
time and resources in doing this and have gotten to the point with the
state Florida Department of Environmental Protection, which is the
agency that manages and administers the conveyance process, to get
to a point where the state's ready to accept that property pending
resolution of this TDR transfer issue.
We've also been working with your county staff on the
mechanism to do that. And Mr. Bosi, as he indicated, have (sic) been
working on a document that would facilitate that process.
Our clients need to move forward with their conveyance.
According to the obligation, they're ready to move forward to do that.
They're also at the process where they're ready to seek their final
conveyance bonus credits.
They're very concerned after all this time and effort in the
process that they've spent that they may be further delayed by the
transportation study issue, and we don't believe that should be an
obstacle to the conveyance process at this point.
The county TDR process is an invitation to the property owner to
participate. Our clients have done that as well as other property
owners who are currently in the process to do that.
Page 88
June 24, 2008
And we would be concerned, obviously, about the delay for our
clients, but also from a policy perspective, that there would be any
disincentives for property owners to participate in the process.
We would encourage, Commissioners, consistent with what your
staff has said, to direct their staff to move forward with that transfer
assignment document and get that issue resolved with the state now to
facilitate the conveyance.
We would also encourage you to direct your transportation staff
to work pro actively with the state now on the preliminary alignments
in the process for acquiring property, some of which we understand
may be, as the graphic indicated, may be existing state lands that may
need to be acquired in order to complete the roadway extension and
also to affirm that the State Forest Management Plan would be
acceptable for purposes of the TDR conservation process and to direct
your staff to process those conveyance bonus credit applications as
they are -- as they are received, without further delay based on the
transportation study.
I'd be happy to answer any questions. I appreciate your attention.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think you're in favor of what staff
has brought forward; is that correct?
MS. DINEEZ: With the proviso that we would -- that the
recommendation seems to indicate that there would be an expedition
of the feasibility study. Our understanding is that may not be finished
until spring of next year.
From our client's perspective that would be a significant issue to
delay that process any further.
So we would ask you to ask your staff to work now on the
alignment in the process that they would need do but not hold up
conveyances or the transfer of that conservation easement issue based
on the transportation study.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're not allowed to interfere with
the day-to-day business, but I'm sure if there's some cooperation,
Page 89
June 24, 2008
monetary cooperation with the landowner, the County Manager's
Office, I'm sure, will take that under consideration.
We're not allowed to direct the County Manager on what staff is
doing to say, no, don't that, do this, unless they ask us. But if you're
willing to pony up to expedite it, I'm sure the County Manager would
listen, correct?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I don't hear staff is trying to slow it down
in any way, stretch, or form. We're trying to get the study done as fast
as we can to figure out exactly what we need for those extensions so
this we can -- we can pin that down a little bit.
You don't normally go out and acquire properties when we don't
need the property for the road. So we're trying to lay it out. Once
we've got the cross-section of the proposed road laid down, that's
when we come back and we start doing offers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. The presenter or the -- well,
let's see.
MS. DINEEZ: I represent Naples Reserve. My name is
Caroleen Dineez.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: She just said that this might be
holding this up till next spring; is that true?
MR. BOSI: I should probably defer to Nick Casalanguida. But
the original -- the original --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You get into that situation with the
corridor study where you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.
You don't want to rush or predetermine anything, so you want to look
at all possibilities. We're going to be in a position probably this fall
where we can eliminate a bunch of land and say we've done a due
diligence and say, now we've refined it.
I can put it on -- a preliminary draft on maybe ELMO. We could
turn that on to give you an idea.
If you look on the diagram here, you can see that the outline of
Page 90
June 24, 2008
the study area is very large. You can follow it around. But you can
see that these lines that were shown here are actually alignments and
they're starting to make sense. So, you know, come fall, we can take a
whole swath in the middle and say, this is not a potential in any area
like that at all. We could bring that back to the board and say, refine
the study.
But I'm including in that right now because they are looking at
environmental impacts, archaeologic impacts, things like that, and I
want them to go through the whole process and do that.
There are certain areas that are located in this that are in that
potential land that's owned by the attorney's applicant or client there
that we're going to look at right now.
What I want to do is take the next month or so and get with the
state and come up with a memorandum or an agreement as to what
that means to their receiving the land. I know their permit is
contingent upon submitting all property to the state. It doesn't give
them any other option.
Again, as I pointed out, we don't have that problem with
Conservation Collier because of the exceptional benefits ordinance.
And I just want to make sure that the state understands that and we
don't run into a problem in the future.
I think right now we're not holding them up for this reason. They
want to take this opportunity while the County Attorney's Office is
clearing up that issue to have that answer back in the fall.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So you're telling me, no,
you're not going to be holding it up till spring?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I will not be holding it up till spring.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. You'll be doing that this fall?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I will be doing it probably by
September, October.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nick, do you know the location of
Page 91
June 24, 2008
the petitioner's property?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, I do. It's approximately down in
this area over here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it is in an area of a possible
alignment?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir, it is.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it property that has to be
transferred to the state or can it be transferred to Collier --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: See, that's the funny part. Without
doing a permit modification -- we discussed it briefly in the hallway.
Right now it requires them to transfer it to the state. And I -- without
having them go through the re-permit process, I want to ask both the
Corps and the state, could it be converted to, say, Conservation Collier
as a letter mod. Well, how would that affect them, because that makes
it really easy for us if that's the case.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And it expedites their process?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It does, but I don't want to cloud their
process by making them go back through it all over again. I want to
see if it's a correction. If it's not, then we'll have to deal with the state.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: When can you make that
determination?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Within the next two months while
they're working out the other issue.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Two months?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I would say that that's fair, just to give
me enough time, because it -- I've got to find the right people and get
them together, and I'm coming up into July and August.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Bosi?
MR. BOSI: Chairman, just to highlight where -- the importance
of -- of the issue of where the Naples Reserve property is. The blue,
the kind of last -- and that is right above the receiving area as well. So
Page 92
June 24, 2008
that is one of the prime -- the prime areas towards where potentially
that alignment would be -- would potentially locate and, therefore, I
think that's why the importance ofMr. Casalanguida's efforts to have a
Memorandum of Understanding that wouldn't prevent, as
Commissioner Coletta said, our ability to have that future road when it
is needed.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Thank you.
MS. DINEEZ: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next speaker?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Kris Van Lengen.
MR. VAN LENGEN: Good afternoon. Kris Van Lengen from
Bonita Bay. Thank you very much for listening.
I don't want to belabor the transportation question any further,
but I do agree with Mike Bosi's comments and recommendations as
well as the motion on the floor.
The only context I wanted to add is, as far as a management plan,
the LDC requires that the county approve a management plan. In
South Belle Meade, we have the choice between Conservation Collier
and DEP/DOF as manager. It seems to me they should look at the
map. Many of those parcels are end parcels that are, for economic
reasons, likely to be suitable for DEP just simply from a management
standpoint. So DEP has been approached.
And as you see the red markers there, those are the properties
that are ready to go to DEP from the Bonita Bay Group.
So I guess the only issue I wanted to touch on is just getting a
management plan, that is to say, the forest management plan ofDEP
approved by the county would be also a step forward, because at this
point it has not been approved.
Keep in mind that DEP and DOF, as forest manager, cannot
change the management plan for site specific properties. So if our
environmental staff wishes to change the listed species management
on a particular site, DOF cannot do that under the management plan.
Page 93
June 24, 2008
The appropriate method for county staff would simply be to
participate in DOF's. There's one going on now. There will be all
through the future every ten year. So they have a management plan in
place, and I encourage the county to adopt that.
And I thank you very much for listening.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Or participate in that
management plan.
Mr. Bosi, is there anything else before we take a vote?
MR. BOSI: Nothing other than the recommendation that
Commissioner Coletta was invited and I believe attended, the public
hearing regarding the potential revisions to the ten-year management
plan.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. In may correct that. I
attended the evening meeting when they had everyone show up. I left
here when the meeting finished, I got down there. I was 20 minutes
late, and they already concluded the meeting by the time I got there.
The next day I had to rely on Brian McMahon, and he did well. I
was a speaker at the Urban Land Institute breakfast and couldn't make
that. But it went very well.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And you all got a report from
Brian McMahon.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, can we forward the comments
about the Board of County Commissioners willing to work with the
agencies, unlike what happened in the agreement of the Picayune
Strand.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 94
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries.
Thank you, Mr. Bosi.
We've got five more minutes before we go to our time certain.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
Item #1 OI
RESOLUTION 2008-201: REQUEST THAT THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO
OPPOSE THE LEASING OF THE ALLIGATOR ALLEY TOLL
FACILITY - ADOPTED W/CHANGE
The next item would be 101. Let's do 10 -- it's up to you. lOI, it
could -- how many speakers do we have, Ms. Filson?
MS. FILSON: One.
MR. MUDD: Okay. 101, request that the Board of County
Commissioners approve a resolution to oppose the leasing of Alligator
Alley toll facility.
Mr. Norman Feder, Transportation Administrator, will present.
MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, I can be very
brief on this. As you're aware, the state is looking at privatizing
Alligator Alley. This board had discussed at one time sending a
resolution that would signify your opposition to that action but note
that if it were to occur, that the desire would be that multiple road
projects, which the state hasn't attended to, be attended to in this
county.
At the MPO meeting, there was discussion that, in fact, we
should not do the second part of that, that rather we should just make
it clear that we're opposed to this action.
What you have today is a resolution for each of those items, and
Page 95
June 24, 2008
the note is that you do have the ability, if you send the one that just
says no, that you're opposed to the privatization, at least by statute,
theoretically, that the funds are supposed to stay in the county and
Broward County -- and so you've got that action you could take
should the state move forward with privatization. But obviously the
choice to this board, both resolutions are in your package.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I personally feel that we
should mirror what we did in the MPO, and that I'm sure that if we're
not successful -- and I hope we are, I don't want to give anybody the
thought at the state level that we're supporting this action -- then at
that point in time, like Mr. Feder said, they are obligated to talk to us.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion to approve MPO's -- adopt
MPO's resolution, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Commissioner Halas and Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I -- are you saying that in this
proposal that was adopted by the MPO where it says, whereas, the
following roads on the state highway system located in Collier County
have construction maintenance and improvement needs, include the
following list of roads?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This one that's signed.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You got the wrong one.
MR. FEDER: I'm recommending the other resolution,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to make sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just have a wording problem.
The resolution reads that you object to the submittal to the MPO board
Page 96
June 24, 2008
and subcommittees. I think you need to change the way you word that
sentence.
MR. FEDER: If that reads--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I know what it means, but it --
MR. FEDER: If that's the way it reads, it definitely needs to be
changed.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. What it should say is, you
object to the state's -- well, first of all, let me ask you a question. Are
you objecting that they did not submit it to the MPO board or
committees or you're objecting to the fact they didn't give the MPO
board and committees sufficient time, advanced notice?
MR. FEDER: Technically both, but the main thing is we're
objecting to the action they're contemplating, and we're also
recognizing we're objecting to the way that they proceeded to go about
their current considerations.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then in could just recommend a
wording change.
MR. FEDER: By all means.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You say that you object to the
state's lack of adequate advanced notice and local public involvement
and the state's failure to permit the MPO board and subcommittees an
adequate opportunity to review and comment on the potential lease of
the Alligator Alley toll facility. That is much more clear.
MR. FEDER: I agree.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if you wouldn't mind doing
that.
MR. FEDER: No, by all means. If that's what the board's
direction is, of course that's what we're going to do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'll include that in the
motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Public speaker?
Page 97
June 24, 2008
MS. FILSON: Gina Downs.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have one minute.
MS. DOWNS: Just very brief.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Five minutes. I vote for five
minutes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Five minutes.
MS. DOWNS: It won't even be that long. I'll talk real fast.
Thank you. Gina Downs, Citizens Transportation Coalition, and
I'm not doing the whole presentation I did to the Metropolitan
Planning. Four of the five of you already saw that.
Just a reminder, briefly, the governor is telling us that the money
is coming back to both counties. This is just one example of a quote
of the newspaper where he admits the funding will be used for
education environment. Go on and on and on.
New information. The Pennsylvania Turnpike lease was just
rejected. That was a vote of 185-12 in Pennsylvania.
The difference between Pennsylvania and here, Pennsylvania, it
went to the full legislature. Here in Florida it only has to be passed by
the budget committee members. These are the members on the budget
committee. We encourage you to contact any and all of these
members to tell them that Collier County is opposed to this plan.
This is what was passed at the MPO, and we're glad to hear that
you're thinking of the same resolution.
We went to the MPO meeting in Lee County and asked that they
pass the same resolution. Representative Hudson tells me that there
are some cities on the east coast that he expects to pass a similar
resolution soon.
So we're just encouraging all of our public representatives to
speak up loud and clear against this proposal to sell. It's only the
beginning of a sale of assets, public assets, to private sectors.
That's it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Any further discussion?9
Page 98
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
Item #12A
June 24, 2008
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT PURSUANT TO SECTION
286.011(8), FLA. STAT., THE COUNTY ATTORNEY DESIRES
ADVICE FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
IN CLOSED ATTORNEY-CLIENT SESSION ON TUESDAY,
JUNE 24, 2008, AT A TIME CERTAIN OF 12:00 NOON IN THE
COMMISSION CONFERENCE ROOM, 3RD FLOOR, W.
HARMON TURNER BUILDING, COLLIER COUNTY
GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
NAPLES, FLORIDA. IN ADDITION TO BOARD MEMBERS,
COUNTY MANAGER JAMES MUDD, COUNTY ATTORNEY
JEFFREY A. KLATZKOW, AND ASSISTANT COUNTY
ATTORNEY JACQUELINE WILLIAMS HUBBARD WILL BE IN
ATTENDANCE. THE BOARD IN EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL
DISCUSS: SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS AND STRATEGY
RELA TED TO LITIGATION EXPENDITURES IN THE PENDING
LITIGATION CASES OF LUCKY, M.K., INC. V. COLLIER
COUNTY, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-0958-CA, NOW PENDING IN
THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA - CLOSED SESSION
Page 99
June 24, 2008
Now, 12A.
MR. MUDD: Time certain, shade session, sir, 12A.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Best time of the day.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Klatzkow, do you need to say
anything before --
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, I do. We're going to be going into the
shade session where we'll be discussing a settlement offer in Lucky
M.K., Incorporated, versus Collier County, case number 07-0958-CA.
When we leave the shade session at one o'clock, we will get direction
from you as to how to proceed.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We're adjourned -- in recess.
(A closed session meeting was held, followed by a luncheon
recess. )
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Item #12B
DIRECTION TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS TO
SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS AND STRATEGY RELATED
TO LITIGATION EXPENDITURES IN THE PENDING
LITIGATION CASE OF LUCKY, M.K., INC. V. COLLIER
COUNTY, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-0958-CA, NOW PENDING IN
THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA - MOTION TO ACCEPT SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT - APPROVED
Commissioners, that would take us to 12B, and this is -- we had
the sunshine -- or excuse me. You had the shade meeting on 12A at
noon, and this is 12B. It's the sunshine piece, and it's for the Board of
County Commissioners to provide direction to the County Attorney's
Page 100
June 24, 2008
Office as to settlement negotiations and strategy related to litigation
expenditures in the pending litigation case of Lucky M.K., Inc., versus
Collier County, et ai, case number 07-0958-CA, now pending in the
20th Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ms. Hubbard?
MS. HUBBARD: Yes. County Attorney's Office needs
direction regarding whether or not the board wishes to accept the
settlement offer from Lucky M.K., Inc., in case number 07-0958-CA.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioners? Commissioner
Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to accept the settlement
offer.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Halas.
Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries, unanimous.
MS. HUBBARD: Thank you very much.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2008-34: PUDA-2007-AR-12322 LIVINGSTON
Page 10 1
June 24, 2008
PROFESSIONAL CENTER LLC, REPRESENTED BY ROBERT
L. DUANE, AICP, OF HOLE MONTES, INC. IS REQUESTING
AN AMENDMENT TO THE HIW ASSEE PUD TO REVISE
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, TRANSPORTATION
REQUIREMENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERSHIP
INFORMATION. THE +/-12.52-ACRE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS
LOCATED 1400 FEET NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF
EA TONWOOD LANE AND LIVINGSTON ROAD, IN SECTION
13, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA - ADOPTED W/STIPULATIONS
INCLUDING CCPC RECOMMENDATIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this brings us to our other one p.m.
time certain, and this is, this item requires -- it's 8A. This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by commission members.
It's PUDA-2007-AR-12322, Livingston Professional Center,
LLC, represented by Robert L. Duane, AICP, of Hole Montes, Inc., is
requesting an amendment to the Hiwassee PUD to revise existing
development standards, transportation requirements, and property
ownership information.
The plus-or-minus 12.52-acre subject property is located 1,400
feet north of the intersection of Eatonwood Lane and Livingston Road
in Section 13, Township 49 south, Range 29 east, Collier County,
Florida.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All wishing to participate in this
discussion, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now, for ex parte communications,
starting with Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I have had
extensive discussions with just about everyone in the entire
Page 102
June 24, 2008
It's important to stress that there are no changes in the authorized
land uses.
This PUD amendment also moves the entrance to the PUD from
the center to closer to Pine Ridge and Livingston Road intersection
and the entrance, shared entrance, there would be with the LaCosta
Apartments.
It provides for a ten-foot sidewalk and bike path along the
existing FPL easement in the rear, and if FPL does not grant
permission for that -- they've given some preliminary indications, I'm
told, that they are fine with it -- but if we can't put it there, then it will
be a six-foot sidewalk along Livingston Road.
And lastly, the PUD adds language that expressly provides that
this PUD will accept stormwater drainage from Eatonwood Lane,
which serves the Kensington development.
And I'll be glad to try to answer any questions or to turn it over to
staff.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala has a question,
Mr. Anderson.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. Did you resolve these two
letters of objection?
MR. ANDERSON: Well, they're not so much with anything the
project is doing, I don't believe. We resolved Mr. Disney's. And the
other one, I think, had more to do with transportation matters that are
not really under our sole control.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. ANDERSON: I would defer to Mr. Casalanguida on that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle and
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. My questions will have to be
answered by the county's transportation staff.
Nick, when this PUD was originally approved, the entrance to
Livingston Road was substantially further north than it is in the most
Page 104
June 24, 2008
recent proposal. There was a deceleration lane to make a right-hand
turn into the PUD, and there was also a left -- or right-turn lane
provided going into Eatonwood Lane.
I can't tell from what I have in this packet whether -- to what
extent that has been modified. I would like to get a clear
understanding of where the deceleration lanes are and the right-turn
lanes are getting -- going into Eatonwood.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. For the record, Nick
Casalanguida with Transportation. The Eatonwood Lane would not
change. The deceleration would remain as it sits today. The access
point has been shifted slightly north to accommodate the spacing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: North or south? It looks like it's
south to me.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's south in the original -- they're
conceptual, Commissioner. What we've done is said, let's put it in the
best way possible to meet access management.
One of the reasons is, they originally requested us to modify the
median opening that exists currently on Livingston. That would stay
because it would affect the people at Brynwood to be able to make a
U-turn. Once that U-turn's done, whether it was for people from
Brynwood or people wanting to access the site, we didn't want to set
up a weave condition, so we've shifted it slightly south consistent with
access management.
So they could come north on Livingston, make a U-turn, head
south, and then work their way into that turn lane if they wanted to.
So we made that adjustment accordingly for that.
The access is right-in, right-out only. It does not have a median
opening, so it's consistent with our access management policy, and
they will put in turn a lane consistent with FDOT design standards.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'm still asking questions,
Page 105
June 24, 2008
please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I've got a ways to go yet.
Nick?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We'll be here all day.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is there a deceleration lane coming
from the north to turn into this development?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Coming from the north? They don't
have access heading north.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no. I'm not talking about
heading north. I'm saying coming from the north --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Heading southbound, there will be a
deceleration lane for this project, yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There's a deceleration lane for this
particular project?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Into the new entrance. Now,
coming out of that new entrance and turning right onto Livingston
Road, is there an acceleration lane?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sir -- and no, none's required. None
of the projects on Livingston Road have an acceleration lane.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They have clear line of sight, and it's a
six-lane facility.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And what is the distance between
the new entrance location and the beginning of the right turn-lane
going into Eatonwood Lane?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'd say about 350 to 400 feet.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And that right-turn lane
going into Eatonwood Lane is going to remain?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that correct?
Page 106
June 24, 2008
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There is no access whatsoever from
this PUD to Eatonwood Lane?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: None at this time, sir, no.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, the entrance on the
north end into the LaCosta property, I see an entrance that will serve
this particular PUD, but I see nothing defined that will link up with
LaCosta -- the LaCosta property.
I have seen drawings in this packet that are quite confusing about
where the traffic is going to go, and what you've just been handed is
probably the drawing that I find very confusing. So if you could
throw that up there and let's take a look at it.
Now, you see how that -- we're talking about the entrance on the
right-hand side, which would be the very north, beyond the north edge
of the property.
You have a curved entrance going over and linking up with
another road that serves both LaCosta and this particular PUD.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The access point is here, sir, and it
feeds the PUD itself.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And then it turns and heads north and
ties into that parking lot that goes into LaCosta and also provides
access to the county's pond maintenance site. So if we chose to
eliminate that, we'd have access to our maintenance facility that way
as well, too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, wait a minute. What is that
entrance on the very right-hand side of this? Right there.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That is an access point to our
stormwater pond. That's our maintenance pull-off for the stormwater
pond that's there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So that is not intended as an access
to LaCosta Apartments?
Page 107
June 24, 2008
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So the entrance to LaCosta would
be through this PUD?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that is acceptable with
LaCosta?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I would imagine the public meetings,
they've had no objections that I've heard of.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do we have the right to do that
without making them part of this PUD?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, I think the way it's written and if
the applicant wants to clarify it, they'll pay their fair share to connect
to that. The applicant will build their portion up to the property line.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So I'm going to expect
somebody to provide me evidence that LaCosta has agreed to that
arrangement.
Now, the second thing is the bike path and the sidewalk.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I -- I want to make sure that the
bike path and the sidewalk that takes people away from Livingston
Road and puts them behind this particular PUD will bring them back
out to Livingston Road at the north end of the property. It's not
entirely clear that that's what's happening here.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right now you'll be able to come in
from the south side, travel north. Our goal is to pick it up at this
corner and take it all the way up to Pine Ridge.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And you're going to stay within the
right-of-way of the FP&L --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And if we can't, our second goal is to
come up and hug the edge of the pond, which is county-owned
facility, and then take it up that way. And ifnot, we take it back to
that entrance that exists right now.
Page 108
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then we would continue with
the sidewalk along Livingston Road; is that correct?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: When I can fund it, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, with respect to the
entrance that is now going to be a joint entrance for this PUD and
LaCosta property, what are we doing to shield the Kensington
Development from the impact of traffic and headlights, of more traffic
shining into their community? Is there going to be a landscaping
requirement back there along that bike path and sidewalk?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: There is a landscape buffer that's
required within the PUD, and I don't know if they're going to --
probably the project manager from CDES would probably be able to
define that better than I would. I don't deal with the buffers.
But if you mean as vehicles come in, they shine that way, will
there be something protecting that light from going into the west of --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Is that your question?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'll defer to John David Moss on that.
MR. MOSS: John David Moss, Department of Zoning and Land
Development Review. The applicant has committed to providing a
15-foot wide type B buffer in that location.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Describe to me the extent of that
buffer, please. How far to the north and south of that entranceway
will that buffer be?
MR. MOSS: Well, it's going to be on the edge of the Florida
Power and Light easement, so I guess on the west side of this picture,
and it's something that would have to be approved by FP&L.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MOSS: So it's going to run the length of the eastern--
excuse me -- the western boundary of that FP&L easement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The entire length?
Page 109
June 24, 2008
MR. MOSS: The entire length, yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So it will be a type B buffer
and it will start -- it will essentially be located then between the bike
path/sidewalk and the property boundaries of this PUD?
MR. MOSS: That's right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And it will go from the --
from Eatonwood Lane all the way to the northern --
MR. MOSS: To the northern edge of the property.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- edge of the PUD?
Okay. All right. Now explain one other thing for me -- and this
is for Nick to deal with.
There's a dotted line going -- looks like a continuation of the bike
path and sidewalk. There's a dotted line on the north end of this
particular project that goes through the LaCosta Apartment Complex.
What is that? Do you see what I'm talking about?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's the -- that defines the property
line around the county's pond. To the west of the -- east of that dotted
line is county owned. To the west is LaCosta. That's where the
county's stormwater facility is.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I don't think so, but let's try
that again.
MR. MUDD: Point. Am I getting close?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: There's a dotted line to the south, and
then there's one up here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, go up a little bit
higher, up a little higher.
MR. MUDD: Higher. Go up that way. Up that way. Come on,
Nick.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You just passed it. There is a
dotted line going to the right there. It looks like an extension of the
pathway -- or the sidewalklbike path. What is that?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's an aerial, Commissioner, and
Page 110
June 24, 2008
it's facing probably upside down.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You've got to turn it 90 degrees to
the left. There you go.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Can I borrow your pen?
MR. MUDD: Sure.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Anytime.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: This is maintenance pathway for our
pond, and right now it looks to be that there is -- probably in the
FP&L where they drive their vehicles to maintain the FP&L easement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. You're not intending to
using that for any purpose, are you?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sir, other than maybe putting -- if we
continue the pathway that was on the original plan to bring it up either
into that FP &L trail to continue it north to Pine Ridge or the pathway
would come in and follow the edge of our pond all the way up to Pine
Ridge.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right. That would be a
good plan. Now, is there any intent to permit LaCosta access through
this particular access that we see to the left of our pond?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You mean here, sir?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, sir. The access to LaCosta would
come in through here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So there's no possibility that
traffic would ever be going in or out of that particular entranceway?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The only reason, if county stormwater
wanted to maintain that access would strictly be for the maintenance
of that pond. Our intention is to take it in through here --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- to LaCosta, and then access that
there, and then that should close that down.
Page III
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, you're going to close this down
completely?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: If the maintenance folks are okay with
coming through this development, we'll close it down completely. If
they want to maintain it, we'll leave it open.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right. I think you
answered all my questions.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Halas, did have you
anything?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. I make a motion to
approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Now, we have two speakers,
I understand.
MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am. The first one is Chuck Wicker.
He'll be followed by Dennis Richardson.
MR. WICKER: Ms. Vice-Chairman, and when the chairman
returns, give him my regards.
Commissioners, for the record, Chuck Wicker. I'm a Brynwood
Preserve homeowner. I'm currently a Director of the Brynwood
Preserve Owners' Association and past treasurer of that association.
My concern -- I'm delighted to see your concerns. My concern is
a little bit different than what we've heard previously this morning.
And I did bring two graphics. The first one actually -- let me just use
that.
The first one is very close and it comes out of the master plan
extract. The first one shows the discussion that's been going on. And
the point I would like to make with that is I'd like to expand our
thinking a little bit broader and include the other side of Livingston.
And by the way, I mean -- I meant right up front to thank two of
Page 112
June 24, 2008
your staff, two of the county staff. Been very helpful to me, Claudine
Aserk (sic).
COMMISSIONER FIALA: O'Claire (phonetic).
MR. WICKER: O'Claire, sorry, and then sitting behind me, John
Paul Moss (sic).
Our concern is traffic. I spoke with Nick's office last summer,
you know, show that on the next graphic, above a stop light to sort
through. That was not considered appropriate.
Since this area is being developed, our feeling, not Chuck
Wicker, but the association and neighboring association, feel that we
are really developing an area that is going to cause a great deal of not
only confusion, but as has occurred at Livingston and Pine Ridge,
fatalities.
If you'd put that up, please.
MR. MUDD: Absolutely.
MR. WICKER: There are five -- and I don't know the
appropriate term -- five entrances in and out, if you will. There are
four turns-around, and there are three bus stops all within 1,500 feet
either side of the Brynwood Preserve entrance. And if I could grab
the walk-around mike. Thank you.
MR. MUDD: If you're going to point, point right here.
MR. WICKER: I didn't mean to blow to the ear. Pine Ridge and
Livingston. And I wanted to expand your thinking a little bit here
because, since the light was turned down -- it would have been at this
position -- this mall has opened up with new access right here.
And where that light was proposed -- and that's the southern
boundary of the area we're discussing --
MR. MUDD: Eatonwood.
MR. WICKER: -- Eatonwood, a car can proceed from either side
directly across. There is no control there at all. There is no place for a
school bus to pull off the main road in this location. All Brynwood
residents, as someone mentioned, I think Nick, you have to come out
Page 113
June 24, 2008
and go out here to a turnaround.
So when you get up to this turnaround, you now have traffic
slowing for a right, you have the residents of Brynwood changing
three lanes in a matter of feet, 180 here, heavy traffic coming off Pine
Ridge, now slow down -- as I understood earlier comments, no slow
down lane or no fast departure, whichever the appropriate comment is.
At this point --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sir, your time has expired. Can you
get to --
MR. WICKER: Yeah. The bottom line is, we think, as a part of
what you are considering today, there should be traffic control in this
area before we increase the traffic flow. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Dennis Richardson.
MR. MUDD: That's public record.
