BCC Minutes 05/14/1996 R REGULAR MEETING OF HAY 14, 1996,
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COHMISSIONERS
LET IT BE REHEHBERED, 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 districts as
have 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: John C. Norris
Bettye J. Matthews
Timothy J. Constantine
Timothy L. Hancock
Pamela S. Hac'Kie
ALSO PRESENT: W. Neil Dorrill, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Item #3
AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Call the County Commission meeting to order on
the -- on May 14, 1996.
Mr. Dotrill, will you lead us in an invocation and pledge to the
flag, please.
MR. DORRILL: Heavenly Father, we give thanks this morning for the
wonder and beauty that you have bestowed on this community and its
people. Father, we give thanks to you for the wonderful quality of
life that we enjoy in Collier County as we live or enjoy retirement
years or raise a family or start a business. Father, we thank you for
the dedication and the direction and vote of the County Commission
today as they make important decisions concerning the business of this
community. We thank you for the support staff and the citizens of
Collier County that choose to participate in their government process,
and as always we pray that the vote and direction of this commission
today would, in fact, be a reflection of your will for Collier County
and its people. We pray these things in your Son's holy name. Amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Do we have changes to the agenda today, Mr.
Dotrill?
MR. DORRILL: Yes. Good morning, Commissioners. We have just a
couple of changes this morning.
I have one item that we would like to continue for three
weeks until your first meeting in June which will be the meeting of
June the 4th. That's item 8(C)(1). It's under community development
-- excuse me -- public services, rather, which is a recommendation
concerning a developer contribution credit. That will be continued
until June the 4th, 8(C)(1).
I have two items that I would like to move off of the
regular consent agenda and onto the regular consent agenda for a
presentation and suggestion. The first one is under public works.
It's item 16(B)(3). It is moving and will become 8(B)(1) on the
regular agenda. That's to approve a budget amendment to fund the
final design of that portion of the landscape beautification project
for the Davis Boulevard medians in two phases between U.S. 41 to
County Barn Road.
The other item is under public services, and it's --
item 16(C)(1) is moving and will now become 8(C)(2).
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Dotrill, is that moving
because Ms. Chernoff's name was spelled wrong, or what?
MR. DORRILL: I don't know. This is the item pertaining
to the approval of the board of directors for the Collier County
Fair.
MR. OLLIFF: There are a number of typographical errors,
and that's the only reason we have actually handed out corrected
resolutions that have correct names and titles on them, but that's the
only reason for that.
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yeah. I had noted for the
record to correct her name. That was the one that was really obvious
to me but --
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Do we usually pull items for
typographical errors?
MR. DORRILL: Not usually.
COHHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I have no trouble leaving
that one on there -- on the consent agenda and then letting the
typographical changes be made.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Likewise.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Make the necessary changes.
Holly Chernoff and not Churnall (phonetic). COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Churnobal (phonetic).
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Chairman, we have one add-on item,
then, this morning, and it will be under proclamations and
presentations. It's item 5(A)(4), and it will be a special
proclamation in recognition of Collier County Law Enforcement Week.
And that's at the request of the commission offices, and that's all
that I have this morning.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Weigel, anything?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, two items. In regard to the 16(B)(3)
with the typographical corrections, the record should reflect those
corrections to be made including John Yonkowsky's name to be added to
the resolution with the appropriate title with the fair board.
Secondly, I would request item 16(E)(2) concerning
tourist development-- excuse me -- yeah, tourist development and
money with a film commission agreement be moved to the regular
agenda. Mr. Dotrill can tell us where that will move to if that's
your pleasure.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Is that at your request?
MR. WEIGEL: It's my request, yes. There are some
inconsistencies for the executive summary in the consent agenda and
the agreements that have been provided by Lee County.
Neil, 16(E)(2) I am requesting be moved to the regular
agenda.
MR. DORRILL: And that will become 8(E)(4).
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: 16(E)(2) was it?
MR. WEIGEL: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Ms. Matthews, do you have any changes
today?
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: The only other change that I had
was 16(E)(2). I wanted to move it.
I would also like to note that on the record Mr. Weigel
was saying 16(B)(3) for the typographical corrections, and I believe
it's 16(C)(1).
MR. WEIGEL: Pardon me if I did.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Hancock?
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Commissioner Hac'Kie?
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Commissioner Constantine?
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I have one. I have one item
under communications, but I would like to add item 5(A)(5), and that
will be a recognition proclamation for John Lundsford. They're having
a little celebration for John later in the week.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: 5(A) (5).
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Is that going to be tongue in
cheek?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Is this one on the agenda?
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I think it is if you flip the
page.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: All right. No problem. Then we need
a motion.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion
to approve the agenda and the consent agenda as amended.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second for our
agenda.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed are none.
Item #4A
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 23, 1996 - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
We have some minutes.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Motion to approve the regular
meeting minutes of April 23, 1996.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second to
approve the minutes.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
There are none.
Item #5A1
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE WEEK OF HAY 12-18, 1996 AS KATHLEEN
PASSIDOHO WEEK - ADOPTED
Mr. Billie, if it's going to be your intention to stand
up the whole time, could I ask you to move to one side or the other,
because the camera there for the folks at home I believe you're
blocking.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Actually, I think he meant to one
side of the room or the other, because there's a camera behind you
that tries to get the picture of the commission.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: And the speakers.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: And the speakers, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you. That's fine.
5(A)(1) is a proclamation. Is Kathleen Passidomo here?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Kathleen, you need to come right up
here.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Whereas, juvenile crime has been
identified as a significant problem in our region; and
Whereas, Kathleen C. Paddisomo has served as the
founding Chairman of the Collier County Juvenile Council Inc.; and
Whereas, Kathleen C. Paddisomo provided the leadership
that increased Council membership, created viable Council committee
structure, and formulated a County Council Plan; and
Whereas, Kathleen C. Passidomo worked diligently to help
secure the D.R.I.L.L. Academy for juvenile offenders in Collier
County; and
Whereas, Kathleen C. Passidomo has worked in concert
with the Collier County Commission and the Collier County Sheriff's
Office to find a suitable location for a much-needed juvenile
detention center; and
Whereas, Kathleen C. Passidomo has been instrumental in
bringing together partners whose focus is to establish a juvenile
assessment center in Collier County,
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of HAy 12th to
the 18th, 1996, be designated as Kathleen C. Passidomo Week.
Done and ordered this 14th day of HAy, 1996. By the
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida.
And, Board Members, I would like to make a motion that
we accept this proclamation.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Opposed?
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: See, we said we had a real
academy proclamation.
MS. PASSIDOHO: I had no clue.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: If you would like to say a few words,
you can use that microphone.
MS. PASSIDOHO: If you don't mind, I would. Do you know
something about the state of my health that I don't? This s -- I had
no clue. Thank you very much.
But I do want to say that everything that I have done
with regard to our Juvenile Justice Council and juvenile crime in this
community has been in collaboration and cooperation with so many
people, and as I think back over the last four years, every one of you
and your predecessors have come to meetings, have given us advice, and
have given us time, effort, money.
People on the Juvenile Justice Council meet regularly.
The school board, all of the members, the members of the school
administration, the sheriff and his staff, I mean -- I think this
should go to everybody. I mean, this is really a wonderful thing,
and -- and maybe if you change the name from Kathleen Passidomo to
community -- I don't know -- something week. But I really -- I really
appreciate it. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you for all your help.
(Applause.)
Item #5A2
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE WEEK OF HAY 18-24, 1996 AS NATIONAL SAFE
BOATING WEEK - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: National Safe Boating Week,
Commissioner Hancock.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Yes. Is Lieutenant Commander
John R. Carey here? Mr. Carey, would you please --
MR. CASEY: Mr. Casey.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Casey, I'm sorry.
Mr. Casey, it's my pleasure to read the following
proclamation.
Whereas, each year more Americans are choosing
recreational boating as an ideal way to relax with their families and
friends; however, what starts out as a pleasant cruise often ends in
tragedy because boaters fail to teach their families to swim, fail to
properly equip their craft with personal floatation devices and other
protective equipment, or fail to instruct their passengers in the use
of such devices prior to a boating cruise; and
Whereas, every year hundreds of lives are lost in
boating accidents. These fatalities can be reduced, and boating made
more pleasurable, if those who engage in it will emphasis knowledge,
care, and the courtesy necessary for safe boating; and
Whereas, the Congress of the United States having
recognized the need for such emphasis has, by a joint resolution of 4
June, 1958 requested the President to annually proclaim one week as
National Safe Boating Week.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of HAy 18
through 24, 1996, be designated as National Safe Boating Week.
Done and ordered this 14th day of HAy, 1996. Signed
John C. Norris, Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, it's my pleasure to make a motion to
accept this proclamation.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
There are none. That's accepted.
MR. CASEY: Yes. I would just like to thank the Board
of County Commissioners and Collier County for this proclamation and
would just like to through this medium let you know that the Naples
safe boating course is several times a year, and we hope to make the
waters safer around Florida. So anyone who wants to give us a call,
we'll happily put you in our course. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you, Mr. Casey.
Item #5A3
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE WEEK OF MAY 19-25, 1996 AS EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES WEEK - ADOPTED
Emergency Medical Services Week, Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes. If Dianne Flagg is here --
if she would come up to accept this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: She was here earlier. Oh, there
she is.
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good morning.
Whereas, emergency medical services is a vital and
irreplaceable public safety service; and
Whereas, the paramedics of the Collier County Emergency
Medical Services Department are ready to provide lifesaving care to
those in need 24 hours a day, seven days a week; and
Whereas, access to quality emergency care dramatically
improves the survival and recovery rate of those who experience sudden
illness or injury; and
Whereas, emergency medical services providers have
traditionally served as the safety net of America's health care
system; and
Whereas, the paramedics of Collier County Emergency
Medical Services Department engage in thousands of hours of
specialized training in continuing education to enhance their
lifesaving skills; and
Whereas, members of this community benefit daily from
the knowledge and skills of these highly trained individuals; and
Whereas, it is appropriate to recognize the value and
the accomplishments of the Collier County Emergency Medical Services
Department by designating Emergency Medical Services Week.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of Hay 19
through 25, 1996, be designated as Emergency Services Week.
Done and ordered this 14th day of Hay, 1996, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, John C. Norris,
Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I move we accept this proclamation.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second for
acceptance.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
There are none. That's accepted.
Is Sheriff Hunter present?
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Dianne wanted to say something.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Oh, Dianne wanted to say something.
MS. FLAGG: Mr. Chairman, if I could --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Sheriff Hunter, you're going to come
up right after Dianne says something.
MS. FLAGG: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, and Mr.
Dotrill, on behalf of my colleagues, I would like to thank you for
your commitment and trust in the lifesaving skills of the over 100 EHS
paramedics and pilots who on a daily basis dedicate their lives to the
lives of others. EHS Week is a very special time for us providing us
the opportunity to reflect on the many lives we have had the privilege
to save. It is also recognized that without the commitment by
yourselves to assuring that paramedic vehicles are available to meet
the growing needs of our community that we realize these lives could
have been lost. For this we gratefully thank you.
The Collier County EHS Department was recognized as
achieving the best cardiac patient outcomes in the State of Florida.
I would like to introduce you to Mr. William Pew who eight years ago
died on a golf course in Naples, Florida, and was brought back to life
by Battalion Commander Theresa Ortengren and Lt. Fugella (phonetic).
Mr. Pew.
MR. PEW: Good morning, Commissioners. It's very
glad -- I'm very glad to be here, and as she said, eight years ago I
was gone for around 35 minutes, and I'm here. I still have my mind, I
think, and I enjoy life. I will go back like -- when I was given the
information from EHS, and I looked at the -- they have -- look at my
notes here -- you know, because they didn't put anything in my head,
but they put something in my heart.
Let's see here -- anyway -- there's around 200,000
people lives in Collier County and in Naples here, and they make --
made last year 25,000 calls. That means one out of 16 people in this
room or in Collier County is going to have to call 911 EHS for
service. And these girls are -- and the paramedics and the EHS, all
of them are so well trained that they sure took care of me, and I love
them for it. I would like to have them come up so I can give them a
little hug for doing what they did do.
(Applause.)
Naomi and Terri, and they're the ones that worked on me
when the EHS wagon arrived, and isn't that nice? Still enjoying it.
We have something to give them today. It's called the Collier County
EHS Department, the EHS prayer. And I was thrilled when I came in
this morning standing out in the hall hearing the Board of Commission
saying a prayer before their meeting. That means they're sincere
about what they're trying to do. And we all have to be more sincere
each day as this country keeps falling. And here's the EHS prayer.
As I perform my duty, Lord, whatever be the call, help
to guide and keep me safe from dangers big and small. I want to serve
and do my best no matter what the scene. I pledge to keep my skills
refined, my judgment quick and keen. This calling to give of myself,
must do not understand -- most do not understand, but I stand ready
all the time to help my fellow man. To have a chance to help a child
restore his life with glee. A word of thanks I might not hear, but
knowing is enough for me. The praise of man is fine for some, but I
feel truly blessed that you, oh, Lord, have chosen me to serve in
EHS.
Isn't that great? I want to present one here and,
Terri, too -- also. And I want to thank you again for all your -- for
all you've done.
They even come and kept checks on me there like I was
going to jail or something here. When they first came on their
machine where they took how my heart was acting, showing that it
wasn't acting at all. And then they started giving me the -- the
shocks. They gave me four shocks when I was laying there. Nothing
happened. As you can see on here, my heart wasn't going at all, and
they put me in the EHS wagon for dead.
On the way back into Naples they shocked me for the
fifth time, and I started to breath, and then they put a thumper on me
and kept the process of keeping my heart beating. And they put a tube
down my throat to give me enough oxygen, and I think I was fully
restored.
But I would like to tell you just a little bit of what
this second life has meant to me. I was an electrical engineer in
Detroit for 40 years. I owned one of the biggest electrical companies
in Detroit. I built panels for General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler
that made -- made most of them -- that made automation work on the
engine line. That's the block and the head and the assembly line.
You have all seen it on TV. All of these robots and all that are
going around and performing all of the work and that. Well, I started
in that back in 1949, and so I was a little baby. I grew up with it,
but the best thing about it is I didn't have any competition, because
all the old electrical engineers at Ford, General Motors, and
Chrysler, they knew power, but they didn't know anything about
electronics.
But God had taken me, and I didn't realize it at the
time, but here I was. We lost our home in Detroit where I was born,
and we was one of those that you see loading up your possessions on a
car and driving out leaving your home because you couldn't afford to
stay there longer. We went up to my granddad's farm in Canada, and
there I was raised. Went to school in Canada, four years of Latin,
and four years of French, and four years all of that British history
and all of that. Me milking cows. I didn't pay much, you know,
attention to it, so I totally flunked out my second year. But my
teacher was so gracious. She told -- or he told me that I wouldn't
even make a dumb farmer, but God had other plans in my life.
And I came back to Detroit when I was 18 years old. The
second world war was coming along. It was on. I knew I was going to
get drafted. So I went down to join the Navy. I spent four years in
the Navy, and then unbeknown to me, the Lord was behind me. Here I
was a flunk-out. I was standing in line, and the chief petty officer
comes along, taps me on the shoulder, and the only thing he asked me
is how was you in math in school? I says not too bad. He says take
this Eddie Test, and if you pass it, they will send you to radio
school. I took it, I passed it, and they sent me to Texas A&M.
And now I wanted to learn, because I had worked at Excel
as a file clerk for three dollars an hour. A dollar a day on the
farm. And I seen those electrical engineers making 18-20 bucks a
hour. Now I wanted to learn. I went to Texas A&M. I came out as an
honor student, and then they sent me to Corpus Christi for radar.
Again, I came out as an honor student. They kept me for an
instructor, and the commander of the base -- oh, I haven't even got
started. Let it go.
I -- after it was all over with and I got back home, I
hated English, but I set down and started to write a book. And when I
was writing, I started thinking -- not the way a pastor or a priest or
a theologian or a rabbi, any of them think. I was thinking the way a
layman would. It had to be a fact. If I say this is a microphone,
you're going to agree with me. So it had to be a fact.
So I wrote this book called "Second Chance," and in it I
tell about what happened to me. The second chapter is written by the
people that saved my life. Then I go out through and talk about where
we're all born equal. Why. The death of the American home. I think
we all see that coming. And why communism is still a threat. I wrote
about it seven years ago what's happening today, and yet -- that's
what I wrote about that.
Going into the founding of America, and told how to
found. Told how this country is founded under God. And everything
that's written was either influenced or quoted from the Bible.
Fifty-two of the fifty-five founders was Godly people. They quoted
from the Bible. That's all disappeared from our government pretty
well today. And then I talk about that. And America's plague of
immorality, I talk about that. Just turn the news on. And America's
last chance.
And there's one thing I would like to say, if anybody
wants this book, and if they will send $5 into the EMS, I will give --
donate all the books that they want. And you can read about what it
is like to have a second chance. And all the money will be given to
them. I don't care what they do with it. They can buy more
equipment. Maybe they can go out and have a little fun, whatever they
want to do. But I will gladly supply all the books that anybody
requests free of charge.
And I know I got to get out of here. I have so much to
say. But just one thing I want to tell you. There's nothing more
sure than death, but there's nothing more unsure of when it's going to
take place. And everybody in this room -- not everybody, but the
majority of the people, in 30 years will meet their death. Are they
concerned where they're going to be spending eternity? I told you I'm
not a preacher. I'm a layman, and I got thinking about where I was
going to be spending eternity, and I got involved -- that very, very
highly in the Alliance Defense Funds. My book got into Ed Nees'
hands, the attorney general in Washington, and Bill Bright, James
Dobson, and many more of the spiritual leaders across America, and we
started what they called the ADF Organization and --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Pew, we're going to need to get on
with our meeting.
MR. PEW: All right. Here is our standard. Just let me
tell you what we stand for, please. A national alliance funding the
legal defense and advocacy of religious freedom, the sanctity of human
life, and family values. That's what we're -- I'm in there. I'm
working harder than I ever did before to restore America back to it's
Godly principles.
Thank you for your time. I wish you would give me
another hour.
Item #5A4
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING HAY 13-17, 1996 AS COLLIER COUNTY LAW
ENFORCEMENT MEMORIAL WEEK - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Is Sheriff Hunter still here?
