Loading...
BCC Minutes 01/27/2009 R January 27,2009 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, January 27, 2009 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board( s) of such special district as has been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Donna Fiala Fred Coyle Jim Coletta Frank Halas Tom Henning ALSO PRESENT: Jim Mudd, County Manager Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney Sue Filson, BCC Executive Manager Page 1 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS and COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB) ~. " )1 ,,\ AGENDA January 27, 2009 9:00 AM Donna Fiala, BCC Chairman Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Chairman Fred W. Coyle, BCC Vice-Chairman Commissioner, District 4 Jim Coletta, BCC Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Vice-Chairman Frank Halas, BCC Commissioner, District 2 Tom Henning, BCC Commissioner, District 3 NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS." January 27, 2009 Page 1 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 A V AILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1 :00 P.M. 1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. Reverend Bob Hinklin, East Naples United Methodist Church 2. AGENDA AND MINUTES A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and summary agenda.) B. December 23,2008 - Value Adjustment Board Hearings with Special Magistrate Scott Watson C. January 6,2009 - Value Adjustment Board Hearings with Special Magistrate Scott Watson 3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS) A. 25 Year Attendees 1) Louise Bergeron, Library January 27, 2009 Page 2 2) Danny Dominguez, Road Maintenance 3) Michelle Edwards-Arnold, Alternative Transportation Modes 4) Richard Lockerby, Water 5) Jack Miles III, Wastewater 6) Linda Murphy, CDES 4. PROCLAMATIONS 5. PRESENTATIONS A. Presentation on the progress of the Marco Island Historical Museum. Presented by Mr. Bill Perdichizzi, Vice President, Museum Capital Campaign. B. The Waste Reduction Awards Program, the WRAP award, is presented to the Naples Botanical Garden for contributing to the greater good of all of Collier County by promoting green business practices, thereby helping to prolong the life of the Collier County Landfill. C. Recommendation to recognize Joanne Markiewicz, Operations Manager, Purchasing Department, as Supervisor of the Year for 2008. Presentation on progress of widening Collier Boulevard (US 41 to Davis Boulevard) from existing 4 lanes to 6 lanes divided roadway, drainage improvements, lighting, bike lanes, sidewalk and pathway. 6. PUBLIC PETITIONS A. Public petition request by Jeff Nunner to discuss sign permit for Naples Mazda. Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m., unless otherwise noted. 7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS January 27, 2009 Page 3 8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS A. Appointment of member to the Environmental Advisory Council. B. Appointment of member to the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee. C. Request that the Board of County Commissioners consider waiving the residency requirement in relation to Gary Eidson, member of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee. 10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT A. This item continued from the January 13,2009 BCC Meetinl!: and is further continued to the February 10, 2009 BCC Meetinl!:. This item reauires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to deny the Alternative Impact Fee Appeal submitted by Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC (Developer) and authorize the Chairman to execute a notice to the Developer for the collection of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD) Alternative Impact Fee calculation of$120,904 for the existing tenants of Building 300, with Developers concurrence, or the original amount of $196,873 without Developers concurrence. (Tom Wi des, Director Fiscal Operations, Public Utilities) B. Recommendation to approve award of Request for Proposal Number 08- 5038R Automated Meter Reading System to Ferguson Enterprises, Incorporated and Municipal Water Works, Incorporated in the estimated amount of $2,000,000. (Jim DeLony, Public Utilities Administrator) C. Recommendation to approve the purchase of three fixed-route buses and trolley decal wrap for Collier Area Transit, at a total cost of $1 ,058,460. (Norman Feder, Transportation Services Administrator) D. Briefing to the Board of County Commissioners in regard to the Code Enforcement Departments process to address Code Enforcement violations on Lis Pendens / Foreclosed properties in unincorporated Collier County. January 27, 2009 Page 4 (Diane Flagg, Director, Code Enforcement, CDES) E. Recommendation for the approval of the sixth Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List and direction for the County Manager or his designee to actively pursue projects recommended within the A-Category. (Alex Sulecki, Senior Environmental Specialist) F. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners provide the County Manager or his designee guidance as to how to enforce the approved sign code amendment and regulations as codified in the Collier County Land Development Code for the geographical area ofImmokalee. (Joe Schmitt, Community Development Administrator and Diana Flagg, Code Enforcement Director) G. Request that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approve the extension of the deadline to complete expanded intersection improvements to April 30, 2009 as part of conditions of approval and status of compliance for the Coconilla Planned Unit Development Ordinance No. 05-15, also known as the Aqua at Pelican Isle Yacht Club Project, that was presented on September 23,2008 as Item #16Kl (moved to Item #12A). The expanded intersection improvements will include full construction of the permanent access point at the signalized intersection with related site improvements. (Norman Feeder, Transportation Services Administrator) H. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the redirection of a portion of FY 09 budgeted tourist tax funds from off-season to in-season advertising and promotion up to $200,000. (Jack Wert, Tourism Director) 11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY January 27, 2009 Page 5 15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS 16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1) To accept final and unconditional conveyance of the water utility facility for Treviso Bay Golf Course Maintenance Facility. 2) To accept final and unconditional conveyance of the water utility facility for Promenade at Naples Centre. 3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the sewer utility facility for Treviso Bay at Southwest Boulevard. 4) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer utility facilities for Preserve Commons. 5) Recommendation to have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) approve the expenditure of $1 ,540.00 to pay for the installation of arterial level street lighting at the Casa Del Vida subdivision entrance. A $10,000 cash bond was posted and is in place to pay for completion of the improvements. 6) This item reQuires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission Members. Should a hearinl!: be held on this item, all participants are reQuired to be sworn in. This is a recommendation to approve for recording the final plat ofDiamante Estates Di Napoli, approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. 7) BIas Elias and Bert Eisenbud of Es Country Store requests a Temporary Use Permit in accordance with the provisions of the Land Development Code (LDC) for twenty-eight consecutive weekends (Saturday and Sunday), alternating between the location at the corner January 27, 2009 Page 6 of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard, Section 03, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, and the location at the corner of Oil Well Road and Immokalee Road, Section 23, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, five additional months beyond the sum total twenty- eight day time limit that is allowed by the LDC during the 2009 calendar year to operate a mobile smokehouse cooker, and to allow the applicant to pay the two hundred dollar fee, per location, to encompass the entire requested length of time. 8) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (public) and drainage improvements for the final plat of Mission Hills Shopping Center with the loop road and associated drainage improvements being maintained by Collier County. The property owners association will maintain the internal paving and drainage improvements within the shopping center. 9) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve an impact fee reimbursement requested by Stock Construction on behalf of Players Cove Development, LLC, totaling $58,262.16, and a reimbursement of the Allowance for Funds Prudently Invested totaling $2,229.32 due to the cancellation of a building permit. 10) Recommendation that assessment oflot mowing cost related to property located at 18523 Royal Hammock Blvd., Collier County, Florida be waived. Code Enforcement case number CENA200800l2474. 11) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfactions of Code Enforcement Liens for payments received. 12) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve an amendment revising Ordinance Number 05-44 to clarify the requirements for the Special Magistrate's role in the imposition of nuisance abatement liens. B. TRANSPORT A TION SERVICES 1) Recommendation to approve an Easement Agreement for the purchase of a perpetual road right-of-way drainage and utility easement which January 27, 2009 Page 7 is required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project. Project No. 60168, Phase II (Fiscal Impact: $11,900) 2) Recommendation to approve award of contract #09-5121 to Aztek Communications, Precision Contracting Services, Inc., and OSP Management, Inc. for Fiber Optic Installation, Maintenance and Repair. Annual expenditures are estimated around $750,000. 3) Recommendation to award Bid #09-5160 Airport Road (Cougar to Vanderbilt Beach Road) Roadway Grounds Maintenance to Hannula Landscaping and Irrigation, Inc. in the estimated annual expenditure of $76,767.65 (Fund Ill, Cost Center 163865). 4) Recommendation to award Collier County Golden Gate Beautification MSTU/MSTD Roadway Grounds Maintenance to Hannula Landscaping & Irrigation, Inc. in the amount of $267,418.64. 5) Recommendation to award Bid #09-5152 Immokalee Road (Tamiami Trail North to Strand Blvd.) Roadway Grounds Maintenance to Hannula Landscaping and Irrigation, Inc. in the estimated annual expenditure of $90,525.48.(Fund Ill, Cost Center 163888). 6) Recommendation to award Bid #09-5040R including alternates 1 for construction of Old US 41 Stormwater Improvements Phase 2, Project No. 511331, to David Foote Environmental Construction, Inc. in the amount of$645,982.75 plus a ten percent contingency. 7) Recommendation that the Board of Collier County Commissioners approve award of Bid #09-5108, Annual Contract for Concrete Sidewalk and Curb Maintenance to BQ Concrete, LLC and Design- Build Engineers and Contractors, Inc. Annual expendtiures are estimated to be $150,000. 8) Recommendation to award Bid #09-5150 for construction of St. Andrews Boulevard Phase II Stormwater Improvements, Project No. 51140.1, to Haskins, Inc. in the amount of $13 8,863 .50 plus a ten percent contingency. January 27, 2009 Page 8 9) Recommendation to approve and execute Subcontracted Transportation Provider (STP) Agreement Financial Project Number 41604318201 between Collier County and the Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged for an award in the amount of $251,519.00 for the provision of transportation for qualified Medicaid recipients. C. PUBLIC UTILITIES 1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners accept the withdrawal ofImmokalee Disposal, Inc.s petition for an extraordinary rate increase associated with fuel costs. 2) Recommendation to accept a South Florida Water Management District Alternative Water Supply Grant in the amount of$500,000 for partial funding ofthe construction of the North County Regional Water Treatment Plant and South County Regional Water Treatment Plant Sand Separators, Project #71052. 3) Recommendation to approve Certification of Financial Responsibility for the permit renewal of the Department of Environmental Protection Permit for Injection Well Number 2 at the North County Regional Water Treatment Plant in the amount of$46l,011. 4) Recommendation to approve Change Order #2 to Work Order PG-FT- 3972-08-01, Contract #05-3792, with de la Parte & Gilbert, P.A. for Fixed Term Specialized Legal Services in the amount of$IOO,OOO.OO. 5) Recommendation to award Bid No. 08-5097, Annual Contract for Chlorinator Equipment Maintenance to Water Treatment & Controls, Company in the estimated annual amount of$80,000. 6) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of $65,000.00 to fund the close-out of the Pelican Bay Fire & Irrigation Water System Improvements Project, Project #74023 D. PUBLIC SERVICES January 27, 2009 Page 9 1) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to approve a Parking License Agreement with Vanderbilt Real Estate Holdings, LP, for temporary parking for beach maintenance equipment at an annual cost of $6,000. 2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Edgar Dominguez Martin and Barbara Dominguez (Owners) for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 36, Block II, Naples Manor Lakes, East Naples. 3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a Resolution Appointing representatives to the Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Recreation and Parks Advisory Group which has been established for the purpose of updating the Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park Management Plan. 4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, an Agreement providing for a $250,000 State Housing Initiative Partnership (SHIP) grant to Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. for the acquisition and/or rehabilitation of at least five (5) residential dwelling units to benefit households earning less than 120% of the Area Median Income. 5) Present to the Board of County Commissioners a summary of the Impact Fee Deferral Agreements recommended for approval in FY09, including the total number of Agreements approved, the total dollar amount deferred and the balance remaining for additional deferrals in FY09. 6) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a $275,000 subrecipient agreement with the Collier County Housing Authority (CCHA) to provide Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) for approximately 38 low income families in Collier County. This Agreement amount will be comprised of $250,000 in HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) funds and $25,000 in Marco Island Affordable Housing January 27, 2009 Page 10 Trust funds. 7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Jean Baptiste Sergot Souverain and Marie Edith Souverain (Owners) for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 38, Liberty Landing, lmmokalee. 8) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to approve the submittal of the attached 4-H Foundation Inc. Grant Application requesting $50,881.00 for the 4-H Outreach Coordinators and the enhancement of outreach activities managed by the Collier County University of Florida /IF AS Extension Department. 9) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves and authorizes the Chairman to sign an agreement with Collier Health Services (CHS) for $221,603 and an agreement with the Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) to participate in the Low Income Pool Program. Participation in this program will generate an additional $275,265 in Federal matching funds to be paid directly to Collier Health Services for medical services for the most medically needy in Collier County. 10) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a Delegation of Authority to Act as Certifying Officer form designating the Director of Housing and Human Services as the Certifying Officer for Environmental Reviews required for federally funded grant projects. 11) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an amendment to the Big Cypress Housing Corporation Home Investment Partnership Program (HOME) and CHDO Set Aside for (55) Fifty-Five Units Subrecipient Agreement approved on November 13, 2007 (ItemI6D28) for $250,000.00 This amendment will allow final payment of$47,488 to be made to Big Cypress as reimbursement for expenses incurred for eligible costs associated with the Agreement even though leasing of January 27, 2009 Page 11 the units is not complete. 12) Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve a Budget Amendment totaling $317,667.32 for the 951 Boat Ramp Parking Lot Expansion Project. E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 1) Recommendation for BCC to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the Public Assistance Sub-grant Agreement for TS Fay so the County can submit to FEMA for reimbursement of $15M. 2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners ratify additions to, modifications to and deletions from the 2009 Fiscal Year Pay and Classification Plan made from October 2, 2008 through December 31, 2008. 3) Recommendation to award RFP #08-5131 Security Services to Wackenhut Corporation for government security services at an estimated annual cost of$995,237. 4) Recommendation to approve the payment of Group Insurance actuarial consulting fees to Willis, Inc. in the amount of $61 ,772.50. 5) Recommendation to approve and execute a Resolution authorizing the Commission Chairperson to execute Deed Certificates for the sale of burial plots at Lake Trafford Memorial Gardens Cemetery during the 2009 calendar year. 6) Recommendation to approve and execute a First Amendment to Lease Agreement with Overseas Development Corporation for the continued use of temporary office space for the Guardian Ad Litem office during construction of the new Courthouse Annex building at an annual cost not to exceed $14,162.63, Project #525331. F. COUNTY MANAGER 1) Approve budget amendments. January 27, 2009 Page 12 2) Recommendation to approve the sole source purchase of 49 Optic om Emitters for use in County Emergency Medical Services vehicles in the amount of$87,465.00. 3) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments (appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds) to the Fiscal Year 2008-09 Adopted Budget. 4) Recommendation to approve a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for NCH Healthcare System for non-emergency ambulance service and approve a Budget Amendment recognizing and appropriating the $250 annual renewal fee. 5) Recommendation to award Bid No. 09-5156 to Stryker Sales Corporation for the purchase of 30 stair chairs for Emergency Medical Services in the amount of$59,493.00. G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1) To approve and execute Sweat Equity Grant Agreement(s) between the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency and a Grant Applicant(s) within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment area. (3180 Caledonia A venue) 2) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approve and authorize its Chairman to execute two grant agreements with the Florida Airports Council (F AC) in the amount $5,000 each, and approve all necessary budget amendments. This grant funding is to provide wages, living assistance and/or transportation expenses for one internship program for the Immokalee Regional Airport and one internship program for the Marco Island Executive Airport during the spring of 2009. These grants do not require matching funds. H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose. January 27, 2009 Page 13 Attended the US Coast Guard Auxiliary Change of Watch Ceremony on January 16,2009 at Marco Island Yacht Club on Marco Island, FL. $55.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget. 2) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose. Attended the Marco Island Historical Society Time Capsule and Beerial Ceremony on February 3, 2009 at Marco Island Historical Society Museum Building Site on Marco Island, FL. $25.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget. 3) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose. Will attend the Economic Development Council Project Innovation series on January 8, 2009; January 15,2009; February 19,2009; March 19,2009; April 16, 2009; and May 20, 2009 at the Naples Beach Hotel and Golf Club in Naples, FL. $200.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget. 4) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose. Will attend Broadway in the Stacks on February 8, 2009 at the South Regional Library in Naples, FL. $25.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget. 5) This item continued from the Januarv 13,2009 BCC Meetinl!:. Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for payment for attendance to a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner Coletta attended the 2009 Everglades Coalition Conference, January 9-11,2009. $190.00 for Conference Registration Fee (meals a-la- carte); $190 for Conference talks (included meals); $454 for accommodations (includes $56 in parking); and $5.00 in tolls (Alligator Alley); for a total of$839.00 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget. I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE 1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed. January 27, 2009 Page 14 J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of January 03,2009 through January 09,2009 and for submission into the official records of the Board. 2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of January 10,2009 through January 16,2009 and for submission into the official records of the Board. K. COUNTY ATTORNEY 1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves Staffs proposal (I) to deny Mrs. Cynthia Dennis Prays request that the Board waive the federal loan granted to her by Collier County Housing and Human Services, (2) send a written demand to recover the funds, and (3) not initiate litigation against Mrs. Pray. 2) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the amount of $910,000 for Parcel ll5FEE in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Robbie L. Rayburn, et. aI., Case No. 07-4268-CA (Santa Barbara Boulevard Extension Project #60091, and Lely Area Storm Water Improvement Project #511011) (Fiscal Impact $122,200). 17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI- JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN. January 27, 2009 Page 15 A. This item reQuires ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission Members. Should a hearinl!: be held on this item, all participants are reQuired to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Petition A VESMT- 2008-AR-13809, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the Countys and the Publics interest in two drainage easements which were originally created in Official Record Book 2130, Pages 1078-1081 and shown on the plat of Fiddlers Creek Phase Four, Unit Two, as filed in Plat Book 45, pages 40-47 of the Public records of Collier County, Florida situated in Section II & 14, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, the vacated easements being more specifically depicted and described in Exhibit A. B. This item reQuires ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission Members. Should a hearinl!: be held on this item, all participants are reQuired to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Petition A VPLA T- 2008-AR-13888, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the Countys and the Publics interest in that portion of a 20 foot wide drainage access easement for drainage maintenance over Lot 9, Block B, as shown on the record map known as Palm River Estates Unit No.7 and filed in Plat Book 12, pages 28 through 30 of the Public records of Collier County Florida and situated in Section 23, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, and being more specifically depicted and described in Exhibit A. C. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission members. V A -2008-AR -1360 I, Okeechobee Inn, LTD, represented by Gina Green, P.E. of Green Engineering, Inc., is requesting a Variance from LDC Subsection 4.02.27, Specific Design Standards for the Immokalee-State Road 29A Commercial Overlay Subdistrict, to permit access to State Road 29 for a parcel having less than the minimum 440-foot street frontage width. The 9.04-acre subject property is located on the west side of State Road 29, just north of the Lake Trafford Road intersection, in Section 32, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Immokalee, Florida.CTS D. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission members. CU-2008-AR-13639, Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter- Day Saints, represented by Alan Brewer of Reynolds, Smith and Hills, is requesting a Conditional Use for a church in the Residential Single-Family (RSF-3) Zoning District, as specified in Section 2.03.02.A.l.c.2 of the January 27, 2009 Page 16 Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) The 4.63-acre subject property is located at 4935 23rd Court SW in Section 21, Township 49 South, Range 26 East of Collier County, Florida.CTS E. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission members. SV-2006-AR-10482, Seasonal Investments, Inc. d/b/a Fairways Resort, represented by Tim Hancock, AICP of Davidson Engineering, Inc., is requesting five variances for an off-premises sign. The first variance is from Subsection 5.06.04.C.16.b.i. of the LDC which allows a maximum sign area of 12 square feet for a double-sided off-premise directional sign to permit an 80 square-foot off-premise sign. The second variance is from Subsection 5.06.04.C.16.b.ii. of the LDC which allows a maximum sign height of8 feet in height above the lowest center grade of the arterial roadway for an off- premise directional sign to allow a maximum sign height of 20 feet. The third variance is from Subsection 5.06.04.C.16.b.iii. of the LDC which requires that a sign is located no closer than ten feet to any property line to allow a sign within zero feet of a property line. The fourth variance is from Subsection 5.06.06.Z. of the LDC which prohibits any sign which publicizes an activity not conducted on the premises upon which the sign is maintained to allow an off-premises sign. The fifth variance is from Subsection 5.06.06.AA. of the LDC which requires that no sign shall be placed or permitted as a principal use on any property, in any zoning district. The subject property is located at the southwest corner of Piper Boulevard and Palm River Boulevard, in Section 23, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (CTS) F. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission members. CU-2008-AR-1339l, Bishop Frank 1. Dewane, Diocese of Venice, represented by Margaret Perry, AICP, of Wilson Miller, Inc., and Bruce Anderson, Esquire, ofRoetzel & Andress is requesting a Conditional Use expansion in the Residential Multi- family (RMF-12) zoning district pursuant to Collier County Land Development Code Subsection 2.03.02.C.l.c. The proposed Conditional Use will supplement the existing Resolution Numbers 98-173 and 04-220 by adding four (4) lots to be used for church and school related uses including but not limited to a chapel, church/school related offices, religious goods store (not to exceed two thousand (2000) square feet), priests residences, and parking for church and school uses. The subject property is located at 5280 January 27, 2009 Page 17 28th Avenue S.W. and 2780 52nd Terrace SW, in Section 28, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (CTS) 18. ADJOURN INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383. January 27, 2009 Page 18 January 27, 2009 MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your seats. Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot mike. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Thank you all for being here today. Would you please rise with me to hear our pray, our invocation, by Reverend Bob Hinklin of East Naples United Methodist church. REVEREND HINKLIN: Let us be in prayer. Almighty and ever gracious God, we thank you for this day, this beautiful day that we experience in this wonderful state and this beautiful community. We pray that as we are gathered here today that we may feel your spirit upon us, that we may be good stewards of all that you have given to us. As public officials, as servants serving all the people of this community, we pray, dear Lord, that your grace may reside upon these commissioners, upon those in enforcement, upon all the employees of this county that, indeed, they may feel your grace and your wonder and your awe as they serve people. We pray in service that they may, day by day, observe not party or prejudice but the sound wisdom of their minds and the discretion of the needs of this community. Bless us now. We do pray in your most holy name, in the name of Jesus, amen. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And now would you say, with Commissioner Halas and all of us, the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Now, shall we begin with you? MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Our County Manager, Jim Mudd. Page 2 January 27,2009 Item #2A REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA- APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES MR. MUDD: Agenda changes, Board of County Commissioners' meeting, January 27, 2009. Item 3A should read, 20-year attendees rather than 25-year attendees. That clarification is at staffs request. The next item is Item 3A6, Linda Murphy, community development's environmental services, will not be present to accept her award today. And that clarification is, again, at the recipient's request. The next item is Item lOA. It was continued from the January 13,2009, BCC meeting. It's further continued to the February 10, 2009, meeting. And yesterday I was told that the petitioner asked that it be continued even further until the February 24, 2009, BCC meeting. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by commission members. It is a recommendation to deny the alternative impact fee appeals submitted by Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC, the developer, and authorize the chairman to execute a notice to the developer for the collection of the Collier County Water/Sewer District alternative impact fee calculations of$120,904 for the existing tenants of building 300, with developer's concurrence, or the original amount of $196,873 without the developer's concurrence. That item is being continued at the petitioner's request. The next item is Item lOB. The two contracts associated with the award requests for proposal number 08-5038R have incorrect signature blocks. They indicate Commissioner Tom Henning as chairman rather than Commissioner -- Commission Chair Donna Page 3 January 27,2009 Fiala. Correct contracts have been distributed appropriately. That clarification's at staffs request. The next item is Item tOE. Two pages of backup material for the core (sic) parcel -- excuse me -- the Gore parcel and the Berman Trust parcel are being added to the I-75 projects, and those backup sheets have been distributed to the commissioners appropriately. That's staff -- that change is at staffs request. The next item is to add on Item lOr. It's a request that the Board of County Commissioners provide direction with respect to whether the county should close on the Pepper Ranch transaction in light of the proposed easement through the Pepper Ranch and whether the county should reduce the purchase price to reflect the bond-carrying costs and the reduction in the value to the Pepper Ranch due to the access. That item is being added at staffs request. The next item is to move Item 10A5 to 10J, and that is a recommendation to have the Board of County Commissioners approve the expenditure of $1,540 to pay for the installation of arterial level street-lighting at the Casa Del Vida subdivision entrance. A $10,000 cash bond was posted and is in place to pay for the completion of the improvements. That item is being moved at Commissioner Coyle's request. The next item is Item 10 -- excuse me, 16A12. Again, next item is 16A12. It's continued to February to, 2009, BCC meeting. It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve an amendment revising ordinance number 05-44 to clarify the requirements for the special magistrate's role in the imposition of nuisance abatement liens. That item is being continued at staffs request. The next item is to move Item 16C4 to 10L. That's a recommendation to approve change (sic) number two to work order PG-FT-3792-08-01, contract number 05-3792, with della Parte & Gilbert, P.A. for fixed-term specialized legal services in the amount of Page 4 January 27, 2009 a hundred thousand dollars. Also note that this item references work order PG-FT-3972-08-01, but the correct work order is PG-FT-3792. That item is being moved at Commissioner Henning's request. The next item is to withdraw Item 16D7. That's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves and authorizes the chairman to sign a lien agreement with Jean Baptiste Sergot Souverain and Marie Edith Souverain, owners, for deferral of 100 percent of Collier County's impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 38, Liberty Landing, Immokalee. That item is being withdrawn at staffs request. The next item is to move Item l6E2 to 10K. That's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners ratifies additions to -- additions to, modifications to, and deletions from the 2009 fiscal year pay and classification plan made from October 2, 2008, through December 31, 2008. That item is being moved to the regular agenda at Commissioner Henning's request. The next item is Item 17B. In the resolution of this item, Page 9 of 10, the sixth line from the top should read, Lot 9, rather than just Lot. That clarification's at staffs request. Commissioners, you have one time-certain item today, and that's 10F to be heard at 10 a.m., and that item is a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners provide the County Manager or his designee guidance as to how to enforce the approved sign code amendment and regulations as codified in the Collier County Land Development Code for the geographical area of Immokalee. That item for time certain, it was asked at Commissioner Coletta's request. That's all I have, Madam Chair. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. How about our County Attorney; do you have anything for us? MR. KLATZKOW: No changes, Madam. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Thank you.i Page 5 January 27, 2009 And now Commissioners, do you have any changes to the agenda or anything to declare on the ex parte? Commissioner Coletta, would -- can we start with you, please. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have no changes to the agenda. I have nothing to declare under the consent agenda. Under the summary agenda, Item 17D, I have had correspondence, emails, and we entered three times into AIMS, the issue itself, to have staff come back and report to us. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no further changes to today's agenda; and ex parte communication on today's summary agenda, l7F, I met with the Father from St. Elizabeth Seton, also talked to civic leaders and interesting (sic) parties in Golden Gate City. That's it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair, I have no disclosures for the consent agenda, and for the summary agenda, for Item 17D,E, and F, I have documentation only related to the Planning Commission hearing, and I have no further changes to the agenda. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Somebody took my mike. CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's right there. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, Madam Chair. I have nothing on the consent agenda. On the summary agenda, on 17E, I've had correspondence and emails in regards to this concern. And I have nothing else to pull from today's agenda. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. And I have no changes or recommendations for the agenda and Page 6 January 27, 2009 nothing to declare on the consent agenda. And on 16 -- 17E, I have received emails regarding the Fairways Resort. And that's all I have to declare. Yes, ma'am. MS. FILSON: I just want to let the commissioners know that 16C4, which is moved to lOL, is not on your agenda index. I just got that at nine o'clock. So you may want to mark your index. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Would you say that again, 16-- MS. FILSON: 16C4 was moved to 10L. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you. MS. FILSON: And that's not on your updated index. CHAIRMAN FIALA: l6C4. Thank you, Sue. Okay. And with that, may I have approval for -- today's regular, consent, and summary agendas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: So moved. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve as amended. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I have a move to approve from Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Halas. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) Page 7 AGENDA CHANGES BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING Januarv 27. 2009 Item 3A should read: "20 Year Attendees" (rather than 25 Year Attendees). (Staff's request.) Item 3A6: Linda Murphy, CDES, will not be present to accept her award. (Recipient's request.) Item 10A was continued from the Januarv 13. 2009 BCC meetina. further continued to the Februarv 10. 2009 BCC meetinCl and is further continued to the Februarv 24. 2009 BCC meetinCl: This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to deny the Alternative Impact Fee Appeal submitted by Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC (Developer) and authorize the Chairman to execute a notice to the Developer for the collection of the Collier County Water- Sewer District (CCWSD) Alternative Impact Fee calculation of $120,904 for the existing tenants of Building 300, with Developers concurrence, or the original amount $196,873 without Developers concurrence. (Petitioner's request.) Item 10B: The two contracts associated with the award of Request for Proposal Number 08-5038R, have incorrect signature blocks. They indicate Commissioner Tom Henning as Chairman rather than Commission Chair Donna Fiala. Corrected contracts have been distributed appropriately. (Staff's request.) Item 10E: Two pages of back up material for the Gore Parcel and the Berman Trust Parcel are being added for the 1-75 projects. (Staff's request.) Add On Item 101: Request that the Board of County Commissioners provide direction with respect to whether the County should close on the Pepper Ranch transaction, in light of the proposed easement through the Pepper Ranch and whether the County should reduce the purchase price to reflect the bond carrying costs and the reduction in value to the Pepper Ranch due to the access. (Staff's request.) Move 16A5 to 10J: Recommendation to have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) approve the expenditure of $1,540.00 to pay for the installation of arterial level street lighting at the Casa Del Vida subdivision entrance. A $10,000 cash bond was posted and is in place to pay for completion of the improvements. (Commissioner Coyle's request.) Item 16A12 continued to the Februarv 10. 2009 BCC meetina: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve an amendment revising Ordinance Number 05-44 to clarify the requirements for the Special Magistrate's role in the imposition of nuisance abatement liens. (Staff's request.) Move Item 16C4 t010L: Recommendation to approve Change Order #2 to Work Order PG-FT-3792-08-01, Contract #05-3792, with de la Parte & Gilbert, P.A. for Fixed Term Specialized Legal Services in the amount of $100,000.00. Also note that this item references Work Order PG-FT-3972-08-01, but the correct Work Order is PG-FT -3792. (Commissioner Henning's request.) Withdraw Item 1607: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Jean Baptiste Sergot Souverain and Marie Edith Souverain (Owners) for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 38, Liberty Landing, Immokalee. (Staff's request.) Move Item 16E2 to 10K: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners ratify additions to, modifications to and deletions from the 2009 Fiscal Year Pay and Classification Plan made from October 2, 2008 through December 31, 2008. (Commissioner Henning's request.) Item 17B: In the Resolution for this item, page 9 of 10, the sixth line from the top should read "Lot 9" (rather than "Lot"). (Staff's request.) Time Certain Items: Item 10F to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners provide the County Manager or his designee guidance as to how to enforce the approved sign code amendment and regulations as codified in the Collier County Land Development Code for the geographical area of Immokalee. (Commissioner Coletta's request.) 1/27/20098:52 AM January 27, 2009 Item #2B and #2C MINUTES FROM THE DECEMBER 23, 2008 VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD SPECIAL MAGISTRATE WATSON; JANUARY 6, 2009 VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD SPECIAL MAGISTRATE WATSON - APPROVED AS PRESENTED CHAIRMAN FIALA: Go for it, Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me get to it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I make a motion that we approve the December 23,2008, Value Adjustment Board hearing with Special Master Scott Watson, and January 6, 2009, Value Adjustment Board hearing with Special Master Scott Watson. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Do I have a second? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: And now it is a pleasure, as commissioners, to give our service awards to our employees, and so we'll all step down front. Item #3A SERVICE AWARD 20- YEAR RECIPIENTS - PRESENTED Page 8 January 27,2009 MR. MUDD: Service awards. We have -- it's our distinct pleasure today to have five recipients that have served Collier County for 20 years. The first recipient is Louise Bergeron, and she works for the library. (Applause.) MR. MUDD: Our next 20-year recipient is Danny Dominguez from road maintenance. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you, Danny. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much for your servIce. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Glad you're here. You do a wonderful job. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, you make us look good. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for all those speed bumps. (Applause.) MR. MUDD: Our next 20-year recipient is Michelle Edwards Arnold, alternative transportation. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Wow. Twenty years, wonderful. (Applause.) MR. MUDD: Our next 20-year recipient is Richard Lockerby from the water department. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER COYLE: Richard, thank you very much. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thanks for your services. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thanks, Richard. Appreciate your servIce. (Applause.) MR. MUDD: And our last 20-year recipient for today is Jack Page 9 January 27,2009 Mills (sic), III, from the wastewater department. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER COYLE: Jack, thank you very much. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Jack, 20 years. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you for your guys. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you for your service. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Congratulations. (Applause.) MR. MUDD: Congratulations. Item #5A PRESENTATION ON THE PROGRESS OF THE MARCO ISLAND HISTORICAL MUSEUM. PRESENTED BY MR. BILL PERDICHIZZI, VICE PRESIDENT, MUSEUM CAPITAL CAMPAIGN - PRESENTED Commissioner, we have no proclamation for today, so that takes us to our next part of the agenda, is presentations. Our first presentation is on the progress of the Marco Island Historical Museum, presented by Mr. Bill Perdichizzi, vice-president of the museum capital campaign. And I think I -- I hope I pronounced it okay. MR. JONES: Perfect. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You did a good job. MR. JONES: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, chair persons (sic). Hank Jones, Department of Facilities Management. It's my pleasure to introduce to you -- first presenter is Craig Woodward, who's honorary co-chairman of the Marco Museum Capital Campaign, followed by Bill Perdichizzi, who is the vice-president and co- -- also co-chairman of the museum capital campaign. Craig? Page 10 January 27,2009 MR. WOODWARD: Right. Well, thank you very much. We really appreciate you listening to our presentation. It's in two parts. The first part is the design of the museum, and the second part Bill will go over kind of where we are and what we have to finish up. We're going to move fairly quickly because we know you have a lot of pressing issues today. The status of the museum and what remains to be done. Little background on this. The historical society on Marco prepared and negotiated a contract, a partnership, with you where you donated the land, and you will staff and operate and maintain the museum and design and construct the exhibits and the displays using TDC funds. And we're raising the funds for the museum complex and to construct the buildings, and then the completed complex would then be managed jointly by the county and by the Historical Society. This is what the museum will look like. We did give each of you a packet, which is this same presentation. This is a model of the museum. As you come down Heathwood, you would see a shell mound and then you would see these buildings that have a chickee-hut-type roof to give you sort of a look that people would want to stop and visit. This is the roof. It's actually synthetic thatch material. It's not a real chickee hut roof. This we found is being used up at Disney World and has like a 20-year life, and it's fairly expensive, but then that's something that the Historical Society is paying for. But it gives us that look with less maintenance. There's an overhead view of the museum. This is actually of a model, which I built the model. And the -- it's -- it shows the look of it. The main museum is the building that has the air-conditioners, the little green things on the top of it, is actually the main museum. To the bottom of that main museum is the administration building where the archives are kept, and then the building on the bottom left is the Living History Hall where presentations and meetings would be held.e Page 11 January 27, 2009 There's a lagoon in the front in the shell mound, which you see from the main road as you go by. The actual lagoon we're making a little bigger than the model shows. And there's a bridge over the lagoon, and there's a chickee hut out there. And you can see sort of a rendering of an Indian canoe there on the -- on the lagoon. The existing site, as you may well know, has the library on Marco, which in this picture is in that sort of bottom left area, and then there was a large area that the county owned that had a women's gazebo in the middle of it, and that's that circular thing you see there. That's the actual location of where the museum is going to be built. It was dedicated on March 15th. And we'll show the progress on the museum. This shows the site with the complete museum being built. It's kind of hard to see, but there's parking, around the back sides, and then the shell mound in the middle. There's -- right now we're working on Phase 1. We have all our permits from the City of Marco, and everything is going on that. Phase I is the main museum and the administration building all of the parking that's needed for that, the parking to the south and to the west. We're going to kind of walk through the buildings here. This is the main museum there on the left and the administration building on the right. They're being built together sort of one building. And if you were to go in the entrance, this is -- the main lobby is right there. You can enter from either the west side or the north side, and there'll be an information counter, a wall of donors, and there'll be some traveling exhibits. Then if you were to go the next room is the special and temporary exhibit room, and in that room we would have things that would be traveling exhibits, artwork, shell collections, and any type of special events. These are some paintings that were done as part of a program that we recently did on art, interprets history on Marco. The next room, which is really our major, largest room, is the Page 12 January 27, 2009 Calusa room, and you would enter that from the prior room. And the Calusa room is the -- will depict a Calusa village with various activities going on. We haven't decided -- we're working with your staff on what will be there. We hope, as part of this, to have part of the Cushing expedition artifacts. We're working with the Smithsonian, which would be very exciting to have some of those on loan to us. And as part of this room, we will also have a vault that's being built in the room that meets our specifications, so the items would actually be in the vault. You wouldn't know it if you were in the room. You would just think they're in a display case, but it's actually a vault. The next room after leaving the Calusa room is the pioneer room, and the pioneer room will contain the history and artifacts of the pioneer era, the Barfields, the Colliers, the -- you know, those are the people that lived on Marco in the early days. And we'll also have short videos and some, you know, reenactment areas and discussion areas. The next room is the Deltona modern Marco era, which would really be the early '60s in the development of the island by the Deltona Corporation. And it would -- there's a picture of the MackIe brothers and a picture of the original site plan for Marco Island. And we'll have a lot of artifacts and things like that from the modern era. And then the next room would be the museum store. And so basically you're sort of making a big circle around the building as you walk through each of these different areas. And then you would move from there. In the museum store we would have things like DVD's, books, and things for sale. And the profits would go to the Historical Society to continuous with us to maintain and replace exhibits, to add traveling exhibits and things like that. The next building is the administration building and archival Page 13 January 27, 2009 area, and it will contain offices, conference rooms, lunchroom for employees, reference library, shipping, receiving areas. The second phase of the museum is the top part, which is a little parking lot up there and a Living History Hall. And here's an artist's rendering of what that building will look like, and also this is what the inside of it will look like. That building is designed with the wood floor and sort of the inside will also have a chickee hut, so you think you're really looking up at the real roof. Instead it's really two roofs on top of each other. Now I'm going to turn the presentation over to Bill, who's going to finish up with the remaining items here. Bill? MR. PERDICHIZZI: Good morning. What I'm going to go through now is basically what we've done and where we're going. These are the completed actions. In June of 2007 we had prepared the site plans and we discussed them with the city and the county. We had to revise the site plans and resubmit them to the city and county December of 2007 based on the conversations that we had with them and their suggested edits and then comments. In that process we actually contacted five well-known contractors in the area, and we sent out bid proposals to them in June of 2008. The site plan was finally approved by the city in July of 2008, and so we went out to contractor, and we selected Core Construction in August of2008. The county staff verbally approved on September 15th the start date of September 11 th -- excuse me -- start date of September 15th on September 11 tho The county's also improved the installation of the foundation footers on November 11,2008, and the City of Marco Island directs revision of footers and the stem walls to meet the city requirements. The county has agreed to -- agreed to revise the footers and stem walls on December 1 of 2008, and the city finally approved the Page 14 January 27, 2009 building permit December 5 of 2008. The site preparation for footers and preparation, mid December through January, is the period that all that has been taking place. In fact, right now we're in the position of -- they're putting in the stem walls and are -- soon will start the foundation. With regards to fundraising. In -- by mid January of 2009, we had raised $4.1 million out of our goal of $4.5 million. We have $400,000 left to raise. And with the fundraising efforts that we've got planned, we feel very confident that we will reach our goal by the end of2009. And we feel quite strongly that we're going to be able to build both buildings now by probably January of201O, so we are in the process now of having the plans designed for the Living History Hall, and we're going to be submitting those to the county and the city shortly for their review and approval. What remains to be done. From the Marco Island Historical Society, we still need approval from the county to proceed with the constructions. This is a vertical construction of the buildings. Hopefully we should receive that fairly shortly because we're just about ready to start building that. We need to complete the fundraising for Phase II. But as I said, we feel quite confident that we will reach our goal by the end of 2009. We need to provide the county staff with the MIHS archival inventory. And we actually have some very nice items in our inventory. One is an actual Calusan necklace that was discovered in the 1995 dig by Dr. Rudolph Whitmore, and another is a very rare square pottery, piece of pottery, which right now is being held by Dr. Bob Carr. And as soon as the museum is built and we have a secure place to save it, that will go into the museum also. And square pottery is extremely rare in Indian pottery, so we're quite anxious to display that. And we have many other things. We have some large wheels Page 15 January 27, 2009 that we've discovered on the island. So we do have a number of original artifacts, but we still plan to work with Smithsonian and with the University of Pennsylvania to obtain additional artifacts. We have to work with the county staff to plan a display -- display the exhibit, and Ron just gave us a package today of his initial thoughts, and we're going to go over that and get back together with them. Some of them look pretty good to us right now. So I think that we're making excellent progress there. And then upon completion of the buildings, we need to deed the buildings to the county, and they will become your property. We need to work with the county to establish joint management board, so we still really have to outline all of the parameters to how that joint board is going to function, how often it will meet, et cetera. And then the joint board, once established, is going to have to set up the management operating policies and procedures. What remains to be done by the county? Well, you still need to budget funds for the planning and design of displays and exhibits; you need to budget funds for the purchase and acquisition of the displays and exhibits; and you need to budget funds for the management, operation, and maintenance of the Marco Island Museum complex. You're going to have to plan, acquire, or construct the displays and exhibits, and then you're going to have to hire or transfer staff to operate the museum, and then we need to work together to establish joint management boards. This is sort of a rough schedule that we've come up to. Most of them are -- with the exception of the first item, they're earliest possible dates. We think that definitely the museum and the administration building will be completed by September 30th, but it may be even completed earlier than that. We don't see any possible glitches on that area. So if everything goes according to plan and we finish on September 30, we'll be ready to deed the property over to the county Page 16 January 27, 2009 on October 1 of 2009. And, of course, I think this fits in with your TDC budget schedule. So hopefully everything should fall into place there. As far as the opening of the museum building, we can do that anywhere from October Ion. I think it's a matter of collecting the material that we have and then setting it up in the museum. As soon as we can possibly do that, we're going to work with the county to help that happen. And so from really October on, it would -- that museum could open to the public. December 31 st is the anticipated completion of the Living History Hall, so hopefully the whole complex should be completed by the end of2009, and sometime in January 2010 we are planning a formal opening of the full museum complex to the public. These are some ofthe activity that's (sic) taken place. This is the demolition of the Women's Club gazebo, but that's going to be replaced by the gazebo that Craig showed you in the earlier PowerPoint presentation; that gazebo near the lagoon will be replacing this. This site preparation, the deep area there is a water retention area, and the site was built up to over 10 foot. This is how we hope to give the Indian mound effect so that when you drive by on Heathwood you see an Indian mound. This is where we stand now today. I took this picture actually day before yesterday. You can see the stem wall being put in, concrete being poured to the footers and stem wall, and hopefully the foundation will start pretty soon. What happened to my picture of the finished product? Oh, there it is. This is the finished product as it's going to be, and we think that it's going to be a jewel in the Collier County Museum system. We really would like to thank the commissioners for all of the support that they have provided us. You've been absolutely marvelous in this project. We'd also like to give special thanks to the county Page 17 January 27, 2009 staff, especially Ron Jamro, who accompanied us all the way up to Tallahassee to help apply for a grant from the state that we're still awaiting word on whether or not the state legislators will approve money for those grants. We did get approval for the grant. We're, I think, 23rd on the list, but if they approved the funds for it, we should be getting $500,000. And the effort that was put into that grant application by your staff was absolutely terrific. They -- they're very timely and very, very hard working on the whole thing. And we'd just like to thank all of the people involved on this project. And we hope that, indeed, this will be the jewel of the Collier County Museum. By the way, if -- we are closing the Founders Circle on May 15th. We feel that that's going to be the end of anybody's opportunity to be able to have their name on the wall. So any of you commissioners that would like to have your name on the wall of the museum -- I know Commissioner Fiala already has her name on that wall -- we welcome you to either make a pledge or donation to the museum project. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. It's an exciting, exciting museum to see being built. And I'm so pleased. Our staff is just delighted that you all are doing this, and so will the community. That will pretty well round out our museum complexes then, wouldn't it, or museum family. That's great. Any questions from commissioners? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If! may comment. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Certainly. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I tell you, the thing that makes this so unique is the fact that you have -- it's a community venture. This isn't a county venture. This isn't Collier County Government that's putting this together. It's the citizens of Marco Island that have Page 18 January 27, 2009 formed this together, found the money. About the only thing we really helped them with is the available land to be able to use and, for the most part, that was surplus. But I commend the citizens of Marco Island that got involved in this, and especially you, Commissioner Fiala, for spearheading this and moving it forward. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Thank you so much. And thanks, everyone. Wonderful report. We move on. Item #5B WASTE REDUCTION AWARDS PROGRAM. THE WRAP AWARD, IS PRESENTED TO THE NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE GREATER GOOD OF ALL OF COLLIER COUNTY BY PROMOTING GREEN BUSINESS PRACTICES, THEREBY HELPING TO PROLONG THE LIFE OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LANDFILL - PRESENTED MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 5B, which is the Waste Reduction A wards Program. The WRAP award is presented to the Naples Botanical Garden for contributing to the greater good of all of Collier County by promoting green business practices thereby helping to prolong the life of the Collier County Landfill. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do we read this proclamation? MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. May I give this to somebody? There we go. And also I'd like to give this to somebody, because this is also yours. Beautiful award. And I shall read it. Proclamation -- as soon as I put my glasses on. Page 19 January 27, 2009 The mandatory non-residential recycling ordinance adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on July 27,2004, established the Waste Reduction Awards Program, the WRAP. The WRAP award recognizes businesses and institutions for enhanced and innovative recycling programs. The Board of County Commissioners is pleased to recognize Naples Botanical Garden for contributing to the greater good of Collier County by promoting green business practices, thereby helping to prolong the usable life of the Collier County Landfill. Naples Botanical Garden is a good example for other businesses in the area. Some aspects of their recycling program include purchasing office supplies, paper, and dishware products made with recycled content or that are environmentally friendly, recycling all plastics, cans, cardboard, magazines, junk mail, and offices paper, providing each staff member with cardboard boxes for the easy collection of recyclable office paper, publishing their maps, brochures, and their newsletter Garden on recycled paper, purchasing refillable, recyclable ink cartridges and reusing office paper for notes and scratch pads, shutting off lights when not in use, utilizing daylight when possible, and installing programmable thermostats, compo sting yard and garden waste, utilizing shredded newspaper as mulch. The smart car used on site uses no fuel, runs on electric motor charge, gets 40 miles per charge, and travels up to 25 miles per hour. The WRAP Award Program includes a framed certificate, a trophy -- oh, well, I don't know if you need to know that, right? The solid waste department and the Board of County Commissioners congratulate Joyce Zirkle, COO; Jill Berry, director of external affairs; Rich Lewis, operation manager; Janele Smith, Chad Washburn, Brian Galligan, David Webb, Pat Lampe, Chris Brighton, and all of the staff of Naples Botanical Garden for their outstanding green business practices and continued efforts to promote waste reduction and recycling. Page 20 January 27,2009 Their green team -- and you're looking at them -- promotes conservation and sets a positive -- positive example to others that will have a significant effect on sustaining the useful life of the Collier County Landfill and protecting the environment. Jim, do we have a written one of these to give to them or should I just -- MR. MUDD: No, but we can get one through Mr. DeLony, and it will get over to them. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Wonderful. I'll just give you this as a temporary proclamation. And we want to thank you all for all of your work. Thank you. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: And maybe you'd like to get up -- I hope some of you have taken a ride past the Naples Botanical Garden to see all the activity going on there. Oh, my goodness. It's exciting. It just -- it makes you salivate waiting till it comes to be, so -- Thank you. Would you like to say something, Jill? MS. BERRY: I just want to, on behalf-- CHAIRMAN FIALA: You have to go to a microphone. Thank you. MS. BERRY: On behalf of the green team and the entire garden, we just want to thank you for this award. And we believe that the program that the county's running is concurrent with our mission of being a good sustainable example for everyone in our community. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Thank you very much. (Applause.) Item #5C RECOMMENDA nON TO RECOGNIZE JOANNE MARKIEWICZ, OPERA nONS MANAGER, PURCHASING Page 21 January 27,2009 DEPARTMENT, AS SUPERVISOR OF THE YEAR FOR 2008- PRESENTED MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to our next presentation, and that's a recommendation to recognize Joanne Markiewicz, who's the operational manager for the purchasing department, as Supervisor of the Year for 2008. Joanne, if you could come forward, please. (Applause.) MR. MUDD: Joanne Markiewicz, operations manager for the purchasing department, has been selected as the Supervisor of the Year for 2008. Joanne is a knowledgeable and professional manager who is committed to giving her best to Collier County. She is a team player, always willing to roll up her sleeves and pitch in. Joanne has learned every position under her supervision from the ground up. This gives her a complete perspective of each role, allowing her to restructure responsibilities effectively and grow the skills of her staff. Her employees see their roles expand in a logical and consistent manner, allowing each of them to meet the challenges facing the county while gaining new levels of confidence and success for themselves. Joanne has been instrumental in making the purchasing department a more cohesive team by encouraging communication, focuses on common goals, and increasing teamwork at every opportunity. She is an innovative thinker who goes to extraordinary lengths to return value to the taxpayers. Examples of this can be seen in the department surplus property efforts, use of alternative markets for the sale of unwanted equipment, and the expansion of the purchasing card program to bring rebates back to the county. She is the first to investigate new technologies Page 22 January 27,2009 and recommendation solutions to challenges. Joanne serves as an example of how to get things done right, on time, and within budget. For these reasons and many more not listed here, she is truly deserving of the title Supervisor of the Year for 2008. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Wow. MR. MUDD: May I present to you Joanne Markiewicz. (Applause.) MS. MARKIEWICZ: Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Congratulations. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you for all your work. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Outstanding. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations. MS. MARKIEWICZ: Thank you. MR. OCHS: Congratulations. Thank you very much. MR. MUDD: Congratulations. (Applause.) Item #5D PRESENTATION ON THE PROGRESS OF THE WIDENING OF COLLIER BOULEVARD (US 41 TO DAVIS BOULEVARD) FROM THE EXISTING 4 LANES TO A 6 LANED DIVIDED ROADWAY, DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, LIGHTING, BIKE LANES, SIDEWALK AND PATHWAY - PRESENTED MR. MUDD: The next presentation is a presentation on progress of widening Collier Boulevard, U.S. 41 to Davis Boulevard, from existing four lanes to six lanes divided roadway, drainage improvements, lighting, bike lanes, sidewalks, and pathways. And Mr. Jay Ahmad, your Director of Construction and Engineering for the Transportation Department, will present. Page 23 January 27, 2009 MR. AHMAD: Good morning, Madam Chair, Commissioners. I'm Jay Ahmad, for the record. I'm your Director or Transportation Engineering and Construction Management. This item this morning is a presentation by Better Roads, Inc., for the construction of -- to give you a status on the construction of Collier Boulevard, the project that started in October, 2007, to widen Collier from U.S. 41 to Davis. The project has been progressing, and we're approximately 50 percent complete, little bit over 50 percent complete. And I have with me Robbie Powell to give you a status report on the status of this project. As you know, the construction of this project is to the median and to add that third lane in each direction. And from the status report that you have, it shows the project is somewhat behind schedule, although the majority of the pay items for dollars that would report to you are in milling and overlaying. Essentially we will be milling the entire five-and-a-half miles of roadway and overlaying into the asphalt. So those dollars are to come, and we are progressing on schedule. Regardless of what is shown on here, we are progressing to completion by September 2009. Robbie Powell with Better Roads here. MR. POWELL: Good morning. As Jay said, my name is Robbie Powell. I am vision manager for Better Roads. Right now our current status, as Jay said, we are widening everything to the median. So all drainage has been completed in the median area. We've paved approximately five-and-a-half miles of structure course, which is the bottom lift of asphalt at this time. We've completed and are finishing up over the next month the rest of the widening from Business Circle to Davis Boulevard. Along with that, the lighting is installed, is approximately three quarters of the way complete, and we anticipate the signalization on the project being done somewhere around the first part of March of '09. Page 24 January 27,2009 Along with that, there is a greenway or pathway, as it were, on this project. In the beginning that was delayed for a significant amount of time due to some overlapping with Ackerman Construction. We're currently proceeding on that, and that is going well and quickly. As Jay said, the dollar figures that you have in front of you and that you've reviewed do show us approximately 14 percent behind schedule, but rest assured, Better Roads will be completing this project on time, and we feel that, like Jay said, all of the dollars really kind of come at the end. The dynamics of this project widening to the median create for slower progress. It takes a while to get the limerock in, get it going, get it widened. The asphalt is done very quickly. And as you know, being that it's a fuel product or a tumidus (sic) product, it does come with a higher dollar amount. What you'll probably see in the next one to two months is a tremendous increase in the payout to Better Roads for the work in a shorter period of time. Along with that, we would just also like to point out that we have been working closely with Collier County on taking care of any issues that we've run into and KCCS. Our team is very much complete, and it has done a very good job, in my opinion, on communicating with each other and making sure everybody is on the same page and progressing nicely. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Any questions from commissioners? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. Thank you so much. MR. POWELL: Thank you. Have a nice day. CHAIRMAN FIALA: We move on to public petitions. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Yes, ma'am. And the first -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's all right. Page 25 January 27, 2009 Item #6A PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY JEFF NUNNER TO DISCUSS SIGN PERMIT FOR NAPLES MAZDA - MOTION TO APPROVE A WAIVER TO OBTAIN A SIGN PERMIT - APPROVED MR. MUDD: -- and the first -- I'm sorry. And the first public petition is a request by Jeff Nunner to discuss the sign permit for Naples Mazda. MR. NUNNER: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is JeffNunner, and I am representing Myers Enterprises, owner of Naples Mazda. Thank you for your time today, and we appreciate your consideration to support our request to allow the Mazda monument sign to be installed at this time. Naples Mazda site is located at the southwest corner of Airport Road and J&C Boulevard. The Mazda site is connected to the existing Dodge facility. The Myers family has been in business in Collier County since 1971. The Mazda building project is temporarily on hold due to current economic conditions. The Mazda sales and service are currently provided at the Naples Dodge facility. Proper signage is necessary in order to identify the location of the Mazda dealership in order to conduct business. We have met with county staff and have been directed to pursue this request with the Board of County Commissioners. Again, we thank you for your consideration considering this request. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Mr. Nunner, you came to my office to talk to me about this particular concern. As you know, you stated basically that you have got the site laid out for where the Page 26 January 27,2009 building is going to be and that you were requesting that the sign be located out in front without the building in -- the building being built. Our concern is that, normally we like to have the building and the sign put in place at the same time. Is there any possibility that the sign can be put with the current sign which advertises Chrysler and Dodge at the present time? MR. NUNNER: We looked into that, Commissioner. The current sign is actually owned by those manufacturers, and it's leased back through the local dealership. Also, that sign is at its maximum square footage allowed. So in order to add another dealership to that sign, we would have to reduce the existing sign, and that's just not an option for us. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. If the board decides to bring this item back to be approved, is there anything that can be of a public benefit here? And I guess where I'm going with this is that I believe with your approval of the site for the building of the Mazda facility, there were some discussions or some promises made of intersection improvements at J &C and Airport. MR. NUNNER: That's correct. We would -- we would ask that the board consider approving our request today and not require us to come back for a public hearing. That being said, there is a requirement in our PUD that the Myers provide engineering for J&C improvements, which includes also signalization improvements at J &C and Airport Road intersection. That requirement isn't due until the building is ready for a Certificate of Occupancy, but we would be willing to go ahead and do that engineering and permitting at this time if we could move forward with our sign. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And complete the intersection improvements prior to the building being built; is that correct? MR. NUNNER: Well, we can only meet the requirements that we've committed to in the PUD, which is to have that design Page 27 January 27,2009 completed and to do the permitting process. As far as having those improvements completed, that would be outside of our control. COMMISSIONER HALAS: County Attorney, I guess I need some assistance here. They're looking for a waiver in regards to their sign. We really can't give that to them today other than the fact that we can bring it forward to probably the next meeting after it's properly advertised? MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think you need to advertise this. If you want to take action now, you can, although you typically ask for this to come back in an executive form, generally on consent, so you can get broader information. The choice is yours how you want to deal with it. If what you're asking is for them to accelerate their commitments before the sign goes in, then I would recommend that you direct staff to come back on the consent with the executive summary with some sort of documentation to that effect. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I think what we need to do is make sure that what we did is put things in order so that they can get their monument sign but also that they fulfill the commitments of intersection improvements at this point in time. MR. KLATZKOW: I think Nick wants to say something. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You have something to say on this? MR. SCHMITT: Well, let me clarify. For the record, Joe Schmitt, Community Development Administrator. There is no variance procedure for this. So there would be no public advertisement or no requirement to -- unless you want it to go through some kind of a proceeding. But basically what he's asking for is the board to grant the allowance of putting up an accessory structure, which is a sign, without having the principal structure constructed. In could ask to put the visualizer on. So there's really no procedure for that. This is a special exception. Page 28 January 27, 2009 Mr. Nunner has agreed to do the engineering. Nick can talk about what is going to be done as far as on site. The site is already being used to store cars. It's an SDP that's already approved. Some work has already started on that site. I'm not sure what the issues are in regards to the building of the actual building. I'm sure it has to do with construction loans and, of course, the uncertainty in the auto industry. But from a standpoint of doing the improvements, at the corner where the sign is going to go in, it will be built in accordance with the LDC. There are no variances required in regards to the sign itself, and the sign will be constructed in accordance with what has been approved on the SDP landscape as required by the LDC. In that regard it's up to the board. Frankly, we have no problems with the sign going in, just with the understanding that it's an accessory being allowed without the principal structure. And I'll turn it over to Nick if you want to ask any questions about the intersection improvements. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, my concern is, this is kind of an unusual case. MR. SCHMITT: Yes. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what I want to make sure is that there's some public benefit out of not only him getting the sign but the citizens getting the intersection improvements done prior to the building being built because, obviously, there's been a lag here in regards to constructing the building because of the economic climate. MR. SCHMITT: Well, we're going to require that the engineering be done in accordance with the PUD and -- in accordance with what is approved on the SDP. They will do the engineering. I'll turn it over to Nick. Nick can describe how the construction's going to take place. MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the record, Nick Casalanguida with transportation. I applaud the Myers. They've really worked with Page 29 January 27, 2009 us on this project. If they're willing to accelerate the design, that's the public benefit. We're working right now with the MSTU funds and bringing it to the MSTU for review. The number one priority for those additional funds would be this intersection improvement. To have that design in place and ready to go would accelerate that right project. So if they're willing to accelerate the design, that's a good public benefit for us. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Well, I make a motion that we approve this sign variance. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I second it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Halas to approve this sign variance and a second by Commissioner Coyle. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? MR. SCHMITT: Can I clarify for the record. It is not a variance. It's just to allow the sign to be constructed. COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's a waiver. MR. SCHMITT: We'll use that word. MR. KLATZKOW: You're accelerating the process. That's all we're doing. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep, okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nothing. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nothing? Okay, very good. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. Page 30 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good, thank you. MR. NUNNER: Thank you. Item #9A RESOLUTION 2009-25: APPOINTING CHRIS STEPHENS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL - ADOPTED MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to it- -- or Paragraph 9, and that is 9A, appointment of a member to the Environmental Advisory Council. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Certainly. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to make a motion that we go with the committee -- well, they didn't make a recommendation -- but the only technical member that's been offered up, and that's what they're looking for, is Chris Stephen (sic). COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Motion on the floor for Chris Stephens -- or Stephens, and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) Page 31 January 27,2009 Item #9B RESOLUTION 2009-26: APPOINTING MAURICE J. BURKE TO THE COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - ADOPTED MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings you to 9B, which is appointment of a member to the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve James Burke. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Motion to approve and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) Item #9C REQUEST BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CONSIDER WAIVING THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT IN RELATION TO GARY EIDSON, MEMBER OF THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA REVIEW COMMITTEE - MOTION TO WAIVE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT - APPROVED MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 9C. It's a request that the Board of County Commissioners consider waiving the residency requirement in relation to Gary Edison, member of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee. Page 32 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: So moved. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor to approve by Commissioner Halas, a second by Commissioner Coyle. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. They're due to sunset this spring. I don't see any problem with that as long as -- as long as the committee sunsets. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) MR. MUDD: Commissioners, just -- there's some clarification. I believe I read in the weekly community development's environmental services weekly on Friday that this group is coming to the board for an extension to their life for another year, so it will sunset in April of 2010. That hasn't come to you yet, but I want to make sure that you're aware of that idea coming forth from this committee because they haven't finished everything that they need to get done because of extra reviews, the EAC, the CCPC, and things like that that came -- that came later into the process. It has nothing to do with your request today. I just want to make sure -- Commissioner Henning's absolutely right. It's due to sunset this year. I believe they're going to ask for a year extension. Page 33 January 27,2009 Item #lOB AWARD OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NUMBER 08-5038R AUTOMATED METER READING SYSTEM TO FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, INCORPORATED AND MUNICIPAL WATER WORKS, INCORPORATED IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $2,000,000 - APPROVED That brings us to lOB, and that's a recommendation to approve award of request for proposal number 08-5038R, Automated Meter Reading System to Ferguson Enterprises, Incorporated, and Municipal Water Works, Incorporated, in the estimated amount of $2 million. And Mr. Paul Mattausch, your Director of your Water Department, will present. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great presentation, Paul. I have a motion to -- MR. MATT AUSCH: Thank you, Commissioner. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- to approve by Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Coyle. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any speakers? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? Page 34 January 27, 2009 (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. Item # lOC THE PURCHASE OF THREE FIXED-ROUTE BUSES AND TROLLEY DECAL WRAP FOR COLLIER AREA TRANSIT, AT A TOTAL COST OF $1.058,460 - APPROVED MR. MUDD: Commissioner, our next item is a recommendation to approve the purchase of three fixed route buses and trolley decal WRAPS for the Collier Area Transit at a total cost of $1 ,058,460. And Mr. Norman Feder, your Transportation Services Administrator, will present. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Another great presentation. MR. MUDD: So far, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those -- I have a motion by Commissioner Coletta to approve, a second by Commissioner Coyle. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Page 35 January 27,2009 Item #lOF RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROVIDE THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE GUIDANCE AS TO HOW TO ENFORCE THE APPROVED SIGN CODE AMENDMENT AND REGULATIONS AS CODIFIED IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF IMMOKALEE - MOTION: NEW SIGNS MUST COMPLY WITH SIGN ORDINANCE; EXISTING SIGNS THAT ENDANGER CITIZEN HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE MUST COME INTO COMPLIANCE AND DIRECT STAFF TO WORK WITH BOB MULHERE AND IMMOKALEE CRA TO PRODUCE A SIGN ORDINANCE FOR THE IMMOKALEE AREA - APPROVED; MOTION: TO RECONSIDER PREVIOUS MOTION - APPROVED; MOTION: NEW SIGNS MUST COMPLY WITH SIGN ORDINANCE; EXISTING SIGNS THAT ENDANGER CITIZEN HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE MUST COME INTO COMPLIANCE OR BE TORN DOWN; DIRECT STAFF TO WORK WITH BOB MULHERE AND THE IMMOKALEE CRA TO PRODUCE A SIGN ORDINANCE FOR THE IMMOKALEE AREA; EXISTING SIGNS WITHOUT A PERMIT MAY REMAIN AS THE COUNTY WOULD HOLD BURDEN OF PROOF; NEW SIGNS WILL REQUIRE A PERMIT AND COMPLIANCE WITH THE CURRENT SIGN ORDINANCE AND EXISTING SIGNS THAT THE COUNTY CANNOT PROVIDE PROOF REGARDING PERMITS MAY STAY UNTIL A NEW SIGN ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED - APPROVED MR. MUDD: Commissioners, you have a time-certain item at lO a.m. Brings us to lOF. We're close. It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Page 36 January 27,2009 provide the County Manager or his designee guidance as to how to enforce the approved sign code amendment and regulations as codified in the Collier County Land Development Code for the geographical area of Immokalee. Mr. Joseph Schmitt, your community development administrator, and Ms. Diane Flagg, your code enforcement director today, will present. MR. SCHMITT: Commissioners, again, good morning. I won't go into great detail. You have the executive summary, but this was brought up at the last meeting by the County Manager where we noted there were 80 cases involving code violations in Immokalee regarding SIgns. The executive summary goes into detail about the history of the sign code. Of course, it goes back to 2001. The executive summary notes there are 80 cases, 40 of which have been abated, six are working towards compliance, and there's 34 on hold. We're basically here today in response to your request to bring this item back. We've provided pictures of the existing violations. Subject to your questions, that pretty much concludes my initial opening remarks. I think we're here as -- basically to get your guidance on how to proceed. Our intent with these is to get with each of the establishments and discuss in detail where the violations exist. I think there was some, shall I say, some annoyance that code enforcement didn't really get with each of the proprietors or the owners of these properties and define what the violation was. That certainly will be taken care of. We will meet and greet with each of the property owners if you direct that we proceed, and we'll describe in detail what the violation is and what needs to be abated. Many of these signs have existed for many years in Immokalee. We're here, if you want to decide just to leave this as is, and we'll direct our resources elsewhere. Page 37 January 27,2009 Also I'd like to note that certainly there are existing violations in the coastal community that we're pursuing as well. So that pretty much concludes my opening remarks. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I don't have any problem to put this offuntil the committee brings forward a potential LCD change. I guess my only concern is health, safety, and welfare with the placement as far as on how they're secured, and make sure that they don't interfere with visual -- traffic visual issues and all -- at the end of the day, they're all going to have to be -- have to have a permit. MR. SCHMITT: We've included some in here that have already come into compliance, so there are -- not every one of these note. We note there some that are in compliance. But basically what I've just heard you say, ifthere are any ones that we deem that violate a line of sight or some other type of health, safety, welfare, we'll deal with that immediately but, otherwise, we'll wait till some kind of an LDC amendment is prepared and sent before you to deal with this. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. But would it be fair to say that they all have to be permitted eventually? MR. SCHMITT: They're all going to have to be permitted or replaced. Those that are not -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or removed, if they don't comply with the new sign code for Immokalee? MR. SCHMITT: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. So that's kind of where I am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioners, I have three commissioners waiting on deck, but would you like to hear from the speakers first? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure. CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have five speakers, and then that will Page 38 January 27, 2009 move this along. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'd just like to ask one question. I think it would clarify something, if I could. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. COMMISSIONER HALAS: In the agenda package on Page 2, just the last paragraph above the fiscal impact, it says, of the 80 alleged sign violations in the Immokalee community, 40 cases have been abated through voluntary compliance. Six cases are working towards compliance by obtaining the required permits; 34 cases are on hold. And then it says, of these cases, the property owners have not been notified of the alleged violations or the properties that have alleged violations. Can you clarify that? If everybody -- if you had 80 and they came into compliance and you got only 34 left but you haven't notified them -- I don't understand what the problem is. MR. SCHMITT: Well, when the manager brought it up -- go ahead. MR. MUDD: Hang on, Joe. Let me -- there's a piece that is -- if you remember correctly last time I brought it up, I got a call from Fred Thomas before Christmas and said, there's a sign inspector that's out there, and he's notifying businesses that they have sign issues, and a lot of people are upset, especially around Christmastime. Could we ask you to cease and desist until after Christmas? And I told him -- he said, cease and desist. And I said, I can't just not obey the board's rules. I said, I will hold off at Christmastime because it's Christmastime. We will not notify any more, but I have to bring this back to the Board of County Commissioners the first meeting that they have in January, and I did during communications so that you knew that I had an issue that was out there so I could get some guidance from you as far as to continue to move on and notify the rest and/or to wait your direction. And your decision last time was to bring this back as a -- an Page 39 January 27, 2009 agenda item and that's what we're talking about today. And so, Commissioner Halas, I think that clarifies and answers your question, sir. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. We'll call on the speakers, now. MS. FILSON: I have one additional speaker. Do you want to accept that one? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Please do. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. Oh, okay. MS. FILSON: Thomas Patterson. He'll be followed by Penny Phillippi. We have three minutes for each speaker. MR. PATTERSON: Hello, Commissioners. My name's Thomas Patterson. I'm representing Taps Automotive Performance and Service. We've been in business in Immokalee since 1996. We built our present location in October of 1998. We were on the EDC, the fast track, with Helene Castletine (phonetic). It was a -- I think we were one of the first businesses to go through that in Immokalee. We had a sign built. It was about $20,000. The sign was inspected by the county and approved for all wind ratings and so forth and so on. I contacted Alltech (phonetic) Sign Company, and they are out of business at this time. The problem that we're facing is the county's saying that I did not have a permit for this humongous sign and -- that we built in 1998. I have a permit number that's on the sign from Alltech, and I believe it's a possible data entry problem or perhaps -- we would like to comply with the codes. There's no safety factor on this sign. It is definitely wind rated and has already been through a couple of hurricanes. And I'd like to comply, but right now with the economy the way it is, it's hard to take and pay the labor to lower a sign or what the county needs. If it's a -- the only -- MR. MUDD: Sir, is this your sign that I just put on the -- is it Page 40 January 27,2009 Taps? MR. PATTERSON: Yes, it is. That's our sign. And we're about -- not sure exactly how far off the main road, but we're back behind an existing business that's down Fifth Avenue. But as you can see, the sign was permitted. We got the certificate of occupancy in 1998. And 10 years later the county comes by, the code enforcement, and says that I do not have a permit for this sign. And I do have a permit number here, if you guys could check back into that. And there is some signs on the building that we did put up that were not permitted. I'll admit to that. It was like, no entry, or you have to be with an authorized personnel of Taps Automotive to enter the shop. I did put up a couple signs like that, and I would pay for the permitting on that. But to take care of this sign or cut it down or lower it when it was approved and we got the Certificate of Occupancy, it would really be a devastating cost right now. And that sign is our advertisement that people can read from Highway 29. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you own this business? MR. PATTERSON: I own this business, yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Coletta has a question. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. The -- they duly permitted it and everything, and at this point in time they're coming back and telling you there is no permit; is that what they're saying? MR. PATTERSON : Yes, sir. That's what code enforcement is telling me, that there's no permit for this sign, and I tried -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, this should be one of the easier ones to resolve because you do have a permit. And if you haven't showed it to them yet, please show it to them. What we're looking to do is cover situations that aren't covered. Sounds like you already got it pretty well covered. I'm not too sure how it works as far as longevity of these signs Page 41 January 27, 2009 due to changes in ordinance and stuff. I know that they usually come up with a schedule that goes a number of years off into the future, depending on the size of the sign or the cost of the sign, that they allow for it. Eventually at some point in time -- and when that point in time comes is one of those things that we're going to discuss at great lengths, I'm sure. All signs in Immokalee will have to comply with the new codes and ordinances that are brought together by the Immokalee Master Plan Overlay and through the LDC process. But in the meantime, you have a unique situation that's quite different than everyone else. And I would hope that staff will take this into special consideration as we go through with the rest of these discussions. MR. PATTERSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Diane, could you -- could you work with him? MS. FLAGG: Yes. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Very good, thank you. You can meet with them out in the hall when this subject is finished, if you don't mind. MR. PATTERSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good, thank you, sir. MR. PATTERSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Next speaker? MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Penny Phillippi. She'll be followed by Fred Thomas. MS. PHILLIPPI: Good morning. For the record, my name is Penny Phillippi. I'm the director of the Immokalee CRA, and I'm just, again, here to provide a little historical perspective on the entire situation. I appreciate Commissioner Henning's comments, because they were exactly in sync with the advisory board's comments. Page 42 January 27,2009 In November Diane Flagg came to talk to the advisory board and the IMPVC, and the room was literally packed with people. And what she conveyed to the folks out there was that it was a new kind of administration and they were going to spend a lot of time educating people in the community as opposed to writing a lot of notifications of noncompliance. And then in December, the sign bomb hit Immokalee literally, and our red flag program was kept very busy with a lot of phone calls and trying to figure out what in the world has happened out here. And I do want to say that we are housed with the enforcement officers in Immokalee, and the majority of these folks do stop and sit down and talk to people and tell them what happened and what's wrong and how to fix it. It just seems that this particular sign officer would take a picture and drive away, go back to the office, and write a notification to these folks, and I think that was the single biggest complaint because they literally had no clue what happened until the thing hit the mailbox, so that was a big issue. So November we found out this, December the bomb hit. And then the advisory board in December, by majority vote, had made a motion to request that the county not cite our sign violations unless they were health and safety issues, to be determined by Kitchell Snow, who is the supervisor of the code enforcement officers in Immokalee, until such time as you said, Commissioner Henning, until the LDC interim amendment is completed. I'm sorry I'm going over my time just a bit. MS. FILSON: No, that was your one-minute warning. MS. PHILLIPPI: Oh, okay. Thank you. So I can tell you that our interim LDC amendment that would provide for some deviations has been completed. It has one more review. It's just been reviewed a second time by Mark Strain, and I'm told by Bob Mulhere that we're ready to bring that forward. It will come forward this year in the next cycle. Page 43 January 27,2009 So if I had a request at all, my request would be the same as the commissioners and the CRA advisory board, that we consider putting things on hold unless it's a health and safety issue until such time as we can get our interim LDC amendment approved and in place. Thank you. MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Fred Thomas. He'll be followed by Daniel Gonzalez. MR. THOMAS: As chair of your CRA and your Master Plan and Visioning Committee, I want to thank you, Commissioner Henning, and thank Joe Schmitt for what you all were recommending today, because that's exactly what we need to have happen until we can get things in place. The only other thing we would want from you is to help us expedite the approval of our master plan and our new Land Development Code so that we can better serve the community of Immokalee. Thank you. MS. FILSON: Daniel Gonzalez. She'll be followed by Sandra Gonzalez -- or he will be followed by Sandra. MS. GONZALEZ: Well, can we both come up together? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. MS. GONZALEZ: Okay. My name is Sandra Gonzalez. We have a restaurant in Immokalee, and we've been -- we've been there for quite a while. Now, we -- I have a few pictures of the sign that we did have. CHAIRMAN FIALA: What's the name of the restaurant? MS. GONZALEZ: Lozano's Restaurant. I got a few pictures here of the sign that we had. Now, we were told -- I understand that this sign is a little over, you know, the height requirement that we needed. Why were we told that we had to take the whole framing off instead of just having it lowered to code so we could not be in violation? That's my question. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Maybe one of our enforcement people Page 44 January 27, 2009 could answer that question. MS. FLAGG: I'm sorry. What was the question? MS. GONZALEZ: Our -- the sign that we have, we were told that we had to take the whole complete sign off instead of just having to lower it to where we could be in compliance. MS. FLAGG: Okay. Christina. MS. GONZALEZ: And that sign's been there for over 50 years. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Doesn't meet the square foot. MS. PEREZ: The sign has been there for how long? I'm sorry. MS. GONZALEZ: It's been there for over 50 years. MS. PEREZ: For the record, I'm sorry, Christina Perez, Collier County Code Enforcement supervisor. I imagine that because of the Land Development Code rules and regulations, that that is why the sign isn't in compliance with LDC as of today, and that's why the sign was asked to be removed or -- it should have been removed or replaced, you know, as the LDC deems applicable. MS. GONZALEZ: So we couldn't just lower it down to where it was going to be in compliance with the height requirement? MS. PEREZ: We would have to look at the sign and refer it back to the LDC so that we could try to see what the -- but I would be glad to -- MS. GONZALEZ: Well, the sign's already been taken off. I mean -- I mean, that was our advertisement for our business. Why did the code enforcement not explain to us, I mean, why we had to put the whole sign off? We had to pay a fine, we had to come to court for all this. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I think this is a good conversation for after this meeting. Maybe you can go into the hall and discuss that, because we're talking about the whole effect. And I'm sure that they would be -- as soon as we're finished with this subject. Page 45 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, one of the things I think is very important is that we had some people that acted before we had a chance to act on this that have done something that has done great harm to their business immediately. In other words, in their effort to try to comply as soon as possible, they went and they more or less cut off their head to be able to continue. In this case here it's a sign that they lost that's a landmark for their business that brings people there. So when we go through our deliberations today and we decide to go forward, this is the perfect example of what I'd like to see able to continue. In other words, restore the sign to the present condition that it was before they removed it with all safety features in place to be able to go for that period of time until we deem that, you know, the new master plan will kick in with the overlay that will affect new signs and they'd have to come forward and address it at that time. But just because somebody complied, we can't say, okay, the people that didn't comply get special treatment. There's going to be some situations out there. And I mean, it's not a simple inexpensive measure to be able to put up a sign. It's a very, very expensive thing to do. So we have to be realistic in our approach on this to be able to be fair to everyone, especially those people that were trying to comply in the beginning and didn't want to be put down on the books as violators of our laws and codes. CHAIRMAN FIALA: She was asking some questions about signs and so forth that maybe she can talk to them outside about. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine, but meanwhile we've got the problem of where do they go now. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, discuss that in our deliberations. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And let me say, I understand, because we went through the same thing in East Naples and all the way down the Page 46 January 27,2009 line. So, you know, I'm real familiar with that. Thank you very much. And our people will talk to you and maybe give you a little bit of guidance in the hallway. Thank you. MS. PEREZ: Yeah. I do ask that the business owners do wait in the hallway after so I can talk to them. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great. MS. GONZALEZ: All right, thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. MS. FILSON: The final speaker is Luis Trejo. MR. TREJO: Good morning. My name is Luis, and I'm a business owner also in Immokalee. And I do understand that I think my signs -- I did put up my signs, I would say, probably without permitting, not knowing that I had to get a permit. But I bought a business, an already existing business, and they had a hand-written or wooden sign out there in the Main Street, and I thought it would be nice for me to put up -- only thing I did was just remove the wooden sign and put a lighted sign on there, a 3D sign to make it look nice on the Main Street, and now we got all this going on. I think most of the people that had already spoke kind of answered my questions. But I had a deadline on the 25th of this month to, you know, move on permitting my signs, but unfortunately the person that was going to do it was in an accident and now I don't know what to do. Because I'm here, I still have no permits, and you all stepping on my toes. And I need to know what I need to do. That's my question. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did you hear that question? MR. TREJO: Tom from Sign Guy is supposed to be doing my SIgns. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We're going to be figuring that out right now, but then we have our code enforcement people that you can also talk to for personalized questions afterwards. And let me just say for all of those people in Immokalee. We Page 47 January 27,2009 had the same thing happen to us in East Naples, and we -- and people had big signs and little signs and some permitted, some not. And they were very upset when all this sign regulation came into effect. And, oh my goodness, there was all kinds of uprising. What happened was, when they complied, it changed the appearance of the community, and all of a sudden it began to look better. And interestingly enough, the businesses who had signs that looked better also attracted more business because now it made them -- it didn't make them look like -- well, it made them look like classy businesses. So it's amazing what signs can do to the appearance of a community. I'll just throw that in. Commissioners Coletta, and then Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Was that the last speaker? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, it was. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And your observations are correct, but we're at a different location in a different time. Different time is the fact that if this was East Naples at this time going through it, I'm sure that they would feel all the pain that everyone else is feeling in Collier County and throughout the State of Florida and the United States of America with the downturn in the economy. I understand that some 17 percent of all commercial property will be emptied by the time that summer rolls around. Times are desperate. People are just holding on by the edge of their fingertips. And they need -- they need a little consideration because of that particular situation with the economy. To force the situation across the board with many of these small businesses, and if you looked at the handout that we got earlier, it was showing the different sign violations, which none of them seem to be that grievous as far as I'm concerned, it -- they're very small operations. Mom and Pop stores that are very difficultly trying to come up with enough money to cover the rent, the electricity, and the insurance, much less their taxes. Page 48 January 27, 2009 So because of that, that's the one situation. The other thing is, too, unlike East Naples, Immokalee, the average wages are about one-third what they are for the rest of Collier County. It's a totally different environment. Hopefully as time goes forward those demographics will change considerably. But meanwhile we have to deal with the realities of the day. And because of that, what I would like to see is that we take a couple things in consideration. One, the fact that these signs have received -- as far as I know -- and I'm sure we can hear from code enforcement -- have you ever received any complaints or any number of complaints in the Immokalee area from residents regarding the business signs that exist there? MS. FLAGG: My understanding is the investigator did go out as a result of a complaint. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A complaint? MS. FLAGG: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the "a complaint" was probably one of the first ones in a long time. Because I know we've done sweeps throughout the rest of Collier County, and we finally get to Immokalee about five years later because of one complaint. And it was probably a businessman that wanted to do in his competitor for his own betterment by making him comply with the sign ordinance. But what I'm saying is, the people of Immokalee are fine the way it is now. Sure, eventually they'd like to see everything improved. But you're not having any large amount of citizens turning up in a protest over the deplorable conditions of signs in Immokalee, are you? Is there any organized uprising among the natives there in Immokalee? MS. FLAGG: Let me back up. It's Diane Flagg, director of code enforcement, for the record. What -- again, this is a policy decision. Code enforcement's job is to apply the codes. Page 49 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Exactly. MS. FLAGG: And so when the complaint came in, the investigator, the assigned investigator, went out to Immokalee. And because it was a situation of, why do I have to comply and they don't have to comply, that was the complaint. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. MS. FLAGG: And so the investigator consistently applied the same codes, that is, the current codes for the county, to the signs in Immokalee. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I understand fully what you're doing, and that code enforcement officer is doing their job, and if they did any less, I'm sure they'd be reprimanded. You'd have to. But the point I'm trying to make is, the citizenry of Immokalee is fine with the situation at hand. It's not a case of they're finding the conditions to be unlivable, deplorable, objectionable. They're not. They're finding this to be a status quo they can live with for the moment. So what I'm suggesting is that we put a reasonable time period to allow for the new Immokalee Master Plan Overlay to kick in with their particular phases of the sign ordinance as to what it is, and most likely it will not meet coastal standards, which is just fine as far as I'm concerned, and at that point in time everybody will be put on notice that they'll have to comply within a reasonable period of time. And meanwhile, I would also further suggest that we go back with all the pictures that we have of people that didn't comply -- and some of these people have taken down the signs that were on their building. They no longer have any way of identifying their business because of their rush to be able to comply with coastal Collier County ordinances. They removed the sign, they removed a good part of their business potential to be able to be identified, that recognizing from these pictures and everything, we allow them to reinstall those signs in a safe and efficient manner for that same period of time and they don't Page 50 January 27, 2009 -- we don't penalize them just for the fact that they tried to get in front of the code enforcement officer as far as not violating the law any longer than they had to. That's my suggestion to this commission, and I hope this commission exercises a certain amount of understanding for the situation that exists. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I don't see any way to be fair here. The people who've come into compliance have done so at probably a considerable expense. Those people who haven't come into compliance, some of them don't have a sign permit at all. That's clearly not acceptable. But if they get a sign permit for the sign they have now, when the new overlay comes in, they're probably going to change it, so it's going to cost them more money. So I can't find a really fair way to deal with this issue, except to delay until we get the new overlay. My question though is, how long is it really going to take to get that done? I'm not interested in having this drag out for a year or two years. The point that Commissioner Fiala made is, whether people are upset about it, about the signs is, in most cases, irrelevant. A good sign ordinance improves the community, and that's what you want to do. It's not a matter of being upset about it right now. Not many people in East Naples were upset about it when we decided we would have a sign ordinance that applied to them. But when are we going to have this overlay? MR. SCHMITT: I'll turn to Bob on that. MR. MULHERE: For the record, Bob Mulhere with RW A on behalf of the CRA. When last I was before you, you gave -- the board gave authority for me to prepare, on behalf of the CRA, an interim set of Land Page 51 January 27, 2009 Development Code amendments that would deal with a number of issues, one of which was signage. And I have prepared -- as I think Penny alluded to, I've prepared a final draft of that. I'll be submitting it to staff within the next 30 days. My understanding from staff is that they are going to have an '09 LDC amendment cycle, and this set of interim amendments would be included in that '09 cycle. So the timing, once I submit it, is really a function of the staff review. We're not in a position yet to write a sign ordinance for Immokalee. That's why we asked to do the interim amendments so we could get the GMP amendments and the public realm plan, which we're doing, for the CRA, and then to write a sign plan for Immokalee, which may be, in some cases, different than the coastal sign ordinance, but we're not there yet; therefore, the interim standards. The way I've written that, it's got some criteria by which you could request a deviation, but it would be case by case and have to come in for an approval. And I didn't write it so that they would all come before the Board of County Commissioners. There is a certain amount of administrative authority, and then before the Planning Commission, and only in an appeal case would they come before the Board of County Commissioners. Very similar to the post take plan that we wrote that you all approved. So a very similar process. So that was an interim step to allow someone to ask for a deviation. Let's say they get -- they get cited by code enforcement and they feel that the sign doesn't present a health -- public health, safety, and welfare issue and that it's been there for, you know, a long time. They could ask for a deviation. That deviation would be granted on a temporary basis or a permanent basis. So I think we're probably a year away from that '09 LDC amendment cycle being finalized, unless staff can expedite that or this component of that. Page 52 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I guess my response to that is, I am not at all interested in waiving the responsibility for people to get sign permits for a year. If a person has a sign and it's not permitted, they're in violation of the law. It is entirely different from people who have a sign that has been there for a long time and/or a sign that is permitted but not -- might not meet the current or new specifications. I can live with that. I can't live with someone who just violates the law, puts up signs, and doesn't even bother to apply for a permit. So I guess I would divide this into two levels. Those people who have sign permits -- we can use the interim standards to make decisions concerning those. Is that what you're telling me? MR. MULHERE: Correct. I think those interim standards will allow for a deviation process if it's necessary. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that can be done by staff? MR. MULHERE: Correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. MULHERE: At certain thresholds. It's kicked up to the Planning Commission if they -- the deviation exceeds certain thresholds. But, again, you're going to see that coming before you as a land code amendment. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And when are we going to see that? MR. MUDD: In the fall, sir. MR. SCHMITT: In the fall. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it's going to be some time? MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir. You already approved that cycle in an executive summary back in November. There -- we're still waiting for input. The input date closes -- Bob, I believe we announced the first of March you have to have that in. MR. MUDD: Correct, correct. MR. SCHMITT: There are other amendments coming in. And Page 53 January 27, 2009 then we start the review process going through the various committees, through the Planning Commission. You'll see it in the fall, late fall. MR. MULHERE: I just wanted to -- I'm sorry. I just wanted to add one quick thing. I think it's germane to what you're talking about in terms of separating these things. There's this sort of -- not to confuse things further, but there's the example of a sign that's been up for 50 years -- and in some cases, to be honest, my experience in researching through county records is, you know, who knows whether there was a permit. It's not a question that there isn't a permit. There's just -- there are no records. So I do agree with you that more recent -- more recent signs that might have been put up without a permit, it's a -- you know, it's clear that you should have a permit for that. But something that's existed for a long, long time, maybe that could go through the deviation process because I can tell you that there aren't any records from 30, 40, 50 years ago. They just don't exist. You have to assume that they were permitted, I think, in those cases. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think it's a shame that that restaurant had to take their sign down in that case. But, look, let me just throw out some things, and then I'm going to leave the final decision -- or the motion up to the commissioner in whose district this -- Immokalee lies. But here's what I would be willing to support, is to issue instructions to code enforcement to explain to anyone who receives a citation for an improper sign, explain to them what their rights are, do not require that they remove it immediately, let them understand the appeal process, then, perhaps, we can deal with the things like the restaurant and their sign that's been there for 50 years. But for people who have completely disregarded our laws and put up signs without bothering to even apply for a sign permit, those people, in my opinion, should be cited and they should apply for the Page 54 January 27,2009 sign permit, and they should put up a sign that is in accordance with our existing sign requirements if that's what they want to do. If the time comes when there is a new sign ordinance for Immokalee and they wish to change the sign and they have to get another sign permit, in my opinion that's only fair. They failed to apply for it the first time. If they have to reapply later at a second time, then that's the penalty for violating the law. But for people who already have signs, I don't see the logic in causing them additional costs in a period of economic depression such as we have now. So if that makes sense -- and i[I didn't explain it clearly, please let me know. But I just think we need to divide it into those two categories. If you're in violation of the law and you haven't bothered to get a sign permit, then you treat it one way. That's a violation. If you've got a sign that's been there for some time and we can't prove that it wasn't permitted, then let's assume it was permitted and let the person keep it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Commissioner Coyle. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I need clarification in regards to our sign ordinance. My understanding, that this came into effect on February 1,2003. Was the -- is that correct? Is that the date that it came into -- MR. SCHMITT: No, sir. It actually came into effect in 2001. It's the Citizens Horizon Committee. It was 2001. There was an amortization period, a period that extended based on the cost of the sign where they had to come into compliance over a period of years. COMMISSIONER HALAS: What was -- what was the February 1, 2003, date then? MR. SCHMITT: Those were -- as explained there, those signs that did not conform to the requirements of the '91 code were able to be maintained until 2003. Page 55 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MR. SCHMITT: After 2003, they had to come into compliance. Any sign that was permitted after that period, there was an amortization period that allowed them to write down the cost of that sign or to utilize that sign. If you recall, probably one of the emotional issues was right here on 41, the Italian restaurant that had the towering sign that finally had to come into compliance. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Globally. MR. SCHMITT: And that was an extremely emotional event. Likewise, we had a court case up on 41 with a gas station that finally came into compliance. COMMISSIONER HALAS: So my other question is, this sign ordinance, was the sign ordinance just directed specifically for the coastal area -- MR. SCHMITT: No, sir. COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- or was it this countywide sign ordinance? MR. SCHMITT: Countywide. There was -- it basically addressed size of copy and height. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So why hasn't there been any follow-up on the sign ordinance until just now? MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, there have been in the past in Immokalee, notices. Many of these signs, as you can tell by looking at them, are homemade signs. One of the problems we have as well is -- and I'll pursue it through contractor licensing so contractors -- sign contractors who put up signs without a permit. COMMISSIONER HALAS: So we've had this ordinance for a number of years -- MR. SCHMITT: Almost ten years. COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- and we've had this when times were good, and we still had people that were out of compliance. And Page 56 January 27, 2009 so now we've brought this before the Board of County Commissioners, and now everybody's saying, I can't afford it and I don't need to comply with the sign ordinance. And I have some concerns about that because if -- I think everybody realized or should have realized that we did have a sign ordinance that came in effect. And you just stated that it wasn't just strictly for the coastal area. It was the countywide area. And, of course, as Commissioner Fiala brought up, that there was some issues throughout the area, and there was some concerns about having to replace signs. And now we're in a situation where when you did replace the signs, it actually benefited the whole community overall. I have some real concerns about how come this has just come before us in the Board of Commissioners when this should have been acted on for a number of years since the sign ordinance has been in effect. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I hope that -- I hope that we can give some kind of temporary relief to those existing signs up there, being that we are in an economic hard time, and wait for the Immokalee community to come forward with a sign code for the Immokalee urban area or, you know, a specific corridor. Basically, if it -- ifit meets health, safety, and welfare, why don't we? CHAIRMAN FIALA: How about permits? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I understand Commissioner Coyle's concerns, but here's the fact. If they -- if they don't have a permit, I guess it would have to be proven that they didn't apply for a permit. And the second thing, even if they didn't have a permit and they get a permit, it has to come into the new sign code. If it has to come into the new coastal -- or what we comply with throughout Collier County, they'll probably want to change it later on for a less restricter (sic) sign code for the Immokalee area. Page 57 January 27,2009 And I think what we really need to do is task the task force to come through with a sign code amendment for the board to consider and the advisory boards to consider. If the economic times were different, I could understand doing something what -- along the lines of what Commissioner Coyle is saying. It's tough out there. We're lucky that there are still some businesses left out there. If you drive up and down any area in Southwest Florida, there's a lot of vacancies. And let's give some specific task to the task force and let's give some interim relief. So I -- there's just one thing that I have concerns about. If people has tried to come into compliance and to let them put back what they had prior is -- it's probably not something I can support. But if it -- a sign exists now, let's give some interim relief for those people who are not in compliance with the coastal sign code. I shouldn't say the coastal sign code because it is the sign code. That's all. CHAIRMAN FIALA: County sign code. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. And thank you, Commissioner Henning, for pointing out the different parts of this. And I think you and I are about -- saying about the same thing. The only thing, my concern was, getting to that part that you mentioned at the end about possibly not being able to support people that have taken down their signs in the rush to try to remove any kind of code issue, these are the people that should have been -- that should be rewarded for their concern over trying to live within the code. They probably can't afford to put up another sign now. If -- recognizing what signs are in these pictures -- and I guess this is the vast majority of them, I would assume. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And some of these have been taken down, correct? Or are these the ones that are still up? Page 58 January 27, 2009 MR. SCHMITT: Pictures you have here are the ones that are either, there are some examples of where they're in compliance and the others are where they're -- it says on the bottom whether they're in compliance or out of compliance. But most of these are the -- these are part of the 34 that you have. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. But there is -- in here isn't the ones that have been taken down? MR. SCHMITT: No, sir. Those -- we didn't provide those. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Most of those that were taken down, were they just -- MR. SCHMITT: They were either wall signs, signs in windows, other type of infractions that were what I would call hastily-put-up signs. Those -- some of those that we did the research on -- oftentimes what happens is a sign company never calls for a final CO, so we took care of that and closed out those records. So most of the ones where they came into compliance was merely either removing the infraction, meaning unauthorized banner or wall sign, or doing the research to ensure that the permit was issued properly. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle was absolutely correct, there's no way you can come up with fairness in this. No matter what you do, there's going to be somebody that comes up short. In order for this to go forward, I have three commissioners that are going to vote for this. Now, there's a couple things I think this Board of Commissioners needs to recognize, the fact that they have played a tremendous role in the uplifting of Immokalee over the past eight years, unbelievable differences taking place. Substandard housing for the most part has been removed from Immokalee, compliance of the living conditions for the residents that live there full time and the migrants has improved ten-fold from what it was in the past. Through a system of controls, there's been a tremendous amount Page 59 January 27, 2009 of improvement. And of course, the big thing has been the citizenry of Immokalee themselves that have been driving this engine. So it's not a case that we've been ignoring Immokalee and that they're not coming forward. They are. I think the whole issue lies around the fact of, we have a pending change to the sign ordinance that hasn't been clearly defined yet, and we should be concentrating with that as the issue and trying to work around an interim program that Bob Mulhere mentioned that would allow for the transition from one point to the other. That time period is elusive. Originally I was going to suggest two years to try to cover what's out there. That might not be realistic. It might be way too much time. I heard one suggestion of a year. That might be too short. I don't know. This is something that I would like to see staff explore and work it out with the CRA, Bob Mulhere, their consultant, to be able to see how this whole thing could come together in a meaningful way so the transition takes place in a meaningful way. I hate to see the people in Immokalee put up signs -- and forgive me, it is a coastal standard. I never voted for this sign ordinance from day one, and I represent 80-some percent of the land mass of the county. The people in my area never supported it, and so it is a coastal sign ordinance. So let's give them the chance to be able to come up with their own definition of signs and be able to identify the communities they like. And a couple of things I would like to put forward as part of a motion. One, that all new signs have to comply. That anyone that's coming into business now or has no sign up has to comply by the present sign ordinances. They can't put up a temporary sign because then it raises all sorts of problems what that sign's supposed to be. Two, that any and all signs that are a danger to the health, safety, and welfare, and that includes how they're placed on the road, the Page 60 January 27, 2009 vision that you can see when you're turning the corner, have to be removed, and the property owner will have to comply to regulations that are in effect at this particular time, because the interim ones are too far away. I can't -- and, of course, they could not put up any sign at all -- that would be an option, which I can't picture them doing -- and that we work with the CRA and Bob Mulhere, the consultant, to be able to come up with some interim plans for the rules and everything and recognize them as -- with the direction we're going for these particular sign codes to be able to move everything forward and have staff and the CRA come up with a -- the shortest possible time period that we can do. In other words, we don't want to prolong this forever. We have to come up with something that's going to be uniform from one end of Immokalee to the other. That would be a motion and I -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'll second that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, it sounds great to me. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any discussion from other commissioners? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have a motion on the floor from Commissioner Coletta. You've written that out so that you can give it to our County Manager, right? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. When-- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And a second by Commissioner Henning. No further discussion, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? Page 61 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a 3-2 vote on that. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, just while we're working this thing out with -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, we're going to take a -- oh. MR. MUDD: Let's just get some clarification before we -- and I know you got to go for a break. I'm sorry. I just want to make sure. I've got new signs; they abide by the ordinance. We've got health, safety, and welfare signs that put the public at risk, we tear -- we enforce the code for signs. Number three, we work with Mr. Mulhere and the CRA to determine some interim guidance. But while that's going on, I need you to tell me as a board that you want us to toll any other violations of signs until the Mulhere/CRA issue comes back to the board for approval. That's the piece that I'm missing. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. MR. MUDD: Toll means not enforce. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The existing signs. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. MR. MUDD: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. That's what I understood it was all about. MR. MUDD: I just wanted to take the -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Just put that on -- put any further -- MR. MUDD: No, I think I've got it, okay. I just wanted to make sure we were clear with that particular piece, all right, so that -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Two comments, though. Commissioner Coyle, and then Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And what that really means is that people who don't have a sign permit at all will continue to get away with violating the law. Page 62 January 27, 2009 MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Just wanted to make sure that was clear. MR. MUDD: That's what -- I'm trying to get some clarification. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't agree with that at all. I think that those that don't have a sign permit should. And, you know, another thing, the Immokalee area is trying desperately hard to pull itself up by the bootstraps and attract business, and they say high-wage jobs. They're trying to attract these things. Unless you improve your appearance, you're not going to do that. And as long as you're complacent and want to leave it as is, you're not going to attract those businesses. And I -- I hope you're keeping that in mind. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Would you want to make a motion to reconsider? CHAIRMAN FIALA: You mean to add -- yes. I will make a motion to reconsider our last vote. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Last vote. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And do I have a second? COMMISSIONER COYLE: You do. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a second on that. Motion to reconsider the last vote. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I'm opposed. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I -- just a procedure question. How can we reconsider something when not all voted in the majority? Page 63 January 27, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, that's true. I don't know that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: A person voting in favor of the motion can ask for a reconsideration. MR. KLATZKOW: You're good. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And that was me. MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, you're good. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And all I'm concerned with is the permitting part of that. The rest of it I agreed with, but -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wait a minute. I'm still-- you had a second that wasn't part of the majority. MR. KLATZKOW: I think -- no. The motion has to be made by somebody in the majority, but the second can be made by anybody. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I stand corrected. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, if I may? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I understand what you're saying. The only thing is, is we're the rule makers here, and we've got a right to be able to extend people out. We've done it all the time with people that come before us, ask for extra time being granted. We have made these exceptions on a regular basis based upon the facts in front of us. If we go back and we say now that, yes, 100 percent, everything's going to go forward but everybody has to comply if they don't have a permit, we're effectively nullifying anything these people have asked for. I can't picture any advantage for the rest of it to take place. Why would we even need an interim sign thing if we're going to say, okay, if don't have a permit you're no longer eligible? And Bob Mulhere can put it in much more elegant words than I ever could. MR. MULHERE: I just wanted to say one thing with respect to not having a permit. I think what we're talking about here is existing signs -- I think Commissioner Coyle mentioned it -- existing signs Page 64 January 27,2009 where there's no evidence that there was a permit, that those would be held in abeyance unless there's a health, safety, and welfare issue, that there wouldn't be an enforcement taken. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. MR. MULHERE: I don't think anyone has suggested that a brand new sign with no permits shouldn't be permitted. It should be. And -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're saying the same thing. MR. MULHERE: And either -- people have a choice. Either they wait; I think you said it, Commissioner Coletta -- either they don't put up a sign or they permit a new sign. So I don't think anybody is suggesting from my perspective what I heard from the CRA, that there would be no action taken on signs that should be permitted that haven't been permitted with the exception of those signs that exist where there really is an argument as to whether or not there was a permit, and that was the one exclusion, I thought; and then everything else, I think, that you mentioned was appropriate, that there be no further code enforcement action taken on existing signs unless there's a health, safety, welfare issue, until we come back with the interim amendments, which would be within a year. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. That's the way I -- okay. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. And that was very specifically stated when I suggested it. If we can't prove that a sign wasn't permitted, then you assume it was permitted, okay. The burden of proof is on us if there is a question, so that the sign that was there for this restaurant for 50 years would have been permitted to stay there until we sorted all this out under this -- my particular proposal. The requirement to bring people into compliance with our current sign (sic) would be abated. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. Page 65 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that gives the people everything they've been asking for. And Mr. Thomas agrees with that. So I don't understand why there's such disagreement about doing this. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And help me a little bit. So what you're saying is that businesses that haven't been in business for like 30 years and they have a sign there and they can't find a permit, then those people will be considered in violation? COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. MR. MULHERE: No. COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no, no. If the county cannot prove that it was not permitted, then they get to keep what they've got. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Let's go fast forward in time. The county's been doing an excellent job of recordkeeping for the last five years. Probably the vast majority of businesses in Immokalee are five years old or younger. It's just the nature of things, how things turn over. So everything that's at a certain point like five or seven years out that they can't find a record that there's a permit, the assumption will be that there was never applied for a permit; is that what you're saying? COMMISSIONER COYLE: That is correct. And the people would be expected to apply for the permit for the sign that they have. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're basically saying the same thing -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- except for, you know, if you have a sign that is clearly a safety issue, a health issue, then you're going to leave it up because staff cannot prove that they did not have a Page 66 January 27, 2009 permit. CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. I think in the motion it was already said -- stated that this is just in addition to, but -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Whose motion? CHAIRMAN FIALA: In Commissioner Coletta's motion. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And we're going to reconsider that. But what our -- what I assume our motion will be is just to add to what Commissioner Coletta already said or to readjust it so as to make sure that -- about the permitting aspects of this, is the way I'm -- you know, the way I'm going forward to reconsider. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine. MR. MULHERE: I think the risk of saying that you don't need a permit until we come back with the interim standards is, anybody who puts up a sign, they don't need a permit either. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Exactly right. MR. MULHERE: So you don't want that situation either. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll tell you what. I'll restate my motion to include what you suggested in it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, you can't restate it right now until we vote on reconsider. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I thought we did. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, we did. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did we vote on reconsider? MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am, you did. It was 3-2. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, boy. We need a break. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And now I'll include what you suggested in it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So his motion is restated with the addition. Page 67 January 27,2009 MR. MUDD: Let me see if I can get it right, all right? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. MUDD: Here we go. Number one, the -- if you're going to put up a sign and you're going to put it in right now for your business, you must go for a permit and you must be in keeping with the sign ordinance. That's number one. Number two, if you have a sign, okay, that is not permitted, is illegal according to our sign ordinance, and is a health, safety, and welfare item, you've got to get rid of it, you've got to tear it down. That's number two. Number three, staff will work with Mr. Mulhere and the CRA and come back with a new sign law or deviations thereto in the interim. And the part that I needed clarification on, and which you gave me, goes something like this: If you have an old sign and there's no permit for it, that sign gets to stay until this new sign piece comes in. If it is -- there is no permit but it's a new business, a new sign, then they must fix it and come in for a sign permit and put up a sign that is with -- in keeping with the sign ordinance. COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, that's not what I said, but you got it almost right. If anybody put up a sign last week or three years or four years or five years ago, and they didn't bother to apply for a sign permit, they're going to have to submit a request for a sign permit. So did you say that? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, I did. COMMISSIONER COYLE: If that's your understanding, then . , It s -- MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- okay with me. CHAIRMAN FIALA: But those existing signs that -- that the county cannot prove that have a sign permit will be allowed to stay? COMMISSIONER COYLE: They will allow them to stay. Page 68 January 27,2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: But if we can -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I can clarify that for you. It has -- it's based upon the county's records that they keep, and the records are as complete as ever could be for X number of years. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right, exactly right. So is that stated in this motion then as well? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So your motion then stands as-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Previously stated with the addition. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- County Manager -- with the addition as we just spoke of. Okay. Then may I have a second on that? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yep. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I've got a motion on the floor to an adjusted motion and a second. MS. FILSON: Who's the second? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Pardon me? The motion maker was -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Henning. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- Commissioner Coletta, and the second was Commissioner Henning. Thank you. All those in favor, signify -- oh. Commissioner Halas? Sorry. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to make sure that I got clarification. What we're voting on is what the County Manager has brought forth before us in regards to the motion; is that correct? CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's correct. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, actually it's the motion before plus that added, Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: That addition. COMMISSIONER COYLE: As summarized by the County Manager. Page 69 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, as was summarized, okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All those in favor, signify by saymg aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. That is 4-1 vote. And I think we need a break right now. We'll see you here-- MR. THOMAS: Can I just say something? I want to say thank you very, very much, number one. Number two, you all mentioned it before. As quickly as we can get our new overlay in depends on how quickly we can get our master plan through development services. So any speed that we can have would be appreciated. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. We're -- we'll take a break. We'll be back here at 11:10. Thank you. (A brief recess was had.) MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your seats. Madam Chair, Commissioners, we have a hot mike. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Item #lOD BRIEFING TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN REGARD TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT'S PROCESS TO ADDRESS CODE ENFORCEMENT VIOLATIONS ON LIS PENDENS/FORECLOSED PROPERTIES IN UNINCORPORATED COLLIER COUNTY - MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S DIRECTION -APPROVED Page 70 January 27,2009 MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to Item lOD, which is a briefing to the Board of County Commissioners in regard to the code enforcement department's process to address code enforcement violations on lis pendens and foreclosed properties in unincorporated Collier County. Ms. Diane Flagg, your director of code enforcement, will present. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Diane, you've gotten taller. MR. BONO: Trying to keep you guys off base. MR. MUDD: State your name for the record. MS. FLAGG: Sorry, Commissioners. Diane Flagg, director of code enforcement. What we're going to do today is give you a brief overview of the foreclosure program that the code enforcement department has joined hands with lots of different agencies and community members to address the potential blight, certainly blight that's impacted other areas of the community and what we've done in conjunction with the other team members to address this situation in our area. And with that, I'd like to introduce you to Mario Bono. He's going to do the presentation for you, and he's our foreclosure investigator. MR. BONO: Good morning. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good morning. MR. BONO: Well, I was a little nervous, but after hearing the Immokalee sign case, I'm okay. So -- so I want to start by saying thank you, distinguished County Commissioners, Madam Chair, guests, and fellow associates. We know this past year has been filled with challenges, and the housing crisis and the foreclosure crisis in itself has grown to national prominence in 2008. And we have battled the negative effects it's had on our communities; however, it has allowed us to reach milestones and achieve major accomplishments. The success of the Blight Prevention Program is clearly Page 71 January 27, 2009 measured by the partnerships we have built and nurtured over the last three months with banks, lenders, third-party mortgage entities, services contractors, both national and local, and attorneys, and we are rehabilitating these properties through those relationships at a cost savings to the department's budget. And we'll say that department's -- that is really a zero dollar investment on our part at this point in time. So at this time allow me to support our efforts by presenting the following presentation. And I guess I've got to pull out the keyboard. MR. MUDD: The left house button will do it. There you go. MR. BONO: Thank you. The Blight Prevention Program focuses on three main objectives: To address health and safety, stabilize property values and property tax revenues, and prevent blight in the community. So how do we do this? That should be your first question to me is, oh, that sounds great, looks great on paper. What do we do? Well, we have to react immediately to reported code violations and maintain mutual working relationships with the lenders. That is paramount, okay. And once again, it's keeping that cost down as well to us. Typically as property values increase, so does the property tax. Now, obviously we're seeing a decline in property value at about a 42 percent clip, and that's from the National Area Board of Realtors that came out last week. So what we do is communicate to the lenders to adopt a maintenance schedule, grass cuts, litter, ongoing inspections of the property, so that obviously gives them a chance to keep their property somewhat in integrity as well as in a salable and presentable condition. Our third approach is to -- is strictly proactive. We utilize the code enforcement sweeps within our department for targeted areas, and we utilize community task force teams that have been developed through the code enforcement department to address vacant and Page 72 January 27, 2009 distressed properties. By doing so, this approach reduces and/or eliminates potential crime havens and dealing with any code violations as well. I've put together a graphic here, and these numbers were given and contrived from realquest.com. We believe it is a viable source of information, and they do updates daily. Well, you can see by district where we stand in the pre- foreclosures, which is indicated by your lis pendens and a foreclosure, which would be a final judgment or final summary of judgment on the foreclosure action; auctions, either public or private; and bank-owned. And the graphic I like best is really on District 5, is the bank-owned. That's pretty high. And the reason I like it is because we can get immediate results from the banks. We know the banks have it. We have a clear Certificate of Title. We know who to go after. And I hate that word, but unfortunately we have to -- obviously sometimes it puts pressure on the banks to do their job as well. I just brought down the numbers in a -- sort of a number group here and by the numbers. The total foreclosures, either pre-foreclosure auction and/or bank-owned is 5,872. And I think even if you could take a conservative estimate of this of 10 percent, we're looking at about 600 cases that exponentially increase our case load. The Blight Prevention Program has committed to join and create five community task force teams. We have done this through cohesive efforts through the Sheriffs Department, Public Utilities, Domestic Animal Services, and other related agencies within the county. We also use bank and lender key contacts, at this point in time about 33 key contacts that I can personally call on a moment's notice to abate any violation. Of course, abatement, as well as compliance, is what we're after and, of course, the community caretaking list, which is -- and also the foreclosure tracking list which is not mentioned here, that lets our sales measure successes and, of course, keep accurate Page 73 January 27,2009 records for the county. Just a graphic on here on the task teams that we've actually created and generated. We do have monthly meetings on here, so we work together with the Golden Gate City Task Force, Golden Gate Estates Task Force, East Naples Task Force, North Naples, as well as Immokalee Task Force, and great things have come to that. It's just been a really concentrated and cohesive effort on everybody's part. Some of the memories I may have mentioned here, but you'll see this little graphic has code enforcement, obviously ourselves, utilities, the DEP, solid waste, the Sheriffs Office, the fire departments, pollution control, the DAS, Fish and Wildlife Commission, civic associations, HOA's and POA's, Naples Utility, as well as the health department. And here is the community caretaking list that we have. We track everything as far as properties are concerned, so we know that -- where we're at at any time. If a citizen or the commissioners do happen to have a call, we can give you an update on exactly where the problem is and where the property is and where we're at with the property itself. Here comes the good part. I like this picture. This is on Linwood Avenue, Madam Chair. This is 3132 Linwood Avenue. I'm not ashamed to say that address. This took one phone call to Wells Fargo Bank, of which we established a very good working relationship. This was cleaned up within two days. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Wow, that's great. MR. BONO: There were several, I would say, dozen, buckets of hazardous materials and solvents that were on the property. As the property looks today. It is completely cleaned up. And once again, no cost to the county from either an administrative resource, a financial resource, or manpower. Of course, we understand today's economic times is tough for everybody right here in Collier County, of course, across the nation, Page 74 January 27, 2009 and we like to be well-armed when we come across these situations, and we've created a link and a website to address and convey to those citizens -- excuse me. That did not work out very well -- to go ahead and look at this resource. And if you click on that, we come up with a handful of resources for area citizens and community members. And it's just -- just filled with information, either -- national, local, and state programs. And last but not least, and thanks to my director for pushing me on this one. We're the Blight Busters, and you see that we resolve life safety issue, prevent blight in the community, and stabilize property values and property tax revenue. I would like to, if I could, share some testimonials that have been expressed to us by the lenders and the servicing companies. Quote, I wish we could form similar relationships with other cities and counties like the one we have with Collier County. I think we could solve problems much quicker this way, end quote. Quote, I'm glad we can help. It's part ofthe day-to-day around here, but we usually don't get positive feedback from the code enforcement community. So on behalf of my staff, thank you for all your kind words and assistance in dealing with the troubled properties in Collier County, end quote. Quote, I cannot begin to express my gratitude towards Collier County for not only their professionalism and attention to detail, but their willingness to work with situations -- with institutions such as ours for the greater good of the community, end quote. Quote, as a fairly new member of the property preservation team here at Fifth Third Bank, it was refreshing to come across an organization who took the time to work alongside me while developing a program headed in the right direction in Collier County and has set a high standard I now expect and use with other cities across the country. I have come to learn a great deal over the past several months, Page 75 January 27,2009 and for this I will be eternally grateful. In closing, I'd like to say that -- and to reiterate, we have 100 percent compliance rate. We have not used any administrative resources, financial or otherwise, to take any of these banks in front of the board or the special magistrate. And I also want to, obviously, thank my fellow associates who have been instrumental in making this program successful. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Mario. I've sat in on a few of the task force meetings, and it's almost exciting to see how dedicated everyone in that room is to making a difference, each and every facet of our government. And, Mario, you've been an angel to work with. MR. BONO: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: He takes on these jobs with a vigor. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, Mario, and Diane Flagg, I want to thank you very much for this presentation. I think it was very enlightening to realize that you have a great working relationship with the lending institutions that now have the properties in land, and that they're working with us to make sure that we don't have a blighted community. My question is -- and I'm not sure if you can answer it, Mario. But you've been working with the banks in the past. Do they give you any indication, when you're working with them on these particular items, what the value of the property is in today's market? MR. BONO: I don't have that information, Commissioner, but I would think that if I -- if I do ask the question, I think it could be -- you know, be provided for me as well as yourself. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. What I was kind of looking for is maybe after the meeting, if you could get some of this information for us, unless it's too much of a task. I know that you're working with other concerns and with properties in Collier County. Page 76 January 27,2009 What I'd like to know is what properties or how many properties in Collier County of the 5,872 are priced under $200,000, and how many of these properties are priced under a $100,000 -- $100,000 or under. It would be interesting just to -- for my own information as far as affordable housing. MS. FLAGG: Commissioner, I would add that in speaking with the banks, what we're starting to see is that the banks are holding onto the properties because the values have decreased. And through the work that Mario and his colleagues have done in talking to the banks, they're actually helping lead the banks in the direction that they need to go, because this is all new to the banks also. About 80 percent of our banks that hold mortgages in Collier County are out of state, so we're dealing with, you know, Bank of New York, Washington Mutual, Wells Fargo. And what the banks are learning is if they let our community members stay in the house, maintain the house, instead of pushing them out of the house, that -- what the banks are starting to do now is to hold onto the property. So whereas before, six months, they -- the sheriff shows up at the front door and tells them get out. The banks are now slowing that train down and listening to these folks when they tell them, what you may want to consider is what some of the other banks are considering, which is Cash For Keys, and some of the banks are letting homeowners, if they stay in the home and take care of the home, giving them a 2- to 5,000 Cash For Keys Program where, once they do actually foreclose on the home, they will give them a small amount of money for maintaining the home. So what we're seeing is trending, is that we're going to see that graph on bank-owned continue to increase because the banks are starting to not flip those properties and resell them. The other thing that Mario is doing, we don't have -- what we're explaining to the banks, because they're not familiar with the weather in Naples, Florida -- and so what we're explaining to the banks is that Page 77 January 27,2009 it is a really good idea for them to keep the electric on, which is another reason to allow our community members to stay in the home, because allowing the community members to stay in the home allows the electric to remain on, allows the air-conditioner to continue to run so that we don't run into a mold problem. So basically we like to say the gentleman that was in the mailroom last week is now in lost (sic) mitigation because the banks are dealing with this overwhelming foreclosure issue, and certainly these folks are on the front end of just talking with the banks and encouraging them to share -- you know, they know what's working because they're working with all the banks, and they're sharing that information with other key contacts and bankrupts so that the information is getting out. COMMISSIONER HALAS: My last question is, are the banks working with the present homeowners to try to keep them in the homes and to work up some kind of an agreement to where they can continue on living there and come up with some kind of a payment program to institute -- to get their mortgage paid off? MS. FLAGG: What code enforcement -- we also participate with the Collier County Chamber who has a task force, and that's geared to assist the community members. And so we're working with the banks from a loss mitigation, which is addressing blight. We want to -- we don't want blight to start here in Collier County. The Collier County Chamber Task Force has a group of attorneys and mediators, and people like myself, who, we get together once a month and talk about how to help community members. So in answer to your question, yes, in some cases, but, again, the banks are having to learn. They have to -- they had to throw out the old play book because this is something that they've never dealt with before. So we're helping them from the loss mitigation side saying, hey, you know, Wells Fargo is doing this. You may want to talk about the Page 78 January 27, 2009 Cash for Keys Program. And the information is starting. I know that we've been asked to speak to a banking group, I believe it's next month, and we're going to talk about these things with them. Because what we're finding is, we're sharing information with key contacts in the banking community, and they're basically -- because they don't have past practice to deal with the situation that they're facing, that they're starting to -- whereas before they were foreclosing quickly. Now they're slowing the train down. They're letting the people stay. The other thing that code enforcement is doing -- because we're usually one of the first ones in conjunction with the sheriffs office or utilities enforcement that see that there's something wrong at the house, that the code investigators carry a resource list with them so that if they come across somebody and they say, look, I know I have all these violations, but there's nothing I can do, then we give them the resource list for the chamber web site and explain to them that you want to talk to your bank about staying in the home if you can't make the mortgage payments. So we're approaching it also with the resource, a community assistance when we come across these situations. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Once again, thank you very much for all the work you guys are doing -- I really appreciate it -- to keep the quality of the community looking the way it is, thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Diane, I want to thank you and, naturally, Mr. Bono and Michaelle Crowley for this program, and I don't think it really emphasis (sic) what they have accomplished is, when it's in between lis pendens and foreclosure, the owner still owns it, but code enforcement department is working with the banks to get in there prior to foreclosure to clean up the property. And that's a -- in my estimate, a great achievement and just a wonderful approach. So if nobody has any objections, I'd like to recognize the code enforcement staff and also the task force for such a great Page 79 January 27,2009 accomplishment to keeping the neighborhoods up. And I'm going to make a motion to approve staffs recommendations. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second, with one addition, if I may, Commissioner Henning. Would you have it brought back as a proclamation at a future meeting so we can duly recognize the public? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, that was my full intent. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's wonderful. Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a second. Commissioner Coletta, did you want to say anything else? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, just briefly a couple points I wanted to make is, one, how many homes have you dealt with so far? What kind of numbers is it? What's the total numbers you've actually dealt with where you had to intercede looking for compliance? MS. FLAGG: You're talking about with the banks? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, ma'am. MS. FLAGG: Two hundred three? MR. BONO: Two hundred three registered cases. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Two hundred and -- over 200? MR. BONO: Over 200, and this program has been only -- its inception since November 6th. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, think about this for a moment. You've dealt with 200 entities out there and you come up with 100 percent compliance and you did it without a gun? I think it's absolutely remarkable. And I understand, too, that what you're doing out there will help to lessen the dangers from forest fires that could decimate especially the rural areas of Collier County by requiring the people to keep the place clean and also remove any danger from overlying brush or weeds, and that's also a tremendous benefit as we go forward. Page 80 January 27, 2009 And I can't thank you enough. It's -- you and your task force and your staff are really to be complimented for doing an excellent job of working out there with the community and not having to use the enforcement arm that's within your jurisdiction to use. I thank you very much. CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have one speaker. I'm sorry. MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am. Steve Harrison? MR. HARRISON: Just a couple of quick things. First I wanted to commend Director Flagg for the amazing progress that's being made on this issue. When I've come before you in July and September, we were looking at 8- to 9,000 foreclosures in '08. It turned out to be almost exactly 8,000. The financial press is projecting that with unemployment rising, that the numbers are going to go up in '09. She's making such great progress. If it comes to pass that she needs more resources, I hope you'll look on it favorably. There's three areas that are still gaps that I'm seeing in the marketplace. We have a lot of condo associations where 15 to 20 percent of the condo owners are no longer paying their dues, so there's a great level of distress popping up in the condo associations around the county. Also, roughly half of our transactions, real estate transfers, are foreclosures being sold as is with the right to inspect. So a lot of violations that maybe have been attached to the properties through the years are being conveyed to the future owners. That's probably something that Diane will be looking at here shortly. But it's great work, and we hope to see more of it as she goes on. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much, Steve. Now we have a motion the floor and a second. Any further comment? (No response.) Page 8 1 January 27, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thanks for the great work, guys. MR. BONO: Thank you. Item #10E THE SIXTH CONSERVATION COLLIER ACTIVE ACQUISITION LIST AND DIRECTION FOR THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO ACTIVELY PURSUE PROJECTS RECOMMENDED WITHIN THE A-CATEGORY- MOTION TO APPROVE ACQUISITION LIST WITHOUT THE P AGANES AND STIRNS PROPERTIES - APPROVED MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 10E, and that's a recommendation for the approval of the sixth Conservation Collier active acquisition list and direction for the County Manager or his designee to actively pursue projects recommended within the A category. And Ms. Alex Sulecki -- yeah, I'll get it -- Alex Sulecki, your senior environmental specialist, will present. Now, I will -- I will mention to the board before Alex starts that one of the things she asked, she goes, you know, our list could be impacted based on the board's decision to 101, and that has to do with the easement on the Pepper Ranch and the future issues. So if the board should decide not to acquire the Pepper Ranch -- Page 82 January 27, 2009 and I haven't got a sense yet from the commissioners that that is the case -- but if that would happen, there would be $32 million, additional dollars, that you basically have in your program and you've loaned, you have a loan on, where your list would expand. If that is, indeed, the case, Ms. Sulecki will come back after she talks with the CCLAC, okay, and if that list gets expanded based on the decision, then she will come back to the board with this list amended, okay. Alex, I think I've covered it. Go. MS. SULECKI: Thank you for the introduction. And I think you should actually call me Ms. So Lucky because I have a job. Thank you very much. Good morning. For the record, Alex Sulecki, coordinator of your Conservation Collier Program. I am pleased to be here today to seek your approval for the six acquisition -- six Conservation Collier recommended acquisition list. And I don't know if I have any committee members here this morning. Do I have any? No. Okay. Well, I'd like to give you a little status update just to start out with. We -- as of today we've acquired 1,336 acres. We've spent about $69.2 million. Currently we have another 55 acres under contract for $347,000. Pepper Ranch would add 2,512 acres for another 33, approximate, million. And if we acquire Pepper Ranch, we would have then a total 3,856 acres and would have spent approximately $103.3 million. We have five final management plans currently being administered, we have three more under review, and we have nine properties that are under an interim management plan currently. So as you may recall, we have prioritized our active acquisition list. If you look on the right, you can see a map of the Conservation Collier properties. They have the priority colors attached to them, the list that matches with the list that you were provided in your agenda Page 83 January 27,2009 materials. Being -- those properties that the CCLAC recommends, A, green, that's like go, we'd like to buy them; the yellow or orange, that's wait, hold; and red, C category, a recommend not to pursue. Notice we also have some blue properties here on the map. These are properties or areas that have been approved previously but in some cases we don't have willing sellers for all the properties, and that's -- as in our two multi-parcel projects, unit 53, which is up here, Winchester Head. Camp Keais isn't exactly in that category, so I'll leave it aside for now. And then down here, RJS. Camp Keais hasn't -- many haven't accepted our offers, and it's not a multi-parcel project. And RJS actually is in the process of contract but hasn't closed. But we'd like to keep these on the list technically so that when we are prepared to close, we can go forward with them. Our ordinance asks us to equitably distribute these properties geographically, so you can see spatial relationship of those properties on the map. And we have a recommended A list, and so I'm kind of going to focus on this. If you have questions on the B or C list properties, I'll be happy to address them, but I'll focus just on those. We -- the parcels recommended for purchase are adjacent to current preserves. These provide larger areas that increase the environmentally significant areas that we've already decided we want to buy, and it also provides us some efficiency for management purposes, for staffing, and for cost. So you see here our A list properties and the approximate total of the property values and the estimates per-acre values here, with the total there. So you can get a sense of what these things are costing. And then I've also listed in those blue parcels down here, this is the RJS contract. It's pending. North Golden Gate Estates, Unit 53. These represent the values for the remaining acreage that we have not Page 84 January 27,2009 acquired at this time, we don't have willing sellers for. So that gives you an idea of what it might cost. That's in current, today's values. And so we currently have about $3.2 million, which is enough to buy our A list. The -- and RJS has been included in previous calculations, so that's in monies already set aside. Winchester Head and North Golden Gate Estates, those are projected for the future, so we would not be spending that. But if you wanted to look at a total of those, it's approximately 4 million. Okay. I wanted to show you the breakdown ofthe types of lands that are currently owned by Conservation Collier. We have, blue is wetlands; brown, upland forest; yellow is improved pasture, and that references Starnes particularly; and the very small turquoise slice there represents water. So you can see the rough breakdown of what we currently have. If you look at the next -- to the right pie chart, we have -- this is the recommended A list. So we have 40 percent wetlands and a little under 50 percent upland forest. And a different kind of category than in the original pie chart, this is structures; because we do have some properties recommended in the A list with structures, and I'm going to talk to you about them specifically. So if we combine the current and the A list, this is what you see. It's roughly the same breakdown. You can't really see that brick portion because it's so insignificant. It's less than 1 percent. If we include Pepper Ranch in that, you can see the breakdown doesn't really change that much. So that's really approximately what we have in Conservation Collier now. If we go into the A list, the first three properties on the A list are in the Rivers Road acquisition area. That's the Cosentino property, Devisse, Paganes, and Stirns. The red -- this is the Rivers Road project area, and you can see here where it's located in county just south of Immokalee Road, and that's Twin Eagles up above it. The red parcels over here are those we have just acquired. And Page 85 January 27,2009 the other colors, see the purple, the blue, the green, and the orange are those that are proposed as A list properties. And the total estimated cost for these properties is about $2.3 million. Now, the cost for the red parcels, which we've already acquired, is about 4.7 -- was 4.7 million. So if you look at the total projected cost of this project as a whole, you're looking at about $7 million and about 91 acres, which works out to about $77 (sic). MR. MUDD: Seventy-seven-- MS. SULECKI: 77,500 per acre. Okay. Now, that's kind ofa moderate to high price for the lands that we've looked at, but this is in the rural fringe mixed-use district receiving lands. So it's possible it could be developed. It could even be developed more than just the one per five acres. It met quite a bit -- it met five out of six of our initial screening criteria. Currently it's zoned mobile home overlay, agriculture, mobile home overlay. And it's receiving lands, so there's no TDR's associated with it, but they could be placed here. It's surrounded by and developed agricultural residential, rural residential. And one of the major reasons why this area was looked at for acquisition and is deemed important is that it actually connects with a wildlife corridor that is not currently in existence but is a negotiated private wildlife corridor between the developer of those lands and some conservation groups here. I don't know much more than its location because it's a private agreement, but this connects with a wildlife underpass right there on Immokalee Road, and then up through the Twin Eagles conservation golf areas up to more than 60,000-plus acres of conservation lands. So it's considered a critical wildlife corridor, and I think that's the major point I want to bring on those properties. Also that this is in one of the highest aquifer recharge areas in our county, so it does provide some really good aquifer recharge for our Page 86 January 27,2009 drinking water aquifer, not only the surface -- surficial aquifer. It does -- there are properties on there with structures. This is the Stirns property, the little green one up in the corner. And what's on there currently is a house, a barn, this sort of working -- work structure with bathrooms, and then -- a pool and a pavilion. The owner has agreed to remove all the structures at his own cost except for the pavilion -- he'd fill in the pool -- and except for this structure here with a little office and bathrooms. There's also a nice parking area already done there and a gate and fencing that would remain. Now, we've thought about what the cost might be for retrofitting these structures because we would have to retrofit them for ADA access, and we'd have to also upgrade various things. Went out there to look at them with our building inspector to see what we'd have to do. And for public use, we're estimating that we'd have to put about $40,000 in it. We do have there on site an existing septic tank that would handle public use. So I just provide that for your information. The other property that has a structure on it is the Paganes property. And I'm sorry I don't have a little map here, but I'll show you. It's right in the middle. It's this blue piece in the middle. And it's got a 1,584-square-foot wood frame cabin; very, very nice cabin, but not the typical thing that Conservation Collier purchases. We looked at the cost to retrofit this for use. Let's say if you wanted to have a wildlife center or something there, it would be approximately $60,000. There's quite a bit of work to do. Okay. What about if you want to just demolish it? Then we're talking about $50,000. But why would you buy a good home and demolish it? So some folks have suggested that, well, we buy it and we move the house. Costs to move are estimated at $144,000, and there's not -- there's a lot of variables that aren't even considered in that value. Doesn't consider, for one thing, the weight of moving it down the road, that you might have to actually improve the road all Page 87 January 27, 2009 the way to Immokalee Road to get it down there on a trailer, or take away the utilities. We don't know if the road is wide enough. So it doesn't seem a very practical solution. Okay. Moving on to the next property, the Joyce property. This is located in North Golden Gate Estates, Unit 42. It's in the Horse Pen Strand. That is an area that Collier Soil and Water conservation district has been bringing as part of a proposed project. This property is adjacent, it's the Joyce property, and it is 2.27 acres, and it's adjacent to some properties we've already purchased, right there. We bought the Oetting properties in -- last year for $50,000, and we are -- the estimated value for the Joyce property today is $27,000, roughly half that. I think that bears out the 43 percent decline in real estate values, at about 11-, $12,000 per acre. So if we acquire that, we will have four-and-a-half acres there for $77,000, or approximately 1,900 an acre. And one of the very good things about this property is that it's in the middle of a slough, it's wetlands. I believe that owners have -- in fact, the Oetting owners tried to build on it. DEP would not give them a permit. It is important for water management in the Estates. It's one of the areas in retrofitting the Estates that people have discussed, and it's right across the street from a school which our staff members have already been in contact with to involve in naming the preserve. So there's a very good educational component involved with this property. The next properties on our A list are right adjacent to our Nancy Payton Preserve, which is in Section 24. We have the Kirby property, which is up here at the north, and you've actually seen that one before. And we have the Murphy property down here below. These met our initial criteria screening scores, five out of six. You can see there's just sort of average scores in there. When you're thinking ecological, human resources, management, and vulnerability, Page 88 January 27, 2009 I would say particularly they're not -- they're not themselves particularly environmentally sensitive, but they do add some things to our property. They add to its size, we're managing it for Red-cockaded woodpeckers, and size is important in that regard. This particular property, the Murphy property, adds the opportunity to take advantage of a 30- foot access easement, because one of the issues with Nancy Payton Preserve is public access. We-- at the time we purchased it, there was considering a roadway across the top. Commissioner Coletta, do you remember that? Do you remember we discussed that? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We did. MS. SULECKI: We did. And at this time it's not still -- it's not in the works. So it's been pushed out further and it's not a guarantee. So the public access potentials were impacted by that. So we're now looking for alternate access, and the Murphy property helps us with that. The Kirby property expands the preserve. And the estimated value for both of them, 185,000. Approximately 92,500 an acre. Now, get to the blue parcels. This is -- just to let you know what these are. This is the McIlvane Marsh project. The ones in blue here we've already acquired. The ones interspersed with those are already owned by the State of Florida DEP, so there's approximately 800 acres there that are owned for conservation. This particular parcel we're talking about, RJS, really provides access to the area. There's a paved road there, Kersey Road, that accesses it directly. We have -- we have done an appraisal, and we have made an offer. The offer's been accepted, but there are some title issues with that, and these go to the fact that the property size was increased by the property appraiser. During a transaction this gentleman owned more properties there and it was sold off, and this little piece was left like an orphan, so it was attached to this property. And we discovered Page 89 January 27, 2009 this quite late in our process and went through a whole 'nother -- that's why it's sort of hanging around for a while -- whole 'nother trip through the Conservation Collier Committee. Anyway, they were -- recommended that we purchase it. It added some access here and a little bit there. So we previously acquired here 340 acres, approximately, for about 7,400 an acre. This one's a little bit more, 9,865 (sic), but because it has public access -- it has access directly from a paved road, so it's a little bit more. So if we add all those together with the project, we will have acquired 369 acres, for a total cost 2.8 million, which is about 7,595 an acre, fairly decent cost for land. We go into the Winchester Head project, and we have -- it's 170 acres total area. We have acquired 58.5 acres or acquired and under contract. And those are the green and the blue parcels there. The estimated value that we're paying now is 16,375 an acre. We're in the process now of getting new appraisals, so we're seeking to keep this on the A list so we can go forward with that process and make offers as willing sellers come forward. All contracts will be brought back through the Conservation Collier Committee and the board for approval, so you will see that price. And I believe we've already made some agreements as to, if the price gets too high, we come back. But currently the price appears to be acceptable. North Golden Gate Estates, Unit 53. That's 305 acres. We've acquired 173 acres of it, little bit more than that. Those are the green and the blue parcels. The blues are under contract. The greens are acquired. The red striped parcels are folks who have said no. Weare currently paying 15,842 an acre. That's -- that value though will be updated, as with Winchester Head. We're in the process of getting undated appraisals. So we're seeking to keep it on the A list and move Page 90 January 27,2009 forward. Personally I believe these are the best values for us in Conservation Collier at this time. And, again, we'll bring each of those contracts to the board and the CCLAC for recommendation. So I'm here today with the Conservation Collier Acquisition Advisory Committee recommendation to approve our active acquisition list asking you to direct staff to actively pursue acquisition of these cycle six properties that are listed in the A category, and reminding that we -- the A list is about 2.8 million. We have another 69,000 and change for costs. And we do have that money budgeted. Any questions? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you so much for your presentation. What I'm going to do now is I'm going to say, before we get into questions, before we get into speakers, I think we're going to break for lunch, and we'll be back at one o'clock. And then rather than get into all of that, then we'll go on and on. I think it's time for us to break for lunch. Let's see you back here at one o'clock. Thank you. (A luncheon recess was had.) MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your seats. Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot mike. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. MR. MUDD: And we were finished with Ms. Sulecki's presentation before lunch on Item 10E, and you were going to entertain public speakers and ask any questions that you had for Ms. Sulecki. CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's correct. I have two commissioners waiting, but I would like to -- unless they have a problem with that, I would like to go right to the public speakers. We have five. MS. FILSON: Two. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, we have two now. Good. Okay. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's break for another ten minutes Page 91 January 27,2009 and we won't have any. MS. FILSON: You ready? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. MS. FILSON: Kelly Salmons. She'll be followed by Jessica Stubbs. MS. SALMONS: Hi. My name is Kelly Salmons, and I actually am here concerned about a property that's on the C list. And I don't want to waste your time if you're not considering pulling it up, which is what we are in favor of. I'm with the Delasol Homeowner's Association, and this is with regards to the Devisse property off of Euclid in -- at the -- by Willoughby Acres and Delasol. And just, the homeowners association is not in favor of it being pulled up or considered for Conservation Collier because we have two stipulations that would make us feel more comfortable; one, that no development was done within 150 feet of the north border of the property, and also that it was only pedestrian access allowed. So -- not to waste any more time. Thanks. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you for being here. MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Jessica Stubbs. MS. STUBBS: Hi. Jessica Stubbs representing the Conservancy of Southwest Florida and our over 6,000 members. The Conservancy comes before you today to support staffs six Conservation Collier active acquisition list with the exception of the 9.7-acre Stirns property within the Rivers Road project area. While the parcel is located within the project area, it does not have the same level of sensitivity as the other A list nominations. This is reflected with the low scoring when evaluated separate from the project as a whole. The Stirns property is 10 acres -- about 10 acres in size but only a third of it, about a third of it, has not been cleared and developed. Of the native cover that is remaining, at least 25 percent is covered by exotic species. Page 92 January 27,2009 By accepting this nomination, the program is purchasing developed properties which has a home and a pool along with about six acres of cleared land which we do not consider to be valuable, environmentally sensitive land. Compared to the Paganes property, which also has a structure, the Stirns property has little remaining natural resource value with or without its structures; therefore, we recommend that the best use of the limited remaining Conservation Collier funds is to approve the cycle six acquisition list with the exclusion of the Stirns property. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. That was our final speaker? MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have commissioners --let's see. The first one was Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Alex, the multi-parcel acquisition, you said that you're going to reappraise that. Would that include the existing -- I'm wishing -- would that include the existing properties? MS. SULECKI: By existing, you mean -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or existing contracts -- MS. SULECKI: No. The existing-- COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- under proposal? MS. SULECKI: -- contracts have -- are just about to you. They've been agreed upon. They're based on the previous appraisals. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- what was that, March? MS. SULECKI: Yes -- yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. How often do you update the appraisals? MS. SULECKI: Well, we're kind of in new territory. Our plan is to do them every six months or thereabouts. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that what the ordinance says, or is that a policy? Page 93 January 27,2009 MS. SULECKI: The ordinance doesn't address it, and it's not particularly a policy. It's just what we've determined is the best way to go about that to get an accurate value. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, would you -- ifproperty values are going up, would you update the valuation of the -- update the appraisals on a more frequent basis? MS. SULECKI: Well, I think the updating of the appraisals and the time period, we're certainly open to your direction on it. But what we're trying to do is respond in -- appropriately to the times and the values and the time frames that are out there for appraisals to be good. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Just to give you an example, the -- I guess what we're coming forward on the Winchester is 16,000 per acre, or roughly thereof. The valuation of the Joyce property, which is in Golden Gate Estates -- it is a wetland -- is 11,800. So, you know, my preference is, how can we get the best bang for the taxpayers that are paying that. MS. SULECKI: I agree. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great. MS. SULECKI: Well, our best way to do that at this point is to move forward with those that we've had approval on and we've gone through our process with, and then simply to reappraise now, not go forward until we reappraise. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the -- what's the -- how many parcels is it, or what's the value on those contracts; do you know? MS. SULECKI: They are at these values. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the total value of those contracts? MS. SULECKI: The total value, I don't know. I don't have that information. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Page 94 January 27,2009 MS. SULECKI: I can get it for you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Doesn't -- I guess it doesn't matter, I guess it's just more of a policy thing. If the market is fluctuating, do you want to buy it at the market price or historical values? My next question is, do you have a blowup of this map on our visualizer? MS. SULECKI: Which one are you seeking to see? COMMISSIONER HENNING: The map. MS. SULECKI: Of this one? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, that map. MS. SULECKI: Well, what I have with me is-- MR. MUDD: Do you have a colored version? I'll slap it up there. MS. SULECKI: I have a colored version here. Would that work? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, that would work. MR. MUDD: Is there any particular area, sir, that you'd like me to zoom in? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I guess my concern is-- and someone pointed out to me -- is the disparity about the purchases in the geographical map of Collier County focusing on one area of the county versus all the area of the county and -- like Rookery Bay down in that area, in the urban area, there's -- I think we just have one parcel down there. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I believe it is. CHAIRMAN FIALA: The mall. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's the mall property, and I guess that's -- the concern that I have is the geographical purchases and the recommendations by Conservation Collier Advisory Board is -- I would like to see more of a balanced approach instead of a targeted, one area of Collier County. That's my comment. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta? Page 95 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. A couple of things. One, I need to follow up on Commissioner Henning's thoughts. I don't -- we're not putting political boundaries on this. What part of the county it's in really doesn't matter. It's what is out there that we can access at this point in time. And, of course, the farther we go to the east, the ability to get these lands and put them into conservation becomes more readily available; as the lands to the west and closer to the coast, the opportunities are few and far between. But I think Collier -- Conservation Collier Advisory Board has seized on every opportunity they reasonably could, and I commend you on that. And, of course, the prices for the lands that are along the coast of -- when you figure it out on a per-acre price, it's way out of proportion than what it is if you go farther to the east. But once again, let's forget geographic boundaries on this and look what's going to be in the best interest of all of Collier County. But the other issue that I wanted to ask you about, Alex, is coming up before us shortly is going to be Pepper Ranch, to be able to get an update on it, and also with the Pepper Ranch supposable (sic) sediment (sic) -- settlement or the offer that they're going to come across with, there's another opportunity that's going to present itself, I understand, with the possibility of a consideration of purchasing outright the Collier property. MS. SULECKI: A small portion of it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A small portion of it. But in any case, that would remove the stigma of an access route through the Pepper Ranch for any purposes if we did so. Are we -- do we have our items in -- out of order? Shouldn't we be considering that first before we get into cutting the pie up for this particular part to be able to see what we're actually dealing with? MR. MUDD: No, because the -- it's a willing-seller program. I'm Alex today. I'm sorry, sir. The -- it's a willing-seller program. That particular option just Page 96 January 27,2009 came about because of the easement mitigation talks that were there. I don't believe -- I don't believe a letter has been received that basically says that that particular property is up for sale. And then you have a whole process with the CCLAC and the assessment and the evaluation of the property to go through, so you -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. But when it comes down to the ultimate, it's the Collier County Commissioner that represents the public as the buyer, and we're the people that will make that final decision. And outside forces that are underway may have a tendency to make us want to rethink the direction we're going with anyone purchase that we're looking at today. Is there anything here that's so time sensitive that it would have to be accomplished in the next two weeks? MS. SULECKI: No, sir, I don't believe so. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So going back to my original question. Maybe you might able to answer it. What we're looking at here and what we're voting in the order of things, wouldn't the decision made on Pepper Ranch and possibly giving direction to staff as far as looking into the willing seller, the property of the Colliers to be coming into it to make everything whole and to be able to bring some kind of finality to this? Wouldn't that be something we should be looking at before we're agreeing on what's on the A list? MS. SULECKI: Well, if that does come to pass -- and we don't have it yet -- then it does have to go through a process. It's not going to be immediate. We've got money set aside for this cycle, and then we've got money for the next cycle. So it's going to take -- I think we looked at a time line. The earliest time line -- and we're already into nearly next year for a closing when we have other monies available. So I'm not sure -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I feel a little bit guilty in the fact that I may have knowledge that my fellow commissioners didn't receive through whatever sources. I don't know if everybody is Page 97 January 27, 2009 up on this or not. And they're not. And so, you know -- and I don't want to get into a deep discussion on an item without having the two parties or the three parties involved up here at the same time. When I'm suggesting is just for the sake of -- to be assured that we're doing the right thing, that we delay the decision on this until after we hear the Pepper Ranch deal and what other options are out there for it, and then immediately come back on this when we have a better idea what we're talking about. MS. SULECKI: We could certainly do that, or as the County Manager earlier suggested, to come back to you and revise the list, should that make a difference. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's a possibility. In other words, we'd be voting on something -- wouldn't we be putting -- MR. MUDD: If you decide today that you do not want to acquire the Pepper Ranch because of the easement or whatever, there will be additional monies that this particular program has in order to spend before the sunset of 20 13 and the tax revenues that come every year between now and then. You buy the Pepper Ranch and the monies that they have available before this particular program sunsets is limited. It's -- they don't have 30 million or whatever to purchase another property. It just doesn't exist. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But is this fair to the willing sellers out there to come up with a ruling here and then change it again at a short time down the road? That's why I think that we should continue this item, and -- just at least until we can hear what is offered on Pepper Ranch, and then we can finish up with it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I also wanted -- Commissioner Henning brought up the fact, maybe the property appraised value might be a little bit lower, so maybe -- maybe we should be hearing it at another time even, if there's lower appraisals coming in. Or are these already Page 98 January 27, 2009 offered? MS. SULECKI: That won't impact what we currently have, no. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I see. MS. SULECKI: Because those are -- that's for the future. We haven't even contacted and tried to find willing sellers yet. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioners, would you like to hear this later in the day and first hear the Pepper Ranch? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Not me. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd just as soon get this over with. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not for the reasons I just heard. Just the opposite. I want -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- to see more properties purchased where -- more in the urban area, myself. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So they do not want to -- they do not want to continue this till later in the meeting, Commissioner Coletta. So, okay. Commissioner Coyle, you're next. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have some questions. I happen to agree with the Conservancy's position that purchasing Stirns property, to me, it just doesn't seem justified. It's developed property, and I'm not at all sure that the Paganas property is worth it either. For those two properties we're spending over $1.3 million for about 14 acres. For that much you can get the remaining portion of the Winchester Head project and you'll have 96 acres. I don't understand why we want to start purchasing developed property . MS. SULECKI: Well, theoretically you can get Winchester Head, because we don't have willing sellers. But I think the reasoning behind the CCLAC's decision was that this parcel provides a gateway to a larger preserve area. Page 99 January 27,2009 And if you look at the structures on it, the owner has agreed to fill in the pool, take away the house, take away the barn, at his own expense. What we would be left with is a structure that could house environmental education, that could be a place for picnics. There's also a bathroom, an office facility on the property. So it could make, you know, a center for people to come to, and also there's parking already established. We don't have to clear for parking. So I think that was the idea. And then when you go to Paganes, which is here in the center, I think that was one of the issues there because it is in the center. And if we have a piece that's excerpted out and somebody's living in it will be more difficult to manage the properties. So I think that's the thinking behind the recommendation. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But the fact of the matter is, that you're paying for those structures one way or the other, whether they're torn down by someone or not. You're paying for the structures. And I'm just wondering if you couldn't achieve your goals -- I mean, if your desire is a place to have picnics or even some environmental education, there are plenty of opportunities to do that on the other property that we already own. You could build simple facilities on the other properties for the -- for a lot less than the money that you're paying for these two. So I think I'm going to be in the position of not supporting the purchase of either of these two properties. And my point with respect to the Winchester Head, you've got the remaining properties of 1.573 million for 96 acres. You could take the money for the Paganes and the Stirns properties and almost pay for that whole thing. And, yeah, it won't be all of them because some people refuse to sell, but it will be the remaining that you've identified here. I just don't think it's good use of the funds you have to spend them on improved property, even though the properties might be Page 100 January 27,2009 returned to their -- to the extent possible to their prior condition. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. I also had a comment. I think it's important that we protect properties that will definitely protect our future water sources. That's -- that goes without saying. I think that's extremely important, rather than let development take them over. One of the things -- one of the objectives we had when we first started this program was also to buy some land in the urban area. And every time I drive by that piece of property at the corner of Estey and Airport Road and -- all cleaned out nicely and I think, oh, my goodness. That is the purpose for Conservation Collier, just sitting there, it's all clean, ready to go, and it's for sale. And I think, oh, I wish we could buy that. So -- MS. SULECKI: We have approached them. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Have you? And they don't want to sell? MS. SULECKI: Yes, ma'am; 13 million, I think, I'm being told, yeah. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. MS. SULECKI: That was one of the issues. But they have not submitted an application, and that's what we need. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I see. That's out of the question anyway. Okay. Would have been nice. Okay. So we've heard from Commissioner Coyle who feels that the two properties that have structures on them would be off his list. Any other comments from commissioners? Commissioner Halas, you don't even have to push your button. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have to agree with Commissioner Coyle. I think that we should be after properties that are more prime, that are more rustic. I think that's the whole purpose of Conservation Collier. So I'll have to go along with the commissioner on that one. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So then if we took those two pieces of property off of list, we have how many remaining? Page 10 1 January 27, 2009 MS. SULECKI: Ifwe took offPaganes and Stirns, we would have Cosentino, Devisse up in the Rivers Road area, we would also have Joyce in Unit 42, and then Kirby and Murphy next, and Nancy Payton. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, Commissioners. Does anybody have any -- anybody want to weigh in on those four pieces of property, one, two -- five pieces of property? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would be willing to support those five pieces of property. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is that a motion? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor to support buying the five remaining properties that we just mentioned and -- by Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Halas. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. Opposed? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a 3-2 vote. Is that -- is that sufficient? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. Okay. MS. SULECKI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Page 102 January 27,2009 Item #10G EXTENSION OF THE DEADLINE TO COMPLETE EXPANDED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS TO APRIL 30, 2009 AS PART OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND STATUS OF COMPLIANCE FOR THE COCONILLA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE NO. 05-15, ALSO KNOWN AS THE AQUA AT PELICAN ISLE YACHT CLUB PROJECT , THAT WAS PRESENTED ON SEPTEMBER 23,2008 AS ITEM #16Kl (MOVED TO ITEM #12A) EXPANDED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS WILL INCLUDE FULL CONSTRUCTION OF THE PERMANENT ACCESS POINT AT THE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION WITH RELATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS - APPROVED MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that would bring us to Item 10G, and that's a request that the Board of County Commissioners approve the extension of a deadline to complete expanded intersection improvements to April 30, 2009, as part of conditions of approval and status of the compliance for the Coconilla planned unit development ordinance number 05-15, also known as the Aqua at Pelican Isle Yacht Club project. That was presented on September 23,2008, as Item 16Kl, moved to Item 10. The expanded intersection improvements will include full construction of the permanent access point at the signalized intersection with related site improvements. And Mr. Nick Casalanguida, Transportation Planning Director, will present. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Nick Casalanguida. Again, I'm causing a little mischief here. When they came in for their site plan review and their right-of-way permit, we noticed that Page 103 January 27,2009 this was going to be done in phases, and we met with the applicant and met with our -- my boss, Norm Feder, and said, let's get this thing done one time, one time only, and let's put the turn lanes in, the sidewalk, and not do this as staged. Then we would also close the temporary access point that's existing right now. So the applicant agreed to do that. They said, at your request to do that, we'll need a little bit more time. We said, how much more time, and they said 30 -- 90 days, and we said, that's reasonable, and that's why we're here today. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion to approve on the floor. Does anybody want to second it? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second it for -- just for conversation's sake. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HALAS: But there's some concerns that I have in regards to what that intersection looks like at the present time, and also the egress road that comes out of the park and then enters onto Vanderbilt Road. Is there going to be some modifications so that, first of all, the egress coming out of that park, if somebody's got a van or pickup truck and a boat trailer, that they'll be able to make that turn? And then is there going to be something done with the alignment so that the service road or the road going into this property, along with the egress coming out of the park, is going to line up so that it lines up with the intersection of Vanderbilt Drive and Wiggins Pass Road? MR. CASALANGUIDA: The answer to both of those questions is yes. In the current condition, you have a constrained curb, but we've tested it. It does work with a tow, because it's an egress only. It will get better when they do the full park enhancement in the Phase II part of their project. And when it's completed, it will all line up with Vanderbilt -- the intersection across the way. Page 104 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: With the -- can you explain what the second portion of the park enhancement is going to be so that we can try to eliminate redundancy in regards to how we're going to address this egress out of the park? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. As part of the Phase II building -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- they're doing parking spaces, joint parking spaces with the park, so it's being constructed as part of the second tower, and they can't do the construction on that portion of the park until they do the -- get permission to break ground for the second tower. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do you have any kind of an aide here that we could take a look at and see exactly what the big plan is? MR. MUDD: Try to get this thing right-side up. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay, thank you. The road parking that's on the west side of the project or the south side of the project over here -- and then you can see this dark curve here, that's the temporary. In the future the egress will come out over this and it will be done with this expansion of pavement that's done as part of this second building that's being constructed. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Why can't we do some of that now so that we don't have to go back there and do it over a second time? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, you wouldn't be doing anything over a second time at the entrance. The only thing you'd be eliminating is this little piece of pavement and fixing that. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, that's the problem right now with getting -- I believe getting out of the park with a pickup and truck and a trailer. MR. CASALANGUIDA: So you're asking for them to do the extended pavement and taking it farther back? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly. Get it done -- if we're going to do it, do it right the first time. MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'd have to ask the applicant, but I Page 105 January 27,2009 think it would require, you know, much more -- or modifying the SDP that you have right now. MR. YOV ANOVICH: Not enough room to build the second tower. MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right. If -- we discussed this in the past as well, too. Once you put in that pavement over there, you've going to encroach in the area to build the second tower. That's why it was phased appropriately. COMMISSIONER HALAS: It seems to me this is going to make it difficult for the public to exit out of the park with a pickup truck and a boat when you look at the radius of this turn. MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's a picture that I asked staff to take yesterday, also had the engineer of record to do an auto-turn analysis with a vehicle in tow. Because the pavement's wide enough to accommodate almost two vehicles wide and it's only an egress, you can make that turn right now with a trailer in tow. It's not ideal, but it does fit. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have one speaker. MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am, Doug Fee. MR. FEE: Good afternoon. For the record, my name is Doug Fee, and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I would agree with what is in the executive summary. It is a very nice project. There are a few things in the PUD approval that I want to make sure that we get, as Mr. Halas has talked about. In a letter on August 9,2007, to RW A, who is the petitioner's agent, there's a stipulation that Stan Chrzanowski put into the record, into the permit, and the stipulation says, the temporary construction access, currently an existing driveway may be used until such time as crane-based construction is completed on building one. Upon dissembling of the crane, the temporary access must be closed and the planned access at the intersection of Wiggins Pass and Page 106 January 27, 2009 Vanderbilt Drive must be employed. That, to me, is the key here. Right now we have an entrance to the north that's been used obviously with the marina and then for the construction of that first tower. There are no turn lanes -- well, let me back up. There is a turn lane going into the project, but there's no turn lane as you're driving south on Vanderbilt Drive to pull into that. So I want to make sure with this agreement that, in fact, they will close that and employ the intersection as the project entrance. I want to put on a visualizer -- on the visualizer a picture -- and you'll notice a little car there at the very bottom of -- middle of the picture, and then also a guardhouse. And I want to point out the driveway -- that you circle around the fountain, and then you have a driveway that comes out, and that would come out at Wiggins Pass Road. Right now, today, that driveway has not been built internal to the project, and I believe that they need to build that driveway and have it come out to the light, of which then they would close the access point to the north, okay. The only other thing that I wanted to point out is in the executive summary, there's a sentence at the bottom of the first page basically stating that the developer would seek approval in the future to open up that northern entrance. And when they go to build the second tower, they would seek approval, and my question would only be, how could they seek that? Would that be in the form of a PUD amendment? How would the public, the traveling public, be aware of this? Would this be an administrative approval? And the reason why I ask that is, I would have some concerns with the safety using that northern entrance with the unit owners that are CO'd. Thank you very much. Page 107 January 27, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Do you have an answer to that, Nick? MR. CASALANGUIDA: I've worked with Mr. Fee on this, and we put that language in hopefully to alleviate his concerns. We do maintenance at traffic driveway connections all the time. If someone comes in for a couple days, they need to get an access point. They can get a temporary access point. Because this was controversial I said to him, I'll make sure that we bring it as an agenda item to the board. If they come in with a set of construction plans for the second tower and it's shown that by staging that second tower that they can't physically use the existing driveway, it's hazardous, we will bring that item to the board for review and consideration that they could get a temporary access point. To address his first question, they are going to build that connection road as part of this. That's one of the things I stopped and asked them to do and they've agreed to. So when they're done, they're going to close the northern driveway, have full access to the signal, access and egress; and if in the future, whether it's a year or two years from now and they want to build the second tower and can prove to us and you, the board, that they need a temporary driveway for safety reasons, we'll review that at that time. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Does that work with the commissioner of that district? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep. Yes, it will. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Very good. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just a question for Mr. Klatzkow. We do have -- is it $250,000 escrow for this agreement? MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, I believe we do. I mean, I haven't seen the money. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is this the proper forum to Page 108 January 27, 2009 amend an agreement, or do we have to bring back an amended agreement to -- if the motion passes? MR. KLATZKOW: No, I think we're okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're going to change -- amend the agreement and have the chairperson sign it? MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HENNING: As directed by the board. MR. KLA TZKOW: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Coyle to approve, a second by Commissioner Halas. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: That is a 5-0, thank you. Item #10H REDIRECTION OF A PORTION OF FY 09 BUDGETED TOURIST TAX FUNDS FROM OFF-SEASON TO IN-SEASON ADVERTISING AND PROMOTION UP TO $200,000 - APPROVED MR. MUDD: Commissioner, our next item is number 10H, and that's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Page 109 January 27, 2009 approve the redirection of a portion of the FY -'09 budgeted tourist tax funds from off-season to in-season advertising and promotion up to $200,000. Mr. Jack Wert, your tourism director, will present. This was an item that was brought up by the board at your workshop, and Commissioner Coyle was outspoken on this particular item. The outstanding item that you have, it was completely briefed to the board by Mr. Wert at the time of the thing. What he didn't have was the TDC input, okay, to the particular recommendations. So Mr. Wert, if you could please tell the board what the TDC decided yesterday on this particular mission. MR. WERT: Thank you, Mr. Mudd. And good afternoon, Commissioners. Jack Wert, your Tourism Director, for the record. Yesterday, we did review the moving of funds from the spring and summer campaign into the first quarter primarily directed at our northeast and Midwest markets, which are our number one and number two feeder markets at this time of year. That was unanimously recommended by the Tourist Development Council for your consideration today. I do have a PowerPoint presentation that I can go over that reviews what we would do, or I can simply answer questions. The materials that we provided you, I think, gives you that detail. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Halas and a second by Commissioner Coyle to approve. And I would just suggest to you, on the second to the last line of the first page of the executive summary where is says Paradise, priced perfect, you really -- MR. WERT: Perfectly, yes. Page 110 January 27,2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- change that to perfectly. MR. WERT: That is correct. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great, thank you. Any further comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. MR. WERT: Thank you, Commissioners. Item #101 REQUEST THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROVIDE DIRECTION WITH RESPECT TO WHETHER THE COUNTY SHOULD CLOSE ON THE PEPPER RANCH TRANSACTION, IN LIGHT OF THE PROPOSED EASEMENT THROUGH THE PEPPER RANCH AND WHETHER THE COUNTY SHOULD REDUCE THE PURCHASE PRICE TO REFLECT THE BOND CARRYING COSTS AND THE REDUCTION IN VALUE TO THE PEPPER RANCH DUE TO THE ACCESS - MOTION TO PROCEED W /STIPULA TIONS - APPROVED MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item, which is 101. That was a walk-on item at staffs request. And there was some time sensitivity to this particular item, and it was because Page III January 27, 2009 there was a mitigation session that transpired Thursday of last week in which the County Attorney and staff were present for the majority of that particular mitigation. We thought it prudent to bring what we heard as results of that mitigation talks to the board's attention to determine if we should go forward with the procurement of this particular item. Add-on Item 101, request that the Board of County Commissioners provide direction with respect to whether the board should close on the Pepper Ranch transaction in light of proposed easement to the Pepper Ranch and whether the county should reduce the purchase price to reflect the bond-carrying cost and the reduction in value to the Pepper Ranch due to the access. This item was an add-on and walked on at staffs request, and Mrs. Alex Sulecki will present. MS. SULECKI: Good afternoon, again. As you recall, we were here before you on January 12th in regard to a claim of easement made on the Pepper Ranch. And since that time, you had sent us away to see if there could be a resolution to it to come back within two weeks. Your election -- there were some options presented to you at the time of how it could be resolved. These are in your executive summary as one, two, three, and four. And you elected to pursue option three, making sure that any easement didn't diminish the county's ability to obtain the maximum panther habitat units otherwise available from U.S. Fish and Wildlife. You asked them to address -- or us to address a reimbursement of the county carrying costs for the transaction, and we were to conduct negotiations to return in two weeks, and here we are. Since then, on January 22nd, the Barron Collier Company and Lake Trafford Ranch folks participate -- and the county participated in a mediation. That was at no cost to the county. And as a result to the mediation, there was an easement proposed that meets the board's Page 112 January 27,2009 requirements with the exception of a reduction in the purchase price for the access easement. There were a couple other issues that came up. The access, of course, was limited in the easement. There was an issue regarding the size of the easement, and I'm not sure if that has been resolved. And that issue, it was in regard to -- the easement as proposed was 30 feet wide through the whole length of the easement. This is about two-and-a-half miles. This is about a mile and a quarter. There's currently a -- an easement -- oh, I'm sorry. You can't see what I'm seeing. MR. MUDD: Okay. We can make that happen. There you go. MS. SULECKI: Thank you. Okay. This is the two-and-a-halfmile portion. It's already 30-feet wide. It's the easement that the oil company people use to access the wells, and then the -- it branches off, and this is a 15-foot wide tract, as you see down here, and I guess there was some discussion about whether it should be 15 feet or 30 feet or how that should go, and that went to valuation as well. There was also some discussion -- excuse me -- discussion about costs for the loss, potential loss, ofPHU's ifthere is an actual road easement through the conservation easement that U.S. Fish and Wildlife grants, and we did have some discussions with U.S. Fish and Wildlife. Basically they told us that, as proposed -- and they saw a copy of the easement -- that they don't think it will -- it would do little to diminish the value for panthers, but when questioned on little, how much little actually meant, they actually weren't willing to give us a firm answer on that until they sawall the documents in front of them. And then there was the question of carrying costs. So those were the issues that were discussed. I don't have the answers to all of them. I would be happy to turn it over to however you would like to get those answers. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? Page 113 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I think you're getting close to it. In other words, we know that we have a diminished value to the land because of the access, from what you're telling me. We don't -- MS. SULECKI: Possibly. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Possibly. Also, too, isn't there a couple of other alternatives that everyone's exploring on this to be able to do away with the easement? MS. SULECKI: That's possible, too, but I would have to defer to those parties because I'm not -- I don't know how -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could we do that at this time, Chair? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure, sure. You have one speaker. Is that the -- MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- party? MS. FILSON: Amber Crooks. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. No, we'll hold for Amber until we hear from -- should we hear from Tom Taylor? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, Tom Taylor or his representative or -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Clark Gable? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- Collier Company, possibly both of them at the same time. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. Richard Grant. MR. MUDD: Just to be said for the record, one of the issues at the last meeting -- and it wasn't specifically that -- Alex laid out what's highlighted in yellow on the map. One of the things that we left from the last meeting, it was -- it was undetermined at the time if this access was only going to be used for the present agricultural ranching activities that are transpiring on the Collier piece that's below the red line border at the -- on your slide Page 114 January 27,2009 at the bottom. And I believe during the mediation, that particular issue was resolved. And the easement in yellow is for the land in its present purposes, i.e., agricultural and ranching only and that it would also be unimproved -- it'd basically be access as it exists today in the particular process. So that particular issue, I believe, has been at least clarified from the last board meeting, and that needs to be added. MR. GRANT: Commissioners, I'm Dick Grant, counsel for Lake Trafford Ranch. With me is Christy Wilson, who's one of my colleagues in this matter also. We participated in the nine-hour mediation on Thursday which, like most mediations, sometimes gets long and tedious, but everybody approached it in good faith, and I think the outcome is good from everybody's point of view. The County Manager is absolutely correct. The easement that is being proposed, there's a copy of it in your packet, I believe, limits -- and I'll allow the County Attorney to step in anytime if they want to correct me. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry to interrupt. MR. GRANT: Yeah. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Chairman Fiala, would it be possible to have Collier up at the other podium so that if we have any discussion that needs to take place, we can do it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. MR. GRANT: Sure, good. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. MR. GRANT: Anyway, the easement limits what the use can be made of it to the current uses that currently exist, which are cattle grazing, cattle ranching, or things comparable to that, but I think the key words in it are that we'll add no additional burden or additional usage to the easement. Page 115 January 27,2009 And it was certainly our understanding in that discussion on Thursday that, in terms of the staff participation, that they believe that concept was an acceptable concept from the county's point of view. The road is certainly used for other purposes and presumably will be used by the county for its own internal land management purposes anyways, so it's not entirely a case of an easement being placed on this property for that kind of use that may have been made of it in the past and that would continue being the only use that's going to be used anyway. And so I think -- I don't know if that answers the question. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, it does. Would you go on to the other alternatives to the easement that exist today? MR. GRANT: Well, the other -- the other alternatives are -- and I'll let the Barron Collier Investments folks speak to that -- is, I believe they're prepared to make their Big Hammock property available to the county under Conservation Collier. But I'd defer to Andy Solis, their attorney. MR. SOLIS: Good afternoon, Andrew Solis with Cohen and Grigsby on behalf of Barron Collier Investments. As part of the discussions at the mediation and part of the agreement, we will be making an application to the Conservation program to sell the property -- the Big Hammock property is what we've called it -- through the Conservation Collier Program. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: At the appraised values that is standard for Conservation Collier. MR. SOLIS: Correct. The usual procedure through the program, correct. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And how many acres is that? MR. SOLIS: It's approximately 235. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And if you did that, you would no longer need an easement; is that what -- is that your total property? MR. SOLIS: Correct. If it was sold, correct. Page 116 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, okay. MR. SOLIS: And actually -- and part of, I guess, the application will be that -- what we've called Big Hammock, if you can look at the diagram, is the uplands piece there. There are other lands there, but what would be, I believe, sold or at least the application would be made out for would be the 240 piece. There are other lands to the south, but they are mainly wetlands. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And so the situation with the finalizing of a deal of this sort, there's the unknown factor, I guess, that exists out there, is exactly what happens to the panther credits. If! understand correctly, if the easement goes away because we purchased the land or if access is gained -- and I understand you've been in communication with the principals from Trafford Oaks Road -- that if you can gain access to that, that would also make the easement through the Pepper Ranch property go away? MR. GRANT: That's correct. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But in the meantime, the unknown factor is, if none of the above happened, there's a diminishing effect upon the value of the land for panther mitigation, an unknown amount. I mean, no one could pin anybody down. So I guess that would be the big obstacle at this point in time is -- of course, nothing could be finalized until we know all the particulars. But in lieu of the fact that you might not be able to purchase through Conservation Collier the Collier property, in lieu of the fact you might not be able to have access to Trafford Oak Road if that property isn't purchased, then we have to deal with the easement that does exist that goes back there and the parts of it and the impact that it would have upon the value of the panther credits. Is your client willing to do anything to put us in a position that will hold us where we are at this point in time knowing what the value of the property is versus the panther credits? MR. GRANT: Well, I can't answer the question because the Page 117 January 27,2009 subject of concern over panther mitigation units being reduced really didn't arise in the discussion on Thursday. I understood late yesterday afternoon from a conversation with a member of the County Attorney's Office that -- I know there had been discussions with Fish and Wildlife about it. I just don't know the particulars. And it's certainly been our impression from what we'd understood that the Fish and Wildlife Service had indicated that having roads of this sort and uses of this sort is not an uncommon circumstance with property over which conservation easements are impressed, and -- but I understand, refer to the discussion, and tried to push it down to, what does that mean. Perhaps the county wasn't able to get a definitive answer. But I don't have an answer to the question, Commissioner, because it's not something -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's deal with what we do know. MR. GRANT: Yeah. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We do know that we need a lot more answers to be able to proceed. We have to have something in the way of written document that shows the county the advantage to go forward. Mr. Klatzkow, would you please comment on this? And maybe you can give us some idea of the most logical direction to go. MR. KLA TZKOW: You've got two alternatives. You can put this in a hold until you get a determination by the states as to the panther issue. That could take a long time. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But that could be resolved before that if -- access to Trafford Oaks Road or if we can get it into Collier Conservation for consideration. MR. KLATZKOW: I think Trafford Oaks Road is going to take a long time because there are multiple property owners to be involved Page 118 January 27, 2009 there. MR. GRANT: That won't be done quickly. MR. KLATZKOW: And I think the -- acquiring the other property for Conservation Collier will take a minimum of four months. So it's a time -- if you want certainty and hold this off, it's a relatively long period of time to get that. The other alternative is to open up an escrow account and a certain amount of money, whatever it is, say a million dollars, and if it's determined that there has been a diminution of panther, you take it out of that. And if it is determined that there has been no loss, whether -- because of the nature of the easement or because we're acquiring the property to the south, then the million dollars would go to the property owner. But you would retain some amount of money to hold in escrow just in case it became an issue. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, what about the interest factor, that we're paying interest on the money that we have? How does this work into it? And this is my last question. MR. KLATZKOW: If you buy this property, you would have had to pay the interest anyway. It doesn't matter if you bought the property two weeks ago or two months ago. We're still paying that interest. The only time that interest becomes a problem is if the deal doesn't go through. Now we're paying money on a loan that we didn't need. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'm sure my fellow commissioners have numerous questions. I hope that we can proceed on this in an orderly fashion to protect the best interests ofthe public. MR. GRANT: Could I make a comment, Commissioner? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. MR. GRANT: Would that be appropriate? I don't know that we know for sure, and I don't think I heard the county staff say that this easement is a definite problem with regard to PHU's. I understand it's an unknown factor. Page 119 January 27,2009 But I think -- it seems to me the issue really ought to be not whether there is a formal easement or not but the nature of the use that is being made and will be made and has been made. It seems to me that's what the real concern is, and perhaps the staff can focus that down for you just a little bit. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, Mr. Grant. We have Commissioner Coyle waiting to ask some questions. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. Well, Mr. Grant's absolutely right. The thing that interrupted our closing is the access issue, so let's see if we can't dispose of the access issue. I have some questions concerning the agreement. I'd like to refer to Page 1 of the access easement agreement, Paragraph 1 starting in the middle of the page, last sentence there. The servient estate of state, that is the grantor, retains and shall have the right to use the servient estate in any and all ways that are not inconsistent with and do not unreasonably interfere with the easement. Now, before we've clearly specified what the uses are. It bothers me that we now have complicated the determination by putting in some subjective qualifications that require us to determine and define what is not inconsistent and what is not unreasonable interference. MR. GRANT: Yes. Commissioner, if the county were to close with this, the county becomes the grantor. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. GRANT: The county becomes the landowner, so you're in complete control of what things you choose to use the road for or not. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Ah, okay. Then I've misinterpreted the question. MR. GRANT: No. You're correct to raise the question, but you have to read this in terms of whomever is the landowner at the time, which would become the county. Honestly, that gives you some wiggle room there that you want to ensure that as the landowner Page 120 January 27, 2009 you're not giving someone an exclusive right to use this road. You're able to use it for your own purposes. The noninterference language is designed to ensure the recipient of the easement that you won't do something contrary to what you've allowed them to do, if that answers your question. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I guess I'm a little confused now. MR. GRANT: Okay. I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is an access easement. Are you suggesting that it is an access easement between the county and Barron Collier Investments? MR. GRANT: No. It's an access easement being granted by Lake Trafford Ranch to Barron Collier Investments -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. GRANT: -- which, if the county finds it acceptable and closes on the purchase -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: We become the grantor. MR. GRANT: -- the county will take subject to it. You step into that position. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. GRANT: We could change the word and the terminology to call it the landowner if that would make it more clear. COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I understand, as long as I know who the grantor is. MR. GRANT: The grantor becomes you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. GRANT: You step into that. The County Attorney's going to correct me if -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: So -- but the basic agreement is going to be signed between -- MR. GRANT: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- Lake Trafford Properties and Barron Collier Investments. Page 121 January 27, 2009 MR. GRANT: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then we step into the shoes of the grantor if we purchase that. MR. GRANT: Exactly, exactly, exactly. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, let's go to Paragraph 2, second sentence says a parenthetical phrase there that clearly wasn't intended to be included in this agreement. MR. GRANT: That's a glitch. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I understand. I see. I see whose fault it is. MR. GRANT: No, I don't know whose fault it is, but -- MS. BELPEDIO: It's mine. I'm sorry. MR. GRANT: -- it's a glitch. We noticed that over the weekend. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So -- well, what about general care of cattle breeding and -- or dairy? Since we've brought it up, what about it? MR. SOLIS: Commissioner, I think what's intended there is just the normal operation of running cattle and grazing cattle on the land. COMMISSIONER COYLE: There's a difference really between grazing cattle on land and running a dairy operation. MR. SOLIS: Correct. I'm not aware of any intention of ever having a dairy operation on the land. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we eliminate that possibility? MR. SOLIS: Yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I'm certainly not going to interfere if the cattle want to breed, but the dairy operation pushes it a little too far, okay? MR. SOLIS: Correct. I think that was a question maybe by staff, we're not sure. But the uses that are listed in the access easement are specifically limited to grazing, cattle ranching. Dairy farming would not be one of them. So we'd be glad to resolve that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: If we could make that stipulation Page 122 January 27,2009 there. And the other thing is, does it make any difference to you whether there is a 15-foot-wide easement or a 30-foot-wide easement? MR. SOLIS: No. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So if we granted a 15-foot-wide easement, that would meet your needs, right? MR. SOLIS: Correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then, Commissioners, I would -- I would suggest that if the access easement itself is acceptable to the board, that we consider it to be 15 feet wide so that we minimize the width of the easement, and then we go on to the next decision-making step which is, how do we best protect the county from an adverse impact on the panther mitigation credits? Now, we can do that by putting money in escrow. Is that a problem for your client? MR. GRANT: Yeah, I think it is. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, can anybody give me any comfort level concerning what Fish and Wildlife is going to say? Because the panther mitigation credits are a big part of this decision-making process, and we're going to need to have some way of protecting the county's interests ifthere is a substantial impact on the panther mitigation credits. MS. HENNIG: For the record, Melissa Hennig, principal environmental specialist with Conservation Collier. Unfortunately there is no good answer. We've requested several times from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to indicate what sort of possible diminished PHU value there might be, and they -- honestly, they cannot give us a good answer until they have a Habitat Management Plan in front of them, including any easements, they have a site visit and any restoration plans that we will not be able to do until we own the property. But just so you know, I was talking -- speaking to a member of the transportation department who also deals with PHU's. What I Page 123 January 27, 2009 figured out on the map here -- you can see the hashed lines. That is the SSA area portion, which we will not be getting PHU's from. So what I did in an attempt to figure out just -- just what U.S. Fish and Wildlife might take away from the PHU's, just comparing it to what I experience with with Starnes. The amount of PHU' s in the area south of -- the easement south of where it branches off to the oil wells. So if you look just to the southern part of the road, which is, we've decided -- 15 -- MR. MUDD: Is this what you're talking about? MS. HENNIG: Yes, actually -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Look up higher than that. MS. HENNIG: This and this. So I did not include the section that is part of the SSA. That road being 15 feet wide, I believe -- it was either 15 foot or 30 foot, I apologize -- when I did the calculations, came up to approximately 10 PHU's, assuming that the pasture land will have a diminished value. As we heard from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, it's not seven. It's probably more about three. That's about 10 PHU's just for the road. So we are looking at $15,000 on the open market for that road. The question that we have and that I honestly cannot answer, are they going to deduct PHU's from the surrounding land because that road is going to interfere with activities? All I can tell you is they didn't do that at Starnes. So that's all I have to go on. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is there any motivation for Fish and Wildlife Service -- MS. HENNIG: I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is there any motivation in your opinion for the Fish and Wildlife Service to use this as an excuse to reduce the PHU credits? MS. HENNIG: No, not in my dealings with them. I think they're just -- they're just hesitant to give an answer in lieu of other things that -- in the past that have happened where they've given a definitive Page 124 January 27,2009 answer, people invest and do different things, and then it might change in the future. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I guess -- yeah, my final comment is, it's a risk and there's no way that we can quantify the risk, which means, generally, I wouldn't proceed with the purchase of the property with that -- without quantifying that risk; however, there are some other mitigating factors and -- so I'm not going to take a hard stand on that position at this point in time. But it is a risk, and if we are doing our job responsibly, we will try to minimize that risk to the extent possible. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I think we came to a conclusion that we're looking at just a 15- foot easement, and I think staff came up with a value of that easement as about $168,750. Who's going to pay that portion? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Not me. MR. GRANT: I have no ability to agree to that, Commissioner. MS. HENNIG: You mean appraised value? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Appraised value ofthat easement. MR. GRANT: Well, I think one can probably question whether that's correct or not. I understand the numbers and I've seen it. I'm not sure if that enters into the question that we've been talking about with regard to PHU credits. That's a different -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, yeah. It's just one part of the equation. Right now we don't know if -- what the impact is going to be for panther mitigation units, credits, and so that's one aspect of it. The other one is, now that we've discussed -- brought forth the idea that there is going to be an easement through this property and we don't know whether that easement's going to be there forever or whether it's just a temporary easement until such time as -- if the other piece of property that's attached to this is brought forth to the Board of Page 125 January 27,2009 County Commissioners as part of the Conservation Collier. So if we're looking at this thing, we've got two things going here. We've got panther habitat credits, and then we also have this easement, and the valuation of the easement, there's two values, I believe, and one was about 225,000. So I guess where I'm coming from, is that going to be taken off the price of the property, or is that going to be paid by Collier? MR. GRANT: Commissioner, I think what has been recommended to you, as I understand it, is that the commission consider proceeding with the transaction accepting the limited purpose easement that is being proposed. And I say that with all respect only because we all spent Thursday discussing this with the benefit of a very skilled, capable mediator and obviously reached some resolutions, and the subject of compensation and adjustment did not come up. Now, in fairness, I understand the county representatives there are not the five of you sitting here and can't bind you, and they made that clear and we all understood that. So I'm not faulting anyone other than to say that it wasn't raised as something that needed to be addressed, and so it wasn't addressed. And I think we all felt that you were going to be receiving this recommendation. I suppose you can look at it, if you want to, as the county accepting some part of an overall compromise here if the county were willing to accept this limited use easement. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, what's really transpired in this whole operation, this whole deal in regards to purchasing this property is that we went through an exercise here where we tried to come up with what we thought was a fair market value for the piece of property. At that point in time, there was no discussion about an easement. MR. GRANT: Right. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And then at the last hour of the Page 126 January 27, 2009 negotiations and getting this thing all wrapped up, then all of a sudden this issue of an easement came into being where we really don't have any control over this easement because the other property owner that's adjacent to this wants access through his land. MR. GRANT: Right. COMMISSIONER HALAS: So that's posed a problem of, has it diminished the real value of the property? And then staff comes up with these two figures, one for 30 feet and one for 15 feet. MR. GRANT: Right. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Now, this had to come up into the discussion when you were going through the mediation. MR. GRANT: Well, honestly it didn't come up, and I don't believe any of us heard those figures at the time of that -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, then maybe the County Attorney or somebody from staff, whoever -- MR. KLATZKOW: Well, I could be very blunt about this. The first time that I met right after Christmas I said, if there's going to be an easement, then the value's going to have to be diminished for the property . Now, I don't know what that value is. But, you know, we were buying a certain property, we're getting slightly less ifthere is an easement. There's going to have to be an "in combination". Now, whether the appraised value is the right value, I don't know. But to say that the issue never popped up, that's not so. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, my concern is in the discussions you had with my fellow Commissioner Coyle here in talking about the possibility of putting some money into escrow to get a study done with -- in regards to the panther habitat credits with and without the easement -- we're trying to figure out how much it's diminished that possibility. And so -- we also got the idea here that if that impacts us and you can't put the money in escrow, then there's got to be some type of a Page 127 January 27,2009 compromise. MR. GRANT: Commissioner, I understand -- believe me. I think there's nothing that my client would love to do more than resolve this today, as would you. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. MR. GRANT: So I'm totally with you, okay. I simply said, I don't have any authority. We've not been asked to consider a specific -- I'm honestly hearing two things from you all now. One is the panther mitigation credit concern, which is unknown, and the other is the potential reduction in value, which is an identifiable known. Maybe we can all question what number that is, but we all understand that concept. So I'm hearing two things, and I don't know whether -- I think what I need to do, frankly, is we're going to have to step out in the hall and have a good discussion because it's not been -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, maybe the chair would-- MR. GRANT: And I think we would need to know what it is that we're being asked to do, and I can't promise -- yeah? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Maybe the chair could take a ten-minute break. MR. GRANT: Sure. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Let's take a ten-minute break. MR. GRANT: Can I have my co-counsel say something? CHAIRMAN FIALA: After Commissioner Henning. MR. WILSON: May I just -- my name is Christy Wilson with the firm of Wilson, Garber & Small. We've been brought in recently as special counsel in this case. And responding, Commissioner Halas, to you and your concern, which is a legitimate concern, my clients do not -- they're not standing here trying to be unreasonable; but from their perspective, we had a deal back last year, and we have come off the deal that we had by $675,000. Page 128 January 27, 2009 I understand there's give and take, but -- and we had certain expectations, including closing before the end of the year, that were part and parcel of our decision to make that reduction in the price of the property. Now, I understand that these issues have come up regarding access and other things that we didn't know about, but your staff, as I understand it, has appraised the burden of this access on the property at 90 percent. You need to understand that this dirt track-way will be used not only by the cow people, but it will also be used by -- and if I'm wrong on the 90 percent, I'm wrong. But this will also be used by you and is an important thing. I understand that there's a desire on the part of the Conservancy to maybe make some uses, or the county, to make some uses of the property to the south that would require public access through here. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Chris, you aren't a registered lobbyist, are you? MR. WILSON: No, I am not. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. WILSON: I'm here as counsel for -- I'm an attorney with offices in Orlando, Florida. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, he has to be a lobbyist. MR. WILSON: No, I am not -- I have not asked to be a lobbyist. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you getting paid for being here? MR. WILSON: I'm here trying to resolve the matter for my clients as their attorney. I am not here as a lobbyist. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So you need to register upstairs when we're finished here, please. MR. WILSON: I'll be happy to do that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you. I think it's $25 or something like that. Okay, fine. Page 129 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a thousand dollars if you're late. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's $186,000. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And Commissioner Henning. And then -- and then we'll give them that break that Commissioner Halas suggested after Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, then the County Manager wants to say something. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The conservation lands are the only lands in Collier County that are going up. What a deal. I think -- the only thing that we need to do is give our staff direction. What they do is what they do. And what I've heard is interest money that we're paying on the note, I've heard escrow money for the cost of potential loss ofPHU's, and I've heard a cost of --lots of the property of easement. We don't have to take a break. We can make a decision, give staff guidance, and if it doesn't happen per our guidance, there's no deal. That's my opinion. I don't -- they work it out, that's as far as I'm concerned. We don't need to hear how they work it out. We just need to give direction. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So -- now we have a speaker on -- waiting, and then think about how you would form a motion. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm not -- I'm not in favor of this property anyways. I think we paid way too much money for it, so I'm not going to make a motion. I'm just giving recommendations to the -- my colleagues. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Yes, Mr. Mudd. MR. MUDD: Commissioners, if! may, before they go outside and waste time -- because right now they're kind of dealing with, you know, kind of the movie Flubber, you know. I feel like I've got that Page 130 January 27,2009 ball and it's moving around. You've decided the easement sits there. You need to tell -- you need to tell us, first, this point right here to this point right here, right now it is a path that's got two ruts down the thing, and it's 15-foot. From this point right here all the way over to here it's 30- foot. So what you're basically talking about is providing a 15-foot easement or 30-foot easement, at the board's -- at the board's discretion and point between this point and this point -- we need to know that -- because there's a difference in price lost value to the county based on how wide that easement is. In your book it says if it's 30-foot, it's worth around 225,000. If it's 15-foot, it's worth $168,750, number one. Your County Attorney has told you the loss money interest really isn't an issue if you're going to buy the property. It only becomes an issue if you're not going to buy the property. So if you're going to buy the property it's not an issue. Okay. If you're not -- you know, if you're not going, then it becomes an issue and it's a loss value to the taxpayers, and we'll have to pay whatever penalties are there. The next issue is -- and you heard Ms. Hennig talk about, we have to give them a management plan before the Fish and Wildlife -- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will tell you panther habitat units. If we're going to determine if there's any loss to panther habitat units because of this easement, we have to give them a management plan and tell -- and ask them when we do our submission to please give us panther habitat units, the worth of the property with and without that easement, and that way we'll know. Now, the only way you can make that sale contingent is to have money in your escrow in an escrow account that sits there, and that determination is made. So my recommendation to the board as these folks go out on break is that you get some compensation for lost value because of Page 13 1 January 27,2009 easement, may it be 225,000 or 168-; that you don't worry about the interest that's lost if you're going to buy the property, and that some value be put -- some monies be put in the -- in an escrow account that is there to compensate the taxpayers for any loss of panther hat (sic) units for the purchase of this property with that easement on it. And that value needs to be something probably about a quarter of a million dollars, from what I just heard, and that basically takes it on the very conservative end as far as the county is concerned. Now, we heard ten, but I can't tell you if it's just ten. What happens if it's a hundred, okay? Then it's a different ballgame. That's why I say about a quarter of a million dollars. I believe with those particular conditions, those gentlemen can go out in the hallway and try to get this thing resolved and come back and see you and/or you could tell staff right now that you want a 15-foot easement that goes north/south until it runs into the 30-foot easement that runs east/west, and you can tell the staff that you want to get the purchase price reduced by $168,750 because of that easement, and you can tell the staff to tell the sellers that you need to have an escrow account set up for a quarter of a million dollars to compensate for any panther habitat units that are lost to the taxpayers and that can get worked out. With that, staff can go out there and make this purchase or not make this purchase based on those conditions. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Mr. Mudd, I see what you're saying, and it's not unrealistic. But what happens when we -- if we put this particular deal together and we do go forward with purchasing 45 days, three months, six months from now, that Collier piece of property and the easement goes away? Do we refund the money at that point in time? MR. MUDD: The board could give us direction to do that, sir, yes. Page 132 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Just looking for some certainty in the whole thing. MR. MUDD: You could tell us to do that, yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm ready for a break. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm willing to make a motion essentially supporting what the County Manager just described. I would like to have some discussion later about how you assess the cost of the easement, but I don't see any reason why that guidance wouldn't be sufficient to establish the basis for some discussions about a settlement. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Should we ask the parties to go out and discuss this before we -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Then come back and make a motion. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. Okay. We shall do that. We'll take about a ten-minute break while you go out and discuss this. MR. GRANT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. (A brief recess was had.) MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your seats. Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot mike. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Well, let's see. Commissioner Henning, your light is on. Did you want to say something? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, take it out for reappraisal. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta, this is your district. Where are we going from here? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'd like to hear back from Taylor and his group. Page 133 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: They're not coming back. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I saw Blake Gable peek in the door and then quickly disappear. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's Blake Gable. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Here they come. MR. MUDD: It's on. Here they come. Look out. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Who begins here? Dick, is that you? MR. GRANT: I'll begin, Commissioner. Here's what we would like to suggest in response to your concerns. With regard to the concern over the panther habitat unit mitigation credits, we're agreeable to escrowing a quarter of a million dollars pending a determination of that. We would like to suggest that the county be required to diligently pursue filing the necessary mitigation plans or whatever you have to do to get those determinations. We'll give you a year to do that. Hopefully it won't take a year. We thought a year was plenty reasonable. Ifthere isn't any resulting loss ofPHU's, we get the money back. If there's some resulting loss that comes out of the escrow, we get the difference back. With regard to the acquisition cost, we just don't accept the numbers that we've been given. We think they're high, to be honest with you. I believe Barron Collier has indicated it is willing to accept the easement being 15 feet in length, I think, but I think they need to ask -- or the question whether they mean the entire length -- I think they do -- not just the southern leg. And we're willing to escrow $168,000, which I think was one of the numbers in the analysis for the 15-foot route. And we would like to propose that instead of just accepting that number, we'll escrow that. We'd like to have an independent appraisal done of what the resulting devalue to the land is from a 15-foot easement, that at least Page 134 January 27,2009 on a significant part of this road is on top of other easements that already exist, because I don't think any of us necessarily think that the devalue is the same thing when there are multiple easements over the same property. And whatever that independent appraiser concludes -- and we'll pay for the appraisal. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Who chooses the appraiser? MR. GRANT: Well, I think we and the county staff would just have to agree it's somebody independent. I don't think we're slighting Mr. Leonard at all, but I think we just would like to have somebody independent and somebody approaching a point of view of how one should properly and fairly analyze what the effect of this is, recognizing its limited purposes. And if it's less than 168, we get the difference. If the county were to end up acquiring the Collier Big Hammock property to the south some day, then we think we should get all the money back for the easement devalue. So that's what we're proposing. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And that meets your agreement? MR. GRANT: Well, I don't think we talked about it, but -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. GRANT: -- it doesn't affect them, it affects us. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay, fine. MR. GRANT: Other than the 15 feet. MR. SOLIS: My only purpose was to confirm that Barron Collier Investments is fine with a 15- foot easement all the way to the east/west leg. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good. MR. SOLIS: That's acceptable. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I'd just like to say a few words here. This has been a long, arduous task, and it really wouldn't have had to have been that way if the parties that were involved in this Page 135 January 27, 2009 easement, if this was -- would have been brought before us or settled before we discussed what the sale price of this piece of property was. So I'm hoping that other people out there who are thinking about bringing forth lands to Collier County and want us to purchase those lands, that they be forthright in regards to if there are any easements that need to be addressed so that we don't run into a situation like this agam. I feel bad that we didn't find out about this until the 11 th hour, the 59th minute where we were almost ready to sign the documents, and all of a sudden this became a problem, but I think we're to the point where we can see this thing to fruition. But again, I would hope that any other parties that are involved and want to sell land to Conservation Collier County would make sure that it's clear in regards to this. MR. GRANT: Commissioner, could I add a comment? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Could-- MR. GRANT: I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know you would love to, but I've still got a speaker waiting, Commissioner Coletta wants to make a motion, Commissioner Coyle wants to ask a question or say something. MS. FILSON: We have a motion. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. We have the motion already? Was it seconded? MR. MUDD: I don't. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, so it wasn't seconded. COMMISSIONER COYLE: The motion, I think, was based upon the expectation that someone would bring back something that we could agree to, and I would say that it certainly has, as far as I'm concerned. I think Mr. Grant's client has essentially done exactly what we asked him to do, setting up an escrow of a quarter of a million dollars for the panther habitat units and agreeing to reduce the cost of the Page 136 January 27, 2009 property by the fair assessed value of the easement itself. The only thing where I would differ would be with the guarantee of the refund if we purchase the Collier property later on. And I take that position only because if I were to make an offer to purchase that property, one of my motivations would be the elimination of the easement, and that would be factored into the purchase price. So I'm not sure that I would like to commit myself to refunding that money. But if we reach agreement on the price, I can't imagine that will be a substantial stumbling block. So I'd be happy to make the motion to proceed under those -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- circumstances. MR. GRANT: Could I just ask a question, Commissioners? If you all were to approve this, is that direction to the staff to get this closed with us without it needing to come back to this commission? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Quickly, quickly. MR. GRANT: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, we have one speaker, but our -- Jeff Klatzkow would like to say something. MR. KLATZKOW: Just to wrap up some very minor issues to make sure there's no issues coming back to the board. F or the appraisals, you want an independent appraisal. We have county-approved appraisals. We can give you a list of those county-approved appraisals, and you can select one of them; is that acceptable? MR. GRANT: I think so, sure. MR. KLATZKOW: That takes care of that. My understanding, you've got two appraisals -- two escrows. One's going to be for $250,000. That will be for the panther. The county would use its -- in good faith, its best efforts to comply -- to get the governing bodies to give us whatever that number is. It might be a year. It might be two years. As long as we're using Page 13 7 January 27,2009 our best efforts, that escrow's going to have to stay open, because I don't know how long they're going to take. MR. GRANT: I understand. Let's just say the year is a good target and a goal. MR. KLATZKOW: But as long as the county's proceeding in good faith, the escrow will remain. MR. GRANT: I guess I don't know what else to say. I think-- yeah. I mean, I understand you can't control other agencies. MR. KLATZKOW: Okay. And for the other escrow, for the 168,750, my understanding, if the number comes in less than that, that's what you get paid. MR. GRANT: Right. MR. KLATZKOW: If the number comes in more than that though, we're limiting ourselves to the 168,750? MR. GRANT: Yes. MR. KLATZKOW: Okay. So we're taking the risk on that one. That's all I have for the housekeeping. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And our speaker? I'm sorry, speaker, but this has been such hot-and-heavy conversation. MS. FILSON: Amber Brooks -- Crooks. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And you can just waive if you love this decision, by the way. MS. CROOKS: I'll be quick. Very quick. Amber Crooks representing the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. We're encouraged to see the parties are able to work together on this easement. And as you've heard, it seems to meet all of the intent of the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee's recommendations about limiting the use, not paving it, not having future development or utilities. So we're very happy to have seen that come forward. We respectfully request that you direct staff to close on the contract in a timer matter (sic) to ensure that we are successful in Page 138 January 27,2009 acquiring this extraordinary property which is valuable to Collier County citizens for many reasons, not limited to PHU's, and this property is the headwaters to the Cocohatchee Slough, aquifer recharge, and water supply value and will provide outstanding recreational value. These values are somewhat unquantifiable. But we do know that the Conservation Collier Committee had ranked the property at its highest natural resource value, and we encourage you to support the motion on the floor. Thanks for letting me speak. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. I'd also like to add how important this is because it's adjacent to the CREW lands, and so this has been very important to the people -- Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed to see this coming through. So I love the motion and the second. MR. MUDD: I got one -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta, your button's still on. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're right, it is. I think Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner Halas covered the motion and the second quite well. I do think that we need to recognize the efforts of all parties concerned and how far they came from zero and to the highest of pinnacles to be able to reach it, especially I appreciate what Collier has done, stepping forward to be able to resolve this in a timely manner, and at their comments -- commissioner comments, I want to discuss about the possible inclusion of the purchase of the Collier property for consideration under Conservation Collier. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner -- I mean, Mr. Mudd, you have your hand up? MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. I need one clarification. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. MUDD: Okay. I understand the motion. I understand the Page 139 January 27,2009 offering. The offering was that if Conservation Collier, Collier County, purchase the Collier interests to the southern portion, that they get the money back, they -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was not the motion. MR. MUDD: They get the money -- see, that's what I-- clarifications. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. MR. MUDD: They get the money for the easement back and any panther habitat units that would be recovered. I just want to make sure that that isn't part of the motion or it is. COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I think the easement was not-- it was not part of my motion because I said that if we purchased the remaining Collier property, one of the reasons we would do that is to eliminate the easement, and that probably would be reflected in the purchase price. So rather than refunding it -- MR. MUDD: So the refund would only be for any panther habitat unit -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Panther habitat units. MR. MUDD: -- that would be restored when the easement went away? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, that's correct. MR. KLATZKOW: And the chair's authorized to sign any documents in connection with the sale? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I would presume so. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: As long as she clears it with me. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just to make sure I understand this now. So what you're saying is, is that when we go to -- we hopefully go to purchase the Collier properties. If we don't purchase it, then I guess we would refund it. If we do purchase it, the amount Page 140 January 27,2009 of money that we have in escrow for this would be coming off the appraisal part to lower the cost of that; is that what you're saying? COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no. Wouldn't have anything to do with it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's an entirely separate transaction, and the current owner would not get any benefit from that transaction. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me explain. We're going to put money into escrow for the easement, and then we're going to have hopefully an impartial appraisal of the easement. If -- and we'll come up with a price. If that price is less than $168,000, the amount in escrow, the difference will go back to the current owner of the property. Ifit is over $168,000, we eat the difference, okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. That I understand. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, the $225,000 on panther habitats will remain in escrow until we can get a determination from Fish and Wildlife Services as to what the possible diminution of the panther habitat value is. And if it is less than the $225,000, we will refund a quarter of a million dollars -- MR. GRANT: Two fifty. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- $250,000 -- we will refund the difference, or at least the difference to the current owner of the property. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But go back to the first one. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: From what I understand, what you're saying is, when they put it in for the right-of-way, you're saying that the right-of-way, regardless of what happens, it will affect the outcome of buying the Collier property? COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, it won't. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I misunderstood you. Page 141 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: It won't impact it at all. It's two entirely different transactions. They were asking -- let me start from the beginning. They were asking that $168,000 be put in escrow because that's what we said the right-of-way was worth. But then we're going to get together and decide what it's really worth. And if it's worth less than $168,000, we're going to give the difference back. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That -- I understand all that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But now, if it -- let's suppose it comes in at a hundred thousand dollars, okay, we give them $68,000 back. Now, subsequently we decide to purchase the remaining Collier -- the Collier property south of this property. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Or they go by Trafford Oak Road. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Or whatever -- well, forget that. But if we buy the Collier property, we're not going to give them back the hundred thousand dollars for the right-of-way that they paid us. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that's -- the reason for that is? COMMISSIONER COYLE: The reason for that is, if!'m going to offer the Colliers a price for their property, one of the reasons I'm doing that is so I can get rid of that easement, so it's going to be factored into the purchase price probably because the easement is something of value to the Colliers, okay. So I'm going to be buying the easement from the Colliers as well as the property that they have. So why would I give the easement money back to the original owner? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now that you said it three times, I understand it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right. MR. GRANT: Commissioner? Page 142 January 27, 2009 MR. KLATZKOW: You're also going to be spending more money for the Collier property now that there's an access point to get there. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. Well, we'll hamper the access some way so they won't be able to get in and out. MR. GRANT: Could I throw in another condition which is, that if in the four-year period that Conservation Collier remains during which the county might acquire the Collier property, if in that time period we were able to have the Collier easement just go away without the county acquiring the property, should we not recover the money then and/or loss of mitigation credits if you get them back? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wouldn't have a problem with that. MR. GRANT: That would seem reasonable. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wouldn't have a problem with that. MR. GRANT: Because that scenario could exist. I don't know how realistic it is, but -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wouldn't personally have a problem with it. I don't see how it harms us. MR. GRANT: Okay, okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas, your button is on, or are we done? COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're done. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, that's great. So let me just ask all of my commissioners, does everybody understand what the motion is? Is everybody happy with the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Coyle, which I will not even try to repeat, and we have a second by Commissioner Halas. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Page 143 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is it? Are you aye? Okay. So that's a 4-1 vote. Okay. Thank you very much. That is a 4-1 vote. MR. GRANT: Thank you, Commissioners. Item #10J THE EXPENDITURE OF $1,540.00 TO PAY FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ARTERIAL LEVEL STREET LIGHTING AT THE CASA DEL VIDA SUBDIVISION ENTRANCE; A $10,000 CASH BOND WAS POSTED AND IS IN PLACE TO PAY FOR COMPLETION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS - APPROVED MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item, which is lOJ, and that used to be 16A5. It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners board approve the expenditure of $1,540 to pay for the installation of arterial level street-lighting at Casa del Vida subdivision entrance. A $10,000 cash bond was posted and is in place to pay for the completion of the improvements. This item was moved to the regular agenda at Commissioner Coyle's request. I want to make sure that the reader -- or the listeners out there and the viewers out there understand that the price of the lights are $1,540, not $1,540,000 that you might have read in the paper, okay. And Mr. Stan Chrzanowski from your engineering department, community development's environmental services, will present and answer any questions that you have. Page 144 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. The only reason -- if! can. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll cut through this real fast. There's not a big issue here, but it is confusion. The executive summary says that the money is to pay for the installation of the street-lighting. Down under considerations, the last sentence under considerations, there's a statement that says, there is no upfront cost associated with the actual streetlights themselves, only the monthly fees. So what I'm trying to figure out is, if $1 ,540 is a monthly fee, or what is that since we -- you're saying we don't have to pay any upfront costs associated with the street-lighting. MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir, I see the confusion. I will try to -- you're going to see more of these. I'll try to make them more clearer next time. The $1,540 is what we're paying FPL for the design, engineering, and installation of the lights, and there will be a monthly bill for the lights that is going to go to the homeowners association. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. CHRZANOWSKI: They will pay that. The county is not paymg any money. MR. MUDD: Where does the $1,540 come from? MR. CHRZANOWSKI: The $10,000 account that's in control of the Clerk that we need your permission to access. MR. MUDD: But that is -- that is money that was put aside as a bond by the developer and/or the homeowners association. MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir. It was a letter of credit that we called on, and now we have the cash money in an account, and we want to draw on it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So no taxpayer money is -- no. No taxpayer money which we get is going to pay for this. MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir. I should have been clearer Page 145 January 27,2009 when I wrote that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. That would be helpful. And we're not going to be on the hook for $1,540 a month for monthly fees or anything like that? MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then you answered my questions. I don't have any concerns with it. I'll make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Motion on the floor and a second. Commissioner Halas -- or Henning, excuse me. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, Commissioner Henning has a question. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, that is you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is the lights going on tract B; do you know? MR. CHRZANOWSKI: They're going on the property, yes. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's tract B. CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And opposed, like sign? (No response.) MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Five-zero, thank you. Item #1OK Page 146 January 27,2009 RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RATIFY ADDITIONS TO, MODIFICATIONS TO AND DELETIONS FROM THE 2009 FISCAL YEAR PAY AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN MADE FROM OCTOBER 2,2008 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2008 - MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS - APPROVED MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 10K, it used to be 16E2, and that is -- just trying to get to it -- is a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners ratify additions to, modifications to, and deletions from the 2009 fiscal year pay and classification plan made from October 2, 2008, through December 31, 2008. The item was asked to move to the regular agenda by Commissioner Henning, and Mr. Don Albonesi from your human resources department, will present. MR. ALBONESI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Don Albonesi. I'm the manager of compensation, and I'm losing my voice. I'm here to answer your questions. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the board -- the board-- the board's supervisor position that is posted, it says it prefers a bachelor's degree of three to five years, related experiences preferred but the change is, there's no qualification for education. And what I heard from my colleagues, though I didn't agree, that our staff needs supervision, so why not have that qualification that they have either past supervision experience or a BS degree in supervision? MR. ALBONESI: Sir, when we write the classification, we ask for the minimum requirements. And I worked with Mr. Ochs on this one, and we determined that those -- the minimum requirements were as written in the class specs; however, it's not unusual when we post a job to post not only the minimum requirements that we have in the classification, but also some preferred requirements. Page 147 January 27,2009 So this is one of those examples where we've posted both the minimum and some preferred requirements. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I don't know. Again, the majority of us wanted with supervision. I would think that you'd want somebody with -- that has -- is qualified to supervise staff. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, and then Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I think we've brought an interesting concept here. I, quite frankly, don't know why we're filling this position at all. Ms. Filson is still doing 75 percent of the job. Whenever anybody has a problem, they call Sue Filson anyway, which I understand is perfectly okay with the County Manager. I don't know why we're spending this kind of money for someone who will be doing only probably less than half of the job that Ms. Filson did when she was occupying that position. So I don't understand it. Why don't we just leave it vacant and save the taxpayers some money? We're having budget reductions. MR. ALBONESI: Sir, I would -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I was under the impression that we have an interim person that's filling those requirements; am I right or wrong? MR. MUDD: This laryngitis must be contagious, excuse me. The -- Mr. Sheffield is filling in in that particular regard as far as the supervision of the executive assistants up in the office right now. One of the things that the board asked based on their motion previously was for me to go and ask Mr. Sheffield ifhe would do it on a permanent basis, and that would be his sole job. Mr. Sheffield declined in that particular regard. With that, I came back to the board and asked them, and the board said they wanted to have a permanent manager person that was Page 148 January 27, 2009 on the floor, and that's why you have this particular item in the classifications scheme. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I guess it's just my understanding if you're -- whatever class you're trying to fill or identify, whether it be manager, deputy County Manager, supervisor, that you would want that person to have past experience for that position. And if that's my misunderstanding about what -- the detailed categories on there, then I'll make a motion to approve this item. MR. ALBONESI: Let me just correct something I said before, Commissioner. It does require supervising. In the minimum qualifications, in the third line, it does quote, performing and supervising clerical functions, so that was included in the minimum qualifications. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So you have to have a -- some kind of previous history or some BS degree in supervising in this case? MR. ALBONESI: Yes. Associates degree, plus three years of experience, some of which would be supervision. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If your motion stands, I'll second it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And is there any way to maybe try to clarify those a little bit better? MR. ALBONESI: Certainly. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Thank you. MR. ALBONESI: You're welcome. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I apologize for keeping you here all day. MR. ALBONESI: No problem. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That is a motion. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor to approve as written. Is that correct, Commissioner Henning? Page 149 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I mean -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Recommendation that the board -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: The gentleman just clarified it, so I'm okay with it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do you have a second? CHAIRMAN FIALA: And the second is by Commissioner Coletta. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think we're missing a step here. What is the job description for this particular person? Is it exactly the same as the job description before? MR. ALBONESI: No, it is not. It's been modified, sir. And the pay level -- the pay level and the pay grade has been decreased. COMMISSIONER COYLE: By how much? MR. ALBONESI: By three pay grades. COMMISSIONER COYLE: How much? MR. ALBONESI: Oh, from a minimum -- excuse me, sir. From a minimum of 58,585 to a minimum of 50,606. That's the minimum of the pay grades. Pay grade 23,58-; pay grade 20,50. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And what's the maximum? MR. ALBONESI: Maximum's respectively for pay grade 23, 86,155; pay grade 20,74,420. COMMISSIONER COYLE: The point I'm trying to make -- and I don't think anybody's going to pay any attention to it -- is that all of the advisory board work is being done by Ms. Filson. She is sitting here today doing all this. Whenever there is a question in our office that needs to be answered because nobody knows the answer and nobody knows where to go to get it, they call Ms. Filson, whether it's Mike Sheffield or whether it's the ladies who work in the office. Now, we're going to get somebody to occupy a position of a manager in this office. What is that person really going to do? And I Page 150 January 27,2009 guess I haven't seen a good clear identification of that. Now, the other point is that Ms. Filson still has a contract with the Board of County Commissioners, okay. So what I would like to find out, really, is, what are we hiring a person to do here? What are they going to do? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Actually, I was hoping to see somebody fill the front desk position myself because -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you're not going to want to pay that kind of money for somebody to fill the front desk, are you? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Of course not, but that's what -- I'm saying, you know, as a different position rather than this one, to be honest with you, but -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, if that's the case, then let's save the taxpayers some money and hire somebody for the front desk and leave that management position open, because I'll tell you right now, there is no degree in the world that is going to prepare anybody for managing this office. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let's see. Who do we have first, Commissioner Henning or Commissioner Coletta? I don't know. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. The item on the agenda is changing the pay grade. The only thing I wanted was a clarification on that. Now, Commissioner Coyle, you and I disagreed on filling a position, either manager or supervisor in the office. I'm beyond that. And the majority ruled, and I'm going to go with the majority. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't like to follow people over cliffs. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is it my turn or Commissioner Coyle? Page 151 January 27,2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, it's your turn. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, okay. I didn't want to get in front of him. I'll tell you what I'm thinking is the fact that, the way we've got it set up now, we're not talking about replacing the lady at the front desk. Our aides have, with difficulty, been covering that. By having someone in there to supervise the office, our aides can more appropriately cover the front. And I don't think we need to replace the person at the switchboard, and our aides can continue to share that task as they go forward. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm done. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you have any comments anyway? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that we ought to just move on. We've got a motion on the floor, let's see how it falls. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. I have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Henning, I think it was, and second by Commissioner Coletta to approve this pay grade decrease. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it's, whatever the item is on the agenda, staffs recommendations. MR. ALBONESI: The item contains a number of changes to the pay plan. This is one that you've been talking about. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? Page 152 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you very much. Item #1OL CHANGE ORDER #2 TO WORK ORDER PG-FT- 3792-08-01, CONTRACT #05-3792, WITH DE LA PARTE & GILBERT, P.A. FOR FIXED TERM SPECIALIZED LEGAL SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000.00 - APPROVED MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that, Mr. Chair -- Ms. Chairman, that brings us to 10L, which used to be 16C4, and this is a recommendation to approve change order number 2 to work order PG-FT-3792-0801, contract number 05-3792, with de la Parte & Gilbert, P.A., for fixed-term specialized legal services in the amount of$100,000. And Mr. Phil Gramatges from your public utilities division will present. MR. GRAMA TGES: Good afternoon, Madam Chairman, Commissioners. I'm Phil Gramatges, public utilities division. Now, I have prepared a short presentation on this change order. And let's start with the proposal. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, let me ask Commissioner Henning if he would just like to cut to the chase. MR. GRAMA TGES: By all means. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, maybe this has my -- the question that I asked over the weekend, and the question is, you have items one through 12 that -- the tasks that the -- this law firm is going to do. MR. GRAMATGES: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What are they? Are they complete? Any of them complete? And can we pay those out of the Page 153 January 27,2009 associated fees? MR. GRAMA TGES: Sir, let me refer you then to slide number five where we start talking about the first one of these items. I can go through all of them if you wish. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Go ahead to five. MR. GRAMA TGES: Okay. This one is for freshwater and brackish water 50/50 split, and this work is ongoing. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. GRAMATGES: Sir? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm fine, with that one. MR. GRAMATGES: Okay. Utility service concurrency management, there is no work presently being done here. Concurrency management, as you well know, is part of the day-to-day activities of public utilities. And from time to time we need legal advice on this issue, and this is here on an as-needed basis. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Orange Tree Utility? MR. GRAMATGES: Orange Tree Utility. This work is related to the ongoing due diligence work required for the acquisition of the Orange Tree Utility. It has nothing to do with the litigation that we have ongoing with the Orange Tree Utility. It's simply trying to address any legal issues that are part of us taking over that utility. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. This one is special district protocol, which I have no idea what that is. MR. GRAMA TGES: The water/sewer district is a special district. It was special district by the legislature of the state, and that may present from time to time some legal issues that also we need to address. And like I said, there is no work presently being done here. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Utility areas; infill is outside of the district? MR. GRAMA TGES: No, sir. It's within the district. There are some areas within the district that we do not service. That, in itself, creates some legal issues that, from time to time, we need to address. Page 154 January 27,2009 And this, as well, is an as-needed basis. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Florida Government Utility Authority? MR. GRAMATGES: Florida Government Utility Authority is within the district. MR. MUDD: Flip the slide. MR. GRAMA TGES: Is within the district, and so is Orange Tree for that matter. And since they are a private utility located inside the district, this proximity, from time to time, generates issues that we also need to address. We have no -- nothing going on here right now. This is on an as-needed basis. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- Florida Government Utility is within Collier County's water and sewer district? MR. GRAMA TGES: It's within the limits -- we surround it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I know. But any work done in here, could you take it out of fund, what is it, 432? Because that's what you're proposing. MR. GRAMATGES: This is fund 412. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Four twelve. MR. GRAMATGES: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You can use a user fee outside the users? MR. GRAMATGES: Well, this would be issues that have to do with our users, not necessarily with users of the Florida Governmentally -- Governmental Utility Agency. These are issues that affect our users in the relationship that we have with FGUA. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I don't understand. It's not in our service area? MR. GRAMATGES: No. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But yet, any legal work that you're -- you do with dealing with Florida Government Utility System, Page 155 January 27, 2009 which is their own government entity, you would use user fees? MR. GRAMA TGES: There are some areas in this county that-- where we supply water and they supply sewers. There's very few of them. But, indeed, they are. And those are issues that we need to -- some time to -- we haven't done anything on this for some time, but obviously we want to be able to act quickly if there are some legal issues. We can't wait weeks in order to get approval on something that requires work in this area. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I understand now. Only when it deals with services that we're providing? MR. GRAMA TGES: Correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, thank you. And the next one is expansion -- utility district expansion evaluation. I thought the board gave direction to reduce some, and especially areas in Golden Gate Estates. MR. GRAMATGES: That is correct, sir. And this may be mislabeled but, indeed, it covers any legal advice for expansion or contraction of the district. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But that's not in one of the one through 12 items? MR. GRAMATGES: Yes, sir, I believe that this is the last -- no, there's two more. I should have numbered them, but I know there's more than this. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know there is but -- MR. GRAMA TGES: There's another slide. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The last one with expansion of utility is not within the one through 12, expansion of value is number 12. MR. GRAMA TGES: Sure. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I got it. They just wasn't in order. Next one? MR. GRAMA TGES: I apologize if it's confusing. Page 156 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine. Thanks for your explanation. Next page? Okay. And if! would have got that yesterday, I would have been fine with it. It's more of an explanation instead of spending hundred thousand dollars on areas that I had no idea, and especially when you talk about a different utility authority. There wasn't any explanation in the response. So I'll make a motion to approve. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I hear -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- a second? Motion to approve by Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Halas. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. Item # 11 - Discussed and continued to later in the meeting PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to public comment on general topics. MS. FILSON: I have one speaker. Mark Teeters. Page 157 January 27,2009 MR. TEETERS: Good afternoon, Commissioners and County Manager Mudd. I'm here today to ask you for something. I'm a member of the West Coast Muscle Car Club, and I want to tell you a little bit about the group, first of all. A non-profit organization, founded in August of 2003. Over the past six years, the club's donated to charities such as Toys for Tots, Habitat for Humanity, St. Matthew's House, Lorenzo Walker Institute of Technology, Shriner's Hospital, and the list goes on and on and on. We have a car show that's scheduled for March 14th at Sugden Park. And it came to my attention in getting involved with this group and trying to help them to save some money, which is going to be donated to charities, we found out that we were being charged an $800 user fee to use the park for this car show. We do not charge admission. It's purely by donation. This year's going to be difficult because a lot of the money that we get from -- that we use to give to the charities come from car dealers. And as you well know, the car dealers are having a very difficult year. So most of what we're going to collect this year is going to be from people that are donating. We're going to have some school groups there this year doing food for fundraisers. So it is something that we do for the community. It's not just a whole bunch of guys just having fun and making money. All this money this year is going to go to the Shriner's. That's our chosen charity for this year. The park does remain open during this, and we've gotten accolades from the parks and recreation department about how clean we leave the park. Everybody goes out and polices the area. So basically what I'm asking you to do at this time is to waive the $800 permit fee, or not a permit fee, but is a user fee for Sugden Park for the -- what is that, about a five-hour -- it's about a five-hour car show, six-hour car show that we have every year. Page 158 January 27,2009 And that's really what I'm here to do. See, isn't that neat? What do you think, Commissioners? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That means you've got another minute. MR. TEETERS: That means I've got another minutes. Oh, I thought I was done. Should I tell you some more? No, I think I'm done. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. TEETERS: But I would like to -- it would be great if you guys would do that for me. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Could I ask -- I'm sorry -- parks and rec' s -- oh, all ready for it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Just happened to be sitting there. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Help us with this a little bit. Here we've got a company or an organization, a non-profit that's out there to raise money for scholarships. MR. TEETERS: We do. We have done scholarships in the past. We did them for Lorenzo Walker, but this year the money is going to go to the Shriner's. Let me tell you what they're going to use it for. The money does stay here in Southwest Florida. The Shriner's run a van multiple times a week between Southwest Florida and Tampa to the Children's Hospital, and that money is needed for them to use to run that van back and forth with the children that are going to the hospital -- I am a Shriner, so I know a great deal about it -- but also the families of the children that go up in the van. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That means your dinner's ready. MR. TEETERS: That means I'm done. Turkey timer. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So the question, what park are you looking to use again? MR. TEETERS: Sugden Park. Page 159 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Any kind of leeway in this? MS. RAMSEY: For the record, Marla Ramsey, public services administrator. Your fee policy states that a non-profit using the facility for a countywide event is $800 a day at Sugden, and $1,200 for a for profit. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Whoa. Is there -- do we have the ability to make exceptions for that, or is this open to some sort of MS. RAMSEY: Board of County Commissioners has the latitude to do that. Staff does not. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I tell you, I think the fee is excessive, to be honest with you. If we can recognize this as serving a public purpose, I think the fee should be severely reduced, if not eliminated. My own personal feelings. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- Mark, instead of the Shriner's -- and I understand why you're doing it. That's very noble. But in other cases where parks and rec has a partnership or been a partner with not-for-profit organizations and they would get a cut of the proceeds -- and that way -- Marla, please help me. It's kind of like a 50/50? MS. RAMSEY: There's actually two ways that it goes, Commissioner. If there is collections at the gate and it exceeds the $800, then we would get an additional cut to whatever that amount was. So the minimum is $800, and ifthere's a gate fee or there's additional collections at that location, then we would get, you know, a piece of that action as well if it exceeds the daily rate. So if the gate fee came out to be $900 instead of the $800, we would get a $900 fee, of course, which goes into our funds for the various events especially. At that particular park is where we do our special-needs programming. Page 160 January 27, 2009 MR. TEETERS: We have given money to the park in the past for the water ski program and some of the other things that they've done out there. We've given money to a bunch of the different county things. But I just think the $800 is -- I just think it's excessive. I would rather see that money go to charity, to some type of a worthwhile thing also -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Mark. Let me tell you why I brought this up. The board has heard this over and over again about not-for-profits using our facilities, and in the past we have not, you know, granted that. And all I'm -- and there is a community benefit for what you're doing, I recognize that. But if we set precedence, we have do it for all nonprofits, and every nonprofit is worthy in Collier County. That's why I'm suggesting, is partner-shipping with parks and rec., and -- well, you heard what Marla had to say and how it goes. I'm just throwing it out there. MR. TEETERS: Okay. I don't have a problem -- I guess -- the group doesn't really have a problem with some type of a -- some type of a donation or some type of a program, but I guess my fear this year, it is a difficult year, and if we don't get donations at the gate if -- let's say that we don't get $800 -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, Mark, I don't mean to interrupt you, but you've already said this, and I've got two more -- MR. TEETERS: Oh. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- people on board. MR. TEETERS: I am sorry. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. So Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Mark, I understand your concern, and we, as a county, have some concerns because these fees that we charge help make sure that the parks and rec stays solvent. They have a budget and, of course, they rely on events like this to make sure that Page 161 January 27, 2009 they stay solvent. So everybody is in a point whereby it's going to be a tight year for everyone. And so, I hope you understand that we've got some huge decisions coming in front of us in the next couple of months in regards. So I understand what your concern is, and I think you do a worthwhile cause here in the community, but it's the idea that we have to make sure that parks and rec has a budget so that they don't have to come back to us and say, hey, I need an amendment to the budget. And we get to pretty -- we don't take kindly to some -- when people come back and say, we need a budget amendment. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And the good thing is that some of that money goes into helping the handicapped children, a program right there at the park, and that is certainly local and certainly helping the children in our community. So it is a worthwhile cause that you're helping through your dollars. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. One of the problems is, I think Mark's saying he might not be able to get any money at all or get enough money to cover more than the use fee. But, Marla, does it cost us that much to have an event like this? MS. RAMSEY: Well, Commissioner, again, this is based upon -- a Sugden policy was brought out a number of years ago, which was separately approved by the Board of County Commissioners when that park came on because that was an event park, and a lot of people do use it for events. And the fee policy that you have approved does state that a nonprofit pays $800 if they want the park for the day. From the time you set up to the time that you take down, that's a full-day event. Sometimes they'll actually come in on Friday before to do the setups. We don't necessarily charge for that if it's just late afternoon. But that is what the fee policy states. And as you know, staff does not have Page 162 _.'-'-~-~~"._-""""~"----.-"--"-"-~-'--~ January 27, 2009 jurisdiction on that particular end of it. To talk about how much does it -- you know, you break it down over a period of time, what are the hours associated with it, I don't have that data at my fingertips, but it is what we've used in the past. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, one of the problems, of course, is it's already been stated that if we do exempt one person, we're going to have to exempt them all ultimately. And if we do that, what we're really doing is forcing other taxpayers to pick up the difference, which means you're forcing them to contribute to something they didn't have anything to say about, which is not fair. But I don't know how to be fair about this at all. I don't know how to solve the problem for you without creating more difficult problems for us. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. Mark, obviously we're not going to get there where you want to go today. I can see that right now. And probably this year is too late, but next year early on I'd like to personally work with you to look at such ventures as the fairgrounds and other private entities out there where they might be a little bit more forgiving in this direction, maybe even a car lot where we can intercede on your part. I can go in there and see what's available to be able to help them out with drawing people in. There's other lands that are available out there that we'd probably have to get a use permit to be able to use it. But believe me, there's other ways than spending an $800 fee. MR. TEETERS: Yeah. We do have other options for this year, by the way. We're not out of time. So we do have some options. We just -- the venue is a very nice one, so -- okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good shot. MR. TEETERS: Thank you very much. MR. MUDD: Is there any more speakers, Ms. Filson? Page 163 January 27, 2009 MS. FILSON: No, sir. Item #15 STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS MR. MUDD: That brings us to staff and commissioner general communications. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Let's start with you, Mr. Mudd. MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am, I have several items. First, this present Voluntary Separation Incentive Program window, we have had employees that are eligible outside the window that have come -- we have about 20 employees that want to take what we have. And we have -- we have about half a dozen that are outside the window, but if it was offered later on this year, they would take it, okay, because then they would be eligible and they would be within the window. I see this as not a one-time type request. And so we've gone to the County Attorney's Office and asked the best way to proceed if we want to do multiple windows in the -- for VSIP in the future. They said it would be better to draft an ordinance and bring that back to the Board of County Commissioners, and then you could do a resolution when you want to offer a window of eligibility for the employees, instead of going through this very rigorous step-by-step restrictive approach. So I'm recommending to you that we craft an ordinance for, not this window, but maybe a subsequent one this year, or maybe next year. That gives us -- that gives you and I the latitude with a resolution approved by the board to enact it. So that's the first item. If I see three nods, then we'll go with the County Attorney and we'll get that ordinance crafted so that we can get that done. Page 164 January 27,2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm seeing the nods. MR. MUDD: Okay. The next item is, I met with the owner -- and this has to do with the property appraiser's property that he rents, that we rent, for him, to the tune of over $600,000 a year. I met with the owner of that property to determine ifhe was interested in selling. He is not interested in selling for any price. So we left as friends, and I've made a subsequent offer with board's approval later when we see if we get some kind of an acceptance in draft for the Elks Club; and I gave that offer on Friday once I found that the owner of the property that the property appraiser is in, that he wasn't interested in that particular regard. I have not heard anything back from the owners of the Elks Club one way or the other on our particular property. But I am continuing to look at other properties in Collier County. I just have to see if they're in the window of affordability. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could I comment on that? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'm sorry, Mr. Mudd. I do have to bring this up one more time. What percentage of our workforce has been laid off? Twenty-two percent, is it? MR. MUDD: We're around 20 percent. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there any way we could consolidated some place where we can clear an area within the county complex or one of the other government complexes for the -- MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I am trying to bring the people that are in rental space right now into the particular confines of the office space that we have. I have Mr. Wert outside on a contract. I've got part of Marcy Krumbine's housing section that's on a contract, and we pay a penalty if we end it sooner than May of this year. As soon as May hits, she's -- the group is gone. That's a left-over from a previous housing director. Page 165 January 27,2009 We are bringing in the state attorney, the public defender, EMS; all of those people that are in renter -- rental space, we're bringing them into the confines of the county. We are bringing in every bit of the sheriffs maintenance operation into the county in the county-owned properties and get out of all of those leases that have been there for years and years and years. What we're trying to do is save the taxpayers about $1.9 million. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I understand you, but let me make sure I heard you right, that if we have -- we're still utilizing all the office space, all the floor space that we have for our employees. We don't have a lot of empty rooms, we don't have a lot of reserved capacity where we could confine people together to be able to make enough space? MR. MUDD: No, sir, and that's with all those people coming back into the ownership and county-owned property instead of being in a rental space. When that happens, sir, no, you don't. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And I'm not saying I don't doubt you, but some day I'd like to have a tour of the county complexes and be able to get a first-hand view of what's actually happening. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm still having a hard time understanding how we can reduce our employment base by 22 percent and still have to have new facilities. MR. MUDD: Well, when you take a look at your AUI (sic)-- AUI presentation, and Mr. Ron Hovell, I remember specifically when he laid that out, he laid out the cost per square foot per population, and he also told this board over 15 percent of your office space is in rental property, and we're bringing that basically onboard, and that's the issue where that space that's been vacated will have people that sit in it because they're coming out of rental space into county-owned Page 166 January 27,2009 properties. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We need to spend more time on this -- MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- so I better understand where we are. MR. MUDD: Absolutely, sir. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. MUDD: Okay. That brings us to our next item, and I only have one other one after that one, and this has to do -- and Jeff and I are going to share in this particular regard, and this has to do with the economic development zones. I use the right terminology, Mr. Ochs? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. MR. MUDD: Economic development zones. The board, based on the workshop with the EDC where we talked about economic development zones, basically directed staff and the County Attorney's Office to meet with the EDC and community leaders and their director and their chairman of their board to find out the feasibility of economic development zones. Weare of the opinion that they are, indeed, feasible. They are, indeed, feasible on both CRA's; they are, indeed, feasible at city -- city gate; they are, indeed -- I'm giving some examples, because that's already industrial zoned and the owner has said if he could get it -- get the economic development zone, he would give the land in order to be an incentive for any future business that wanted to come on -- the Silver Strand, which you will hear soon, which is south of the Immokalee stockade jail. That will come to you for zoning. That's been offered up as an economic development zone, as well as some portions of Ave Maria. Mr. Klatzkow has talked to our outside experts, and that's with Nabors Giblin, I believe is the firm, and gotten some quotes for their help in this particular regard. Page 167 January 27,2009 What he received was for the first phase setting up the economic development zone and the second phase, which is the vetting process, the fees, they -- they think, for that particular work, would be the tune of $30,000, not exceed. And I wanted to make sure that we had board's okay before we started to go down that road with the economic development zone issue with outside counsel helping us with that development. Mr. Klatzkow, did I miss anything? MR. KLATZKOW: No. That's -- that would be the estimated cost of this. It's going to be in two phases, as Mr. Mudd said. And we could -- if you didn't like the proposals, we could just cut it off. And I think the first phase, Mr. Mudd, was about $10,000? MR. MUDD: The first phase was 20,000. MR. KLATZKOW: Twenty thousand. MR. MUDD: The second phase was ten. MR. KLA TZKOW: All right. So we'll come back to the board with the proposals and, you know -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: When we had this workshop and the people came in here looking for services, I want to know exactly what it's going to cost the taxpayers totally. You've got -- right now we're talking about having an outside law firm give us direction on this. I'm assuming that community development is going to have to playa part of this. And so, what are we looking at as far as the bottom line of taxpayers' dollars that are going to be used for this in regards to this whole project? MR. KLATZKOW: No. I think it's about $30,000. We're going to set up the structure to allow this. I don't think staff time -- or very much staff time is going to be involved. You're already industrially zoned. And the idea is to set up one economic development zone but have it in different ports -- parts of the county so if somebody wanted Page 168 January 27, 2009 to go to Bayshore, they could do that. If somebody wanted to go up to Ave Maria, they could do that. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And who's going to pay for this? It's coming out of -- MR. KLATZKOW: The cost to set it up, approximately $30,000, that's coming out of our funds. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MR. MUDD: Now, for the taxpayers in general, after it's done, there'll have to be some kind of TIF that sets up, tax incremental funding, that's set up for that particular regard in order to entice that particular business to come onboard into Collier County and bring any satellites that are there. Now, that will all have to come back to the board for decision, because you might want to have a straight TIF like you have in a CRA that's good for a certain number of years. You might want to have a TIF that basically ramps away from your tax base and brings more proceeds into your tax base than if -- it would be if it was a straight TIF. For instance, one of the -- one of the things that the EDC tried to sell to you as far as the process -- this would increase the tax base of Collier County and give the taxpayers of Collier County more options, more dollars to do future things that they want to do with their community. F or that to be true, your TIF cannot be a straight TIF. It has to -- it has to ramp down, so to speak, so that they take less over time from the TIF and return more into the general fund, and that is one of those options that we're taking a look at to make sure that you have -- you, as a board, have all the options you need to when you make that decision on that particular regard. COMMISSIONER HALAS: So what you're telling me is in the long run, then the taxpayers basically get repaid for the -- what we're trying to accomplish here? Page 169 January 27, 2009 MR. KLATZKOW: You're looking at an investment. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep. MR. KLATZKOW: You might -- if this is successful and you bring in high-wage jobs, it will enhance the tax base. If this is not successful and no jobs are brought in, then, you know, it's $30,000 you're not going to get back. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right. Well, I just want to make sure that -- because when other people come in and want to use the services of the county, they have to pay an upfront fee. So I just want to make sure that we don't go down a road where this is a continued investment, and we keep throwing money at more money, and we're not getting anything in return. So that's my concern. And as long as everything looks like -- and I think the County Manager brought up the deal about the reoccurring TIF funds and that the amount of TIF funds start to come back into the coffers of the taxpayers, I'm good with it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And if this is their idea that we're going to be funding, how much a part of -- are we going to be of the decision making? MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, we're going to have to set up an Economic Development Council. That could be you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Because, I mean, if we're going to fund this thing, we should certainly have some participation in the decision-making process, I would guess. MR. KLATZKOW: You will be the decision makers. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. This is our program. The reason it was developed was specifically to keep us from having to pump money into the economic diversity program. You'll recall we've got incentives to waive impact fees, waive taxes for ten to 15 years. We've got job credits, all those kinds of Page 170 January 27, 2009 things. And the point that we have made to the EDC at our meetings is that we don't have the money to keep doing this. We might be able to do it one time a year, but we can't do it on any scale that's designed to diversify our economy. So one of the requirements was that we should develop a self-sustaining program that didn't depend upon the government pumping money into it. The only money that we're going to be allocating to this thing upfront is the $30,000 to build the structure, and then that structure will be used time and time and time again at all of these locations without any more investment. And so what we expect to happen is that we'll develop these economic development -- we'll designate the economic development zones, we'll do our best to get preapproved permits from South Florida Water Management District, Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Corps of Engineers, and have a shovel-ready project; and to anybody coming here wanting to come here, that's a huge incentive, because you've got something ready for them to deal with. And so the landowner, many of them have already told us, they will donate land to the first person. That's a huge incentive. So you get that first person in, that first person builds their business, they hire employees, they -- that increases the value of the land, increases the tax revenue for that land. That initially goes to provide the incentive for the next company that comes in there. And then, as County Manager has stated, at some point in time this begins -- there's a sharing process, okay. They've got to start giving back to the taxpayers of Collier County. So it's designed to really make it self-sustaining and not have any financial burden on the people of Collier County. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you for that explanation. Okay, Mr. Mudd. MR. MUDD: So Commissioners, I want to make sure I'm Page 171 January 27,2009 getting three nods on the $30,000 not to exceed expenditure for Nabors Giblin to help us do the economic development zones as part of this particular process. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I mean, I think it's a great idea to have the structure. We wasted $30,000 just in staff time, all those people sitting in the back row discussing it. But this is a good thing. MR. KLATZKOW: And we'll be coming back to you-- MR. MUDD: Oh, yeah. MR. KLATZKOW: -- County Manager Mudd, because we're going to need some sort of advisory committee set up so -- to vet these ideas before we come to you for conclusions. I don't know who you want to use, an existing committee, or if you want to set up a different one, but this is going to need to be fleshed out, so we will be coming back. MR. MUDD: Commissioners -- and my last item, and then I'll be quiet, I promise. I just need to work out your schedules a little bit. Do you have one of these little calendar things on your -- by your seats? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. MR. MUDD: Okay. And you've got that heading looking thing that shows by month at the tops of -- just kind of look, and we'll go back and forth on what I've got on the overhead. I just kind of want to -- let's start with June. Okay. You'll have a June meeting on the 9th and the 23rd, but F AC, Florida Associations of Counties, will have their annual meeting in Marco Island the 24th, the 25th, and the 26th of June. Well, that's exactly the time that we would normally have our budget workshop, okay. So that causes a little bit of a dilemma, not much of a dilemma, but it causes a little bit if there's the chairman and/or any commissioners that want to go to the F AC conference that's here on Marco Island. Page 172 January 27,2009 So that logically leads us over to the handwritten note that's over to the side of my piece of paper right here that says, budget workshops on the 29th and 30th of June, and that would make it on that Monday and Tuesday of the last two days of June. Our recommendation is that we go a little bit later based on the way the dates and the days laid out with our mandatory requirements to report there by the 5th of August, that we have the board's meeting setting your ceiling on your millage rate on the 28th of July. So that would be -- your meeting in July would be on the 28th, okay. That leaves you the month of August. And let's come into September. Now, there's one little day in there that causes a little bit of a hiccup because Labor Day happens later in the year this year than it did -- normally it's on the 1 st or 2nd or whatever. It's on the 7th, okay. And it would be the day before your first meeting in September, and that kind of makes it a little awkward for the board. So -- and because you have three Tuesdays in September, our recommendation is in September we do the third and the fifth week for the boarding, and that would be the 15th of September and the 29th of September. Also wanted to note that you'll notice there's a handwritten piece over here that talks about what your budget hearings are. Your budget hearings, based on -- and we've already talked to the school board. They get to have first digs -- or digs (sic) as far as the dates are concerned in September. Your budget hearing would be -- your first one would be the 10th -- that would be three days after Labor Day -- and on the 24th of September, and that fits in with the third and the fifth week quite well, and your books will be delivered for your first meeting in September on the 10th. So you'd get those at the same time that we'd have the budget hearings in the evening. So that would kind of set pretty well. We'll have a normal schedule in November of two meetings on the 10th and the 24th, and we'll go back to your one meeting in Page 173 January 27, 2009 December, and that's December 8th. And I just wanted to talk to the board about our recommendation and at least get your concurrence as far as the schedule is concerned. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't have a problem, but I'm wondering why you want to have the budget hearing on the 29th and 30th rather than having the budget hearing before our last BCC meeting of June. It seems to me more logically to have it at that point in time before the BCC meeting than after it. MR. MUDD: Well, that just -- I was just trying to -- because a lot of commissioners prep on that Thursday and Friday when they get their books before that -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let's do it Wednesday and Thursday, 17th and 18th of June. That way if there's -- there are any other issues that we have to deal with formally, we can do so at our regularly scheduled meeting. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'd -- being that we have so many constraints, I would rather not rush on the budget. F AC is, what is it -- what'd you say, 24th, 25th, 26th? MR. MUDD: The F AC is -- they're here on the 2- -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: 23rd. MR. MUDD: They're going to start on the 23rd, but their -- meetings have it go 24, 25, and then they break by noon on the 26th. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MS. FILSON: Mr. Mudd, I can tell you that the commissioners all have the June meetings on their calendars. We don't have the September, but the July and the June budget meetings. MR. MUDD: Okay. I just want to get their approval before we try to schedule anything. I understand good staff procedures would try to set it aside to make sure if we have any issues. But I want to make sure that -- well, I don't want to do something that the board Page 174 January 27,2009 doesn't want to do. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm all for this. This looks fine. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, to finish up, I'm in favor of what's recommended. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So in other words, let me just see if I understand what now is recommended. Instead of having any meeting in July at all, we're going to have them all in June, budget -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- and everything? COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. You're going to have July 28th. MR. MUDD: July 28th will be your board meeting. You have to set your ceiling on your millage rates before the 5th of August, okay? And it just so happens you've got time before the 5th of August. Last year we didn't, and that's why we went on the third -- the third week in July instead of last week in July for the board meeting. CHAIRMAN FIALA: How does that work for our staff as far as having the budget meeting a month early? MR. MUDD: No. The budget workshop is a little bit later than we normally have it in June, but it works for us in order to get things resolved. We have enough time, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So the proposal to move that budget hearing up till -- what was it, June 17th? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that was my proposal, 17th and 18th we have the budget hearing, and that way it gives us a formal meeting period on the 23rd to take any final action if we wish to do so based upon those initial budget workshop results. So I think it is smarter to make it earlier rather than later. CHAIRMAN FIALA: But you have to weigh in on this, Mr. Mudd, because, you know, you know what staff can do and what time constraints they might have. MR. MUDD: What we tried to do is we tried to de-conflict this Page 175 January 27,2009 room, too, at the same time as we laid this schedule out. There's some Planning -- and I'm not saying that the board gives deference to the Planning Commission. I'm just saying the Planning Commission's got this room for the 18th, on the -- and that's what Leo was picking the phone up about. I know we went through that to figure out when this room was available, when things were set up and how we could do it. We would normally do it and forget about FAC because they would be out of county someplace, but because you're the host county, it kind of puts this board in a predicament. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And it would be nice if we were there, yeah. Okay. So-- COMMISSIONER HENNING: What are we doing? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well-- COMMISSIONER HALAS: I got a question. Is there any reason why the meeting that you've got planned for July 28th couldn't be the 21st? MR. MUDD: Yeah, it could be the 21st, but that -- that gets into people's breaks, and we try to give you some time that you, as a board, staff if they wanted to take vacations, they could. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, okay. Because I was looking. MR. MUDD: If you're going to the 30th of June, you pop to the 21 st. COMMISSIONER HALAS: It would open up more time off for August, and then if we had the 21st, then we'd be out of town. I mean, it's just an idea. MR. MUDD: Whatever the board wants to do. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Board members -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just throwing it out there for a suggestion. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- we have to give them some direction. Page 176 January 27, 2009 Mr. Mudd made suggestions. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You got two over here in favor of what's on the board. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right on the board up there. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioners, how do you feel about the stuff that's on the board? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that Commissioner Coyle brought up a good point here, that if we had the budget hearings on the 17th and 18th, as long as it didn't cause a huge conflict with other people that have this room scheduled, that might be beneficial so that on the board meeting on the 23rd, if there was any residuals, we could address them at that point it time. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: We could even do it the 16th and 17th, too, you know. The point is to try to get it done before that last board meeting, because I think there are always things that we can clean up following those budget hearings, and a perfect time to do that would be during the scheduled board meeting. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I just think that it would work out better for staff and everyone if we kept it with the 29th and the 30th. We have to -- staffs going to be busy with the agenda, with the changes to the agenda and everything else. Their docket will be cleared and they get right into the 29th and the 30th. And Mr. Mudd, how's -- is that what you're saying? MR. MUDD: Well, all the commissioners know, they've all been chairman, they know what happens Wednesday prior to the board meetings. I have a staff meeting to resolve any unanswered issues, if there's anything that comes up the commissioners want on the agenda at the last minute, we're able to plop it. We have a meeting -- I have a meeting with the chairman to make sure he or she is locked in as far as the agendas go, and then by five o'clock we go to the printer that Page 1 77 January 27,2009 Wednesday. Thursday morning the agenda shows up. That's the only issue that you have that week, and we can -- we can work around it. It's not much fun, but we can work around it. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'll go along with the 29th and the 30th then. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm done. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Look at it a different way. Let's suppose we went with the 29th and 30th of June. Now you're going to have to set the millage rate on July the 28th. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right. Now, let's suppose on the 29th and 30th of June you really aren't in a position to make a final decision on the budget. What are you going to do? You don't have another meeting scheduled between that time and the 28th of July when you've got to set the budget hearing. If you've got the budget finished earlier, like the week before our 23rd meeting in July -- in June, then you've got a board meeting scheduled there. You can make some final adjustments and final decisions about the budget. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So are you suggesting possibly June 15th and 16th, which is that Monday and Tuesday? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, whatever works. But I'll do it on Saturday and Sunday, I don't care. But the thing is that it's just smart, in my mind, to have a board meeting after the final budget hearing before you set the millage rate. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So -- Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Whatever works the easiest for staff. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll make a motion that we accept the schedule that's right here for the 2009 BCC meeting schedule as it's shown on the screen in front of us. Page 178 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: Madam Chair, I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I personally liked Commissioner Coyle's, but that was only on a personal basis. Nothing more. That was being a little selfish, so. Okay. I have a motion on the floor for the schedule to be as seen on our screen, and I have a second on that. (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any more discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. MUDD: I don't dare bring up anything more. I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Smart move. Okay. Let's start with you, Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What about the County Attorney? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry. MR. KLATZKOW: No, I'm good. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I want my commissioners to be a little patient. I originally had five items. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, maybe we better start at this side. No. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I took two items off, and I'll try to be brief with what I've got left. We never received a report from the Clerk regarding our Page 179 January 27,2009 investments; is that correct? We never received a point where he said he'll come in and make us a -- have we received any kind of reply? MR. MUDD: Commissioners, the Chairman signed a letter to Mr. Brock, Commissioner Fiala did, on the 20th of January, and gave him some dates in order to present based on information that he needed that was relayed to us by Commissioner Henning, and he still has some dates in February to do so, so we've-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we're getting down to the wire. We're going to be coming into the budget before long. We have to know where we stand. No one can do financial planning without knowing what their reserves are. They are what they are, and -- but we have no idea if we retained them, if we lost a small fraction, we lost a big part. And, meanwhile, we're talking about what we're going to do in the future year as far as budget goes, and we have no idea what we've got to fall back on. What I would suggest is, because of the seriousness of the nature of this whole thing, is that we send one more letter to the Clerk, that we actually schedule a date and a time for him, and ifhe doesn't find that to be -- if he finds that to be a problem, he can reply and let us know he won't be there. But I'd also include copies of the two previous letters that we sent. I think that might get us where we need to be so that we can get on with this and find out where we stand. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is that -- are the other commissioners in agreement with that? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I've got some nods here. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, my concern is, we've already sent him correspondence, and you've just recently sent him correspondence along with the first letter that was written by the previous chair, and we still haven't gotten any response. So I'm not Page 180 January 27,2009 sure what you're going to do or what you're going to accomplish by continually sending letters. And I'm not sure where we're going to end up with this. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Well, let me add one more little bit to it. One, we're going to be giving him a specific date and time to be here, and if it doesn't work, he'll have to get a hold of us. Number two, if you feel that we need to get his attention, let's also copy our governor, Charlie Crist, and the Attorney General. Does that get you where you need to be? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I guess so, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just -- the only thing I want is the report. I realize -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: I understand -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- the financial -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- exactly where you're at, but I think all 0 f us -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- situations out there are beyond anyone's control. But I just got to know what we got. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I understand where you're coming from, Commissioner. I think all of us have those concerns, but I don't know how we can go about to get a decent response for our question. And so that -- I have great concern, and I would hope that there would be other people out there that would hopefully get involved in this so that we can get to the bottom of this and figure out what's going on here in Collier County Government. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So do I have the support for a letter or not; that's the whole question. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I see three nods. Then the other part that I wanted to come back to you with is the -- back at a previous meeting I brought up about the possibility of finding a way to be able to waive zoning as it exists along with Page 181 January 27,2009 additional impact fees for a period of seven to ten years for an incubator-type business to be able to try to fill in some of the vacant properties we've got out there to be able to spur things forward. There seemed to be a little bit of interest in the whole thing, but at that point in time we never -- we never directed staff as best -- MR. MUDD: Oh, no, you did. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We did? Forgive me. My mistake. I didn't realize. MR. MUDD: And Mr. Schmitt and staff is coming back to you with that. That was part of my -- you talked about that at your workshop. That was on my list when I met with the EDC, and Mr. Schmitt had two of the items that you' specified. He's coming back to the board on the particular issue. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And the other part I wanted to report to you, I've been keeping you abreast of one little thing I was looking into, and that had to do with the possibility of bonding out impact fees over an extended period of time. I talked to you about it when I was thinking of going forward with it, and at that point in time I briefed you the letter, the white paper that I put together I sent to every one of the commissioners here also. I had that meeting with members of the business community and the builders' community. And to be honest with you, there was more questions than there was answers. They were very interested but not to the point where they were ready to say, yes, this is it. There wasn't enough flesh on the bone. The concern was if you have to finance it with bonds or you have to finance it through a conventional mortgage, what's the difference? Of course, the difference would be is that you're only going to pay for X number of years on it for the amount of time you're in there. I don't know where to take it past this point. Without -- and I don't know if we want to put staffs time in this or if we want to just hand it back to the EDC and the chamber of commerce. Page 182 January 27, 2009 But I'm looking for your input on this before I go in any other direction. I don't want to get any more involved until I hear from my fellow commissioners. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry. Which one is first? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Frank was first. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, here's what my concern is, Commissioner. We hear a lot of static about impact fees and how they're going to stimulate the economy. Until the banks release the money, there's nothing going to happen. And furthermore, with the amount of homes that are on the open market, and there's being more commercial that is being put on the market, and there's not -- there doesn't seem to be a real stimulus. And when I look at the Sunday paper and I see that homes that were priced at $350,000 are now at $199,000, and there's nothing moving in this direction, I'm wondering if -- to me, that's a real stimulus, 350,000 to 199,000. That addresses our affordable housing Issue. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, it does. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And nothing seems to be moving, okay. So I'm concerned about where we want to give -- release the impact fees that we worked so hard to establish here in this county so that we can go forward and make sure that the quality of life -- and that we address the issues that our citizens have been concerned about over the years. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I agree with you 100 percent. I was talking about bonding them out, getting the money upfront. COMMISSIONER HALAS: We already got them bonded out. Some of those impact fees are bonded. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, we got them against -- but the only thing I'm looking from you is, just say you don't think this is Page 183 January 27, 2009 worth pursuing, and I'll go on to other things. That's the only thing, you know. I mean, there's justifications for it. There was interest in it. But I just want to -- I want to make sure that there is enough interest on this commission for me and possibly to pursue it, and also if I'm going to pursue it, I would need an allotted amount of staff time to be able to get to the next step. But, hey, you're the people that are going to make the final decision, so enter in now and guide me along on this. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's a big world out there. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Well, to answer your question, I would say let's wait; and the reason I say that is, we already have tasked the staff to go out and investigate all sorts of things with respect to impact fees, including time payment plans, including time -- you know, financing those things. And it's my understanding they're going to come back and give us a report the next -- MR. MUDD: Next meeting. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- meeting. MR. MUDD: Eighth of February. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So let's see what -- you know, we've already tasked them. And they're meeting with representatives -- well, the stakeholders. And so we'll have the benefit of the stakeholders' input and the staffs analysis. One of the suggestions I had made I've talked with staff about, and after we've analyzed it, one of them doesn't seem to work, you know, and maybe the bonding thing won't work either. But let's hear their report, and then when we hear their report, we'll be in a better position to determine what we should do after that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I like that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But I -- I don't want to prejudge any effort to do something good. But I think we've got so much going on right now that we need to see that through for a few more weeks Page 184 January 27,2009 and then just, you know, react to it and provide the staff with additional guidance, however it turns out. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I thank you for that. And I have one last item, and I'll be quick about it. There's concerns by certain elements of the Golden Gate Estates community, and especially the Vanderbilt Beach corridor, but I'm not too sure who all's playing into it, but I know the civic association has expressed concerns over the fact that the Vanderbilt Beach Road corridor cross-section that they're aiming for is an urban cross-section rather than a rural one. And there's advantages and disadvantages to both. And after hearing Norm Feder (sic) explain it, I think it's the right direction that they're going with, with the fact that it's an urban one as far as how much land's going to be taken and the impact on the neighbors. There's other things that has to do with drainage. But the whole thing is, there's a part of our community out there that's left wondering where this is. I'd like us to direct staff to bring it back under presentations, make a 10-minute presentation on it at a future meeting just to be able to explain the difference between the urban and the rural cross-section and the reasons for it for the Vanderbilt Beach corridor. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'd like that education. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, it's for the public, too, of course. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. That does it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You're seeing some nods here so we'll ask Norm to please do that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just a question. Wasn't that part of our corridor management presentation? MR. FEDER: From the corridor that we defined for you is about a 200- foot corridor when we established the corridor and went out. That requires basically the urban cross-section. It's about 300 feet if Page 185 January 27,2009 you were going to go within rural, but we'll be happy to come back and go through that detail. But yes, all along we've said that we're going to try to stay within the 200- foot cross-section as we designed it. We've been able to do that within 200 -- a couple places a little bit more -- to get back down to grade, but it would be a much larger cross-section if we went to a rural cross-section. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Am I getting something confused? Is it because I heard this presentation at the Productivity Committee that I thought that we had had it at the Board of County Commissioners' meeting? MR. FEDER: No. Actually you're talking two different things, I think, Commissioner. What you're talking about is our right-of-way preservation corridor efforts. What we're talking about here is we went to a 60 percent design meeting on the Vanderbilt corridor getting ready to start acquiring other than whole-take parcels. There we showed them what -- our design as established within that 200-foot corridor, which does include curb and gutter and some retention areas as well as a swale on the side, which is required to receive the water coming to the facility. If you were to go a rural cross-section, which you also evaluated, instead of staying essentially within 200 feet, you'd be about 300 feet, which would be generally 100 feet more of taking on either side of the property and, therefore, more impactive. MR. MUDD: To add one more thing. There's more to this conversation besides feet, okay? Norman's and staffs tried to minimize, especially when you're taking property or homes or whatever, to minimize the cross-section that you need in order to make a six-lane road. Urban cross-sections, 200-foot, as he explained. A rural cross-section is 300- foot. When you do the urban cross-section and you go 200-foot, you also limit how fast you can go. You're now at 45 miles an hour. And Page 186 January 27,2009 we took a risk. The board took a risk when you upped the speed limit on Immokalee. MR. FEDER: Shh. MR. MUDD: Yeah, you did. When you went from (sic) Immokalee Road from 951 out to the fairgrounds when you increased it by five miles an hour. If you keep it rural and take more land, you can go at 55 miles an hour. You can go to 60, depending on the -- upon the -- where you're putting it. So the amount of land that you take, okay -- if you do it urban, you reduce your speed. That's the way it is. If you go rural and spread out, then you have places to go on shoulders, you can go over the medians and not flip over and those kind of things. You can go faster. And so, you get into a point in time -- there is a tradeoff, and the tradeoff is right-of-way space and speed that you can go on the particular road that you design. But Norman can bring that back and lay it all out for you. MR. FEDER: And impact to property. MR. MUDD: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, it's my turn. MR. MUDD: Do I have three nods to have Norman come back and tell you -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, uh-huh. MR. MUDD: -- just what I told you? COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I've heard it all before. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, yes. MR. MUDD: Or he can give you -- he can send the board a memo. But if it's -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I need it on the television so that I can have a link to it for the civic association to be able to see the reason why. MR. MUDD: Fine. We can bring that back instead of having a Page 187 January 27,2009 construction presentation. One meeting we could have Norman -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why don't we set up a workshop for Commissioner Coletta on his television station channel. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I like it. I can have Commissioner Coyle's proxy to be able to move forward. MR. FEDER: With all due respect, seriously, if that's really what we're trying to accomplish, we'd be happy to provide a memo to the board and go on the county television, which we could use in that form, along with the commissioner and make that explanation. I think that gets at what you're trying to do more directly, but we'll do it at the pleasure of the board. But honestly, I'd rather send you a memo on the particulars, show you the cross-sections as a board, then go onto the TV with Commissioner Coletta for his purposes, and then if the board looking at the information wants a further explanation beyond that, we'd be happy to come to the board. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. And while I -- I only said I have three items, I do want to tell you -- give you a coming attraction for the next comments that's going to take up at the next meeting. I want to discuss MSTU's for mediums (sic) as far as how we plant them and maintain them in the future. Data, that's it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: All righty. Good. At least you're giving us a heads-up on that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that in small, mediums and large? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's whatever you like. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, I was pretty close until we got to Item 15. I met with a constituent -- pretty excited about this item. He was -- he's part of an HOA who was tasked to take a look at energy Page 188 January 27,2009 efficiencies within the community. Ironically, FP&L guided him to this company here in Naples. On their streetlights they provide -- instead of the sodium lights, they provide LED lights. The payback is in a year and a half. Speaking to Mr. Feder, FP&L requires -- there's no -- there's a set fee for streetlights. And I don't know if we could work on that to where we could get them metered instead of a fixed fee. But we do have the community of Immokalee that is not serviced by FP&L. There could be a cost savings there. But also I'd like to give this information to the County Manager. You have, you know, your parks and your -- all your ball fields and maybe some of the facilities such as North Naples Regional Park where you have street- lighting in there, and kind of give us a report. Actually, I think it's a real good news item. And besides, I'm told it reduces our carbon footprint so we can slow down the climate change. I have a relative that is going to go back up to climate change in about another week or two, so -- that's all I have. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wouldn't dare. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, just one question. Getting back to what Commissioner Coletta was talking about where we buy additional right-of-way. Does this mean we'll have to take more homes? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. I never proposed we buy additional right-of-way. Gosh, you're trying to get me lynched? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, you're saying 300-foot right-of-way. MR. MUDD: If the board decides to do a rural footprint instead of an urban footprint, then, yes, you would have to buy more right-of-way. Page 189 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. MR. MUDD: Okay. And that's one of the things that you have to -- the biggest issue that I believe that Commissioner Coletta's got exactly what I described. You have a speed issue. Urban cross-sections you have a limited speed. You don't want to get more than 50 miles an hour; 45 is preferred. Rural cross-sections you can go 55, 65 on them, but you've got a bigger area. So the car pulls off to the side or can pull off to the median or whatever. If you've got a curb, you go over a curb in an urban section and it causes some really COMMISSIONER HALAS: I understand. I'm just -- MR. MUDD: That's the bottom line. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I got to follow up on that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So it ought to be interesting when the report comes back; is that what you're trying to tell us? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Honest to God, I just want a report. I don't want anybody to change anything. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I got to follow up on that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Of course. COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is getting very, very confusing for me, and if we do this to the public we're probably all going to get lynched. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Get lynched. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So I would be very careful about going on television and saying anything about broadening or even talk about going to an urban cross-section -- or rural cross-section. I think you'd be far better off having Tindale of Tindale and Oliver give his presentation about corridor management. That's a far smarter way to present it to the public because what it does is it minimizes the future taking of homes. MR. FEDER: Which is what we've done. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, the problem is that Page 190 January 27,2009 I've been sitting here asking questions about, has anybody made this corridor management presentation, and everybody, you know, has a blank look on their face. MR. FEDER: We have, and we have on this corridor specifically. The only thing I said differently is we have gone further on this corridor because we're in 60 percent design plans. That's general. We've done that. We did that many times, as you know, before we came to the board. We now have this corridor preservation. We're raising that out to the community. This is one ofthose corridors we're going to place that on, and so that presentation will be made in some more detail, regardless of this discussion in general on corridor management. We raised those issues during the process. We had 60 percent design. So in answer to your question, Commissioner, I agree. That information we're going to get out to the public as part of our corridor management efforts. We've already had some meetings. This one went further though because we went to 60 percent design plans is the only thing I was pointing out. CHAIRMAN FIALA: From here on in, I'm not calling on you first. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, my gosh. I'm telling you. Please don't. MR. FEDER: Again, I've got to raise to the board just for the discussion that you're having here and even Commissioner Coyle's comments, I still would request that you tell me if you want me to come to the board, I will, but we're raising this whole thing into another agenda item again. On many occasions we've had it. My question is, do you want information on this so it's clear, we don't confuse anyone on this, and then I meet with Commissioner Coletta and do what we need to make sure the community hears about corridor management as well as specifically the design on thisÍcorridor? Page 191 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Got it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, everybody needs to understand what corridor management is. MR. FEDER: I agree. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. FEDER: I agree. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But you don't need to go to the people on Vanderbilt Beach Road and lead them to the opinion that you are going to be taking more property and more homes. MR. FEDER: No. We specifically told them that we didn't do the rural because of just that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right. Good. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know how we got off the conversation of talking about Vanderbilt Beach extension when we were talking about Gulfshore Boulevard, right? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Actually, I thought it was Livingston. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Livingston. Oh, was it Livingston? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It was Livingston, right. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or was it -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Only with the months with an R in it? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Was it Gulfshore Drive? CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think we're getting a little punching, okay. And Commissioner Coletta, are you done? Are you finished? MR. MUDD: I think you're the only commissioner left. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm done as much as I want to be. If no one else wants to talk about the subject, I really don't either. Page 192 January 27,2009 Item #11 - Continued from earlier in the Meeting PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. But we had a gentleman walk in who drove in from Immokalee to speak under public comment, and although we're all ready to leave, I don't know how much audience you'll have, I'll give you three minutes, please. And if I need to, I'll relinquish my own time. MR. HEERS: I don't think that will be necessary. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know I don't have to. MR. HEERS: My name is Rick Heers. I'm the executive director ofI-HOPE. You folks did us a great honor by giving us a special proclamation about a month and a half ago or so. But I wanted to come and speak to you today about some challenges that we've been having to try to provide affordable housing. You folks, again, have shown us a lot of trust by approving grants through the CDBG/DRI-l projects. But I come today representing One-by-One Leadership Foundation that's building the first four homes under this project, one with SHIP funds and another with CDBG/DRI-l monies, and I'm on the board of One- by-One Leadership and helped write the grant that was approved, but I'm also coming on behalf ofI-HOPE as the executive director. And I just want to give you a brief historical synopsis of our challenges. In June of 2006, our contract was drafted, and -- or I'm sorry. We submitted a bid and were approved, and our contract was drafted in the fall of 2006 and was to go forward to you folks in December of 2006. After months of delays due to issues between Collier County and DCA, the contract was approved by the board in November of2007 after we had to replace all of the paperwork for the grant that had been lost somewhere in the internal organs of the Collier County. We did Page 193 January 27,2009 that at the -- it extended our time a little bit. The new housing and human services director very kindly predated our contract document to May of 2007 in order to allow us to include the -- many of the preconstruction costs, such as planning, qualification contractor engagement, and systems design. One was -- One-by-One was able to send our RFP's and engage a contractor in March of 2008, and in April of 2008, submitted a reimbursement on those preconstruction costs. After three-and-a-halfweeks, we were -- we inquired at a staff level why we hadn't received any word and were informed that all of our preconstruction activities were reclassified as administrative costs which were not covered by DRI regulations and DCA's interpretations. So after explaining our situation with DCA and HUD, HUD staff member by the name of Linda White -- we do have documentation of these emails and conversations -- we were told that if, indeed, our activities were what we described, then they are allowable costs. And she said that we should file a formal complaint; however, after these discussions -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: You're all done already. I don't know what you were here for, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Can I ask -- MR. HEERS: We have had -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The Clerk's not paying him. MR. HEERS: It is -- we've only gotten $20,000 -- we've completed our first of four houses, and we've only gotten $20,000 out of the -- from the Clerk's office from our -- when we signed our contract, we got $20,000, and we've gotten no more. And we also have -- we've met all the obligations. We responded excitedly to staff that said we would -- we're going to have a training session to teach all of you people that are doing funds how to properly fill out all the forms and meet all the dead- -- so we -- I had three of Page 194 January 27, 2009 my staff ready to go. They canceled the meeting at the last minute. And we said, well -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Who's they, Rick? They? Who's they? MR. HEERS: Marcy Krumbine called us and said it was canceled and that she didn't know if or when there would be another training session schedule, which we thought was a wonderful idea to try to alleviate these problems with saying, oh, you've got to fill out this form or that form or you've got to change this or change that. Well, then subsequently, you folks approved I-HOPE getting a refund, if you'll recall, of permitting fees. It took us four months last year to get our funds after we submitted all the paper. Once again, after four week -- after eight weeks, I called and said, why haven't we gotten our monies? Oh, we've lost your forms. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Who lost the forms? MR. HEERS: We were told the -- again, I was told this by Marcy Krumbine, that all of our forms were lost somewhere and we needed to resubmit them, which we did. And again, a month later, four months after we initially submitted them, we finally got our reimbursement. October 28th, I brought down personally all of the paperwork and the requesting almost $7,000 worth of reimbursement for permits that we had used. And I called the end of December and they said, oh, there's been a glitch in the -- Marcy said there's a glitch in the system. You'll have -- you'll get your money, but you need to call us sooner when you've not -- when you don't get your money. And here it is, end of January, and we don't have the money. I was -- I had sent out a notice to my board that we were shutting down our operations because we're out of money because some of our faith-based funders tomorrow are finally going to be sending us our funds that should have been here in December. So we operate on a very tiny budget, and we cannot keep Page 195 January 27,2009 extending ourselves. We're going to have to stop the work that we're doing. And we appreciate -- you folks have done a wonderful job of approving these -- this help. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think it's -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. Everybody wants to talk, and -- so we'll have to ask you to stop talking, okay. MR. HEERS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Look, there's a simple solution to this. Ask the County Manager to have Marcy Krumbine specifically identify what the problem is, and if it is with the Clerk, then you're going to have the most wonderful experience you've ever had in your life. You can go over and sit down with the Clerk and he'll tell you how anxious he is to help you, and then you'll leave and you still won't get paid, okay. But we've gone through this with other people who have the same problem. We have no control over the Clerk. If we did, things would move a lot more efficiently in this county. But nevertheless, since Marcy Krumbine is the person who has been giving you the reasons for these problems, we need to find out if it's Marcy Krumbine's problem or if it's the Clerk's problem. And the County Manager is the only one who can do that. We can't make a decision about that, okay? MR. HEERS: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Commissioner Halas, before you take off. He's clutching his books. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's exactly what I was going to MR. HEERS: Thank you. Page 196 January 27, 2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- refer to is that, as you said, they lost the forms, and I'm trying to figure out who's they. MR. HEERS: Me too. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, if it's the transition from Marcy Krumbine's desk to the Clerk, then that's where the problem lies, okay. MR. HEERS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner-- MR. HEERS: Thank you for allowing me to speak. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- Henning. COMMISSIONER COYLE: County Manager's going to work that out for you. MR. HEERS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I guess the comment that I heard that is concerning is about backdating documents, and I'd like to get to the bottom of that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Can you talk with the County Manager on that afterwards? I'm sure he'll help you. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I think the County Manager's the right person to go, and I believe that we're all universally tasking him to figure out what's going on and to resolve this. End of story. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Thank you. MR. HEERS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Everybody will be talking to you. MR. HEERS: I appreciate you allowing me to come in late. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioners, I appreciate your patience. It dragged out near the end. I tried to keep it on task, and -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's still dragging. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to adjourn. Page 197 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Then I won't give you my comments. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, no. Please do. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Withdraw my motion. CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's all right. It's all right. I'll save them till next time. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no. We're not going to move till you give them to us. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I was waiting for those. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is the high point of the day. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. Just wanted to thank you all for your help in making this a really great meeting and for your patience and see you next time. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You want a motion to adjourn? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Motion to -- yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Motion to adjourn by Commissioner Henning, second by Halas and Coletta. We're adjourned. ****Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner Halas and carried unanimously that the following items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted **** Item #16Al Page 198 January 27, 2009 FINAL AND UNCONDITIONAL CONVEYANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY FOR TREVISO BAY GOLF COURSE MAINTENANCE FACILITY - W /RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY Item # 16A2 FINAL AND UNCONDITIONAL CONVEYANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY FOR PROMENADE AT NAPLES CENTRE - W /RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY Item #16A3 FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE SEWER UTILITY FACILITY FOR TREVISO BAY AT SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD - W /RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY Item #16A4 FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR PRESERVE COMMONS - W/RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY Item #16A5 - Moved to Item #10J Item #16A6 THIS ITEM REQUIRES THAT EX PARTE DISCLOSURE BE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS. HAD A HEARING BEEN HELD ON THIS ITEM, ALL PARTICIPANTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE SWORN IN. RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT Page 199 January 27, 2009 OF DIAMANTE ESTATES DI NAPOLI, APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY - W /STIPULA TIONS Item #16A7 BLAS ELIAS AND BERT EISENBUD, OF E'S COUNTRY STORE, REQUESTS A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) FOR TWENTY-EIGHT CONSECUTIVE WEEKENDS (SATURDAY AND SUNDAY), AL TERNA TING BETWEEN THE LOCATION AT THE CORNER OF GOLDEN GA TE BOULEVARD AND WILSON BOULEVARD, SECTION 03, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, AND THE LOCATION AT THE CORNER OF OIL WELL ROAD AND IMMOKALEE ROAD, SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, FIVE ADDITIONAL MONTHS BEYOND THE SUM TOTAL TWENTY-EIGHT DAY TIME LIMIT THAT IS ALLOWED BY THE LDC DURING THE 2009 CALENDAR YEAR TO OPERATE A MOBILE SMOKEHOUSE COOKER, AND TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO PAY THE TWO HUNDRED DOLLAR FEE, PER LOCATION, TO ENCOMPASS THE ENTIRE REQUESTED LENGTH OF TIME - FOR OPERATING A PORTABLE SMOKER, SERVING ONLY CUSTOMERS IN THE CONVENIENCE STORE AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL STATE HEALTH REGULATIONS Item # 16A8 RESOLUTION 2009-13: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE ROADWAY (PUBLIC) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR Page 200 January 27,2009 THE FINAL PLAT OF MISSION HILLS SHOPPING CENTER WITH THE LOOP ROAD AND ASSOCIATED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING MAINTAINED BY COLLIER COUNTY. THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION WILL MAINTAIN THE INTERNAL PAVING AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE SHOPPING CENTER - W /RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY Item # 16A9 AN IMPACT FEE REIMBURSEMENT REQUESTED BY STOCK CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF PLAYERS COVE DEVELOPMENT, LLC, TOTALING $58,262.16, AND A REIMBURSEMENT OF THE ALLOWANCE FOR FUNDS PRUDENTLY INVESTED TOTALING $2,229.32 DUE TO THE CANCELLATION OF A BUILDING PERMIT - PERMIT NO. 2008051917 CANCELLED ON AUGUST 21, 2008 Item #16AI0 WAIVING THE ASSESSMENT OF LOT MOWING COSTS RELATED TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18523 ROYAL HAMMOCK BLVD., COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE NUMBER CENA20080012474 - IN THE AMOUNT OF $125 FOR A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT WAS TEMPORARILY UNDER WATER Item #16All RELEASE AND SA TISF ACTIONS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS FOR PAYMENTS RECEIVED - COST FOR RECORDING IS $10.00 PER RELEASE. TOTALING $190.00 Page 201 January 27, 2009 Item #16A12 - Continued to the February 10,2009 BCC Meeting AN AMENDMENT REVISING ORDINANCE NUMBER 05-44 TO CLARIFY THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE'S ROLE IN THE IMPOSITION OF NUISANCE ABATEMENT LIENS Item #16Bl EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A PERPETUAL ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT REQUIRED FOR THE V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168, PHASE II (FISCAL IMPACT: $11,900) - FOR A .38 PORTION OF AN ACRE LOCATED IN TRACT 90 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT 17 Item #16B2 CONTRACT #09-5121, TO AZTEK COMMUNICATIONS, PRECISION CONTRACTING SERVICES, INC., AND OSP MANAGEMENT, INC. FOR FIBER OPTIC INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR. ANNUAL EXPENDITURES ARE ESTIMATED AROUND $750,000 - FOR ROUTINE AND EMERGENCY WORK DISTRIBUTED AND BASED ON THE QUOTE FOR SERVICES AND ABILITY TO MOBILIZE IN EMERGENCIES Item #16B3 BID #09-5160, AIRPORT ROAD (COUGAR TO VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD) ROADWAY GROUNDS MAINTENANCE TO Page 202 January 27,2009 HANNULA LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION, INC. IN THE ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENDITURE OF $76,767.65 (FUND NO. 111 COST CENTER NO. 163865) - FOR APPROXIMATELY 2.6 MILES OF LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION Item # 16B4 BID #09-5153, GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU/MSTD ROADWAY GROUNDS MAINTENANCE TO HANNULA LANDSCAPING & IRRIGATION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $267,418.64 - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Item #16B5 BID #09-5152 IMMOKALEE ROAD (TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH TO STRAND BL VD.) ROADWAY GROUNDS MAINTENANCE TO HANNULA LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION, INC. IN THE ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENDITURE OF $90,525.48 (FUND NO. 111, COST CENTER NO. 163888) - FOR APPROXIMATEL Y 3.5 MILES OF LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION Item #16B6 BID #09-5040R, INCLUDING ALTERNATE #1, FOR CONSTRUCTION OF OLD US 41 STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENTS PHASE 2, PROJECT #511331 TO DAVID FOOTE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $645,982.75 PLUS A 10% CONTINGENCY- LOCATED WITHIN THE ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY SOUTH OF THE COLLIER COUNTY AND THE LEE COUNTY LINE CONTINUING SOUTH TO THE INTERSECTION OF OLD US 41 Page 203 January 27,2009 AND NEW US 41 Item #16B7 BID #09-5108, "ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR CONCRETE SIDEWALK AND CURB MAINTENANCE" TO BQ CONCRETE, LLC AS PRIMARY VENDOR AND DESIGN-BUILD ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS, INC. AS SECONDARY IN THE ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $150,000 - FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF CONCRETE SIDEWALKS AND CURBS ON COUNTY ROADWAYS Item #16B8 BID #09-5150, CONSTRUCTION OF ST. ANDREWS BOULEVARD PHASE II STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT #51140.1 TO HASKINS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $138,863.50 PLUS A TEN PERCENT CONTINGENCY - LOCATED WITHIN THE ST. ANDREWS BOULEVARD ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND PLATTED DRAINAGE EASEMENT WITHIN THE LEL Y GOLF ESTATES UNIT NO.2 Item #16B9 RESOLUTION 2009-14: A SUBCONTRACTED TRANSPORTATION PROVIDER (STP) AGREEMENT, FINANCIAL PROJECT NUMBER 41604318201 BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE FLORIDA COMMISSION FOR THE TRANSPORT A TION DISADV ANT AGED FOR AN AWARD IN THE AMOUNT OF $251,519.00 FOR THE PROVISION OF TRANSPORTATION FOR QUALIFIED MEDICAID RECIPIENTS - FOR THE MONTHS OF JANUARY, 2009 THROUGH JUNE, Page 204 January 27, 2009 2009 FOR NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Item #16Cl WITHDRAWAL OF THE IMMOKALEE DISPOSAL, INC. PETITION FOR AN EXTRAORDINARY RATE INCREASE ASSOCIATED WITH FUEL COSTS - FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: FUEL COSTS HAVE DECREASED AND IMMOKALEE DISPOSAL DID NOT WISH TO DISCLOSE THEIR FINANCIAL INFORMATION IN DETAIL AS OUTLINED IN THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR DISTRICT II Item # 16C2 RESOLUTION 2009-15: A SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AL TERNA TIVE WATER SUPPLY GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000 FOR PARTIAL FUNDING OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT SAND SEPARATORS, PROJECT #71052 - FOR FILTERING THE RAW WATER SUPPLY THEREBY INCREASING THE LIFE OF THE DOWNSTREAM CARTRIDGE FILTER ELEMENTS Item #16C3 CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PERMIT RENEWAL OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PERMIT FOR INJECTION WELL #2 AT THE NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $461,011- REQUIRES RENEWAL EVERY FIVE YEARS FOR THE Page 205 January 27, 2009 DISPOSAL OF CONCENTRATED WASTE STREAM CREATED WHEN TREATING WATER Item #16C4 - Moved to Item #10L Item #16C5 BID #08-5097, "ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR CHLORINATOR EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE" TO WATER TREATMENT & CONTROLS, COMPANY IN THE ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $80,000 - TO PROVIDE PREVENTATIVE AND REACTIVE MAINTENANCE AT PUMPING SITES WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY Item # 16C6 BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $65,000.00 TO FUND THE CLOSE-OUT OF THE PELICAN BAY FIRE & IRRIGATION WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT #74023 - ENSURING LONG-TERM RELIABILITY OF PELICAN BAY'S FIRE PROTECTION WATER SYSTEM BY CONVERTING THE FIRE PROTECTION WATER SUPPLY WITHIN PELICAN BAY FROM IRRIGATION QUALITY TO THE COUNTY'S POTABLE WATER SYSTEM Item #16Dl PARKING LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH VANDERBILT REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS, LP, FOR TEMPORARY PARKING FOR BEACH MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT AT AN ANNUAL COST OF $6,000 - LOCATED AT 239 VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD, FOR A THREE YEAR TERM BEGINNING NOVEMBER 1, 2008 Page 206 January 27,2009 AND ENDING OCTOBER 31, 2011 Item # 16D2 LIEN AGREEMENT WITH EDGAR DOMINGUEZ MARTIN AND BARBARA DOMINGUEZ (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER- OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 36, BLOCK 11, NAPLES MANOR LAKES, EAST NAPLES - DEFERRING $29,948.82, PROPERTY BEING DEVELOPED BY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY LOCATED AT 5301 JENNINGS ST. Item #16D3 RESOLUTION 2009-16: APPOINTING REPRESENTATIVES TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION'S DIVISION OF RECREATION AND PARKS ADVISORY GROUP ESTABLISHED FOR THE PURPOSE OF UPDATING THE DELNOR-WIGGINS PASS STATE PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN - APPOINTING COMMISIONER FRANK HALAS, DISTRICT #2 AND MARLA RAMSEY, PUBLIC SERVICE ADMINISTRATOR, AS THE ALTERNATE Item #16D4 AGREEMENT PROVIDING A $250,000 STATE HOUSING INITIATIVE PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) GRANT TO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY, INC. FOR THE ACQUISITION AND/OR REHABILITATION OF AT LEAST FIVE (5) RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS TO BENEFIT HOUSEHOLDS EARNING LESS THAN 120% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME - TO BE COMPLETED WITHIN TWELVE Page 207 January 27, 2009 (12) MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE AGREEMENT Item #16D5 SUMMARY OF IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL AGREEMENTS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL IN FY09, INCLUDING THE TOTAL NUMBER OF AGREEMENTS APPROVED, TOTAL DOLLAR AMOUNT DEFERRED AND THE BALANCE REMAINING FOR ADDITIONAL DEFERRALS IN FY09 - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Item # 16D6 SUB RECIPIENT AGREEMENT FOR $275,000 WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY (CCHA) TO PROVIDE TENANT BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE (TBRA) FOR APPROXIMATELY 38 LOW INCOME FAMILIES IN COLLIER COUNTY AND COMPRISED OF $250,000 IN HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (HOME) FUNDS AND $25,000 IN MARCO ISLAND AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUNDS - PROVIDING UP TO ONE (1) YEAR TENANT BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE FOR ELIGIBLE PARTICIPANTS Item #16D7 - Withdrawn LIEN AGREEMENT WITH JEAN BAPTISTE SERGOT SOUVERAIN AND MARIE EDITH SOUVERAIN (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 38, LIBERTY LANDING, IMMOKALEE - DEFERRING $12,442.46 IN IMPACT FEES Page 208 January 27,2009 Item #16D8 SUBMITTAL OF A 4-H FOUNDATION, INC. GRANT APPLICATION REQUESTING $50,881.00 FOR 4-H OUTREACH COORDINATORS AND THE ENHANCEMENT OF OUTREACH ACTIVITIES MANAGED BY THE COLLIER COUNTY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA/IFAS EXTENSION DEPARTMENT - PROVIDING EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES IN SCHOOL AND AFTER SCHOOL IN COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITIES Item # 16D9 AGREEMENT WITH COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES (CHS) FOR $221,603 AND AN AGREEMENT WITH THE AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (AHCA) TO PARTICIPATE IN THE LOW INCOME POOL PROGRAM WHICH WILL GENERATE AN ADDITIONAL $275,265 IN FEDERAL MATCHING FUNDS PAID DIRECTLY TO COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES FOR MEDICAL SERVICES FOR THE MOST MEDICALL Y NEEDY IN COLLIER COUNTY - COVERING THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2008 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2009 FOR SERVICES AT THE MIKE DAVIS MEDICAL CENTER (FORMERLY HORIZONS) AND OTHER FEDERALLY QUALIFIED SITES Item #16DI0 BCC CHAIRMAN, ACTING AS CERTIFYING OFFICER, TO SIGN A DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY FORM, DESIGNATING THE DIRECTOR OF HOUSING AND HUMAN SERVICES AS THE CERTIFYING OFFICER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS REQUIRED FOR FEDERALLY FUNDED GRANT Page 209 January 27, 2009 PROJECTS - DELEGATING MARCY KRUMBINE AS COLLIER COUNTY'S RESPONSIBLE FEDERAL OFFICIAL Item #16Dll AMENDMENT #1 TO A SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH BIG CYPRESS HOUSING CORPORATION'S HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (HOME) AND CHDO'S "SET ASIDE FOR (55) FIFTY-FIVE UNITS" PROJECT APPROVED NOVEMBER 13,2007 (ITEM #16D28) FOR $250,000 WHICH WILL ALLOW FOR THE FINAL PAYMENT OF $47,488 TO BE MADE TO BIG CYPRESS AS REIMBURSEMENT FOR EXPENSES INCURRED FOR ELIGIBLE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE AGREEMENT EVEN THOUGH LEASING OF THE UNITS IS NOT COMPLETE - FOR THE RESERVE AT EDEN GARDENS (CONTRACT #M-07-UC-12-0017) FOR MIGRANT WORKERS IN THE IMMOKALEE AREA Item #16D12 BUDGET AMENDMENT TOTALING $317,667.32 FOR THE CR 951 BOAT RAMP PARKING LOT EXPANSION PROJECT- DUE TO SUBSTANTIAL PROJECT ENHANCEMENTS AND REGULA TORY AGENCY REQUIREMENTS Item #16El PUBLIC ASSISTANCE SUB-GRANT AGREEMENT FOR TS FAY SO THE COUNTY CAN SUBMIT TO FEMA FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF $15M - PROVIDING FEDERAL AND STATE REIMBURSEMENT ASSISTANCE FOR EXPENSES INCURRED DURING THE PREPARATION AND RECOVERY Page 210 January 27,2009 OF TROPICAL STORM FAY IN AUGUST, 2008 Item #16E2 - Moved to Item #10K Item # 16E3 AWARD RFP #08-5131, "SECURITY SERVICES" TO W ACKENHUT CORPORATION FOR GOVERNMENT SECURITY SERVICES AT AN ESTIMATED ANNUAL COST OF $995,237 - FOR A ONE (1) YEAR PERIOD PROVIDING SECURITY SERVICES AT THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE, GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS AND ASSORTED PUBLIC FUNCTIONS Item # 16E4 PAYMENT OF GROUP INSURANCE ACTUARIAL CONSUL TING FEES TO WILLIS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $61,772.50 - FOR ACTUARIAL WORK COMPLETED IN FY08 FOR THE IMPLEMENT A TION OF THE NEW INCENTIVE BASED WELLNESS PROGRAM Item #16E5 RESOLUTION 2009-17: AUTHORIZING THE COMMISSION CHAIRPERSON TO EXECUTE DEED CERTIFICATES FOR THE SALE OF BURIAL PLOTS AT LAKE TRAFFORD MEMORIAL GARDENS CEMETERY DURING THE 2009 CALENDAR YEAR - ON LITTLE LEAGUE ROAD IN IMMOKALEE Item # 16E6 Page 211 January 27, 2009 FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR THE CONTINUED USE OF TEMPORARY OFFICE SPACE FOR THE GUARDIAN AD LITEM OFFICE DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW COURTHOUSE ANNEX BUILDING AT AN ANNUAL COST NOT TO EXCEED $14,162.63, PROJECT #525331 - LEASE RENEWAL IS ON A MONTH- TO-MONTH BASIS FOR SPACE IN THE COURT PLAZA, NORTH OF THE GOVERNMENT CENTER ON AIRPORT ROAD Item #16Fl BUDGET AMENDMENTS - ISLE OF CAPRI FIRE DISTRICT (#09-142) AND GENERAL FUND (#09-143) Item # 16F2 SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE OF 49 OPTICOMTM EMITTERS FOR USE IN COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES VEHICLES IN THE AMOUNT OF $87,465.00 - FROM TRANSPORTATION CONTROL SYSTEMS OF TAMPA, FLORIDA, GIVING EMS VEHICLES THE ABILITY TO PREEMPT TRAFFIC SIGNALS ALLOWING FOR SAFE PASSAGE OF EMERGENCY VEHICLES THROUGH TRAFFIC LIGHTS AND FOR EFFECTIVE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT Item # 16F3 RESOLUTION 2009-18: APPROVING AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FY08-09 ADOPTED BUDGET Page 212 January 27,2009 Item #16F4 CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR NCH HEAL THCARE SYSTEM FOR NON-EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE AND APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING AND APPROPRIATING THE $250 ANNUAL RENEWAL FEE - RENEWED ANNUALLY FOR POST HOSPITAL INTRAFACILITY TRANSPORT Item #16F5 BID #09-5156 TO STRYKER SALES CORPORATION FOR THE PURCHASE OF 30 STAIR CHAIRS FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $59,493.00 - FOR MOVING EMS PATIENTS ON STAIRS Item #16Gl SWEA T EQUITY GRANT AGREEMENT(S) BETWEEN THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND A GRANT APPLICANT(S) WITHIN THE BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA (3180 CALEDONIA AVENUE) - IN THE AMOUNT OF $837.32 Item #16G2 TWO GRANT AGREEMENTS WITH THE FLORIDA AIRPORTS COUNCIL (F AC) IN THE AMOUNT $5,000 EACH, AND APPROVE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO PROVIDE WAGES, LIVING ASSISTANCE AND/OR TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES FOR ONE INTERNSHIP Page 213 January 27, 2009 PROGRAM FOR THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT AND ONE INTERNSHIP PROGRAM FOR THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT DURING THE SPRING OF 2009. THESE GRANTS DO NOT REQUIRE MATCHING FUNDS - FOR STUDENTS INTERESTED IN PURSUING CAREERS IN AIRPORT MANAGEMENT Item #16Hl COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER ATTENDED THE US COAST GUARD AUXILIARY CHANGE OF WATCH CEREMONY ON JANUARY 16,2009 AT THE MARCO ISLAND YACHT CLUB ON MARCO ISLAND, FL; $55.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT 1400 N. COLLIER BLVD. Item # 16H2 COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER WILL ATTEND THE MARCO ISLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY'S TIME CAPSULE AND BEERIAL CEREMONY ON FEBRUARY 3, 2009 AT THE MARCO ISLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY MUSEUM'S BUILDING SITE ON MARCO ISLAND, FL; $25.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT 1264 MISTLETOE COURT, MARCO ISLAND Item # 16H3 Page 214 January 27,2009 COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER WILL ATTEND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL'S PROJECT INNOVATION SERIES ON JANUARY 8, 2009; JANUARY 15,2009; FEBRUARY 19, 2009; MARCH 19,2009; APRIL 16,2009; AND MAY 20,2009 AT THE NAPLES BEACH HOTEL AND GOLF CLUB IN NAPLES, FL; $200.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT 851 GULF SHORE BOULEVARD NORTH Item #16H4 COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER WILL ATTEND BROADWAY IN THE STACKS ON FEBRUARY 8, 2009 AT THE SOUTH REGIONAL LIBRARY IN NAPLES, FL; $25.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT 8065 LELY CULTURAL BOULEVARD Item #16H5 - Continued from the January 13,2009 BCC Meeting COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETTA ATTENDED THE 2009 EVERGLADES COALITION CONFERENCE, JANUARY 9-11, 2009. $190.00 FOR CONFERENCE REGISTRATION FEE (MEALS A-LA-CARTE); $190 FOR CONFERENCE TALKS (INCLUDED MEALS); $454 FOR ACCOMMODATIONS (INCLUDES $56 IN PARKING); AND $5.00 IN TOLLS (ALLIGATOR ALLEY); FORA TOTAL OF $839.00 TO BE PAID Page 215 January 27,2009 FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Item # 1611 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various departments as indicated: Page 216 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE January 27, 2009 I. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED: A. Minutes: I) Animal Services Advisorv Board: Minutes of November 18, 2008. 2) Bavshore/Gatewav Triangle Local Redevelopment Advisorv Board: Minutes of November 4, 2008. 3) Collier County Planning Commission: Minutes of October 22,2008 wi Productivity Committee; November 6, 2008 regular session. 4) Contractors Licensing Board: Minutes of October 15,2008. 5) Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agency: Agenda of December 17,2008. Minutes of November 19,2008. 6) Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisorv Board: Agenda of December 17, 2008. Minutes of November 19,2008. 7) Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee: Agenda of December 17,2008 joint meeting wi CRA. Minutes of November 19,2008 joint meeting wi CRA. 8) Parks and Recreation Advisorv Board: Minutes of November 19, 2008. 9) Pelican Bay Services Division Board: Agenda of October 1,2008; November 5, 2008. Minutes of October 1,2008; November 5, 2008. 10) Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee: Minutes of December I 1,2008. January 27, 2009 Item #1611 DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 03, 2009 THROUGH JANUARY 09, 2009 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD Item # 1612 DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 10,2009 THROUGH JANUARY 16,2009 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD Item #16Kl STAFF'S PROPOSAL TO (1) DENY MRS. CYNTHIA DENNIS PRAY'S REQUEST THAT THE BOARD WAIVE THE FEDERAL LOAN GRANTED TO HER BY COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING AND HUMAN SERVICES, (2) SEND A WRITTEN DEMAND TO RECOVER THE FUNDS, AND (3) NOT INITIATE LITIGATION AGAINST MRS. PRAY - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Item # 16K2 STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $910,000 FOR PARCEL 115FEE IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V ROBBIE I. RAYBURN, ET. AI., CASE NO. 07-4268-CA (SANTA BARBARA BLVD. EXTENSION PROJECT #60091 AND LEL Y AREA STORM WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT #511011) (FISCAL IMPACT $122,200) Page 217 January 27,2009 Item #17A RESOLUTION 2009-19: PETITION AVESMT-2008-AR-13809, TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN TWO DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ORIGINALLY CREATED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 2130, PAGES 1078-1081 AND SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF FIDDLER'S CREEK PHASE FOUR, UNIT TWO, AS FILED IN PLAT BOOK 45, PAGES 40-47 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SITUATED IN SECTION 11 & 14, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THE VACATED EASEMENTS BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A Item #17B RESOLUTION 2009-20: PETITION A VPLAT-2008-AR-13888, TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN THAT PORTION OF A 20 FOOT WIDE DRAINAGE ACCESS EASEMENT FOR DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE OVER LOT 9, BLOCK B, SHOWN ON THE RECORD MAP KNOWN AS PALM RIVER ESTATES UNIT NO.7 AND FILED IN PLAT BOOK 12, PAGES 28 THROUGH 30 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND SITUATED IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A Item #17C RESOLUTION 2009-21: VA-2008-AR-13601, OKEECHOBEE Page 218 January 27,2009 INN, LTD, REPRESENTED BY GINA GREEN, P.E. OF GREEN ENGINEERING, INC., IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM LDC SUBSECTION 4.02.27, SPECIFIC DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE IMMOKALEE-ST A TE ROAD 29A COMMERCIAL OVERLAY SUBDISTRICT, TO PERMIT ACCESS TO STATE ROAD 29 FOR A P ARCEL HAVING LESS THAN THE MINIMUM 440-FOOT STREET FRONTAGE WIDTH. THE 9.04- ACRE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF STATE ROAD 29, JUST NORTH OF THE LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD INTERSECTION, IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, IMMOKALEE, FLORIDA. (CTS) Item #17D RESOLUTION 2009-22: CU-2008-AR-13639, CORPORATION OF PRESIDING BISHOP OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS, REPRESENTED BY ALAN BREWER OF REYNOLDS, SMITH AND HILLS, IS REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A CHURCH IN THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMIL Y (RSF-3) ZONING DISTRICT, AS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 2.03.02.A.l.C.2 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) THE 4.63-ACRE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 4935 23RD COURT SW IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. (CTS) Item #17E RESOLUTION 2009-23: SV-2006-AR-I0482, SEASONAL INVESTMENTS, INC. D/B/A FAIRWAYS RESORT, REPRESENTED BY TIM HANCOCK, AICP OF DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC., IS REQUESTING FIVE VARIANCES FOR Page 219 January 27,2009 AN OFF-PREMISES SIGN. THE FIRST VARIANCE IS FROM SUBSECTION 5.06.04.C.16.B.I. OF THE LDC WHICH ALLOWS A MAXIMUM SIGN AREA OF 12 SQUARE FEET FOR A DOUBLE-SIDED OFF-PREMISE DIRECTIONAL SIGN TO PERMIT AN 80 SQUARE-FOOT OFF-PREMISE SIGN. THE SECOND VARIANCE IS FROM SUBSECTION 5.06.04.C.16.B.II. OF THE LDC WHICH ALLOWS A MAXIMUM SIGN HEIGHT OF 8 FEET IN HEIGHT ABOVE THE LOWEST CENTER GRADE OF THE ARTERIAL ROADWAY FOR AN OFF-PREMISE DIRECTIONAL SIGN TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM SIGN HEIGHT OF 20 FEET. THE THIRD VARIANCE IS FROM SUBSECTION 5.06.04.C.16.BJII. OF THE LDC WHICH REQUIRES THAT A SIGN IS LOCATED NO CLOSER THAN TEN FEET TO ANY PROPERTY LINE TO ALLOW A SIGN WITHIN ZERO FEET OF A PROPERTY LINE. THE FOURTH VARIANCE IS FROM SUBSECTION 5.06.06.Z. OF THE LDC WHICH PROHIBITS ANY SIGN WHICH PUBLICIZES AN ACTIVITY NOT CONDUCTED ON THE PREMISES UPON WHICH THE SIGN IS MAINTAINED TO ALLOW AN OFF-PREMISES SIGN. THE FIFTH VARIANCE IS FROM SUBSECTION 5.06.06.AA. OF THE LDC WHICH REQUIRES THAT NO SIGN SHALL BE PLACED OR PERMITTED AS A PRINCIPAL USE ON ANY PROPERTY, IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PIPER BOULEVARD AND PALM RIVER BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. (CTS) Item #17F RESOLUTION 2009-24: CU-2008-AR-13391, BISHOP FRANK J. DEW ANE, DIOCESE OF VENICE, REPRESENTED BY Page 220 January 27,2009 MARGARET PERRY, AICP, OF WILSONMILLER, INC., AND BRUCE ANDERSON, ESQUIRE, OF ROETZEL & ANDRESS IS REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE EXPANSION IN THE RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY (RMF-12) ZONING DISTRICT PURSUANT TO COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SUBSECTION 2.03.02.C.l.C. THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE WILL SUPPLEMENT THE EXISTING RESOLUTION NUMBERS 98-173 AND 04-220 BY ADDING FOUR (4) LOTS TO BE USED FOR CHURCH AND SCHOOL RELATED USES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO A CHAPEL, CHURCH/SCHOOL RELATED OFFICES, RELIGIOUS GOODS STORE (NOT TO EXCEED TWO THOUSAND (2000) SQUARE FEET), PRIESTS RESIDENCES, AND PARKING FOR CHURCH AND SCHOOL USES. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 5280 28TH AVENUE S.W. AND 2780 52ND TERRACE SW, IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. (CTS) Page 221 RECEIVED FEB 1 7 2009 January 27,2009 Board 01 County Commissionets ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order ofthe Chair at 4:16 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL /L~- dA4. DONNA FIALA, Chairman ATTEST: DWIGH;FE': 13R.Q<;:K, CLERK .. . "~-I '>, ' e.,~ , ~.. ~hL'O( ~ttttt.. ,to,...,;. -." ,JQtI,turf . (;,; .or-....... , These minutes approved by the Board on ifl iftt I dD(f1 , as presented V or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS. Page 222