MR. RICHARDSON: I'll waive my right to speak; thank you.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The east/west Whippoorwill,
is that part of the relief of this, Nick? Trying to get to the -- I think
that's part of the answer to the problem is that you -- east/west.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sir, that's correct. You will pull traffic
off this intersection with east/west, that Whippoorwill loop-around
connection south. Right now that's been permitted, it's on our
right-of-way department. It's pending pickup from the applicant of
Marbella Lakes that's currently in bankruptcy.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: To address one other comment he had
made, there is a deceleration lane northbound left-turn lane to make
that U-turn. When you have multiple developments that are all entitled
to that one access point, you try to accommodate multiple
developments. It is a safe movement. You've got traffic on a six-lane
facility, but you can make that U-turn with a deceleration lane
northbound.
Page 114
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Does staff have a presentation
or was that given already?
MR. MOSS: No. I don't have anything further to add. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Now, I'm sorry, is there a
motion on the floor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There is a motion and a second on
the floor.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Motion by Commissioner
Fiala --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- to accept the changes to this PUD.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: To--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Staffs recommendations to the
Planning Commission?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Staffs recommendations, right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And Planning Commission's
recommendations?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And who seconded it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I did.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And Commissioner Coletta seconded.
Commissioner Coyle wants to say something.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I suggest that you
specifically include the stipulations made by staff and the petitioner
concerning the type B buffer on the west side of this property?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's a type D buffer.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I will include that in my motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's included in the second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
Page 115
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Close the public hearing before we
take the vote.
Any more discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
We have three minutes before we go to our time certain, sir.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I think we can do one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, why don't we do the Gary
Mullee? I mean, that's real easy. I pulled it off the consent agenda.
That's the surplus funds.
Item #lON
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AFFIRM STAFFS
INTERPRET A TION OF THE PROPER DISPOSITION OF
REVENUE GENERATED FROM THE SALE OF CDES FUND
113 SURPLUS GOODS, AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF
THAT ALL REVENUE GENERATED FROM THE SURPLUS
SALE OF SUCH CAPITAL GOODS ORIGINALLY PURCHASED
WITHIN FUND 113 BE RETURNED TO FUND 113 CAPITAL
RESERVES - MOTION TO APPROVE REVENUE TO BE
RETURNED TO FUND 113 CAPITAL RESERVES - APPROVED
Page 116
June 24, 2008
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. That's ION. Excuse me. It's ION, but it
used to be 16A15, and that's a recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners affirm staffs interpretation of the proper
disposition of revenue generated from the sale ofCDES fund 113,
surplus goods, and provide direction to staff will all revenue generated
from the surplus sale of such capital goods originally purchased but
the fund 113 be returned to fund 113 capital reserves.
And Mr. -- the item was moved at Commissioner Henning's
request, and Mr. Gary Mullee, your Director of Operations for
Community Developments, will present.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm going to make a motion to
approve, but I had to do this for a certain reason.
Mr. Mullee recognized a shortfall on the process that we're doing
now, and I totally agree with it, but we're also doing it with other
funds, such as 111, surplus whatever we sell goes into the general
fund, and that's really inappropriate, or something that's paid with
impact fees, like a tractor or a truck or something, that that would go
into the general fund.
And that is very problematic because clearly the statute says for
MSTUs, the payers in that MSTU shall have a direct benefit, and I
think we need to further give staff direction to make sure those monies
get put back into their proper account that they were taking care of.
Do you --
MR. MUDD: That's that surplus -- that's that surplus equipment
sales.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
Is there a second to my motion before we give direction?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second. It makes sense.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What about the surplus funds in
making the fund whole wherever that surplus is sold from?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that part of your motion?
Page 117
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I'll make it part of my motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Then it will be part of my
second. I think it makes sense.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. All in favor of the motion,
signify by saying -- you have one speaker, I'm sorry.
MS. FILSON: Brenda Talbert.
MS. TALBERT: Good afternoon. For the record, I'm Brenda
Talbert. I'm the Executive Vice-President of Collier Building Industry
Association, and looks like you've already agreed so I probably should
sit down and shut up. I thank you. It's a wise and smart move.
Thank you, Gary, for finding it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What is our -- how's our present
law state in regards to the way we address this particular issue?
MR. KLA TZKOW: You have a policy that surplus property
goes back into the general funds. That's the policy.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And we passed that sometime ago?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. I don't think that's -- the policy is
against the statute, by the way, but I think it's a good thing that the
monies do go back to the original source.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commission Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do we have the option of going
either way or is there sufficiency of law to be able to support one way
over the other?
MR. KLATZKOW: You have the option of going either way, in
my opmIOn.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But the advantage of having the
general fund is we can always apply it back to that particular fund that
it came from if we wanted to. Whatever the needs are at that point in
time, we could shift the money, but we've got a little more fluid
Page 118
June 24, 2008
available to be able to --
MR. MUDD: Flexibility.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- be able to move funds back
and forth.
MR. MUDD: Flexibility is what I think --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Flexibility. And that's what I
like about having it go into the general fund. If the fund it came from
needs more money, no problem, put it right back in there. I think
we're causing some problems for ourselves. I really don't feel that
comfortable with the motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, I didn't know
how you voted.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I -- it's the right thing to do
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- but it ties our hands with respect
to flexibility.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm just asking what your vote was.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. My vote was no.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, okay. The motion failed, so
consider another motion at this time to approve the item on the
agenda.
Page 119
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve the item on
the agenda.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So we're okay. We're going to
do this for CDES. We're going to do this for the water/sewer district,
but we're not going to do it for any other fund?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is that what the motion says?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's what the motion says.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Not what I said, not the motion I
made.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion is to approve this item,
which says, any -- in this case, the four pickup trucks being sold on a
surplus, those monies are going to go back into CDES.
MR. MULLEE: Yes, sir. Back into fund 113.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. Thank
you.
MR. MULLEE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Apologize, and thanks for your
patience.
MR. MULLEE: Appreciate it.
Item #lOL
Page 120
June 24, 2008
REVIEW CLAM BAY RESTORATION AND LONG TERM
MANAGEMENT PLAN PERMIT COMPLIANCE ISSUES AND
OBTAIN DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS ON HOW TO PROCEED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this brings us to the time certain
item of 1 :30, and this is to review Clam Bay restoration and long-term
management plan permit compliance issues and obtain direction from
the Board of County Commissioners on how to proceed.
Mr. Gary McAlpin, your Coastal Zone Management Director,
will present.
MR. McALPIN: Thank you, County Manager. For the record,
Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management.
Commissioners, before you is an item we need direction on. We
have two permits that have jurisdiction over stipulated activities
within Clam Bay.
The first is the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
permit. Second is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit. Both of
these permits were issued in July of 1998 and will expire July of this
year.
We have -- we are desirous of closing these permits out and -- but
before we can close these permits out, we have to come into
compliance with all these items. Staff has done research on this and
believes that both informational markers and navigational markers are
required for Clam Bay.
Because this is a contentious issue, we sought specific direction
from both permitting agencies on this item, and also with the Coast
Guard, to clarify if the markers were required.
DEP came back to us and indicated that the permit was
authorized, authorized the installation of navigational markers, but
they did not require it.
Page 121
June 24, 2008
Further to that, they indicated that informational markers were
authorized and also were required. There are five informational
markers that are in the permit.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers came back to us and said that
the channel needs to be marked for navigation as per their special
condition in the permit. The special condition in the permit ties the
Clam Bay Management Plan into their permit and makes it a whole
and official part of the permit.
Since the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requires that the channel
be marked for navigation, the Corps has issued us the approval for
private aids to navigation. And in the information packet, I've
included all documentation relative to that.
We have set up a community work team that made some
recommendations to us relative to what specifically would be required
to mark the channel for navigation. These are in no way 100 percent.
There is some room to tweak these.
The -- both agencies refer to local knowledge in terms of what is
required for navigation. They do not necessarily tell you where the
markers should be but leave it up to the community to identify where
the markers should be placed based on local knowledge.
We had a work group that was set up that came up with this
recommendation. The channel -- the informational markers are
required to protect the environmental resources of sea grasses and
marine habitat. Navigational markers are required for safety, and the
safety that is required there is both for boaters and for swimmers, and
that's throughout the pass and the bay system.
There was considerable discussion earlier on that the Pelican Bay
community was the one that wrote the long-term maintenance and
management plan associated with this.
In subsequent discussions, the Sea gate community will also
identify that they had significant input into this when the permit was
being drafted.
Page 122
June 24, 2008
We do have -- we think we have clear direction from the Corps
that says that the markers are required. We had -- and that they're --
they are requiring us to come into compliance with the permit.
Obviously the Clam Bay community, the Pelican Bay
community feels differently, and we're asking for your guidance on
this item.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala suggested, since we have 15 speakers, to go
to the 15 speakers. Whatever the board wants to do. If you want to
keep our comments and questions short and then go to the speakers,
it's up to you. I know that Commissioner Coyle wants to say
something.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll wait until after the speakers
speak.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Why don't we call the
speakers, please.
MS. FILSON: Benny Leiore?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Leiore?
MS. FILSON: It looks like L-E-O-I-R-E.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I think it's Bonnie.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Bonnie?
MS. FILSON: Bunny, okay. It could be Bunny.
MS. LEVERE: That's Bunny Levere, L-E-V-E-R-E.
MS. FILSON: Okay. She'll be followed by Joe Stenza.
Go ahead.
MS. LEVERE: I wish -- with all due permission, I wish to cede
my time to Marcia Cravens.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Joe Stenza.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Stenza?
MR. STENZA: Yes. Commissioners, I wish to cede my time to
Page 123
June 24, 2008
Marcia Cravens.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Tom Cravens.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Cravens, do you want to accede
your time to Marcia Cravens?
MR. CRAVENS: Actually I'd like to cede my time to Georgia
Hiller.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Georgia Hiller.
MS. FILSON: Art Ritas?
MR. RITAS: Good afternoon. My name is Art Ritas. I'm a City
of Naples resident and certified master naturalist, having completed
180 hours of University of Florida Extension courses.
For the past five years I've conducted walking tours at Clam Pass.
I'm opposed to the installation of navigational markers in Outer Clam
Bay. The only reason to install markers is to take the first step toward
dredging and making the bay suitable for a small special interest
group, those with large boats.
Currently the bay and pass are enjoyed by kayakers, canoeists,
and swimmers and those with shallow draft boats. We have a fine
balance currently for numerous and diverse users.
The decision to install markers and the inevitable next step of
deep dredging would upset this balance. Not only would these actions
compromise the use of the bay and the channel for current users, it
could have negative environmental impacts.
Larger boats create turbidity that would kill the sea grasses so
many are eager to protect. Some argue that dredging the bay will
increase flushing, but there's no scientific evidence that dredging will
create flushing in this closed system.
In fact, keep dredging in the bay could result in further
siltification in the bay as it has at the pass. If markers are installed and
deep dredging done, it's likely that the county will have to wage an
ongoing and very, very expensive battle to keep the deep channels
Page 124
June 24, 2008
open.
From a naturalist point of view, there are exciting signs that
Outer Clam Bay is relatively healthy. The Tomasko report describes
the general good health of the north end on of the bay.
On my walks last season, I saw a number of quahog clams for the
first time in five years. These are indicator species of filter feeders that
may signal an improvement in water quality.
In addition, I participated in the annual bird count as a part of the
2008 Southwest Florida Birding Festival. We counted 44 bird species
in two hours at the boardwalk and the pass. This number ranks Clam
Bay number six of 14 outstanding birding sites in the county where
counts were made.
In short, Outer Clam Bay and the meandering channel at the pass
are invaluable and unique resources in the county, the kind that the
Visitors Bureau uses to promote ecotourism. We should not
compromise Outer Clam Bay and Clam Pass to serve the needs of one
small special interest group, those with deep-draff, large boats.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Georgia Hiller. She'll be followed by Judith
Hushon.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sue, could you set the timer for six
minutes.
MS. FILSON: Six minutes.
MS. HILLER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Georgia Hiller,
for the record.
One hour ago I went to the Naples Ship Store and I asked them
for the mariner's chart of Clam Pass, and this is what I purchased for
$21.75.
This map shows Clam Pass as a non-navigable shoal. Online this
morning the map that you have on the overhead was on the website. It
shows the same thing, that Clam Pass is a non-navigable shoal. You
Page 125
June 24, 2008
can't place red and green navigation markers in non-passable waters.
The Army Corps has not asked for navigational markers to be
installed in Clam Pass. What they have said is that the managements
plan should be followed. The management plan, in turn, defers to the
Coast Guard on the issue of navigational markers. The Coast Guard
says, no navigational markers are needed; therefore, the current permit
does not call for navigational markers.
As I said earlier, importantly, NOAA and the Coast Guard
mariner chart designate Clam Pass as a non-navigable shoal. Placing
navigational markers in a non-navigable shoal rises to the level of
creating an attractive nuisance and will result in potential legal
liability for both the county and the Coast Guard.
Also, allowing power boats to compete with the public that swim
and is permitted to swim in Clam Pass places additional potential
liability on the county and the Coast Guard.
It is clear why the Coast Guard has not required navigational
markers be placed in, I repeat, a non-navigable shoal.
Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Judith Hushon.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And Ms. Hushon will be followed
by?
MS. FILSON: Michael Levy.
MS. HUSHON: Hi. I'm Judy Hushon. And the 10-year
restoration permit that went through asks for markers, but it turns out
that the markers the people who were writing it were thinking about
were actually informational markers, not navigational markers.
And so they were thinking about canoe paths, kayak paths, things
like that, because that's the basic use of this. This is too shallow for
any other type of major boating.
And the biggest concern is that if markers are located outside of
the entrance -- as you can see on the overhead -- can you see those --
Page 126
June 24, 2008
can you see those markers? Those markers would actually encourage
boats and boaters who don't -- who have rental boats or don't know the
area to go in there. They'll get stuck. That will also damage the
bottom, and we work hard enough to get the grasses in good shape
anyway and that will -- they will just get stuck.
This will lead to the situation where dredging will be called for.
And this is one waterway -- it's a dead-end waterway, and there is no
call to dredge this. We have spent enough money dredging other
waterways in this county.
This should be left for the kayakers. They have very little area
right now. You can't kayak on Naples Bay. You'll get over-swamped
with wakes and things like that. So this is a beautiful place to go in
and kayak. I've been back in there and it's lovely, and it's the way it
should be, and we should try to maintain that.
I have a feeling that the Army Corps of Engineers acted without
maybe even ever visiting or definitely without looking at the map,
because had they looked at the aerial, they would have seen how much
of that is really almost white in color. That means it's really shallow
on the aerial, if you're interpreting the aerial. It's a couple feet or less.
That isn't for boating. That's for kayaking.
So I would ask you to please think that way when you're
considering this measure, that this is not an area that ever should be set
aside for large boats, that it should be maintained as a -- for
swimming, kayaking, lower-level uses, nature center.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, the next three speakers wish to
cede their time to John Domenie, and that is Michael Levy, Coleman
Connell, and John--
MR. IAIZZO: Iaizzo.
MS. FILSON: Thank you. And then the next speaker is John
Domenie.
Page 127
June 24, 2008
So how --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Three times three.
MS. FILSON: Nine.
MR. DOMENIE: I'm sorry. I wasn't aware I was that popular.
I'm going to repeat very quickly -- I want to talk to you about the
claim that Clam Pass is an international navigable waterway, has been
stated by David Buser and supported by Mr. McAlpin. This is a copy,
part of the NOAA chart, November 1st, 2005, covering Clam Pass
inlet, and it says, please note report non-navigable since 1982. That
was long before the Pelican Bay Services Division was established or
the permit was issued.
Then let's go to the next one which is the Coast Pilot 2008
Edition. Turn to chapter four, page 237, which describes Clam Pass as
quote, a shoal drainage canal to Outer Clam Bay. The pass is used
only by outboards in good weather, unquote.
Then go to two other well-known maritime publications, the
Florida Cruising Guide Directory and Doscher's Waterway Guide.
Neither one even lists Clam Pass in its directory; yet, according to
Seagate residents, it is an international navigable waterway. Doesn't
that strike you as being incongruent?
And are you aware that this area has been designated as a natural
protection area by none other than the BCC?
Nobody is denying access to Outer Clam Bay by people with
local knowledge. In fact, the route is already marked by sticks which
can easily be moved as shoals move or grass seabeds, which are
ephemeral, shift from one location to another.
Do Seagate residents really want outboards, inboards, and
personal watercraft roaming outer bay -- Outer Clam Bay?
Let's remember what markers are for. They're aides to navigation
indicating the preferred and safe route. But unless expressly
prohibited, a boater can stray outside the markers at his or her own
risk, so there is no guarantee that inviting boaters into the pass will not
Page 128
June 24, 2008
harm the environment.
So let's be honest and look at what the county is proposing.
Markers one and two are an open advertisement and invitation for
strangers and all boaters of all sizes to enter Clam Pass. I do not
believe that is what the residents of Seagate want. Eliminate those
two.
Then markers three and four. They sit on shoals that shift. If you
put permanent markers there, you'll find them sitting on the grass or
on sand or in deep water. I have no idea, because that channel shifts.
If you look very closely, sort of right here, there's a dark -- there's
a dark area. That was the last dredging that was done at the request of
Mr. McAlpin in the hope that that would form a channel. Nature
knows better, has abandoned that channeled that was dredged, and has
formed its own channel. So items three and four are totally useless.
Marker five, green marker five, sits on a shoal. That shoal was
dredged a year ago. So where do we go from there? Do we have to
keep moving that marker?
Then you have two more markers, six and eight. Those two sit
right on -- those are red right-returning markers. Well, nobody is
going to go any closer to that mangrove forest, and you don't need
markers there.
Then 10, 12, 14, and 16, which are red markers, guide you
around that island, and -- but you don't need 11 because 11 is to port,
and you're never going to go that way if you're following the path.
Then we come to the bridge, and the bridge has four markers, 19,
20,21 and 22. If you look at your charts for Venetian Bay, for
Moorings Bay, for Vanderbilt Lagoon, the three bridges, not one of
them have markers. So why for a 12-foot span do you need four
four-foot markers. I can't believe that that is what -- the intent.
I think what you really -- if you're going to put any markers
there, they should be private navigational markers only where it's
required and they should be such that they can be moved as the shoals
Page 129
June 24, 2008
move. I think that is very important.
Let me -- and the ultimate goal, I think, of all these markers, is
what has been mentioned before, is that, to dredge in the future. As of
this moment, our permit does not permit any dredging in Outer Clam
Bay, and I hope the one-year extension has included that and also our
future application, the five-year extension should include that.
I would like to address another matter, too. These are the
accusations that somehow Pelican Bay residents have not been good
stewards to the environment, and I quote from an executive summary
prepared by Mr. McAlpin. The Clam Bay estuary is a significant
mangrove preserve located adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico within
Collier County that has experienced alarming increases in nurturant
loadings over the past several years.
I find this extremely strange, as the Pelican Bay Services
Division each year has prepared four different reports which are
distributed to every environmental agency imaginable yet we have
never heard a complaint. I can show you very quickly and simply
where the pollution comes from. And I'm using Dr. Tomasko report,
which was prepared at a cost of $40,000.
This is page 24 -- yes. This is page 24 of said report, and the
next one is a blow-up. And in the first column --
MR. MUDD: You want the blow-up?
MR. DOMENIE: Yes, please. It shows various nutrients and
phosphorous turbidity and color. And if you look, GB5 was taken at
the bridge leading to Outer Clam Pass, and BGC and L -- and these
are designations made by Dr. Tomasko -- is in -- it's in Seagate.
And if you look at the percentages, you'll see that salinity is very,
very high at Seagate, indicating very good flushing. If there were no
flushing, the salinity would be less. But then look at all the other
items, nitrogen, phosphorous, turbidity, and color. Color up 385
percent over what comes into the bay, so that pollution is not coming
from us, but that's coming from Seagate, and we have no control over
Page 130
June 24, 2008
Seagate.
Seagate is part of the City. And I know Mike Bower -- I don't
know if he's here -- he's very concerned about it because there are 72
storm sewers that empty directly into the bays of the city. So he is
aware of that, but please don't blame Pelican Bay for it.
And I think that's it. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to
answer them.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: George Dietel?
MR. DIETEL: I wish to cede my time to Marcia Cravens.
MS. FILSON: Muriel Dietel?
MS. DIETEL: I also wish to cede my time to Marcia Cravens.
MS. FILSON: Nick Sullivan?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Sullivan? So followed by Mr.
Sullivan?
MS. FILSON: Meredith Dee?
MS. DEE: Yes. Come on up?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MS. DEE: I'd like to take maybe a quick minute and then give
some time to Robert Rogers as well.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Either you want to speak --
MS. DEE: All right, I'll speak.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- or you want to waive your time.
MS. DEE: I didn't know in could split. That's fine, I'll speak.
MS. FILSON: Following her will be Mary Anne Womble.
MS. DEE: My name is Meredith Dee. I'm a Seagate resident for
12 years. I'm also on the board.
And a couple of things I wanted to just make note of before I go
on with what I wanted to say about safety issues. First, it's impossible
for us to either have big power boats or also not be on navigable
Page 131
June 24, 2008
water.
There are 65 docks in Seagate. Seagate was developed in the late
1950s with canals, with sea walls and with dockets -- dockage.
There are 90 home sites, 65 docks. We do have several small
boats, flat boats, that can navigate the water fine. There are canoes;
there are kayaks as well.
The issue at hand is really, the federal government has said there
needs to be markers. The waterways can become a safety issue for
boaters and for swimmers.
During high tide, the current markers that are there are for canoes
and kayaks. They are metal markers. During high tide, they're almost
completely submerged. A boater could easily run into the markers.
When you come out into Clam Pass on your boat -- we were
there on Sunday, there were no less than 25 swimmers in the water.
Without markers, they're unaware. Mostly tourists, visitors, people
who don't live in Seagate might not know that boats are coming
through and vice versa, so it is a safety issue not only for boaters, but
for the swimmers and for the public in general.
Protecting the environment. Without the markers, it's difficult for
boaters to know where they should stay clear and where it is safe to
navigate.
Public safety, environmental safety, boater safety is what -- really
what's at issue here. We have no interest in dredging the pass. That's
not on the agenda today.
So thank you for your time and consideration.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker, Mary Anne Womble, indicates
wants to cede her time to Nicole Ryan, who is the next speaker.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Anybody else want to give
their time to Nicole Ryan?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I give my time.
MS. RYAN: Six minutes is enough.
Page 132
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coyle's going
to leave and give you his time.
MS . RYAN: I promise six minutes will be enough.
Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Nicole Ryan,
here on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida, and I think
the navigability of the system has been very eloquently described by
other speakers, so I'm not going to focus on that.
But I do want to really examine this outstanding issue,
outstanding commitment from the 1998 permit that the Corps of
Engineers issued because it really isn't a clearcut issue. The Corps
permit states that all special conditions must be complied with.
The Corps didn't actually talk about navigational markers. They
simply said that all special conditions would be complied with, and
one of the special conditions is compliance with the components of the
Clam Bay Restoration Management Plan, was an attachment to the
permit.
In the plan it states that the main channels will be marked in
accordance with the requirements of the United States Coast Guard;
however, you have an email from the Coast Guard stating that the
Coast Guard has no requirements for any entity to install aids to
navigation in Clam Bay.
So could this actually fulfill the requirements of the permit?
Something that really does need to be examined.
As far as the DEP permit, they have said that their requirements
were really for educational signage, for educational enhancement and,
therefore, their concerns have been met and we're not out of
compliance with the DEP permit.
So the Conservancy believes that there are a lot of questions that
still need to be answered regarding the navigational markers, and the
best way to do this is to really get these agencies together with the
county, with the stakeholders, sit down and talk this out.
This is a very, very sensitive system. This isn't an easy system.
Page 133
June 24, 2008
It's a very complicated process and program, and we want to make
sure that what is done there is not going to be in conflict with the main
intent of the Clam Bay Restoration Plan, which is environmental
enhancement and restoration.
The plan was designated to do three major things; allow for
natural historic hydrologic flow of the water. Through this there
would be limited dredging for the purposes of allowing those interior
flushing cuts and there would be limited dredging after storms to make
sure that the pass stayed open for environmental flow. Very important
to note, environmental flow.
So the plan and the permits to implement it were written really
with the intent of environmental enhancement, not navigational
enhancement. That being said, there are educational signs that are out
there, the canoe, kayak markers. So there are markers that are out
there.
And there are environmental concerns with placing the
navigational markers in the Clam Bay system. First you have the
impact of physically putting the markers in. Typically channel
markers lead to arsenic, copper, or cadmium, depending on what type
of wood you use, so that's one impact.
But beyond this, there's the very real concern about the
ramifications of placing navigational markers within a waterway that's
classified on the NOAA charts as non-navigable. Yes, you're going to
get some small boats, canoes, kayaks in there, but on the charts, this
really isn't intended to be one of the navigable waterways. So is it
appropriate to place these markers in such a system.
Another concern is that placement, as mapped on the exhibit,
could lead boaters to pass directly over the ebb shoal, which could
lead to grounding, and the presence of the large channel markers could
encourage boats who are not familiar with the system to go into a
shallow area where they're going to get stuck. Could lead to liability
issues for the county and would likely lead to an outcry to dredge in
Page 134
June 24, 2008
the name of public safety and to make this waterway more navigable.
Additionally, as the potential for stranding increases, so does the
potential for environmental damage to the substrate in the system,
including the sea grasses that are still remaining.
Another concern is that this is a shallow waterway that's going to
meander. The pass has moved and relocated itself naturally over the
years. And if you permanently place a channel marker in one
particular area, it certainly isn't going to be the proper place for that
channel marker in a few years' time. We've seen this with Wiggins
Pass to the north and we've seen it's a very lengthy process to get those
channel markers moved. It does not happen quickly.
So there's the concern about having these markers and trying to
keep them -- that pass in one place, and you do that, again, by
dredging.
Currently the Clam Bay system is a stable system. It's
functioning at or near equilibrium. So if you do excessive
manipulation, for example, too much dredging, you're going to create
an imbalance. The bigger hole you dig, the quicker it's going to fill in.
This is a system that's balanced, and we want to keep it that way.
You only have to look a bit to the north at Wiggins Pass to see
that there are a lot of problems there that are going to be costly to fix,
erosion and other such things. So we really want to make sure that
we're protecting this area.
The Conservancy believes that instead of moving forward with
installation of these navigational markers, let's think this through. Let's
stop, let's ask the right questions, let's make sure that what we're doing
is going to be compatible with the plan, and the Conservancy believes
that these navigational markers would not be compatible. But let's ask
the board. Let's get them down here. Let's get everyone together.
This is just one of the concerns surrounding this system, and this
may be a good time for the commissioners because you are the ones
that set the parameters for how Clam Bay is protected to really
Page 135
June 24, 2008
reiterate the purposes of Clam Bay and its restoration. It's a natural
resource protection area, as has been mentioned before. It's also part
of a conservation area, as part of the Pelican Bay PUD. It's a shallow
waterway considered, again, non-navigable on the NOAA charts, and
it's a natural system at or very near equilibrium.
And so it could be important to really reemphasize as projects,
work orders, permits are coming forward for your approval, that any
of these proposals need to meet this litmus test of environmental
enhancement preservation, restoration.
We would ask that anything that comes before you meet this
litmus test and that all proposals and projects are thoroughly vetted
through the public process, through stakeholder input, and through
scientific review so that we know what work product we're getting, we
know what's going to happen, and we can protect this Clam Bay
system.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Nicole, I have a question for you.
MS. RYAN: Yes, sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I appreciate your -- the process that
you're recommending, but what if the board gives direction to the
County Manager to just mark the sea grass beds?
MS. RYAN: If that's part of some of the educational markers,
others that have been out in that system more than I could give --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, marking them, you know,
warning sea grass beds.
MS. RYAN: Ithink--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I mean, what I heard, correspondence
from residents of Seagate is, you know, nobody knows where the sea
grass beds are, and if we mark them, then they would stay off the sea
grass beds.
MS. RYAN: Well, that could certainly be done without putting
in the large Coast Guard navigational channel markers. I think that
Page 136
June 24, 2008
that could be done through some educational signs. Of course, the sea
grass beds are going to move and shift, so there would have to be a
constant monitoring and updating of that, but that could certainly be
done without the navigational large channel markers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you know there's -- the TDC
approved a contract for maximizing the dredge to get cheap sand for
the renourishment of the beach for Clam Pass? That was discussed
yesterday.
MS. RYAN: (No verbal response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Sue Black. She'll be followed
by Ernest Wu.
MS. BLACK: Sue Black, resident of Seagate since June of '02.
We've owned two boats. One 18-foot Sea-Doo Challenger with a
12-inch hull and a 15-foot Sea-Doo Speedster. We have four children,
and we boat quite often in the pass. We do have to watch the tide
because it will damage our boat if we go out on an extremely low tide.
I'm -- this is my first time in front of everyone. So I'm kind of
listening to all these contradictions here, and it's confusing me.
One environmentalist says five years ago -- he takes these nature
walks, and five years ago he didn't see a clam and now he's starting to
see this specific species from this process. And I'm thinking to
myself, well, gosh, we just dredged. Maybe clean water came in to
allow these specimens to start redeveloping.