Sheriff, if we could get you to come up and face the
camera, please. We have a little proclamation this morning.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Good morning. I believe Chief Rambosk
is out here. Was he not called in?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Have him come on in.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Chief Rambosk, are you here? If
you are, could you come in and join us.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Yes, come on in, Chief. Now we're
ready.
Whereas, the 15th day of HAy of each year has been
designated by the State of Florida as Law Enforcement Memorial Day;
and
Whereas, the 13th to the 17th of HAy have been
designated by the Sheriff of Collier County as Law Enforcement
Memorial Week in Collier County; and
Whereas, this is a time to remember all law enforcement
officers who gave their lives to serve and protect the safety of the
public; and
Whereas, it is fitting that we recognize and honor the
Collier County sheriff's deputies who have died in the line of duty:
Bill Hutta, 1931; Manrice Anglin, 1972; Allen Amos, 1979; Corporal
A.Q. Ned Howell, 1983; Corporal Mark Carlton Caperton, 1984; Sergeant
Roy A. Williams, 1991.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of HAy 13th to
the 17th, 1996, be designated as Collier County Law Enforcement
Memorial Week.
Done and ordered this 14th day of HAy, 1996 by the Board
of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida.
And, Board Members, I will make a motion that we accept
this proclamation.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I will second that
proclamation.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I have a motion and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
That's accepted.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Do I get the opportunity to say just a
few words?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: If you would like to say a few words.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Six minutes or less.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Thank you. I would like to remind all
in the audience that this is Law Enforcement Memorial Week, and it
certainly includes law enforcement officers of all agencies including
our municipalities who also serve the cause in public safety. I would
like to thank the Board of County Commissioners for recognizing this
week as memorial week. I would like to also thank you for calling the
names of our fallen deputy sheriffs, our six.
I'm here gladly, and I feel it a privilege to represent
the survivors of all of our law enforcement officers who were killed
in the line of duty, and I would like to add that there were 160
killed in the line of duty in 1995 alone and hundreds, literally
hundreds and hundreds, who were injured both permanently and
temporarily in the line of duty just last year.
Again, thank you, Board, for this recognition and for
the recognition of the survivors and those who have fallen. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you.
Item #5A5
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING JOHN LUNSFORD AS AN OUTSTANDING CITIZEN -
ADOPTED
Commissioner Constantine, I believe you have the next
item.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: The next item I can read,
however, it's supposed to be a surprise. Tomorrow there is a
luncheon, or is it a dinner?
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: Dinner.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Dinner, thank you, for John
Lundsford, recognizing his efforts on behalf of the community, and we
have a short proclamation recognizing those efforts and applauding
those efforts, and I would just like to make a motion that we pass
that. It will be read in its entirety and accepted by Mr. Lundsford.
Hopefully it's still a surprise unless he's watching television this
morning.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: He has better things to do.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Tomorrow Commissioner
Matthews will give that presentation. So I make a motion we approve
the proclamation for Mr. Lundsford.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: Second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
That's accepted.
Item #5B
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS - PRESENTED
Service awards, Commissioner Matthews.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yes. We have two today and two
that have been with the county for a longer period than I have. Of
course, that's not hard either. Is Ed Perico here today? He has
been -- he's with our building review and permitting department 10
years.
And this next one is truly a honor to award somebody a
20-year pin. Ron Cook with housing and urban improvement.
Twenty-five is next. Thirty.
Item #5C1
MICHAEL DOWLING, REAL PROPERTY DEPARTMENT, RECOGNIZED AS EMPLOYEE OF
THE MONTH FOR HAY, 1996
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Is Michael Dowling here today?
Michael?
While Michael is coming up here, I would like to read a
couple of things here. With almost six years of service to Collier
County, Michael has earned a superior rating for the majority of those
years. He has been commended by client departments for his knowledge
and expertise in the field of leasing for the Board of County
Commissioners and other constitutional officers. Working within short
time frames he has performed his duties with diligence and
professionalism. He has consistently proven to be an exceptional
employee and individual. Without any reservations he was nominated
and selected as the employee of the month for Hay, 1996.
Mr. Dowling, I have here a letter for your file. It
says, it is indeed a pleasure for us to announce your selection as
Collier County's Employee of the Month for Hay, 1996. This
well-deserved recognition is for your valuable contributions to the
county through your work in the real property management department.
This honor includes an exceptional performance plaque as well as a $50
cash award, which I am proud to present to you. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
Item #5C2
FIFTEEN YEAR SERVICE PIN TO GEORGE KELLER AND HIS IMPENDING RETIREMENT
FROM COUNTY GOVERNMENT - PRESENTED
Mr. Constantine, I think you have the next one.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I do. You know, all
proclamations and awards are a joy to give away, but this one is
particularly enjoyable for me. George Keller, come on up here.
We have -- those of you who even mildly follow what goes
on in Collier County know George. He's been with us for a long time
and been very, very active. There's two things here I want to read.
The first is an outstanding citizen award awarded to George F. Keller
in recognition of your loyalty and dedication to Collier County and
its citizens, your willingness to share your insights and constructive
criticisms, and your 15 years of faithful service to the Board of
County Commissioners. We hereby present you with this certificate of
recognition.
And then, actually, this one not only has a certificate,
but we have a 15-year pin here as well for you.
The Board of Collier County Commissioners takes pleasure
in recognizing George F. Keller for the highest order of sensitivity
to matters of public interest and concern, for unselfishly devoting
untold hours to auditing of local government and process, and for
generously sharing his own conceptual framework of pertinent issues
with the public and with the Board. He well evidences the
Jeffersonian axiom that the closer government is to the people, the
better our democracy can function.
This is presented on the occasion of his completing 15
years of service to the public before the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, and upon noting with regret -- this one I simply don't
believe -- his intention to retire from participating in the process
of local government.
I suspect we'll still see you here from time to time.
With the recommendation of county manager Neil Dotrill
and the advice and consent of the Board this 14th day of Hay, 1996,
John C. Norris, Chairman, Board of County Commissioners.
Mr. Chairman, I don't know if we need a motion or not to
approve these items.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Hake one anyway.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I will make one to approve
the recognition of George F. Keller for his outstanding service.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: We'll all second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second for
recognition of outstanding service. All those in favor, signify by
saying aye.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: George, you know where the
microphone is, don't you?
MR. KELLER: Unaccustomed as I am to public speaking, I
don't intend to give you my life history. However, I do wish to thank
you for this award. When you gave me the 10-year award, the newspaper
never mentioned it. I hope that they have at least the courage to
acknowledge this one. As you may know, I lead the fight against the
sales tax, and since then they have never mentioned my name again.
I appreciate this very much. I have been in Collier
County 27 years, and I got very much involved in civic affairs in the
last 15 years. I was one of the organizers of the tax action group of
the Collier County Civic Federation, and I also was one of the
organizers of the tax action group. So I would just like to -- just
say a few words and thank some of the past people who were very, very
active in this county. Carl Gilsow, Wade Schroeder, Ira Evans, Henry
Maxant. They were all very good friends of mine and advisors, and
they have now passed away. Then there are some living people. Earle
Davis, Elbert Tripp, Holly Hagee, Jim HcGrath, and Fred Terrant, who
have also been close advisors with me and to me, and they have helped
me immeasurably in bringing some important facts before this County
Commission.
And I really do want to thank each and every one of you
and all past County Commissioners who have at least given me the
opportunity to express some opinions. I want to thank my wife, Sandra
Keller. She has been very tolerant. I spent a lot of hours going
over county papers and attending county meetings, and I'm quite sure
that it disrupted her life somewhat, but it sure increased the
benefits of my life.
Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
Item #SB1
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO FUND THE DESIGN OF LANCSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION
PROJECTS ON DAVIS BOULEVARD BETWEEN U.S. 41 AND COUNTY BARN ROAD -
APPROVED
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay. We'll move along now to item
8(B)(1), which is the former 16(B)(3), Mr. Dotrill.
MR. DORRILL: Yes, sir. This will be in two parts. We
have a fairly routine item Mr. Conrecode will present. Then I want to
update the board on our being eligible for state FDOT grant
opportunities on all state roads, and I will do that at the conclusion
of his item.
MR. CONRECODE: For the record, Tom Conrecode from your
public works division, and 16(B)(3), now 8(B)(1), is approval of a
budget amendment that goes with the action you approved on April 2nd
to fund final design on phase one of the Davis Boulevard median
beautification and both permanent area and final design on phase two
of the Davis Boulevard median beautification. This action simply
provides us with the funding -- the transfer of those funds to carry
out the previous direction of the Board.
But in addition to that the Collier County Naplescape
Group has proposed the option of doing a master plan effort -- a
phase-one master plan effort at this point to go forward with really
the first step in getting us into the cycle for FDOT grants on a much
broader scale in a larger number of roadways throughout the
community.
So if the board so desires, we can bring that action
back at another board meeting and go forward with really the next step
of the process.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Tom, I believe that would be
consistent with the direction we gave at the time this item was
brought forward as a potential MSTU countywide, so I, for one, would
like to see that brought back.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I will make a motion to direct
staff to bring the item back to the Board of County Commissioners in
accordance with the presentation that was made under the county MSTU.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Motion and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
None.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Chairman, I thought Mr.
Dotrill was going to give us an update on the grant process. We have
been listening to county grant processes now for two or three years.
And I asked him yesterday if we're missing grants, and he said
probably.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely we are.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And I want to ask this board if
in the current budget cycle that we're going through that we consider
a grant writer and fund that person with administrative fees from
grants that we actually received as a result of the grant writer's
effort. And possibly even have that person on a small salary from the
commission so that we can somewhat control the grants they write for,
because matching grants we're not interested in. There's no point in
spending their time. But we can't do that without some sort of small
salary. But I would like that included into or some investigation
into it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So would I.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I would like the opportunity to
look at it myself.
MR. DORRILL: I have made that note, and I think we have
the direction. Collier Naplescape needs a vote of thanks for heeding
your advice the last time they were here for working diligently with
their own money to get us grant eligible. There is a final phase that
we can bring back with a budget amendment. The requirements and the
application for the FDOT street-scape grants are extensive. They have
done all of the necessary work to get us grant eligible on state road
segments throughout the county that, frankly, are currently going to
Sarasota County, both the city, the county, because they seem to be
the only county in the district, in the Bartow District, that are
taking advantage of that. So we need to thank them, and I would like
to have a proposal for you to look at within two weeks.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Chairman, do we still need a
motion on item 8(B)(1) -- a motion to approve item 8(B)(1)?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Motion and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
Thank you, Mr. Conrecode.
The next item, 16(C)(1), we determined that we were not
going to pull off of the consent agenda; is that correct? So we will
move forward to --
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I think we determined not to.
Item #8D1
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL/CHAMBER COALITION'S DISASTER RECOVERY TASK
FORCE STATUS REPORT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS - PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: -- 8(D)(1), disaster recovery task
force status report. Who's going to handle that?
MR. PINEAU: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record my name is Ken Pineau, the county emergency management
director. As you know, I think we are changing our strategic plans
for the residents of our community. This overwhelming population that
we're getting down here makes it virtually impossible for everybody to
evacuate that think they want to evacuate. It's literally going to
take weeks to get everybody out. So with that in mind, I think the
biggest effort that we're trying to make right now is to prepare,
remain in place, not only for your individual homeowners but for the
businesses as well. We estimate that there are more than 90 percent
of the businesses nationwide, especially small businesses, have no
concept whatsoever of disaster planning. Those that do are going to
fair quite nicely. It's been proven, most recently in Hurricane
Andrew in south Dade County, that those that had plans were able to
get back up and running in a very short period of time that had some
sort of protection for their businesses. If they didn't have a
customer base before the storm, they certainly had one after the
storm, and those that had a plan maintained those customers, and they
have maintained them up to the present time. So it's very important
that we do have some disaster planning activities for the general
business community.
Also, those that have no plans, they're not going to be
dealing with their workers. We have found that in Dade County, for
example, a large portion of the skilled workers are going to go
elsewhere, and they're not coming back. It's going to be a tremendous
loss to the local economy.
So having said that, Kim Anderson and John Ayres about a
year ago established through their leadership a disaster recovery task
force here in the community, and we have been meeting frequently,
almost on a monthly basis for the past year. And we have broken the
task force up into 11 different subcommittees. This will strengthen
our ability to get things back up and running immediately, or
hopefully immediately, after a storm. We hope that we won't have to
exercise this this year. Of the 11 committees -- actually 11
committees, 10 of them are going to be a part of this session that
we're going to have on the 13th of June at the Telford Center to
establish or to help these small business owners to develop a plan.
The llth committee is the modeling committee, and we hope that next
year we'll be able to incorporate all of the things that we -- that we
can gather from developing this plan into a statewide exercise that we
had just recently. So of the 11 committees -- and I'll go through
these just briefly.
Banking. We have had a tremendous support from the
various banking organizations. Up to last year they probably weren't
speaking to each other, but now we have plans to develop ATHs -- bring
ATHs in here almost immediately with generator backup power. They
will stop the -- the fees for ATHs. If it's a non-member customer,
they can to go any bank as long as the disaster is in progress, and
use any ATH fees -- ATH machines. Limiting -- or I think -- each
bank, I think, will establish levels of check cashing, probably in the
200 to $500-range. And in Hurricane Andrew that really wasn't a
problem. You'd think that a lot of people are going to be ripping off
the banks, but it was a very small problem over there in Dade County.
Construction was another one. We're trying to establish
a network that would have the various major dealers bringing in
construction equipment and stuff like felt and shingles and things
like that for -- for home rebuilding. Food and water.
One of the major problems we're having is the fact of
identification. We have a couple hundred thousand people in our
community now, and we don't know if they are members of our community
or not. So what we are trying to do is come up with an identification
methodology were, as you read in the newspaper this morning, they
would have decals on their vehicles, both for the business and the
private community homeowners. And actually buttons. This is going to
cost some money, though. We're trying to establish a methodology in
how we can do that with you.
Insurance. I think one of the big problems we're having
these days is people need to be educated as to the requirements for
flood insurance and homeowner's insurance. That is rapidly changing.
This -- this area now is changing every day. The JUA is starting to
scale down -- that's the Joint Underwriters Administration in
Tallahassee -- but it's going to be increasingly more difficult to get
insurance, and I think people have to be very up on the things that
they need to do about getting that.
Law enforcement. We're working very closely with the
City of Naples Police Department and Emergency Services as well as the
Sheriff's Office to have a very coherent plan as far as law
enforcement activities.
Medical. Not only from the fire service side but the
public health unit and EHS. We're trying to establish
first-aid stations in several selected spots within the community
that's hardest hit to provide basic first-aid immediately after the
event. We could have these HASH hospitals coming in a little later
on.
Power and fuel. Power and fuel is a -- we know we're
going to lose electricity. One thing that I didn't know up until a
couple months ago was the unavailability of fuel down here. I sent
out a survey to 62 service station owners. And to my knowledge it's
only one service station here in the county that has a generator for
their -- for their tanks. So everyone else is going to just shut down
operations until the electricity is restored. So we're going to have
to do a little bit better job on educating those people.
Sanitation. Just get the word out that we have to start
separating trash, both from a homeowner point of view and the business
and make things a lot easier than they had been for us, not only here
but in Dade County.
And telecommunications, of course, Gary Arnold and Jim
Keeting from WNOG have been working diligently, and I think we have
come up with a fairly coherent plan for us in that area as well. Does anyone have any questions?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Tell us again what the date is on this
program.
MR. PINEAU: The date for the meeting for the small
business owners is going to be on the 13th of June from 7 to 9 p.m. at
the Telford Center, and we hope that we have a very good turnout. We
did it last year. We had between 75 and 80 people up at the Naples
Beach Club. And so this is the second generation for that.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: It looks like a lot of what
you're doing is actually going to carry over and help the people that
live here, not just the businesses. MR. PINEAU: Absolutely.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: And on both fronts I think you're
to be commended for working with the EDC and Chamber to do this, and I
appreciate their involvement greatly.
MR. PINEAU: Well, we have a lot of support from not
only the people in local government, but as well as the Chamber and
the Economic Development Council. Kim Anderson and John Ayres and
Elly have been absolutely tremendous. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Great.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Ms. Clear (phonetic), do you have
something to say?
MS. KRIER: For the record I am Ellie Krier with Chamber
EDC Coalition. I would like to acknowledge that Ms. Anderson and Mr.
Ayres are here -- they have co-chaired this effort for the last
year -- and simply tell you that our efforts are targeted at that area
of recovery in particular which is not government's purview but which
the community needs. And business wants to be there so that not only
are our citizens able to continue their lives, but as we have
discovered, and Mr. Pineau said, after Andrew a lot of small
businesses after the interruption of their business never went back
into business. And we want to make sure that does not happen to our
small business community. So that's our goal for this session.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you very much. It's a great
effort, and we sure appreciate it and hope you get a good turnout on
the 13th at the Telford Center.
Item #BE1
REQUEST FROM THE INTERNATIONALL FIREWORKS MANAGEMENT GROUP FOR $300,000
FOR CATEGORY C, TOURIST DEVELOPMENT FUNDS - APPROVED IN THE AMOUNT OF
$200,000 AND PLAN TO BE SUBMITTED ON TRACKING OF ROOM NIGHTS
Our next item is 8(E)(1), International Fireworks
Management Group. Ms. Gansel.
MS. GANSEL: My name is Jean Gansel from the budget
office. The next four executive summaries that you have are all
related to the tourist tax, how much revenue we have collected and
what's the balance of those funds.
In category B, at the end of fiscal '94, we had a
balance -- and we have made some allocations since then -- but the
balance is $26,000. Year-to-date in category B we have collected
749,000. So essentially, there's a balance of 775,000 that has not
been allocated.
In category C there is a balance of 1,221,000. In
addition year-to-date we have collected 449,000.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: That's category C?
MS. GANSEL: Category C, yes, of which 800,000 is needed
to fully fund the economic disaster advertising that we have just
talked about. And that leaves 880,000 which is unallocated and will
not dip into our reserves that are necessary for the advertising.
The total requests of the next four executive summaries
is $933,000 total.
Okay. The first applicant.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Before you go on, the total
requests of any of those don't actually need the money for months to
come; is that correct? Or are they all going to get that today? MS. GANSEL: I'm sorry, which one?
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: You said the current balance
is 880,000, total is 960, or something, of what's being requested
today.
