Loading...
BCC Minutes 11/03/2008 S (AUIR) November 3, 2008 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida November 3, 2008 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in SPECIAL SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Tom Henning Donna Fiala Fred W. Coyle James Coletta F rank Halas ALSO PRESENT: Jim Mudd, County Manager JeffKlatzkow, County Attorney Sue Filson, BCC Executive Manager Mike Bosi, Planning Manager, Comprehensive Planning Page 1 --' -....... ~'" , _.- .- ::::",:'-:". AGENDA Monday, November 3, 2008 9:00 a.m. Tom Henning, Chairman, District 3 Donna Fiala, Vice-Chairman, District 1 Fred W. Coyle, Commissioner, District 4 James Coletta, Commissioner, District 5 Frank Halas, Commissioner, District 2 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 "PUBLlC PETITIONS." ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. REVIEW OF THE ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT ON l'UBLlC FACILITIES, CATEGORY A AND CATEGORY B. A. AUIR OVERVIEW - MIKE BOSI B. IMPACT FEES RELATED TO THE AUIR- AMY PATTERSON C. DEPENDENT FIRE DISTRICTS ISLE OF CAPRI- CHIEF RODREIGEZ OCHOPEE - CHIEF McLAUGHLIN D. COUNTY ROADS - NORM FEDER AND NICK CASALANGJ;IDA E. DRAINAGE CANALS AND STRUCTURES - NORM FEDER/JERRY KURTZ/STEVE PRESTON F. POT ABLE WATER SYSTEM - JIM DELONY/PHlL GRAMATGES G. SEWER TREATMENT & COLLECTOR SYSTEMS - JIM DELONY/PHIL GRAMATGES H. SOLID WASTE-JIM DELONY/PHlL GRAMATGES I. PARKS- MARLA RAMSEY/BARRY WILLIAMS J. COUNTY JAIL - CHIEF SALLEY K. LAW ENFORCEMENT-CHIEF BLOOM L. LIBRARY - MARLA RAMSEY/ MARILYN MATTHES M. EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES - JEFF PAGE N. GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS - SKIP CAMPIHANK JONES 3. ADOPTION OF 2008 AUIR 4. ADJOURN INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383. LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M. November 3,2008 CHAIRMAN HENNING: We1come to the annual- annual update and inventory report for 2008 public facilities, today being November 2nd (sic) -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Third. CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- 3rd 2008. Would you all rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: I believe the county attorney has an item before we get into the AUIR. MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. We have the SHIP agreement with Mr. Barlow. I pres -- presented pursuant to board direction for today a quick executive summary and a copy of the agreement. It's the opinion of the county attorney that there was, indeed, an agreement between Mr. Barlow and the county staff. The agreement started with an application form and went on from there through promissory notes and other various course of dealings between the parties. I think the issue for the board is these agreements are for -- for board approval, not staff approval. So what this board's going to have to do is ask itself had this agreement come to us initially would we have approved it or not. If your feeling is we should -- we should have -- we would have approved it at that time, then you should feel free to ratify staffs actions and Mr. Barlow's actions and to enter into this contract effective as of August 19th, 2008. If you believe that when this agreement would have come to you initially you would not have voted for it, then do not ratify staffs actions, and we'll be done with it. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Klatzkow, does the board have full legal authority to make the determination here? Are there any legal impediments? Page 2 November 3, 2008 MR. KLATZKOW: None. COMMISSIONER COYLE: None? MR. KLATZKOW: None. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any other questions? Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yep. I'd just like to make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: A motion by Commissioner Fiala to approve the agreement, second by Commissioner Halas. Discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that would bring us into the AUIR. And Mr. Mike Bosi from Community Development Environmental Services Comprehensive Planning will be your emcee, so to speak. MR. BOSI: Thank you, county manager. Mike Bosi, Comprehensive Planning. Good morning, Chairman, Commissioners. We're here for the two thou -- hearing of the 2008 annual update and inventory report. Of course, that is the presentation of the five-year capital improvement programs for each of the divisions and departments throughout the county. Page 3 November 3, 2008 The AUIR is made up oftwo specific type of facilities, Category A and Category B facilities. Category A facilities, which are transportation, drainage, water, wastewater, solid waste, and parks, are the categories that fall within the capital improvements elements. The AUIR is a preparatory document for the annual update of the CIE, and it is, basically, the -- the tool utilized to establish the running total for concurrency for future developments within the county. For Category B facilities, jails, law enforcement, libraries, EMS, government buildings, and the dependent fire districts, the AUIR ensures that the level-of-service standards that the -- the board has adopted are identified -- and identified within the impact fee studies are maintained and meet the dual rational nexus test required by Florida law. And the way the capital improvement programming is determined within the county -- it's basically a linear equation. It's new population compared against -- or multiplied against your level-of-service standard, and that equals what your required capital improvement program is. It should be noted that public utilities and transportations have developed more of complex formula and system for maintaining level-of-service standards which dictate capital expansion, but the basic premise of additional demand requiring new improvements is the underlying principles contained within those divisions and departments as well. In relation to -- to that specific math equation, the -- the driver is population, and as everyone has been aware of, the past 18 months there has been a pretty dramatic change within -- within that driver, meaning new population within the county. I've provided two slides within this presentation to kind of highlight that. This slide really compares the -- the Bureau of Economic and Business Reacher -- Research population numbers, which are the numbers that -- that come from the University of Florida Page 4 November 3, 2008 that -- that each locality in the state of Florida has to utilize, you know, for determining new capital improvements. 2008 compared to 2007 BEBR numbers, basically, it's -- over a 15-year period, 20-year period, it's about 8 1/2 percent. Over a five-year period, it's about a 6 1/2 percent reduction from -- from the prior year to this year. And what that does is that means that the -- the timing and requirements for when new capital improvement programs are going to be needed is going to be pushed out because the population that we had exp -- expected just the previous year is being cut, so -- so the need for the new facilities is not -- is not as close as it was just this last year. A further example is the -- the amount of population growth that we are expecting within the five years. In this 2008 BEBR's saying the county over the next five years could expect 46,101 new -- new residents. For 2007 that number was a little bit more aggressive. That was -- that was 60,459, And for 2006, before the slow-down started to materialize, we were at 92,755 with a caveat with that number -- that was the number when -- when the county still utilized BEBR high population, and after 2006, through correspondence with DCA, the Board of County Commissioners had agreed to utilize BEBR medium numbers. But regardless of those changes, basically, the -- the -- the examples are -- are put forth -- put forth to let -- to -- to show the changing conditions that -- that -- that each individual department and division within this county has had to -- to -- to adjust to in terms of what they're thinking of the timing for the new capital improvement programs that are needed. And based upon this assessment of downward revision to the population projections, the projects within the AUIR have been pushed out to the later years. The capital improvements in place or under construction are still moving forward, and they will satisfy the Page 5 November 3, 2008 demand for the population over the next five years. The -- the -- there are three years where you're going to see some __ where you're going to see projects still being proposed: transportation, drainage, and EMS. On October 22nd, about a week and a half ago, the CCPC and the productivity committee reviewed the 2008 AUIR. Both bodies offered unanimous recommendation of approval of all components of the AUIR as presented with the exception of regional parks and jails. For jails there -- there wasn't a unanimous recommendation of approval. It was a six-to-one recommendation of approval from -- from the planning commission. And then for regional parks the productivity committee had offered a unanimous recommendation of approval, but, also, with a caveat that the BCC should consider the additional recreational acreage provided by the federal and state park system throughout the county in evaluating the 2.9 acres per thousand population, or the current level of service for population. Barry Williams, the Director of Parks, will -- will be able to -- to address that point. And, also, there was a supplemental package that was delivered to the Board of County Commissioners last week where the -- the acreage amount for -- for both the federal and the state -- the federal and state ac -- or park ser -- park -- park provided were provided to the -- to the BCC. And within the executive summary we asked the Board of County Commissioner to make a number of specific recommendations. The -- the first is to find that there is -- there is adequate capacity for drainage, structures, potable water, sewer treatment, solid waste, parks and recreation, and they're available over the next 12 months to issue building permit requests. The second is to find that there's sufficient road network capacity in the transportation currents management database for continued operation of the real-time declining balance ledger to support development orders issued until the end -- until the FYO '09/2010 Page 6 November 3,2008 third quarter status report; basically, that there's going -- that there's enough capacity within the system for the continued issuance of building permits. The third is just basically -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mike, could you go back to that slide? MR. BOSI: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That -- that language with respect to transportation concurrency management database is different from the language in -- in the update of our AUIR meeting that you just provided us, and I have a question. It says that there is, essentially, sufficient capacity to support development upon the issuance until the FY '07/'08 end of third quarter status report. You're saying '09/'010 . You've jumped ahead two years on us. Now, what -- what happened here? MR, BOSI: There -- the -- if the -- the -- the specific recommendation that was contained within your executive summary refers to '07/'08, then that was a fault on comprehensive planning on my side that I did not provide the updated -- the -- the updated year and time frame that we're specifically dealing with, COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that's sort of important because you were saying that the planning commission -- this was the planning commission's finding that it was okay until the FY '07/'08 third quarter status report, My question was going to be, when are we going to get the '07/'08 third quarter status report? But if this was an error, it was an error even after the planning commission made their decision. So what __ what's -- what did the planning commission actually approve? MR. BOSI: I would have to check the specific recommendation contained within the planning commission's staff reports. Page 7 November 3, 2008 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, in the smaller book it is page MR. MUDD: Eight. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- 2 of3 under Exhibit B. Actually, it's page 3 of 3 in Exhibit B. MR. BOSI: And the recommendation of the planning commission was limited to FY '08/'09, and it should have been -- it should have been updated to '09 and 2010. Because -- because we have a two-year concurrent -- transportation concurrency window, basically, what -- what the planning commission had indicated when they approved the AUIR was that there was -- there was capacity within the system for the next year. And it should have been -- it should have been corrected by myself at the time that -- that it was for the '0912010. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think the question is, what action did the planning commission take? What -- for what years? And I -- I don't know if you received an answer on that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I've -- I didn't. I guess what I'm looking for is a document or a statement from the planning commission that specifically references FY '09 to 'lO or FY '07/'08 or FY '08/'09. What -- what did the planning commission approve? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, for the record, Nick Casalanguida with Transportation. I can't answer that question directly, but I know what the intent was of that two-year window. There's a two-year look-forward in concurrency where if the capacity is available for two years -- so they take the current year, and they go forward two years, and I think that's why it says '09/'010, But it's a general statement. We still do currency link by link. If there isn't capacity in a specific link in anyone year or any point -- point in time, no development orders will be issued. They're just saying based on that Page 8 November 3, 2008 snapshot in time, that two-year look-forward, based on adequate capacity for two years is okay on the network right now subject to link-by-link concurrency. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But it would -- it would -- it would be -- make me feel a lot more comfortable if there was a record that showed what they -- what they actually approved. If you put this same document in front of them to review and they -- they reviewed it and approved it, they approved the FY '07/'08. So what -- what I'm asking you is, what document did you put before the -- the planning commission and -- and what document did they approve? MR. BOSI: If I -- the -- within -- within your AUIR has -- it has a action for transportation. Within that section for transportation, it has all the projects that are contained within the next five years for -- for-- for the transportation division. The -- the planning commission approved as presented the five-year capital improvement programs for -- presented within your Category A facilities over the next five years for the -- the work project that -- that were presented to them. They -- they did not specifically recommend -- or they did not specifically act upon a recommendation for the FYO '08/'09 or the FYO '09/2010. They made a ref -- a unanimous recommendation of approval for the -- for the five-year capital improvement programs that were provided for them contained within the transportation division section of the AUIR. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And, Mike, I -- I understand what you're saying, but FY '09/'010 is not the upper limit of the five-year transportation plan capital improvement element, so if they had approved the -- the -- if they had said that there's sufficient capacity to support development orders through the five-year capital improvement element, we would have been going out to 2014, okay? We're not. You're saying we're going out to FY '09/'010. The documents Page 9 November 3,2008 we've been provided say it is adequate for FY '07/'08 third quarter report. I'm -- I'm -- I'm merely trying to make absolutely positive that we all know what it was the planning commission approved. MR. COHEN: For the record, with Laryngitis, Randy Cohen. The CCPC followed your explicit direction with respect -- for planned and constructed facilities in the first two years. That takes you to the '09/'010 time frame. And then beyond that they followed your direction with respect to not putting things in there unless they made sure they were financial -- financially feasible. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, MR. COHEN: So that's where the '09/'010 comes from, COMMISSIONER COYLE: So -- so, in fact, they have endorsed our previous guidance? MR, COHEN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. That makes it clearer. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, Please continue. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I had one question, On Attachment E on the transportation portion, they did look at Attachment E, road financing plan update? MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER HALAS: They being the -- the productivity committee and, also, the planning commission; is that correct? MR. BOSI: Correct, sir. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So they know where the funding is coming from and the debt services and everything else; is that correct? MR. BOSI: Correct. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, Please continue. MR. BOSI: And, again, let me apologize for -- for the inconsistencies within the years. That -- that's a responsibility that -- Page 10 November 3,2008 that I had failed to meet. The fourth recommendation that's being specifically requested is the -- for -- for the BCC to provide staff direction for the projects proposed and the revenue sources identified within the Category A facility for inclusion within the FYO '08/'09 schedule of capital improvements element of the CIE in -- in its annual update. Fifth would be provide an evaluation upon the appropriateness of the existing levels-of-service standards associated with the individual components of the AUIR and provide alternative level of service where deemed appropriate, and that would be by each individual section by section. If -- if you find that the projects being proposed are appropriate and the level of service being appropriate, you -- you would basically endorse those projects being put forward. And, finally, there was a specific recommendation for the pro -- productivity committee that I had mentioned earlier related to regional parks, and staff is looking for the -- the BCC to provide direction in relation to -- to that recommendation, and that's the consideration of the state in regional park acreages that are provided throughout the county in evaluating the 2,9 acres per thousand level of service for regional parks. And Mr. Barry Williams will get in -- will address that point within the parks section of the AUIR. One other -- just seeking direction from the Board of County Commissioners in terms of -- there were a number of indivi -- or a couple of individuals who indicated that they would -- from the public would like to speak. Whether -- would the board like to hear those individuals at the appropriate time for each division or -- or and department or at the -- at the end of the proceedings? The individuals would sign up. I'm not sure if they would sign up to be -- speak about an individual division or department, but at the end of each presentation from the divisions of the department we may want -- or the chair may want to open up to -- to the public, whatever Page 11 November 3,2008 the discretion would be. CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think it's all related to landscaping, and that's under -- that's under transportation. I have several questions under transportation that might be related to -- to landscaping. MR. BOSI: Okay, CHAIRMAN HENNING: So personally I -- I'd like to get -- get to that category A for transportation. Commissioner Fiala, COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just going to say the same thing, As long as they have -- they are addressing a specific subject, I would prefer to hear them on that specific subject rather than -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- at the end of the meeting because then it would make more sense, MR. BOSI: Thank you, And on the agenda I had indicated to Amy Patterson -- she -- she doesn't have a formal pre -- and that -- Amy Patterson, being the impact fee manager for the county, she doesn't have a formal presentation, but she is available in case any questions comes up related to the matter. And with that the -- the first up are the divisions and department __ based upon the BCC request would be the dependent fire districts. CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have questions for Amy Patterson. Do we want to wait 'til the -- is she going to be here the whole meeting or -- MR. BOSI: She -- she will be here the whole meeting, but how ever the chair would like to proceed, CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's fine. MR. BOSI: And -- and with that the -- the first division would be MR. MUDD: Chief Rod. MR. BOSI: -- Chief Rodriguez. MR. MUDD: From Isles of Capri. Page 12 November 3, 2008 CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Good morning, Commissioners. Chief Emilio Rodriguez, Isles of Capri, for the record. And, again, I'd like to thank y'all for allowing us to be first in the agenda. MR. MUDD: Chief Rod. CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Basic -- MR. MUDD: Chief, hang ten for just a second, okay? CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this would be on your second tab, Category B, page 169. CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Thank you. I am here to answer any questions that you-all may have pertaining to my AUIR. CHAIRMAN HENNING: You have no proposed expenditures for the next five years. CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: That is correct, un -- unless the WCI donates the land on Mainsail Drive that is still up in the air due to the fact ofWCI -- I believe they filed bankruptcy, so we don't know what's going to happen in that area with the remainder of the two high-rises that are supposed to be constructed there on Mainsail Drive. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Questions by the board? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Sir, if you would, please. CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The -- the next construction that you have in lines, the one you're going to actually be building, is how many years out? CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Well, that's going to depend on the WCI land donation. If we don't receive the land donation there, then we're not going to be able to construct a second station in that area. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, are we going to be able to adjust your impact fees accordingly to be able to allow for this? CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: To build the building there, sir? Page 13 November 3, 2008 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, in other words, if we don't know we're going to build the building -- CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: We can't collect impact fees for something that won't happen. How -- what's the nexus we're using to be able to continue to collect the impact fees -- fees for new -- new construction -- CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Well, we have no construction right now in that area being that the two last high-rises are on hold right now with WCI, so we're not collecting any impact fees from that area at this time. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that's an area that needs fire, I mean, you've got East Naples that are there, you've got Marco Island across the bridge, and you've got Isles of Capri. Isles of Capri district bleeds over into that particular development. There needs to be some kind of fire station that's there. That will probably be a subject during the merger talk, the consolidation talk between the fire districts, but I will tell you under the present day there will need to be something that's there. CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Yes. MR. MUDD: And they will have to do something with hook and ladder because of the high-rise situation that's there, because I don't believe Chief Rod's got that right now, CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: No, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, my concern is -- my understanding is any impact fees that'll be collected can only be held __ what is it? -- five or seven years before they have to be expended. And, you know, if we're -- we're looking to plan out in the future-- and this all ties back into it -- what's going to happen if we build nothing and we -- we do collect something in the way of impact fees for your department? And I know you say that that construction project for the most Page 14 November 3, 2008 part is -- is off to one side now. I can understand that. But is there any source of impact fees that's coming into you at this point in time? CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Right now we don't have a lot of construction in the district that I'm aware of, and we have not been collecting any impact fees that I'm aware of. And I believe that Amy here can answer that. MS. PATTERSON: Hi. Amy Patterson for the record. I'm the Impact Fee Manager for the county. The -- the collections for Isles of Capri Fire District related to impact fees are -- are minimal. They can also be used for capital exp -- expansions like equipment that may be needed in the district, so it's not limited strictly to construction. They could also use it for appropriate equipment, fire trucks, or other things that are -- that are needed by the district. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, Amy. Isn't there also a limit that if we collect impact fees and do not use them that they're turned back? MS, PATTERSON: They have to be expended or encumbered within seven years of their payment. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any other questions? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Chief, I -- I just -- I'm -- I'm struck by the information provided here concerning the number of calls that you get -- CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- specifically with respect to fire alarms; 224 fire alarms but only 1 structure fire and 12 brushfires. What __ what is the reason for so many fire alarms? Are you getting a Page 15 November 3,2008 lot of false fire alarms? CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: The majority of the fire alarms are all fault activations. If we have any type of storms in the area, it could cause the alarms to go off. If we have a lot of rain, it could cause a malfunction of the alarm, And we also provide a substantial amount of mutual aid to the City of Marco Island with their fire alarms, so that brings up -- our call volume up to -- quite a bit. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is there any charge for false alarms for fire as there is with burglar alarms? CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: We do not have that established. Only the county -- yourselves here can actually have us prepare some type of ordinance where we could charge after so many fire alarms to that same specific building. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And is there any interlocal agreement that provides for reimbursement for backing up Marco Island? CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: No, sir, not at all. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it appropriate that one be considered? CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: That would be up to the board and Mr. Mudd here, but we do provide -- I mean, we -- easily 50 percent of our calls are to Marco Island -- to the City of Marco Island. MR, MUDD: This might be -- this might be a great opportunity for -- and I don't mean to cut you off. CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir. MR. MUDD: But he's absolutely correct. And I can't tell you the same reciprocal coming over the bridge to the Isles of Capri is -- is that way and/or to East Naples or to Ochopee. There is a significant amount of aid that is sent to the Marco Island Fire Department and to Marco Island, and one of the things you're going to talk about in December with your joint meeting with the __ with their council is EMS and -- and their desire to probably Page 16 November 3, 2008 take over EMS, okay, at the municipal side of the house. I can only surmise that that's why they have it on their particular agenda. But what I will tell you is if it wasn't for the Isles of Capri and that engine going to Marco Island their fire rating would be significantly reduced and everybody on the island would pay higher fire insurance costs if -- if the Isles wasn't providing it. But all the mutual-aid agreements that we have with all the independents and the municipalities there is no cost with one helping the other; that's why they call them mutual aids. But in this particular case there might be something to -- to talk about during that discussion with Marco Island. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I -- you know, I -- I feel generally that -- that mutual aid between emergency facilities is a good thing, and we shouldn't worry about it, but if it's mostly going in one direction I -- I think maybe there should be -- be some reimbursement perhaps, some way to balance it out, but -- MR. MUDD: What I -- what I can also have Chief Rod do is -- is to, basically, itemize for you out of this list of calls and call volume how much went over the -- over the bridge, so that you guys -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, that -- MR. MUDD: -- have that -- the commissioners have that -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: That would be helpful. MR. MUDD: -- particular item for discussion. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And it might be useful if you spent a little time trying to determine if it is appropriate to charge some fee, not a punitive fee, but some fee for false alarms that are excessive from any particular location. It might indicate there's something wrong with their system and they have to get -- should get it -- get it fixed. CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Sir, I know for our specific fire alarms that we run within our area we don't have an abundance of alarms there because most of our alarm systems are all state-of-the-art new buildings, and we rarely run alarms within our district.n Page 17 November 3,2008 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Uh-huh. Okay, Good, Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any -- any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: We don't take individual motions on this, We're going to do that all at once. MR. MUDD: But it would be good, sir, if -- if -- in the past we've __ we've done it by individual motions so that if we get to a point in time where we have a severe disagreement on a particular item at least we can pass the parts that we can all agree to, and then we can -- get -- and nail them to that other one. Just this way we don't have a -- if one commissioner has to leave or commissioners have to leave, then we -- we haven't lost the -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: So would the motion just be to accept this report then? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Accept -- MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry, CHAIRMAN HENNING: Accept the Fire -- Capri Fire and Rescue District's AU -- AUIR report. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'd like to make that motion, please, CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala. Second by Commissioner Henning, Discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye," COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. Page 18 November 3, 2008 CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? (No response.) CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. It carried unanimously. MR. MUDD: The next -- the next speaker is on page 200, and this is the Ochopee Fire Control and Rescue District. Chief McLaughlin will present. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, For the record, Al McLaughlin, Fire Chief, Ochopee Fire Control District. And, again, I would like to thank you for allowing us to present early, Do you have any questions on the AUIR for Ochopee? MR. MUDD: I -- I can give you a brief update real quick. We're trying -- I've been in consult with Mr. Shucart as far as the Port of the Isles ship's store and facilities. I believe we have an agreement, but it's based on board acceptance of the agreement. We will bring that to you on the -- on the 11/18 BCC meeting. Part of that agreement would be a modification to the ship's store, the warehouse facility so that there would be a fire engine and firemen located there in order to do it. We will use portions of his impact fees, some 166,000 -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Eighty-eight. MR. MUDD: -- 188,000 -- thank you -- $88,000 (sic) in impact fees along with $600,000 of his reserves will still leave some $300,000 of reserves in his account, and that will be his fair share to that particular facility in order to get us -- help us to purchase it. So that's in addition to what you have on your particular sheet. Chief had no way to determine if that was going to happen prior to all the pre briefs. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Chief, if you would, please, I notice on -- I guess it's page 207. Yeah, About the proposed Page 19 November 3, 2008 temporary Port of the Isles station we were talking about and this commission directed to go forward with it -- is that in operation at this time? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: No, it is not. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And why not? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: It was put on hold until this was able to be resolved. We didn't want to bring both those to the commission at the same time. It was scheduled to be on the agenda. We put it on hold until we could resolve what was going to happen with the Port. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So, in other words, when this comes back to the board, we'll be choosing one or the other, I would take it? I mean, we -- I thought we already directed monies to be set aside for this, but the -- what is it, Mr. Mudd? MR. MUDD: For the rent, sir -- for the rent, sir, and the fire depart -- and the fire engine to be parked over at the side, yes, you have, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So rather than expend that money we're holding back a short period of time until we find out the direction? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. He's going to need to use that money to help modify and put some doors in the facility and stuff like that, and so -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Yes. Yes, sir. There's 34,000, roughly, appropriated for that. Instead of moving with that, until we can find out, we can take that money and put it in renovation. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I see, CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: But the lease agreement has been signed. It's been done. We've -- we've met with Sunstream. It's just got to come to the board to get the approval for the final lease signing, but we've put that on hold for right now until we -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So we're -- we're not locked into the lease at this point? Page 20 November 3,2008 CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: No, sir, we're not. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Chief, what's been being done in regards to the needed station on I-75? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: That is still in review with whatever's going to come up from the state, COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: We -- we have -- we cannot fund that as a district. COMMISSIONER HALAS: If the proposed sale of the Alligator Alley doesn't go -- does not go through, will the state come up with the money in regards to that proposed station out there? MR. MUDD: No. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: No. MR. MUDD: I just received a letter from them over the last week, and they basically said that portions of the toll cannot be used for -- in that particular regard, so we'll have to get something passed in legislation in order to get it funded, sir. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Thank you, Commissioner. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Forty-three percent of your calls so far this year are for 1-75 calls. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do we get any reimbursement from the state or federal government at all? Any assistance? Any funding? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: No, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Zero, CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: None. Zero. These -- those calls are being funded as a burden to the taxpayers of the Ochopee Fire District. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And what are your legal obligations Page 21 November 3, 2008 with respect to that? Are you legally obligated to respond? I -- morally I'm sure you want to, but legally are you obligated? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Morally --legally, I don't believe we are because it's a state road and we don't receive any reciprocity from them, federal highway. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Does the state provide any assistance to anybody for assistance on state roads, or do they just assume that the local community will respond? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Not that I'm aware of. I do know that there's other counties in Florida that have this same particular problem on 1-95 and 1-75, and they have proposed recovery fees to those departments for service. So, basically, they bill insurance companies for services provided to the mostly vehicle accidents and auto fires on these roads. Escambia County, I believe, is one of them -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Uh-huh. CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: -- that's been -- been very successful at it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would suggest we -- we pursue that as an additional source of funding. If we can't get it from the state or the federal government, we should get it from an insurance company. So I think we should start tightening down on these kinds of things. And I -- I -- I understand your -- your desire to respond to those, and I wouldn't want to interfere with that, but I think we should pursue some sources of funding. The -- the people in the Ochopee Fire District should not be burdened with that. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: We did have a company come in last March and give us a review for recovery fees, and they were looking at about $110,000 a year in recovery fees for the amount of calls and services we provide. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Good. Is there -- does the board support that idea? Page 22 November 3, 2008 CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I give direction to -- to pursue that. That would have to go through the advisory board and then eventually to us. Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, the only thing bad about that is once you go through the insurance companies then the end result is the rate payer pays a huge increase in rates, so I'm not sure we can win that -- that argument. It would be nice if the state would step up and -- if they've got some responsibilities, and I think that ought to come out of the FDOT budget for supplementing emergency runs on 1-75. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. And I would agree with that. The only problem is, knowing the state legislature, what they would do is take it out of our transportation allocation and -- and just transfer it over, so we'd get no more money at all. They'd just -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: What allocation? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I know. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But I -- I see no reason not to pursue all these avenues, you know, try to get the state to -- to take responsibility, the federal government, and if that -- and -- and at the same time pursue insurance companies for -- for recovery. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Anything else? Entertain a motion to approve the -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion made. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second, CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- Och -- Ochopee Fire District's AUIR report, The motion was moved by Commissioner Coletta, seconded by Commissioner Halas. Discussion on the motion? (No response.) Page 23 November 3,2008 CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: It carries unanimously. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Thank you, Commissioners. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that will bring us to county roads with Norman Feder, Nick Casalanguida, And while Norman's giving his presentation he also owes you a piece that's not part of the AUIR but that has to do with landscaping, CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Why don't we finalize with that what we're going to do with landscaping. MR. FEDER: Do you want to do that first? CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's get the AUIR first. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good morning, Commissioners. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good morning. MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the record again, Nick Casalanguida. I'll entertain your questions. I have two topics in the AUIR that I would like to address with the board. Other than that, I'll just answer any questions you may have. One of the topics I have -- and Mr. Feder will be addressing that as far as maintenance goes. One of the things that I brought and discussed with transportation as we look at projects is what the ongoing maintenance of projects are, And we have a section in here, and Norman is going to provide you a report on that as well. Page 24 November 3, 2008 One of the topics that I'd like to talk to you about is vacancy rates. What we're dealing with right now -- when we have the concurrency management system, we have a system where we measure actual traffic on the ground, and that's your baseline of -- of traffic, and then we take in a trip bank where we expect a project to come online within the next 12 months or -- or longer, and -- and that's added to the background traffic, which gives you a total. And then we have our service volume. And as long as that -- we're not above our service volume we allow projects to go forward. Through the course of the concurrency system one year after a project is C.O.'d we typically take them out of the trip bank because we're starting to count them in the background traffic. So they -- they fall into that category -- bottom category, and that category grows, With the vacancy rate issue we're having, we're having a hard time reconciling the background traffic to be accurate. What we think is happening is, like, a multi-family development, the BO -- the building could be C.O.'d, and we would wait a -- approximately a year after that C.O., and we'd let them count in the background. If -- that vacancy rate could be as high as 50 percent in the urban area, We're uncomfortable with saying they're in the background right now. We're providing artificially low background traffic. So our recommendation to the board is that we monitor this for this year, don't remove any project that we suspect has an artificially high vacancy rate, and wait one more year to keep an eye on that proj ect. _ And staff can do that on a simple case-by-case basis on -- on a -- on a link by link and kind of keep an eye on that. It's difficult to ascern (sic) vacancy rates, but what we've been doing is talking to HOAs, real estate agents, field accounts, looking -- looking around and just getting a -- kind of a general sense of what's going on in a certain area. So if that's the board's pleasure we'd like to do that. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Page 25 November 3,2008 CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anybody have any objections? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. Okay. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Other than that, I'm here to answer any questions you have on your report. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the board? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I have a question. May I? CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just -- yes, you may. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. On page 18 you talk about the Golden Gate Boulevard/Wilson update five-year program. You also talk about Oil Well and -- excuse me. I was just running. On Oil Well you actually put that before Golden Gate Boulevard and yet Golden Gate Boulevard has so many more people on it, and Oil Well is, you know, going rather slowly. Do we really need to move Golden Gate Boulevard way out? And shouldn't we do the opposite? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, we're under contractual agreement to do Oil Well Road, Commissioner. And Oil Well Road's permit should be almost in hand. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but that has to do with impact fees, and we're not really getting them, right? MR. MUDD: No, it doesn't have to do with impact fees. MR. CASALANGUIDA: No. MR. MUDD: The Board of County Commissioners signed a DCA -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. MR. MUDD: -- with -- with the Collier family for Ave Maria, and it didn't have anything to do with impact fees. It had an impact fee projection to it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: But -- MR. MUDD: So we're kind of on the hook for the road. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Jeff, you know something about this, don't you? Page 26 November 3, 2008 MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, I think I know a little bit about it since it was Norm and I who did this deal. To put it quite simply, in exchange for getting the university, we agreed to put in the road. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh. MR. KLATZKOW: And that's the heart of the deal. And they put in the university, and now we have to put in the road. And I realize that projections are not going to meet what we thought they were, but that was the deal. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: But -- but -- but -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's -- let's just stay on this topic of Oil Well Road because I have questions. Commissioner, are you finished? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I was just going to ask one more, but that's all right. We'll get back to it. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER FIALA: My -- my -- my biggest concern is we put Oil Well Road in that has no people traveling it and -- and -- and we put off Golden Gate Boulevard which -- which is in desperate need, and -- and there's my concern. Isn't there a way to modify the DCA so that it makes more sense to the people in the area? MR. KLATZKOW: Not without the agreement of the Colliers. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could we go to Mr. Feder first? And I'd like to -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, for the record, Norman Feder, Transportation Administrator. Basically, what both Jim and Jeff told you is the case. I'll just elaborate a little bit further. In the agreement there is a projection of impact fee revenues from Ave Maria itself. What the agreement does provide is for that impact fee district and the adjacent, which includes, by the way, Golden Gate Boulevard, that the impact fees collected Page 27 November 3,2008 will be used to widen Oil Well. The dollars that you have in this work program are reflective of, since that agreement, the level of impact fees that have been collected in that district and the adjacent district, and they are dedicated as the agreement provides for Oil Well improvement. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if! may. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commission -- Commissioner Coletta, Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Also, too, I -- I -- the statement was made about the fairness of the whole thing and what was being given by the deal that was put together. There was a lot more to the deal than just a promise made. In exchange for it, we also got the -- are getting the fill for Oil Well Road at a cost. We got all the right-of-way set aside for it. We have -- MR. FEDER: Stormwater. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- impact fees that have been-- being -- being paid in advance. In addition to that, there is a very much -- there's a very, very strong need. Both roads are very, very important. But the part of Oil Well Road going to Everglades Boulevard is highly congested, and the schools there desperately need to have that fixed before anything else, and that's -- that's a priority. MR. FEDER: And, Commissioner, I will add, if -- if, actually, you look at the record, when we approved this development contribution agreement, I think you'll find that the record indicated that we noted that by committing the impact fees for these two districts that we may well have to delay some projects, one of which we said could be potentially Golden Gate Boulevard, to make sure that we met the terms of this agreement if it was adopted, which it was, COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And Golden Gate Boulevard is being delayed 'til -- Page 28 November 3,2008 MR. FEDER: We're showing here that we might be able to get to it a little bit sooner on production, but you can see your construction on Golden Gate, I believe, is in '13, is it not, Nick? MR. CASALANGUIDA: '12, MR. FEDER: '12, yes. And there's a possibility, as we've noted in here, of '11. If the funding is available, production will be ready about '11. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas, Commissioner Coyle, COMMISSIONER HALAS: The items that Commissioner Coletta brought forth, that's the items that I was going to bring forth -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Which -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- in regards to that DCA. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, I distinctly remember the county manager promising us that Norm would -- would not be speaking today. MR. MUDD: I tried to get Nick to go forward. COMMISSIONER COYLE: This -- this might deviate very slightly, Mr. Chairman, but it -- it actually addresses -- my intent is to address the issue. I'm going to have to leave in just a few minutes to go to the canvassing board, so I -- I -- I would like to get a report of the costs of installation and ongoing maintenance on an annual basis for land -- median landscaping. Okay. And -- and I -- I would also like to -- to ask you a question about whether or not it makes sense to allocate some of those costs to achieving some of the important road construction projects first and deal with landscaping afterwards. You get the traffic moving, then you make it pretty. The second part of my question is, on the east side of 1-75 on the -- on -- is it Ever -- no. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Immokalee. Page 29 November 3, 2008 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Immokalee, MR. FEDER: Well, it's Immokalee Road. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Immokalee Road, Immokalee Road COMMISSIONER HALAS: And Vanderbilt Beach, COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- doesn't have landscaping completed; whereas, the -- the west side does not have the landscaping completed. The east side has been completed. COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, it's the other way around. MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's the other way around. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And -- okay. I've -- I've got it reversed, I'm just trying to find out why, and if you could provide a quick answer I'll -- I'll be out of here. MR. FEDER: Commissioner, I'll be extremely brief. First of all, the -- in 2003 the board established a landscaping master plan. At that time we had built a couple of roadways and opened them up from 2000 without any landscaping, so it was established that there would be a catch-up plan to landscape those roads, the Pine Ridges, the Airports that had been widened without any landscaping, and that subsequent to that, once we completed the maximum lane standards, basically, six lanes on any of the roadway constructions, we'd follow that up with landscaping. We followed that pattern and that process, the last of which was that section of Immokalee that you mentioned, which is the western section between U.S, 41 and 1-75. That was the last and most recent landscape project; however, we have 32.3 miles in another eight projects coming forward to completion, three of which we already had started the design on or design complete, which is Vanderbilt Beach Road, Immokalee between 75 and 951, and Rattlesnake Hammock. All three of those are coming to completion, and we find that we don't have the funding for capital, and we've actually pulled out dollars from maintenance. And in the presentation I'm going to Page 30 November 3, 2008 recommend, bottom line, that the monies for maintenance be reinstated allowing us to at least mow on these other facilities as they come forward and that next year it be identified, because I need a reoccurring source of that 1.14 million that was taken out of maintenance, that we look at Fund III probably, but the board can decide how, if we're going to fund a new capital and further maintenance program in the future. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, The -- the problem as I see it and as probably most taxpayers see it is that if you take money out of one program and you move it over to another program you're going to have to find something to fill the hole where you originally took it. MR. FEDER: Of course. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And -- and there are no ways to fill those holes. We -- we are in very severe financial straits because of the -- the state legislature's attempts to limit our revenue sources. So what I'm really getting at is a prioritization that says what is more important. Is it more important to make the streets pretty right now, or is it more important to move the traffic? MR. FEDER: We came-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: And -- and -- and I -- I just need somebody to -- to -- to start getting serious about the fact that we have priorities we have to decide upon in Collier County. And -- and in my mind health, safety, and welfare is more important than pretty, although I will work diligently to try to solve that problem at some point in time. But I'm not willing to see important construction projects that -- that relate to health, safety, welfare sidelined because somebody wants to have a pretty median. MR. FEDER: Understood, Commissioner. And-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Everybody has to understand that the taxpayers voted overwhelmingly to reduce the taxes collected in Collier County, and by doing that some things are going to suffer. And Page 3 1 ......-----...."..^"...- _.'-"''''.~'--~''- November 3,2008 we haven't even seen the beginning of that yet. MR. FEDER: Un -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: So with that -- MR. FEDER: Understood. Understood. And, Commissioner, what I'll point out to you -- because of that last year when we came to you with our budget, the AUIR and our budget, we had a $180 million shortfall in the '07 AUIR and then followed up with the '08 budget. In that respect, we pulled the gas taxes out of -- and I have a full presentation, but the gas taxes out of the landscaping program noting that it would have to be funded totally now by III because the gas taxes were needed to -- to provide the capacity improvements. I will point out to you, though, that, while we have 90 miles already landscaped, we need to maintain our commitment to that; that's why you see the recommendation we have here is one not to address landscaping purely as pretty. It also provides traffic harmony, added property values, a lot of other good variables. But having said that, we also recognize that I don't want people sitting there watching the -- the flowers grow. So with that in mind what we're proposing to you is that we reinstate the maintenance dollars because I need to maintain those 90 miles we already have -- I squeezed that to be able to mow at least twice a year on all of these new miles as they come aboard -- and that we address this when we have the ability to address it probably with a III millage question to the community but, nonetheless, address it to the next budget cycle, That's our bottom line. Now, if you have the funding, the thing I'm going to tell you on this and other maintenance is it needs to be reoccurring. Turnback by itself doesn't address it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I -- I really want to stay on the Page 32 November 3, 2008 CIE. I -- I totally disagree with Commissioner Coyle's statement. It's not fair, and it just doesn't make sense. But getting back to the AUIR -- or the CIE -- MR. FEDER: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN HENNING: On Ave Maria they -- they had a commitment and -- and they gave us a schedule of -- of construction. Now, the leg -- there was legislation to -- to defer that -- that schedule, and the governor didn't sign it. Remember that, Jim? MR, MUDD: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: They owe us an updated schedule. In __ in other words, it was -- it was deferred out of that -- their commitment to affordable housing where they put in -- took out low-low affordable housing and put in what's basically selling on -- on the market today. And -- and their construction schedule could not -- was not going to be addressed because of this bill that never was signed. How do we get that schedule changed that was in their -- in their DRI commitment? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, from a transportation perspective, it's not something I -- I would do. I think there's a five-year review of the DRI, and it's mostly a planning question that will address it. It's a five-year review, and they do a financial analysis reView. But it wouldn't be a transportation review. I think that would be something for maybe Joe's shop to address. MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, for the record, Joe Schmitt, your Administrator of Community Development. You know you've had the Phase 1 report on the Ave Maria project. Actually, the RLSA, Rural Land Stewardship, overlay Phase 1 report. Their Phase 2 report is currently in process. That'll be coming back to you. That would probably be the best time to discuss those kind of issues pertaining holistically to the entire RLSA program. Page 33 November 3, 2008 Now, that will be coming back to you in a board meeting with a proposal for a schedule to amend the RLSA GMP amendments dealing with the RLSA implementation, if you want to look at that from that standpoint. If you're looking specifically at Ave Maria, we would have to bring that project back for your review if -- specifically for the DRI, if you want to look at the funding, But I think at the -- probably the best way to look at this would be the entire scope of the RLSA program. And you could look at it -- that during -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that's -- that's not going to help us out in our problem with development now not happening in Ave Maria. MR. SCHMITT: They also -- they also owe us the five-year review of the fiscal impact analysis model, the FIAM, and that would also be a time to look at -- at specific -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is -- is that coming to -- to the Board of Commissioners? MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. MR. SCHMITT: That comes to the board, yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ave Maria's financial feasible plan? MR. SCHMITT: Their financial impact analysis model, it's the five-year review looking at that. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. MR. SCHMITT: And certainly they're -- as you well know, they're well down below their anticipated development in sales, I think probably about 13 percent of what they had -- they had expected. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Oil Well Road, the two -- two links of capital -- capital improvements you're moving them. It was in MR. FEDER: Fiscal year '07, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, I'm looking compared to what we Page 34 November 3, 2008 had last year. MR. FEDER: It had already moved to fiscal year '08 because it was obvious -- the agreement was '07 for these two segments. When the agreement was done in -- in -- I believe it's fiscal year '04, they have not yet gotten permits, Since they didn't have permits at that time, it was moved to '08, Now it's being shown as -- as '08 with carry-forward following you to '09, As we can -- once they get the permits, but they're still working to get permits in hand that by the development contribution agreement is for them to secure. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. For -- the reason to advance it is -- the only reason is because of permitting issues? MR. MUDD: To move it -- MR. FEDER: The reason to move it back is permitting issues, that's correct. MR. CASALANGUIDA: We also have a $6 million state grant that doesn't come on line until the fiscal year next year for the state, and we can't -- we can't move forward on the project -- we'd lose the money, so it's all tied into that mid letting -- mid -- mid next year letting. So there's $6 million of trip money that goes on Oil Well Road as well too. MR. FEDER: But that is not why we pushed it back. It is because they don't have the permits, and I cannot let it until the permits are in hand. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Am I reading this right? Yeah. So we're slipping Golden Gate Boulevard east of Wilson one year? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And that's just because of the -- of the financing? MR. FEDER: Available financing, that's correct. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ifwe didn't have this DCA with Ave Maria, would this -- the recommendations be the same? Page 35 November 3, 2008 MR. CASALANGUIDA: I think if you weren't spending that total amount for Ave Maria you could probably advance projects earlier on. MR. MUDD: Commissioners, if -- the direct answer to your question is Oil Well Road would not be on Norman's radar screen except from the school district to Immokalee Road. MR. FEDER: Everglades. MR. MUDD: It wouldn't go -- I wouldn't go out that far. MR. FEDER: Everglades to Immokalee would be our priority. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right. MR. FEDER: The section to the east would not be a priority over Golden Gate Boulevard, if that's the question. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I agree. You know, Oil Well Road where the school is to Immokalee Road does need to be improved. So does Golden Gate Boulevard. So it's kind of a pickle on -- on that one. I have other questions, but you've satisfied my questions on those two projects. Is there any other questions on the CIE? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, just one more, if! may, CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Have you did -- done any reduction in this capital improvement element by reducing it because of population projections? I mean, it showed two years ago you had 96,000, and now you're down to, what, forty -- forty-two or something like that. You have less than half of the population that you were planning on before, but I don't see any reduction in your plans here, and -- and I __ and I'm -- I'm saying that, also, because if we don't need to build as quickly because our populations have been reduced maybe we can just start tying up some of these other loose links like, for instance, landscaping and catch up on some of these things before we get too far behind as we did with the road building years ago and then -- and then Page 36 November 3, 2008 we were stuck trying to catch up. And so I wanted to -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- address that question. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. No problem. Commissioner, your __ your transportation area has nothing to do with population in its -- in its raw sense of people -- how many people move in, It's -- it's counts. It's what you actually measure on the ground, and that's what we report on. And I'll always caution you, as I had done before, about the vacancy rate. You have a significant amount of units in both vested and approved and built that haven't been occupied. And -- and it's a lingering -- it's like a hangover that's waiting to hit us. We have a bunch of roads, 951 and Davis Boulevard, that still show a need even under existing counts. If you took all the vacant units that are built, both commercial and residential, and turned them on I would assure you we wouldn't have that comfortable feeling we have right now based on what you're experiencing on the roads right now. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. The last question then is, are you still basing this on low-mile costs? MR. CASALANGUIDA: On lane-mile costs? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Lane-mile costs, yeah. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Our lane-mile costs is -- is what we use as a -- as a projection to adjust that CIE, that's correct, how much it costs. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that a fair way to figure it? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, it -- it is. We use what it costs us to build the road and then -- and then we kind of -- until we get more data to adjust that, that's how we base that five-year program if we look our -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'm referring now to Santa Barbara Extension. You -- you said 30 million, but the -- the project -- Page 37 November 3,2008 the __ the estimated costs came in at 18 million, you know, so there -- there's a great difference between the two, almost half again, And -- and I'm just wondering -- I don't feel real, real comfortable with the figures, to be honest with you. MR. FEDER: Yeah. Commissioner, what I will tell you is they are estimates. They have been adjusted based on the more recent costs we've gotten in. In the case of Santa Barbara Extension, we were able to take advantage with the LASA (phonetic) project of considerable fill, earthwork, both lime rock and fill on site. We got $2, which I can't even transport it for that price. That's the bid price. It's over 70 percent of a savings from the engineer's estimate. But we have taken more recent account -- bids into account, adjusted prices, and they're reflected here. We start to -- stay conservative, granted, but we did take that into account. And every year you readjust. That's the good part, that you get to see this every year. And as we see prices going then we have to adjust accordingly each year. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I just -- on -- on page 18 just -- and I know it's kind of an eye chart, at least it is for me. Where you get down closer to the bottom -- it's like one, two -- you'll see this thing called short-term loan commercial paper. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh. MR. MUDD: Do you see it where it says in '10 -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Got it. MR. MUDD: -- for Navarro 22, and then 18, remember, that's that $50 million loan, and that's what's getting pushed out as far as the need and when we -- when we get a project that's -- comes in a little bit more reasonable. Because Norman knows that ifhe borrows that $50 million he's going to have to repay it within a five-year period of time in total. Right now they're not extending commercial paper past the first five Page 38 November 3, 2008 years, so he knows ifhe borrows he's got to have a bogey that's going to -- he has -- is going to have to pay with. And if -- if we don't get this spurt of -- of growth where we get impact fees for roads, Norman's not going to be able to repay it. So that's the thing that we've been pushing out, and that's the thing that's really been -- getting at your particular comments, when a project comes in cheaper, that we don't have to borrow it early. So we're borrowing it late, and hopefully Norman will never have to borrow it based on the economic times that we're in because with that $50 million you're done. You don't have a -- you're up to your 13 percent in your growth management plan as far as your balance of payments and what your debt service is, So we would -- we would prefer never to borrow it, but it's there if he needs it and if things come in heavy instead of light as far as the bid document's concerned. We're hoping for light the entire time so we never have to borrow it. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, and then I want to expand on Commissioner Fiala's thoughts. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, exactly. I was just going to go back to Commissioner Fiala's comments regarding the cost Qf building roads. We -- we've seen, thank God, a tremendous reduction in the cost for building lane miles recently. Are we projecting this into our figures as far as -- MR. FEDER: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- coming up with a base for impact fees? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir, we are. There's look at probably -- you're looking at a cost from 8 million down to about 6 million. And -- and we have to be cautious because you can't -- you can't turn on a dime. We weren't able to turn on a dime on the opposite end of it when we had an engineer's estimate of 23 million and it came in at 43 million. Page 39 November 3,2008 So it's -- it's one of those where you're -- you're making that adjustment when you start to feel comfortable that that curve, it's a trend because if you try -- if you always -- if you're always switching based on an on-the-spot price that you get, you will not have any sort of impact fee that you can count on or any sort of road cost you can count on. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, then let me -- let me rephrase the question just a little bit differently. The impact fee schedule that we now have is based upon what? Some sort of low numbers going to high numbers over a number of years, or is it based upon a high number that we had two years ago? MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's based on your historical and your projected, and it's -- and it's balanced. It's like you're -- you're taking all those numbers and you're following a curve, and you're balancing them out as you go forward. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The historical being what? Historical high or historical average or -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, historical average, the last three years of what you had for prices. So three years ago you were behind the curve. You had numbers coming in for road projects, and you were collecting -- you weren't collecting enough. And so you couldn't -- and so on the other end people were saying, "Don't raise the impact fees," but we were behind the curve on that point in time. Now, if prices start to trend down, you may be ahead of the curve, but you're going to make that adjustment. Our impact fee full study is coming forward, and we're going from about $8 million __ eight-point -- 8.1 to -- down to about $6 million, so we're -- we're starting to reflect that change in costs. But you don't want to do a spot change based on one or two prices. You want to look at historical trends and -- and average that change out. Page 40 November 3, 2008 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. And when you average it out it should -- it should translate to a lower impact fee, correct? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Not necessarily, Commissioner, because -- you know, we'll get into a whole impact fee study discussion here as well too. We've done a trip-length study as well, too, and that'll be part of your impact fee update as well. What you've found is in your urban area people travel so far. Well, our study has gone and done an impact fee trip-length study from the edge of the urban area into rural area. People from, say, 951 all the way out to Immokalee travel farther, and that's a component of your impact fee as well, too, how far they drive. I mean, it's -- it's a replacement cost. So -- and a simple definition is your unit cost, that lane-mile cost, may go down, but the amount of units I have to buy to add that replacement capacity will go up. So your impact fee could stay flat to go up in a little bit because I have to add more lane miles, more units even though the unit cost is going down. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Klatzkow, does that fall within the legal nexus that we're talking about -- or were talking about earlier? MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, I believe it does. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. MR. CASALANGUIDA: You're welcome, CHAIRMAN HENNING: The -- what is your unit cost this year? MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's showing right now, because we haven't brought the study to you -- forward right now, it shows as 8.l lane-mile cost for the impact fee. It's not a unit cost or construction cost. It's everything to do with the impact fee. And we're -- we're anticipating to be about 6 million, so dropping about $2 million. And that's a study that's coming to the board. I think we're going to either do December or January. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is the -- the study done? Page 41 November 3,2008 MR. CASALANGUIDA: The -- I just got the draft report about three days ago. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Because your impact fee -- or your unit cost in -- in 2007 was 8.1. MR. CASALANGUIDA: And that takes into account interchanges, carrying costs, right-of-way acquisition. It's not just the construction cost. It's everything included in it. CHAIRMAN HENNING: But -- but you've been doing it consistently. MR. FEDER: Yes. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I mean, to keep the unit cost the same and -- and knowing the projects or the contracts that we sign are at least 20 percent lower. In the case of Santa Barbara it was quite a bit of difference, and I understand the LASA project and that. But why can't we adopt the unit costs of $6 million instead of keeping it -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, you would, but you have to do it as part of your impact fee study. You couldn't just adopt that cost right now. It wouldn't change anything. MR. FEDER: Commissioner. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, yes, it will change things, It's going to change how much money you're -- you're going to do -- do these projects, And, in fact, you can do more projects like landscaping because you're going to have money. MR. FEDER: Commissioner, if I could, first of all, what you have in here at each AUIR is the adopted lane-mile cost from your impact fee as adopted at that time. Until that changes we would be moving this thing around all over the place. Nick, you can hit a graphic up there, For instance, when we did the last update of the impact fees, that was in June of '07. Page 42 November 3,2008 MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes. MR. FEDER: They didn't get implemented until January of '08. And if you look at where we are now everybody's saying, "Gas prices are coming down, so your prices should be coming down." But if you look at the graphic there that shows you crude oil, shows you the gas prices in Tampa and Miami, it shows you that we're only now starting to come close to where we were in June of'07, and we're actually well above that. Well, we went through cycle. And the issue is that the prices change over time; that's why you have your current, two years of historical, and you carry that three-year average so that when times are going up rapidly you're not all of the sudden increasing exorbitantly. And when they're coming down you're adjusting down by taking off a high year and adding a lower year and coming forward. But you have to have that ability to relate to the market and where it's going; otherwise, you're going to be like this chart, bouncing up and down just about every day on a statement of where you are in your costs. The costs that you have in that five year are updated every year. Understand, we're not adopting a five year and saying that's it. They are updated every year. You're very tight on this current year, and our estimates are a lot tighter on those projects because we know more about them. We know less about some of the projects, less design information and the like, in outer years. And, as Jim pointed out, we are keeping that l5 million to an outer time as best we can, but we have that opportunity to move in should the board want to. Also, look at your revenue stream. When we say, very quickly, capacity versus landscaping -- and, understand, I want to sit here and tell you I want the landscaping funded. I do. But I also need to point out to you that a major portion of my funding is impact fees which I cannot use on landscaping; that's why part of my presentation to you is I need an ongoing maintenance funding, not only for landscaping but Page 43 November 3, 2008 other areas where I cannot use impact fees. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. MR. FEDER: So I can't just say, "Take it out and put it there." MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner Henning -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, if we can stay on topic. MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- I think I can answer your question. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner Henning, I think -- I think I know what you were asking me. If we take that 8 million and made it to 6 -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Uh-huh. MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- would your CIE schedule of fees drop down? CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, sir, because your CIE is based on engineers' estimates that -- what we have coming in. It's not related to your impact fee rate. That number that you see at the front, that $8 million, sir, is -- is what the adopted impact fee rate is, but it's not reflected in your five-year CIE as our cost of doing business, Those are based on engineers' estimates for each individual project. So that's what our current engineer's estimates are. It's not based on an 8-million-per-lane-mile cost. So that -- that might be lower than that 8 million, and that's why you're going to see that in your impact fee being changed. MR. FEDER: And then those estimates as they come to fruition impact that impact fee cost level, which we're already telling you based on recent ones it is going to come down. CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you're not using your unit cost. It has to do with the CIE? MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why is it in here then? Page 44 November 3, 2008 MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's -- it's just -- it's always shown in your AUIR as the adopted impact fee rate is what it is. But your unit costs are going to vary. For instance, I may have a project that comes in, such as Santa Barbara, where there's no maintenance of traffic and on-site material. I wouldn't use just an across-the-board rate. We'd have the engineers look at it. And the same with Golden Gate Boulevard at Oil Well Road Road. CHAIRMAN HENNING: So what are you -- MR. FEDER: It is the average. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Excuse me. MR. FEDER: It is the average rate of costs, number of projects. CHAIRMAN HENNING: What you just said leaves me with more concerns. How do you balance that out? Where -- where is your -- your -- your costs? . MR. CASALANGUIDA: So when you look at these projects in the five-year CIE -- what we do when we prepare this document for you is our TECM design project team goes out and does a long-range estimate. They get with the engineer of record for each individual project, and they say, "Based on this location, Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension, for an example, it's going to be elevated 4 feet. It requires X amount of cubic yards of fill. This is the spot price of fill right now. With inflation this is where we expect it to be." So each one of these costs in your five-year CIE have a very individual component to them based on the design engineer and our project manager working together to provide that long-range estimate, CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is it taken under consideration of our recent projects -- MR. FEDER: Uh-huh, CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- in that? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir. MR. FEDER: Yes. Page 45 November 3,2008 CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can I answer -- can I ask the question before you answer it? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. CHAIRMAN HENNING: How do you know what the question is? MR. CASALANGUIDA: If you were ask -- go ahead, sir. I apologize. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is the new reflected contracts that -- that'we let taken under consideration of these cost estimates? MR. CASALANGUIDA: At -- at the time the document was prepared, the answer is yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: When was this prepared? MR. CASALANGUIDA: About two or three months ago, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So we haven't had any projects -- actually, we had Santa Barbara -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right. CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- after that. So that's not reflected in here. MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: But Collier Boulevard is. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And -- and that was a -- substantially less. MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, I think before we jump on the impact fees here I think we have to realize that we're still in the process of catching up, and I believe that because of the downturn in the economic situation and downturn in the amount of new construction coming forward we're still in a catch-up mode. So I think that -- overall that the impact fees that have been collected hopefully will address some of the issues of intersection Page 46 November 3, 2008 improvements that we need greatly in this county. One is u.s. 41 and 951, and I believe there's some other ones that also need to be addressed. But I think before we jump on this impact thing -- impact fee I think what we need to do is wait a year and make a determination where we are, because there could be some big changes. Because of the fact that we've had a downturn, I don't think this is a good time to look at it as it's a windfall and that we need to look at dropping the impact fees until we get additional data. CHAIRMAN HENNING: You actually might collect more -- more impact fees if you drop them down. We sure didn't -- after we indexed them, we sure didn't get any more, COMMISSIONER HALAS: Listen, we didn't cause this problem, This was caused by Wall Street and the people on Wall Street, okay? CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't mean to make you angry, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'm just telling you what-- CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't know why your outburst when I was speaking -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'm telling you where-- where I'm coming from on this. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I think that we need to take a 10-minute break. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think what we need to do is look at the thing rationally. (Recess held.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there any further questions on the transportation CIE? Did we want to get into the presentation on landscaping? Page 47 November 3, 2008 MR. CASALANGUIDA: If you -- Mr. Chairman, if you want, sir, if you're -- are you closing this out, this version -- this session of it, or did you want to come back to anything else that's in the -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, why don't we address it all at once. Can we do that? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay. Sure. MR. MUDD: Norman, have you got this on the machine or -- MR. FEDER: No, I -- let me do it. MR. MUDD: Okay. We'll do it -- we'll do it like that. That's fine. Just let me know. MR. FEDER: I think everybody's got their copy, and we'll put it on the overhead so I can do it this way. I'm going to go through this fairly quickly since we covered a little bit of it. And I want to open it to your questions, but what I wanted to point out is, first of all, when we started out before 2003 when we did the landscape master plan we already had about 32 miles of landscape roads here in Collier County. Those were developed out of the predecessor, Naplescape, as well as different developer agreements and some agreements as well with the state that once they allowed an area to be landscaped we had to take on the maintenance of that. Fifty-eight additional miles were added as part of the landscape master planning since 2003 for a total of ninety miles that we have today. When we developed that 2003 master plan -- if! could go to the next slide, Jim. MR. MUDD: I'm -- which one are you on? Is this the one-- MR. FEDER: 2003 landscape beautification. Let me go here. MR. MUDD: Thank you. I'll go right along. You just tell me which -- which to go -- which slide you want me to go to. MR. FEDER: I'm going to switch over to the computer. MR. MUDD: Okay. That -- that'll help a lot. MR. FEDER: Yeah. Okay. When we established the 2003 Page 48 November 3,2008 landscape beautification master plan, the board direction was to use Fund Ill, which is the MSTD, or the unincorporated area MSTU for a three-year catch-up program. And those were the facilities I mentioned, the -- Pine Ridge Road between Airport and 1-75, Airport Road between Pine Ridge and Vanderbilt, and others that we had brought to six lanes without providing any landscaping at the time. And Fund 313, which is the gas tax, would be used upon completion of the individual projects when they were brought to their six-lane capacity, Maintenance was to be funded out of III and has been, again, out of that unincorporated ad valorem. Our 2003 beautification plan got changed, particularly last year. We came to the board after we had had an AUIR that showed there were about a l80 million shortfall in the transportation funding program. We had made a number of changes in the program that you're well aware of. One was adding that 50 million of bonding, which, again, we're not going to use until specifically needed. But we had moved the gas tax out of the funding, and we're relying totally on Fund Ill, the unincorporated MSTD funding, and we noted to you at that time that that would mean that we probably couldn't get to the projects immediately following construction but would continue to proceed in that manner. And we then have two components, and the one I need to emphasize first is maintenance. And in our '08 budget we had had 5.3 million budgeted for the maintenance of that 90 miles that exists today, We requested, because we got in some more favorable bids with the economy and the issues at this time, 4.9 million. The board in trying to balance against highest-priority activities in a revenue-reduced year took 1.104 out leaving 3.8 million, rounded up, for maintenance. What you have here is a chart that shows you for the nine projects that are coming forward for completion of construction that Page 49 November 3,2008 normally would have been landscaped immediately following the completion of construction, essentially what it would cost to add the construction, also what the maintenance costs would be, and what that cumulative maintenance cost will be. So I need to call your attention to the yellow on top and the 90 miles. By removing the 1.14 million we now have that as a shortfall from the 4.9 that we had requested as part of our maintenance budget for this fiscal year. As you go down, you see as you add on -- and these aren't in any order, folks, as far as how you might address them. But if -- as you add on anyone or more of these nine with more capital expenditure, we need a ongoing source of revenue for the maintenance activity, and that's the point we're trying to make here. So, essentially, if all nine were -- were completed and done we'd need about 3 million more in ongoing, continuous maintenance funding. With that in mind, what we have noted previously -- I showed you a slide, but -- that we can mow for less of a cost than we can to actually maintain the -- the landscaped areas. And currently what we're doing -- we've got roadway maintenance done by our road and bridge for 3224.8 acres around the county, The landscape master plan, as you already saw for the landscape section, is 90 miles, and on the previous chart I noted 32.3 in the nine projects coming forward, Well, if I'm able to mow more frequently, I can possibly use up that 1.14 as reinstated, the monies for the 90 miles, and also be in a position -- as you can see, the dollar costs are a lot cheaper -- to mow those segments of 32.3 miles as they come on line. So reinstating that 1.l4 puts us in a position to respond. If we do not reinstate it, then the required reduction in -- in the 90 miles will be realized. I'd have to pull back on the level of maintenance of those. The non-landscaped project segments in the master plan, that 32.3 miles that's now completing or soon to be completed, would -- Page 50 November 3, 2008 would be mowed, basically, once every two months, essentially, which is the cycle we're on. We're 24 of our road and bridge crew down already and not able to replace them. And beyond the nuisance issue that that creates there are some safety issues, particularly at median openings, intersections, and the like in visibility. If, in fact, the l.14 is reinstated, we can keep current with the landscape master plan maintenance level of service. The non-landscape sections can be mowed 24 times a year, or twice a month, and, therefore, we won't have issues of sight distance and problems. Going back to the same chart you saw previously, I have that 32.3 miles I referenced here highlighted. That is in the nine projects. We've got to look at what we can bring forward in the way of capital. And as you noted there was 1.4 that was in our requested capital program that was pulled out, also, because of priorities for health, safety, welfare. There are three proj ects that we have already designed or significantly in design. They are Vanderbilt Beach Road, Rattlesnake Hammock, and Immokalee Road, 1-75 to Collier Boulevard. These three projects total 10.3 of that 32.3 miles, and about 2.9 for construction, So even our proposal -- because we had pulled back quite a bit at 1.4, which was removed -- couldn't have hit all three ofthem. But, obviously we would love to landscape them, but, again, as I'm hitting the theme, I need the maintenance costs addressed. If the l.l4 maintenance is reinstated, I still need, since that's turnback money that we'll be talking about in November, an ongoing source of that funding. If, in fact, I do 1.4 in capital or more or some level of capital and that brings on more miles, I'm also going to need that beyond the 1.l4 in an ongoing funding source as well for maintenance over time. Page 51 November 3,2008 And, again, back to the graphic so that you can use it for a reference point. I did give you our basic overall recommendation, and our recommendation is not to pull away from the landscaping program, but acknowledging where we are right now that we reinstate the maintenance 1.14, which would be turnback. It would only be for one year, but at least we could then mow as these segments get completed out of the 32.3 miles, and that with the upcoming budget we're recommending -- but, obviously, the board will direct if you're going to do anything, and if so, how -- that Fund III be considered for increase to fund with specific dedicated funding to both capital and maintenance ongoing for the landscape program. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? I have questions. So you said to do Rattlesnake, Immokalee, and Vanderbilt you need 2.9 in capital costs. MR. FEDER: Two -- two point nine in capital, that's correct, sir. And then I'd need the maintenance relative to that, which I believe was about a half a million annually. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, if the 1.4 you're -- you're recommending to -- to increase for -- for mowing -- how much would you estimate you would not have to mow if -- if those three roadways are landscaped and maintained by a contractor? MR. FEDER: Let me get on the computer right here. Yeah, Yeah, We'll get to that, yeah. This chart in -- in your presentation, I think, shows it the best. The mowing, we're looking about 192,000. What I'm saying -- if I get the l,14 reinstated, I try and squeeze in that 90 in the overall 4.9 budget to get this mowing as those came on line. And in this case the three of them would be just under 200,000 to mow based on twice a month throughout the year. If, in fact, they were developed as capital, it would be 595,000 to maintain them on a regular basis. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. The -- the -- on the turnback, County Manager, I -- if I remember right, what -- what was your Page 52 November 3, 2008 anticipation? MR. MUDD: Commissioner, turnback right now that I've got -- and I'm still waiting for one more -- one more deposit. We are at $10.5 million that isn't -- that isn't budgeted from the five constitutional officers. Can I -- can I put it on -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: (Nodded head.) MR. MUDD: And the intend -- hang on, Norman. Don't touch anything, okay? MR. FEDER: I'll switch it. MR. MUDD: Let me just get this thing done. And our intent is to bring that back to the board for your deliberations and directions on the next board meeting, which is on the 18th of November. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And that's above and beyond what we talked about in the budget? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: So there's -- there's plenty of money to do those three segments. MR. MUDD: You've got -- you've got some -- yes, sir. There -- there's some -- there's some things you, as a board, need to discuss. You made some cuts on landscape maintenance, landscape capital, lime rock road funding, resurface funding, all of which are cuts of over a million dollars. You've got EDC incentive program that you need to talk about. You've received a letter from the David Lawrence Center from David Schimmel that talks about dollars that they particularly need. You've got the south regional library with a due-out of some 364,000 for books. And that's why I would rather have all this to you. Plus, on reserves from June on the general fund, you've -- you're 939,000 deeper into the reserves than where you should be -- or should have been at the time. Page 53 November 3,2008 And things came up with Wilma and Ike and Fay and things like those tropical storms. And -- and I'll lay all of those out for you so that you'll know, and then you can tell us as a board. But I believe you have money, sir, to do (sic) exactly where you're trying to go. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. That's the bottom line? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, that's the bottom line. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. I'd like to bring some attention to a couple of things. In the one page -- and pages aren't norm -- aren't numbered. But this has to do with the -- the issue of how you broke it down. And you've got a subtotal. Then you add Immokalee Road from 95l to 43rd, and then you show a total. MR. FEDER: Here. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There you go, Thank you. MR. FEDER: Yeah. MR. MUDD: Don't get -- there we go. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Let's talk about that a little bit. This is extremely disturbing. All of the sudden, you know, we've got a subtotal, and then all separate from everything else is __ Immokalee Road from 95l going to 43rd is a whole total different entity than the rest of it. Why is it down there at the bottom after subtotal? MR. FEDER: Only because if I do landscape the median on that section ofImmokalee between 951 and 43rd, as we had discussed, if! put in landscaping, I need to put in curbing in the median and reduce the speed limit down to 45. We had brought the speed limit up to 50 at the request of the community. At that time we noted to them that if I do go to landscape I would have to pull that speed limit down and was told -- at least I understood that the community wanted the speed limit more than the Page 54 November 3,2008 concern for the landscaping at this time. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I think you -- you might have had a partial picture at that point in time, but I'm now receiving letters from Heritage Bay, TwinEagles, a lot of prestigious communities in that area that -- who were expecting landscaping and now they're not going to get it. MR. FEDER: Again, that's why I did not omit it from the list. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand. MR. FEDER: That's why I showed as a-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But I -- and there are some things we need to talk about and -- you know, as far as how that's going to affect the speed limits and everything else, that's -- that's still out as far as I'm concerned, the jury is, on that. We need to talk a lot more about it, and we need to have some community meetings to be able to really resolve the issue. Let's also talk about your -- your second part of it that you were suggesting, what staff was suggesting as far as putting aside new landscaping and -- and stepping up the mowing program, the -- the maintenance of the medi -- medians with the mowing. And if there's one thing I've been getting a lot of complaints lately, it's been the mowing, and I keep telling people it's because of budget constraints; we can't do it. However, when I looked at one of those charts you had and it was showing the mowing -- more frequent mowing, I -- I don't believe it mentioned this section of Immokalee Road. MR. FEDER: No, it -- it was as they come on line. Those are the first three that will come on line. There's others as well, And what I was saying is if the I.l4 was re-established, at least on one-time money, a turnback, that we would then mow as they came onto our ownership. As we accept the roadway, it comes over, and -- and that section of Immokalee would come and would also be required to be mowed. Page 55 November 3, 2008 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would that be mowed with the same consideration that Immokalee to -- the -- MR. FEDER: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- west of that? MR. FEDER: What we're saying is all of them we try to mow twice a month as opposed to putting it into our landscape program, which, unfortunately, is once every two months right now for mowing. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And how much money would you need to be able to maintain present landscaping over and above what you've got at an acceptable level and to be able to mow with maybe a more frequent schedule? MR. FEDER: What we've said is for 4.9 we can maintain the 90 miles and do the mowing as they come on line. We would have to assess that as we saw the prices we'd get, but we feel we can do that and then hopefully have this addressed the next fiscal cycle because, again, even if you gave that 1.l4 -- I need to emphasize that -- that is turnback, which is one-time money. And then I'd have to have the turnback again, or I'd have to have other funding to replace it. But we could do the mowing. But, again, that is not saying that we want to pull back from the landscaping, only that until we get to landscape these segments we need to not put them in a situation -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just -- just -- MR. FEDER: -- that -- once every two months to mow. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And just -- just work with pure numbers, Norm. MR. FEDER: Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: From the budget you presently have, how much more would you need back from turnback money just to be able to maintain the status quo and to keep the mowing at a reasonable level? MR. MUDD: $1.l million-- Page 56 November 3, 2008 MR. FEDER: One four. MR. MUDD: -- that you cut that -- the board cut at your direction MR. FEDER: Uh-huh. MR. MUDD: -- to -- because you said that his funding would go from the hundred percent funding to the 75 percent funding. And so what Norman is right now -- he's got a 25 percent cut to his landscape maintenance and mowing. If the board re-establishes that 25 percent cut, Norman's back into maintaining the landscape he was prior to the board's decision. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And how much more money would you need to put in all the additional landscaping including Immokalee Road from the turnback? MR. FEDER: Okay. Again -- MR. MUDD: Put the other slide back up. MR. FEDER: Yeah, bring it back up. I'll go like that, yeah. MR. MUDD: Right there. MR. FEDER: There's your answer. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So you -- you'd need what? MR. FEDER: I'd need -- I'd need in construction $9 million, 3 million on ongoing maintenance. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that's -- that's almost as much as going to be in the turnback, right? MR, MUDD: It's more than the turnback, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: So far. But the interest isn't included in that. MR. FEDER: But, again, the turnback is for one year. If I -- and the point I'm trying to make, if I implement 9 million worth of additional mileage to bring my 90 up to 123 -- l22.3 miles, I need that extra 3 million every year -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Uh-huh. Page 57 November 3, 2008 MR. FEDER: -- and the 1.14 million-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand. MR. FEDER: -- every year to maintain, COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand where you are. And this is what I'm torn between, Collier County is extremely unique because of its median plantings and how it's maintained, but, on the other hand, we're -- like Commissioner Coyle mentioned earlier before he had to leave was that there's the problem of how do we make the money go and what -- what's our priorities. And you mentioned the David C. Lawrence Center. I understand they're going to be shop -- possibly shutting down a good part of their operation because of the lack of funding. There's -- and I'm not saying that we have to address their lack of funding totally, but, I mean, there's some needs out there that way exceed what we're going -- we're going to have in the turnback money. And so when it comes time for those priorities we're going to have to balance a whole bunch of issues from the ambience of what we know as Collier County against the actual needs of the residents that are here, And how do we get them through these tough times in a way that's going to be meaningful, that -- that's a concern. That-- that's -- it's a difficult job, and that's why you get -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: The big bucks. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- paid for the job. Right, that's what you get the big bucks for. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, then Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's my understanding that just to do the three projects that you're going to need roughly a total of a little over a million -- $4 million to continue the mowing on a two-week cycle versus a two-month cycle and then 2.9 million for just the three projects that we're talking about at the present time. MR. FEDER: Yes, basically. Page 58 November 3, 2008 COMMISSIONER HALAS: The other thing is that's just -- and we're talking about turnback money. MR. FEDER: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HALAS: But we have to find some other means to continue that funding for the upcoming years. And I feel that next year property values are going to be assessed even at a lower rate, so I think that's where we're at. And we have to make sure that we take care of health, safety, and welfare issues before we get involved in if we're going to just take care of the landscaping issues. So my concern is I'm not sure where we've got the ongoing $4.04 million. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala and then I want to go, and then we'll go to -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you want to go first? CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- public speakers. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Two things. One of them is it has been proven that landscaping does reduce speed and does make a safer roadway. So we talk about health, safety, and welfare, but it does fall in line with this. And with overgrowth it can also be a safety factor. I -- I just wanted to make that point clear. Secondly, off to the side just a little bit with that landscaping that has not -- on the roads that have not been accepted by the county but they're in disgusting appearance, what are -- what can we do about that? I just went down Rattlesnake Hammock again with the big piles of grass that are just stuck there and laying all over the -- the street and the -- and the grass growing down the sides. And I realize we don't have control of that yet, but isn't there something that we can do to at least -- you know, that -- that in itself is -- is, I think, awful looking. MR. FEDER: We've put in our contracts, which is unusual nationally, that the landscaping -- those issues need to be maintained during the construction by the contractor. It is a constant battle. Page 59 November 3,2008 When it gets really high, they send somebody out there with a bush hog, and you get the net result of all that tall grass being on the side there and not very well kept. We're hoping that we don't end up there, but that's -- somehow we have to treat what I will call the many acres around the county under our road and bridge program; that's why I was proposing to you the recommendations that we did, which is, essentially, at least make sure that we go to a constant mowing process even if we can't get to landscaping at this time. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Even on roads that have not been accepted by the county? MR: FEDER: Only once we accept. We need to work through the contract while it's still under -- under their control. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, Thank you, CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, just piggybacking on that, don't -- don't they get reimbursed for that service? MR. FEDER: Yes. There's a line item that -- we get a constant basis of them not getting to it. Jay -- oh, he's here. Okay. I'll give you the specifics of that, Commissioner. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Here he comes. MR. AMAD: Good morning, Commissioner. Jay Amad for the record. Yes, they do get reimbursed every time they do it. On Rattlesnake it's -- the project's approaching completion, and the contractor has punch-list items, and mowing is certainly -- they __ they've done it three weeks ago, and they've done it again three -- I think recently. So they do it every three weeks. They mow. And, unfortunately, the grass does grow in -- in wet weather. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I -- I guess my concern is the lumps of grass getting in the stormwater drainage is going to be -_ Page 60 November 3, 2008 could be a problem, I should say, besides, the lumps of grass in the medians kills the grass -- or kills the sod that they just put down there. So I -- I just think it's very problematic. Besides, we -- we hear a lot in the community about the -- the appearance of it. The people have to go through -- or get to go through all that construction phase and then have -- at the end of it have to, you know, see that kind of thing on the -- on -- that's just a comment. You don't have to comment on it. MR. AMAD: No, they -- they -- it is -- it is a problem for us. On Rattlesnake they've been cleaning those sewers because -- precisely what you just described. We haven't accepted the storm sewer system because there are a lot of items in the sewer. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. MR. AMAD: And they've been cleaning those, and it's an ongomg Issue. CHAIRMAN HENNING: The -- the -- the next thing is we have started a program, median landscaping, and several roads have been landscaped. And now the residents expect that kind of service. MR. FEDER: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I appreciate your -- your recommendations. It really didn't address why we had this topic brought up. It was how to fill those gaps that doesn't have landscaping. MR. FEDER: Uh-huh, CHAIRMAN HENNING: And -- and so we haven't really addressed that. My concern with your recommendations are we get further and further behind. We -- I mean, if we put off these three segments, you're going to have Collier Boulevard south of Davis Boulevard, three commissioners' districts -- how can we put that one ahead of -- MR. FEDER: Collier Boulevard North? MR. MUDD: Both. CHAIRMAN HENNING: How can we put that -- that one ahead Page 61 November 3, 2008 of this -- these three? You have Collier Boulevard North, which is two commissioners' district. You know, I think we need to address it. I would like to get these done so we can get -- address some of those other ones, Now, Commissioner Coyle's comment -- and we've tried to do that is -- tried to put monies for construction, and we're putting ad valorem dollars, these people's taxpayers (sic), for construction, and that's what impact fees are -- are supposed to pay. I realize that. But I think the -- the one thing I've heard recently -- and I'm sure you have, Norm, too -- is -- is median landscaping. MR. FEDER: Very strongly. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And -- and I -- I would like to have these segments done so we don't fur -- fall further behind and -- and get those done, but that's my opinion. And, I guess, after we get public comment we can maybe come to conclusion. COMMISSIONER FIALA: What -- what I'd love to do is maybe hear a little bit from Michelle Arnold, also, on landscaping if -- if that would be acceptable. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Miss Arnold. MS. ARNOLD: For the record, Michelle Arnold. I think Norm is -- has pointed out that we -- we do have these projects that have been designed that, you know, we are ready to move forward for -- with construction if we have those dollars provided back to us. And the ongoing issue with maintenance is something that the board's going to have to keep in mind, COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Thank you. First speaker. MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, we have two speakers. The first is Henry Nardone. He'll be followed by Kathleen Adams. That's good. MR. NARDONE: Chairman Henning, Board of Commissioners, my name is Henry Nardone. I live in Island Walk on Vanderbilt Beach Road. I'm also the chairman of their external community affairs Page 62 November 3, 2008 committee, and they've asked me to come -- come to you because you are the only hope we have to get landscaping done on the median in Vanderbilt Beach Road. We're not here to complain about the construction delay. That's not the topic of this. And so we're asking for your help, your consideration in finding the money to landscape the median along Vanderbilt Beach Road. We passed a resolution and sent it here to you folks, which you've seen, and a petition, and we kind of -- if -- if I were a betting person, I would bet that the County Commissioners would be very happy if they never heard the three words "Vanderbilt Beach Road" agam ever. So we just -- in closing I just want to ask for your help, your consideration in finding the funding to do the median on Vanderbilt Beach Road. Thank you for your time. MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Kathleen Adams. MS. ADAMS: My name is Kathleen Adams, and I'm vice president of the Village Walk of Naples homeowner association, a community of 850 homes. We want the landscaping problem addressed, as you have been, and I think many of our neighbors along Vanderbilt Beach Road feel the same, Next month we will have lived with the disruption of construction on Vanderbilt Beach Road for more years than I can or want to remember. Instead of the June 2007 completion date, we're now looking at an additional 1 1/2 years of construction if the road is completed at the end of next month. I won't go into the whys of the delays, as we're all familiar with them; however, let's talk about just what that disruption has been: bumps and potholes into and out of our development; traffic congestions and accidents; lake contamination with sand, silt, and trash pouring into our lakes; an eyesore impacting the resale value in a Page 63 November 3,2008 declining market; dirt, mud, standing water, flood, and grime. Sounds like paradise to a five-year-old boy, but not to the people within our community who are confronting these problems on a daily basis calling our office telling us that they can't keep their lanais and their cars clean. Inconvenient, yes, but we thought the end was in sight and our road would open with a landscaped median and street tree plantings. Suddenly the money that was there has disappeared because the road wasn't finished in time. We say, "Don't make your problems our problems and make our community suffer even more." It was suggested the planning be done in 2010, and that adds insult to injury compounding our problem. After living through an additional 1 1/2 years of construction, how do you expect us to sit back and accept another disruption in two years? Finish the mess. Finish the construction and planting now. We want you to find the funding through turnback money, the transfer of funds from lower-priority projects, or, if possible, from newly generated income. We live on a section of Vanderbilt Beach Road that is residential, not commercial, and want to keep up the look of our neighborhood, enhance it, if possible, and make it look like the Collier County we have all come to expect. Please help our community and the other communities along Vanderbilt Beach Road achieve our objective. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. That's the last speaker. I'm going to make a motion to accept transportation's CIE, and then also in my motion is to direct the county manager to put on the unfinanced requests the three road segments and an additional $1,1 million for -- for median -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Maintenance. CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- maintenance. I was going to say Page 64 November 3,2008 mowing, but maintenance is -- is the correct word. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second your motion. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Discussion? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So you're -- you're proposing that -- to add the -- the new segments, to use the turnback money to finance the new segments. MR. MUDD: No, he's basically saying put it on the list for the l8th for your consideration and have it an item that sits there and it's specific so the board can discuss it and look it. That's what I heard. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. What -- and -- and the -- that's approximately $6 million. Like Commissioner Halas said, you're going to have an additional $4 million above and beyond that for what you're anticipating, correct? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. In the out years, yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. COMMISSIONER HALAS: But, Chairman, realize that that's a one-time finance of that project, and that what we have to do is figure out what we're going to do to continue this on in the upcoming years. CHAIRMAN HENNING: I agree with that. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any -- any further discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oppo -- aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion carries 3 -- 3 to 1. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to -- who's doing Page 65 November 3, 2008 drainage, Norman? MR. FEDER: I am, very quickly. COMMISSIONER FIALA: But you know what? I may I -- may I ask something? CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure. COMMISSIONER FIALA: In the last -- in the last conversation, the RLSA was brought up a couple of times and said that that's coming to us, but I -- I'd heard that it's not -- it's proposed not to go to the planning commission, and that concerned me because I think the planning commission really needs to take a look at that RLSA before we get it. Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, you established as a board your Rural Land Stewardship Advisory board to look at your five-year implementation of the RLSA. The board established that group. You didn't establish it under someone. You established it under you. They will come to you with the rural land stewardship review, and then you as the board, if you determine you want it at that juncture to go to the planning commission for their consideration or the EAC, or if you want the changes that are going to go in your growth management plan or your land development code -- whatever you decide to do as a board, then you do that. That's fine. But that's the board's decision. You -- you established the committee, The committee reports to you. They're going to report to you, and then your determination of what you want to do with that report and how you want to implement it or not implement it is up to the Board of County Commissioners. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, MR. MUDD: That's -- that's my take, ma'am. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. As -- as long as then we have the opportunity to tell them -- because it said in the newspaper they're going to skip the planning commission altogether. I don't like that idea Page 66 November 3, 2008 at all. We -- we look to the planning commission for advice, We -- they -- they get into such depth and -- and they relieve us of -- of a lot of studying because we have so many other things to be working on, and I just want to make sure that they get to see that. MR. MUDD: Where the board decides to -- for this thing to go after they present to you is your determination, ma'am. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, and -- and I also got quite excited about it and even wrote a letter to Ron Hammill on that very subject because I -- I do believe that it's very important to have the planning commission involved in every step of the way. They do all the heavy lifting for us. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I talked to George Varnadoe after that, and he explained to me that it was never their intent to sidestep them, and he said, basically, what Mr. Mudd did. So I -- I'm sure that it -- it's inevitable. When it does come before us, we are going to accept what they got and send it on to the planning commission for them to review it and give it back to us for recommendations. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And maybe the EAC too, yeah. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, yes, for sure. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Fine. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Fine. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I was just going to say that that's our option. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Thank you for letting me interject that. MR. MUDD: Oh, absolutely. Page 67 November 3, 2008 Norman's going to talk about his drainage. MR. FEDER: Very quickly, Commissioners. A lot of attenuation, which is discharge and cubic feet per second, water quality treatment in acre feet in two thousand -- last year's AUIR we had modified to respond to planning commission productivity committee's concerns that we address the two features relative to stormwater and move forward. We did that. Also, they directed that we come back and restructure the stormwater ordinance, and that was done with you in -- January 29th of this year, which puts the focus on the secondary system, not on the tertiary system. That has all been done. And what you have on page 31 shows you we're continuing based on the four projects that are in our growth management plan, in particular, the first three, and we're waiting for the watershed management planning on the fourth. We're making progress, and that gives you a chart to show how we're doing it both on discharge and on retention. The thing that I'll focus your attention on only -- and then I'll be done with my presentation -- is on page 30. What we're looking at to go beyond those four projects in our growth management plan is to coordinate with the efforts of the watershed management planning. Right now staff is working diligently -- and they're here with me today -- to inventory the existing system. By January of'09 they will have that information finished. They are working with the watershed management planning, which is doing computer models, and that will then be used in the -- by the end of the year to start looking at what new projects we need to bring in. As you see, our five years is pretty well consumed with our available funding to meet the three major priorities we have today, the biggest one being LASA, the other one the Freedom Park, or the water-quality park, and the last being the Gateway Triangle, If there are any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. Page 68 November 3, 2008 CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? Entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas made a motion to approve the 2008 stormwater -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Drainage canals and structures. CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's right. Is there a second to the motion? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Fiala. All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: It carries unanimously. MR. FEDER: Thank you very much. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that would bring us to the -- the potable water system. Mr. Delony and Phil Gramatges will present. MR. GRAMATGES: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. I am Phil Gramatges, Interim Director of Public Utilities Engineering. Public utilities provide potable water, wastewater treatment, and solid waste collection and disposal to most of the citizens of Collier County , Essential public health services contribute greatly to the high standards of service enjoyed by the rate payers of the Collier County public utilities division. First let me provide you with the bottom line. There are no consent orders under which any of the public utilities departments are Page 69 November 3,2008 operating. Public utilities comply with all required standards, permits, and regulations, and meets the customer demands for services every day. The AUIR process offers us as planners and decision-makers an important opportunity to provide the mechanism for accomplishing the three most critical aspects of public utilities: to stay in compliance with all rules and regulations, to meet the customer demand, and to posture the utility for the future, These public utilities divisions 2008 AUIR submittals are based on the population estimates provided to us by comprehensive planning on June 11 th, 2008. Now, at this time the public utilities administrator, Mr. Jim Delony, his directors, and I are prepared to begin our presentation, but if you prefer we can simply answer your questions. CHAIRMAN HENNING: We'll go to questions. Commissioners Halas then Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I was looking at the level of service. It's interest{ng that we used to be at 185 gallons per day per individual, and now we're down to an estimated 170. How did you come to that conclusion? MR. GRAMATGES: Well, the -- the level of service is something that for public utilities is dependent on a lot of factors. And we have seen a steady decline, or a decrease, in the level of service for the last few years, and most recently with the -- with the drought that we experienced in Collier County we have seen further declines, That -- that is -- the declines are due, of course, to our efforts in order to control the demand but, also, based on regulatory requirements and regulatory restrictions. We have decided that usually when the population at large has modified their behaviors and drive down that -- that consumption in that manner it usually stays with us for a long time. So we took the average of the last several years, and we decided Page 70 November 3,2008 that it was prudent for us to reduce the level of service that we had been keeping since the year 2000 at 185 to 170. COMMISSIONER HALAS: My followup question is -- is, do you think that this has an effect because of the fees that we've incorporated in regards -- those who use more pay more? MR. DELONY: For the record, Jim Delony, Public Utilities Administrator. Let me see if I can address that. I think you're right. I think so. I think the -- the more you use the more you pay has had exactly the effect that we intended it when the -- we recommended to the board and you saw fit to set that up and then put that in motion. And I believe that what Phil said about the conservation culture of this community has certainly taken root. The drought, obviously, brought our attention to the -- the need to conserve and to protect our water resources here in Collier County, South Florida in general. And I believe that there's a two-pronged effect of both rate and conservation culture of the firm -- of -- of the county, sir. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MR. DELONY: I think it's both. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Back in 2004 we had a-- the reliable system capacity was right there with the total rel -- reliable system capacity. In other words, the two lines met when we were at more or less a near-crisis situation. And we came close to it again in '07 where the lines came fairly close. What I -- my question is going out to year 20 l2, that slight jog up, is that supposed to be the Orange Tree utility that I see on this? MR, GRAMATGES: Commissioner, may I ask what chart you're looking at. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. Page W4. MR. DELONY: For the record, Jim Delony again. Sir, the-- Page 71 -...--,---... ._.._---..- November 3,2008 what you see here reflected, if you'll look at that chart and look at exactly where it says thou -- year two -- 2012, that in that area there -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir. MR. DELONY: Okay. That -- that's what -- is that the question you have? Is that -- if that jog up is -- is what's associated with -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: (Nodded head.) MR. DELONY: No, sir, that's not it. If you'll go back and look on your previous chart -- previous page, if you'll look -- this will be page W2 -- you'll see that we have two planned expansions in 2012. Do you see that, sir? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir. MR. DELONY: That -- in that -- in that chart there. First is -- is -- there was a planned expansion of 2 MGD for a high-pressure RO expansion at the north water treatment plant. That's 2 of that 3.9. And then the 1.9 that's there below it is the Orange Tree rating as we understand it today, So that's reflective of that 3.9 that you asked the question about in 2012. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Now, does that -- is that a new constructed plant, or is the old plant being taken under -- MR. DELONY: That is our understanding of the old plant's capacity now. We have not done our due diligence with regard to that. That is a projected amount. And I believe we actually reference where we got that. I received that in a meeting I had with Orange Tree a year ago. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. But in reality we're not gaining anything new because that's a plant that's already on line. MR. DELONY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we're only adding it to our inventory, so we're picking it up. MR. DELONY: Yes, sir. We'll have to make sure that we have adequate capacity, obviously, and ifthere's anything problematic with that -- with that plant we'll have to correct that when we assume that Page 72 November 3, 2008 responsibility and assure we're able to meet that demand. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just following up on Commissioner Coletta's question. So then you go down a little bit further, and it says 2018 it's still the same existing 1.9 Orange Tree water treatment plant, but it still doesn't say about anything new, right? MR. DELONY: You'll see your first new plant in the northeast -- this is new plant actual -- you know, something different than what's there today -- as projected in this AUIR in 2018, ma'am. That first increment of change is in 20 l8 when you'll get that. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And is that the Orange Tree one? MR. DELONY: Yes, ma'am. If you'll notice -- ifyou'll-- on that same page -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. MR. DELONY: -- page W-2look where it says 7.5 -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. MR. DELONY: -- is the new expansion. And then we would retire that old plant. That's the current plan, to retire that old plant. And then you would net that out to the amount that's changed in 2018 of a 5.6 MGD. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you, MR. DELONY: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain amotion to accept the potable water 2008 capital -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: So moved. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And motion by Commissioner Halas, second by Commissioner Coletta. All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." Page 73 November 3, 2008 COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed? (No response,) CHAIRMAN HENNING: It carries unanimously. Now we'll go to the other side of the water stream -- MR. GRAMATGES: Sewer. CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- which starts on page -- MR. DELONY: Watch it. MR. GRAMATGES: 44, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Can we just go to -- through the -- MR. MUDD: Sewer. MR. GRAMA TGES: We do -- well, I'm ready to answer your questions, I thought -- I thought you had some questions about that. I can present the -- the sewer system, or I can answer your questions at this time. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why don't you just tell us what -- when your next capital improvement is going to be. MR. DELONY: Let me take care of that. Let me run it real quick. MR. GRAMA TGES: Sure. MR. DELONY: In the interest of time, sir, let me go through that with you very quickly. If you'll go to page 47 will be the first chart that reflects what's going on within the system. As you may remember, we conduct concurrency -- re-evaluate concurrency in the wastewater on an area basis, not as a distributed basis where the entire district -- like we do in water, but, rather, we do it on a -- on an area basis. So you're going to see a series of charts dealing with different Page 74 November 3,2008 areas of the county and where we stand with regard to current capacity. If you'll go, first of all, to W -- page 47, you'll see what is the level-of-service standard and what is our planned expansion of the north county water reclamation facility service area. And, as you see, we have nothing planned out to 2027 at this stage of the game, Okay. If you'll go, then, to the next chart which is on page 4 -- 53, Let's see that picture. I'm sorry -- on page 50, five zero, you'll see the south county water reclamation service area, and that is the south plant. As everyone, I believe, knows, I'm sure Mrs. Fiala, that that plant is built out, and that's it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh. MR. DELONY: And through the period of consideration there'll be no change in that -- in that plant in terms of its capital plan. Again, all this is reflective of what you decided in June with regard to the master plan, We did -- there's been nothing here that's changed since your approval of our last master plan update. Going to page 53, which is the northeast plants, we just spoke to that. You can see similar to the water -- you see we pick up Orange Tree in 2012 at 1.1 MGD, page 53. And then you see a 2.9 MGD expansion in 20l8. This is parallelling. The same time we're going to pick up the water we'll pick up the wastewater. We'll construct the capacity at the same time we receive that demand. Then if you go to page 56, which is, I believe, the last one, we'll talk about the southeast. And this is the area of the county down the East Trail beyond 951, I guess the closest thing would be the 6L Farms area of the county. And you would see where we see growth according to the population's numbers projected by comprehensive planning, our first requirement for a new plant construction in 2018 of 4 MGD, and that would be followed in 2024 with a 2 MGD expansion. Page 75 November 3, 2008 Did I answer your question, sir? CHAIRMAN HENNING: That answered my -- one of my questions, yes, What about your debt service anticipated impact fees? MR. DELONY: Great question. Let me -- let me -- let me get Mr. Wides up here so he can give you some hard numbers, then I'll come back and summarize behind him. MR. WIDES: Commissioners, good morning. For the record, Tom Wides, Operations Director for Public Utilities. As we look at the capacity of the water-sewer district in total over the next five years, we have a combination for growth-related projects of impact fees to cover the projects and the debt service that we will incur to, in fact, build those plants to capacity during that period of time. We know that the impact fees will not come in in advance of the building, so, in fact, most of our -- most of our coverage will be in the form of revenue bonds or other revenue-producing external sources of debt. CHAIRMAN HENNING: What is your debt service now? MR. WIDES: Right now our debt service on the impact fees on an annual basis -- the debt service on the impact fees is approximately $l1.3 million as it stands today. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And -- and -- and the projected impact fees per year? MR. WIDES: About five, six million dollars. CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you have eleven -- eleven going out each year and five coming in? MR. WIDES: We have eleven going out and five coming in, and that's as we look to the future. And there -- the only way to really finance that is through any other sources of revenue, so we really need those -- those impact fees to come in on the basis we projected. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you using user fees to pay down capital improvements? Page 76 November 3, 2008 MR. WIDES: At this time we are temporarily using some user fees, and those will be paid back as the impact fees come in, MR. MUDD: We're using it as a debt, so the debt's being -- the difference between what's coming in for impact fees versus what the principal and interest payments are, there's -- they're -- they're basically creating a debt for impact fees. So when impact fees go up and get above $ll million a year then they'll pay the user fees back for those years that the user fees had to subsidize the impact fee debt service. MR. WIDES: Yes. The -- the key to the -- to the internal user and to the new user coming onto the system is as Mr. Mudd alluded. In fact, we're using a much less expensive source of funding rather than going to an external debt and still would be paying back that extern __ or that internal source of funding. CHAIRMAN HENNING: So it's approximately $5 million a year that you're using for -- from -- MR. WIDES: There's what we see going forward. CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- user fees? MR. WIDES: That's what we see going forward from here. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, right now your impact fees -- your debt service making up the difference between impact fees is over $30 million a year, ad valorem, user fee all combined. MR. WIDES: And -- and to the extent we did some projections looking out into the out years, If the impact fees diminish or go away totally, that can have as much as a per-year impact on user fees of an additional lO percent, so each year we would need to cover at least 10 percent going into the out years without those impact fees. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, go ahead. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Was that the good news? CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. No, it wasn't. Just -- just Page 77 November 3, 2008 something I -- I need to -- it's a small, little issue. But on page 47 the wastewater north county water re -- re -- reclamation facility, it's a little bit of an anomaly compared to everything else. But why do we see a slight dip at year 2018 on the required capacity? I -- it doesn't make any sense. MR. DELONY: For the record, Jim Delony again. Sir, that, again, is where we're going to take flows from the north service area and move them to the northeast plants that come on line during that time frame, We actually will move those flows away from the north plant, and that demand will be shifted to our new northeast plant; therefore -- that's the reason you see the dip. There's actually going to be a lowering of demand, and that's -- that's all in planning to make sure that we're -- we're able to meet demand both -- in both service areas. And so the timing of the northeast plant is tied not only to that area around Orange Tree but some of that would -- that we can move from the northeast -- excuse me -- from the north so we don't have to put any more plant in place at the north wastewater treatment plant. Did I answer your question, sir? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further questions? Entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion made to accept. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala to accept -- or Commissioner Coletta to accept the 2008 AUIR water/sewer district's -- I guess it's just AUIR. MR. MUDD: It's the AUIR. MR. DELONY: AUIR, yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: No -- there's no CIE in there. MR. DELONY: The master plan is inclu -- is inclusive of that, and that has been already approved by the board, and that's -- that's Page 78 November 3,2008 what constitute that CIE. CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. MR. DELONY: So it's -- it's a subset of it, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Fiala. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye, CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? (No response,) CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion carries unanimously, MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this will bring us to solid -- to -- to solid waste. It's Item H, 2H. MR. DELONY: And, Commissioners, we're on page 65 in terms of the actual chart itself and 68. As you know, concurrency is measured two ways in a solid-waste program, in how much air space we have in big footprint and how much air space we have in smaller footprint, undeveloped cells and developed cells. So we measure it twice to make sure that we've got what we need because both require extensive permitting in terms of time and effort. So if you'll look at page 65 this shows your -- your -- your concurrency with regard to demand in red and capacity in terms of blue line. In terms of line cell capacity, that would be the small footprint. That would be what we have ready to go to accept solid waste today or immediately upon -- you know, on -- on the demand you see on this chart. And then if you will flip over to page 68 -- yeah, 68, you will see what the 10-year look is. And, of course, you have a decision point on Page 79 November 3, 2008 page 68, which is FY '26. As we stand here today, at FY '26 you're within lO years, or your decision point or -- or your concurrency point, of have -- not having sufficient air space in the current Collier County landfill. And we've talked to you before about what that means in terms of what we plan to do and bring back to you in terms of how we're going to continue in ter -- in the terms of reference of the integrated solid-waste management strategy, which includes several alternatives to move that decision point further out in time and space. And I -- I don't know if you want to get into that today, but we certainly have got to plan ahead to move that out further at your direction. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I was going to ask if this takes into -- into consideration the possibility of raising the height of the landfill out there. MR. DELONY: Commissioner, this does not do that. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MR. DELONY: When we -- when you make that decision and we're able to get that permitted, this will move that red point out. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MR. DELONY: And we'll pick up that capacity. But our job is to tell you what we know -- what we know today and where we are today in terms of concurrency. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MR. DELONY: And, obviously, you've given us some very strong direction on what you intend for us to do for the future concurrency of the county in terms of the solid-waste program. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: It just looks like, gentlemen, that we're going to have to stick around here for a long time to see all of this stuff through. We'll be here for another 10, 12 years. Now, I know Page 80 November 3, 2008 you want to stay to see Orange Tree built. Man, we're going to be here a long time. MR. DELONY: Well, it's -- obviously, some things have shifted out in space a little bit, ma'am, with -- with where we're at right now in terms of demand. They've moved forward. CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't -- I don't see your financially feasible -- I don't see the -- I don't see that balance anywhere in a lot of these like we used to have. ' MR. WIDES: Commissioner, again, for the record, Tom Wides. If! may answer that for you. If you turn to page 70, seven zero, on that page 70 what you'll see are the projects planned by year -- the capital projects planned by year for the solid-waste program. And the revenue sources are the landfill tipping fees to match those planned projects. You'll see that there's not a great deal of expenditure here, okay, as it stands today, so we can cover it with the fees that we have scheduled. CHAIRMAN HENNING: The revenues are in -- in the spreadsheet? MR. WIDES: Yes, sir. It -- the first -- the first line is titled "Solid Waste Projects." That would be all your capital expenditures. And then there's -- it's speaking to Cells A-3, which is Phases land 2, and then Cell A-4, which gives you your total capital expenditures, for example, in year 2008-09 is l.6 million. And then you go to the next line down, which is revenue source, which is landfill tipping fees, at 1,6 million, basically balancing out your program. And that's set up by year. CHAIRMAN HENNING: But your -- your collections are -- are steady, and -- and they're not reflected in here, correct, your -- your annual collections. MR. WIDES: The -- if we're -- if we're looking at the revenue coming from the residential household -- is that what you're asking? CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, you have residential and Page 81 November 3,2008 commercial going -- taking unwanted stuff to the landfill. MR. WIDES: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And just your annual income is not in here -- MR. WIDES: The -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- to show -- MR. WIDES: Okay. CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- you know, to show your operating -- naturally, this isn't where you want to put your operating, but your construction dollars for each year as you collect it versus when you're going to expend it. That's how it was reported in the past. MR. WIDES: Well, I believe this is consistent with the way we've reported in the past, Commissioner. But if I'm catching your question we receive revenues for operations for the daily operating expenditures, the contract management of the landfill, and those revenues go to cover that program. The revenues left over are really set up for the capital expenditures, and we've really trimmed the capital expenditures in this program pretty heavily to, in fact, match those revenue sources from -- whether they're coming from the disposal of residential landfill waste or from commercial landfill waste. Am -- am I answering your question, sir? CHAIRMAN HENNING: I guess, when do we get that information? MR. MUDD: What -- what -- what he's asking for, Tom, is -- you get a revenue from the tipping fee that you set aside for your capital projects that have to do with solid waste. Now, anything that comes in above that goes into your capital fund reserve to replace the landfill sometime in the future. The board doesn't have that incoming and outgoing and how it gets laid on, and Commissioner Henning is asking when is he going to get to see that. MR. DELONY: The -- the key for this entire program begins Page 82 November 3, 2008 with the tipping fee and the lay-down we do on a budgetary basis as we bring you our budget, and within the context of your budget approval you see where those dollars are and where those dollars are going in terms of those revenues, and that's the source for this capital program as outlined by the county manager. So where you see that is on the annual. When we bring our budget in, we lay that out as part of our budget submission, if! may. MR. MUDD: But, Jim, you can provide that. MR. DELONY: Sure, I can provide it anytime, but I just -- and we can -- and we can show you what our assumptions are in the go-ahead plan and -- but, in -- in essence, that's where that is usually and most oftenly taken care of a board -- on board action, sir, to answer your question directly. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. Thank you for answering the question, But we all know our capital improvement plan has to be financially feasible, but a lot of these, and especially, you know, parks and rec, the next one, I don't see any revenues. So how can we say it's financially feasible if we don't see those capital improvement -- where the dollars are coming from and when they're going to be expended? MR. DELONY: Again, with regard to the matters dealing with the construction costs that you see in this, this is derived from tipping fees, and we can show you the projection on those tipping fees per the LOA. Now. The -- the -- the key of this is is that if you don't have demand you don't have the demand on the -- on the air space and, therefore, you don't get the tipping fees. So it's fairly consistent that if you're going to get the demand you're going to get the money, and then you're going to turn that money around to provide for the capital construction. So there's your continuity. And should -- should we see a drop in demand then we will slow down commiserately our construction program or anything associated with that revenue stream, and that's how we've kept concurrent in this Page 83 November 3, 2008 program. There's no borrowing at all in this program at all. It's all cash and carry. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. I just don't see it. MR. DELONY: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I think we're supposed to be financially feasible. Mr. Bosi, is that -- is that correct, when we adopt that? MR. BOSI: Correct. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. MR. DELONY: Yeah, it's on page 70, I know, but I -- I don't think we've answered his question. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Which page? MR. DELONY: Yes, sir, page 70. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, that's the one we just -- just went over. MR. DELONY: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. I -- yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Enter -- entertain a motion to accept the solid waste -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- 2008 capital improvement AUIR. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I ask you a question? CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Would you feel more comfortable if they came back after lunch and gave you the information that you're seeking? CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, I just -- I know that it has to be financially feasible on all these projects. It should -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Each one of the elements should be laid out. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, Page 84 November 3,2008 CHAIRMAN HENNING: I trust Mr. Delony is not going to be coming to us for ad valorem dollars. MR. DELONY: Absolutely not, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: But in order for us to do our job we should see that in -- in -- in each one of these. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And I made -- I made a particular note in this particular case to make sure that next time -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm okay the way it -- just in the future I hope that we can do that. There was a motion by Commissioner Halas to accept the solid-waste 2008 AUIR, and there was a second motion from Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: (Nodded head.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to parks, and that's Miss Marla Ramsey and Barry Williams. MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioners, good morning. For the record, Barry Williams, Parks and Recreation Director. Commissioner Henning, if I may just start by saying what you've described we can provide for you as well, and it not being in the packet -- I know that's the question about financial feasibility. I would point out, however, in -- it's a question that certainly Page 85 November 3, 2008 we're concerned about. We have -- for impact fees our current debt service is 3.135 million, and we have 2,3 million budgeted with about 2 million in reserves, so for the very near future we are looking cautious about growth. But for the two -- 2008 AUIR there are no projects proposed in the community parks and very few projects proposed in the regional parks. The projects that we have listed are Freedom Park, Big Corkscrew Island Regional Park, and a commitment from South Florida Water Management. Regarding the regional park land, there was much discussion about including state and federal lands in the regional park calculation. MR. MUDD: That's on page 76. MR. WILLIAMS: And included in your packet, if I may just share this -- I don't know if you can see that. Comprehensive planning staff did a nice job of providing this graphic, and it shows the current federal and state facilities that exist within Collier County. The total acreage ofthose lands are 935,000 acres, so it's a considerable part of Collier County that is in the state and federal category, Those lands certainly have recreational use, and while we have asked DCA about these properties what we've understood is that unless they're under direct control they cannot be considered as part of the AUIR; however, our understanding is that it can be used when you look at level of service. One concern that we have from a parks perspective, however, is that many of these lands do not truly represent the recual need -- recreational needs of the community. Athletic fields in particular are not found within these parses, and we're unique in the development of these type of assets for public use. Just to share with you another graphic, if I may -- and, again, apologize for the eye chart here. You can see some of the -- the yellow dots -- Page 86 November 3,2008 MR. MUDD: It's on page 81 in your packets, Commissioners. I'll try to blow it up, MR. WILLIAMS: You can see some of -- of what we've attempted to do with our good relationship with the school board. What we've been able to do is to develop through interlocal agreements greenspaces that can be used for soccer, for lacrosse, for flag football, our youth org -- youth programming. We've been able to expand ourselves into these areas east of 951. And you can see a couple of the sites, Corkscrew -- the Corkscrew area, Corkscrew Middle School and Elementary School, we have an interlocal arrangement where we have greenspace that's used for that purpose. So these type of amenities, they aren't necessarily what you would see in a state and federal. And I know that last year there was some discussion about private PUDs, and on page 241 of your packet you can see some of the work that was done regarding a survey of the private PUDs and the type of recreational amenities that were -- were created. For the most part, the -- the number-one item on that list, 510 tenn -- tennis courts, 245 swimming pools. As far as boat ramps, football, soccer fields, gymnasiums, racquetball courts, softball fields, there were none that we could find in those PUDs. Just in the last 5 to 10 years we have added these amenities. And, again, the eye-chart test continues here. You can see the amenities that we're adding. We're adding things like -- we're adding things like fishing access points, multiuse fields, football and soccer. We've added 10 softball fields, baseball fields. There's nine there total. If you look at the tennis courts, where there were 510 tennis courts added through private PUDs, we've not added as -- as many. Obviously, that need's being met. Picnic pavilions, playground splash pads, other playgrounds -- we've added six, and, of course, our water park and amphitheater at Page 87 November 3, 2008 Sugden. Those two amenities are very unique from a parks and rec perspective, So our recommendation in looking at the AUIR and some of the discussion related to the productivity committee in particular is that we continue to analyze the properties associated with the state, federal, and leased properties that we manage and recalculate our inventories based upon characterization of these categories. We would like to pre -- re-present the inventory with this complete characterization, and, basically, we would take -- we would give you an inventory that showed the lands that we controlled -- you've seen the state and federal lands -- the lands that we have leased, and that we bring that back to you for your consideration. Weare in the process of completing our impact fee study for parks, and a good opportunity for us to bring this inventory back for -- for your consideration would be when that im -- when that impact fee study's brought back. At this time I'll stop and just try to answer any questions that you might have. And I -- I do have people that have historically been involved in this process and dealt with some of the issues that you've brought up in past years. So, if! may, I'll just stop to answer any questions you might have. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? Commissioner Halas -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- Commissioner Coletta, Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I do have -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: I understand where there are some concerns about state and federal facilities, but we really don't have any control over them, And I think you brought up a good point is that a lot of these facilities really don't offer any amenities as far as -- whether it's soccer fields, baseball fields, et cetera. In fact, we have problems with using these facilities from state Page 88 November 3, 2008 and federal for recreational purposes such as A TV s or whatever. So I understand our concern there. And we really don't have any control over that. MR. WILLIAMS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Barry, if you take a look at the map that's -- that we have on 81, it -- it shows quite a cluster of facilities in the Immokalee area right in Immokalee itself. MR. WILLIAMS: I got it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would you say at this point in time there's a surplus of -- of facilities in Immokalee, or is this something that just barely is meeting the community's needs? MR. WILLIAMS: I appreciate the question, Commissioner. Absolutely not. As far as have we met the need, our biggest need is -- is certainly athletic fields. In Immokalee sports complex we have three athletic fields, soccer fields that we use for the community. They are tremendously overused. We struggle with keeping them maintained at the level they need to be. We have had an succ -- a successful interlocal agreement, though, with the new elementary school that's been added, Eden Elementary, and we've added some greenspace there, but it's -- it's just not enough. Soccer is such a popular sport out there, and with just having, you know, four fields at our disposal for the folks it -- it's a struggle to keep up with demand, COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there any -- any -- any attempt to open -- have an interlocal agreement with Ave Maria and some of their facilities there? I know that they're building soccer fields. I don't know if that's been tried yet or not. MR. WILLIAMS: I -- I would -- I appreciate the suggestion, Commissioner. It's not something -- we have had some suggestions with Ave Maria on a variety of levels, but we've not pursued that in Page 89 November 3, 2008 particular about looking at an interlocal agreement that would allow public use, and it's certainly something that we could pursue. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just think it's something possibly for tournaments that would benefit Ave Maria bringing people to the area that would be able to participate. I think that you might have something opening for you there, and you -- if you'd please pursue it. MR. WILLIAMS: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The other -- the other part that's a little concern -- a great concern, to be honest with you, is -- thank you very much for the fact that we do have in the planning stage two regional parks, which is No. 52, the Vanderbilt Extension Community Park and the Big Corkscrew Island Regional Park, because when you get out to this particular area there -- there's next to nothing available for people to recreate. Where are we in the planning process for these two parks? MR. WILLIAMS: Both those projects -- and I appreciate the question, Commissioner. Both those projects we're working very closely with transportation on the Vanderbilt Beach Extension. As that road is completed and an access is made available, that park -- project will come aboard. We're also working very closely with public utilities. As the utilities is completed there, also, that park would come on line. Weare somewhat restrained with the current economy and how things are going for the development of those two projects, but as those two projects move forward certainly we'll be right there to develop the park. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, well -- and I understand. You don't really have any -- MR. WILLIAMS: I don't have a good answer to your question. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I -- I appreciate your honesty in that. Question. Now, when we figure out the AUIR, are we basing it upon Page 90 November 3, 2008 population? That's correct, right? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. Yes, COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. That's total population of the county. It's not broken down into regions. I mean, Collier County is a massive county, the biggest county in the state of Florida. And if we're breaking it down according to -- if we're not breaking it down and we're treating it as one entity and -- and -- and the coastal area is receiving X number of units and it's supposed to meet the needs of the distant eastern part of Collier County, that -- that's an issue that I'm not too sure how we're going to resolve. Is there any thought that goes into this? MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi with Comprehensive Planning. The county is not broken up into subsets. When we satisfy our level-of-service standards for regional and community parks, it's looking at the total population of the county as a whole. What the -- what internally happens within their planning process is they recognize the lack of facilities in the east-of-95l area, and that's why they're going forward -- all their -- their primary focus has been, aside from the beach -- the beach and boat access that the board has established as a high priority, that their -- their focus has been on the east-of-951 area. And those next improvements that -- that -- that the park system is going to fund is within those areas based upon the -- the deficit currently that we have within the east-of-951 area for recreational amenities. But to answer your question it's not broken up into subsets. It's looked at as a population as a whole to satisfy the level-of-service standard. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. When -- of course, I'm sure we'll keep that in mind as we move forward. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Before I go to Commissioner Halas -- no, you were next. Page 91 November 3, 2008 COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that's all right. You go ahead. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, No. No, go ahead, I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I noticed Marco Island is split into two areas. The -- the area on the second page, page 83, we have in there, but, of course, we have no acreage. Is that because we don't provide any -- any money toward the -- toward -- toward those parks at all? And if that's the case, why do we even have them in here? MR. WILLIAMS: Well, they -- they're listed as recreational amenities within the community. We -- we don't count them towards our AUIR. They're not included -- they're not part -- or controlled by the county, per se, so they're not included. There are -- as you can see on page 82 at the top, there are some facilities that are regional in nature -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. MR. WILLIAMS: -- that serve all of Collier County that -- that are included. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I -- I saw that. I was just wondering why they were split in two like that. But -- but they don't have the acreage, and it must just be because you're placing them in a parks category but it has nothing to do with funding. Is that it? MR. BOSI: Well, it does -- it does relate to the impact fee study. Within community parks a new residential unit in unincorporated Collier County will be assessed in impact fee for community parks, but if you're in one of the municipalities you will not be assessed that impact fee for community parks. Community park impact fees are only for unincorporated Collier County. But if you have that same structure in an incorporated area they will be charged a regional park impact fee. So regional parks is assessed as an entire county population; whereas, community parks is separated only to the unincorporated, and that's why you have the distinction. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And -- and I wanted to know Page 92 November 3,2008 how -- how the facilities unit costs are -- are calculated in this, MR. WILLIAMS: Sure. And I may -- if! -- if! might, because we had Amanda working on this last year, perhaps if I could ask her to step up and address that question for you. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No dogs or cats or anything? MS. TOWNSEND: Good morning. Amanda Townsend with the Public Services Division. If you'll recall, last year we removed facilities value as a component of the parks and recreation AUIR, so what you have going forward from now on will be community and re -- regional park acreage only. We look at facility type now in -- in accordance with some guidelines that the board approved in June of '07 to determine what sorts of facilities should be built, but any more facility -- excuse me -- facilities value is not a part of the AUIR. COMMISSIONER FIALA: How does that effect, then, the calculations when it's done that way versus the way it was done before? MS. TOWNSEND: Similar to Commissioner Henning's comment early -- earlier on solid waste, what you see in the AUIR is a -- only a portion of the parks capital plan. You see the land acquisition portion. And the park development portion is separate, and I do believe that parks and recreation has been working on -- but I don't think has completed -- a complete schedule of -- of capital expenditures and revenues. What you see in the AUIR is, indeed, a portion of that but not the whole thing. MR. MUDD: If you look at page two -- if you look at page 233 of your booklet, 2007 in June staff basically presented -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What page? COMMISSIONER FIALA: 233. MR. MUDD: 233. Staff presented -- Page 93 November 3, 2008 MR. WILLIAMS: This one? MR. MUDD: Yeah. MR. WILLIAMS: Yeah, I got it. MR. MUDD: Staff presented guidelines that the board basically accepted as far as water access, athletic fields, hard courts, indoor recreational facilities, and pathways. And you'll notice on that chart -- and I'm sorry that on your slide the blue shows up, and on the overhead it looks purple and it just blurs everything. But it basically talked about what was surplus and what was deficit. And then you take a look at basically what is being built in -- in our 2013 plan, and it basically talks about what's surplus and what's deficit. So water access we're surplus. Based on lover 10,000, we're surplus 47, Athletic fields we're down by four. Hard courts we're up by 54. Indoor recreational facilities we're up by 6,850 -- MR. WILLIAMS: Square feet. MR. MUDD: -- square feet. And pathway miles we're down by eight. Okay, So that kind of gives you an idea of our long-term plan in 2013 and how that basically lays on as far as what's used. Now, if you wanted to in your discussion with -- with -- say, what the productivity committee was trying to get at is if you want to talk about your state lands and your regional lands and you want to start getting it -- you know, that minus eight on pathways that you see right there on your 2013, you know, regional parks have pathways. They have trails and things that you can meander up on and enjoy yourself to see nature, That could help cut down on that particular cost for the board, and that's what they were trying to get at. And -- and what we haven't gotten yet -- and Commissioner Coyle -- Commissioner Coyle hits upon it all the time. And we can make it really short ifhe doesn't show back up again. But what -- what he basically says how do all the hard courts and Page 94 November 3, 2008 stuff for the municipalities lay into our program as far as costs are concerned. And it -- and it will have to be some kind of a level-of-service diminishment in order to account for those because the DCA says you can't count them, okay, when you come up with your level of service in order to meet your needs. So the way you would do that is you would lower your level of service and incorporate them to basically keep your level of service offline, sort of on a separate set of books -- your level of service the same, and that's how you would accomplish that particular issue. But, ma'am, in your comment we're -- we're not paying for the capital piece for the particular facility; that's a missing link in order to tie all that stuff together to get that decrease and that level of service. And right now, based on prior board decisions, that doesn't exist anymore in your AUIR. And we strictly do it by acquisition of acreage. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Before I go to Commissioner Halas, on the -- on the pathway issue, why can't we use Conservation Collier? They're already setting up those type -- type of things, Can we take a look at that for -- for 2009? MR. WILLIAMS: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The -- the -- my second question, you have $3.l million in debt? MR. WILLIAMS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN HENNING: What's the anticipated payback of that bond? MR. WILLIAMS: I'm -- I'm looking back at Susan Usher, and she's mouthing -- and she's coming up. Let me ask her to answer that question. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. MR. MUDD: A lot of that particular debt that they're paying is on the -- is on the north regional park. But go ahead, Susan. Page 95 November 3, 2008 MS. USHER: Hi. My name is Susan Usher with the Office of Management and Budget. That debt, 3.1, is the annual debt service payment. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, okay. And how much impact fees are -- are you anticipating getting in? MR. MUDD: He's getting in around two million, so he's short a million and a half, and he's got two million in reserves. So he's good for about a year and nine months before he has to start loaning money from the ad valorem side of the house if impact fees don't pick up. CHAIRMAN HENNING: So that'll be in 2010? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And how much is the total bond value right now? MS. USHER: Including 2009, the total outstanding debt is $55,8 million, so we'll be paying debt service until 2026, CHAIRMAN HENNING: Wow. We need to do something with parks and rec to make sure that we're hitting the target a little bit better. Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER HALAS: On -- on some of the -- the AUIR report here, I didn't see anything where you were going to accommodate additional ball fields, whether baseball fields or softball fields. How were you going to address that? It seems that we continually get reports about fields not being in good shape or we have a lack of fields, And how -- how was that going to be addressed under this economic time? MR. WILLIAMS: Well, the interlocal agreements certainly have -- have been a godsend for us. The Big Corkscrew Island Regional Park in the design does have athletic fields, and so that project as it comes to be will develop some more opportunities for us to -- to include -- increase athletic fields. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I was basically referring to -- closer Page 96 November 3, 2008 to the coast area whether it's down in -- in the south portion of the county or whether it's up in the north portion of the county. It seems that some of the concerns are traveling from one area of the county out to another area, especially when gas was high, So I guess where I'm going at is are we -- is there anything that we're going to do with the existing parks that we may be able to convert them over to baseball fields if -- if we don't have a high usage for soccer in certain areas? MR. WILLIAMS: There's -- there's no current plans to do that particular thing. We -- we do have athletic fields that have multi -- multiple use, and so where we can take an existing field that is used for, say, softball and convert it to Little League we've had -- had some success with that. At Max Hasse -- I'll mention that park in particular -- we have softball fields, but to convert them for Little League what we did was we established fences, outfield fences at the 200- foot level that allowed for that field to be used as -- as a Little League field. So there are some opportunities for us to do that where it doesn't change the -- totally change the configuration of the existing field. The reason why in a lot of cases we don't want to convert fields to a specific use is just that. You know, the -- the recreational need changes throughout the year. If you can make it available for softball, Little League, girls' Little League, you know, you have all those options available for you. It helps you use your resource as efficiently as you can. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you. MR. WILLIAMS: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Two questions. One, I know a while back you were going to try and build a softball field at East Naples Community Park. I know we've been -- MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. Page 97 November 3,2008 COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- working on that for, what, just 20 -- about 15 years or so? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I was wondering, how is that going? And is that in this report? MR. WILLIAMS: The acreage is -- is -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: I know we own the acreage. MR. WILLIAMS: The acreage is in the report. The -- the facility creating the soccer field -- I can tell you that we are through the local permitting, South Florida Water Management permitting, and right now we're working with US -- USACE in the permitting issues with :-- with that regulatory authority. We have had some back and forth with them on acquiring the permits. We actually are working with them towards compliance of a permit that had lapsed, and we're -- we're having some very successful conversations with them. I -- I know it's been in the works for a long time, and I -- I'm -- I'm reluctant to tell you when that -- that soccer field will be built, the exact date, but I can tell you we're very close to getting the permits necessary so that we can begin construction. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I know I started working on it in 1991, so I know it's been there -- MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- for a while. MR. MUDD: The vio -- the violation you had with the Cor -- with USACE, the Corps of Engineers, is -- is one that goes back into the latter part of the '90s, and Barry is trying to work that out. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I remember when it expired about 1997. They'd forgotten it. It was sitting on a shelf someplace. And -- and Tom Olliff said he found out and, oh, well, it was too late; it had already expired. But, anyway, also, another question. In revenues it shows here on Page 98 November 3, 2008 -- on page 72 zero revenues from impact fees allocated for see -- fee-simple acquisitions, and I -- I saw something that was -- I didn't get it from Amy, but I saw it was written by Amy, and it showed that we had actually received 2.5 million. Can you kind of help me along on that? MR. WILLIAMS: I'm -- I'm sorry, ma'am. What page are you on? MR. MUDD: Your page 72. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Seventy-two. MR. WILLIAMS: Let me just find that real quick. COMMISSIONER FIALA: The beginning, your summary form where it shows impact fees allocated to fee-simple acquisitions, and it shows zero. MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. And this is -- you're referencing community park land. And if you look on page 73 you can see in the five-year window, park acreage plan in the AUIR, we're actually showing a transfer of 47 acres. So in that five-year window we're not anticipating purchasing any community park land, thus, that's why -- why you see that number. COMMISSIONER FIALA: The -- but the revenue says zero, but you did receive 2.5 million in impact fees? MR. WILLIAMS: The 2.5 million is the -- the annual dollar amount that we're receiving in impact fees. I don't know if that was exactly the number that was -- was described. That money's being used to pay for our debt service. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. It didn't reflect that here, so thank you. MR. WILLIAMS: Well, again, if I may say, the -- the impact fees allocated to fee-simple acquisitions, that's within the five-year additional park land that we might purchase, and there is -- there is no additional park land that we're going to purchase in community park Page 99 November 3, 2008 land, so there is no impact fees that would be towards that category. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Fine. Thank you. Now I understand. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER HALAS: There were some PUDs that were approved years prior whereby there was development -- developer commitments. How are we addressing those issues with some of these developers that are, obviously, going into bankruptcy or whatever? They've made some promises to -- promises or commitments to the citizens here in Collier County. MS. RAMSEY: I know that one or so that you may be ref-- referring to had to do with some funding that was going to be given to us for Cocohatchee River Park as well as some improvements at that location. And we -- we have worked with them, and I think it came to the board not too long ago to help them get a loan so they could continue with the construction. There's been no -- no indication so far that they're not going to honor those, and I do believe that the attorney's office did send a letter hoping that if they did go into bankruptcy that we would have our stake into the -- into the pot as well -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'm not just talking about just this particular one. There's other issues, I think, that are pending by developer agreements whereby they were going to either come up with funding for additional access to the waters or whatever else that hasn't been addressed, and so I'm just wondering. MR. MUDD: Heritage Bay -- did you get the money from Heritage Bay? MS. RAMSEY: Yes, sir. And we spent it on Bayview. MR. MUDD: Okay. Sir, what -- what the -- what -- in consult with the County Attorney's Office, both of us are in agreement -- and I passed it out to staff -- if there is a commitment from a developer that's out there right now that has to do with land and/or monies, we need to Page 100 November 3,2008 go get it as fast as we can to make sure that they honor their commitments before we lose the opportunity, because once they go into bankruptcy it's a hall -- it's a brand-new ballgame. And there's several bankruptcy attorneys that will be involved in that particular issue, and what Collier County and where Collier County will be in the pecking order of payments after that bankruptcy issue is -- is seriously in doubt that we'll be anywhere close to the top. Jeff, did I say anything wrong? MR. KLATZKOW: No. I mean, we're going to try to enforce what we have, and if a developer goes bankrupt we'll try to enforce it on the successor for that developer. I think the end result's going to be that a lot of things we thought we were going to get are going to get put off maybe for some years to come. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And how about impact fees? Are -- are some of these concerns also involved with not receiving our impact fees? MS. RAMSEY: Oh, most definitely, sir, we have a concern about not -- not having new construction that will produce the -- the impact fees. I do believe that we've collected the impact fees that are due us, though. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. We do have -- in other words, we're up to date with the -- the collection of impact fees at this point in time for parks? MS. RAMSEY: That's correct. MR. KLATZKOW: You don't get a building permit without paying the impact fees. MS. RAMSEY: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to make sure we -- we've got them. CHAIRMAN HENNING: This is a good example why we need, you know, our debt and -- and our allocation of impact fees. I never realized how much debt we have on the North Naples Regional Park, Page 101 November 3,2008 and I'm sure there's other things in there too. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. As I mentioned before, you're -- you're about a $30 million payment, and I believe that's exclusive of water and sewer. And when you add them you're up to about 45 million on an annual basis, and you will proceed to make those payments -- and those are impact-fee related debt -- through 2033 or something like that, in remember correctly, but I can get you that sheet, because we really need to talk about it because when the board -- and the board needs that, sir -- and you're -- you're dead on -- because when you -- when -- when the community comes in and says they want their impact fees to be less -- and you've heard that, okay, from several people that have met you -- you have to understand that if you do that, okay, then you're going to shoulder that debt service. It's going to be less on impact fees, and it's going to be more on ad valorem dollars. And you have a debt, and -- and -- and you won't go delinquent in that particular debt, so it's something that you need to have for your decisions. And I'll get you that before the end of lunch. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, if we can just start including that in -- in each of the categories, then -- when we say, "Okay. Go ahead and do this project," I think we need to see the whole picture on it; that's all. MR. MUDD: Okay. Do I get three nods on that one? CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. MR. MUDD: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Before -- before we break for lunch, I just want to -- I recalled Commissioner Halas one year -- it must have been four or five years ago, and he said, "You know, we're racking up a whole bunch of debt here," and he said, "If we keep racking it up, we're going to have an awful lot of debt service to be paying out. We ought to be careful." . Page 1 02 November 3, 2008 Do you remember saying that -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I did. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- a few years ago? And that stuck with me all this time, and here it is now we're -- now we're -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Coming home to roost. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- coming to grips with it, yeah. COMMISSIONER HALAS: We agreed to it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, we did. We agreed to it, but I-- I just remember his warning then. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. MR. MUDD: Do we have a motion on parks before you-- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, that's what I was going to ask for. Is there a motion to accept the -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion. CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- parks and recs -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- AUIR for 2008? Motion by Commissioner Coletta, second by Commissioner Halas. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. Let's be back at one o'clock. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, and that'll bring us into Category B. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, we still have -- yes, you're absolutely right. Page 103 November 3, 2008 (Recess held from 12:03 p.m. until 1 :02 p.m.) MR. MUDD: We finished with parks, and we are now onto the county jail. Chief Salley will be the presenter, I believe. CHIEF SALLEY: Good afternoon, Chairman, Board. My name is Scott Salley. For the record, I'm chief of Corrections and Judicial Services. Reviewing the AUIR, probably the most significant thing that I'd like to -- to share with you is that our inmate population dropped 13 percent during the last year, which is unusual, extremely unusual for any jailor prison in the United States at this time. And probably the -- the reason that we had a decrease in the inmate population was not only economics of our -- our county, but, also, the criminal alien task force. And we have transferred closely -- close -- approximately 600 detainees to either other jails in the state or to federal facilities, and there they would be processed either for federal time and/or deportation. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Questions? Entertain a motion to accept the AUIR report on county jails, Category -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: And -- and a good job. CHIEF SALLEY: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Halas to -- to accept, second by Commissioner Coyle. All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? (No response.) Page 104 November 3,2008 CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion carries 4 to O. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next -- next item on our agenda is the law enforcement, and I believe Chief Bloom -- MR. BAKER: I'm standing in for him, sir. MR. MUDD: You don't look like Chief Bloom. MR. BAKER: No, sir. Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Mark Baker. I'm a captain with the Collier County Sheriffs Office standing in for Chief Bloom who was unable to make it today. Based on a review of the AUIR, sir, and the projections and populations, we don't have anything new up and coming in the next five-year period projected. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? Entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle to approve the law enforcement Category B capital improvement, second by Commissioner Halas. All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 4 to O. CHIEF SALLEY: Thank you. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, our next item is L, 2-L, and that's libraries. Miss Marla Ramsey and Marilyn Matthes will present. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala called in and said she'd like to hold off this discussion until she returns. She should be back momentarily. She's en route. MR. MUDD: Okay. This would bring us to emergency medical Page 105 November 3, 2008 services, and Jeff Page will be presenting. This is not doing well. He must be waiting for libraries. So let's try government buildings, Skip Camp, Len Price. MS. PRICE: Skip will be up in just a second. MR. MUDD: Okay. CHAIRMAN HENNING: What page is government buildings on? MS. PRICE: 155, sir. Jeff is here if you wanted him to go first. MR. MUDD: Jeff, you ready for EMS? CHIEF PAGE: Sure. MR. MUDD: Okay. MS. PRICE: I'll be back. MR. MUDD: Go find somebody to help. Commissioner, EMS would be-- MR. BOSI: 132. MR. MUDD: -- 131, 132 -- yep, 132, sir. CHIEF PAGE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Jeff Page with Emergency Medical Services. Just to give you a little background, during the 2007 AUIR, the loss was changed from 1 to 15,000 population to 1 to 16,400. Also, the response-time goals were changed from an 8-minute travel time 90 percent of the time to 8 minutes 90 percent of the time urban and 12 minutes 90 percent of the time rural. The current inventory is 24.5 units. That's a reduction of 2 units that were recommended by the productivity committee, EMSAC, and adopted by the board at the budget hearing in September 2008. And I'm here to answer any questions you might have. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, the two units you're down, one of them was Isle of Capri, and the other one was Immokalee; is Page 106 November 3, 2008 that correct? CHIEF PAGE: Well, that -- I haven't removed them from those areas yet, Commissioners. I had four growth units that we got back in 2006. The two units that I've re -- I have some flex staffing with right now, they are doubled up in the county at different stations. So those four growth units -- out of those four growth, two were removed from doubled-up stations. The Isle of Capri unit and the Ave Maria unit's still in place at this time. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And -- and, I'm sorry, but that's -- they're still up for consideration to be removed, or no? MR. MUDD: They're -- they're basically not budgeted. Jeffs -- Jeffs working flex time. The board in past discussions have basically said that they want to consider either bringing them back on or -- or -- in the particular decision to do so, they wanted to do it when they did n when you as a board looked at the unfinanced requirements on the . 18th of November. If the board decides that they want to add those units back on, that will be close to a million dollars. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Mr. Mudd, we're going to have a lot of activity around this agenda item on the 18th. Do you think that we could get a time certain for it early on so that the public can be aware of it? I have a lot of people that are very interested in what's taking place with that turnback money. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, we'll work on it. MR. MUDD: Yeah, I'll discuss it with the chairman, and we'll -- we'll lock 'er down. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I -- no -- no offense, but sooner than later because people have to make their plans way in advance. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further questions? What Page 107 November 3,2008 was the productivity's -- committee's recommendation? CHIEF PAGE: Both approved as it was presented unanimously. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala to move -- approve the EMS's, emergency medical services, capital improvement AUIR for 2008, second by Commissioner Henning. Discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. CHIEF PAGE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you want to go back to libraries? MR. MUDD: Which -- let's go back to L, which is libraries. And -- and Miss Maril -- Miss Marilyn Matthes will present. And that is on page 118. MS. MATTHES: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Marilyn Matthes, Library Director. As you'll see in the buildings summary, we have no publicly funded projects after we finish the south regional library in this current fiscal year. Are there any questions about either buildings or collections? CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Thank you. Yes, I -- I wanted to Page 108 November 3, 2008 talk just a little bit about the furniture that -- that you -- you need to buy, and I was wondering if you can please explain where you are in that process for the south regional library. CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's on the November 18th agenda. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is it? Yeah. MS. MATTHES: On -- we had planned on coming to the board on November 18th to seek clarification. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh. MS. MATTHES: Ifwe follow the local vendor preference and process that you've recently approved for purchasing furni n furnishings, we estimate that we won't have the furniture for the south regional library until late Mayor June instead of our anticipated opening time of March 2009. COMMISSIONER FIALA: But if we -- can we move this forward if we use the state government contract? And let me say I -- I talked with Marilyn a little bit about this, so I'm familiar just a little bit with this. And -- and that is that there's -- the -- the library furniture itself, the shelving and all of that stuff, isn't manufactured here; is that correct? Or it doesn't -- MS. MATTHES: Correct. COMMISSIONER FIALA: They don't even have a representative here, right? MS. MATTHES: Correct. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And so can you move forward in -- through the state contract to order that? MS. MATTHES: I would anticipate that we would end up buying the library-specific shelving and furniture anyway from a vendor who specializes in library furniture. The local vendors don't represent any of the companies that do sell library shelving and library furniture. The major diff -- well, there are really two differences; the durability of library furniture that has to stand up on a daily basis to 1,500 or 2,000 people a day as well as the Page 109 November 3, 2008 flexibility of shelving that's really put in a public library. They're not -- the vendors that sell that kind of thing are not represented by the local vendors. They have their own representatives. And the bulk of the materials are purchased from state contract prices. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And the last question I have to ask you is, when -- when this was in the design phase and -- and you ordered all of the materials for the carpeting and the walls and so forth, it was all -- it was all in a design pattern -- that was before we passed the local preference, isn't it? MS. MATTHES: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So -- so you have specific -- MS. MATTHES: When you're -- when you're planning a building such as this, you're always looking toward the specific furniture and shelving and -- and to make sure that it will fit and it will fit your needs and it will hold the collection it's designed to. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh. MS. MATTHES: And one of the subcontractors for the architect was a design professional who helped in selecting the finishes for the building as well as the furniture. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So now you're going to be bringing this back to us on the 18th, but I wanted everybody to be aware that, you know, the problem is just a little bit different here in that you can't order the stuff from a local preference anyway. MS. MATTHES: Correct. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And I think that that's all I really needed to say. Is there anything else that I have forgotten, Marilyn? MS. MATTHES: There's another part to the furniture, which includes furniture that could be available from local vendors, such as office furniture, and I -- I think the design professional is -- is trying to separate those kinds of things out so that they can be bid locally. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you. Page 110 November 3,2008 CHAIRMAN HENNING: Other -- other questions? COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I'd like to make a motion to approve -- to approve the report from the library buildings for the AUIR 2008. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala, seconded 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: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion carries unanimously. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks, Marilyn. MS. MATTHES: You're welcome. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that will bring us to 2-N, which is government buildings. And Mr. Skip Camp, your director of facilities, will present. MS. MATTHES: They didn't talk about the collections. MR. MUDD: Oh. MS. MATTHES: There was no motion. That was just for the buildings. MR. MUDD: I'm sorry. MS. MATTHES: That's okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, what? MS. MATTHES: You made the motion for buildings. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have books -- MS. MATTHES: We also purchase library materials with impact fees, and that's part of the AUIR. Page III November 3, 2008 COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I'm so sorry. May I moke-- make a motion to also approve all of the other essential items that need to go into a library -- that -- that's what you need-- MS. MATTHES: The collections. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- for the AUIR -- MS. MATTHES: The collections. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- the collections and so forth. Thank you. Sorry. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala to -- to approve the collections or books. The second to the motion -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: And furniture, right? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second it. I have a question I want to ask. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas seconds the motion. He has a question. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. In the -- the cost of$421 per square foot, does that also include books and all the n MS. MATTHES: It does not include books. It does include furnishings. COMMISSIONER HALAS: It does include furnishings? MS. MATTHES: Yes, it does. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. That's still pretty high, $421 a square foot. That's unbelievable. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any -- any further discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. Page 112 November 3,2008 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion carries unanimously. MR. MUDD: Now we'll try Skip Camp again. MR. CAMP: For the record, Skip Camp, your Facilities Management Director. Commissioner -- Commissioners, for the next seven years there's no plan to build any new buildings. That's your plan. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. COMMISSIONER FIALA: That seems hard to approve. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no questions. And thank you for that. But I think we need to come up with a moratorium that we're not going to build them and start going to a point we start to get with more virtual government. MR. CAMP: Commissioners -- Commissioner, we are actually doing that. We have a CMA now, a policy that allows people to -- when it's appropriate to work at home. We are looking at some hoteling where multiple people could use one workstation. We're -- we're looking at those kind of visual-type offices. Just like corporate America's looking at that, we are -- we are too. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I'm just -- I'm just making noises in the back of the room. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion to approve -- by Commissioner Coletta to approve the AUIR for government buildings, second by Commissioner Fiala. Discussion on the motion? Page 113 November 3, 2008 (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? (No response.) MR. CAMP: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. MR. MUDD: That brings us back to Mr. Bosi, and I believe he has some recommendations that the board has to agree to in every particular count. The board has adopted unanimously, and it -- when it was 4-0, it was 4-0 on the dais except for county roads, and that went 3 to 1. What I received from the Isles of Capri were we should take a look at false fire alarm fees, a break-out call-- break out calls that go over the bridge, and we'll get that to the board before the December workshop. Ochopee, I-75 accidents, recovery fee from insurance companies, try to get money from the state to reimburse our -- our particular activities as we try to save people's lives that are in accidents on I-75. Roads, you want landscaping -- cost of installation and maintenance of landscaping. Commissioner Coyle needed that information, and we'll get that to him. You wanted us to add the three roads plus maintenance to the UFR list that was approved by motion 3 to 1 along with the -- the addition adding back the 25 percent on the mai -- maintenance re-establishment for landscaping. Solid waste revenues, how -- how they come and -- how they come in and -- and what they're used for. For the next AUIR, you want Page 114 November 3,2008 come in and -- and what they're used for. For the next AUIR, you want to make sure that that's on the sheets, that you know that. Parks, you bas -- the board basically said use -- get conservation trails from Conservation Collier into the pathways computation for next year. And then all -- for all categories you want to include the debt service in the AUIR by category. And I provided the -- the board members with one sheet -- spreadsheet that talked about it right after lunch, but we'll make sure that that's included. Those are the notes that I took from this particular AO -- AUIR. Mr. Bosi. MR. BOSI: Thank you, County Manager Mudd. One clarification that Commissioner Coyle had pointed out the inconsistency related to Recommendation No.2, and that should state that -- find that there is sufficient road network capacity in the transportation concurrency management database for continued operation of the real-time declining balance ledger to support development order issuance until the FYI '08/'09 end of the third quarter status report. And what that basically is saying, every year we come back and we provide you the status report of our -- our real time -- our concurrency management database. At the end of the fiscal year, third quarter, is basically June of the calendar year. So every annual update and inventory report we give you the one-year -- the -- the one-year update towards that balance. So when I had updated the '09 -- updated it to say '09/'010, that was premature. It should be '08/'09. Where it should have been updated was the recommendation from the planning commission should have had the '08/'09 fiscal year for the -- for the recommendation being sought from the Board of County Commissioners. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Is there a -- MR. MUDD: Mr. Bosi, you have to -- you have to go down the list of recommendations with the board -- Page 115 November 3, 2008 asked -- or the staff is asking the board to make is -- the first is to find upon analysis review actions taken and directions given based upon the 2008 AUIR that adequate ga -- that adequate drainage canals and structurals, potable water, sewer treatment and collection, solid waste, and parks and recreation facilities will be available as defined by the Collier County Concurrency Management System as implemented by Chapter 6.02.02 of the LDC to support development orders issuance until presentation of the 2009 AUIR. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a motion? COMMISSIONER FIALA: I motion to approve -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- Item No.1 for recommendations. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Question. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Henning. Question? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, Mike, you just said 2009 AUIR. This says 2008 AUIR. Which one are we talking about? MR. BOSI: The two thou -- this is the 2008 AUIR. We're asking you for the -- for the -- for the next year until we present the 2009 AUIR that you find that there is adequate facilities for each of those. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Mike, Paragraph 1 at the end, it says, "Until presentation of the 2008 AUIR." CHAIRMAN HENNING: In the book it says 2009. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, but on his -- on the overhead it says 2008. Now, which one are we talking about? MR. BOSI: Weare currently dealing with the 2008 AUIR. We are asking you to find that there is adequate capacity within -- within the designated sections until the presentation of the 2009 AUIR. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. That should be 2009 then, right, rather than 2008? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Page 116 November 3,2008 MR. BOSI: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And -- and you said 2009, but I -- I see where Commissioner Coyle is coming from. So there's a motion and a second to approve the recommendations of No. 1. 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. MR. BOSI: Number 2, staff is requesting that the board find that there is sufficient road network capacity in the transportation concurrency management database for continued operation of the real-time declining balance legend -- legend to support development order issuance until the FYI '08/'09 end of third quarter status report, and that is different than what is appearing within your book. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Is there a motion to approve No.2? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle, 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. Page 117 November 3, 2008 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: It carries unanimously. MR. BOSI: Three is accept and approve the attached document as the 2008 annual update and inventory report on public facilities. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta to accept -- or approve No.3, second 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: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion carries unanimously. MR. BOSI: The fourth would be provide staff direction for projects and revenue sources with Category A facilities set forth for inclusion in the FYI '08/'09 schedule of capital improvements of annual -- of the annual CIE update and amendments as modified by County Manager Mudd. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve Category A. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta to approve No.4, second by Commissioner Fiala. I just have a question on this one. If some of these in Category A didn't have a revenue source, we're -- we're going to trust you're going to be using impact fees and loaning from -- impact fees, gas taxes, grants, and other sources and loaning from the general fund? Page 118 November 3, 2008 MR. MUDD: (Nodded head.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that an assumption? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. MR. BOSI: And, also, to follow up with that is you -- when you are presented the update of the CIE, those revenue sources will be identified as well. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. All in favor of that 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: The motion carries unanimously. Last one IS ... COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm -- I think that No.4 was two separate motions. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Category B, yeah. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So I -- I make a motion to approve Category B. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. MR. BOSI: Category B facilities are not included within the -- the update to the CIE. We made the distinction, I believe, two years ago. Wen we removed Category B facilities from this CIE because we -- we did not want the state to have control over items that should be solely decided at the local issue. So Category B's only exist for the AUIR, and they won't be carry-forward within the CIE. MR. MUDD: But the -- but the board could approve the Category B -- MR. BOSI: Yes. Page 119 November 3, 2008 MR. MUDD: -- minus the CIE for this particular AUIR site. CHAIRMAN HENNING: So there's a motion by Commissioner Coletta to approve Category B for the '08 AUIR, second by Commissioner Halas. Discussion on the motion? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a comment. I -- I think the thing that's confusing is on the screen we're looking at 4, and it says one thing, and in our books under recommendations it said exactly what Mr. Bosi said. So, you know, there -- that -- there's a lot of confusion there. MR. MUDD: Yep. And -- and my apologies. COMMISSIONER FIALA: There we go. MR. MUDD: Okay. Mr. Bosi -- the reason I put up the '08/'09 is because in the one in your original book it had '08/'09, but then when I -- when I saw that it was -- then he made another mistake. He had 2008 instead of 2009. So you're darned if you do, and you're darned if you don't. So that's the one that he read, ma'am. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by saying "aye." COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: It carries unanimously. Number 5. MR. BOSI: In No.5 I think you've -- you've already made with each determination upon each of the respective divisions and departments, and it just asks for the evaluation of the appropriateness of the level-of-service standards that we have adopted for each Page 120 November 3,2008 individual component of the AUIR. You could make a blanket motion, but I think with each individual acceptance of each division and department that you've rendered an opinion regarding those levels-of-service standards. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any other business? MR. MUDD: Commissioner. Mr. Bosi -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Bosi. MR. MUDD: -- go ahead. You never quit talking when you're done. MR. BOSI: Other -- and I -- personally I would like to thank each individual division and department for all of their efforts that they've provided within the AUIR document and the advisory boards, the planning commission and productivity committee. The amount of hours and time that they've dedicated to providing guidance and insight within this is appreciated at the staff level. And the individual staffs within comprehensive planning, they do a tremendous job of making me look somewhat relatively good. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We need a motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I have one comment. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, please. Thank you. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Mr. Mudd just met General Petraeus this past weekend, and I just -- and it was quite an event. He was from his class at West Point, and I was just wondering if -- I mean, we're here a little bit early. Could -- could we just hear a couple of comments -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, that sounds interesting. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- from Mr. Mudd? MR. MUDD: It was, indeed, a unique circumstance for -- for our class, the class of '74 from West Point. We had two members that were actually going to be in the change of command together; one was General David Petraeus was going to assume command from the Page 121 November 3, 2008 deputy commander in chief of CENTCOM, which is Lieutenant General Promotable Marty Dempsy, also a classmate, which over 83 of my contemporaries from my class showed up. Call it the early brother -- brotherhood of arms, but we were there for support. Wernet Thursday in an informal gathering, which was good because it's hard -- it's -- it's not often that a four-star general and/or three-star general promotable get a chance to let their hair down, so to speak. But with their classmates we closed the doors and -- and we thanked them, we roasted them, we had a very good time on Thursday night. It was nice to see. Now, I -- I have to tell you that one thing that struck me as I looked at his arm and I saw almost five years worth of -- in a war zone -- he had been gone for five years, and -- and when I talked to his wife, Holly Nolton -- or excuse me. That -- that was her maiden name -- Holly Petraeus, she hadn't seen him but about three to four months in that five years total time together, and that takes a real strong spouse to raise those kids. And -- and Marty Dempsy's wife is -- is, indeed, that kind of lady too. Both families have both their children in the service right now, so that legacy basically continues. And to know that he's going to pick up another four years' worth of combat time in CENTCOM doesn't make it -- makes it even more challenging for the family. On Saturday after the change of command on Friday -- the governor was there, Senator Martinez and -- and folks, but 83 of my classmates showed up. He was -- he was scheduled to go to -- to Pakistan on Saturday, so no sooner than he -- that he got there he was leaving again, so, indeed, extraordinary people and extraordinary time serving this nation. And it was good to -- to look back and -- and -- and think about the old times, laugh about the old times, so to speak, and encourage them and thank them for their future service time for our country in the -- in the years to come. So it was a good time. Page 122 November 3, 2008 And then I caught a plane to go christen my -- my first grandchild on Saturday with family in Memphis, and those pictures, ma'am, are coming. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations, Grandpa. MR. MUDD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Great experience. COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're real proud of you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion to adjourn? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER HALAS: So moved. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion my 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: It carries unanimously. ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chairman at 1 :31 p.m. Page 123 November 3,2008 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL , Chairman ATTEST: ..' DWI~r::1;U:;l_ ~t 5S tdCnaln14n , ,1911.' 9ft I ~ These minutes approved ~he Board on (9.-/ d(cC{j , as presented ~ or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY KAREN BLOCKBURGER, RPR, NOTARY PUBLIC Page 124