Then I hear this lady saying that Seagate or man is polluting --
we're polluting Seagate -- or Seagate community is polluting the water
and it's not us doing it, when the environmentalist that was just up
here, she just said that it's pretty healthy. So are we ruining it? Is
Pelican Bay ruining it? I mean, I'm kind of confused here.
I'm just here to tell you that when we're out on a boat and we go
out of the channel, out into the open road in the waters, there are times
when we almost -- we're kind and we say, a boat coming through,
Page 13 7
June 24, 2008
coming through, and people, they look at you like a deer with
headlights, and they stop, and you're like, can you move aside, please,
a boat's coming through. There is no indication for them, or signage,
that says navigable waterway here. Folks, kind of watch out for it.
We're not intending to dredge. I'm just saying, we just need to
have some kind of marker. The signs that are out there, to me, they
can't -- they get full of crustation and crab and they're dirty and you
can't see them. And I know from the condos up in Pelican Bay, they
want to keep it pristine and pretty. It's nice to look down at Clam Pass
and not see those big old telephone polls with the red and green. I can
see why a lot of these people are here, but what I'm saying is, can we
come to some kind of compromise where we get a marker to let them
know we're coming through but it's not unsightly.
So that's all I have to say. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Ernest Wu. He'll be followed by Marcia Cravens.
MR. WU: Hi, my name's Dr. Ernest Wu. I live at 5194 Seahorse
Avenue in the Seagate community. I'm also a member of the Seagate
board.
And basically, I'm a little flabbergasted of why this process has
taken so long. This permit is out of compliance for 10 years. It's been
actively fought by -- well, I shouldn't say fought, but contested by the
Seagate community for probably two years. I want to thank Dr. David
Buser for all the work he's done.
And the -- you know, I've heard there's some confusion about
whether -- you know, what way the permit should go and what the
Army Corps of Engineers really meant to say. Well, I think we know
now what the Army Corps of Engineers needed to say. They've said it
right now; those permits need to be there in compliance. There's -- it's
there in black and white. We have to do it.
Weare, of course, very concerned about the environment and, of
course, we are very concerned about safety. I have two young
Page 13 8
June 24, 2008
children, I have two kayaks, and some day I would like to take them
out on a boat.
I know even in the kayaks, people say, well, you have local
knowledge. I've lived there for six years. I've run aground in my
kayak several times. You can't see where the bottom is. You don't
know where it is. You don't have some special vision to see it unless
it is well marked.
It's currently marked by some, about one-inch diameter PVC
pipes, which often get knocked down or you can't see them during a
high tide. I find it's very disturbing, and I'm afraid to take my children
out into that waterway without it being marked. We could be out in
there and a sudden lightning storm comes in, we need to come in
rapidly. And if we get stuck, that's a serious safety issue. I also think
it's a serious liability issue knowing that this permit has not been in
compliance for so long, and it hasn't been taken care of yet.
Last, of course, are the sea grasses. Every morning I look out my
back window and I see the Clam Pass water 30 feet from my window.
I am intimately -- can see it all the time. And we've seen it, the quality
go up and down noticeably over the past few years. Just this past year
it does seem to have gone up quite a bit.
But, of course, we want those sea grasses protected. We don't
want to have to go hunting for what the best way is by running over a
bunch of sea grasses. By having these markers in place, we can get
through safely, we can get through without chopping up a bunch of
sea grasses. And I think in the long-term we would very much like to
see all this happen.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Marcia
Cravens.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I count four. I count four. How
many do you count?
MS. FILSON: Minutes?
Page 139
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, four people.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I counted one.
MS. FILSON: I wasn't keeping count, sorry. Twelve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, four plus one is 15, and not a
minute more.
MS. CRAVENS: Hi, Marcia Cravens. I'm a resident of Pelican
Bay. I'm also on the Mangrove Action Group.
I am feeling very invested in the Clam Bay system. I have been
researching it and very involved with the agencies.
As regards to the only governmental agency that had one person
who gave an interpretation that she believed that the marking had to
be done because of a special condition in our permit, she actually cited
our management plan incorrectly.
I have brought this up to her superiors. I have an email from
them that they will be looking into it. Cynthia Obdink (phonetic) said
that the language of it was that finally the main channel will be
marked in accordance with the requirements of the United States
Coast Guard to ensure that those who use the system clearly will know
where the channel is and prohibitions against operating their
watercraft outside the same.
She changed a significant key word there which was part of her
interpretation. She took out the word imposed. Imposed carries quite
a strong connotation to it.
Anyone reading the actual language of this plan would
understand it to mean that the Coast Guard would be the one who
would be imposing this requirement.
I personally have a statement from Chief Joe Embrace (phonetic)
from the Miami Coast Guard who said that the Coast Guard has no
requirement whatsoever for the channel in Clam Bay to be marked.
And so, once again, the person of the U.S. Coast -- U.S. Corps
who said that this channel needed to be marked according to the Corps
actually cited it incorrectly.
Page 140
June 24, 2008
And I have to say in regards to one of the speakers that was here
who said she had Sea-Dos out here in these waters, according to
Collier County ordinance, they are not supposed to be in there. It is
supposed to be idle, no wake. I don't think that you can operate a
Sea-Doo without creating a wake. I just want to bring that up.
You could enter this in the record, if you would like, which is my
email from --
MR. MUDD: Page 38 and 39 here.
MS. CRAVENS: Okay. I've already read it.
MR. MUDD: Okay.
MS. CRAVENS: Thank you. I just want to talk a little bit about
how we arrived at this point here. Why is it that we're here today
talking about permit issues?
And I just want to go back a little bit about the special
relationship that Pelican Bay Services Division has with the
commission here.
I'm going to show you an organizational chart which kind of puts
it in a nutshell.
As you can see, you have the commission at the very top of the
page there, and directly below that is the Pelican Bay Services
Division. It is even above your County Manager.
It -- then you have your County Manager going down slightly
below that board, and then below him is John Petty, who is the
administrator of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board, and then
you have this line going off to the side then connecting John Petty to
the Pelican Bay Services Division.
It explains something that many of us have been puzzled about,
and that is why we sometimes are not able to get things accomplished.
I have been attending a lot of the board meetings where there is
an issue on the agenda, there's discussion, there's a vote, and there is
instruction given to John Petty that the board wants action taken by
him, and he ends up being obstructed actually from being able to
Page 141
June 24, 2008
accomplish it.
This is what happened a year ago when the renewal for the
management plan and the permits first was voted on and unanimously
passed by the Pelican Bay Services Division Board.
John Petty was instructed to submit it. He submitted it, and it
was put on hold here, and it never came before the commission.
It was only after quite a bit more discussion with the board that it
was determined to make a resolution to try and finally bring this to the
attention of the commission, which happened this past April which
was, again, another confusing situation because there never was any
discussion or agreement among Pelican Bay Services Division board
members to only care for the trees. That was decided for them.
I would ask somehow that we have some relief from this
situation. It should not be a situation where the Pelican Bay Services
Division Board, which is representative ofthe community, is not able
to have their own agenda items decided amongst themselves in their
community.
We just recently had a situation where there were comments
made to the chairman of the board and to our administrator to take
things off the agenda.
I would ask you for relief from this, please. There must be a way
where the Pelican Bay Services Division Board is allowed to conduct
its business that you, the commission, charged them with doing.
This started under ordinance 91, I believe, and it has been -- we
have a long trail of ordinances that have been amended, but most
recently we have ordinance 2006-05, which does have duties and roles
of both the Pelican Bay Services Division Board and the County
Manager spelled out in it.
There just seems to be a problem with being able to get done
what needs to be done to keep the mangrove forest and the estuary
working as well as it could and doing the best that they can.
I'm just going to deviate from this a little bit and talk a little bit
Page 142
June 24, 2008
about another staffer here who -- there's no animosity there, there's no
problem with individuals being the new kids on the block and having
ambitions and having talents. We have a new department here and a
new director. And there seems to be some kind of almost a tug of war
with the duties and the roles between these two entities.
There is a -- people have mentioned before this document that's
called the sea grass -- the Clam Bay Sea Grass Assessment. They've
already talked about how it actually discusses -- if you look at the
facts and the data in this report, it actual tells you that the Clam Bay
system is a healthy system.
In no way is there ever a point at which the water quality data
indicates that it is below the standards for the State of Florida.
Actually those -- the data falls between median and best. We think
that's a pretty good accomplishment there, but yet we're being told that
it needs to be better or that there is a problem with it.
We recognize that there is a problem south of Seagate in the
Venetian and Moorings Bays. We know that there have been water
quality data being taken from there by the Conservancy for a number
of years, and that data now is somehow being included with the data
from Clam Bay in a way to try and persuade the public to believe that
there is a problem with the water quality in Clam Bay.
I would just like to see somehow that misinformation to be
corrected and that Clam Bay be understood to be the healthy system
that it is.
There are many problems with waterways in the county here, and
they deserve the attention and the talents of the people that work for
you, but, please, not on the back of Clam Bay. Clam Bay is one of our
very, very few precious remaining natural resources that is a
mangrove-lined estuary. You've heard people here talk about how they
value it as a canoe trail.
I, myself, have been out there on many occasions talking with
people who enjoy it, fishing, swimming, kayaking, snorkeling. I see
Page 143
June 24, 2008
people who are second and third generation. They came there as a
child themselves. They are now bringing their own children there.
They very, very much value it.
I know there are projects that are in the works. I know there is
funding that is being looked at. And you know, I can't fault people for
wanting to do that. But please spend that money. That's good
taxpayers'money. Please spend it where it's needed. Spend it and fix
the problems in the waterways that do have water quality problems
and not in Clam Bay.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. With time to spare. That
was our last speaker?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle's first, then
who's next? I will be.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me preface my comments by
telling you what I believe.
I believe that the Pelican Bay Services Division has done an
absolutely wonderful job with managing the restoration and the
protection of mangroves in the bay.
I believe that the people in Pelican Bay have a very direct interest
in what goes on there. And I will say to you that the people in Seagate
have just as much of an interest in what goes on there.
There has been a failure here not to protect mangroves or not to
protect Clam Bay. There's been a failure on the part of the community
and the county commissioners.
I have never heard so much disagreement about facts that should
be readily available. How can three or four different groups go to the
Coast Guard and the Corps of Engineers and come back with different
answers about whether navigational markers are required?
We, the county commissioners, are being told by staff that the
Corps of Engineers is requiring navigational markers. There's no
Page 144
June 24, 2008
equivocation there. It's very, very, very clear in their minds. But in
the minds of the people who have spoken here today, it's very clear in
their minds, too, that it's not required.
We have people trying to snatch little bits of information and
words out of plans consisting of hundreds of pages to try to prove that
somebody else is lying.
A notation on a navigational marker that -- a report was made in
1982 that this area is not navigable does not mean it has been
unnavigable since 1982. It merely says, there was a report in 1982
that says it was not navigable. It could be navigable tomorrow if we
had a storm that washed out the pass. That's just the way things work.
We solve problems like this by getting together and talking about
them honestly without accusing everybody else of some scheme. And
the fault is ours, the Board of County Commissioners. I think it's
extremely rare that we take a natural resource protection area such as
this and turn it over to the administration of a single homeowners
association. That is, in my opinion, a major mistake.
We have taken great care in all of the other areas that we're
dealing with throughout Collier County to make sure all stakeholders
are represented, but we have people in Pelican Bay accusing people in
Seagate of wanting to run out -- huge yachts out through the bay, and
we have people in Seagate alleging that the people of Pelican Bay
don't want their boats on the -- in the Clam Pass area anyway.
So we've got to solve that problem. And honestly, we are not
managing this. We have provided no guidance to anybody to do
anything as far as I know. As a result, they just going around doing
what they want to do.
And I'm going to propose something. And we've been told by
staff that they want to bring this thing to a close. They want to close
out this project. They want to get rid of the so-called violations, but
then the next thing I hear is, we're approving a budget for another one
year of an expended contract -- extended study.
Page 145
June 24, 2008
This has to stop, and I'm going to suggest that we terminate this
entire program and re-establish an organization that consists of all of
the stakeholders so that we can -- we can deal with all of the issues.
We can't parcel them out and have somebody deal with the health
of the mangroves and/or the sea grasses, somebody else deal with
water quality, somebody else making decisions about dredging the
pass.
We need to have a comprehensive plan, and we need to outline
several things. Number one, it will not become a major thoroughfare
for large motorized vessels, end of story. We shouldn't even be
thinking about doing any dredging associated with that, and we ought
to make these things very, very clear, because I am disappointed not
only in our own organization but in the people who are involved in
this process that you're letting animosities between neighborhoods and
suspicions get in the way of getting the job done, and we can't permit
that to happen, and it's not getting any better.
So the only thing I can suggest is that we just create a new
organization and we get the answers to some of these questions and
we make sure that all of the stakeholders are represented and we
develop a comprehensive management program for this area. That's
what I'm going it -- and I am not going to vote for an extension of any
other management programs. I'm not going to support any budget
allocations for this.
I want a new organization put together that represents the entire
community, not just a subset of it. This is not property that is owned
by Pelican Bay. It is not property that is owned by Seagate. It's not a
battle of -- between city residents and county residents. This is a
resource of the people of all of Collier County.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Want to make a motion to that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I will make a motion that we do
that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I'll second it.
Page 146
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion and second
on the floor to create a -- give direction. Is this a -- is this a committee
in the sunshine recognized by the board by resolution or ordinance?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: To do -- to do the--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: A comprehensive management
program for this NRP A.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And to get -- and to close this thing
out?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And close this one out.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I recognize the motion, but I
must tell you, in order to do that you really need to reconsider the
action that the board did about the permit. It is -- it is the -- it is the --
by a supermajority of the Board of Commissioners, gave direction that
PBS&D do certain things in here, and that is the understanding of the
residents.
So if you're going to reconsider that direction, I would suggest
that you do it correctly by the ordinance or it could and probably will
be challenged.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let me respond to that. I'm
not sure anybody here can tell me what we've done.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I can tell you. I have the minutes
right here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. You might have, but I can
also tell you that in testimony during your budget hearings and
elsewhere, we have been told that our request for a new -- for a new
permit will supercede this one and cause it to expire immediately upon
approval of the new permit. I've also been told --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: If I can finish, please, because I had
the floor.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I was asking questions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. You're asking questions of the
Page 147
June 24, 2008
person speaking or staff?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I was asking questions, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, let me finish. I
understand that staff is doing things. And in fact, yesterday at the
TDC, they were addressing hydrology of the ebb shoal of Clam Pass.
That is opposite of what the board directed because -- Commissioner
Halas made the motion and I seconded it for a new permit to take care
of the mangroves and the hydrology in the area. That is -- was for
PBS&D to take care of.
And, in fact, I said later on that I feel that government or the
citizens can do a better job of taking care of that than government, and
government doesn't need to be all to all.
And that was understood by the residents, at least two of the
residents from the area that spoke onto (sic) it. And, in fact,
Commissioner Coyle, you voted against it because it was not exactly
what the motion is, a comprehensive study of one permit, and that
wasn't what staff was suggesting.
So, again -- and I'm not finished -- if you're going to change that,
I suggest that you reconsider the previous action according to our
ordinance.
The second thing, I think what Nicole Ryan from the
Conservancy recommended is a more complete way because you're
closer to what the issue is on the agenda. The issue on the agenda is --
and Mr. McAlpin's statements -- was to -- what do we do with these --
do we have a visualizer? I would like a copy of that, too, either sent to
me electronically or in my office -- of the markers. That is the
question.
So I'm not going to support the motion. I feel that, again, our
decision could be challenged because it's not the proper procedure.
Commissioner Halas, you had raised your hand.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I believe what we have found
out later -- and that's something that's going to have to come up for
Page 148
June 24, 2008
discussion -- is that the residents in Pelican Bay can address the
mangrove situation without another Corps permit if they're not going
to do any more dredging or cutting of channels. It's just a
maintenance of what they presently have, and that's my understanding,
and maybe staff can correct me if I'm wrong on that.
So this was information that came to us after the fact, and that's
probably something that will have to be addressed on a future agenda.
But I think what we're trying to do here -- this permit has been
active for over 10 years, and I think we're getting to a point where I
think we need to bring this to closure, and I'm hoping that the two
warring groups out there can come up with what needs to be
addressed.
And I think I also need to have staff tell us who has got
jurisdiction over this, the Corps of Engineers or the U.S. Coast Guard.
MR. McALPIN: Mr. Chair, if we could, the -- essentially what
happens is the u.s. Corps of Engineers indicates that they have a need
or -- to mark this channel for navigation. They issue that statement to
the Corps of Engineers. Excuse me. They issue that statement to the
U.S. Coast Guard, and then the U.S. Coast Guard then will issue the
permits to install the aids to navigation.
And that documentation is in the package where we have a later
document from the u.s. Coast Guard which says that since they have
authorization from the Corps now, that navigational markers are
required. They are in the process of issuing the permits.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does that answer your question?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. So when somebody wrote to
the Coast Guard and said, do we need to put markers in here, the
Coast Guard doesn't do anything until they get some direction from
the Army Corps of Engineers; is that correct?
MR. McALPIN: That email correspondence was -- early on they
did not have any direction from the Corps. We asked the Corps to
make a statement to interpreter the permit. The Corps interpreted the
Page 149
June 24, 2008
permit as navigational markers were required. They put that in
writing to us. And with that the Corps -- the U.S. Coast Guard then
issued the aids to navigation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. It's also my understanding
that we hold the permit to this thing, and we're the ones that will be
held accountable in regards to getting this addressed and getting it off
the books; is that correct?
MR. McALPIN: I believe ultimately Collier County is
responsible for actions of the permit or not actions of the permit.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So what we need to do is get the
two parties together and figure out how they're going to mark this
particular waterway; is that correct?
MR. McALPIN: Yes, Mr. Chair (sic). We had -- the original
meeting that we had, we had the engineer from Pelican Bay Services
Division, we had local builder knowledge of what needed to be done
to mark the channel. That's what they came up with as -- in terms of--
but certainly that can be revisited and relooked at if that's the direction
of the board.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that was the way that the
motion was made.
Am I correct, motion maker?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. This thing's gotten awfully
confused, and I'm not -- I'm not sure that anybody sitting on this board
knows what they're talking about right now. Okay?
I don't believe that the provisions that Commissioner Henning
has referenced have actually been implemented either in the budget or
in any other guidance. I believe that we do have the authority to
reorganize this effort. Weare the primary permit holder. Weare the
responsible party.
And I believe that rather than sit around here and argue over what
somebody said at some previous meeting and what was -- what the
intent was, I will revise my motion to provide guidance to the staff to
Page 150
June 24, 2008
come back to us with a recommendation as to how we can proceed
with creating a comprehensive management program for this NRP A,
and to include all the stakeholders in an organization which will draft
and manage that management program.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's the same thing. But is this in
the sunshine? Is this a board committee in the sunshine?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The motion was to provide the staff
guidance to come back with a recommendation to us as to how this
could best be done.
Now, they come back with a recommendation to us. My
reference is that it be, anytime we appoint a board, it is a sunshine
board. Any board that is officially designated by us is subject to the
sunshine.
So if we officially designate a comprehensive management
committee or board to manage and oversee this NRP A in a
comprehensive manner, then it's going to be a sunshine organization.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can I ask you a question?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is this -- what -- you going to set
up a timeline, because I believe we've got a short period of time here
that this permit has got to be closed out. I think we've got a one-year
extension, so is there a timeline involved in this?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I can't imagine why the staff
couldn't come back at our next regularly scheduled meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Boys, we had Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'm just asking him because I
seconded the motion, and I'm just -- I'm trying to make a decision here
what Commissioner Coyle is trying to address here.
We do have a timeline, and if we can't get this done in a -- in the
time line allocated to us, then I'm not going to -- I'm going to pull my
second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, my response to that is, I don't
Page 151
June 24, 2008
know why we can't have a recommendation at our next meeting for
action, and we could have the committee established immediately
thereafter. It's just a procedural -- Commissioner Henning has
concerns about what the procedure is to it. So I'm saying to staff, let's
go out and find out what the procedure really is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, then myself.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, I was going to clarify
some things, but I think there's been too much discussion and there's
too much confusion. The motion is on the floor that they bring this
back. We've got two different parties and we've got an issue about
markers, whether they're navigational or informational as well, should
be considered.
I think that we can't make any further decision than to come
back, so I'll withdraw any further comments.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And I -- you know, I just don't
-- just because somebody disagrees with somebody on a procedural
matter does not have the right to attack another member.
We approved these minutes, and they're there if you want to read
them. And there's no sense on trying to twist anything I say or do,
okay?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I didn't.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You did.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How did I do that?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I'm telling you it's a procedural
matter of what the board direction was. Those ought to be
reconsidered by our ordinance. And, you know, if you want to ask
something about a procedural matter, you ought to ask the County
Attorney.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me say this one more time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And Commissioner Coletta's next.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I'm going to answer your
question.
Page 152
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can we wait till Commissioner
Coletta goes?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I'm going to answer your
question now, okay, so don't interrupt me.
Once again, I said that we should provide guidance to the staff to
find out what is the right procedure for getting this done. It is not an
attack on you or the procedure.
You have alleged that it requires a certain thing. I am suggesting
to the staff that they tell us what is the best way to get it done. Okay?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you done?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm done.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This has been most interesting,
I'll tell you.
Let me see where we are. We have a motion on the floor that
was seconded, then the second pulled the mo -- his second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, he didn't.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, you've still got the second.
Okay. What Commissioner Coyle is proposing is to make everyone
come together on this, that there's too many competing interests out
there. In other words, whoever can get the most emails out, whoever
can speak the longest or -- is the one that's going to win. No, that's not
the way it's going to work.
There's one thing that you said that really -- I mean, everything
you said impressed me. And I'm being nice to you because I might
need your vote later. But the one thing that really impressed me was,
is that you said that it doesn't belong to Seagate, it doesn't belong to
Pelican Bay. It belongs to the people of Collier County. Sir, I agree
with you 100 percent.
And when you have this particular thing put together and when
staff comes back with it, it should be a committee very much like rural
lands, rural fringe, everything we've ever put together before. It's been
Page 153
June 24, 2008
open to the whole county.
And I -- that's one of the -- one thing that I'd be looking for,
because once again, it's a county resource rather than an individual
community resource. But I think if we get everybody to work
together, we can come up with something that would be reasonably
agreeable. Or how's that go again, if you -- if no one's happy when
you get done, you've succeeded?
So I'll support you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion on the floor and a
second. Do you understand the motion? Is the motion clear?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. The motion I have is, come back with a
comprehensive management plan and how does this county go about
implementing it, okay. It may be a board or whatever. That's what
I've got on my notes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Yeah, that isn't what I heard.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Let me try to clarify that. I
don't expect you to develop a comprehensive management plan by the
next time you come back to the board. I am asking that you advise us
how we can put together a comprehensive organization with all the
stakeholders represented with a charge for them to develop a
comprehensive management plan for this NRP A and to oversee that
management plan.
MR. MUDD: I understand.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Because we have a
disagreement as to how we should do it. I'm asking you, hey, tell us
how we should do it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
Page 154
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
Aye.
Motion carries 4-1.
We're going to take a ten-minute break.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Item #10B
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS DETERMINE WHETHER TOURIST
DEVELOPMENT FUNDS MAY BE USED TO FUND
ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL STRUCTURES AT
HIDEAWAY BEACH BY MAKING A FINDING AS TO
WHETHER FUNDING THESE EROSION CONTROL
STRUCTURES IS IN THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST AS REQUIRED
BY THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX FUNDING POLICY -
APPROVED W /STIPULA TIONS
Commissioner, the next item on your agenda is lOB. That has a
2:30 time certain. We're a little -- we're a little off that schedule.
It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
determine whether tourist development funds may be used to fund
additional erosion control structures at Hideaway Beach by making a
finding as to whether funding these erosion control structures is in the
public's interest as required by the tourist development tax funding
Page 155
June 24, 2008
policy.
Mr. Gary McAlpin, your Coastal Zone Management Director,
will present.
MR. McALPIN: Thank you, County Manager. For the record,
Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management.
What I'd like to do at this point in time is kind of just set the stage
a little bit on Hideaway Beach. Hideaway Beach have (sic), as we see
it, the middle portion of Hideaway, the southern portion of Hideaway
Beach that was renourished in 2005, and in the southern portion of
Hideaway Beach we installed five erosion control structures.
On the northern portion of Hideaway Beach, which is off to the
chart (sic) here, we renourished and we installed five erosion control
structures. The middle portion of the beach was part of the
renourishment program. We put 240,000 cubic yards of material on
there.
This area did not get erosion control structures because Coconut
Island was right here. Coconut Island has since disintegrated, and
you'll see the remnants of Coconut Island, which is coming in through
here. You also see Sand Dollar Island, which is to the south which is
moving proceeding in this direction. So what you'll see at this point in
time, this is what Sand Dollar Island looks like at this point in time.
We're working on some of -- to try to get a stick drive up and
running. But what I'd like to do is just take you through some of the
key points of the -- Hideaway Beach obviously has experienced a
significant amount of erosion in the middle portion of the beach as a
result of Coconut Island disintegrating.
The City of Marco is concerned about the access to the
condominiums to the northern end of Hideaway Beach, and they're
working with the DEP and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to do
some temporary protection and also look at permanent solutions.
They have requested $1.6 million from the TDC to provide six
additional erosion control structures on Hideaway Beach.
Page 156
June 24, 2008
Now, the TDC guidelines were revised in -- October 25th, 2005,
to allow the Board of County Commissioners some discretion in using
TDC funds for ineligible beaches. Hideaway Beach, under section
four of the TDC policy, is ineligible because it does not meet public
accessibility guidelines.
The funding policy for section five allows for the possibility of
funding ineligible beaches based on the Coastal Advisory Committee
and the Tourist Development Council stipulating that high -- that this
is a high erosion beach and that erosion control structures are the
proper solution.
Both the TDC and the CAC did that. Staffwill stipulate that it is
high erosion and that erosion control structures will work based on the
experience that we have seen so far; they have been very successful.
The other finding that has to be made is by the Board of County
Commissioners to make a finding that it's in the public interest. And
that's where we are at this point in time.
We -- the erosion control structures and the high erosion is not an
issue. We know that it is -- that is for certain. Coastal zone
management has in the past tried to be consistent in our policy in
adhering to FDEP and public accessibility guidelines as the most
important criteria when determining eligibility cost share.
We believe that public accessibility -- public interest without
public accessibility is somewhat inconsistent, and there can be little
public interest without public accessibility.
Hideaway Beach is the public road -- there is no public road at
Hideaway Beach. The public can technically access Hideaway Beach
by walking around from Tigertail Beach or by boat. Practically,
however, that is -- a very small portion of the public is willing or able
to gain access through those methods. So, yes, it can be done. The
practicality is that it rarely, if ever, happens.
Some private and commercial boating concessions are using the
developing shoals from Sand Dollar Island for shelling and other
Page 157
June 24, 2008
tourist excursions. If Hideaway Beach was not renourished, sufficient
beaches would exist in the area of Sand Dollar Island, the emerging
shoals, and the other T -Groin protected beaches where the tourist
activity would continue.
The condominiums on the north end are serviced by a private
road network, and the county in the past has not used public funds to
protect private roads.
And lastly, Commissioners, the board of -- you made an
authorization or one-time finding in 2005 that public funds could be
expended to provide erosion control structures for Hideaway Beach.
That is -- that project was completed. It was closed out and this is not
a continuation of that previous project.
So with that, the TDC -- the CAC recommended unanimously on
May 8th to say that the erosion control -- this was a high erosion
beach, erosion control structures worked, and it was in the best -- it
was in the public interest to do that.
On May 19th the TDC voted to make the finding that this was a
high erosion beach and erosion control structures would work, but
they were deadlocked on 4-4 that this was in the best public interest.
So, Commissioners, that is the issue whether we have to --
whether TDC funds are to be used on this beach, and the issue is, is it
in the public interest or not.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there any questions before we go to
the 16 public speakers?
MS. FILSON: A lot of these are ceding their time to others.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh.
MS. FILSON: And I'll announce that as I call their names. Are
you ready?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MS. FILSON: Dick Freeman cedes to John Arceri. Ron Bryon
cedes to John Arceri. Paul Bureau cedes to Erik Brechnitz. Elizabetha
Page 158
June 24, 2008
Bryon cedes to Erik Brechnitz. Tom Talbot cedes time to Erik
Brechnitz. Nancy Brechnitz cedes her time to Erik. This one I can't
read. They cede their time to Brechnitz. Carl DeRiseis cedes his time
to Erik Brechnitz. Sandra Eldred cedes time to Erik Brechnitz.
Wayne Eldred cedes time to Erik Brechnitz, and then Erik Brechnitz is
next.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. He gets the rest of the day.
And that's all the speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, then there's speakers after that. There's Erik
Brechnitz, and there's two, three, four, five, six speakers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I guess it's Mr. Brechnitz gets the
vote by quite a bit.
MS. FILSON: So how much time would you--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's 30 minutes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Twenty-seven.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Twenty-seven?
MR. BRECHNITZ: I won't require 30 minutes, Mr. Chairman.