MS. GANSEL: Okay.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Some of those that are being
requested today don't necessarily need the money -- they're looking
for approval today, but I assume we will continue collecting that
throughout the rest of the fiscal year and into next year.
MS. GANSEL: We will continue -- this is the money that
we have in the bank right now, and I'm not sure when the applicants
would actually draw on those funds if that is needed, but there's
continuing to be revenues collected.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Ms. Gansel, I had a separate
question. When we set aside kind of a target amount of money for the
disaster recovery, there was a, if you will -- an addition in
replacement of those funds. Would you just refresh my memory on
exactly how much per year we expect to be freed up from that and
replaced by other funds?
MS. GANSEL: Okay. What we -- what we have is five
percent from category B. Five percent from category C goes into a
reserve account. It equates to approximately a hundred thousand
dollars a year.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Thank you.
MS. GANSEL: The first applicant that we have is the
International Fireworks Management. They are requesting $300,000 to
stage an international pyrotechnical championship in the beginning of
November, 1996. I know you have discussed this item because of the
use of Sugden Park. I just want to point out one area on the
financial statement on page 10 of the executive summary, there's an
indication that the $300,000 that they are requesting will be paid
back to the TDC if they have an 80-percent sellout. They have a
sliding scale there that you can see if it's 50 percent how much will
come back to the TDC and so on.
The TDC voted not to recommend funding for this event at
their meeting two weeks ago.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: And the rationale was?
MS. GANSEL: There was not a discussion why they had
turned down to recommend funding.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Does Mr. Norris have some idea
why they -- since you're our representative here -- what the
discussion was.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: As Ms. Gansel said, there really
wasn't a lengthy discussion on this. I believe it was council member
George that made the motion; is that correct?
MS. GANSEL: Mayor Barnett made the motion to not
recommend funding.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mayor Barnett. And that went very
quickly without discussion and was --
MS. GANSEL: It was a unanimous vote.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: So I really don't of a good handle on
some of the reasoning of it.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: What was the vote?
MS. GANSEL: Seven, zero. It was unanimous. Only seven
members were there.
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Was there a presentation on how
many hotel beds they expected to -- to result from -- from the
production?
MS. GANSEL: That was included in their application.
The applicant did have a discussion of how they intended to bring
people from outside the area and the success that they have had in
other areas with a similar type program.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My question was just was that
presented to the TDC?
MS. GANSEL: Not -- I don't believe the actual -- that
was not part of the discussion. It was more bringing in people from
outside of the area and that they would be staying overnight because
of the distance we would be advertising from. The applicant, I
believe, is here if there are some questions specifically.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: While I can't speak for the other TDC
members, I can tell you why I voted in the negative on that is because
in the original presentation, I think, to the board, there was not a
mention of TDC funding, and they have gone to quite extensive
preparations to -- to have the event. And it's my feeling,
personally, that they probably would not have gone to the extensive
preparations that they have so far if their event was contingent
solely on getting TDC funds.
So it just to me indicates that they originally did not
intend to get them but decided to request TDC funds at some later
point, and that's why I voted in the negative. Any board member of
any questions?
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Are they doing any sort of
presentation today?
MS. GANSEL: They're prepared to answer questions.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: We have seen this presentation
twice now.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Yeah. I don't need to see
the video.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: If any board member has questions for
the petitioners, they're there.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Maybe you can explain. In
here it says almost 9,400 room nights and the associated aspects of
that. Maybe you can give a 60-second explanation on how you arrived
at that number. And I see there's a formula in here, but maybe you
can step me through it.
MR. LEATH: All right. Mr. Chairman and Commissioners,
Brian Leath. If I may just briefly, when we met with you initially,
we did discuss TDC funding. It has been -- the event going has been
predicated on getting TDC funding all the way along. In terms of the
number of bed nights that we'll get, that's strictly based on a
formula we have there.
The advertising focus of this event will be outside of
Collier County. It is an event that does have the potential to draw a
good number of people into the area. In fact, we anticipate bringing
75 percent or 75,000 people into the area. Of those people, based on
what we have seen happen in the Canadian cities, we anticipate
approximately 20, 25 percent of those people will turn into overnight
guests. They will necessarily come into the area, they will spend an
evening, have a meal, stay in a hotel. We will be working with the
hotels and so on to encourage that and actually trying to get them to
create a mini vacation where they will actually come down for as many
as three or four nights. But it is based on experience, and it's
based on -- it's based on the number of people we feel will come into
the area.
COHHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Where will the primary focus
of your advertising be? You say outside of Collier County.
MR. LEATH: We will be focusing in the major population
areas on the east coast and north of us here, so --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Within Florida, you mean?
MR. LEATH: Pardon me?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Within Florida?
MR. LEATH: Primarily within Florida. At that time of
year it's been indicated that a lot of Floridians consider Naples as a
vacation spot, so we want to encourage that.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I have traditionally been
extremely tight-fisted with the TDC dollars. But it seems to me the
things we look for are focussed advertising, a specific plan, and a
track record. One of our complaints when we have turned down other
proposals -- great intentions but no track record. And I'm hard
pressed to decline here only because there is a track record, and
there is some history of success here and that we're not starting out
with something -- good intentions. And I realize there's a couple of
concerns as far as our park facility and so on. I do think it's
encouraging you all have said you will participate in preparing that.
I think the result of that over and above the TDC portion is the
benefit to us is we have parks -- Sugden Park completed early --
earlier than we would have.
So I'm going to make a motion we approve the item.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have more questions here, Mr.
Hancock.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: My only concern -- and I have
been looking for a way to make this a reality, because I think it's a
terrific event, and it's one that the community itself in addition to
the hopefully 75 percent out-of-county visitors would truly enjoy.
The problem I have is that the C money that's being asked for in
essence is paving the way for the event, and we would be gambling at
that point on a 50 to 60 percent ticket sale and then getting none of
it back. My feeling is if the event has a track record, has a
history, you've run it before, you've run it in other areas, your
target should have been higher than 50 or 60 percent when requesting
funding. And my feeling is if you can't -- if you don't feel
confident bringing this event to the community with at least an
anticipation of selling 70 percent of the tickets, then the event
probably shouldn't happen.
And that's where my difficulty was. It's not so much in
the event or any funding, but in the amount of funding. And I'm much
more comfortable with a level of one hundred or one hundred fifty
thousand dollars which would bring a break-even at 70 percent ticket
sales. At 300,000 I am not comfortable, because I think we are then
rolling the dice on an anticipation of 50 or 60 percent ticket sales.
And if that is -- if that's the safety net, it's too low, and I
believe that your chance of success -- if that's what you feel, if
that's what you need to move ahead is -- is shaky. And that's --
that's where my concern comes from. So I'm not comfortable with
$300,000. A lesser degree of funding to an area of one hundred or one
hundred fifty thousand I think is worth. We're then looking at $100 a
room night.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Question for you,
Commissioner Hancock, under 70 percent, which is the number you have
referenced -- maybe I'm reading this wrong. Help me, Brian. MR. LEATH: I will.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: It says $202,000 will be
available to return. I have no objection if that still makes the
project feasible but makes you comfortable at the return rate of
making it at that level.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Well, I can go -- if we give a
hundred or a hundred and a quarter we're saying you better get the 70
percent or you're going to lose money, and that's incentive. But by
giving 300,000 we're saying if you only hit 50 or 60 percent, that's
okay, we just won't get the money back.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: My question was is 202 a fair
compromise for you because that's what we're looking at at 70
percent?
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I would support the motion if
that could make the event a possibility at 200,000. Again, I'm --
it's beyond what I'm comfortable with, but I would like to see the
event take place. I'm just not comfortable with 300,000 in any way.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Commissioner Matthews, you have
another question?
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: What is the track record on
ticket sales with the shows that you have had?
MR. LEATH: Well, in the other areas, ticket sales
are -- materialized very quickly. The event is sold out. Now, the
number of tickets that are actually sold is a smaller amount. It's
about half of what we're looking at. And that's simply because
they're larger venues, and the event is open to the public. And, you
know, there's park land along the waterfront and so on. So you're
talking about, you know, crowds as big as four or sometimes five
hundred thousand people at one time for one performance. So we won't
of that here. We don't have the capacity to have that here.
So we have gone to a different format of event that is
predicated on ticket sales. That way we can control the number of
people that access the park.
Now, in answering your other concern, the TDC fund, as I
understand it, is intended as seed money, and seed money is money
which isn't returned. We are making an effort to return it. We do
require the money, though, initially because a lot of the success of
this event is predicated on ticket sales, and those will happen over
the next four or five months in order to promote the event and get the
event going. And we need to have a pool of money at this point in
time, so it would be difficult to proceed with less money.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I would like to follow up one
more time on what I asked, because I don't feel like I got the answer
that I wanted -- not that I wanted to hear, but in answer to the
question. In the other programs that you have put on and had tickets
sales, what percentage of your ticket sales actually sold, and were
you in 70 percent, 80 percent?
MR. LEATH: Hundred percent.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Hundred percent, you say?
MR. LEATH: Hundred percent. Always a hundred percent.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: So your track record so far
shows that you have produced 100 percent of the ticket sales?
MR. LEATH: But, again, you know, I caution you in
assuming that we'll have 100 percent sellout here. It's a new event.
It has not been done in the United States. We are selling more
tickets. You're talking about, you know, eight to ten thousand in the
other venues, and they're gone instantly. But the whole focus of the
event is different than what we're attempting to do here.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: What's the level of the ticket
prices?
MR. LEATH: The ticket prices are more expensive.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: How much are they?
MR. LEATH: They're between 18 and $20.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Eighteen and twenty dollars per
night?
MR. LEATH: Per night.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: So if somebody wanted to attend
all three nights, you're talking $60.
MR. LEATH: Well, our tickets here will be 15 for a
reserved seat, $10 for general admission, and then children are 5.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: So that's reasonable pricing.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Thirty bucks to go general
admission for all three nights.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yeah. Price is reasonable. One
last question, then. I presume that if this is a successful item that
you will want to do it again each and every year? MR. LEATH: Yes.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And then that follows then that
my question after that is what's your anticipation for being able to
develop corporate sponsorship to eventually not need these funds or at
least of some assurance that you're going to absolutely replace them?
MR. LEATH: I will go on record as indicating that we
will not approach you again for additional funding. If the event is
successful, it attracts sponsors. That's not really a concern.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Chairman, you have two speakers.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Leath, one last question I
have that may form into a request for amending the motion. What --
what method do you have for coming back to us or letting us know how
many room nights you physically created, because this has been the
snag in some of these events. It seems to be our goal, yet it's
elusive. We can never find out what it did or didn't generate. Would
you be amenable to presenting to the Tourist Development Council a
specific plan in tracking room nights directly associated with this
event, in developing that plan, in finding a way to track it, to
working with the TDC to propose that, because I think there's got to
be some comfort level here? And just getting money back isn't really
enough. We want to get those room nights that are generated.
MR. LEATH: We have -- we outlined in the TDC submission
some of the ways we have available to us of tracking. We will be able
to control ticket distribution, so we know where the tickets are
going. And, in fact, we intend to focus 75 percent of the ticket
sales outside of the area. So we will know that the tickets are going
outside the area or whether they're being -- being sold here.
In terms of the hotels, what we're looking at doing and
would like to do with the hotels' cooperation is offer some kind of an
incentive to somebody when they produce a ticket or they produce a
ticket stub when they check in, some little bonus that they get, you
know, maybe a discount on a meal or, you know, an extra package in
their room or something like that. Or we may make it contingent on
their getting a T-shirt when they check in. You know, there are a lot
of different things that we can do, and if the hotels will cooperate,
you know, in creating a record of that, then we have a very firm way
of tabulating the results.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I would like to include some
specific plan for trying to track hotel room nights and bring it back
to the TDC for discussion before the event, again, so everyone knows
it's out in the open, what's -- what are we trying to do, and how are
we tracking it.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I will amend the motion to be
for $200,000 and for -- to include the tracking mechanism you just
outlined.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a couple of public speakers if
we can go to those.
MR. DORRILL: Yes, sir, we have two. Mr. Carpenter, and
then, Mr. Keller, we would like to have you stand by. Mr. Carpenter,
you will be first.
MR. CARPENTER: Hi, Dave Carpenter with the East Naples
Civic Association. It's kind of a shame that I see on the only agenda
that we have got two events coming up for TDC funding, two major
events, both them turned down by the TDC. I think if this meeting
shows anything is that it's time that the county take a long, strong
look at either the composition of the TDC committee or its charter,
it's purview in so far as what type of events. This would be a good
event for Collier County, a great event for East Naples. It falls on
the shoulder, in other words, the off season. They're not asking for
funds for an event during the season, which may have some advertising
benefit after the season. I think they have shown a willingness to
work with the people in the community and work with the county to make
it a truly first-class event, and I think you ought to give them a
chance. Thank you.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Keller.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Keller.
MR. KELLER: Mr. Keller, concerned citizen.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I thought he retired.
MR. KELLER: I said I'm going to retire.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Well, go ahead, then.
MR. KELLER: Okay. Do these -- we should go and start
changing this whole deal. In the first place, it looks like as if we
got a bag of money, and it's open for grabs, so let's give it here or
let's give it there, but let's get rid of it. Now, you know, I
couldn't live that way, because if I just got rid of my money, I'd be
broke. But the point is very simple. The Tourist Development Council
was appointed for the purpose of handling this money. The only reason
why this county commission is involved at all is because you handle
all county money. And I would think that your position would be kind
of like a stopgap, so that in case they were spending too freely, you
could stop them from spending so freely, instead of you encouraging to
spend it freely when they said they don't want to spend it, number
one.
Number two, now I find out this is -- this is what you
call foreign aid. It's a Canadian company, and it looks like as if we
haven't been bagged enough for foreign aid in this country, so now
we're opening up a door and saying come on down, put on a program, and
we'll pay for it.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm afraid you're applauding
misinformation, but go ahead.
MR. KELLER: You know, honestly and truly, if you vote
at all, please vote to put this off and let them come before the
Tourist Development Council and prove their point. Anybody that comes
before the Tourist Development Council and don't prove their point, it
should never -- it should never come before this board to decide how
to spend the money. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion on the floor to grant
$200,000 plus -- or require the petitioner to provide us with a
detailed plan on tracking room nights; is that correct? COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Correct.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a second for that motion.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
None. Thank you, gentleman.
Item #8E2
REQUEST FROH THE CHALLENGE FOUNDATION FOR $600,000 FOR CATEGORY C,
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT FUNDS - APPROVED AND INTELLINET REQUIRED TO PROVIDE
DOCUMENTATION ON EVENT AND WORK WITH MARKETING BRANCHES, HOTELS, ETC.
AND BCC TO LOOK AT FUNDING IN THE FUTURE AT A REDUCED RATE
The next item is 8(E)(2), Challenge Foundation, the golf
tournament.
MS. GANSEL: The next applicant is the Challenge
Foundation, and they are requesting $600,000. Five hundred thousand
dollars is for a nationwide television campaign of more than 12,000
commercials designed to promote Naples and Marco Island for spring and
summer golf packages. One hundred thousand dollars is for fulfillment
of the request on the advertising. The TDC voted five to two not to
recommend funding for this event -- for this funding. The applicant
is here, and I will be glad to answer any questions. And Mr.
Rasmussen is here, too.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Do you have a question now?
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I don't know if it's a question
you will have the answer to, Ms. Gansel, but if the county is being
asked to add $600,000, do we know what Intellinet's contribution is?
Is it equal or more or less?
MS. GANSEL: I believe it's a million dollars. Yeah,
the title sponsor is contributing a million dollars.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Maybe we can ask the petitioner,
but I would like to know the breakdown of who's spending what for the
total cost of the event.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Let's of the petitioner make his
presentation now.
MR. RASMUSSEN: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, good
morning. Thank you for this opportunity to discuss the funding issue
before you. On behalf of the Challenge Foundation, I'm Bill Rasmussen
for the record. In the interest of time, if I may as they say, "cut
to the chase."
Last Hay the Board of County Commissioners granted
$500,000 of category C funds to the PGA for televising the 1996
Greater Naples Intellinet Challenge. That the investment was a
marketing media and promotional success is unquestioned. Locally,
both the executive director of the Naples Area Chamber and the
chairman of the Naples Visitor's Bureau publically acknowledged the
overwhelming response. Just last week, as you heard Ms. Gansel say,
members of the Tourist Development Council, while declining to
recommend funding for next year's event, acknowledged the tremendous
media value Naples, Marco Island, and Collier County received
worldwide.
Nationally, that media value was documented by respected
third-party sources, including the A.C. Nielson Company, Burrelle's,
Joyce Julius & Associates, and others. The documented analysis before
you details the return on your investment $7,160,778 on the $500,000
investment.
A question you undoubtedly of relates to the ever
popular "heads-in-beds during the off-season" phrase. Can I answer
the question how many hotel room nights did or will the investment
generate?
COHHISSIONER HAC'KIE: Please.
MR. RASMUSSEN: Of course not.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Darn.
MR. RASMUSSEN: But then can anybody answer that
question for any TDC money spent?
Clearly the beach renourishment was a major expense.
Can we with pinpoint accuracy identify the number of room nights
generated by that $16,000,000 investment? Of course not. But we all
know that without the effort both the beaches and many of our visitors
might be gone.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: But that's a different category
of funds. Your category of funds is particularly for off-season
"heads-in-beds."
MR. RASMUSSEN: We will get to that. If I may finish
this, I would be happy to discuss that. Can we with pinpoint accuracy
identify the number of room nights generated by category B hotel funds
expenditures of approximately $4,000,000? Can't do that either. But
without the advertising would the same number of people visit us in
season or off season? I doubt it.
Advertising, marketing, promotion, and imaging work.
Branding seems to be the operative phrase today. Trademarks become
trust marks. Just pick up a newspaper or magazine, notice a billboard
along the highway, and think of all the direct mail you receive. And,
yes, what about that most powerful advertising medium of all,
television. You, me, we recognize brands, trademarks, trust marks.
What brands do you buy? Cadillac, Kleenex, G.E., IBM. How do you
travel? American Airlines, Delta, United. And where do you stay?
The Hilton, the Marriott, the Ritz. Brands you recognize. Brands you
trust.
And that's what telling the world about Naples, Marco
Island and Collier County is really all about, branding. Think about
our brand. White sand beaches, lush, green golf courses, Naplescape,
Third Street South, Waterside Shops, The Philharmonic and Tin City.