Ten to 12 is about what I require, if that's acceptable to you, sir.
MR. MUDD: State your name for the record, sir.
MR. BRECHNITZ: Yes. For the record, my name is Erik
Brechnitz, and I'm the vice-chairman of the Marco Island tax district.
And I would like to begin by acknowledging some people that are
here from Marco Island government today who appear here in support
of this project.
Steve Thompson, who is the new City Manager of Marco Island
is here in the audience; as is the chairman of the Marco Island City
Council, Bill Trotter, he's here as well; and John Arceri, who is a
former city councilman at Marco Island and also was a member of the
Coastal Advisory Commission during the period that this project was
under discussion, is here as well. And both Mr. Trotter and Mr. Arceri
intent to make a few very brief comments.
I would also like to take the opportunity to thank the
Page 159
June 24, 2008
commissioners that carved out time in their busy schedules to talk to
us about this issue. We appreciate your consideration and your
courtesy. And I'd like to also thank Jim Mudd who took a good hunk
out of his Sunday on the weekend to come down to Hideaway Beach
and to look at the erosion in person. So, Jim, I thank you very much
for doing that. That was nice of you to do.
I kind of feel like Freddie Kruger in Friday the 13th because I
can hear Mr. Mudd saying he's back, and I am back, and I never
expected to be back, and I know that you folks never expected to have
me back. This is a situation that none of us wanted to have.
And one of the things I want to do is to address the issue of the
one-time -- one-time only funding of this Marco Island northern beach
project.
There are a few issues that are not under debate, as Mr. McAlpin
had indicated. We all stipulate that this beach is seriously eroded. As
a matter of fact, it is probably the most seriously eroded beach in
Florida. Certainly it's the most seriously eroded beach in Collier
County.
The other thing that is obvious from looking at the pictures is that
the T -Groins that were put in by the county -- and I will remind you
the county paid for the T -Groins, and the tax district paid for the sand.
Sand renourishment was our ticket and the T -Groins were yours. The
T -Groins are working as well or better than anticipated.
The third area which is not debatable and is stipulated by the staff
that the six additional T -Groins are the appropriate solution for the
problem. It will work and it will stabilize and protect the beach.
And the final issue, which was stated also by Mr. McAlpin, is
that TDC money -- it is legal to use TDC money to renourish this
beach. This is an exception in the TDC language which allows an
ineligible beach, that is a beach that doesn't fully meet the public
access requirements, to receive TDC funding if it is seriously eroded
and if it is in the public interest.
Page 160
June 24, 2008
Now, Mr. McAlpin would have you believe that public access
and public interest are identical in this issue. And I would take issue
with that statement because the exception is for those beaches that
don't fully comply with the public access requirement. There is no
reason to have the exception if public interest and public access are
identical.
This request of ours is really a request to finish the 2004 project
properly. As you've heard, Coconut Island migrated. It left the beach
fully exposed to the Gulf of Mexico and obviously has eroded greatly.
For whatever reason, the design did not include the eventuality of
Coconut Island disappearing. I don't know why. Everyone knew
Coconut Island was moving. As a matter of fact, it was breached
before the project started. Documents on the public record as far back
as 1997 quote coastal engineers as stating that Coconut Island is going
to migrate and is going to disappear.
It was brought up during the discussions in 2004 and yet, the --
there were no T -Groins designed for this area. I don't know why, but
there weren't. But I think it was a design flaw.
We're simply requesting that the project that we all agreed to in
2004 be fixed. It's not a new progress (sic). It's mitigation and
correction of a project that was started in 2003, and that's precisely
why the permit that exists -- it's a 1 O-year permit that exists for this
project. That's why it was amended. There was not a new permit
taken out. The county amended the 2005 permit to include these
modifications of that original project.
So in our viewpoint, this is not a new project. It is simply fixing
the project that already exists.
Secondly, the county Collier (sic) staff in numerous public
forums have stated in response to questions, that if Coconut Island had
not been there during the design phase of this project, it would have
been designed differently. They stated it on two different occasions
that it would not have been designed the way it was without Coconut
Page 161
June 24, 2008
Island there.
The first statement was made in a CAC meeting in May in
response to a question. And also I would quote being Mr. McAlpin
who appeared at the February 27, 2007, meeting of the tax district in
response to a question.
I quote Mr. McAlpin. He said -- this is a verbatim quote from the
minutes. We could always have gone back at some point in time and
added additional T -Groins. That would take -- that would take a
permitting period and a little bit of engineering but that had always
been the design and understanding, that the system could be added to.
And that's just what we're requesting. We're requesting a fix to the
problem.
Now, six T-Groins, as you've heard, need to be installed to
protect the area. The anticipated cost is 2.5 million. We propose the
identical cost-sharing arrangement that exists between Marco Island
and the county. The county responsible and paying for the protection
and stabilization of the beach in the form of T -Groins and the taxing
district taking care of the sand renourishment. That sharing
arrangement would mean that the county would pay $1.6 million of
the three-five project and the tax district would pay $1.9 million.
Now, the interest of public interest. There is no doubt that the
beach is seriously eroded. Gulf waters are threatening to cut off the
protection of 312 families. All of the utility lines run down the
easement on that road, so they -- so the likelihood of a hurricane
breaching that portion and connecting with Collier Bay, the likelihood
is that 312 families are cut off from fire, from police, from medical
services, from utilities, both electric and water and gas. It's an
unthinkable situation. And if that isn't in the public interest, I don't
know what is.
And the county has always considered this to be an important
beach. They have been concerned with this beach for a number of
years. And the county considered this to be in the public interest four
Page 162
June 24, 2008
years ago. Surely it is in the public interest now.
Your advisory commission agrees with that opinion. They voted
8-0 to recommend. The project -- not only did they recommend a
project in terms of its appropriateness to solve the problem, but they
voted 8-0 that this was in the public interest.
It's a great way to accomplish the mission of the tourist
development tax money because you get to leverage it. You get to
leverage it with local funds, and it's a much more efficient use and a
much more productive way to use tourist development funds because
the local people are participating side by side.
Now, while the beach has been declared eligible for TDC funds
and that public access technically is not a requirement, we know that
it's an important issue with all of you. And I will tell you that this
beach is getting significant public use. Since Coconut Island
disappeared, the use on this beach has skyrocketed.
We contracted for an independent survey by Trollinger and
Associates. Trollinger and Associates is a marketing survey firm.
They came out to that section of the beach on May 24th, 25th, and
26th. They conducted extensive interviews with everybody on the
beach. If someone identified themselves as a Hideaway Beach
resident, they were not interviewed. So they only interviewed and
talked to people who were visitors to the beach and did not live in the
adjacent property.
There were 336 groups surveyed; 52 percent were Collier County
residents, 45 percent were outside of Collier County, and 3 percent
were from outside of the United States.
Respondents were asked how they got to the beach; 63 percent
came by boat, 18 percent walked there. And I would tell you that
there are numerous people who frequently and routinely walk to that
beach from Tigertail.
Now, the CAC guidelines require access within a half a mile.
This access is slightly larger than that. The access from the Tigertail
Page 163
June 24, 2008
entry to the beach, to the beach in question, is .63 miles, and people
walk there all the time; 18 percent of the 336 groups surveyed said
they walked there.
And the conclusion of Trollinger and Associates, at the end of
their survey, they said, based on the foregoing information, we might
reasonably conclude that Hideaway Beach is a public beach in terms
of surveyed usage patterns, and that was just a three-day period and
out of season. So there was -- there was great beach usage at that
point in time.
So we're back here, unfortunately for everyone, we're back
because the project failed to allow for Coconut's migration, and that
needs to be fixed. We're back here because the public interest
interests are compelling, and we're back here because we feel this
project is reasonable and fair.
Thank you very much for your time and attention.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is William Trotter.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have a question. Can you go back
to the slides, probably about four, showing -- I want to know -- that
one there. Is that a part of the survey like the people on that island?
MR. BRECHNITZ: I don't -- there's a little wisp of land that
sticks out from the beach. It's not connected to Sand Dollar Island. If
they were on that portion which is connected to the Hideaway Beach,
they were interviewed. If they were not, they were not interviewed.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's actually Little Marco Island, I
think it is, isn't it?
MR. BRECHNITZ: I don't know what you call it. I think it's our
sand that left the part of the beach that we renourished.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But it's not connected?
MR. BRECHNITZ: Oh, no. It is connected, definitely,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, it's right there?
MR. BRECHNITZ: It's a little finger that sticks out.
Page 164
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I see.
MR. MUDD: It's the little tonsil that comes up.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: A tonsil. I like that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Chairman, can I ask one?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: When you get to your property
from Tigertail Beach, isn't there a crick or something that you have to
forge through?
MR. BRECHNITZ: Yes, but it's -- at low tide it's dry. At high
tide it comes up just slightly over your shoe top. And I can't
remember the name of it. It is -- Little Clam Pass.
And incidentally, that is where -- that is where five years ago we
proposed that another access point be placed connecting property
adjacent to Hideaway Beach connecting to the beach. The Hideaway
Beach people voted to dedicate land for that purpose, an easement.
They were going to put in a walkway and a bridge over the
conservation area.
We've made application to the Florida EP A, and they turned it
down for ecological reasons. So we've attempted to do some access
Issues.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's very near and dear to my
heart, beach access, getting more people there, so --
MR. BRECHNITZ: I would agree.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- I take that very -- that's one of
the things that I'm going to use to -- when I address this thing in a
vote.
MR. BRECHNITZ: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. BRECHNITZ: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is William Trotter. He'll be
followed by Rob Popoff.
Page 165
June 24, 2008
MR. TROTTER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Bill Trotter,
Chairman of the Marco Island City Council.
I'm here today to strongly support the use of TDC funds for this
project. Stabilizing this portion of the beach is critical to the entire
area, including the adjacent beaches on Marco Island.
It was agreed to be in the public interest four years ago and is
even more so now with increased public use, as was described before,
after the loss of Coconut Island. The county has always felt that
saving these beaches to be in the -- was in the public interest.
The county -- the city recognized -- City of Marco Island
recognized the perilous situation here and authorized the spending of
around 400,000 for temporary repairs.
Three hundred twelve families are in jeopardy if the roadway is
cut off and utilities are disrupted. In addition, Marco Island donates a
lot to the TDC fund, and it is a proper use of such funds to protect this
area.
The cost of this project to the TDC would be covered by less than
six months of Marco Island's contribution to the TDC.
In summary, all that is being asked is to complete this project by
addressing this area which should have been addressed four years ago
and is only fair to do so. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Rob Popoff. He'll be followed by John Arceri.
MR. ARCERI: I'm John Arceri. Rob Popoff could not make it
today, but he asked if I could read a very short letter to you; is that
okay?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Six minutes.
MR. ARCERI: Rob is not only a Marco council member, but
he's your member on the Tourist Development Council.
And it's important because Rob was not at that meeting where
there was a deadlock on the issue of public interest. So if he was
there, it would have made a difference.
Dear Commissioners, the issue of beach erosion at the beaches
Page 166
June 24, 2008
adjacent to Hideaway Beach on Marco Island is a very serious matter.
In the event of a major storm, the beach could be diminished to
the point where roads and homes are flooded. And over 300 Marco
Island families could be adversely affected and cut off from utilities
and even separated from the island.
TDC funding guidelines allow for this commission to vote in
favor of safeguarding a portion of the beaches on Marco Island. To
meet TDC funding criteria, there must be a confirmation that the
beach is seriously eroding and that it is in the best interest of the
public to fix the erosion.
After the almost complete erosion of Coconut Island, the beaches
contiguous to Hideaway Beach clearly meet these criteria. It is
imperative that these 400 residents and taxpayers have the same rights
and attention that all residents and taxpayers in Collier County are
afforded.
I ask this commission to please vote in favor of funding through
TDC funds the six additional T -Groins required to protect the beaches
bordering Hideaway Beach. Thank you, Rob Popoff.
Now, I am John Arceri from Marco Island, and good afternoon,
Commissioners. I also didn't think I'd be back four years ago, but I
am, and I'd like to give you a perspective from being a former coastal
advisory committee member who worked on this issue during that
period of several years.
The Coastal Advisory Committee and the county have always
recognized the rapid erosion of this area and the importance of
stabilizing the beaches adjacent to Hideaway.
You have spent millions of dollars in the last 10 years testing the
temporary T -Groins that were put in there a number of years ago,
numerous studies, monitoring, and the project itself in 2004 to install
permanent T -Groins.
There's no question that we all felt that stabilizing this area was
in the public interest and that T -Groins would accomplish our mutual
Page 167
June 24, 2008
goal. T -Groins have worked well. We've seen it on the pictures, and
the Coastal Advisory Committee still feels today that this is the best
way to go, and in a recent unanimous vote, to finish the job of
stabilization. Those are their words.
My concern was that the 2004 plan was based on an assumption
and a hope that Coconut Island would protect the middle beaches and
the T -Groins were not needed there. It was general knowledge at that
time that reliance on Coconut Island was a great risk. I reported in the
transcripts to the commission at that time that the local papers had said
in 2004, quote, Coconut Island was split in half and disappearing.
As it turned out, the premise and the assumptions that were made
in that design were incorrect. Coconut Island was gone very shortly
after it was renourished, and with it the beaches it was protecting.
In retrospect, there's no blame over here. I'm not blaming
anybody, surely myself because I was there. A more prudent plan
would have been to assume the disappearance of Coconut Island and
install the six additional T -Groins now being requested. And as a
minimum, we should have considered some type of conditional
agreement in 2004 such as, let's see what happens to Coconut Island,
and then, if needed, install additional T -Groins so that we finish the
goal of stabilizing the entire area.
Although I am not sure why the Coconut Island issue wasn't
pursued at that time, I do know that there was serious tourist
development fund cash flow issues at that time. If you remember back
four years ago, we were looking to fund the Naples Beach
renourishment, which was a major job, and there was also this
Coconut hope, that Coconut Island would stay there.
I don't know why that wasn't pursued at that point in time. In
retrospect, it should have been. But I do know though, however, that
this assumption about Coconut Island and that design, which was a
bad assumption, has resulted in a loss of most of that center section
that you saw of those beaches, and it's created a dangerous situation,
Page 168
June 24, 2008
and some 312 families involved, and has caused the taxing district to
spend some two-and-a-half million dollars extra to take temporary
emergent action -- emergency action.
Mr. Chairman Council (sic) Trotter mentioned the $400,000
authorization for a temporary immediate fix. The bids look like that's
going to come in over a half a million dollars of really wasted money
if this had been designed right the first time.
In addition to that, they're going to have to now replace, at a cost
of about $2 million, sand that they already paid for once that they've
lost because there was no protection. So the overall burden on the tax
district is an extra two-and-a-half million dollars really as a result of
the fact that we did not have T -Groins there to protect that middle
section.
At the April 2004 commission meeting, there was a lot of
discussion at that time about the need to be fair and the need to
stabilize these beaches for the good of the entire area. That was the
centerpiece of the discussion. Those same needs that we discussed
four years ago are still with us now, and I hope that the commission
sees this request for the final six T -Groins as something that should
have been done originally.
We all understood that this was a one-time arrangement in 2004.
And I remember the strong looks by some of you that this was it. But
one must look at it now. And I'm a professional engineer. I have been
for a long time, but this was not designed right.
Gary McAlpin, I don't have more respect for anybody anywhere
than I do for Gary McAlpin, but for him to say this was a complete job
and it was complete at that time when a design like this, in no way,
reflects that this was done correctly nor is it complete -- and all we're
asking for now is that, for the first time, it be done right and finished
completely. And I would hope that you'd consider all those points that
you're hearing today in your decision.
Thank you very much.
Page 169
June 24, 2008
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Ken Humiston. He'll be
followed by Bruce Anderson.
MR. HUMISTON: Ken Humiston with Humiston and Moore
Engineers. I'm here primarily to answer any technical questions there
might be about the project, but I would like to point out that there are
-- there's another category of projects in Collier County that routinely
receives tourist development tax funding other than projects that, as in
the staffs summary, indicated was the DEP and FEMA qualified
projects.
And that category of projects I'm talking about is the
implementation of the county's five approved inlet management plans.
Wiggins Pass and Doctors Pass routinely receives TDC funds for
dredging of the inlet, placing that sand on the adjacent beaches to
mitigate the impacts of the inlet.
The Gordon Pass inlet management plan, that has created a
situation that is a direct parallel to Hideaway Beach in that it
recommended two T-Groins be placed on Naples Beach, which were
-- in fact, the design and permitting was funded by the property
owners, and the construction was funded with tourist development tax
funds.
The Hideaway Beach project, of course, is the best example. The
initial T -Groins -- the temporary structures were put in the same year
that the board adopted that inlet management plan, and everything
that's been proposed since has been completely consistent with
implementation of that management plan.
I'd be happy to answer any questions.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Bruce Anderson.
MR. ANDERSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name
is Bruce Anderson. I simply registered to reserve the right to respond
to any incorrect statements or questions. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala wants to go first.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you. Yes, we've
Page 170
June 24, 2008
heard about the design flaw, and that's what we're discussing today,
the design flaw. The good things are we've learned that these
T -Groins actually work. There was a lot of concern on our parts four
years ago that we would be putting the sand on the beach and it would
just erode.
And we've found now -- Jim Mudd walked the beach the other
day. He was very impressed with how well they perform.
I've been on the beach quite a number of times, and I've heard my
fellow commissioners talk numerously about public access. What's
been interesting is, as we've lost Coconut Island, which used to be a
very popular boating area, naturally the boats have gone to Hideaway
Beach, and that's fine.
Hideaway Beach people have never objected to that at all. In
fact, they've welcomed that. Not only that, I found it interesting that
the tourist boats from the different hotels actually have shuttles daily
down to Hideaway Beach. I think it's two shuttles a day, and there's a
couple different tourist boats going down there because their people
would like to go shelling and, of course, the beaches down by the
hotels are manicured, so they come down to Hideaway Beach and do
their shelling there.
And Commissioner Halas, especially, has been very concerned
with public access. One of the things I wanted to tell him -- and this
I'm very, very pleased with -- as we open up new boating accesses --
and we're coming on to 951 right now. Marla's given us the good news
that just in the next couple of months we'll be able to start expanding
that 951 ramp, and that will be more boats coming into the water
there.
We're going to be building Goodland, more boats coming in
there. Port of the Islands, we're going to have more boats coming in
there. Isles of Capri. And believe it or not, Marco Islanders who have
boats don't have a beach. They have to boat someplace in order to go
to a beach, and so they use Hideaway Beach as well.
Page 171
June 24, 2008
I think that this is something that we wanted to do right in the
first place, we thought we were going to do right, we didn't do right,
and we need to fix right now, and I make a motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Fiala.
Is there a second to Commissioner Fiala's motion?
I have a question. It was mentioned about Gordon's Pass and
putting the sand on the beach there. Was that after the board
implemented the new policy about public access?
MR. McALPIN: I believe that was before the policy was
implemented, Commissioner. It has not happened since I have been
with the county, and that's been over three years. So we changed the
policy in 2005.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So what about -- that also
requires monitoring?
MR. McALPIN: The--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, the dredge and the sand
on the beach.
MR. McALPIN: Gordon Pass, we are not involved in any
monitoring with Gordon Pass. We routinely monitor the beaches
where we have replaced the sand on the beach. We do not monitor
Gordon Pass. That work, in terms of dredging Gordon Pass, was done
by the Corps of Engineers a number of years ago. So that would be a
condition of their permit. We don't hold the permit on that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: At the TDC I asked the question --
and hopefully legal can answer -- answer this. We applied in that
WRDA bill for monies for Hideaway Beach, correct?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. You identified the project for an
authorization. WRDA, Water Resource Development Acts, are
authorizations. They are not appropriations. You have to be
authorized in the federal system before you could appropriate.
So if and when Congress votes on and approves that particular
Page 172
June 24, 2008
project in the Water Resource Development Act, a year later you'd be
eligible to try to go get appropriation monies in order to do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Then my question was then, if
we do get the award for the -- if we do get the money, could those
monies be used to reimburse TDC funds?
MR. MUDD: No, sir, not if the project's already done.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. All right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I wanted to mention one more thing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't think that they went about
this -- said this as clearly as they could. The subject of the access had
been brought up a number of times, and so the Hideaway Beach
people actually polled their people and said, you know, they really
want a road to go here. What do you think?
Eighty percent -- over 80 percent voted yes. We would build a
boardwalk, and we'll pay for it out of our own dollars. So they applied
for a permit to do that. That would have given them, from the road all
the way to the beach, that access that is needed. And the FDEP denied
their request. So it isn't that they didn't try.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas, and then
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I'll put a second on that
motion --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- from -- that Commissioner Fiala
put on.
My big concern is, I've been to this gated community about three
or four years ago, and I was steadfast then that when we basically got
done with this project in 2004, that was supposed to be the end of it.
I understand the problems that you have here with the health,
safety, and welfare with the road that may collapse. This is not a
county road; this is a private road.
Page 173
June 24, 2008
So I just hope that you realize that if this motion passes, that I
would hope that there would be some way that you could provide
beach access, maybe middle of the week when there's not a lot of
activity, that you could let people come into your gated community,
because obviously there's people who have problems whereby they're
handicapped in some way and they don't have the ability to walk
six-tenths of a mile and ford a stream.
I understand that you tried to put a boardwalk in, but I really
think if you could help step up to the plate, that people who are not as
fortunate as most of us are, that they have that ability to possibly use
this beach if we're going to put funding of this nature on that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. The first time I got -- I
had my experience with the beach down there, Hideaway Beach, it
was seven-and-a-halfyears ago. I believe it was first week I was a
commissioner, a certain land use attorney took me down there on the
tour, and I had absolutely no idea what I was looking at. And the first
thing I asked was, is where is the public access.
And this well-known land use attorney who I greatly respect,
took me all the way around to Tigertail Beach.
And he said, here it is. Well, you know, you lose perspective of
what distance is and everything when you're in the car. So I asked if
we could walk down. We walked down, and immediately we ran into
a channel through the sand where water was running, which presented
a problem to be able to go any farther.
It was explained to me the fact that this channel fluctuates with
the tides, and there's times, you know, that it's passable.
So it became very difficult for me because I've always been a big
access person. But, however, with that said, there has been some
limited access that's been available there. And the residents have been
very nice about accommodating the boaters that come there and
people that walk around from Tigertail when conditions are
Page 174
June 24, 2008
appropriate, although the way the beach has eroded, it's very difficult
sometimes to be able to find enough land to walk on.
But I still have a concern about the fact this is TDC money and
it's exactly targeted -- there's supposed to be a tie-in, a tie-in with
some sort of access. Little bit more than just the very privileged few
that may own a boat that can get there.
Commissioner Halas just seconded the motion, and I'm not too
sure if it was a suggestion or he was trying to have it added to the
motion about allowing access through the community to the beach. It
was a wonderful idea. I mean, if that was an element that existed, I
don't think we'd be going through this discussion now and there
wouldn't be all this apprehension on the part of the commissioners as
to what's the right thing and the wrong thing to do. It's a lot of money.
So I guess the question is, how do you come up with some way
that serves the interest not only of the people that live down there and
to be able to protect the shoreline and the value of their properties, and
still meet the needs of the public?
I would be very inclined to vote for this if there was just one
simple little measure that would be added to it and that would be a rest
room facility that could be added at some piece of the property out
there to accommodate those people that are going to walk around.
What are they supposed to do when they come around all the
way from Tigertail Beach and they walk that distance? They get
there, and when nature calls, at that point in time they've got a real
problem. So you're limited by the size of your bladder, you might say.
So it becomes an issue, becomes a real issue.
If someone from that community would make a commitment to
have a small one-stall bathroom installed where people could used it
to come there -- I'm sure you're not going to get any large crowds -- or
the boaters that come there would have some access to a rest room,
my whole feelings on this thing would change dramatically.
I don't know if there's anyone from the community that could
Page 175
June 24, 2008
address it or not.
MR. BRECHNITZ: I am still a board member of the Hideaway
Beach Association.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your name for the record.
MR. BRECHNITZ: Erik Brechnitz again. I'm sorry,
Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's fine.
MR. BRECHNITZ: And I'm one of nine board members. But
I'll be happy to propose that project at the very first board meeting that
I attend. It would be my opinion that that project would be well
received by the board. Obviously I can't guarantee the vote.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there some way we might be
able to continue this item till then, because my whole vote hinges on
that, and I think you have the greatest of intentions --
MR. BRECHNITZ: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- but I'd rather not give a vote
of approval --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Coletta, you could --
MR. BRECHNITZ: Why don't --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. Someone -- several
people are talking at one time.
MR. MUDD: I understand. You could make your -- you could
make your approval contingent upon that bathroom, and if they don't
have the bathroom, then you don't have -- you don't have the money
for the T -Groins. You could do that and you don't have to continue
the item. I believe Mr. Klatzkow agrees with that.
MR. BRECHNITZ: I've been looking around the audience.
There's a number of Hideaway Beach people here, Commissioner
Coletta, and there are two other board members here, and I'm getting
nodding heads from the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, good.
MR. BRECHNITZ: -- from the two board members that are here
Page 176
June 24, 2008
who are sitting right over there. So why don't you make it contingent
on us installing a bathroom that is acceptable to your staff.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I will add that to my motion for
approval.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And that's in my second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Is there any further
discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So the motion has been amended to
add a bathroom for the residents who --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: For the users.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The public to be able to use on the
beach rather than have to go inside the community.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Motion carries 3-2, Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner
Henning dissenting.
We have another time certain on 12C.
Item #12C
DIRECTION TO STAFF AND TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY,
WHETHER TO COMMENCE A CIVIL LAWSUIT, OR IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, A CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDING,
AGAINST MILANO RECREATION ASSOCIATION, INC., FOR
VIOLATING PUD ORDINANCE NO. 03-54 (THE ROYAL PALM
Page 177
June 24, 2008
ACADEMY PUD), RELATING TO FAILURE AND REFUSAL TO
ALLOW RESIDENTS OF IMPERIAL GOLF ESTATES TO
CONSTRUCT A ROAD (MARQUIS BOULEVARD) OVER
PORTIONS OF THE MILANO SUBDIVISION TO ACCESS
LIVINGSTON ROAD, CONTRARY TO COMMITMENTS MADE
DURING THE PUD REZONING PROCESS - MOTION TO SEND
TO CEB FOR DIRECTION - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, 12C. It's at 3:15. It's a request that the
Board of County Commissioners provide direction to staff and to the
County Attorney whether to commence a civil lawsuit, or in the
alternative, a code enforcement proceeding against Milano Recreation
Association, Inc., for violating PUD ordinance number 03-54, the
Royal Palm Academy PUD, relating to failure and refusal to allow
residents of Imperial Golf Estates to construct a road, Marquis
Boulevard, over portions of the Milano subdivision to access
Livingston Road contrary to the commitments made during the PUD
reZOnIng process.
MR. WRIGHT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
my name is Jeff Wright, Assistant County Attorney, and we're here
seeking direction from the board with respect to a code enforcement
Issue.
Because of the number of people that might be affected by what
course we take, we thought it would be best to bring this to your
attention to make sure that we're proceeding consistent with the will of
the board.
As you know, PUD stands for planned unit development, and
PUDs are created by rezoning an area. And when a PUD is approved,
it's put in ordinance form and becomes county law, and violations of a
PUD ordinance can be prosecuted like any other county ordinance,
that is, they could be brought to the Code Enforcement Board, the
special magistrate, or brought in court.
Page 178
June 24, 2008
In this case we're dealing with the Royal Palm Academy PUD.
And during the approval process back in 2002 and 2003, the developer
committed on the record several times that every single stage of the
rezoning process to allow access from Imperial Golf Estates through
the PUD onto Livingston Road -- and I put up on the overhead, you'll
see right here --
MR. MUDD: Hang on, hang on. Your finger's not showing up,
and if you -- and if you use my pen, it's a lot more pointed than your
finger.
MR. WRIGHT: Thank you.
Right here is a stub from Imperial Golf Estate. The idea is to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're going to have to get on the
mike.
MR. WRIGHT: Thank you. The idea is to build a road known
as Marquis Boulevard from that stub on Imperial Golf Estates all the
way through to Livingston Road.
And you'll see the highlighted area is the area in question. That's
a portion of the Milano subdivision, and that is part of the Royal Palm
Academy PUD.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion to approve to direct staff to
send it to code enforcement for action.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there anything else?
MR. WRIGHT: Mr. Chairman, just one clarification. Do you
want us to proceed before the Code Enforcement Board or the civil
court?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Code enforcement.
MR. WRIGHT: Okay.
MS. FILSON: I have 12 speakers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: When it goes -- a question I have.
As it goes through the Code Enforcement Board, will this then tie in
Page 179
June 24, 2008
with getting this taken care of and directing this through court action if
necessary?
MR. WRIGHT: The specific issue at the Code Enforcement
Board will be whether or not they've violated the PUD, specifically
section 6.2 of the PUD and the master plan. So that will be the issue
before the Code Enforcement Board.
There's always the possibility that on appeal, it will end up in
Circuit Court. And I should point out that there's ongoing litigation
between Imperial Golf Estates and Milano Homeowners Association.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's the proper way to do it because
the Code Enforcement Board is going to vet it out to find if there is a
violation to our ordinance. Okay.
Would you call up the speakers, please.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Louise Hoy. She wants to
cede her time to Francis Hoy. Francis Hoy? He'll be followed by
Carolyn Koehl.
MR. HOY: I'm Francis Hoy. I'm from Palm River, and there are
several people here from Palm River. We're only here because we
were led to believe that in these proceedings the Milano would ask
that you substitute a gate to Palm River to substitute for the access to
Livingston Road.
That has not occurred; therefore, we won't take up any more of
your time other than that I would like to ask you that, if not today,
later, such a proposal may come before you, if not by Milano then,
perhaps, by Imperial Golf Estates.
If you get a -- if you as the commissioners get a proposal to put a
gate through Palm River in place of the Livingston Road gate, we just
ask that you give the people of Palm River an opportunity to explain
why we do not think that's a good idea.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Carolyn Koehl. She'll be
followed by Tom Harruff.
Page 180
June 24, 2008
MS. KOEHL: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Carolyn Koehl. I'm the President of the Cypress Gardens
Condominium Association on Cypress Way East in Palm River.
Palm River is one of the older communities. It was laid out about
60 years ago when the streets were narrow, more so that is allowed
today by your standards. They are not safe to walk on, to walk your
dog, or to ride a bike.
More and more families with young children are moving in along
with seniors who already live there, full time and double the time
during the season. Walking or riding a bike, one spends most of their
time moving to the grass to avoid being run over. The children that
have to wait for school buses stand in the dark and are at great risk.
There are over 1,800 homes and condos that travel on Cypress
Way East and Palm River Boulevard. That does not include 200 more
newer homes in Quail Crossing or the 50 from Horse Creek with an
additional 50 plus to be built. These two all use Cypress Way East
and Palm River Boulevard to get to Immokalee Road.
A traffic count was done about three months ago with -- a stealth
was installed to try to curb the speeding. Not only did it record the
speed, but it also counted approaching traffic, not two-way traffic.
The only thing is, the stealth stat was put up on north Palm -- North
Cypress Way East.
Safe to assume that all cars -- 4,449 cars in five days were
coming in. Safe to assume that all those cars that came in eventually
did go out.
The total number of vehicles passing between six a.m. and 10
p.m. was over 6,700 per day, amounting to roughly two vehicles per
minute; however, the stealth stat was placed again, like I said, at the
north end of the village, and it did not count the traffic going and
coming from Quail Crossing or from Horse creek, Quail Crossing or
the 900 condos and medical buildings which all use Cypress Way
East. A traffic count now taken from the south end of Cypress Way
Page 181
June 24, 2008
East would show well over twice the amount.
We hope these facts will be considered when it comes time to
decide where to put the proposed emergency gate for Imperial Golf
Estates. Palm River can only hope the action that the county
commissioners takes does not endanger the safety of the Palm River
residents.
Thank you very much for your time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Wright, Commissioner Fiala has
a question.
MR. WRIGHT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So far we've only heard from Palm
River. I read nothing at all about Palm River in anything. Does this
have -- does this affect them at all?
MR. WRIGHT: Commissioner, there's really two separate
commitments that are at issue. The one that's on the agenda for today
is a commitment to connect to Livingston. Another commitment that's
not on your agenda relates to this access through Palm River.
And my position would be that that's not on the table.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're not even considering that,
right? Okay. So then -- okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: If any of the speakers want to talk
about that Palm River issue that's going to be decided later on, you
need to talk about the issue on the agenda today, and that has nothing
to do with Palm River.
So if you're here to talk about Palm River, you can waive or talk
about the issues on the agenda.
Please call the next speaker.
MS. FILSON: Tom Harruff. He'll be followed by Karl
Reynolds.
MR. HARRUFF: My name is Tom Harruff. I'm the President of
Imperial Golf Estates Homeowners Association. I live at 1943
Emperor's Court. Chairman Henning, Commissioners, thank you very
Page 182
June 24, 2008
much for the opportunity to address the board, and I thank you for the
action that you just took.
My primary purpose to come here today was to ask you to do
that, take that action. I have with me a resolution signed by some 64
members of our community and I have a number of members of our
community in support of requesting you to take the action you just
did, and they happen to be in this room. Would you please stand.
Obviously the people ofImperial are very, very interested in the
health, safety, and welfare of our community and getting our back
gate. This is a major issue.
And I thank you for the action you've taken today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This has been an ongoing problem
ever since I came on board as a county commissioner. We thought
that we might have this taken care of when the Royal Palm Academy
PUD came before us, and obviously we ran into some problems.
And this is why we're here today, hopefully to take on --
basically give direction to staff to look at this as a code enforcement
Issue.
So thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next speaker?
MS. FILSON: Karl Reynolds. He'll be followed by Harlan
Dam.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Can I have a speaker slip?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Not on this issue. Anybody signed up
after this issue started discussion, according to the board's rule -- and
it's in the agenda packet, you must sign up prior to announcing the
item.
Mr. Reynolds?
MR. REYNOLDS: Good morning, Commissioners. Karl
Reynolds, North Naples Fire Department, Deputy Chief of Fire
Prevention.
Page 183
June 24, 2008
Yes, we're basically -- the North Naples Fire Department has
been in agreeance with this rear entrance to Livingston Road from
Imperial since basically May 21, 1987, was when the first letter
written by Deputy Chief Kenneth Rogers, who was the fire marshal at
the time, and we have not really changed that. We prefer to see that.
There's a couple of reasons. That gives a quicker access to that
rear of the Imperial. Secondly, we have been directed as staff from our
commissioners to bring to them at this next meeting information in
regards to our station 48, which station 48 is the new station that's
going to be going in at the corner just approximately one mile north of
that entrance, and that would increase -- or that would decrease our
travel time and response time. Secondly, it would also help with the
ISO ratings.
Right now we're unable to meet the five miles -- within five miles
of a fire station to the rear of that subdivision.
So we are really for that entrance going in there, and we just want
to give our backing on that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Harlan Dam. He'll be followed by Herbert
Oehlers.
MR. DAMS: My name is Harlan Dam. I'm Secretary of the
Imperial Golf Estates Homeowners Board. Thank you for your time
to speak.
The hindrance to our building is second (sic), 24 by seven
entrance and exit road to Livingston Road from Imperial has already
caused a long delay and also a financial burden on our residents due to
the rising mitigation fees.
This road will be funded and maintained by the Imperial Golf
Estates Homeowners Association. Eighty-three percent of the 634
owners voted last June on the request to financially support the move
to finally build this road. Over 74 percent of those voting voted in
favor of the proposal.
Page 184
June 24, 2008
To have such a large participation in the voting process showed
the importance of this issue to the residents. Road costs are presently
much more than several years ago, so time is of the essence.
My personal story is that in the summer of2003, my wife went
through major cancer surgery, chemo, and radiation. She had just
completed her chemo and had an extremely suppressed immune
system when Hurricane Charlie hit. For three days we were unable to
leave due to the front access road being blocked by down trees and
electric lines. And for the first time, we really felt trapped with no
electricity or air-conditioning and her condition.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Herbert Oehlers. He'll be followed by Debbie
Frost.
MR. OEHLERS: Good after, Commissioners. My name is
Herbert Oehlers, and I reside at 2095 Imperial Circle, Imperial Golf
Estates, Phase V. Thank you for giving me this time to address you.
I won't go through my speech because you've already made a
determination you're going to put this before the Code Enforcement
Board.
The one thing I would bring to your attention is, please direct the
Code Enforcement Board to act on this prior to our determination of --
final determination of what our litigation is. We expect them to take
immediate action and not wait for a determination from our lawsuit. If
you would direct them to do that in your approval, I would appreciate
it.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Debbie Frost. She'll be
followed by John Heerems.
MS. FROST: Good afternoon. I'll keep this short and sweet. I
made a map I will ask to be passed. It visualizes the driving with only
one entrance and exit from Imperial.
Page 185
June 24, 2008
MR. MUDD: I'll put it on the overhead.
MS. FROST: I'm a resident in there. Currently it is 10.5 miles
for me to go to the elementary school. If this back road was put in, it
would be one-and-a-half miles. This affects not only me and residents
of Imperial, but the school, transportation, and operating budget.
This road has been on a map for 20-something years. When I
purchased in Imperial, I knew of this road. When the residents of
Milano purchased in Milano, they knew of this road. It was on the site
plan developed by Pulte, who developed Milano.
It's on the site plan of Royal Palm Academy. It's on the site plan
on Delasol. It's been clear to everybody all along the way that this
road was to be built.
Why are we here today? Why is this a lawsuit? I do not
understand. All I know is if it's code, it should be enforced. If it's on
the maps, it should be put in. It shouldn't cost us thousands and
thousands of dollars in a law -- court of law to determine what's been
determined for years on the map.
I ask that you give this to the code enforcement, give them the
ability to make the decision now and not wait for any legal matters to
be decided.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: John Heerems.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sue, hang on just a minute. There's a
motion and a second, and it looks like it's going to be supported to
take it to the Code Enforcement Board. Although I appreciate all the
public input, there are other things that other -- items on the agenda
that other public want to speak. So you're more than welcome to
waive. We already have one commissioner not here. We wouldn't
want to lose any more.
So it's a choice. If somebody wants to change our mind, please
come up here and tell us, but I think you're getting your way.
MS. FILSON: John Heerems. He'll be followed by Mark
Page 186
June 24, 2008
Adamczyk.
MR. HEEREMS: Thank you. My name's John Heerems. I live
in Imperial Golf Estates.
Just briefly from the heart, I ask that you consider this second
entrance. Four years ago last month a small fire in my garage before
six o'clock in the morning turned into a major structural fire solely
because of the response time of the North Naples Fire Department.
They did everything possible. Records show that they responded
immediately. But because of the lack of access, it took 26 minutes to
get there, and the entire house was lost. My wife, my two very small
children, and myself lost everything.
The addition of the back gate, back road to Livingston Road in
the proposed station 48 would be huge for all 600 and some residents
in Imperial Golf Estates.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Mark Adam something. He'll be followed by
David Alger.
MR. ADAMCZYK: Mark Adamczyk, for the record. I think it's
about time that somebody here from the Milano community, and that
is myself -- I am representing the association, the association's
attorney.
I'm going to kind of abbreviate some of my comments given the
motion on the floor that I'm hopeful for a reversal or a limitation on
that. I will at least present Milano's position for the record.
Let be it known that we have not even seen a copy of the code
enforcement complaint filed by Imperial to date for a proper response.
We got one letter from the County Attorney's Office asking to
acknowledge a developer commitment, which we don't believe is in
the PUD document. The PUD document says, successors to the
developer, which is Milano, are bound by the commitments within this
document, and that is going to be, obviously, debated with the Code
Enforcement Board.
Page 187
June 24, 2008
The executive summary states that the private exclusive access is
shown on the PUD conceptual master plan. The PUD plan does show
several easements and buffers, but in no way does it indicate any
access for Imperial Golf Estates is required.
In several sections of the ordinance the plan is referred to as
conceptual in nature, not to be construed as final and subject to final
platting. I'll address the plat in a moment.
The executive summary also states Milano is obligated to provide
access to the successor because of select statements made by the
developer's attorney in meetings, and that the PUD was an express
condition of precedent. Approval of the PUD -- there was an express
condition that Milano -- Imperial have access. Obviously these should
be clearly stated in the ordinance and the plat, giving us no reason to
object, but unfortunately that's not the case.
I've already hit on the PUD ordinance itself. And assuming that
Marquis Boulevard is the private access and exclusive road that the
developer allegedly agreed to, it's nowhere on the plat and it's not in
the PUD conceptual master plan.
Section 6.80 of the ordinance specifically states that the
developer is not obligated to permit or construct Marquis Boulevard.
If the commitment -- if there was a commitment, it was to provide
excess mitigation credits for the preserve area, if a third party, and not
must, construct Marquis Boulevard. Imperial not being specifically
named.
If a predecessor failed to give what he said he would, it is not
Milano's responsibility to give it now because it's not in the PUD
document. The appropriate question is why the alleged condition of
the PUD approval is not clearly shown in the ordinance or in the plat.
An access easement is reference on the Milano plat, no one will
deny that, where Imperial seeks to construct its road; however, page 1
of the plat clearly shows that the access easement dedication is to
Collier County only for emergency vehicles and services. No
Page 188
June 24, 2008
dedication exists in favor of Imperial or other third party.
There must be another alternative to assuming that property
rights exist in favor of a third party, not a party to the PUD document
in suing Milano on that basis alone.
It's also worth noting that South Florida Water Management
District has repeatedly asked Imperial to first demonstrate its legal
right of access and other items --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, sir. This is going to be
argued in code enforcement, and please present that to them. Your
time is up.
MR. ADAMCZYK: Yes, sir. I just wanted to get a few
comments in the record.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There is no code action on this yet.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is David Alger.
MR. ALGER: I waive. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: He'll be followed by Albert Starr.
MR. STARR: I see no point in any further discussion.
MS. FILSON: That's your final speaker, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any discussion on the
motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What was the motion?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor -- the motion is to refer
this down to the code enforcement for action.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Any way I can talk you out of that?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think this is a decision that we
need to make. It has to do with PUD enforcement, and we've been
very firm that we want developers to adhere to PUD requirements.
And the PUD consists of the entire record, which includes
testimony by the petitioners, by the PUD. I think we should go ahead
and file suit and get this thing resolved as quickly as possible.
Otherwise we're going to be in court anyway. It will go through code
Page 189
June 24, 2008
enforcement, then it will be at the board again.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm going to go to Commissioner
Halas, then I want to say something.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that -- I think this might be
the right way to do it. I think it will be an accelerated process through
code enforcement if we give direction so that we don't have this linger
on and on and on, and I think it's going to end up anyway,
Commissioner Coyle, in court anyway.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We ask the County Manager to
enforce our ordinances, the PUD ordinances, and code enforcement
does that. If I'm wrong, let me know. Are they the ones --
MR. MUDD: They do that, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion on the
motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries.
Next time certain?
Item #10D
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS PROVIDE THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR
HIS DESIGNEE, WITH GUIDANCE RELATING TO THE
Page 190
June 24, 2008
RELOCATION OF WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITY
LINES, AND ASSOCIATED IMPACTS TO ORANGE TREE
UTILITY CUSTOMERS, RESULTING FROM THE WIDENING
OF OIL WELL ROAD. (JAMES C. FRENCH, OPERATIONS
MANAGER, CDES OFFICE OF OPERATIONS AND
REGULATORY MANAGEMENT AND EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, COLLIER COUNTY WATER AND W ASTEW A TER
AUTHORITY, CDES) - MOTION FOR COUNTY ATTORNEY TO
DISCUSS THE ISSUE W/UTILITIES; COUNTY MANAGER TO
BRING THIS ITEM BACK - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to a four o'clock
time certain, and that is item 10D. It's a -- and, oh, by the way, it's
4:02. It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
provide the County Manager or his designee with guidance relating to
the relocation of water and wastewater utility lines and associated
impacts to Orange Tree Utility customers resulting in the widening of
Oil Well Road.
Mr. Jamie French, your Operations Manager from Community--
ladies and gentlemen, if you could please take your --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sir, can you take your conversation
outside so we can continue our meeting?
MR. MUDD: The item will be presented by Jamie French, your
Operations Manager of Community Development's Environmental
Services Office of Operations and Regulatory Management and
Executive Director of your Collier County Water and Wastewater
Authority.
MR. FRENCH: Good afternoon. For the record, my name is
Jamie French. I -- as Mr. Mudd stated, I am the Operations Manager
for the Community Development/Environmental Services Division as
well as the Executive Director of the Collier County Water and
Wastewater Authority.
Page 191
June 24, 2008
This item, Commissioners, was heard before the Collier County
Water and Wastewater Authority on May 19th where staff was
directed by the authority to bring this item to you today on behalf of
Orange Tree Utility.
So staff would like to make this clear that this is Orange Tree
Utility's item to you. We were asked or directed by the authority to be
the vehicle for Orange Tree to present this item to you.
With me today, I'm joined by Mr. Ken Kavinsky. Ken serves as
the Senior Accountant for the Authority. And Mr. Omar Causey of
the Law Offices of Nelson Hess, and he was retained by the Board of
County Commissioners on March 25, 2008, to provide legal counsel
for this very item.
With that, I'd like to turn this over to Mr. William Sundstrum,
who is here to present this item on behalf of Orange Tree utility. Staff
will be available should you have any questions, as well as Mr. Kozy.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
MR. SUNDSTRUM: Mr. Chairman, members of the
commission, my name is Bill Sundstrum, and I'm counsel to Orange
Tree Utility, and this is a plea to sanity.
In a nutshell, Orange Tree Utilities, the staff summary does a real
good job of telling you why we're here. The county staff has issued a
notice to relocate utility lines in connection with the Oil Well Road
widening issue.
There's a companion condemnation case filed relative to some
real estate interests. Orange Tree filed a limited proceeding basically
stating it does not have the money to relocate the lines in question. It
doesn't have the ability to borrow the money to relocate the lines in
question.
The county is claiming a future entitlement to the assets of
Orange Tree in 2012 at no consideration pursuant to an ordinance. So
the question is, who's going to pay for the relocation?
I will tell you that Orange Tree does not believe that it's even
Page 192
June 24, 2008
necessary to do this, but if it is going to be done, we need direction
from you.
The county can pay for it or the customers can pay for it. And if
the customers are going to pay for it, the price today is roughly $3
million with a 30 percent plus or minus wild guess by the engineers,
which basically leaves a $30 a month surcharge for the remaining life
of this utility, or a doubling of rates.
Now, the county ordinance 8713 says that the utility will be
turned over to the county in 2012 at no cost. That means there's -- no
bank's going to give us a loan, you know, under those circumstances
to do it. There is a declaratory judgment action pending in this county
before the Circuit Court as to whether or not that forced dedication is
lawful or not. That's proceeding.
The county in May of 2004 repealed that ordinance on behalf of
the school board. It's another issue that needs to be looked at. But the
bottom line is, what's happening here is, whether or not we're going to
do this, and if we're going to do it, who's going to pay for it?
I can say that I started this with a call to sanity. The lawyers are
making money, the lines are not being relocated, and the customers,
potentially, are going to get hammered, and we don't want to do it.
There's got to be another way. I have suggested in the past -- my
suggestions have fallen on deaf ears -- that we resolve the issue of the
overall lawsuit, that the utility be transferred to the county now, and
that these assets be dealt with accordingly or we can spend another
couple years in litigation, spend a lot of money.
But I'm 60 years old, and I've been doing this for 30-some years.
As a matter of fact, I represented this county when you took over the
Pelican Bay system. And I can tell you at the end of the day, the
matter will be resolved. So I suggest we resolve it now rather than
resolve it later, and that's what I'm really here asking you to do;
otherwise, the utility authority has asked you how you want to direct
this thing. Do you want to pay for the line location? Do you want
Page 193
June 24, 2008
your customers -- do you want our customers to pay for it? What do
you want to do?
That's what I'm here to do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have a question, and Commissioner
Coletta. Anybody else? Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I thought you wanted to go
first.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Mr. French, ifI could,
I'm going to direct the question to you.
Within the county itself, isn't there an impact fee that's put on
every single resident that goes into transportation for moving utility
lines?
MR. FRENCH: Commissioner, I would tell you that just like
with any rate case, when we receive an application, depending on the
government agency, if it were the DEP imposing new test standards,
as we analyze that rate case to determine -- to justify the amount of
money that they're asking for, we did contact transportation to find out
if, in fact, there was anything that could mitigate these costs. We were
advised no.
So I could not answer an impact fee question for you; in other
words, for the private utilities, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. In other words, out there
where this utility's located, we collect an impact fee from these people
to be able to be transferred to utilities that exist under the county to be
able to meet their expenses.
MR. FRENCH: Again, sir, I would defer that question to
someone in the impact fee department. I --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm not being critical. I'm just
trying to get an honest answer.
MR. FRENCH: I was told that there is -- and Norm is here. I'll
let him answer.
Page 194
June 24, 2008
MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, Transportation
Administrator. Commissioner not really. What there is, is there is an
impact fee. In our impact fee for transportation, there's a portion of it
that's for relocation of non-upsize, in other words, in kind, county or
public utilities.
Private utilities utilize our right-of-way for free, and they are
required by statute to move their right-of-way when required for a
road construction project. So our impact fee doesn't cover the cost for
FP&L, Sprint, all the other private utilities that are within our
right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, and I understand what you
just said, Mr. Feder, but once again, we're asking people far removed
from any county utilities to pay an impact fee that's going to benefit
the owners that are on the county utility. And this is a utility that's in
the process of becoming a county utility.
I know it's not a tremendous amount, but what I'm looking for is
some sort of bargaining position. This is going to present a
tremendous hardship to the people that are on the Orange Tree Utility,
and I believe you put it very well. And it's not going to be accepted.
There's a lot of homes out there that are in foreclosure. There's a
lot of homes that have been abandoned, and I'm not too sure how
they're going to be appraised this particular extra amount of money.
There's got to be a better way to come up with it. The lines that
we're going to be putting down in the road, I doubt seriously we're
going to put down the same lines that exist there today when these are
torn out. We're going to put down utility lines that are going to meet
the future needs probably 20 years out. I would assume that we're
going to oversize it considerably from where we are now.
So all these things have to be taken into consideration. What are
the future ratepayers going to have to pay? I hate to see the small
number of present ratepayers having to take this bill and split it where
it comes out to be 30 to $49 per month for three years or four years or
Page 195
June 24, 2008
whatever its time is. It's totally unacceptable.
We've got to find a better way to do this, and all I can say is, is
that I don't think we exhausted all the possibilities. There's got to be
some methodology to be able to come up with something. If there's
going to be anything assigned, it should be something that's assigned
over a long period of time that will be able to take on future rate users
as they come on the system 10, 15,20 years from now.
Possibly this should be something that's 30 years long and maybe
at the front part something more than an interest, but just a small
amount of payment just to be able to keep it going forward, and then
due credit given with anything that's paid towards the impact fees that
will be coming up in another five years, seven years, whatever that
may be for this particular plan out there.
Mr. French, you must have heard all these different angles
before. What are the possibilities that you have now, or don't you?
MR. FRENCH: Again, what we look at is the rate application
and we make sure that the minimum final requirements have been met
with the rate application, and I will -- just for the record, we came up
with different numbers than the utility. We expected those numbers to
come in at about 25 or $26 per ERC, which is an equivalent residential
connection. You have one ERC for water, one ERC for sewer.
So your residents -- and we were very aware of this, that could --
and that's why we had a lot of questions for this utility, and I've
included that in your packet. It was not in the printed documents, but
there was a lot of correspondence that went back and forth between us
because essentially we got an application with no justification. They
did not show us that they had agreed to go into business with the
county for this relocation.
They were asking for, at that time, $2 million to be recovered,
and over a four-year period of time. And we're very well aware of
that April 1st deadline in 2012 that's coming up with this utility, and
so their numbers didn't match.
Page 196
June 24, 2008
So to answer your question, sir --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
MR. FRENCH: -- we've not explored -- we were told it was $2
million. In fact, we sought that bill from the transportation
department, which they did give it to us, but we have not explored any
options, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Mr. French, I understand
that. Meanwhile, I need to know, when does this have to be resolved?
When is the road going to be going into the point where you need to
disturb the utilities there and put the new ones in?
MR. FRENCH: Yes, sir. I--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: When is that going to take
place?
MR. FRENCH: They are still at 60 percent design based off the
latest -- the latest bill we received or the estimate we received. I do
not know what their timeline is. And again, I'd have to defer that, but
I would say that in any other rate case what we would do is we would
defer that out or we would use that as a capital expense over a period
of anywhere from a 20 to 30-year in amortization period for
collection, and that would be based off of a -- probably commercial
paper or bond, and any other type of rate case.
But in this particular case, we cannot do that with this utility
because, again, based off of the PUD agreement, this utility goes away
on April 1st, 2012.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand. Can't the bond be
set up in such a way that even -- recognizing the fact that we're going
to have the utility in our domain, that we might be able to go ahead
and bond it out against future collections and run it through our public
works department?
MR. FRENCH: My staff and I have never -- have never done
that type of work. IfI can defer the question to counsel?
MR. SUNDSTRUM: Mr. Chairman? Could I have that
Page 197
June 24, 2008
question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MR. SUNDSTRUM: The answer's yes, you can. There's a lot of
ways to solve this thing without doing what the petition said, as long
as you want to stretch the financing out over a reasonable period of
time, 20 years, 30 years, what's usually done in this business.
I've been exactly in his position when I was counsel to the Public
Service Commission. There is a resolution. If you would instruct the
County Attorney and I to sit down, I think we can solve this case.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Under no circumstances am I
going to allow this to become a way for you to try to take care of all of
Orangetree's utilities, things that the -- just by using this to be able to
try to leap frog and maybe make the county lose an advantage that
they have at this point in time.
I treat -- I want this treated as a separate issue, totally separate
than everything else that's out there. The idea that we're going to have
to settle everything with Orange Tree Utility in a favorable way for
them to be able to come up with something that's going to meet for the
residents is not acceptable.
What I would charge both of you to do is to go back and see what
you can do on this one issue. The rest of the things will work out as
time goes along as far as court goes. Trying to come up with a total
settlement of all the issues that are out there -- it even relates back to
the PUD -- isn't going to work, and we're not going to use these people
out there in Orange Tree for a pawn to get to that point.
So what I think we should do -- and my fellow commissioners, I
hope they weigh in on this -- is send it back to you to come up with a
way that's going to, one, recognize the impact that's there, take a look
at all possible sources that exist that might be able to help to pay for
this project that doesn't come from the ratepayers there, recognizing
the fact they're going to be becoming a county utility. See what's
possible and what isn't possible.
Page 198
June 24, 2008
Two, to see how you've bonded it out in such a way that it's
going to take into projections as far as what the future population's
going to be so the people that are on the front end of this, even though
they know the payments will be small, will not be paying something
out of proportion and paying for all these repairs against people that
are coming along in the future, and then bring it back to us. Bring us
back several different alternatives. That's my suggestion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Jeff, you're in favor of sitting down
with the attorney to try to resolve this?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think we could accomplish it to Mr.
Coletta's satisfaction.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. What about the rest of the
board's satisfaction?
MR. KLATZKOW: We'll bring it back.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We don't care about him.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Coyle.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What -- I guess my concerns is
precedence, so --
MR. KLATZKOW: This is unprecedented matter though
because you've got such a short window here between the take over of
a utility. I think what we're going to be discussing is how we can
bond this out over 30, 40 years so instead of a customer being hit with
30, $40 a month, they're only hit by a couple dollars a month.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you going to include the staff in
this from transportation and public works?
MR. KLATZKOW: I always include staff.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Pardon me?
MR. KLATZKOW: I always include staff, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, do you want to make
that a motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I make that a motion.
Page 199
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second the motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: To direct the County Attorney to sit
down with the utility, along with County Manager's staff, to see if
there's any resolution and bring it back.
So there's a motion and a second on the floor.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I just -- and I'll support that
motion. But what you did with this item is that you came to us with
no recommendations, no choices, no alternatives, and you asked us to
tell you what you're supposed to do.
MR. FRENCH: Sir, that was the direction of the authority.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, whatever it was, it was
wrong, okay?
MR. FRENCH: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We don't have the capacity to do
that. We can't sit down and talk about how we ought to do this, so --
and you certainly don't want us talking for two or three hours up here
trying to do it on the fly.
So it's just a good idea if -- when things are brought to us for
resolution, that staff gives us some alternatives to choose from, and
that we can do.
MR. FRENCH: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have one public speaker, and if I
ask -- may ask the public speakers if they're not in favor of the board's
direction, please come up and tell us, or otherwise, you may waive
your time.
MS. FILSON: It's Omar Causey.
MR. CAUSEY: I'm with these guys. I'll answer any questions
the board may have of me, but I'm special counsel to the board.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, please.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We all set?
Page 200
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, if I
may, we have a public speaker that represents Waterways that just
turned in a slip. Could we recognize him this one time?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, this item's on the agenda,
it was a time certain. He had more than ample time to sign up for it
prior to the item coming to the floor, and I do recognize him. He's a
very handsome gentleman. So we're going to move on.
There's a motion and a second on the floor.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries.
Do we have any more -- yeah, we do have another -- you know,
our court reporter needs a break.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, so do I.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And let's take a 10-minute break to
get our time certain at 4:30.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Item #10G
Page 201
June 24, 2008
RECOMMENDA TION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS ADOPT THE 2008 COLLIER COUNTY
WATER AND WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN UPDATES,
DATED JUNE 24,2008, PROJECTS 700703, 730663, 750071,
AND 750072. (THIS ITEM HEARD BEFORE ITEM #8B AND
#8C) - APPROVED
This brings us to our 4:30 time certain, and it's basically three
items, and they're all interconnected, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Which item are we going to take
first?
MR. MUDD: lOG is first, and that's the approval of the
water/sewer master plan, and then we start with your advertised public
hearings, which are 8B and 8C.
So the first thing we'll talk about is lOG. It's a recommendation
that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a 2008 Collier County
Water and Wastewater Master Plan update dated June 24, 2008,
project 700703, project number 730663 and 750071 and 750072.