Boating, sailing, and sunsets. Creating the trademark. Creating the
image. Creating that trust mark.
And it sure must be working, because if it wasn't many
of us wouldn't be here. We all know, everyone of us in this room,
that the $16,000,000 on the beach, the $4,000,000 from the hotel and,
yes, the half million dollars televising the PGA Seniors all combine
to tell the story of Collier County to the world. Which specific
fund, which specific dollar spent makes someone come to our corner of
paradise? There's not a person alive that can answer that question
for you.
There simply is no way to slice and dice and cut up
advertising, marketing, promotion, and imaging to make it fit into a
neat efficient package.
And while I'm on the subject, the entire TDC fund itself
is just a tiny piece in a very large financial puzzle that must come
together to create this very special place many of us call home,
without which, by the way, all the funds in the world, tourist or
otherwise, wouldn't make a bit of difference.
I submit to you that the only real yardstick of whether
tourism has increased is the collection of the two-percent county
occupancy tax. Each year since inception collections have increased
and presumedly will do so again this year. And by the way, during
that same period, population has increased, so has business in the
county, the highway infrastructure, schools, residential development,
the quality of life. You name it, something is working.
It's a privilege to play a role in the shaping of our
area's magnificent image, and I ask for your support in showcasing our
county, displaying our brand, our trademark life in southwest Florida
with words and pictures to the world during the 10th anniversary visit
of the Senior PGA tour to Naples. I ask you not to discard this
valuable asset.
Without question this event is an important piece of our
in-season business, an important piece of our in-season
entertainment. It certainty is an integral part of our year-around
advertising, marketing, promotion and imaging -- indeed, a significant
piece of our economy. This event is a trademark. This event is a
trust mark. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Rasmussen, one of the
things we saw immediately after the event, everyone came forward,
everyone applauded the response and announced we're getting thousands
of calls, and we had a parade of people in front of us a couple weeks
after the event at one of these meetings, all applauding the event.
The one snafu, if you will, in this year's planning was the response
on our 800 number and all of that. And hopefully at this point we
have ironed that out for this year. I don't want to assume anything,
so I would like you to explain how we have corrected that in your
proposal for the upcoming year.
MR. RASMUSSEN: We propose -- and I understand that this
will be within county guidelines obviously -- that a national, slash,
international response firm be retained as has happened with the -- a
few weeks ago, as you discussed -- that particular firm, Connect
America, would obviously be included in the bidding, but I understand
it would be open to -- there are several national companies who can
respond.
I believe, as I mentioned the other night before the
TDC, that we all did things that we can all do better next time
around, and I think one of them is the point that you have just
discussed, and that is prepare for the response before the event, not
while the phones are ringing off the wall. CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Hancock.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I have got a few questions, Mr.
Rasmussen. The first is one that I have read in the paper, but I feel
a need to ask it. Why are we being asked to make this decision
instead of waiting until we have some very solid numbers on the
package responses to base our decision on? That's one.
MR. RASMUSSEN: I thought you were going to continue.
I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: We'll give you one at a time.
MR. RASMUSSEN: Okay. A number of elements go into that
answer. One, the PGA makes a committment -- requires a commitment as
of May first for tournaments following. Obviously we have passed that
date. They are waiting for the results of today's -- last Monday's
meeting and today's meeting, quite -- quite honestly.
Number two, the promotion that we talked about discussed
delivering people during the off season which ends October 31st. We
won't know the answer until October 31st, and then, as I said, I don't
think we can give you an accurate pinpoint -- with pinpoint accuracy
count of what it has produced. There is no one -- I know that some
people have called hotels independently. They don't care to be part
of a package. There's no way to identify the impact of whether it was
watching on television or talking to somebody sitting on an airplane
flying to Kalamazoo, Michigan, that made them come down. The specific
question of a specific time frame, we won't know the results until the
October occupancy tax is collected, and were we to wait -- where the
PGA even to consider our waiting until then or hear of our waiting
until then, we simply wouldn't of the event. There is no time to
prepare the marketing, prepare the publicity, prepare all that goes
into making this event work. This is really a year-around event.
Next year is going to be even more demanding, but a lot more fun and a
lot more visible, because it's the 10th anniversary. There is quite a
bit of work to be done. We simply can't wait.
You said you have some other questions.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: I do. Last year the relationship
between the tournament and the hoteliers soured for whatever reason.
It just wasn't there. And that's got to be made better this year. MR. RASMUSSEN: Much better.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: And I just -- more than a
question, I'm probably going to ask of this, if it moves ahead, we do
similar to what we did with the fireworks that there be a periodic
reporting to the TDC of specific plans. And that leads me into my
third point.
Last year you talked about target markets and
advertising -- you mentioned a value of, I believe, $7,000,000 or
something to that effect. Did someone assign a value to the
advertising?
MR. RASMUSSEN: That's -- that's only for the three days
of February 9, 10 and 11. The rest of it -- what I said was that I
will bring you the affidavits of performance when the promotion is
finished running which will be late this month, because the -- the
participants in each of those markets will, in fact, be visiting the
county, 40 people on May 30 through June 2nd. So we will of all of
that documentation, where it ran, what time it ran, what networks it
ran on, and how many ran.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: Who defined the target markets
that you're talking about?
MR. RASMUSSEN: We did, we did.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: So you and your group did?
MR. RASMUSSEN: Well, let me modify that.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay.
MR. RASMUSSEN: Immediately upon the receipt of the
approval last year for the funding, we had a meeting with a group of
representatives from the hotel industry who had some very specific
opinions on where this should be done, and since we had come to you
and said we would be doing it outside of the State of Florida, our
opinions differed somewhat and -- and we went and did it.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: The reason I asked that is are
you familiar with a company called The Vacation Store? MR. RASMUSSEN: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: They have a great program, and
they run ads. The number -- the number you call comes into their
marketing division. So rather than coming in strictly for
fulfillment, you call someone who's educated on the product, who can
actually fill -- fill in the blanks right there and actually book your
vacation at that point.
And what I am concerned about is that we can hit a lot
of target markets, but if they aren't those that are typically
receptive to Naples as a destination or as a golf destination,
someone's got to help make that. I'm thinking maybe fewer markets
with a more elaborate fulfillment or marketing campaign is going to
produce the room nights more so than just call for information and
follow up later. And what I'd like to see is I'd like to see the
input from the Tourist Development Council help guide us in that
direction. With your connection to, you know, the media community and
their input, I think we can accomplish something similar to what The
Vacation Store does so that people call into a marketing arm, not just
a fulfillment arm. And I would like to see that as a focus. It makes
a lot more sense, because you have someone who can sell the product on
the phone when they call.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Hancock, I just
have a comment or a question one step further, and that is how did
you -- for the first year, how did you establish what markets you were
targeting? Did you have input from --
MR. RASMUSSEN: We -- we talked to individual cable
systems in those markets outside of the State of Florida that were the
appropriate sized markets, and literally, we did it through the
Midwest, some in the Northeast, and some in the far west. And it was
literally a discussion with the TCIs, Time Warners, etc., of the
world.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I don't mean to question that.
We just don't of the results.
MR. RASMUSSEN: We're going to have a pile of them as
soon as we get them. If we do this again in a month, I can bring them
all.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: And the last thing I have to
mention is I would obviously like to see more of a marketing effort
there than just a fulfillment effort, and I think with -- with -- MR. RASMUSSEN: I'm about to talk to you about that as
soon as you ask me your last question.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: And the last thing is the TDC
funding for this, if we were to fund this at the same level this year
or at the level requested, that can't continue ad infinitum, because
we don't collect a tremendous amount of funds in category C. So I
feel the need to institute a weaning process, because it simply can't
be repeated time and time again. And I just wanted to make that
statement more for my purposes.
MR. RASMUSSEN: I hear what you're staying, and I
understand what you're saying. And obviously from the comments that I
had at the beginning, and from the reaction of the TDC last year and
the reaction of the TDC this year, I think, and from some earlier
speakers today, I think that we have to examine putting square pegs in
round holes. Pure and simple, advertising around the world on the
weekend in February of the golf tournament is about the best
advertising -- in the definition of the TDC that would be category B
money -- that you could have. I understand that this is not a request
for category B funding. I understand that.
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: I have one question. Really
just one question.
MR. RASMUSSEN: Yes, ma'am.
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: And that's picking up on Mr.
Hancock's last comment, the petition for funds last year. MR. RASMUSSEN: Yes.
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: That we were asked to add funds
because the tournament was going to go away if we didn't. And as
things had happened rather quickly, and you needed a commitment from
the county rather quickly to assure that the tournament would be
here. We're now another year down the road, and the funding level is
the same. Last year you had said that you were going to seek other
corporate sponsorship, and we're not seeing that. I'm a little bit
concerned that you're back looking for the same amount of money again
this year, and, yes, I agree a weaning process has to happen. MR. RASMUSSEN: Yes.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: But we were told that last year,
too.
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we're going in the other
direction.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yes. It's going up, not down.
And we are told last year --
MR. RASMUSSEN: Excuse me, going up?
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Not if you include the $93,000
from --
MR. RASMUSSEN: Yeah, that's --
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Well, at least it's the same,
and last year we were told that you were going to seek other corporate
sponsorship to gradually reduce this, so we would not be looking at a
half million dollars each and every year. And, frankly, I'm just a
little bit disappointed that that has not happened.
MR. RASMUSSEN: If I may, the PGA has raised the purse
limit on the title -- the purse requirement on the title sponsor from
$600,000 to a million dollars this year. And that will escalate as we
wean out of this. That will of to be addressed, but it is a major
requirement of theirs. And that will just go away.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: You're actually spending -- as
title sponsor you're -- MR. RASMUSSEN: The title sponsorship this year is a
million dollars plus all the rest of the ancillary money.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: And last year it was?
MR. RASMUSSEN: Hatched yours. It was matching last
year. It was plus.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Six hundred thousand dollars.
MR. RASMUSSEN: Yeah, plus the other things. It was
actually -- not counting time, it was probably closer to $700,000.
But actual dollars was pushing $600,000.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: What other corporate sponsors
have you been able to secure to help you raise these funds? In the
intervening year what other corporate sponsors have you been able to
secure to help you raise these funds?
MR. RASMUSSEN: At this moment that's a requirement that
we have. We have to -- we have to guarantee to the PGA the purse
dollars. We don't of -- we don't of those other sponsors at this
instant.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: But last year you said you were
going to search for them.
MR. RASMUSSEN: It's not an easy search.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I know it's not an easy search,
but just one would help.
MR. RASMUSSEN: Uh-huh. And the search will continue
and will -- that's all we can --
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: The point is in the meantime
the Intellinet is going to have to pick up the slack itself; is that
accurate?
MR. RASMUSSEN: Pick up the slack or get somebody to
pick up the slack, yes. Not -- not this somebody, but the title
sponsorship somebody.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: But if Intellinet wants to
remain -- and I hope that you do want to remain the title sponsor --
what's happened is that the PGA has said that the check for that, the
cost of that is a million bucks. So that's -- MR. RASMUSSEN: That's correct.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Am I correct? So that's the
price that you corporately of decided to make for the benefit to your
company to be the title sponsor, and I respect that. But that is a
completely separate question from where were you planning on getting
this $600,000.
As you said, this is a year-long process, and it is an
annual event. I'm aware, you know, that it goes on constantly twelve
months of the year. And I guess I just of to echo that it -- well,
it's not only that I'm a little disappointed that you haven't been
able to come up with the other sponsor to replace the county, but that
I'm afraid that if we continue to fund it that why would anybody ever
come through and -- and I, also, of some question. It seems to me if
we turn it down, somebody is going to show up with the money.
Somebody is going to want to be the co-sponsor.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Wait a minute. That was my argument
on the previous question.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: We did reduce their requested
funds, too.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I think that's what I'd like to
do here is not fund this at the $500,000 level. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Six.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Well, I can understand the
fulfillment costs.
MR. RASMUSSEN: It's a separate issue.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: It's a separate issue, but we
were promised last year that there would be a gradual weaning, and I
would like to begin this year to wean them. And I'd like to make a
motion that we approve this, but we approve it at -- at the $500,000
level including fulfillment, meaning they only get $400,000 for the
tournament.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I think we're going to have some
public speakers.
MR. DORRILL: You have one. Mr. Olds.
MR. OLDS: The name is Stanley Olds, and I am against
this Intellinet for several reasons. You have a TDC, and they voted
five to two against it. Now, Mr. Rasmussen is a very excellent
salesman, I can see that, but I don't think he convinced the TDC, so
why should he convince you people? I mean, you should take the
effects of what the TDC said, and I think you should run with that
rather than to allow him to give you all these other extraneous
arguments.
Now, he hasn't any other corporate sponsors as far as I
know, and I think as Ms. Matthews said, that he had -- didn't promise,
probably -- but he said he was going to try. But he hasn't got any
yet. Another thing, too, is that the money that we gave to him last
year, is there any recording as to where it all went? Okay. As long
as you have that. But I do think in the long run, he had a chance
last year to do what he said he was going to do. And I don't think
he's performed, and in my estimation I don't think you should give him
the extra money. Thank you.
MR. DORRILL: That's all, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I'm going to vote against the
motion, because I think it should be at the level requested for a
number of reasons. And I disagree with Mr. Olds. The TDC didn't want
the tourist tax originally, yet at public referendum the public said
they would. And the TDC is an advisory board. And while we certainly
need to take their comments -- I was here that night -- and certainly
take their comments into consideration, one of the concerns is they
are heavily weighted in favor of one particular industry, the hotel
industry, who is -- the money in category B primarily goes toward them
and there have been at least six efforts in the last 18 months to
alter category C funding to funnel that into category B. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Only six?
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I said at least. And that
effort was lead by the hotel unit. So I think there is an interest.
Obviously they want to do whatever they can to generate hotel beds
here, but I think they would like to have as much control over that as
possible. So I don't think it was strictly a clear advisory -- no
offense to the TDC, but I think that's why you ended up with a split
vote on the TDC. It wouldn't be the first time that we have had
disagreement on that. As I said, they disagreed with the public at
large on the concept to begin with, and yet I think today they embrace
the concept.
So it goes down -- it all boils down to -- maybe I'm
oversimplifying it, but it all boils down to a very simple thing for
me, and that is what does TDC stand for? Tourism development. Now,
their role is to develop tourism, and this money can only be spent for
one thing. It's not collected from the tax from the public at large.
It's collected from tourists to develop more tourism. Does this --
did the Intellinet project this past year develop tourism? Was it
beneficial to tourism? I don't think anybody can look us in the eye
and say, no, it was not. And so if you look at what is the purpose of
this, and did it fulfill that purpose, and is it continuing to as
those 12,000 ads continue to run, I think it is, and I think does. I
think it did, and so I'm going to vote against this motion, and if it
does not pass, I am going to suggest we fulfill the entire request.
However, I agree with both of you. There needs to be a
weaning process. I don't think that's been made clear to this point,
and that's the main reason why I want to fill it to the amount
requested. But I think, Mr. Rasmussen, you need to be clear that
while we may go forward this year, as of October 31 we will of a clear
picture, a clearer picture on how fulfillment was this year. We will
go through the following year, but I think next year, you're going to
see a step away from the board, but we'll also have a clearer picture
on which to base that decision. But I think you will see perhaps some
participation, but you need to be aware. And this will give you one
year's advance notice that that will likely be to a smaller degree.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I will support those comments, and I
will -- I am not going to support the motion as it is either.
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have a question.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I'm not going to call it until I get
to you.
But I agree with those comments. I think that being
shown an audited verification of $7,000,000 worth of advertising for
$500,000, I certainly don't want to pull the plug on this event this
year. But I think it is probably time, and I will agree to just say
that we're going to need to move away to a degree at some point.
Any other questions?
MR. RASMUSSEN: Mr. Chairman, for the record I would
like to respond to one thing that Mr. Olds discussed. Mr. Hancock
nodded his head, but I would like to have more than the head nod. For
the record, the money did not come to Intellinet or Bill Rasmussen.
It went directly to the PGA for television. It was handled not
through us. It went from the county financial manager's office. The
contract was drawn with the PGA. We are not involved with that in any
way.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm not sure why I nodded my
head.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We do have a paper trail on that. I'm
sure you are aware. But thank you for putting it on the record.
We have a motion to grant 400,000 plus 100,000 for
fulfillment. And before I call that question, I'm going to ask
Ms. Mac'Kie to put one more thing on the record.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just have a question for Mr.
Weigel. My fundamental premise here is that, yup, we get to decide
how the money is spent, because we are the County Commission. But
this is a fund that was voted on by referendum, and I recall that --
that the referendum was really clearly stated that the -- that the
categories were laid out when the public voted on it. So my question
is just for my recollection. Was -- was category C defined as
shoulder season, 15 percent in the referendum that was voted on?
MR. WEIGEL: No. I can respond that that definition did
not appear in the referendum. COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry?
MR. WEIGEL: That definition did not appear in the
referendum.
COMMISISONER MAC'KIE: That came afterwards.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: It's a guideline.
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's in the guidelines. I'm just
trying to be really careful about, you know, that we spend the money
in accordance with the discussions.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay. That being all the comments, I
will call the question.
This is for $400,000 for the event and $100,000 for
fulfillment.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Opposed?
That motion fails three to two.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I want to make a motion we
grant the request for the full -- as offered for the full $600,000,
and perhaps you can help me with the verbage Mr. Hancock put on the
weaning process. Also, on the fulfillment track record as the year
goes on, just as we did with the last petitioner.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: If I may suggest two elements
added to the motion. The first would be that Mr. Rasmussen present to
the Tourist Development Council at the first meeting immediately
following the October 31st date both the results of this current year
and a full marketing package and accept their input regarding that
marketing package for the February event and the proposed televised
period so that everything is above board, it's out there.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Would you restate that motion,
please?
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Pardon me?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Would you restate that motion?
MR. RASMUSSEN: The presentation of the specifics,
verified, signed affidavits and so on will be presented. If we were
to wait till the November meeting of the TDC to discuss with the TDC a
marketing plan for the February 1997 event, we might as well not go
down that path.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: How's next week, then?
MR. RASMUSSEN: Yes, that's fine.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Why don't we try to simplify
that. I think on the little marketing packages that were sent out
this year, there were 15, 18 different hotels in our general
vicinity.
MR. RASMUSSEN: More like 40.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Whatever. I will assume you
will work with those hotels individually and with -- what's the hotel
bureau?
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Visitor's Bureau.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: There's another one. Anyway
work with them.
MR. RASMUSSEN: Naples Area Accommodations Association.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Thank you. I assume you
either are or will -- we'll make that part of the motion -- work with
them in assembling that marketing.
MR. RASMUSSEN: I would be delighted to work with them.
We have some magnificent ideas we think for next year, and we don't
believe that this should be a divided effort at all. We think it
should be one coordinated effort, and we're just a major piece of that
effort.
And we have gone so far -- and I didn't get a chance to
say this before -- we are contemplating a ten-minute -- in honor of
the 10th anniversary -- a 10-minute free phone card to everybody who
calls during the Intellinet Challenge. They will get the card and
they can call the hotel of their choice, the restaurant of their
choice, make tee-times, call their cousin in Naples or whatever they
want to do, but the people from the professional fulfillment facility
will be marketing Naples. We will be sending out information about --
I should say Collier County -- Naples and Marco Island, and they will
call.
And we can only bring the people to dialing the phone.
When it gets here, if the people don't want to market or if they kind
of look at it as kind of a side event or a side issue, we -- we, the
tournament, cannot control that. We have to do this together. We
have to work together. That's the point of all of that.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Let me restate the motion.
I'll make a motion we approve the $600,000, we require Mr. Rasmussen
and the Intellinet to provide complete documentation on this current,
ongoing year and event, and that we ask that they work with the
marketing branches of the appropriate area hotels and motel bureaus,
slash, associations.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Do we have a second for that?
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: In addition to that, it is the
intent of this board to -- if looking at funding in the future for
this event -- to look at it in a reduced nature.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I will amend my motion to
include that.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Second.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: I'm going to support -- I would
have preferred a lower number to begin the weaning process, but I'm
not ready to pull the plug.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I'm not going to support the
motion, not because I want the tournament to go away, but because this
discussion of weaning, and plans, and "head-on-beds" is Hay 1995 deja
vu. We haven't made any changes.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: All those in favor, signify by saying
aye.
Opposed?
(Note: Motion passed 4-1 with Commissioner Matthews
opposed.)
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We'll take a short, five-minute
break. Be right back.
(Short break at 10:50 a.m.)
Item #8E3
TOURIST DEVELOPHENT FUND, CATEGORY C CONTRACT WITH NAPLES CONCERT BAND
- APPROVED IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We will reconvene the County
Commission meeting. Hs. Gansel, if you would.
MS. GANSEL: Okay. Jean Gansel, budget office. The
third applicant that we have --
MR. CONSTANTINE: I would like to make a motion we
approve this item.
MR. HANCOCK: Second.
MS. MATTHEWS: Second, yeah.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second.
Any public speakers?
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
There's none.
MR. CONSTANTINE: The Hiami band alone will make up
for --
MR. HANCOCK: If you need a really bad fourth trumpet,
Dwight, let me know.
Item #8E4
AMENDMENTS TO CATEGORY B, TOURIST DEVELOPMENT FUNDS FOR FILM COMMISSION
AND MARCO ISLAND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: 8(E)(4) is our former 16(E)(2).
MS. GANSEL: This was also an item that involved
category B funding that was discussed at the basic TDC meetings.
There's two elements. The first element is to transfer $34,000 from
the Marco Island Chamber of Commerce, their contract for
advertising -- they would like that money to be transferred from
brochures to media relations.
The second item is to increase the amount of funding for
the Southwest Florida Film Commission by $23,000. This would be to
equal our contribution to Lee County's contribution. Also included in
the amendment is to provide for some eligible expenditures for
salaries for the full-time staff and for personal property and
property entertainment. We are requesting that the board waive
these -- these are ineligible expenditures. We would like the board
to waive those guidelines and to provide for them.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: This was pulled off the
consent agenda because --
MS. GANSEL: We have had one item that on the
recommendation we did not ask for the authorization for the chairman's
time.
MR. DORRILL: We have no speakers, Mr. Chairman.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Well, I approved it on the
consent agenda, and I'll even approve you signing the item. I will
make a motion we approve the item.
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: My only question is to John
Ayres. It says, "Sincerely, B. Dole for John Ayres." Is Bob Dole
signing your stuff now?
MR. AYRES: He's outside if I could bring him in.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 96-231 AUTHORIZING A $2,283,000 PRINCIPAL REDUCTION ON TAX
EXEMPT COHMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM LOAN, DRAW A-l-2 - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: 9(A), Mr. Weigel.
MR. WEIGEL: It gives me great pleasure to introduce
Mike HcNees to provide the item.
MR. HcNEES: Thank you, Mr. Weigel. Mike HcNees with
the county manager's office.
This is an item where we're asking for your approval to
use what are somewhat surplus funds in the prepayment of the
$13,000,000 commercial paper debt that you are aware of was issued to
fund road projects. I need to give you a little bit of history on how
we got to the point we reached when the finance department brought
that item to you.
In fiscal '93-94 the development services division was
reorganized, and it recognized a significant amount of savings during
that year and then in the subsequent '94-95. The development services
advisory committee recommended to you that that surplus money to the
tune of $2,000,000 be returned to the general fund for the purpose of
retiring the debt that was issued to construct a development services
building so they could get out, essentially, of their mortgage early,
and then they would no longer of the operating expense of the
mortgage. You were unable to retire a piece of the sales tax issue
which was used to fund that building, and what you decided to do
instead was take that $2,000,000 and use it to buy down what was
unsecured also general fund debt which is the commercial paper.
For some reason during fiscal '95 when that payment was
budgeted, that actual pay-down of the debt did not take place. As
Mr. Smykowski reviewed the budget preparation, he then asked -- saw
that that had not happened and asked the finance department to
actually make that pay down, and which brings us to where we are today
with the request for the resolution to actually pay down that debt.
So the bottom line is this is money that was intended to
pay down principal of general fund debt that was issued to build the
development services building, and it would be staff's recommendation
that you actually go down -- go ahead and make that payment to use
this principal money to retire a piece of what is -- COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: How did it not happen?
MR. HcNEES: I can't answer that. I can tell you that
staff budgeted. For some reason the finance department didn't
actually make the payment. It may have been that a year ago they were
waiting for us to say please make the payment, and we didn't. But I
don't have an answer as to the why. But that money has been sitting
and drawing interest in the meantime, and we would recommend that you
go ahead and do what the board decided to do when it made the '94-95
budget.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: You're asking us just to
reiterate our prior direction.
MR. HcNEES: Correct.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: And my question, Mr. Weigel, is
why do we have to vote on this again instead of their just, oops, we
found out we missed, you know, we didn't do what you told us to do the
first time and quickly doing it instead of our voting on it again.
Why is that?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I think the best answer is that we
need the paper trail of authorization from the board by means of a
resolution, and perhaps Mr. Hitchell if not Mr. HcNees will further
respond to the question.
MR. HITCHELL: Mr. HcNees would say he doesn't know why
we couldn't just pay it either, so I will yield to the others who are
saying that we need your approval.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: So I'd like to hear that, and
then I'd also like to be sure that whatever was broken in the system
we're addressing, so that we don't of this happen again.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, that's fine, and, of course, please
note from the executive summary that the county attorney agenda
vehicle is really the vehicle to bring this on for you. Although but
we can monitor it to the extent -- to the best extent that we can
working with the clerk, of course.
MR. HITCHELL: Commissioners, for the record Jim Hitchell, the
director of the finance and accounting department. It's my
understanding the main reason this is being brought to the board
today is to adopt a resolution and take the vote to authorize the
payment. As for the issue of why the payment was not made, the only
thing that I can tell you is that there was a miscommunication in the
office. We have identified that, and we are working very strongly to
make sure it doesn't happen in the future.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Motion?
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: The question I have -- and this
is really the main reason it was brought back from my position -- and
I have to credit Commisisoner Matthews with bringing it up -- I think
it was last week.
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: Last week.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: Am I correct in saying that we're
looking at making a payment for reduction that would result in a
reduction in fee-based operating expenses at development services?
MR. McNEES: No. That -- that decision was made two
years ago. The decision to allow them to prepay their debt. The way
it worked was they were paying the general fund every year for their
portion of the debt service on the sales tax issue that built their
building. They, having surplus funds, decided they could lower their
annual operating expenses if they paid that debt in advance. So that
decision was made to allow them to use their own money that they had
in surplus to offset what might be future and --
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: And we are not legally able to
use those funds for anything other than the paydown of that debt?
MR. McNEES: No. You legally could use that money for
whatever you want. The point is, from a financial standpoint, whether
you want to take that prepayment. You still of the obligation to pay
the debt on that building, and you are not able to reduce that
obligation directly. You can, however, reduce another debt obligation
and lower that debt service payment. So you eventually of a wash to
lower your own general fund debt obligations.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: The reason that I wanted this
brought back is we may have the opportunity here, looking at the
budget conditions we're looking at, to utilize all or part of these
funds to reduce some debt that affects the ad valorem side of our
budget.
MR. HcNEES: And that's what we're talking about is
lowering the commercial paper debt payments not directly but round
about. As you know when you get down to balancing the budget in the
end, it all comes back to ad valorem taxes. So if you lower the
contribution which is currently the gas tax and sales tax to the
commercial paper program, you indirectly lower the general fund ad
valorem subsidy.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: And the motion Commissioner
Hac'Kie just made will accomplish that. MR. HcNEES: Yes.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: To what extent in this particular
budget cycle or are we going to see -- what's being freed up in dollar
value by this decision?
MR. HcNEES: I can't give you -- I don't know exactly
the dollars. What's been freed up will indirectly be gas tax dollars,
because the commercial paper debt -- you're showing a repayment in
your road plan, and those gas tax dollars eventually as you know
come -- are subsidized to the road/bridge fund by sales tax dollars
which eventually come to the general fund as ad valorem dollars. So I
know that probably doesn't make any sense at all.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: If you could say that again the
same way, I would probably take you to lunch, but we're --
MR. HcNEES: The bottom line is there is a direct ad
valorem impact if you pay the debt down $2,000,000. I'm going to say
the magnitude of it is in the hundred thousands range, the low hundred
thousands.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: The magnitude of the what?
MR. HcNEES: Of the savings to the general fund.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Savings to the general fund?
MR. HcNEES: The savings to the general fund of the
budgeted '97 debt service.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Now, the reason that I
questioned last week whether we should do this or not and wanted to
know what the ramifications of not doing it were was that we are
roughly a month from now going to be talking about our budgets for
next year, and we have a significant shortage. And we're going to
have to do some significant things in order to get the budgets
balanced.
And my concern is that should we keep this money in our
reserves until we finish figuring out what it is we're going to do
with the '96-97 budget. It is $2,000,000 from what I have heard that
we can also use to help us through this budgetary problem and spread
the impact of our costs over two years instead of one year.
MR. HcNEES: You certainly have that option. There's
another piece to this puzzle. Your finance committee has been
studying this $13,000,000 unsecured commercial paper debt, which is
something we're not really thrilled about. It's out there, and we pay
interest on it. We don't really at this point of any plan -- formal
plan to amortize that and do anything but pay the interest. We have
been studying -- and we fixed that at a specific rate and make a plan
to amortize. We will be coming back to you in a couple weeks with
some recommendations on that score.
So, yes, we could leave this out there and use that
money in consideration during the budget process. The one thing I
would caution you is this is a little bit like if your aunt gave you
money to pay down your VISA bill, and you say, well, gee, I got an
electric bill to pay, and I have got a phone bill to pay. Instead of
paying off the VISA debt, I'm just going to use this money. And then
you end up you still, you know, of those bills to pay, and you haven't
paid your VISA bill, and you still of that balance.
So I think it was a good decision while you had the
money to make a start towards getting rid of the $13,000,000, which is
an unsecured debt. You certainly of the option of putting that money
into the pot and using it in the budget analysis. That's your
decision.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I think it's a great
analogy. I think nobody wants to keep that ad valorem rate down more
than I, but I think looking long term and the impacts of not paying
that off and still having an outstanding bill on which we are paying
interest is short-sighted at best. This is a decision we made a
couple of years ago to pay off something early or a portion of
something early. And if we can do that, then we need to, and we have
an opportunity here. So it will have, perhaps, a smaller immediate
impact on the ad valorem, but I think long term, it would very clearly
save us some money.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: One more question.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is that a second?
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: That's a second.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I just of one more question. If
we -- if we pay the commercial paper down by the $2,000,000 and over
the course of finalizing our '96-97 budget it's decided that we need
to borrow $2,000,000 in order to make it finalized -- which, of
course, we don't want to do -- but what does it cost us to borrow
$2,000,000?
MR. McNEES: The issuance costs in the commercial paper
program are fairly small. I can't give you a number. I don't know if
Mr. Mitchell has it, but it does -- to borrow, there aren't large
issuance costs. If you wanted, then, to for some other purpose issue
more commercial paper debt, you would have that option at any time.
And it's not an expensive -- it's not like a bond issue where you
have, you know, a ten -- five-percent issuance cost. It's not of that
magnitude.
COHHISSIONER MATTHEWS: The borrowing cost, in your
estimate, is less than one percent?
MR. HcNEES: I really don't want to give you a number.
I don't want to make one up, and I don't really know, but I can tell
you it's not very big. I can sure get you a number, but I don't know.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I know this is off the topic,
but I don't have a real big interest in borrowing money to make our
balance work this year. The federal government has tried that and not
done real well.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I don't like doing it either,
but at the same time, the analogy of paying your VISA bill down, I
mean, you know, I -- I, too, agree that we need to -- we need to keep
our bills paid and our debt as low as we can, but at the same time, to
pay your VISA bill this month knowing you're going to have to borrow
again against it next month -- of course, it doesn't cost any money to
borrow from your VISA.
MR. HcNEES: And the budget numbers that you have seen
so far from Mr. Smykowski don't count this $2,000,000 as surplus and
available. So the context of all this would be new money in that
analysis. So you haven't seen anything proposing, certainly, that we
borrow for operations.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: This discussion served its
purpose for me, and I'm going to treat this as I do at home. I'm
going to pay down the debt, and we'll just have to deal with this year
as it comes.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay. I'm ready to call the question.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
None.
Item #10A
PRESENTATION BY THE "DON'T EAST COAST THE WEST COAST" CITIZENS
COHMITTEE ON URBAN GREEN SPACE PRESERVATION - STAFF DIRECTED TO PREPARE
A REGULAR AGENDA ITEM
The urban green space preservation presentation,
Representative Saunders.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman and Members of
the Commission, it certainly seems like things are more complex than
in the good old days when I was on the board. As I look around the
room, you have got some very interesting issues to deal with today.
And this is, I think, going to be a very important issue and a very
important issue for you, also.
I want to thank Commissioner Mac'Kie for her assistance
in getting us on the agenda, and before I begin, two things. One, I'm
speaking as a member of the committee Don't East Coast the West Coast,
and I have a couple documents that I would like to give out. Clay
Henderson will be making a presentation subsequently. He has a paper
dealing with local Florida initiatives in land acquisition. There's
six copies there. Mr. Weigel, in addition, I have six copies of the
list of the committee members. I will tell you we had to -- we
started off as a very small committee of five or six people, and that
began to grow and grow, and we finally had to say enough is enough,
but there was a tremendous amount of interest in being on that
committee. And then, finally, I have just the basic agenda package.
I have several extra copies of that for board members if you need
that.
In January a group of environmental leaders and business
leaders, and people, civic-minded people, who were not necessarily
environmentalists or in business, got together to begin the discussion
of urban green space acquisition for preservation purposes. And the
reason that we formed the Don't East Coast the West Coast Committee
was simply a realization that as we have rapid development in the
urban area of Collier County, there's going to be limited
opportunities for the county to preserve open space for future
generations. There was an article in the "News Hawk" which is a
publication of the Florida Wildlife Federation that I think kind or
sums up what we're trying to accomplish, and I'd like to read that --
that short paragraph.
"Communities with more green space tend to have higher
property values, are aesthetically superior, and provide a higher
quality of life. The committee is exploring a multiple-use approach
that includes bio-diversity, recreation, air and water quality, water
supply and flood control, and eco-tourism."
So there are a lot of economic reasons why we are
interested in this particular issue. It's also clear that the
citizens of Collier County are very much interested in this issue as
evidenced by the many comments that came out of the FOCUS study.
Environmental issues were at the top of the list. Preservation of
urban areas was also at the top of the list, and additionally, this
commission established a citizen's advisory committee to evaluate the
comprehensive plan under the EAR process. And that committee placed a
high price tag -- a high value on preservation purposes.
The Don't East Coast the West Coast Committee was formed
to serve as a vehicle to get this before the County Commission, and
it's our hope that over the next month or so that this commission will
agree to place this on the ballot for the voters to consider. An
example -- perhaps not a very good example, but an example of what can
be done -- is the proactive steps that this board took in acquiring
Lake Avalon. I think Lake Avalon will be considered one of the best
parks in Collier County if not one of the best parks in southwest
Florida, and it's just an example of what proactive and responsible
government can do, and each of you on the board is to be commended for
doing that. And I use that just as an example of what can be
accomplished.
The committee began meeting, we developed a mission
statement, we developed a recommendation to the County Commission.
Now, this is a recommendation. There are policy issues that I believe
need to be addressed by the County Commission in reference to a ballot
question, but we do have a specific recommendation. It's also
important to note that this committee is representative of a large
cross-section of citizens in Collier County. We had often times very
heated debates on the direction of this committee, whether it should
be urban green space, whether it should be green space outside the
urban area, whether it should be a mix, and I'm very proud of how this
committee worked together. I'm very proud of the dedication and hard
work of the committee members. I would like to thank the two
committee chairmen, Dr. Fran Stallings and Richard Klaas.
Dr. Stallings will first talk a little bit about the committee mission
and a little bit about the recommendation. Richard Klaas will also
address that.
MR. STALLINGS: Fran Stallings speaking as co-chairman
of the Don't East Coast the West Coast Committee. Did I say that
right? As Representative Saunders has indicated to you, our committee
cuts across the broad cross-section of the community. And one of the
outstanding things about this committee is that they put the
community's interest ahead. I think we all did that. We worked very
hard to try to look down the road and see what we can do to make this
a better community. I would stress, also, that we took the
multiple-use approach, that we didn't look at just one reason. We
looked at a whole variety of things for doing this sort of thing.