Again, this item is to be heard before items 8B and 8C, and Mr.
Phil Gramatges will present.
MR. GRAMATGES: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. I'm Phil Gramatges, Interim Director for Engineering
for Public Utilities. And, of course, we're here to present the 2008
Water and Wastewater Master Plan updates.
Our purpose today is to report on this master plan and to
recommend adoption of the 2008 Water and Wastewater Master Plan.
Now, at your discretion I can proceed--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle has a question.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Coyle, second by Commissioner Halas.
Page 202
June 24, 2008
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any speakers? No speakers.
MS. FILSON: No, we're on lOG, right?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All those in favor of the motion,
signify by saying aye.
MS. FILSON: No speakers.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Item #8B
RESOLUTION 2008-202: A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT IMP ACT FEE
RATES ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE NO. 2007-57. (THIS
ITEM HEARD FOLLOWING ITEM #10G) - ADOPTED
And we're going into the advertised --
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, that moves us --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- to 8.
MR. OCHS: 8B, sir. This item to be heard at 4:30. Adopt a
resolution amending the Collier County Water/Sewer District impact
fee rates established by ordinance number 2007-57.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do we have any speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
Page 203
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a second by Commissioner
Coletta.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Next item, item 8C.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can we just say that we actually just
lowered impact fees; by how much?
MR. WIDES: Commissioner, for the record, Tom Wides,
Operations Director for Public Utilities.
The -- in fact, what we've done is we've lowered the impact fees
by 3.7 percent from the current rates, which is approximately 269 --
$269 per equivalent residential connection, and that's for combined
water and wastewater.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Next item?
Item #8C
RESOLUTION 2008-203: A RESOLUTION AMENDING
SCHEDULES ONE AND FOUR THROUGH SEVEN OF
APPENDIX A TO SECTION FOUR OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
ORDINANCE NO. 2006-27, TITLED THE COLLIER COUNTY
Page 204
June 24, 2008
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING
AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE; THIS
AMENDMENT INCLUDED PROPOSED RATES FOR WATER
AND WASTEWATER SERVICES WITH EFFECTIVE DATES OF
OCTOBER 1, 2008 AND OCTOBER 1, 2009 FOR SCHEDULE 1
OF APPENDIX A OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDES FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF OCTOBER 1, 2008 FOR SCHEDULES
FOUR THROUGH SEVEN OF APPENDIX A OF THE
ORDINANCE. (THIS ITEM HEARD FOLLOWING ITEMS #10G
AND #8B) - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Next item, Mr. Chairman, is 8C. This item to be
heard at 4:30. Adopt a resolution amending schedules one and four
through seven of appendix A to section four of the Collier County
ordinance number 2006-27 titled Collier County Water/Sewer District
uniform billing operating and regulatory standards ordinance. This
amendment included proposed rates for water and wastewater services
with effective dates of October 1, 2008, and October 1, 2009, for
schedule one of appendix A of the ordinance, and provides for an
effective date of October 1, 2008, for schedules four through seven of
appendix A of the ordinances.
Mr. Wides will present.
MR. WIDES: Commissioners, again, for the record, Tom Wides,
Operations Director for Public Utilities.
Today we're presenting to you a rate case that proposes an
across-the-board, through all of our block rate structures, 3.5 percent
water rate increase and a 3.5 percent wastewater rate increase.
This is -- this approximates about $3 a day for -- excuse me -- $3
a month for an 8,000 gallon per month user. That equates, for the two,
about 10 cents -- literally 10 cents a day for an 8,000 gallon month
user.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
Page 205
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't think they want this approved
because then they're going to have to go out in this rain. We should
talk about this awhile.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle and
second by Commissioner Halas to change the rate structure for the
water and -- and wastewater utility authority, utility district.
MR. WIDIS: Yes, sir.
MS. FILSON: And I have no speakers, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have no speakers.
Any discussion on the motion?
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion -- it was passed unanimously.
MR. WIDIS: Commissioners, thank you for your consideration.
Item #10J
AWARD BID #08-5065 FOR THE INSTALLATION OF
"IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION PHASE IV STREET
LIGHTING RENOVATION PROJECT - JP A FM #407977 TO
BENTLEY ELECTRIC IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,176,060.87-
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 10J, and that is a
recommendation to award bid number 08-5065 for the installation of
Page 206
June 24, 2008
Immokalee beautification Phase 4, streetlighting renovation project,
JP A FM number 407977, to Bentley Electric in the amount of
$1,176,060.87, and Ms. Diane Flagg, your Alternative Transportation
Modes Director, will present.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve. Wonderful
presentation.
MS. FLAGG: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second.
Motion by Commissioner Coletta to approve staffs
recommendations, second by Commissioner Henning.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
Item #10K
REQUEST FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
TO AUTHORIZE THE ACQUISITION OF AUDITING SERVICES
TO DETERMINE IF THE CLERK OF COURTS HAS ADHERED
TO THE BOARDS DIRECTION, CONCERNING INTEREST
INCOME, AS DEFINED IN RESOLUTION 2007-257, ADOPTED
IN SEPTEMBER 2007 - IF THE CLERK IS NON-COOPERATIVE
THE COUNTY MANAGER WILL BRING BACK THIS ITEM
BACK TO THE BCC - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 10K, and that's a
Page 207
June 24, 2008
request for the Board of County Commissioners to authorize the
acquisition of auditing services to determine if the Clerk of Courts has
adhered to the board's direction concerning interest income as defined
in resolution 2007-257 adopted in September, 2007, and Jim Mudd,
the County Manager, will present on that particular item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Halas to approve the staffs
recommendation.
I have a question.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are we going to go ask the clerk first
before we audit it?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. We will-- we will ask that question first,
and we will get an answer. And based on that particular answer -- it's
certainly a lot better than having his attorney grill your OMB director
in a deposition, and then basically in the deposition, question the
information that has been provided in SAP.
So we'll ask that question before go to the auditing firm,
absolutely, based on Mr. Grady's letter that the clerk will cooperate in
this particular endeavor.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And then ifhe doesn't cooperate,
you'll bring it back to us?
MR. MUDD: Ifhe doesn't come back, I will come back to you
with an auditing recommendation, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 208
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Commissioner Halas is leaving.
Item #10M
REVIEW OF THE PORT OF THE ISLES BOAT LAUNCH
FACILITY PURCHASE PROPOSAL AND OBTAIN DIRECTION
FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON HOW
TO PROCEED - MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPRAISAL FOR
$20,000 AND TO BRING BACK W/REPORT - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 10M, and that is a
review of the Port of the Isles -- and this morning you decided that
you want to bring it back where it's basically been on the agenda that
it would be continued to July 22nd.
This is to review the Port of the Isles boat launch facility
purchase proposal and obtain direction from the Board of County
Commissioners on how to proceed.
Mr. Gary McAlpin, your Coastal Zone Management Director,
and Mr. Barry Axelrod, your Parks and Recreational Director, will
present and be there to answer any questions.
I've heard that the owner has provided some additional
alternatives based -- after we received the letter that's in your packet --
and I haven't had a chance to look at it. I don't know if staff has at this
particular juncture. But Mr. McAlpin?
MR. McALPIN: Thank you. For the record, Gary McAlpin,
Coastal Zone Management.
Mr. Chair, what we're looking for, what we're asking for, is
direction on how to proceed and requesting $20,000 to obtain
Page 209
June 24, 2008
professional appraisals on the number of parcels that are involved in
the potential acquisition of Port of the Isles boat launch facility.
The executive summary that you have for you -- in front of you
has one option. Since that time two more options have been proposed
by the owner, Chris Shucart, of the property. And what we would like
to do is -- and these would involve funding such that it would be
interest only for a period of 10 years with the first three years' interest
would -- being waived.
And so the Shucart family has proposed some attractive terms of
financing which would allow us potentially to do this. What we
would like to do is move forward and get some appraisals of the
property to do some due diligence around stormwater runoff and also
issues associated with canal depths due to Everglades restoration.
I could go through the proposal for you, Mr. Chair, or whatever
you'd like.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. Commissioner Coletta has a
question, then Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. The cost that we're talking
about to do this appraisal is about $20,000?
MR. McALPIN : Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And you -- what you're talking
about is coming back in July at the meeting there and offering us a
bunch of options which we may consider at that time?
MR. McALPIN: Yes, that is correct, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And you'd be doing all the due
diligence at that time?
MR. McALPIN: The cost for the appraisal's about 15,000, the
due diligence. We have allotted $5,000 in there to do the engineering
studies associated with that. And then we would bring this back as
soon as we have all that information pulled together, hopefully within
a month.
Page 210
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And are you also going to
explore that possibility of that one piece of land for use by the fire
department and the EMS?
MR. McALPIN: That would be part of the proposal that we
would bring back to you, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I'm a little confused. We
gave some guidance, I think, last time that this be considered and
evaluated, and you've put it on the agenda to get our guidance, and
something has changed? Has there been another offer by the property
owner? Is that -- has that happened?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
MR. McALPIN: I wasn't aware that--
MR. MUDD: We -- Commissioner, I believe there's a letter
that's in the Board of County Commissioners' area, okay -- I haven't
received a copy -- that basically has now got three options down there
and it goes every -- three options times two. Option one, I believe,
talks about a small parcel that you talked about the last meeting with a
boat ramp, okay.
Well, there they are.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: And that's the small area with the boat ramp.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you haven't evaluated these--
MR. McALPIN: We haven't done our due diligence with this
yet, Commissioner. We just got these --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So all we are asking you to do is go
back and evaluate these options and come back with a
recommendation?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, and have to do some appraisals because
this person's putting dollars against options, and we have no idea if the
properties that he's basically saying are worth such and such are
Page 211
June 24, 2008
actually worth that amount of money.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. McALPIN: We're asking for $20,000 to do the -- the bulk
of that would be, get the appraisals done and then do our due
diligence.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then I would support the motion
that you made.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There isn't a motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There isn't a motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then I would make a motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a second by Commissioner
Fiala. Can we identify what sources the 20,000 is going to come
from?
MR. McALPIN: Marla, can you help me?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Salaries in the parks and recreation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They're down to a bare minimum as
it is.
MS. RAMSEY: The best I can do at the moment is out of an ad
valorem fund. I guess it would come out a -- it's 306 in ours. It's a
fund 306, which is ad valorem fund. We had some cost savings in one
of our projects that we will probably just draw down off of.
So in essence, we could save reserves, I guess. But it's really
coming out of a project that's saving us some money. We've got about
25,000 in. But it's a 306 fund, which is ad valorem.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. We have one public
speaker --
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir, I have one speaker.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- that wants to talk us out of motion
the and the second?
Page 212
June 24, 2008
MS. FILSON: It's Christopher Shucart.
MR. SHUCART: I'll waive my right to speak.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions, comments on the
motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Next item is?
MR. MUDD: It's -- I was just looking. I was almost surprised. I
thought we were done, but I had some that were written in.
Item #lOO
A RESOLUTION TO SUPERSEDE RESOLUTION 06-200,
WHICH DIRECTED THE COUNTY MANAGER TO ESTABLISH
A FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PLANNING COMMITTEE,
TO ADD TWO ADDITIONAL POSITIONS FOR PRACTICING
CIVIL ENGINEERS - MOTION TO DENY THE RESOLUTION -
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: It's lOO, which used to be 16F6, and that is to
approve a resolution to supercede resolution 06-200 which directed
the County Manager to establish a floodplain management planning
committee, and to add two additional positions to practicing civil
engmeers.
Page 213
June 24, 2008
And Commissioner Fiala pulled the item off the regular agenda
in order to discuss.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. We have four speakers on
this?
Yes. I pulled this off -- I don't know if you wanted to have
Robert speak or whether you --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have a question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I just think that when we
initially made this -- we got a request, and we just followed the
request. I didn't realize at the time -- I don't know if my fellow
commissioners did. I didn't realize that when we -- when we created
the Floodplain Management Planning Committee, that in that -- in that
original resolution, it says, to avoid any appearance of impropriety or
conflict of interest, public members should not be involved in any way
in the local building and development industry.
And so -- but we didn't know that at that time, so when DSAC
asked to be on there -- and that, of course, is the development industry
-- we weren't aware of what the original one said, or at least I was not.
So I wanted to readdress that because -- and then -- it was
brought to my attention actually by one of the committee members,
Phil Brougham. And maybe we can hear from him and the speakers.
But I would like to readdress that. I feel that the DSAC can talk
of floodplain management and have a full discussion on it, and then
this committee can talk about it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have a question. This is not a
committee in the sunshine, correct?
MR. WILEY: Yes, sir, it is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It is?
MR. WILEY: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So we have every ability to
change our resolution then? I mean, is it -- it obviously is an
advertised meeting.
Page 214
June 24, 2008
MR. WILEY: Yes, sir, it is. It's advertised for here, and all the
meetings that the floodplain committee have, they are publicly
noticed.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I don't have any problem with
it. You know, it seems like somebody who's objecting to have more
people in there has something to hide, and maybe somebody can
enlighten me on that.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not sure how we're going to do
this. Is it necessary that they be members of DSAC or can they be any
qualified individual?
MR. WILEY: Well, let's talk about -- if you want to spend a few
minutes, we'll talk about the original resolution and then what got us
to this point.
The original resolution was prepared by staff understanding that
the Floodplain Management Planning Committee would be working
under the auspices of CDES. Every regulation that goes through
CDES is put through and reviewed by and commented upon by
DSAC. That's where the issue of the conflict of interest -- because if
you had a DSAC member serving on the committee, they're priming
the pump for their own vote that's coming. So that's what we were
trying to avoid with issues, knowing that DSAC is set up to a
residential development community.
Now, under its FEMA program, they're wanting all kinds of
specific departments that are involved in the implementation and
operation of anything related within the floodplain. They want the
public to be involved, and by the public, they include the development
industry.
So we already had a development industry through DSAC.
That's why -- the floodplain committee was set up to exclude the
development industry because we already were going to go by them.
The issue that has arisen here was the result of a motion that was
Page 215
June 24, 2008
passed at DSAC to request that members -- that there be two civil
engineers put onto the floodplain committee, that that was presented to
you for discussion, and we have complied with that.
And now in your discussion that you had with it, the issue was
talked about actually putting two members of DSAC onto the
floodplain committee, and that really isn't the exact way the motion
from DSAC went. They just said, have two practicing civil engineers.
So this resolution we have prepared for you today simply brings
in two practicing civil engineers but it indicates that they don't have to
be a part of DSAC because there is that potential conflict of more than
one committee. And I think the issue today really, as has been
brought up, is, are you want wanting to be putting in, as we did for the
existing committee, the advertisements that would go out and people
would apply for it through civil engineer positions, or were you
intending for this resolution to specifically stipulate that it would be
for engineers serving on DSAC. And I think that's really the one issue
that probably got most people up in question over.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But my -- the reason I asked the
question is that I think it is very strange to start stacking one
committee with members from another committee.
MR. WILEY: Well--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's not the way it's supposed to
work.
MR. WILEY: We felt that way too, so we're bringing it to you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's exactly why I'm bringing it
back.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I would be willing to support
the two engineers and we select them from whatever source.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you know what, my motion
will be, keep the committee as it is. We've got highly qualified people
on there. Their mission, by the way -- their mission is -- can I -- can I
just finish? Okay. If you don't mind, please. She was shaking her
Page 216
June 24, 2008
finger, so I didn't know.
MS. FILSON: No, no, when you're finished.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can I say something after her? Okay,
go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Their mission is -- in essence, their
final outcome is to lower our insurance rates. And so they have been
pouring their energy into accomplishing just that through this
Floodplain Management Planning Committee.
And we have Du (sic) Vasey right there who's on it and Phil
Brougham. I know that there are -- I don't know your name, sir, but I
bet you're on there, too. But we have qualified people on there.
And so this way I think that the reason we created one from the
public from -- without -- without people that are in the working class
development community, working category of the development
community, is to get a completely different approach so that then
when we have DSAC and we have floodplain management, we have a
very whole and well-rounded result.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, Commissioner, let me just say,
the concerns from members ofDSAC is shared by -- by HOA board of
directors, president, and so on and so forth. I have somebody calling
me every other day trying to get a presentation, and it hasn't happened.
And there's concerns.
Now, we can either try to solve issues in our committees or we
can have a controversial issue come to the Board of Commissioners.
And, you know, there's reluctancy to bring certain things out to
the community, and it's going to be very difficult when it comes to us,
and just be prepared for it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You mean with regard to floodplain
management?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, absolutely, absolutely. And Sue
says, no, she doesn't agree with me.
MS. FILSON: Though the commissioners adopted the resolution
Page 217
June 24, 2008
for this committee, it's a County Manager's committee. He makes the
appointments.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
MS. FILSON: And that's the way it's written in the resolution,
because I heard one of you say, when they come back to us. And the
applicants won't come back to you. I send them to Jim Mudd.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. When they make
recommendations and implementations through ordinance or
whatever, I'm saying that we're going to have a lot of people here to
weigh in on this issue, and we probably won't pass anything. Probably
send it back to correct it. So I -- do you have a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I'd like to hear from the
speakers.
MS. FILSON: I have four speakers, Mr. Chairman. Phil
Brougham. He'll be followed by Brenda Talbert.
MR. BROUGHAM: Good afternoon. It's been a long day. I'll
be brief.
Chairman Henning and fellow commissioners, my name is Phil
Brougham, a resident of East Naples and also a member of the
Floodplain Management Planning Committee, having served on the
committee since its formation in 2006.
Collier County Government should be commended for its
practice of forming advisory committees to focus on different aspects
of regulating and planning the growth and maturation of the county, to
seek new and different ideas and to bring forth the concerns of the
public untempered by any special interest group or groups.
In most cases, not all, members of the public do not serve on
multiple committees, particularly when they do or could impact the
same area of government.
A key element ensuring a success of these committees is their
independence from each other. This separation helps you get all points
of view and not just one opinion. In many cases the work product of
Page 218
June 24, 2008
one committee is passed on to another committee in order to add
content, concurrence, or objection, and that's what you heard earlier.
Floodplain Committee recommendations, if they go to an
ordinance or even if the plan itself is updated, those recommendations
will flow to DSAC, and they can put their two cents worth in on that
as well.
This agenda item is a request from the Development Services
Advisory Committee to modify resolution 06-200 with the intent to
add, quote, up to two currently practicing civil engineers to the
Floodplain Management Planning Committee.
In your April 8, 2008, meeting, the discussion actually mentioned
adding two DSAC members to this committee, as do the minutes of
DSAC dated January 9th, February 6th, and March 5th of 2008.
I believe their request is a knee-jerk reaction to incorrect
information concerning the origin of a pending ordinance on
stormwater facility certification that could impact the development
industry .
In the 17 months of its existence, to my knowledge, no member
of DSAC has ever attended the public meetings of the Floodplain
Management Planning Committee.
The subject resolution, when adopted in 2006, was very clear that
you wanted to avoid any appearance of impropriety or conflict of
interest by not appointing any member of the public involved in any
way with the local building and development industry.
Your intentions at that time were absolutely appropriate in my
opinion. Any currently practicing civil engineer in Collier County
would, no doubt, earn his or her income from the building and
development industry.
While the Floodplain Management Planning Committee may, in
fact, produce recommendations for changes to county ordinance, those
recommendations would flow through all appropriate advisory
committees. This process has worked well and should be left intact.
Page 219
June 24, 2008
I urge you to reject this proposed resolution and to continue to
maintain the integrity and impartiality of your advisory committees.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Brenda Talbert. She'll be
followed by Reed Jarvi.
MS. TALBERT: For the record, I'm Brenda Talbert with Collier
Building Industry Association. I'm their executive vice-president.
This committee is filled with some very intelligent, hard-working
people who have done some good things, and we agree with that.
I don't think -- because our past president, Bill Varian, who is
also the chair of DSAC, has spoken to me -- it is not their intention to
supplant a person in there who's going to derail the good works that
this committee is doing.
But it is our intent and our recommendation that you do appoint
two civil engineers to the committee so they can give the practical
day-to-day in-the-gutter experience that they can bring. And I don't
think anyone should be threatened by that. It is just two votes on a
committee of a lot of people trying to do the end game, and that's to
help with the flooding problem, reduce our insurance. They're here to
help. They're volunteers. They're members of the community.
I don't think that having a dual DSAC person is a good idea. It
was not really recommended. That's not what the intent was to begin
with. It was just to get someone who's day-to-day practicing in this
field.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have a question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. These are open meetings,
aren't they --
MS. TALBERT: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- advertised open meetings?
MS. TALBERT: Sure.
MR. WILEY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So any civil engineer has every right
Page 220
June 24, 2008
to come. Can they comment on the record or --
MR. WILEY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I just wanted to make sure.
MS. TALBERT: And I appreciate that, too. And as a matter of
fact, Robert asked me earlier about my attendance at the meeting, and
we're all working harder than ever with fewer and fewer people, so we
kind of divided, and make sure that we have people who know what
they're talking about who can advise to the committee.
We do have a member who's currently serving on the committee,
and he's maintained himself in a very unbiased and professional way, I
think, and I think the committee would agree to that, too.
Our intention is not to be nefarious. It's to be helpful. So I really
would like you to consider this in a positive way and to rule in favor
of the resolution.
Thank you for your time, and you've had a hard day, and I
appreciate your hard work.
MS. FILSON: Reed Jarvi. He'll be followed by Dennis Vasey.
MR. JARVI: Hi, my name is Reed Jarvi, and I'm a member of
the DSAC Committee, and I just want to say a couple things, as our
intention was purely to add or suggest that practicing engineers would
be added to the committee.
To my recollection, there was not a discussion of being DSAC
people. Although there was -- talking about who would volunteer to
be if this was brought forward. But I think it's important that there's
two practicing engineers that actually would be implementing
whatever recommendations come out of this committee and
ordinances and to see that there are pitfalls or issues on how to address
certain issues.
There could easily be ideas that come up that just aren't
implementable. They may sound good on paper, they just don't work.
And so I think it's important that you have people that are in the field
doing that that can weigh in on those issues and have a vote on it.
Page 221
June 24, 2008
With that said, I mean, DSAC's position was just recommending
that two practicing engineers be involved. We'd -- I don't think in our
letter we -- I think we specifically just said two practicing engineers.
We didn't say they could or couldn't be members of DSAC. My
personal thoughts were they should be somebody else because I spend
enough time doing DSAC work. But if I would be one that would be
appropriate, I would serve there, too.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, Dennis Vasey.
MR. VASEY: Chairman, Commissioners, I'm Dennis P. Vasey,
a member of the Floodplain Advisory Committee.
I've been present from the creation, and since that time we've had
one single purpose. It was to review documents that were already
created by county staff.
To our members' credit we delivered what's been described by
Mark Strain as a very complex plan that only a few members in the
community would ever read.
Plan review meetings in the community and at Horseshoe were
all key pieces to understanding the community rating standards.
Commissioner Henning asked me earlier whether plan approval
would cost money, to which I remark, you've already spent the
money. What this unified plan does is create a culture, a process. It
defines behavior and sharpens staff resource focus on county, division,
and department employees.
Floodplain management doesn't happen by accident. It must be
led with a passion for data valuation and fact-based decision making.
You appointed the ideal manager. County Manager Mudd has acted
on every question and request the committee has made and he's
designated staff principals who have the authority to accomplish
review of our findings and determine appropriateness before they go
anywhere.
Contrary to comments made by DSAC chairman at our last
Page 222
June 24, 2008
meeting that the things we do have a cost and that DSAC was
responsible for everything done at the Horseshoe facility, in short,
only a DSAC engineer could ensure we weren't going off the deep
end, and that's the basis of their letter to Chairman Henning
recommending that two engineers be added to our committee.
Do we have engineers on the committee now? Yes, we do. We
have geologists, we have folks that are in the field every day.
Chairman of the DSAC was surprised, especially when we said, have
you ever met anybody here and, of course, he said, no, I have not.
However, any person on that committee right now doesn't come
from an engineering firm that sits on DSAC, and if you did select,
quote, a general engineer, they probably wouldn't be qualified in
wetlands or floodplain issues.
How do you develop a passion for floodplain management?
Community members afford staff a rare access to members of large
community resident associations throughout Collier County. We, in
return, have been given a better understanding of staff coordination
obstacles and compartmentalization that impedes communication and
staff initiatives.
What we have achieved in the last 18 months would not have
benefited from another anything, much less a general engineer. We
need your insistence to detail but would sincerely hope that you
disapproved adding two additional positions for engineers.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
motion to deny the resolution to supercede the other resolution which
directed the County Manager to add two additional positions.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion and a second
to not approve item 100.
MR. MUDD: 100, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, I'm not going to support
the motion because, why would you want to give the impression
Page 223
June 24, 2008
you're hiding something, or why don't you want to try to resolve
something before it gets up to us?
You're going to have conflicting County Manager's advisory
board and then the board's advisory board in what to do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't think it's hiding anything at
all.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And when it does get to us, then we
need to try to wade through all those issues.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, Mr. Chairman, I would
believe that being that the meetings are open -- and I think now that
we see that it's an important thing for DSAC, they will probably find
somebody or a couple people who would want to sit in on those
meetings and offer any advice they might have.
The County Manager has already picked reliable people to sit on
that committee. It seems to be functioning well. It's been in operation
for almost two years, and it's just now -- somebody wants to change it.
There's -- you know, a public meeting can't be hiding anything.
So I'm sorry, I don't agree with you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's fine.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
Aye.
Motion carries 3-1.
Item #10P
Page 224
June 24, 2008
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A WARD OF CONTRACT #07-
4160 TO EMC CORPORATION FOR INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY SERVICE MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE AND
RELATED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. ($164,593.00) _
MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE JULY 22, 2008 BCC
MEETING - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is lOP, and that used
to be 16E4, and that reads: It's to recommend approval of an award of
contract number 07-4160 to EMC Corporation for information
technology service management software and related personal
services. The fiscal cost is $164,593.
Commissioner Coyle asked this item to be moved to the regular
agenda. Mr. Barry Axelrod, Director ofInformation Technology, will
present.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I asked for this to be pulled and
placed on the regular agenda for the same reason I have asked for a
dozen other similar requests from the same department to be pulled
over a number of years, because you're not only asking us, apparently,
the way I read this, to approve the expenditures of $164,593 plus
annual maintenance costs of$19,000, but you're also asking us to
authorize staff to procure additional software services, training, and
license under the terms of this agreement for an additional four years.
Unspecified costs, unspecified software, unspecified licenses,
unspecified training. I don't do that, okay? I don't just give blanket
approvals to go out and spend money without knowing what it is.
So I would very much appreciate it if you'd stop sending these
kinds of executive summaries to me for approval. Ask for what you
can justify and identify, and then if you need more money in the
future, come back and ask us again, but don't ask us to do something
in the blind. I mean, it makes no sense.
Why are we doing this? I mean, we have budget restrictions, we
Page 225
June 24, 2008
have shortages of funds, and yet you -- you're asking what apparently
is for a blanket authority to spend money.
MR. AXELROD: That's--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if that's not true, then the
executive summary was written improperly. And if that is true, it is at
least the twelfth executive summary that I have had to take this action
on.
So I'd like to have that stopped. County Manager, can you help
me?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I can help you. I'd also like you to
continue this item to the next meeting so I can put that specificity into
an executive summary with backup documentation for the Board of
County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Coyle to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Continue the item.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- continue this item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a second by Commissioner
Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
Item # lOQ
Page 226
June 24,2008
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS APPROVES, AND AUTHORIZES THE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN, AN AMENDED AND RESTATED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING BONUS DENSITY AGREEMENT
(AHDBA) TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE
UNITS FROM THIRTY-TWO DWELLING UNITS TO FORTY-
FOUR DWELLING UNITS FOR THE WORKFORCE PRODUCT
TYPES FOR OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
LOCATED IN THE CIRRUS POINTE PUD DEVELOPMENT -
MOTION TO SUPPORT CONCEPT AND PROCEED WITH
CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 10Q. It used to be
16D12.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: D21, wasn't it?
MR. MUDD: I'm sorry, dyslexia. 16D21, and you're absolutely
right, sir, and that reads --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Recommend the Board of County
Commissioners approves, and authorizes the chairman to sign, the
amended and restated affordable housing bonus density agreement to
increase the number of affordable housing units to (sic) two-thirds
dwelling units to 42 dwelling units for the workforce production (sic)
type owners occupied (sic) affordable housing located at Cirrus Pointe
Development PUD.
MR. MUDD: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: My pleasure.
MR. MUDD: Ms. Marcy Krumbine, your Director of Housing
and Human Services, will present.
MS. KRUMBINE: Thank you, Commissioners.
The executive summary before you is a situation that I've been
working with the developer. As you remember, Cirrus Pointe is a
mixed-income development that's going on in Bayshore, and it was
Page 227
June 24, 2008
encouraged to do an affordable housing density bonus for 32 units at
50 to 60 percent of the median income workforce housing product.
The way that that type of product is successful is to raise the
prices of the market rate units to subsidize the units that are going to
be sold at 50 to 60 percent of the median income.
As you all know, the affordable -- well, the entire housing market
has changed drastically since this agreement was written. And in
order to make this project successful and these units saleable, I
encouraged the developer to look at his product and look at the
numbers to see if we could do the units at 40 -- at 80 percent of the
median income.
The agreement came back to increase the number of units that are
going to be affordable from 32 to 44 only selling them at 80 percent of
the median income. Nothing else of this development will change.
And we do understand that we do have to come back to the board
with a change in the ordinance; however, the developer wanted to get
your nod of approval on the concept before moving ahead.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The reason I pulled this is to
sign an agreement to change the calculations of affordable housing.
And if you go to page 73 of91, 73 is a part of the -- is a part of the
ordinance.
So actually the agreement is not in concert with the ordinance.
And all I'm saying is, it is backwards. We should amend the
ordinance before we amend the -- have an amended agreement. And
if you -- if you see what is on the amended ordinance is the low
income, you have 21 units. In the very low income you have 11 units.
There is no units for 80 percent or anything like that. So I mean,
I just think it's a procedural error.
MS. KRUMBINE: Well, under legal considerations, the attorney
did advise us that the agreement that we're asking you to approve
wouldn't become effective until you signed and approved of a change
in the ordinance. So, again, this agreement is, okay, we support going
Page 228
June 24, 2008
forward with this, and should you approve the ordinance come July
22nd, then it becomes -- it is active.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, that isn't what it says.
The recommendations --
MS. ASHTON: I don't know--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang on, Heidi. Staff
recommendation is, the board to approve authorization for the
chairman to sign the attached affordable housing density bonus
agreement.
MS. ASHTON: Commissioner, ifI may, for the record, Heidi
Ashton, Assistant County Attorney. If you look at the effective date of
the agreement, it's the date that the ordinance is amended. So it could
be signed today but it doesn't become effective until the ordinance
takes place. And if the ordinance is never amended, then it never is
effective.
So I agree with you, the process is different from how we
normally process these. I believe that the affordable housing
department was in favor of going this route. Because of the
advertising costs that the petitioner would incur, the developer wanted
some comfort level that the board would -- at least liked the idea and
that they would approve it in the future before he incurred the
advertising costs.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, then
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, and I -- I did get a chance
to meet with the developer here, and I understand where he's coming
from. He realizes what takes place here, if he gets approval on this, it
in no way obligates this commission to follow through when the
ordinance comes forward.
He's feeling very unsure about everything out there market-wise
and everything, and he's looking for a nod from us to know that he
should keep continuing to proceed.
Page 229
June 24, 2008
Now, he's still at risk. When it comes back as an ordinance, we
could look at that and say, you know, this doesn't meet our
qualifications at all. Commissioner Henning's right to point this out,
but I understand what he's looking for.
I got no problem giving the nod today with him understanding
that when it comes back as an ordinance, we're going to be giving it
even more due diligence.
I don't want him to give up on it because there is a market out
there for certain types of affordable housing, and I think he's going to
hit it pretty soon with this 80 percentile.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Perhaps a reasonable way to
proceed would be to -- for the commission to indicate endorsement for
the concept of making an adjustment such as this and then ask that you
bring it back for a revision of the ordinance at our next meeting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second your motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, this is a PUD, and this would
have to go through an advisory board. It would have to be -- you'd
have to have a NIM. No? Heidi?
MS. ASHTON: We haven't really fleshed that out. I can tell you
that the argument of the owner's attorney is that all we're doing here is
changing the units from 32 to 44. We're not changing the total density
that's permitted. That stays the same. And the density bonus --
number of units approved under the density bonus remains the same.
So there are two changes. One is to increase the number by 12
from 32 to 44 and then to change the low income to workforce. So we
haven't reached an agreement yet of whether or not it would require a
formal PUD amendment process or a lesser amendment process, and
we will, you know, have that resolved in the next week or so.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So if it's an insubstantial change,
would it even come to the Board of Commissioners? Doesn't that just
go to the Planning Commission? Or does even staff do that, without
Page 230
June 24, 2008
that?
MS. ASHTON: Well, if you're changing the text of an
ordinance, then I believe it would have to come back, at a minimum,
to the Board of County Commissioners. But whether or not the --
there don't seem to be any real density issues involved as far as the
number of units, so therefore, there is some merit to the argument that
it would solely be an ordinance amendment that would follow a lesser
period of advertisement, which would just be once as opposed to the
PUD process.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, there's a lot of
unknowns here, but I agree with Commissioner Coyle's statement, you
know, just don't do anything on this item and just bring it back and
change the ordinance.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Except to indicate our at least
majority endorsement of the concept.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The concept you're pursuing, and
then do whatever is legally required with respect to getting the
ordinance back to somebody for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Would that do it?
MS. KRUMBINE: That would do it. You know, the -- I think
that our -- what we're looking for, at least from my perspective as your
director of housing and human services, is I would like the county to
be as supportive as we can within our programs for this development
and not have the county being the stumbling block to what's
happening in the market. Let the market take care of itself and let us
be able to promote the affordable housing program and the density
bonus program well within the guidelines of the program. And your
majority on that would do just exactly what we're looking for.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, the county is a stumbling block.
Have you ever tried to get a permit? It takes a while to do that. So I
mean, it just -- it just doesn't happen overnight. And we probably
Page 231
June 24, 2008
won't see this for quite a while if it does have to come to us. But if it
is administratively done, it could happen in a short period of time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So you're suggesting they handle
this now administratively?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whatever is legally proper.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, whatever's legally proper. So
anyways.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do you need a motion and
second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There was a motion. I made it. I
made the motion.
MS. FILSON: And you seconded it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And I second it. Okay. I
didn't know at the time if it was an acceptable motion. I didn't hear it
repeated.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And the second is to continue this
item, basically?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Continue the agreement?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm in agreement with
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I don't think we want to
continue this particular item. What we want to do is indicate majority
support of the board for the concept you're pursuing and then instruct
you to proceed with getting the ordinance changed as is legally
necessary.
MS. KRUMBINE: Understood.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's the second.
Two speakers?
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Patrick White. He'll be
followed by Kathy Patterson.
Page 232
June 24, 2008
MR. WHITE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Thank you. Just
want to put on the record that Mr. Fields wasn't able to make it today
due to a business commitment but does appreciate your support of the
item.
And we will work with your staff and the County Attorney's
Office to ensure that we do follow all of the appropriate legal
standards. And I appreciate your consideration of the item today.
MS. FILSON: Kathy Patterson?
MS. PATTERSON: I waive.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
That's the last item. Go to public speakers.
Item # 11
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Your public speaker isn't here,
Commissioner Coyle.
MR. MUDD: Do you have any public speakers, Ms. Filson?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir, I do. I have one.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We've got no response.
MS. FILSON: One speaker under public petition, David
Schimmel.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Schimmel?
Page 233
June 24, 2008
MR. SCHIMMEL: Good evening, Commissioners. Is it
appropriate to comment about the budget?
MR. MUDD: You can comment on anything you want on public
comment.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: As long as you say we reduced the
budget.
MR. SCHIMMEL: Well, I believe you're going to do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Reduced taxes.
MR. SCHIMMEL: Dave Schimmel, David Lawrence Center. I
just wanted to make a request if the Baker Act receiving facility can
be on the UFR list, and in October when funds are rolled back in mass
quantities, as we expect, that we could be given some consideration at
that point in time to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
MR. SCHIMMEL: -- try to sustain the cuts we've made in Baker
Act services.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're probably going to need the
additional beds for some of the commissioners.
MR. SCHIMMEL: Well, I don't really want to go there,
Commissioner. There was a gentleman who testified about insanity
earlier on, and if I would have had enough Baker Act beds, I could
have helped him.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think you got enough nods
here to know that this commission is supportive of you. I can't --
nobody can promise you what's going to happen at that point in time,
what our needs are going to be.
MR. MUDD: I told Mr. Y onkosky to add that email that I
received last night that you all received to the UFR list. Whenever I
get the -- whenever I get the request, I add it to the list. I don't syphon
it out or I don't try to weed those out, I just let you know what all the
requests are.
MR. SCHIMMEL: Thank you.
Page 234
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Any more public speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Staff comments and commissioner
comments.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Excuse me, Commissioner
Henning. I hate to interrupt you. I stayed for the whole meeting.
May I be excused? I really would like to get underway.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Have a great trip.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Give us an update when you get back.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good luck. Represent us great up
there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I took a phone call real fast and I got up
out of my chair, and I have to apologize what was -- something was
going on and Leo covered it.
That was Congressman Diaz-Balart basically telling us that we
passed the subcommittee on one of the appropriations. And I've
gotten two phone calls from him in the last week and a half. One was
for EOC technology in second part, and that's passed through some
subcommittees up there for appropriations. He's very happy with that.
Just got the phone call that talked about Physician's Led
Assistance (sic) Network, and it went past, so we've got through the
first couple hurdles on that, and we'll see how it gets done when it
finally -- when it finally gets out as far as earmarks are concerned, but
Page 235
June 24, 2008
so far we've got good news on two of our '09 priorities, okay.
So I just thought it would be behooving to take that phone call to
let you know and give you that information.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Groovy?
MR. MUDD: Sir?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Did you say you thought it was
groovy?
MR. MUDD: It would behoove you. If you want it to be
groovy, you can, sir. No problem.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I misunderstood you.
MR. MUDD: No, sir.
And the next item that I have is to remind Commissioner Coyle
that he needs to bring up the BCC EDC workshop on the catalyst
project in November, okay? You said you were going to talk about it,
but I just thought I'd -- but I'm going to let you do that if you want to.
And last but not least on my list, I'm planning to go up to
Tallahassee this next week on the 2nd to talk with FDEP to talk about
Delnor- Wiggins and our access issues on the road that leads into it and
parking spaces to see if I can come up with something there.
I told you before that I had a phone call from Secretary Sole to
basically address some letters that we had written to try to come up
with some kind of way to improve the access in there and stop all the
traffic jams and then to try to get more parking spaces in there, but not
to overwhelm the particular park and make sure it maintains its special
character for this county, and I'll try to get that resolved and come
back with some good news I have from the 2nd.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, tell them that you have our
unanimous support. I think I can safely say the board has been very
supportive of trying to increase the parking and access up there.
MR. MUDD: Okay. Thank you, sir. That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing, sir.
Page 236
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. Thank you, County Manager
Mudd, for reminding me about the catalyst workshop.
As you know, you appointed me to work with the EDC as part of
a committee to explore ways that we can develop a sustainable
program which will help diversify our economy and get more
higher-paying jobs in Collier County, attract them to the county.
We have been meeting regularly over the past several months,
and the County Manager is part of that committee. And we have
evaluated a number of alternatives.
Weare getting close to developing a concept which can only be
approved if this board likes it. And so they have asked that we try to
schedule something in November, ifI remember correctly, Jim?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, November.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: A workshop where we can go over
this process.
What we all have recognized, I believe, is that -- well, we've been
giving the EDC some money every year to try to attract new
companies. Well, we don't have a lot of money to hand out anymore.
And what we're trying to do is find a way to get a program that is
self-sustaining without us having to take taxpayer money and pump it
into the program, and it will involve community development district
concepts, which I know that Commissioner Fiala is a little weary of,
but I think it's a matter of developing appropriate controls there so that
you feel comfortable with it, but that way you allow the people who
are developing this community activity -- or business activity to
provide funds which go in to support future such elements, and it also
helps develop infrastructure without our existing taxpayers having to
pony up to the bar and pay for it.
So it's an attractive concept. We need to work out a lot of details.
But before we go too much further with it, we need to make sure that
the Board of County Commissioners likes us going in this direction.
Page 237
June 24, 2008
And so we'd just like to get together with you in November for a
workshop and tell you what we're doing, and then if you can provide
some guidance or improve the concept, we'll all benefit from it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. I like the idea. Can't we get
together in August?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They won't be ready that early.
MS. FILSON: Your workshop's on November 5th.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, you okay for a
workshop in November?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I'm certainly okay with that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anything else.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, that's all for me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You can't leave because we need a
vote on adjournment.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to adjourn.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. I got to go to Commissioner
Fiala first.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Speaking of that same subject,
I think I would -- one of the things I would like to address -- I've
noticed as a few new buildings have been built in East Naples -- and
that's great. We love to see the new buildings. But the derelict
buildings, the abandoned buildings, still sit there empty.
And I was thinking that maybe we should try and create some
kind of an incentive whereby impact fees on those buildings are
reduced or maybe -- I know we have some relaxation of some of our
codes because these old buildings didn't have the proper parking and
enough stormwater management and so forth.
But I think the only way we're going to be able to take some of
these initiatives from EDC and maybe use them into some of these old
buildings and to create a better community in the end is to give them
some incentives, so that's one thing I wanted to address. And I've
Page 238
June 24, 2008
been wanting to say that for a while, so maybe we can discuss that at
workshop.
Also, one of the other things that I've noticed just recently, we've
had a few places close. And I realize places are closing around our
town. And I don't know if it's that in the East Naples area we have
kind of an odd mix there. We have either low, low income or pretty
high income. We don't have too much middle income.
So when the retirees with the income leave town in the summer,
we don't have shoppers left because usually the low income people or
the low, low income people don't go out and eat and, you know, they
shop at just a few places, but it's hard to attract good retail in if you
don't have a buying base. And so I think that would be another thing
that we should consider.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, you need to talk to Congress on
that. That is the real --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, actually --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have -- we're in a recession, I
don't care what anybody says. It's the worst thing that I have ever
seen in my lifetime. You know, Darcy doesn't have enough money to
go to the grocery store -- well, she does have enough money to go to
the grocery store, but you're -- everybody's doing with a lot less.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But what I'm talking about is
building though. As we build --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, Commissioner, you're looking
for buyers. The -- the market, the retailers, whatever, is looking for
buyers. The problem is, the buyers doesn't have enough money to
spend. And your issue in East Naples is not just in East Naples.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I know that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's all over.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's exactly what I've been saying
about the Immokalee area as well is that we have to have a better
rounded -- a better balance in our economies in the different
Page 239
June 24, 2008
COmmUnItIes. You can't just have high and low. You to have a
well-balanced community.
I've said this to Commissioner Coletta many times. You know,
they keep wanting to build low, low income housing in Immokalee,
and then they can't understand why they can't draw high-wage jobs
there. You're not giving them any houses, for goodness sake, but that
falls on deaf ears.
But I really feel that we need a better balance. We need -- but I
think we're going that way. Like for instance, now with this 80
percent, we're realizing that you can't just build all low-income
housing. You have to be building middle income.
And I've been reading a book on housing, on smart growth, and
one of the things they said that's lacking across the whole United
States of America is they've been responding to affordable and middle
class, and now they find there's a shortage of housing for the young
professionals. And so it's something we should be taking into
consideration as we move forward.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This program and all the other
programs that the EDC has been working on are designed to do that.
Remember what they're looking to do is bring in high-paying jobs.
Not something for retirees, but high-paying jobs. Once you have
high-paying jobs, then those people are going to be able to afford
higher priced homes, and then the higher priced homes will get built
for those people and they will be a year-round presence in the county.
The importance is that it is done for workers who are going to be
permanently living in Collier County, not seasonal residents, because
that's not what we're targeting. We're targeting workers and
businesses that have a workforce.
But you're absolutely right. But most of that new development
and the higher paying jobs will be located away from the coastal
areas. It's going to be in Golden Gate and further east because a lot of
things are happening out there, and the land is cheaper.
Page 240
June 24, 2008
So the businesses have an opportunity to buy the land and to
build the offices or facilities they need for their higher paying jobs.
That, in itself, is going to create a diversified economy there.
The coastal area is made up so heavily, in many cases, of retirees
that there's not much you can do for them. There's not much they
need to have done for them, okay. It's the rest of the county that needs
it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: As long as we just -- as we don't
continue to concentrate low income in certain pockets. Golden Gate
City, they only have workforce housing there, or just about.
Say Immokalee, that's all low-income housing. East Naples has a
lot of low-income housing, and we keep concentrating it in certain
areas instead of spreading it around, which is, I think, a better way to
plan, and it's our responsibility to do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, good.
Is there anything else?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. Have a nice summer.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, have a nice month.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Have a nice --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Day.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- break.
Three things. I just want to thank my colleagues and the County
Manager to get through a very difficult agenda, and it's 5:30. So, you
know, a pat on the back.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Quite an accomplishment for
everybody.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next think I'm sure the board
members have been -- had some visits from people, landowners and
the environmental community, on the rural stewardship area. That's
going to be very exciting where it's going to be self-funded for things
Page 241
June 24, 2008
of -- like panther crossings in management monies to manage the land
and actually create a panther area.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Corridor.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Corridor, yes, thank you. I understand
that panthers walk around in circles. So, you know, it is what it is, and
they just need to walk around in bigger circles.
The next and last thing is, I don't know if the board had a chance
to read a letter from DSAC, December 12th, about our upcoming Land
Development Code amendments.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: December 12th?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, I'm sorry. It's June 12th. I will
paraphrase what they're asking. What -- they had a discussion and
unanimously supported this letter.
The Land Development Code is being revised. It is -- there is a
number of amendments, and with the economy today, they're asking
us just to do amendments that are necessary for scrivener's errors and
also things that would help business instead of hinder business.
So I wanted to bring that to you and ask if there's any support to
take that into consideration to cut down our LDC meetings.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I support anything we can
do to cut down the meetings. The question is, how important is the
issue itself? And without knowing what the LDC amendment is, it's
hard for me to say whether or not I want to cut it off the list. But I
certainly believe we should be as supportive of business recovery as
we possibly can, but we can't do that to the detriment of some other
things that are important. But I think if we choose wisely, we can
achieve that goal, and --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, I think they're going to
be talking about these LDC amendments through our committees over
the summer when we're on summer break, and I don't know how to
resolve it here today.
Page 242
June 24, 2008
Very good point is, how can you say no to things if you don't
know what you're saying no to.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, you can -- in this particular case,
because they're sharing that particular angst with you, what you could
do is, you could -- you as a board could give high credence to the
DSAC recommendation based on the amendment, at least in this cycle
that's going on, and then I'll go back to my staff and say, hey, look it,
you know, if it's not an EAR-based amendment that we've got to have
and it's not something that's absolutely crucial that the Board of
County Commissioners has told us to do, we're not going to do it for a
while and we need to basically -- we need to put -- and choke back on
the LDC amendments.
And I'll be honest with you, I think staff would absolutely
welcome that, too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, it's not only that, but also to
help business.
MR. MUDD: Oh, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Are you --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd be happy with that, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Anything less cumbersome is good
for me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I agree with that too, so you
have a majority of the board here in support of that. So that's the only
thing I'll have.
MR. MUDD: And I just have one thing based on your comment.
On the RLSA panther thing that just got announced, we have one
piece that we have to put in there so that we're eligible with the
program, and that's our core transportation network out there which
has to get put down in so that we can be recipients of that particular
Page 243
June 24, 2008
program along with the landowners.
And I've -- and that's the piece that they're missing that they've
asked us for. I'd just let you know that staffs working on that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just a potential caution, and
hopefully you can resolve this in a constructive way. I -- unless there
is some delineation of responsibility based upon geographic area, I see
some potential conflict between this most recent Panther Protection
Plan and the habitat management or protection programs that we have
a committee working on also.
You will recall that we first started out with the Red Cockaded
woodpecker and said we need a habitat protection plan for them. And
Fish and Wildlife people told us, no, you can't do that, you've got to
develop it for everything.
And so then the committee changed directions and said, okay,
we'll develop a comprehensive habitat protection plan. Well, now
they've come back to a habitat protection plan for panthers, and so our
Habitat Protection Plan Advisory Committee is working on a
protection plan for panthers in the Immokalee area, otherwise
unspecified.
Now, whether or not that Immokalee area that they are working
on conflicts with or overlaps the area that this new Panther Protection
Plan is addressing, I do not know.
All I'm suggesting is that we be alert to that, and if there is a
jurisdictional dispute there, like one of them, perhaps, should only be
looking at rural lands and the other one should be looking at the
stewardship area, I don't know, but be cautious about that and try to
resolve that for us if it comes up.
MR. MUDD: Before it gets here, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Before it gets here, yeah. And
don't let them waste a lot of time on it because it will be wasted.
MR. MUDD: Does everybody agree with Commissioner Coyle?
Page 244
June 24, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Schmitt, do you have anything to
add?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, I just wanted to add that plan -- for the
record, Joe Schmitt. That plan that was proposed and it was in the
paper, will be part of the Rural Land Stewardship Committee. They'll
review that, and all those -- any amendments associated with that to
implement that, the amendments to our GMP will be part of the
five-year review that you will see as part of the rural land stewardship,
so --
MR. MUDD: You've still got -- we've still got to deconflict --
MR. SCHMITT: But we still have to deconflict the HCP as well.
And my staff, we were just briefed on the other plan because a lot of
that was kept very secretive because of the issues involved.
Jim Mudd and myself met with the representatives involved in
that plan, and now we're fully up to speed, and Bill Lorenz and his
staff will make sure that they're integrated.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. We just don't need those
two committees or two efforts conflicting with each other.
MR. SCHMITT: And then they're also briefing the Rural Land
Stewardship Committee at the next meeting. They'll be briefing them
on the entire plan because they haven't even been exposed to any of
that yet, so it will all be briefed, and you'll eventually see any results
of that that will come as part of the GMP amendment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We only have one more
action. Entertain a motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Page 245
June 24, 2008
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 3-0.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: See you in July.
****Commissioner Halas moved, seconded by Commissioner Fiala
and carried unanimously that the following items under the Consent
and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Item #16A1
SATISFACTION OF LIEN, RELATED TO IMPACT FEES, DUE
TO THE CANCELLATION OF THE BUILDING PERMIT FOR
THE PROPOSED HOME - FOR THE DEFERRAL AMOUNT OF
$8,214.82
Item # 16A2
SATISFACTION OF LIEN DUE TO A CHANGE IN QUALIFIED
APPLICANT AND THE SUBSEQUENT RECORDING OF A NEW
IMP ACT FEE DEFERRAL AGREEMENT AND LIEN IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE IMMOKALEE RESIDENTIAL
IMPACT 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 THE
DEFERRAL AMOUNT OF $7,027.34
Item # 16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
Page 246
June 24, 2008
FACILITIES FOR FIDDLER'S CREEK, PHASE 3 UNIT 1 -
W/RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE
SECURITIES
Item #16A4
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AT TREVISO BAY -
W/RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE
SECURITIES
Item # 16A5
FINAL AND UNCONDITIONAL CONVEYANCE OF THE
WATER UTILITY FACILITY FOR THE ROOKERY GOLF
COURSE MAINTENANCE AND GOLF SCHOOL - W/RELEASE
OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITIES
Item #16A6
RESOLUTION 2008-182: GRANT FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE
FINAL PLAT OF TRACT 9 AT OLDE CYPRESS (OLDE
CYPRESS PUD), ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED -
W/RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A7
RESOLUTION 2008-183: GRANT FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIV ATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF REFLECTION LAKES AT NAPLES
Page 247
June 24, 2008
PHASE lA (WALNUT LAKES PUD) WITH THE ROADWAY
AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING PRIV A TEL Y
MAINTAINED - W/RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE
SECURITY
Item #16A8
RESOLUTION 2008-184: GRANT FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE
FINAL PLAT OF REFLECTION LAKES AT NAPLES PHASE 1 C
(WALNUT LAKES PUD) WITH THE LANDSCAPE AND
IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENTS BEING PRIV A TEL Y
MAINTAINED - W/RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE
SECURITY
Item # 16A9
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF MOCKINGBIRD
CROSSING, APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY - WI STIPULATIONS
Item #16AI0
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF AVE MARIA UNIT 18,
HAMPTON VILLAGE TOWNHOMES - LOCATED IN SECTION
4, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST
Item #16All
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF COBBLESTONE COVE,
Page 248
June 24, 2008
APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY -
W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A12
RESOLUTION 2008-185: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF CEDAR HAMMOCK UNIT 2 WITH
THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING
PRIV ATEL Y MAINTAINED - W/RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A13
RESOLUTION 2008-186: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF CEDAR HAMMOCK UNIT 4 WITH
THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING
PRIV ATEL Y MAINTAINED - W/RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A14
RESOLUTION 2008-187: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF CEDAR HAMMOCK UNIT 6 WITH
THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING
PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED - W lRELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Page 249
June 24, 2008
Item #16A15 - Moved To Item #10N
Item #16A16
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC), SPECIAL AMENDMENT
2008 CYCLE 2A, TO ADDRESS AN URGENT AMENDMENT TO
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN RESPONSE TO THE
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT (FILED
FEBRUARY 13, 2008) WHICH DECLARED SECTIONS OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY SIGN CODE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
(COMPANION ITEM TO 16A17) - TO ENSURE IT CONFORMS
TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION
Item #16A17
A BUDGET AMENDMENT, TO OBTAIN PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES FOR THE REVISION OF THE SIGN CODE SECTION
OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN RESPONSE TO THE
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT (FILED
FEBRUARY 13, 2008) WHICH DECLARED SECTIONS OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY SIGN CODE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND
TO OBTAIN EXPERT TESTIMONY AND LITIGATION
SUPPORT PERTAINING TO THE PLAINTIFFS DAMAGES
CLAIM (COMPANION ITEM TO 16A16) - PROFESSOR DANIEL
R. MANDELKER WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
IN ST. LOUIS HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED FOR THE
COMPLETION OF THIS AMENDMENT PROCESS
Item #16A18
THE PUBLIC VEHICLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PV AC) TO
(1) INITIATE REVIEW OF TAXI RATES; AND (2) AMEND THE
Page 250
June 24, 2008
PUBLIC VEHICLE FOR HIRE (VFH) ORDINANCE (NO. 2001-
75), BY CHANGING THE TIME FRAME FOR EXPIRATION OF
DRIVER IDENTIFICATION (ID) CARDS TO EVERY TWO
YEARS RATHER THAN ANNUALLY; CHANGING THE
EXPIRATION DATE OF CERTIFICATES TO OPERATE (CTO)
TO NOVEMBER 30TH ANNUALLY; AND ADDING A SECTION
TO THE VFH ORDINANCE RELATING TO SPECIALTY
VEHICLE FOR HIRE SERVICES - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16Bl
AWARD COLLIER COUNTY BID #08-5074 TWO SINGLE
ENGINE STREET SWEEPER TRUCKS TO ENVIRONMENTAL
PRODUCTS OF FLORIDA, CORP. ($371,980.00) - TO HELP
REDUCE THE AMOUNT DEBRIS & UNWANTED MATERIAL
FROM ENTERING THE STORM WATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM
Item #16B2
CHANGE ORDER #5 TO ADD $357,971.20 FOR CONTINUING
INSPECTION SERVICES FOR AIM ENGINEERING &
SURVEYING, INC. UNDER ITN 04-3583 "CEI SERVICES FOR
COLLIER COUNTY ROAD PROJECTS" FOR PROJECT NO.
63051 "VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD FROM AIRPORT ROAD
TO COLLIER BOULEVARD"
Item #16B3
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE
TRAFFIC CALMING PROJECT WITHIN THE
TRANSPORTATION SUPPORTED GAS TAX FUND (313)
Page 251
June 24, 2008
PROJECT NO. 601631 TO THE PUD MONITORING/TRAFFIC
COUNTS PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000.00 FOR
PROJECT NO. 691242 - BY ADDING EIGHT STATIONS AND
UPGRADING NINE EXISTING COUNT STATIONS - FOR A
PROJECT W /W A VETRONIX
Item # 16B4
CHANGE ORDER #1 TO ADD $434,779.47 FOR CONTINUING
INSPECTION SERVICES FOR JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC.
UNDER ITN 05-3583 "CEI SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY
ROAD PROJECTS" FOR PROJECT NO. 65061 "COLLIER
BOULEVARD SIX (6) LANING PROJECT FROM GOLDEN
GATE BLVD. TO IMMOKALEE RD" - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16B5
A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GENERATED REQUEST
FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP) TRAFFIC CALMING
PROJECT, FOR CARDINAL STREET FROM NORTH RD. TO
FLAMINGO DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 1,400 FEET
Item #16B6
REMAINING DOLLARS AWARDED TO AM356 SECTION 5303
TRANSIT PLANNING IN THE AMOUNT OF $95,754 AND
CLOSEOUT PROJECT #35083 IN FUND 126 AND MOVE
RESIDUAL BUDGET TO FUND 128, PROJECT #35084 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $34,347 - TO CARRY OUT TRANSIT PLANNING
ACTIVITIES
Page 252
June 24, 2008
Item #16Cl
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $255,000.00 TO
FUND THE CONTINUING LITIGATION AND PROFESSIONAL
EXPERT SERVICES RELATED TO THE CASE KNOWN AS
COLLIER COUNTY AND COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER
DISTRICT V METCALF & EDDY, INC. AND TRA VELERS
CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA (PROJECT
#700751) - COUNTY REPRESENTED BY THE LAW FIRM OF
CARL TON FIELDS
Item # 16C2
RESOLUTION 2008-188/CWS RESOLUTION 2008-01:
RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
HARDSHIP DEFERRALS FOR CERTAIN SEWER SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS FOR THE 2008 TAX YEAR - FOLIO
#77821360004 FOR 90% DEFERRAL, FOLIO #24830680003 FOR
100% DEFERRAL, AND FOLIO #64510680008 FOR 100%
DEFERRAL
Item #16C3
AMENDMENT OF CONTRACT NO. 05-3831 "FEMA
ACCEPTABLE MONITORING DISASTER DEBRIS
MANAGEMENT" WITH R.W. BECK INC., POST, BUCKLEY,
SCHUH, JERNIGAN INC. AND SOLID RESOURCES, INC TO
DELETE LANGUAGE UNDER SECTION 19 OFFER EXTENDED
TO OTHER GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, TO COMPLY WITH
FEMA 325 DEBRIS MANAGEMENT GUIDE (JULY 2007) - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 253
June 24, 2008
Item # 16C4
AWARD CONTRACT #08-5080 TO BQ CONCRETE, LLC AND
DESIGN-BUILD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF HAMMERHEADS ON DEAD-END
STREETS IN COLLIER COUNTY ($215,358.66) - TO ALLOW
COLLECTION CONTRACTORS TO TURN AROUND SAFELY
Item # 16C5
REJECT THE PETITION FROM WASTE MANAGEMENT INC.