Throughout the state there are a number of other counties who have
similar programs, and we were in hopes that we could have such a
program here in Collier County, because, again, we believe that it
will be a real good investment for the future.
What I will do is to go down the recommendations of the
committee and maybe speak to those just a little bit, and there are a
couple of other people who want to address you. The first
recommendation that Representative Saunders just presented was that
you put this issue on the ballot and let the electorate make a choice
as to whether or not they would want such a program. And I would say
throughout other Florida counties where this issue has gone on the
ballot, it's one of the few that has tended to pass. A while back in
Polk County, they actually approved a sales tax there for land
acquisition, and I know Polk County quite well, and I think the hot
place down below froze over at least temporarily when that was
approved in Polk County. So if it can happen in Polk County, I think
it can happen about anywhere.
Another issue that the committee was very strong on was
that we have -- if we're going to do it -- that we don't of a token
program, that we have a very strong and meaningful program. And on
that basis the recommendation is that the program make available at
least $15,000,000 annually to go out and purchase this land.
The next recommendation involved the implementation of a
one-half cent sales tax. Now, this is one where we have heard a lot
of opinions pro and con. There are many people who say a sales tax
will never pass, we need an ad valorem tax. And it was not a
unanimous vote on the committee to recommend a sales tax. So I think
a significant argument could be made for an ad valorem tax as well.
So I think that's a choice, you know, that has to be made. There are
also other sources of money, and in the documents that's in your
agenda packet, we recommended that you look at these other sources of
money, but basically as supplements. And this would be money made
available through grants, through mitigation monies for developments,
and whatever. So there are some other sources of money.
Within this we were also recommending that whatever
monies be made available that at least 10 percent be made available
for management. We do recognize that when you acquire lands, you have
to do something with it. In some cases there may be intiges
(phonetic) out there such as the division of forestry or someone else
who can manage the land at no expense to the county. But in other
cases that management expense will be there, and we think it should be
provided for right up front.
Another area of consensus on our committee was that the
program be on a pay-as-you-go basis, as opposed to bonding. Fifteen
million dollars annually is quite a substantial amount of money, and
we felt like that we wanted to see the most mileage possible out of
the money, and if we didn't have to make interest payments on bonding,
that we would get more mileage.
The next recommendation was that the tax be instituted
for a maximum of five years. At the end of this five-year period, it
would have to be reauthorized, perhaps go back for a new vote or
whatever.
The next recommendation was that the funds collected for
land purchases including maintenance couldn't be used for any other
purpose. I think that sort of goes without saying, but we said it
anyhow.
And number seven, that the program be set up in
accordance with the documents attached hereto. Now, I won't go
through all of the details in the documents, but I will go through
several of them here. The first being that we recommended that a
technical selection committee be set up. Any time you get into a land
acquisition process, it needs to be very clean, and it needs to have
the maximum safeguards in it against someone taking unfair advantage
of it.
So we recommended, first of all, five non-voting
members. The five non-voting members would be a Collier County
Commissioner or their designee, a Naples city council person or their
designee, someone representing the Collier County Natural Resources
Department appointed by the board, someone from Collier County Parks
and Recreation appointed by the board, and someone appointed by the
city council representing the natural resources activities within the
city. Now, these would be non-voting members who would provide inputs
on technical or whatever.
Then there would be a number of voting members. We
could set up 15 or are recommending 15 to you. Again, we wanted to
have technical expertise on here, and we wanted to have a broad
cross-section of the community. So we recommended a realtor, an
attorney, a biologist, an ecologist, a water resources specialist, an
engineer, a land-use planner and urban designer, two
environmentalists, and then we recommended five citizens at large, one
from each Board of County Commissioners' district. So we felt like
that would give it a good balance.
Now, in the section -- prioritization and selection and
process, any citizen would be able to nominate a parcel of land to
this selection committee, and the first cut would be whether or not
that parcel of land had a willing seller. So if the owner of the land
is not willing to consider an offer, then the land just automatically
is not considered. Then this committee would take a look at the
different pieces of land, evaluate them, prioritize them, and
recommend to the Board of County Commissioners only the several
parcels that we have the money to buy. And then you would have the
option of accepting or rejecting those recommendations.
If you reject them, then the committee would have to
come forward with some new parcels for your consideration. If you
accept the recommendations and settle on several parcels, then the
list goes away. That way we don't end up with a list of maybe we'll
buy it, maybe we don't. That some how or other influences property
values or stirs people up. So we're just trying to learn from history
and avoid some of the problems in the Belle Meade situation and go
forward on that basis.
So this committee, then, would make those
recommendations to you. There's two tilts built into the selection
process. One tilt is that when parcels of land come out roughly equal
in the prioritization process, that the parcel of land either in or
closest to the urban area be purchased. That's the first tilt.
The second tilt is that as parcels are prioritized that
we take a look at the different urban areas and on a per capita basis,
where you have an urban area that doesn't of as much green space, that
any green space to be purchased in or near that urban area would get
preference. So in other words, the idea is to balance out among the
different urban areas of the county the greenspace.
The selection process is more involved than that, but I
don't think we can go into it in great detail, at least not at this
time. There's a lot of questions asked, well, you're taking land off
the tax roles or whatever, and that's true. We have dug into those
questions, and a lot of those things, hopefully, if you put it on the
ballot, we will deal with as the election comes up. But from what we
have been able to discover, the communities that have a lot of green
space of a much higher quality of living than the communities that
don't. And that's provided that it's done in a correct way. In other
words, yes, we take land off the tax roles, but the adjacent land goes
up in value. We're never going to stop growth in this sense, and
that's not what this is designed to do. But what it is designed to do
is to have a higher quality growth, to better manage growth, and to
look down the road and of a far nicer community for all of us to live
in.
And before I sit down I would just say, again, that I
think this committee made a very, very sincere effort to put the
community's goals first and to come up with a recommendation along
those lines. Again, we're not focused in on any single use, but a
whole variety of uses, so I think we will all make some compromises
and these compromises are then towards making this a much nicer
community and maintaining that into the future.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I think your committee is certainly to
be commended for developing this issue. I think the voters would
certainly welcome the opportunity to be able to vote on this. This is
an issue that we see a great interest in all across the county and a
very high degree of interest at that. So I am excited about the
opportunity to have it on the ballot, but at the same time, there are
some questions that we need to discuss just yet. And let me ask you,
did I understand you correctly -- I don't think you directly stated
it, but would lands outside the urban area be considered?
MR. STALLINGS: Yes. We built a tilt in because the
urban boundary is an official boundary. And the tilt we built in
focuses in on what's within and immediately adjacent to the urban
boundary.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, if I may also
respond. As I said in my earlier statement, there are some policy
issues that really need board direction. And the committee has made a
recommendation, but it's only a recommendation. This board may
determine that urban green space is the only space to be considered,
and that's certainly a policy decision that we will certainly not --
we will certainly not -- not find fault with.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: The concern for me along
those lines is there are a number of acquisition programs taking place
outside the urban boundary, and I don't want to -- if the intent is to
create something that's not happening now --
MR. STALLINGS: Yeah, that's one of the reasons --
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- because that might
implicate --
MR. STALLINGS: -- one of the reasons that we focussed
more on the urban area is because we do have these other programs
taking place, and we were seeking a balance there.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: In response to Representative
Saunders' statement, there, though, this is not a board-driven
initiative. This is your committee's driven initiative.
Are you suggesting that the Board of County Commissioners take
over the responsibility of the committee and start making policy
decisions?
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: Well, I guess the answer to
that is I don't want to walk through a trap, and I kind of see that
happening.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: But you don't mind if we do?
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: No, no, no, no. The trap that
I'm concerned about is I don't want to say, well, yes, there are
policy decisions that the board needs to make and then have the board
say, well, you're not ready to proceed with this.
And so I want to emphasize that the reason we started
talking about property outside the urban area, quite frankly, was that
Dr. Stallings very wisely pointed out that we may have properties that
straddle the urban boundary. We have properties that are more outside
the urban boundary but partially inside the boundary. We also
recognize that the urban boundary, though it's fixed in concrete, 10
years from now, 20 years from now, 30 years from now may not be so
fixed.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Good point.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: So we want to -- we want to
leave some flexibility for the board to -- to make some of those
policy decisions. We do have a recommendation, but as Dr. Stallings
said, there was some disagreement even on the committee as to whether
it should be purely urban or a mix.
We do have two or three other people that do have some
comments that may answer some of your questions, also, if you would
like to get back to that more or we can continue with the questioning.
MR. STALLINGS: One final comment before the other
speakers come up. In terms of buying outside the urban area, it was
our idea to move forward with the urban area incorporating this green
space into it, because if you stick strictly within the urban area,
the land is very, very expensive, and you can't really buy that much
land for the amount of money. So we will be able to make the money go
further if we can work on the borders of the urban boundary as opposed
to being strictly limited to areas within the urban boundary. The
other thing is you know we're addressing things like flood control,
and water supply, and whatever, and a lot of areas that so directly
impact the urban areas do lie immediately outside the urban areas. So
to reiterate what Representative Saunders was saying, that would give
us a flexibility that we might not have otherwise.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: For me a couple of concerns.
One, is I worry about duplication of some of the existing acquisition
programs, but also if you break it down into those areas that are not
included in the urban boundary currently, close to 90 percent of that
is either currently held or targeted to be held in state or federal
programs, and so my worry there is are we going to end up with a
hundred percent of the area that's not in the urban boundary?
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: Well, 90 percent is too high a
figure. I think probably more in the seventies, low seventies. But
we do have some other speakers who I think can provide additional
input, and then we will be happy to attempt to answer whatever
questions you have.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Just for clarification, 73
percent of the entire county, which means that area outside the urban
boundaries, is in excess of 90.
I understand you have a couple other speakers, but a
couple of thoughts along the way here. First, as Commissioner Norris
says -- and I think we have an excellent intent here -- if you paid
attention to FOCUS or if you of listened to anyone who is awake in
Collier County, there is a genuine concern as to where we're headed
here and how much growth is enough growth. I don't think there's
anybody in Collier who would say that we aspire to be like the east
coast. I think everybody is pretty well in agreement we don't want to
be like Lauderdale or Hiami, and we do need to be proactive. Earlier
in the last year I suggested lowering our densities, allowable
densities, on future developments as one thing.
I have a concern that -- and apparently it has been
discussed in the paper, but I don't think it can be ignored here
today, and that is we passed an ordinance -- a policy two or three
months ago as to how to deal with ballot initiatives and putting a
particular policy in place. The one thing I always hear is government
should run more like a business. And I am hard pressed to think of a
business that would pass a policy and three months later ignore it.
And so I think in addition to dealing with the merits of the issue --
and I think they are there, we need to deal with the issue of
conflicting with our own policy that we just set a couple months ago.
I understand one of the discussions is, well, this was an ongoing
discussion prior to that policy going in place. But so wasn't fire
consolidation, and so wasn't median beautification, and any number of
other things, and if that is our reason for waiving the policy, of we,
in fact -- do we have a useless policy that is just going to be waived
aside for a number of things?
If that's the case then we need to get that up on and on
the board today. It's a little frustrating to have a policy and
choose to ignore it. I agree with you this is an issue that needs to
be dealt with, but I think we need to review our own policy issue as
well.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Weigel, is there something in
the law or the procedure that we adopted that allows for -- for board
members to propose items without their going through the petition
process? I mean, of we obviated -- if I would like to propose this to
the board, of I now lost my right to do that without bringing in
petitions, because I would like to propose this for the board's
consideration?
MR. WEIGEL: No, you haven't lost the right. The
petition policy -- citizen initiative policy adopted February 27th
provides a policy and requirement by policy for petitions following a
particular format and timing to be brought forward and reviewed both
through the county attorney office and through the county manager
office. But it is a policy established by resolution. It is not law,
and, therefore, it is livable to the extent that any policy by
resolution is waivable and that is by a vote of the board to waive or
deviate from the policy that's adopted. That legally is -- the
ability is there.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: If the majority wants to do
that, I'm not going to argue the case. But it just seems to me let's
not play politics and pretend that we're bringing this to the board.
There's a citizens' initiative, and if we want to not utilize our
policy, let's say that. I mean, I appreciate the fact that you want
to bring the item forward, but if we're not going to use the policy,
perhaps we need to bring that back another week and strike that.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: In fairness I have to -- I have
to say that this initiative was under way and the rules were changed
in midstream. They were proceeding because at that time the only
mechanism was to come to the Board of County Commissioners and request
that it be put on the ballot. And that's the direction they were
taking. As they got along in that process, the rules were changed
too. So it's not, in my opinion, a clearly either/or, either we live
or die by the policy or we don't, in this case. But any initiative
that's begun after the adoption of that policy, you will not find me
supporting -- obviating it for the sake of convenience.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: And I don't want to belabor
it. I wanted to make sure we had that discussion today, and we have,
and we can move on.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: Richard Klaas as an associate.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Let me make a statement here. If
you're going to go around the board's policy and have a commissioner
bring this forward, then why don't we just terminate the discussion
today, and you work with the commissioner that you're going to use to
subvert our policy?
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: Well, we were certainly not
going to subvert the board's policy. As a matter of fact, since we're
having the conversation, we did check twice to make sure that we were
okay. And we checked with the board staff to make that determination
with the county manager's office. So we just didn't try to find a way
to circumvent the board. We did check to make sure that we were
within the legal parameters that we were operating in.
I did choose to ask a commissioner to help us put this
on the agenda because, quite frankly, I think that's -- the only way
to get on the agenda is to either of a county staff issue or to ask a
county commissioner to consider placing us on the agenda. But I
certainly don't want leave the impression that we tried to circumvent
the authority of this board. That is certainly not the case.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I have one question before Mr.
Klaas gets started. In the discussion, Representative Saunders, on
the urban area, there are two other urban areas in Collier County
besides the coastal area. Are those urban areas included in this
program as well?
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: The way the program is
recommended right now, yes, they would be, because we're not limited
to just the coastal urban area, and so that was part of the
consideration. And there was quite a bit of dialogue about the
Immokalee area, for example. We wanted to be able to include them in
the event that this acquisition program made sense for that community.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And that's already urbanized?
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: If I may, I don't mean to
interrupt. I hope to curtail. But, Representative Saunders, I don't
see a question in front of me, and what I hear is that you're seeking
some level of direction from this board to help you formulate a
question. Let me go back to the recent fire consolidation question.
The majority of this board turned that request down because of the
form of the question. We didn't agree with the form of the question.
Or at least that was my -- my -- my part. We're being asked today,
gee, what do you think? And before I can make any vote about putting
a ballot question on the November ballot, I need to see the question.
It's not here in front of us today.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: That's correct.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I think a lot of this would be
the same discussion we're going relive if a ballot question is brought
forward. So we're pulling double duty on this item.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: Well, I guess there are a
couple of things. First of all, if we had 25,000 signatures but we
didn't of three or four or five commissioners supporting us, we
wouldn't even bring up the issue, because the political support of an
issue like this is critical. So we want this commission to work with
us to develop that ballot question.
There are a couple things that we want to happen this
morning. One is we'd like for your staff -- you to direct your staff
to work with the committee to help refine some criteria, because there
may be areas that we overlooked. This has to be a partnership. We
also want the commission to direct the county attorney's office to
work with us to develop the precise language of the ballot question,
because there are technical, I guess, holes that we could fall into if
we weren't careful in the way we drafted this.
So we're not -- it's not that we are unprepared to draft
a ballot question. We need this commission to work with us to bring
this issue to the voters. We're not going to ask the County
Commission to campaign or anything of that nature. We're going to
take care of that. But we want the County Commission to help us draft
the ballot question and make sure that the criteria that we develop or
criteria that you as commissioners want to see, because those criteria
we're going to have to live with.
So I understand the dilemma. We have checked with Mary
Morgan in terms of the development of the ballot question and the
election time periods. The final decision has to be made sometime in
June concerning the ballot question.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Well, I guess I'm still not clear on
why you need a committee if the County Commission is going to
formulate the ballot question. It seems to me that -- that should be
the job of your committee to formulate the ballot, and bring it to us,
and we'll put it on for you.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I need you to help me a
little bit, Butt, because I feel the same way. I kind of hear both
sides of the argument. You didn't discuss what was going on before
the policy was in place, but it sounds like the discussion is still
going on, and you haven't come up with all the criteria. If there are
particular things that you think ought to be on the ballot, and you're
worried about the technical wording, then obviously somebody can help
you with that. But the substance of what goes in there, if it's a
citizen initiative -- I assume at this point and from talking to some
of your committee members, I know at this point you have some of that
substance in mind.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: We have a specific recommendation that
can be put in the form of a ballot question right now. The technical
language would have to be drafted by the county attorney's office.
What we would like, though, is for the Commission to take a look at the
recommendation and determine is this really the way we would like for
this ballot question to be presented to the voters. We'd like for the
Commission to be part of that process. And I mean no disrespect by
saying this, but the only way that we felt we could get this issue
before the public and before the County Commission was to form a
committee, come up with the plan, and bring it to the County Commission
as we have. Had we not done this, we would not be having this
discussion before the County Commission, you would lose the 1996
election cycle, and you would be looking at 1998 as the first
opportunity to have an election. By 1998 you're going to
have substantially less opportunities to purchase green space,
because, quite frankly, it will be gone.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I understand that and appreciate the
comment. But still I am left with the County Commission getting too
deeply involved in this. If your committee wants to bring us your
plan in concept, itemized down, and then of our staff put it into a
ballot question, that's one thing. But to have the County Commission
pass judgment on whatever your committee brings forward I think just
brings the whole thing up to questions by the voters. The committee
said one thing and the County Commission said another. Then you have
got a dichotomy here that is going to cost you votes. And I think
every single member on this board wants to see this thing go to a
vote.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: But that is another substance.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: What I'm saying, it's your proposal.
You tell us what you want to be done.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: If we start -- if we start now
the premise that every single member wants this to go to a vote, then
we have kind of won a major battle here, because if five members of
this commission want this to go to a vote, it will to go a vote.