OF FLORIDA FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF UNUSUAL AND
UNANTICIPATED INCREASE IN COST FOR SOIL USED FOR
ODOR CONTROL MEASURES AT THE COLLIER COUNTY
LANDFILL - THE PETITIONER DOESN'T PROVIDE
SUFFICIENT INFORMA TION FULLY STATED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY UNDER THE CONSIDERATIONS
SECTION
Item #16Dl
GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE UNITED STATES
DEP ARTMENT OF HOUSING AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE (EDI) FUNDS
IN THE AMOUNT OF $147,000 FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO
SOUTH PARK IN IMMOKALEE - TO REPLACE THE
CURRENT COMMUNITY CENTER BUILDING WHICH IS IN
POOR CONDITION AND AGED
Item # 16D2
Page 254
June 24, 2008
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,913 TO
RECOGNIZE REVENUE RECEIVED FROM THE COLLECTION
OF CO-PAYMENTS FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY SOCIAL
SERVICES PROGRAM - IT WILL BE USED FOR MEDICAL,
DENTAL CARE, AND PRESCRIPTION ASSISTANCE FOR LOW
INCOME RESIDENTS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY
Item #16D3
CATEGORY "A" TOURIST DEVELOPMENT FUND 183 GRANT
APPLICATIONS FOR BEACH PARK FACILITIES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $803,100 - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Item # 16D4
CATEGORY "A" TOURIST DEVELOPMENT FUND 195 GRANT
APPLICATIONS FOR THE CITY OF NAPLES, THE CITY OF
MARCO ISLAND AND COLLIER COUNTY IN THE AMOUNT
OF $3,623,160 FOR FY-08/09 - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D5
CATEGORY "D" TOURIST DEVELOPMENT GRANT
APPLICATION FOR THE NAPLES PIER ANNUALIZED REPAIR
AND MAINTENANCE WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $18,000.00 FOR FY-08/09 - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 16D6
Page 255
June 24, 2008
BUDGET AMENDMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $115,586 TO
ENSURE CONTINUOUS FUNDING OF THE ALZHEIMER'S
DISEASE INITIATIVE GRANT - WILL ALLOW FOR THE
DELIVERY OF RESPITE CARE AND CASE MANAGEMENT
SERVICES TO THE COUNTY'S FRAIL AND ELDERLY TO
PREVENT PREMATURE AND COSTL Y INSTITUTIONAL
PLACEMENT
Item # 16D7
AMENDMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $706,644 TO ENSURE
CONTINUOUS FUNDING OF THE COMMUNITY CARE FOR
THE ELDERLY GRANT - ALLOWING FOR UNINTERRUPTED
SUPPORT SERVICES FOR SENIORS, FRAIL, AND ELDERLY
CLIENTS
Item #16D8
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,813 TO
ENSURE CONTINUOUS FUNDING OF THE HOME CARE FOR
THE ELDERLY GRANT - ALLOWING FOR UNINTERRUPTED
SUPPORT SERVICES FOR SENIORS, FRAIL, AND ELDERLY
CLIENTS
Item #16D9
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH ARMANDINA CAMPOS (OWNER)
FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT
FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 8, LIBERTY LANDING, IMMOKALEE
- DEFERRING $12,442.52 IN IMPACT FEES
Page 256
June 24, 2008
Item #16DI0
SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL AGREEMENTS
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL IN FY08, INCLUDING THE
TOT AL NUMBER OF AGREEMENTS APPROVED, THE TOTAL
DOLLAR AMOUNT DEFERRED AND THE BALANCE
REMAINING FOR ADDITIONAL DEFERRALS IN FY08 - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16Dll
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH LOUDNEY CENOZIER AND MARIE
C. CENOZIER (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF
COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
34, TRAIL RIDGE, EAST NAPLES - DEFERRING $19,372.46 IN
IMPACT FEES
Item #16D12
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH LAURETTE ARCHANGE (OWNER)
FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT
FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 199, TRAIL RIDGE, EAST NAPLES-
DEFERRING $19,372.52 IN IMPACT FEES
Item #16D13
WORK ORDER CPE-FT-3902-08-02 UNDER CONTRACT 06-
3902 WITH COASTAL PLANNING AND ENGINEERING IN
THE AMOUNT OF $295,185 AND A BUDGET AMENDMENT
TOTALING $295,185 FROM 195 RESERVES (CAPE ROMANO
Page 257
June 24, 2008
SAND SEARCH) - TO LOCATE OFFSHORE SAND FOR THE
COUNTY'S PUBLIC BEACH RENOURISHMENT PROGRAM
Item #16D14
BUDGET AMENDMENTS RECOGNIZING THE FISCAL YEAR
2008-09 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (HUD) ENTITLEMENT FUNDING, AND
STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM
(SHIP) ALLOCATION - FOR JULY 1, 2008 THROUGH JUNE 30,
2009
Item #16D15
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH PETER HARTMAN JR. (OWNER)
FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT
FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNIT LOCATED AT VISTA III AT HERITAGE BAY, UNIT 1504,
NORTH NAPLES - DEFERRING $19,411.65 IN IMPACT FEES
Item #16D16
A SUB RECIPIENT AGREEMENT PROVIDING
SUPPLEMENTAL DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE (DRI)
FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $60,000.00 TO ST.
MATTHEWS HOUSE, INC. FOR HURRICANE HARDENING OF
ITS SHELTER - TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR
HOUSING, PUBLIC FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS, AND
REP AIRS RELATED TO HURRICANE WILMA
Item #16D17
Page 258
June 24, 2008
SUBMISSION OF THE 2008 STATE OF FLORIDA CHALLENGE
GRANT APPLICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OFFICE ON HOMELESSNESS - TO BE
USED FOR (F ACILIT A TING THE INTAKE PROCESSES,
MAINT AINING TRANSPORT A TION VEHICLES, EXPANDING
THEIR INFORMATION MANAGEMENT REPORTING
SYSTEMS AND INCREASING) PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
FOR TRANSITIONING CLIENTS - INCLUDING THE
COUNTY'S HUNGER AND HOMELESS COALITION, SHELTER
FOR ABUSED WOMEN AND CHILDREN, ST. MATTHEW'S
HOUSE AND THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL
ILLNESS
Item #16D18
SUB RECIPIENT AGREEMENT PROVIDING SUPPLEMENTAL
DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE (DRI) FUNDING IN THE
AMOUNT OF $500,000.00 TO GREATER IMMOKALEE
SOUTHSIDE FRONT PORCH COMMUNITY, INC - TO
HURRICANE HARDEN 100 UNITS OF LOW-INCOME RENTAL
UNITS AT THE IMMOKALEE APARTMENTS
Item #16D19
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH ODELIN BETANCOURT (OWNER)
FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT
FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNIT LOCATED AT VISTAS III AT HERITAGE BAY, UNIT
1405, NORTH NAPLES - DEFERRING $19,411.94 IN IMPACT
FEES
Item #16D20 - Withdrawn
Page 259
June 24, 2008
AWARD CONTRACT(S) #08-5068: PHYSICAL AND
BIOLOGICAL MONITORING FOR COLLIER COUNTY
COAST AL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS FOR COASTAL
ZONE MANAGEMENT TO COASTAL PLANNING AND
ENGINEERING, INC.; COASTAL ENGINEERING
CONSULTANTS, INC.; AND HUMISTON & MOORE
ENGINEERS
Item # 16D21 - Moved to Item # 1 OQ
Item # 16D22
SUB RECIPIENT AGREEMENT PROVIDING SUPPLEMENTAL
DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE (DRI) FUNDING IN THE
AMOUNT OF $300,000 TO I HOPE FOR INFILL IN ORDER TO
SUPPORT THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSING UNITS
Item #16D23
SUB RECIPIENT AGREEMENT PROVIDING SUPPLEMENTAL
DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE (DRI) FUNDING IN THE
AMOUNT OF $57,000 TO THE SHELTER FOR ABUSED
WOMEN AND CHILDREN FOR THE PURCHASE AND
INSTALLATIONS OF HURRICANE PROOF WINDOWS,
EXTERIOR DOORS AND ROOFING MATERIALS FOR FOUR
HOMES
Item #16E1
AMENDMENT NO. 03 TO THE AGREEMENT WITH COLLIER
COUNTY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD FOR THE DRIVER
Page 260
June 24, 2008
EDUCATION GRANT PROGRAM - FOR SUMMER DRIVING
SCHOOL FOR PRIV A TE AND PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL
STUDENTS
Item # 16E2
AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY DRIVER
EDUCATION GRANT PROGRAM - TO IMPROVE THE LEVEL
OF SKILL, RESPONSIBILITY AND CAP ABILITY OF
STUDENTS TO BECOME BETTER DRIVERS
Item # 16E3
AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE WITH STIFFLER
SPECIALTIES, INC., FOR 1.14 ACRES UNDER THE
CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM,
AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $18,700 - W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16E4 - Moved to Item #10P
Item # 16E5
ADDENDA "A" TO THE CONTRACT WITH COASTAL
TRAINING TECHNOLOGIES, CORPORATION IN THE
AMOUNT OF $21,500 FOR ADDITIONAL COURSES TO
COLLIER COUNTY'S EXISTING ONLINE SAFETY TRAINING
PROGRAM - PROVIDES FOR 12 ADDITIONAL COURSES IN
ORDER TO MEET TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR COUNTY
EMPLOYEES
Item # 16E6
Page 261
June 24, 2008
STATUTORY DEED FOR THE CONVEYANCE OF A GAC
LAND TRUST RESERVED LIST PARCEL TO THE
CONSERVATION COLLIER PROGRAM THAT WILL PROVIDE
REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $116,914.00 FOR THE GAC
LAND TRUST FUND - THE 7.38 ACRE PARCEL IDENTIFIED
AS UNIT 53, TRACT 1
Item #16E7
FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT NO. 08-5012, CELLULAR
COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES AND EQUIPMENT, AND
AUTHORIZES THE PURCHASING/GENERAL SERVICES
DIRECTOR TO SIGN THE AMENDMENT - PROVIDING A
SAVINGS BY LOWERING THE MONTHLY SERVICE COST OF
BLACKBERRIES
Item #16E8
FINAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE LOGAN WOODS
PRESERVE UNDER THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND
ACQUISITION PROGRAM - THE 5.69 ACRES IS LOCATED
ALONG LOGAN BOULEVARD AND PINE RIDGE ROAD
Item #16E9
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH LARUS PROPERTIES, LLC, IN
ORDER FOR THE SHERRIFF'S OFFICE TO CONSOLIDATE
TWO EXISTING LEASES AT A FIRST YEARS RENT OF
$42,837.36 - LOCATED AT 3511 PLOVER AVE; SUITES 104,
111 AND 112, NAPLES, FL
Item #16EI0
Page 262
June 24, 2008
BUDGET AMENDMENT TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM THE
FY08 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY BUDGET TO THE
EMERGENCY SERVICES COMPLEX CONSTRUCTION
BUDGET TO EQUIP OFFICE SPACE FOR THE INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT
Item #16F1
APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 16F2
GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF COMMUNITY
ORIENTED POLICING SERVICES (COPS) TECHNOLOGY
PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $350,738 - WILL ALLOW
FOR PUBLIC SAFETY EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING COMPUTER
SYSTEMS, WIRELESS TRANSMITTING DEVICES, RADIO
DESK SETS AND INTERNET/INTRANET SWITCHES FOR EOC
Item #16F3
RESOLUTION 2008-189: ADOPT THE COMPREHENSIVE
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR COLLIER COUNTY
AND ITS MUNICIPALITIES
Item #16F4
NEGOTIATED ANNUAL CONTRACT WITH THE FERGUSON
GROUP FOR FEDERAL LOBBYING SERVICES - AT $107,000
Page 263
June 24, 2008
ANNUALLY
Item #16F5
RESOLUTION 2008-190: FORWARD A LETTER AND
RESOLUTION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
AND CONSUMER SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF REPAIRS TO
THE IMMOKALEE FARMERS MARKET
Item #16F6 - Moved to Item #100
Item #16F7
AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE IMMOKALEE CRA
MASTER PLAN UPDATE & RELATED SERVICES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $386,175 AND APPROVE ALL NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENTS (COMPANION TO ITEM #16G10)-
AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item# 16G 1
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO APPROVE
THE RELOCATION FOR THE BA YSHORE GATEWAY
TRIANGLE CRA OFFICE, APPROVE NEW OFFICE LEASE
WITH PALMYRA CLUB INVESTORS, LLC (LANDLORD) AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE LEASE
AGREEMENT (4069 BA YSHORE DRIVE) (FY08 FISCAL
IMP ACT $3,696)
Item #16G2
BUDGET AMENDMENT INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF
Page 264
June 24, 2008
$46,000 FOR GENERAL CONSULTING SERVICES UP TO
SEPTEMBER 30, 2008 REQUIRED TO SUPPORT ON-GOING
PROJECTS AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL, MARCO
ISLAND EXECUTIVE AND EVERGLADES AIRPORTS - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16G3
BUDGET AMENDMENT INCREASE TO THE AIRPORT
AUTHORITY'S CAPITAL FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $192,000
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN AIRCRAFT APRON
EXPANSION AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT-
CONSISTING OF 8,850 SQUARE YARDS OF ASPHALT
Item # 16G4
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000 FOR
ENGINEERING SERVICES REQUIRED FOR THE
COMPLETION OF A UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE RURAL BUSINESS ENTERPRISE GRANT
APPLICATION FOR THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Item #16G5
RESOLUTION 2008-191: LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR
FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,000,000 TO LEVERAGE A
RURAL BUSINESS ENTERPRISE GRANT (RBEG) FROM THE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA)
IN THE AMOUNT OF $495,000 AND A RESOLUTION
AUTHORIZING THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT
AUTHORITY TO APPLY FOR THE $495,000 UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA) RURAL BUSINESS
Page 265
June 24, 2008
ENTERPRISE GRANT (RBEG) AND AUTHORIZING THE
AUTHORITYS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO SIGN ALL
RELATED DOCUMENTS TO CONSUMMATE THE RBEG FOR
AN ELIGIBLE RBEG PROJECT AT THE IMMOKALEE
REGIONAL
Item # 16G6
BA YSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) DIRECT STAFF TO
DRAFT A RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 4315 BA YSHORE DRIVE AND THE THREE
ADJACENT PARCELS OWNED BY THE CRA AS A
BROWNFIELDS AREA, AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO ENSURE
PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH FLORIDA STATUTES IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE
BROWNFIELDS AREA DESIGNATION (4315 BA YSHORE
DRIVE AND THREE ADJACENT PARCELS) - AS DETAILED
IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16G7
AN AFTER-THE-FACT ACCEPTANCE OF THE ATTACHED
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) GRANT
OFFER FOR $201,875 FOR THE DESIGN, PERMITTING AND
BIDDING OF A T AXIW A Y AND AIRCRAFT APRON SOUTH
EXPANSION AT THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT,
AND ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16G8
ACQUISITION OF 2.73 ACRES OF LAND, KNOWN AS TRACT
Page 266
June 24, 2008
Q, ADJACENT TO THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE
AIRPORT FOR $250,000, PLUS ASSOCIATED REAL ESTATE
TRANSACTIONS FEES NOT TO EXCEED $10,000, AND
ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item # 16G9
(CRA) TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF A COMMERCIAL
PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE BAYSHORE GATEWAY
TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT AREA; AUTHORIZE THE CRA
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE REAL ESTATE CONTRACT;
APPROVE PAYMENT FROM AND AUTHORIZE THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO MAKE A PAYMENT FROM FUND
(187) IN THE AMOUNT OF $750,000 PLUS COST AND
EXPENSES TO COMPLETE THE SALE OF SUBJECT
PROPERTY (SITE ADDRESS: 4315 BAYSHORE DRIVE)
[$750,000) - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16GI0
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) APPROVE
THE AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE "IMMOKALEE CRA
MASTER PLAN UPDATE & RELATED SERVICES" IN THE
AMOUNT OF $386,175 AND RECOMMEND THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC) APPROVE ALL
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS (COMPANION ITEM
16F7) - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16Hl
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
Page 267
June 24, 2008
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETT A ATTENDED THE
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA TRANSPORTATION INITIATIVE
LEGISLATIVE LUNCHEON (SWFTI) ON JUNE 6, 2008. $35 TO
BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET - HELD AT THE BONITA BAY CLUB, 26660
COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34134
Item # 16H2
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETTA PARTICIPATED AS
FELLOW SPEAKER AT THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE OF
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA FELLOW TOUR ON 6/11/08. $15 TO
BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET - HELD AT GREY OAKS COUNTRY CLUB, 2400
GREY OAKS DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA 34105
Item # 16H3
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR SERVING A V ALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETT A ATTENDED THE EDC
POST LEGISLATIVE RECEPTION ON MAY 21,2008. $20 TO
BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET - HELD AT THE HAMIL TON HARBOR YACHT
CLUB, 7065 FERN STREET, NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
Page 268
June 24, 2008
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETTA ATTENDED THE
SOUTHEAST REGIONAL DIRECTOR'S INSTITUTE
CONFERENCE ON 5/19/08. $25 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD AT
NAPLES BEACH HOTEL, 851 GULF SHORE BOULEVARD
NORTH, NAPLES, FL 34102
Item #16H5 - Withdrawn
COMMISSIONER FIALA REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER FIALA ATTENDED THE MARCO
BUSINESS AFTER FIVE ON JUNE 18, 2008 AT MARRIOTT
VACATION CLUB, CRYSTAL SHORES ON MARCO ISLAND,
FL. $5.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S
TRAVEL BUDGET
Item #16H6
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMSSIONER COLETTA WILL PARTICIPATE AS
A GUEST SPEAKER AT THE KIWANIS OF NAPLES ON
SEPTEMBER 16, 2008. $14 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD AT
710 GOODLETTE ROAD N., NAPLES, FL 34102
Item # 16H7
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETTA PARTICIPATED IN
Page 269
June 24, 2008
THE NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER PROCLAMATION
READING AND LUNCHEON ON MAY 1,2008. $10 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET -
HELD AT EVERGLADES CITY HALL, 102 COPELAND AVE N,
EVERGLADES CITY, FL 34139
Item #16H8
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETTA ATTENDED THE EDC
VIP BENEF ACTOR FOUNDATIONS AND PREMIER MEMBER
BREAKF AST AT NAPLES GRANDE ON MAY 1, 2008. $28 TO
BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET
Item # 16H9
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETTA ATTENDED THE AVE
MARIA UNIVERSITY COMMENCEMENT CEREMONY AND
LUNCHEON 5/10/08. $20 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
COLETT A'S TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD AT AVE MARIA
UNIVERSITY, 5050 AVE MARIA BL VD., AVE MARIA, FL
34142
Item #16H10
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETTA ATTENDED THE
Page 270
June 24, 2008
SEMINOLE CASINO IMMOKALEE VEGAS STYLE SLOTS
PULL LUNCHEON ON 6/12/08. $20 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD AT
SEMINOLE CASINO IMMOKALEE, 506 SOUTH FIRST
STREET, IMMOKALEE, FLORIDA 34142
Item #16I
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH
ACTION AS DIRECTED.
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 271
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
June 24, 2008
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Minutes:
I) Collier County Code Enforcement Board:
Minutes of April 24, 2008.
2) Contractors Licensing Board:
Minutes of April 16, 2008.
3) Environmental Advisorv Council:
Agenda of June 4,2008.
Minutes of April 2, 2008.
4) Forest Lakes Roadwav and Drainage Advisorv Committee:
Agenda of May 14,2008.
Minutes of April 9, 2008.
5) Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee:
Agenda of April 2, 2008; May 7, 2008.
Minutes of April 2, 2008; May 7,2008.
6) Hispanic Affairs Advisorv Board:
Minutes of April 24, 2008.
7) Historical/Archaeological Preservation Board:
Minutes of December 19, 2007.
8) Pelican Bav Services Division Board:
Minutes of April 2, 2008; April 22, 2008.
9) Radio Road Beautification Advisorv Committee:
Agenda of May 20, 2008.
Minutes of April 15, 2008.
10) Utility Authoritv (Water and Wastewater Authoritv):
Minutes of February 25, 2008.
B. Other:
I) Domestic Animal Services Advisorv Committee:
Minutes of April 15, 2008.
June 24, 2008
Item # 1611
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 31, 2008
THROUGH JUNE 06, 2008 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 1612
DESIGNATING THE SHERIFF AS THE OFFICIAL FISCAL
YEAR 2008 APPLICANT AND PROGRAM POINT-OF-
CONTACT FOR THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE, EDWARD
BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG)
PROGRAM, ACCEPT THE GRANT WHEN A WARDED,
APPROVE APPLICABLE BUDGET AMENDMENTS, AND
APPROVE THE COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE (CCSO)
TO RECEIVE AND EXPEND THE PAYMENT OF 2008 JAG
GRANT FUNDS - WITH A POTENTIAL AWARD OF $40,584
Item # 1613
STATE REVENUE SHARING APPLICATION FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2008-2009 AND TO OBT AIN APPROVAL FOR THE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE APPLICATION
Item #16J4
CAPITAL ASSET DISPOSITION RECORDS FOR TIME PERIOD
OCTOBER 1, 2007 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2008
Item #16J5
Page 272
June 24, 2008
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JUNE 07, 2008
THROUGH JUNE 13, 2008 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16Kl - Continued to the July 22, 2008 BCC Meeting
RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE AN OFFER OF
JUDGMENT FOR PARCEL 124 BY COLLIER COUNTY TO
PROPERTY OWNERS, JEANNIE AND DONALD FIELDS IN
THE LAWSUIT STYLED CC V PACALJ. MURRAY, ET AL.,
CASE NO. 07-4784-CA (SANTA BARBARA EXTENSION
PROJECT NO. 60091)(FISCAL IMPACT: IF ACCEPTED,
$168,803)
Item # 16K2
RESOLUTION 2008-192: REQUEST BY THE COLLIER
COUNTY EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AUTHORITY FOR
APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
AUTHORITY TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS TO BE USED TO
FINANCE EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES FOR AVE MARIA
UNIVERSITY ($17,000,000)
Item # 16K3
SETTLEMENT A T MEDIATION PRIOR TO TRIAL IN THE
LAWSUIT ENTITLED LETICIA ROCHA AS THE PERSONAL
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF DIANA LOPEZ,
DECEASED, ET. AL, Vs. COLLIER COUNTY, FILED IN THE
TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, CASE NO. 07-359-CA, FOR $110,000.00
Page 273
June 24, 2008
Item #16K4
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$57,850.00 FOR PARCEL 128FEE IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V CARLOS ALVAREZ, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-
2882-CA (OIL WELL ROAD PROJECT NO. 60044) (FISCAL
IMPACT $13,950)
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2008-193: RESOLUTION APPROVING WITH
CONDITIONS PETITION: CCSL-2008-02/AR-12877
REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE COASTAL
CONSTRUCTION SETBACK LINE (CCSL) TO ALLOW
WIDENING OF THE EXISTING BOARDWALK AND ADD A
ROOF STRUCTURE OVER THE BOARDWALK, ALL OF
WHICH ARE LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS RITZ
CARLTON HOTEL WITH A STREET ADDRESS OF 282
V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD AND MORE P ARTICULARL Y
DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 2.1, LOCATED IN SECTION 32,
TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY
FLORIDA
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2008-194: PETITION: SNR-2008-AR-12854, BY
CHRISTIAN SPILKER OF HAMIL TON HARBOR MARINA, INC,
REQUESTING A STREET NAME CHANGE FROM FERN
STREET TO HAMILTON AVENUE, LOCATED WITHIN
SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST
Item #17C
Page 274
June 24, 2008
ORDINANCE 2008-30: PETITION: PUDZ-2006-AR-9143,
STANDING OAKS, L.L.C., REPRESENTED BY DWIGHT
NADEAU, OF RW A, INC. AND RICHARD D. YOV ANOVICH
ESQUIRE, OF GOODLETTE, COLEMAN & JOHNSON, P.A.,
REQUESTING A REZONE FROM RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A)
TO RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD)
TO BE KNOWN AS STANDING OAKS PUD. THE 41.1 ACRE
RURAL AGRICULTURAL ZONED SITE IS PROPOSED TO
PERMIT 164 SINGLE AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DWELLING UNITS AT A DENSITY OF 4 UNITS PER ACRE.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 6473 STANDING OAKS
LANE, 6400 STANDING OAKS LANE, AND 6565 14TH
AVENUE N.W., IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #17D
RESOLUTION 2008-195: PETITION: SV-2008-AR-12943,
WOOLBRIGHT DEVELOPMENT, INC., REPRESENTED BY
GLEN WELDON OF GLEN WELDON & ASSOCIATES, LLC, OF
ANDERSON, SOUTH CAROLINA, REQUESTING SIX
VARIANCES. THE FIRST THREE VARIANCES ARE FROM
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) SECTION 5.06.04
C.1. WHICH REQUIRES A MINIMUM SEPARATION OF 1,000
LINEAL FEET BETWEEN SIGNS TO ALLOW A SIGN
SEPARATION OF 70 FEET, 705 FEET AND 775 FEET. THE
FOURTH VARIANCE IS FROM LDC SECTION 5.06.04 C.1.
WHICH PERMITS A MAXIMUM OF TWO POLE SIGNS PER
STREET FRONTAGE TO PERMIT A MAXIMUM OF THREE
SIGNS ALONG A STREET FRONTAGE. THE FIFTH VARIANCE
IS FROM LDC SECTION 5.06.04 C.16.B.I. WHICH ALLOWS A
Page 275
June 24, 2008
MAXIMUM SIGN AREA OF 12 SQUARE FEET FOR AN OFF-
PREMISE DIRECTIONAL SIGN TO ALLOW A 76 SQUARE
FOOT OFF-PREMISE SIGN. THE SIXTH VARIANCE IS FROM
LDC SECTION 5.06.04 C.16.B.II. WHICH ALLOWS A
MAXIMUM SIGN HEIGHT OF 8 FEET FOR AN OFF-PREMISE
DIRECTIONAL SIGN TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM SIGN HEIGHT
OF 9-FOOT 4-INCHES. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
(COLLECTION AT VANDERBILT) IS LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF AIRPORT
ROAD (CR 31) AND V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD (CR 862), IN
SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #17E
RESOLUTION 2008-196: PETITION: CUE-2008-AR-13066,
DIEUDONNE BRUTUS, OF THE TABERNACLE OF
BETHLEHEM, REPRESENTED BY DAVID SNEED, KUHLMAN
ENGINEERING, INC., IS REQUESTING A ONE-YEAR
EXTENSION OF A CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR A
CHURCH GRANTED IN RESOLUTION NO. 05-134 IN THE
VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL (VR) ZONING DISTRICT, PURSUANT
TO SUBSECTION 10.08.E.3 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE. THE 0.69 ACRE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT
305 3RD STREET SOUTH (IMMOKALEE), IN SECTION 4,
TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
Item #17F
ORDINANCE 2008-31: AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER
COUNTY CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE TO
Page 276
June 24, 2008
REMOVE AN OBSOLETE REFERENCE TO THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT IN THE USE OF FUNDS
PROVISIONS IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE INTERNAL
CONSISTENCY OF THE ORDINANCE, AS RECOMMENDED
BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
PRIOR DIRECTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
Item #17G
ORDINANCE 2008-32: AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 97-
33 COLLIER COUNTY CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL
ORDINANCE
Item # 17H
ORDINANCE 2008-33: RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2006-60, WHICH
CREATED THE HALDEMAN CREEK MAINTENANCE
DREDGING MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT, TO
INCREASE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE UNIT TO ADD 5
PARCELS AND CANAL SECTION ADJACENT
Page 277
June 24, 2008
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5:42 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
-i-
TOM HENNING, Chairm n
.
ATTEST
DWIGHTE.BROCK,CLERK
~~.~~k
Atttst as to Chtjl"lllll ,
,jQll4!ur. Oftl.' ',"
These Il1inuteB1$proved by the Board on 1- f2-t1<t3 , as presented
~ ~. or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY
COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 278