Now, we do have a specific proposal which can be formed
into a ballot question.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Let me suggest a course of action
on that. In the interim, you meet with the commissioners individually
to determine what their concerns may be in the language you're
proposing, go back to your committee and see if you can formulate a
question that seems to hit on the majority of the concerns of the
board, if there are any, and that this item be scheduled before the
board to go to a referendum at a public hearing at a later date before
the June whatever. That's what I would see to be a reasonable course,
that you have at least got consensus up here that if it's worded in an
acceptable manner, that the majority of the board would like to see it
go to a question. Now it's up to you to form the question and maybe
meet with us individually to discuss it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I've been waiting to be recognized --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Sorry.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- so I'm just going to butt in,
too.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I recognize you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you. I think it's a darn
shame that we're elected to lead this community -- and that first of
all it's a shame that they're smarter and paying more attention than
us that they brought this issue to our attention. But for God's sake
let's not send them away and tell them, like, you know, come back with
the witch's broomstick or something.
What we need -- what we need to be doing is
participating in the process, and I appreciate being afforded the
opportunity to participate in the process. I would like not to say go
away and come back with a perfect question. I would like to say
please go away, and let's work together to come up with a consensus of
what this community will support. I think they're offering us that
opportunity.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I think that's what
Commissioner Hancock suggested is this community apparently has some
specifics in mind. Commissioner Hancock suggested that they sit down
with each of the board members, which means, then, we become a
participating part of the process, and then we come back -- through
all that process you come back with a question. I think you're both
saying the same thing.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, good.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: We do have a couple other
people, and I'm sure that they will be brief.
MR. KLAAS: Good morning. My name is Dick Klaas.
Chairman Norris, I just of a very few comments. Commissioner
Constantine is correct. Seventy-three percent of the gross area of
Collier County is owned by various levels of government. The area
that I'm most concerned with -- and you can probably see already where
there was some dissention on our committee -- the area that I'm most
concerned with is the urban area. That's where we can stop densities,
and that's where we can of passive recreational uses, because I think
that's very key to getting our issue approved. That is assuming you
approve it to go on the ballot. People sitting in their rocking
chairs, I think, don't care about another section or two out in the
Everglades. Right or wrong, I don't think they do. They can
understand a place to picnic, a place to romp around with the grand
kids, or to launch a boat, or whatever. So these things -- these
things do make sense.
We do solicit your support. And the only other item I
have to mention is that this is one of the few times that I have seen
the development community and the environmental community come
together. I think that's -- I think that's significant. I think that
should be something that should be fostered by the Board of County
Commissioners, because when we all get together and get interacting,
I, for one, now understand a lot of the views that I have never
understood in the past. My cohorts on the committee were always just
somebody to please and get around, and that -- that won't be true if
we get the two sides together. So, please, don't let us down. To
coin Commissioner Constantine's thing, if we get this approved it will
be the -- the west coast won't be the east coast. Thanks.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: We had to bring in an
out-of-town expert to tell us how to do things, but Clay Henderson is
very unique. He's only about 41 years old, and to some of us that's
still just a youngster. But he's -- he's done an awful lot. He was
on the county commission in Volusia County for six years. He's most
noted, though, for negotiating the acquisition of over 50,000 acres of
sensitive lands. He's appeared before 17 or 18 different county
commissions on this issue. And he wants to talk a little bit about
what we're trying to put together and what the benefits are for
Collier County.
MR. HENDERSON: Thank you, Representative,
Commissioners. Chairman and Commissioners, I was on the county
council in Volusia for six years. I was the only person to leave the
council with all of my hair it's original color, so I -- it gives
me -- it gives me -- it gives me -- I get a little nervous when I of
come back into commission chambers. It reminds me of those old days.
I wear a couple of hats. I am president of the Florida
Audubon Society, and as you know Audubon has had presence in this
community for almost a hundred years. But the last 10 years I have
been very much involved in land acquisition efforts state-wide and put
together the first program like the one that you're being asked to
look at today in Volusia County and worked with a number of counties
in putting together a similar program.
And the other hat that I wear now is the chairman of the
State Green Ways Coordinating Council. And I would tell you in that
regard, that, yes, not only are you running out of time because of the
vast amount of development that is taking place in the state, but
you're running out of time to have matching monies to assist you in
your efforts. The legislature just concluded with passing the 7th
series of Preservation 2000 bonds. That means there's only three more
years of that program left. Ten percent of those monies are set aside
for grants to local governments out of the Florida Communities' Trust
Program, about $27,000,000 a year. And the legislature also made one
more change this year in changing the trails program to -- to make it
a green ways and trails program. So we on the Green Ways Council will
be working closely with local governments in trying to promote these
kinds of initiatives. Indeed, you have only got a few more years left
where these dollars can be matched.
All I would like to tell you is if there is a pattern
for success in these programs and your citizens committee is following
that pattern, they have brought together citizens from diverse areas.
They have united. You just heard Dick say united the development
community and the environmental community. That's what these programs
do. The -- the formula they have proposed to you is what has worked.
I might tell you, though -- and this is where the give
and take comes up -- you are the gatekeepers of the ballot box. And
so I think it is well within your province to help -- to work with
them to decide whether in light of the bigger picture, a sales tax is
what you would propose to the public or whether an addition to the ad
valorem is the way to go. I would tell you that the pattern of
success throughout the state has been -- tying it to the ad valorem
tax has been what has been the most popular. There have been a number
of times where it has been put on sales tax that it has not succeeded,
although Pinellas County was able to put $65,000,000 on part of its
sales-tax package which approved, but most of them have been small
quarter mill or a fifth of a mill supported bond issues.
But because of the small amount of time that you're
looking at here which is, you know, four years or five years, that's
probably -- a pay-as-you-go approach certainly would be prudent and
practical.
So I would tell you that you're on the right track. I
would urge you before you pull this together that you do get this
together as a program, because it will be your program. If this
passes it will not be the citizens' program. It will be your program,
and you will be having to work with the other state agencies to find
the matching monies to acquire the lands, and you will want to make
sure early on that you can get some of these issues resolved.
So I salute you for getting it this far to get it to the
ballot. You're going to succeed, and I'll tell you as a former
commissioner what others of said throughout the state. When this kind
of program succeeds, you will look back and see that it was the most
important thing that you did.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Just a couple of thoughts.
Our program is the citizens' program. I don't think we need to
differentiate between the two. I think anything the board does
certainly is on behalf of the citizens. So I think if we can go ahead
with a project like this, everybody benefits.
The other -- I took a little exception to the gatekeeper
comment. I don't think we try to keep anything off the ballot or try
to keep people away from deciding on an issue. I think the only
question today is what is the substance, what's the meat of the
question, what are we looking to put on it, and it appears that the
majority of the board is comfortable putting something of this nature
on. We just need to know what. Hopefully through the question
process suggested by Commissioner Hancock we will get to that point in
the next 30 days.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: We just have one last
presenter, and I was having a hard time trying to decide how to
introduce her. And I have decided just to introduce her as Penny
Taylor, a well known person who cares passionately about her
community.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Do we have subsequent speakers?
MR. DORRILL: We have one.
MS. TAYLOR: For the record my name is Penny Taylor.
Thank you, Commissioners, for giving Don't East Coast the West Coast
Committee the opportunity to speak before you today. Your willingness
to seriously consider our proposal demonstrates to the voters that you
understand the importance that open space has in Collier County's
future.
Through FOCUS many citizens have expressed their hopes
and their concerns. People are worried about local government
population projections that triple our current population in just 23
years. They ask how can we maintain today's quality of life if the
future holds such dramatic population increases? Where are we going
to put all of these people?
Open-space preservation is not a new concept in urban
planning. One of America's greatest examples of open-space visioning
can be found in Manhattan's Central Park designed by Fredrick Law
Olmsted (phonetic). And in Portland, Oregon, Olmsted's sons designed
a parkway through a dense forest that is just five minutes from the
downtown area.
In Collier County open space will do more than just
reduce build-out population. It will ensure a continued intermittence
of urban and natural to accommodate both the visitor and the
resident. Biking, canoeing, nature trails, picnic areas, wildlife
corridors, ground-water recharge, flood control management. All are
positive. All are possible.
The economics of open-space preservation translates very
well. Eco-tourism is not a short-lived trend. Collier County has
become the destination of choice for the world. Quality environment
is our product. It is what we have to sell. Our white sugar-sand
beaches bring many visitors, and our beaches are a fragile asset
worthy of nurturing and preserving. They do, however, have a limited
carrying capacity. Too many people using our beaches will create
costly degradation for our beaches and those living close to the
beach.
Don't East Coast the West Coast recognizes that now is
the time to acquire additional open spaces away from the coastline
which provide recreation and retain our community's global-recognized
quality of life. The lands committee was unanimous in its resolve
that this program would be successful only if the funding was
substantial and land management funds were adequately earmarked.
Under your leadership and with your direction, the
citizens of Collier County will be provided with the opportunity to
participate in their future. The land committee has provided an
excellent program for your consideration, the most basic of which
comes down to your authorization of a November ballot question, and
here's the question: Would you support a sales tax for the funding of
a land-acquisition program to raise a minimum of $15,000,000 annually
for a period of five years?
Collier County is urbanizing at an alarming rate. To
dismiss putting this question on the ballot would be turning a deaf
ear to this county's fundamental survival requirements. But how many
county commissioners does it take to sustain paradise? Just five.
But they really of to want to make it happen.
On behalf of Collier County citizens, make it happen,
Commissioners. Thank you.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, I think based on
the dialogue that I have heard this morning and this afternoon, what
we would like to ask is that the board direct staff to work with us to
deal with the specific criteria -- make sure that we haven't left
anything out -- have the county attorney's office work with us in
crafting the language to the ballot question, and I will meet with
each of the commissioners and incorporate everyone's concerns into
this.
And then I would ask that you direct staff to place us
on the agenda sometime in June with an advertised -- an appropriate
legal advertisement so that the board can consider an ordinance to
move forward with this if the board so desires.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Consider the staff so directed with
the acclamation of the board unless there's dissension.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Sure.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Great.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have one public speaker, and then
we will break for lunch.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Erlichman.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: The committee is going to meet
with each of us to help develop the question.
MR. ERLICHHAN: Good afternoon. Gil Erlichman, East
Naples, and I'm speaking for myself.
After listening to Mr. Saunders and Mr. Stallings and
Mr. Klaas and this gentleman from Volusia County -- Volusia County is
where Daytona is, isn't it? Isn't that Volusia County? Well, in my
opinion Daytona is the pits. It's absolutely. And I say it from
experience. Anyhow, I appreciate -- I appreciate the ex-commissioner
from Volusia County giving us the benefit of his opinion.
What I would like to -- one of the things I would like
to address here is that we have a preponderance of environmentalists
who are telling the citizens of Collier County what, in their
opinion -- what we should do along certain guidelines of so-called
bio-diversity, air and water quality, ground water recharge, flood
control, and, of course, density reduction and aesthetics. But I
thought we have a South Florida Water Management District and Big
Cypress Basin who are -- those bodies are charged with -- by the
state -- with protecting our water supply and also giving us some type
of flood control protection. Why we have to have another layer, you
might say, of bureaucracy in this proposed technical advisory
committee or group which is going to be empowered by this referendum,
I just don't see the reason for that.
Right now we have on our advisory boards -- we have two
environmental advisory boards, one is an advisory board, and the other
is an advisory -- policy, technical, advisory board. And then we have
a parks and recreational advisory board. We have Mr. Ollif over
here. If the commissions want some information or advice as to
placement of parks or lands for recreation, I think we have people
right now that we're paying salaries to that are employed by us.
Mr. Stallings, who is one of the leaders in this -- in
this proposal, I believe, does not live in Collier County. In fact,
he's not -- he's not a taxpayer in Collier County. He doesn't vote in
Collier County. Therefore, I would -- I would not appreciate his
advice as to anything that takes place in Collier County, because he's
not going to wind up paying a tax, whether it's a sales tax or an ad
valorem tax.
I have no objection to this being put to a vote to the
electors in the county. I appreciate that, but I think that the
commissioners should -- should consider what I just said about our own
parks and recreation director and the advisory boards that we already
of in place. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We're going to break for lunch. We'll
take the rest of the speakers later.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, can I ask, are
we finished with this particular item?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: No. Actually, we -- we wound up with
some more speakers, so we'll catch them as soon as we come back from
lunch.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: Okay. We have several
speakers, but the board has -- has made it's decision, or not?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have directed staff to do what you
asked, to work with -- actually, I would like to reiterate that I
think it's a great idea. It's very exciting to have this opportunity
especially since it will come before the voters in a referendum. I
think what we need to do now is for your committee to hammer out the
details to make that a little more firm and to get a ballot question
done, and then I think you're going to see the support of this board.
REPRESENTATIVE SAUNDERS: And I would like to say that I
think the questioning of the board is excellent. I appreciate you
challenging us to make sure that we present a product that's going to
be worthwhile. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay. We will reconvene at 1:15.
(Lunch recess taken at 12:08 p.m.)
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We'll reconvene the county commission
meeting. Mr. Weigel, we're in the middle of speakers on that last
issue that, green space issue.
MR. WEIGEL: One second. We've got Jack Stanley
followed by Stan Olds.
MR. STANLEY: Good afternoon. My name is Jack Stanley.
I'm vice chairman of the Florida Wildlife Federation. This morning
Clay was a little too modest to tell you, but the federation gave him
a rather coveted award for his work on Volusia County's land
acquisition program.
I want to share some of the federation's perspectives
with you on the land acquisition process and what came before you this
morning. One of the reasons the committee chose the name Don't East
Coast the West Coast becomes very obvious to us when we look at the
very popular satellite photo of South Florida. If you haven't seen
it, if you look at it, you'll notice that Broward County is built out
to the levies of the water conservation areas, and all you have to do
is drive east for about an hour, and you suddenly leave this nice
marsh land and come over a little rise and there you are in the middle
of major development, four tiers of interchange for three interstates.
There are isolated pockets of green in this urban mass,
but that's what they are, isolated pockets of green. Collier has the
potential to become the mirror image on the west coast of Broward
County on the east coast. People are leaving Broward County in droves
because the quality of life there has deteriorated so badly.
I want to make it clear that we are very grateful to the
committee and the members and to Representative Saunders for their
work, and we appreciate your consideration of it, and while we're not
opposed to acquiring land within the urban area, we prefer to see the
emphasis put on purchases outside the urban area for several reasons.
We usually get more and better quality land outside the urban area,
and we like to see large pieces of in-tact habitat purchased. Also
this gives you the opportunity to link these purchases with ongoing
acquisition programs and leverage your money so that you get still
more. We would like to see you avoid the checkerboard effect that
sometimes occurs if you buy a small parcel adjacent to the urban area
and then another small parcel distinct from that or disjunct from that
because you'll end up with this checkerboard effect.
In short and in closing, I would just like to thank you
for your consideration, and I applaud your agreeing to go forward with
this process and tell you that we would like very much to work with
you in any way we can to formulate the final language and the program
and the plans and the acquisition standards. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you, Mr. Stanley.
MR. WEIGEL: Following Mr. Olds, the next speaker will
be A1 Perkins.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Olds. Mr. Olds has left.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay.
MR. PERKINS: I have copies for each one of the
Commissioners. It's after lunch so smile, guys. What the heck. Wake
up, people. A1 Perkins, Belle Heade Groups, citizens for
constitutional property rights. If it didn't sing out today, it's
singing out right here in front of you people. What I've passed out
to you is an update on land purchases, the reduction of taxes by 50
percent, and this reflects the land that the evacuation routes of
Miller Boulevard Extension is in.
(Commissioner Constantine entered the board room.)
MR. PERKINS: And if you look close, you will find that
the Department of Environmental Protection has bought two pieces of
property with the -- with the road in it. The Division of Forestry
has bought one piece of property with the road in it. And, of course,
the Wildlife Federation has seen fit to buy a piece of property that
has the road in it. This is public funding. This is tax money. This
is grants.
At the present time, in the Belle Heade, in the southern
Golden Gate Estates, the DEP, the South Florida Water Management,
Rookery Bay, the Conservancy, Save Our Rivers, the Audubon, the
federal government, the CREW and the CARL program all exist, and this
is what I heard here this morning, is we want to buy more of your land
with more of your money so that we can control it.
By the way, before I go any further, I want to make sure
that everybody knows I am not a paid lobbyist. I live in Collier
County, and I vote in Collier County, and I would like to make that
part of every person that comes up here to speak to designate where
they're from and why they're trying to lobby these commissioners and
for what purpose because so far it was brought out here earlier that
one of the lobbyists also lobbied for urban expansion.
UNKNOWN VOICE: Freedom of speech. Ever hear of that?
MR. PERKINS: Sure. I sure do. Anyhow, along with
these lines here, to go into this problem with your purchasing of the
land or even putting it on a tax roll, anybody that takes and gets a
building permit is required to have a certain amount of green area and
water retention. Zoning in the estates is 2 1/4 acres for one house
and one guest house. If you don't think there's enough green space
around it, try mowing the lawn one time. In the agricultural it's 1
home for every 5 acres. Now, the way it looks like, they would like
to put a ballot -- a referendum on the ballot so that the intown can
buy out of town with their money.
Now, Picayune State Park which hasn't been purchased but
it's been earmarked by the State of Florida which is being -- trying
to be purchased by anybody who will buy it that has political
influence with these organizations, and then they're going to turn
around and flood the state park, South Florida Water Management. Now,
we apparently have a whole bunch of lies here going on and a lot of
reasons that make no sense. I have nothing -- no reason why anybody
in the world can buy any piece of property that they can afford, but
when they talk about willing sellers -- and I'll be perfectly honest
with you. I am not a willing seller, yet I have the CARL program over
my head for 16 years. No buyers in sight. No offers in sight. The
State of Florida will give me maybe half of what I paid for it back
then, plus the fact that I have worked at all this time. So the State
of Florida are -- not necessarily the State of Florida but the people
who are running the State of Florida are no friends of mine.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you, Mr. Perkins.
MR. PERKINS: Have fun.
MR. WEIGEL: The final speaker is Judy Leinweber.
MS. LEINWEBER: I am Judy Leinweber. I live on
Immokalee Road, Bay West Nursery, and I've seen all the improvements
with the weirs that water management has been putting in our area, and
every time we get a rainy season I see how much worse the flooding is.
I guess I can thank you folks for that and South Florida Water
Management.
And as for the green spaces, I've seen Bob Hardy's
permit for the Woodlands. I know what he's doing and the plants he
has to plant and the fixed cameras that they're insisting he's going
to have to put in to make sure he has the green spaces and the
wetlands and all that.
And then we've seen the Vineyards. What a beautiful
place that is. And they've got walkways, bike paths. They've got
lakes. And this is what our county is making our land developers do.
They are putting in the parks and the green spaces but not because
we've got the new university going in. And with Mr. Nicewonder's
property there -- which some of it is environmentally sensitive. It
is wetlands -- they want to make a land grab for that. I don't think
that's right. I think he has a right to use his land the way he wants
to, but the environmentalists, they have drawn the lines where he
cannot build, but I don't see anyone stopping Bob Hardy, and he's got
property over there, neelpens (phonetic) he's going to be developing.
He's got three more housing developments back there with Mr.
Nicewonder's that he's going to be developing.
(Commissioner Hancock entered the board room.)
MS. LEINWEBER: So one -- one developer can develop land
that he owns the way he wants to with restrictions, but then we've got
Mr. Nicewonder that's not going to be able to develop his land, but
we've got a new university going there. They're going to put in
Treeline Drive which is going to put Bay West Nursery under water.
I've been in contact with some experts, and they've looked at the
grass, and they've looked at the weirs, and it's going to get worse
and worse and worse, but we the public are going to let our officials
do it to us.
And East Naples, that new flood structure they want to
put in, that's not going to help the East Naples people. It's going
to make their flooding worse, and that is part of their restoration of
the Everglades which Mr. Norris knows about, and it's going to make
our flooding worse. East Naples is complaining because they've been
getting flood waters, and that's because the weirs which are really
dam -- dams are holding back the water, and it's going to get worse.
It's not going to get better, and no one cares about it.
Our chairman, Valetie Boyd, who lives in the Moorings --
this is not going to affect her. She's chairman of South Florida
Water Management. Bettye Matthews, she gets protected by Bob Hardy
over there in Longshore Lakes, but what about the rest of us that
don't have that kind of money behind us? It's not funny, and you've
got an election ahead of you, and I'm going to be there at the meeting
on Wednesday, and I just want you people to be responsible and not
just take care of the fat cats or the poor people. I want the working
man to start being taken care of. I want some of that tax money to be
used for improvements on the working man, the people that pay your
wages. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: That concludes that issue on the green
space.
MS. LEINWEBER: Yeah. I got real mad.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Are you through?
MS. LEINWEBER: You want me to come back up there? I
will.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: No, I don't.
MS. LEINWEBER: I've got a couple of minutes yet.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Actually, no, I don't. I don't have
any desire for you to come back up there.
Mr. Dotrill, do we have any public comment today?
MR. DORRILL: Yes, sir.
Item #10B
NAPLES BATH AND TENNIS CLARIFICATION REGARDING COMPLIANCE OF PUD -
CCPC TO CONTINUE ITEM UNTIL ALL QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN CLARIFIED
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: If I may, if I could ask the
board's indulgence this morning, I had every intention of adding a
very brief item under 10(B) and did not do it. It was a mistake on my
part. If I could ask the board's indulgence to simply request
clarification from the county attorney on an item.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Not -- Not requesting action
from us?
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: No. No. It's not a vote.
Mr. Weigel, the Naples Bath and Tennis PUD when it was
originally created --
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I don't have a problem with
that.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- allowed the board -- thank you
-- allowed for the addition of transient lodging facilities based on
a later approval by the Planning Commission. So what, in essence, is
happening is the Planning Commission is being asked to make a
substantive land use change decision to allow 48 res -- or 48
transient lodging units inside a residential community. Obviously
today we would not structure a land use decision in that manner. So
my request is, is it possible to delay the Planning Commission action
to clarify whether or not the board should indeed have authority in
that decision as opposed to giving it completely to the Planning
Commission?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I tell you, Hargie Student of our
office has been discussing this with me already, and we've been
looking at the -- the old PUD for Naples Bath and Tennis. She may
have a few comments that may assist you, but we're certainly looking
for any direction you may give.
MS. STUDENT: I think it would be appropriate for you to
continue it for two weeks because we'd like some more time perhaps to
go over it with planning, but my reading of the PUD document was that
the hotel or transient lodging facility was already a part of the PUD.
And, in fact, there's a finding that it is compatible in that PUD, and
all that the Planning Commission was to do was to approve the number
of rooms in the facility, the architecture design and landscaping and
parking through an SDP process which staff would normally do. That's
my reading of the PUD, that that's already in there.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: But the number of units is
subjective; is that correct?
MS. STUDENT: I don't believe it's subjective. I think
we would be applying our codes to that and our comprehensive plan to
that. So I think there are some criteria that would guide the --
guide the Planning Commission and staff.
MR. WEIGEL: But your question is well founded in the
sense that the PUD does not provide or prescribe a set number of
units. In fact, the number is not provided there at all. MS. STUDENT: That's correct.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: Which then 100 could be in
compliance.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I think we would look to our current
-- current codes to see if what was in compliance with our -- with
our planning code.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Under proper rule, since I failed
to add this at the beginning of the meeting, what would be required to
request a continuance of that matter until these -- these questions
could be answered?
MR. WEIGEL: A continuance from the Planning Commission
hearing?
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Yes. If it's the desire of this
board. I may be the only voice on this. I don't know.
MR. WEIGEL: Correct me if I'm wrong, Margie, but I
believe that the staff can make a request to the Planning Commission
and --
MS. STUDENT: Yes.
MR. WEIGEL: -- and we would be prepared to do that.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: If we could take a straw poll of
the board, I would like to see that happen.
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: Agreed.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Yeah.
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: Agreed.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Yeah.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: Thank you.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
PUBLIC COMHENT - SEMINOLE CHIEF BILLIE REGARDING EXEMPTION FROM
BUILDING CODE VIOLATIONS
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Now, Mr. Dotrill, do we have any
public comment today?
MR. DORRILL: Yes, sir. Mr. Billie is -- is here on
behalf of the Independent Seminole Tribe and in addition -- he and I
have discussed this briefly, and we -- we need you to clarify and
underscore your policy. There are 14 other people who have registered
on this. I've explained that public comment is generally limited to
five minutes, and you can talk about anything that you want to talk
about, but Mr. Billie is here. You may want to clarify for him the
board's intent on the balance of the speakers.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Well, that's -- that's generally the
policy. You can speak about anything you want to, five minutes. The
board does not take any action. This board does not have anything to
do with code enforcement actions. I would like everybody to
understand that before you start speaking, and keep that in mind as
you speak. The Code Enforcement Board is the sole board charged with
that. From there it goes to circuit court if there's an appeal. This
board does not hear code enforcement action.
So with that, if you could call the speakers. We -- We
might ask that the speakers consider not being redundant if your
point's already been made so we could get through this a little
faster. Please go ahead.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Billie, go right ahead, sir.
MR. DANNY BILLIE: First of all, I would like all the
county commissioners to turn around to look at the Florida seal, if
you would, please.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: We're aware of the Florida seal.
MR. DANNY BILLIE: Well, turn around and look at it. I
ask you to.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I do every day, sir.
MR. DANNY BILLIE: Look at it. There's a Seminole on
there.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Could you state your name for the
record, please?
MR. DANNY BILLIE: My name is Danny Billie, and I'm the
spokeperson for the Independent Traditional Seminole Nation, not
tribe. Nation. And what you, the county commission, and what the
code enforcement are trying to do -- we have taken a petition out, and
there's 652 Collier County citizens and more coming saying that what
you're -- what you, the county commission, and the county code
enforcement are trying is illegal, and you might say it's not, but in
the eyes of the people with consciousness it is, and total petition
through the state, which we still got more petition coming in, it's
1,997 people says it's still wrong. And for me -- we -- if you -- You
keep saying in the papers that you're trying to work with us, but
you're not. You're just waiting to prosecute. That's all you're
doing. And for us, we're saying that if you want to work with us,
give us an exemption and you -- I know that you guys stated many times
in the paper saying that an exemption would set a precedent, but it's
not going to set a precedence because if people wanted to live like
that, they would be living like that already which they're not.
And another thing is that you're saying that you don't
want politics involved, and you said that's not your job to make a
decision on the code enforcement job, but why are you out in the
public every day and every time that a newspaper makes a headline
about it, that you guys are the ones that -- speaking about it all the
time? If it ain't your job, then, you know, stay out of the papers,
stay off the radio, you know.
And another thing is that a lot of people here had come
from a long way to support us in this struggle because that's what it
is, a struggle, 503 years of oppression of trying to assimilate us in
a way that -- you know, as being as who we are and what we are are
extinguished, and that's what's happening today because you're saying
that if we don't follow the code laws, that you are going to do away
with your chickee huts. So that's the same thing when Christopher
Columbus started 503 years and 7 months ago. There's no difference.
And so what I'm asking you is that -- There's going to be several
coming up to speak. Give them time to speak because the time is for
the public.
And what the petition says is that we, the undersigned
people of consen -- consigns request that the Collier County
Commission exempt the Independent Traditional Seminole Nation from the
current building codes. The enforcement of these codes would destroy
their cultural and spiritual existence. Since these people have lived
in the traditional ways since time and memorial before the existence
of building codes or Collier County, we feel that a grandfathered
exemption is -- is not only warranted but necessary. No code or
regulation is worth the total destruction of a culture. These
individuals and their ancestors have lived and thrived in -- in this
fashion since the beginning of time. It is unthinkable and genocidal
in nature to force compliance of rules that would jeopardize their
mental, physical, and spiritual well-being.
That's what the petition says. But, again, our thanks
to Mr. Hancock, and I've heard that he was asked to let us go first,
but, you know, you denied that and -- and another deploy trying to
prolong this whole process so that we can get tired of it and go home,
but you're mistakenly -- you -- you're mistaken because we're not
going to go away because this is our right, and this is who we are and
what we are, and we're going to continue to fight. Thank you.
MR. DORRILL: Keep going?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Keep going.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Billie, Bobby Billie.
MR. BOBBY BILLIE: Thank you. When we was young, maybe
about -- I'm 51 years old. Fifty-one years back ago was living
natural. This whole place was natural. You can see the birds and the
things was free and also water was clean, and there was a future back
then. Everything's clean. People's mind clean. But -- and then the
road came through, and then the airplane came through. Oil wells came
through, and people came in. All those natural way of life vanished
of the excess just 40 -- 20 years ago. It still excessive.
Everything was flowed, and the water was clear. We don't have to put
it in the bottle to drink. It's there to drink. Because of a law,
because of the code enforcement things developed to make the money for
-- for the people behind the seat like that, and then everything put
in packets. It's nothing free anymore. But yet people calling here
the freedom of the -- of -- of people as long as you have paper or
money, but otherwise you not -- you're not involved as long as you
don't have no money. But who bring the food on your table which is
people trying to make money for poor people, farm workers. The people
work in the farm the one that's bringing the -- feeds you every time,
but you always abuse those people. Those are the people you need to
protect and preserve; otherwise, you cannot work out there, raise your
own food. I'm pretty sure you maybe -- maybe some of you cook your
own food, but I don't know, but we still do. I think we need to think
about things like this because we do in our community. Have you seen
that the one small area -- but the whole family of the community that
love and cared and trust all people. But in your society when certain
dates come, you can't wait to see the young child to go away because
it's time for them to leave for home. In our way of life, we don't do
that. When the time they leave for home when they go into Mother
Earth. That's the only time they leave from us, and that -- that's
our tradition. We still do even today. I don't know how you take
care of your -- your ancestors, but we -- we do the same thing too.
We take care of our ancestors, but we don't put the mark as you do
because we don't create other -- we don't try to disturb the other
natures, but you do. You create the stone to stir the other natures
to build the stone to put. The reason we don't do that, we don't try
to create something we don't want to get rid -- we can't get rid of
it. So that's why everything is natural. So that's why we call our
self traditional people. We still hold onto that even today.
And I keep hearing you. You said because of electricity
and TV and all that and you not traditional. You're wrong. All these
things come from -- All these things come from the Earth. It's come
from the -- Everything come from the nature. Without the way of life
and natural way, we couldn't have all these. We can't -- We have to
protect that, the natural way and traditions for those people
protecting the resource, the future generation to generation because
we know our way of life is beginning of the time over six million
years. We have a long history of this Earth, and you can't tell us we
don't belong here because creator have made out of this land and to
give us the freedom on this Earth. If you believe in religions, if
you go to church all the time, you shouldn't be talking to us like
that. We all be talking at the level of the people, believe in the
same God, the same Jesus, but you can't separate us. I want you to
remember that. We are the people. We have a right to live on this
Earth as anything else, the creation to live on this Earth. CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you.
MR. BOBBY BILLIE: You cannot push us off. If you do,
you're going to have a problem with us as you did 500 years ago and
250 years ago.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you.
MR. BOBBY BILLIE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mmm-hmm.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Elijah.
MR. ELIJAH: (Native language spoken not herein
transcribed) I just want to acknowledge that we come from a long way.
We come from Ontario, Canada.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Could you tell your name for the
record, please?
MR. ELIJAH: Howard Elijah, and my real name is
Guneewadala in my language, and I belong to the United Nation, Six
Nations Confederacy in upper state New York and Southwest Ontario, and
we have a community in Wisconsin, and we have people in Oklahoma. And
we come here in a -- you know, we've been here before, and it -- it
disturbs us, I guess what's happening to our people, and we talk about
traditionalism, and we -- it would be nice if we didn't have a phone,
if we didn't have a TV, we didn't have those kind of things, but I
just want you to know that in native country -- I guess in our country
is that we do network and we do -- we do know what's going on in all
parts of North America, and we have to do that because of what the
government is doing to us, taking away our rights every day. And when
the non-Indians came into our territories back in the 1700s, 1600s in
-- there was a treaty that was made with the Six Nations, a
Tuwawampum Treaty, and the reason it was made was to give non-Indians
a right to live in our territories, and it was done so that there
would be respect because we seen that you people were different, that
you looked at the world differently, you lived it differently, and --
and so we couldn't go along with that, and that's been our struggle,
and we continue to have that struggle today.
And I guess in coming into Florida, we have been to
Orlando, you know. We went to Disney World. That's not Florida.
We've been to Miami and seen that we can't even get out of the car to
get gas, that it's not safe, and it's the same thing in Naples too.
You don't feel safe. But when we go to our community, we feel real
safe because they're good people. From the children to the older
people, they have visited our communities. In our communities up
North and wherever there is a cause, they're there because of who they
are. The people, whether they're native or not native, in this area
should be proud of that because when you come to Florida -- if I came
to see you, you wouldn't be able to tell me anything other than what's
on paper, that you couldn't take me into the Everglades and show me
what it really is, and so these people can do that because they're
from this land. And, yeah, they do have a television. They do have a
telephone. They have to because of the dishonesty that continues
today with governments, right from the local governments all the way
up to the federal government.
We had a meeting three weeks ago with -- with the Bureau
of Indiana Affairs with our land claims, and they want to extinguish
our title to our land, and they say that if we go back to New York,
that we're just going to be just like everybody else. So we went to
our older people. They said all they want to do is to complete the
theft. They stole our lands. They removed us from our homelands.
We're not even there anymore. Some of our people are, but the
traditional people are not, and so it's hard. It's hard to take that.
That's why we traveled, and we brought our children to witness that it
hasn't changed what Danny said 500 years ago. You're still trying to
take away who we are. We have clans. We have nations. And if we --
In '77 our people went to Geneva because we cannot get justice in this
country, this country that talks about having justice for people, and
that's the kind of work that we're doing. And when Oka happen in
1990, the European Parliament supported the Mohawk nation in their
struggle. We had to bring Europeans in to help us to -- to show the
people in that area the wrong that they were doing, and today we're
gathered here, and there is people from Europe again. We need to do
that. So if that's traditional, I guess, you know, we do have those
things but we're --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: That's the end of your time if you
could wrap it up for me, please.
MR. ELIJAH: Yeah. Okay. So I want to thank you for
these words, and I hope you look at the seven generations because
that's what we're looking at, that seven generations from now those
chickees are still going to be there. (Native language spoken)
MR. DORRILL: Ms. Gualinga. Then, Mr. Santi, you'll
follow this lady, if I can have you stand by.
MS. GUALINGA: (Speaking native language translated
through an interpreter) Good afternoon. I am an Ecuadorean of the
Amazon.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Name, please. Nombre, pot favor.
MS. GUALINGA: Cristina Gualinga.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Gracias.
MS. GUALINGA: What impressed me the most this morning
was the way the commission received us after walking for three days.
We have done this so that the government would receive us, and they
have -- and only of them have they received and nobody else, and that
way we can come to a relation of comprehension. As an Ecuadorean, I
am supporting the Seminoles because they don't have land. How is it
possible that this goes on in all the lands where Indians exist? You
have to understand that we are original people who were here before
anyone. It's impossible that you do this. I don't blame you
personally but the ones who came in and invaded in the beginning from
Europe. But that's why you as young people are here, is to reform
this and start to comprehend like human beings. And when you came to
the indigenous -- When you came to the indigenous people's lands, you
kidnapped the Indian women, and that's how it came to this point. And
even up to this day white people still marry indigenous women, but
they're apparently not able to come to an understanding on how to
resolve the problems.
We're not here to ask for any favors. We're just here
that you return to what was already ours in the beginning. I'd like
to take advantage of this opportunity to speak to you as authorities.
You have a good relationship with the white people of my country just
as we as indigenous people have good relationships with the Seminoles
here in Florida, but now the companies of this country are trying to
destroy my Amazon, what I'm trying to defend. The Amazon is for
everyone. It is the lungs of the world, and I'm asking this not just
for myself but for all people of the world. Our government gave us
the land, over 2 million acres, and we are taking care of that land,
but as my country is poor, they sell the land, and now it is
destroying it. But it is rich in biodiversity and not like technology
in this land. This materialism and money, it doesn't really serve for
any purpose. We all have to open our eyes and find how we're going to
resolve this situation that will destroy the world within a few years.
Thank you.
The INTERPRETER: Thank you.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. or Ms. Santi, S-a-n-t-i. Toner,
you'll follow this gentleman.
MR. SANTI: (Speaking native language translated through
an interpreter) Good afternoon. I come from the Organization of
Indigenous Peoples of Pastaza in the -- Ecuador, and I came to support
this walk, and my name is Flavio Santi. We are organized to defend
our lands on three levels, provincial, regional, and national. We
live in the jungle in a permanent search for the -- for the best life
and -- and good lands without destruction.
(Mr. Santi played music on a flute-type instrument).
With this music our parents would teach us how to love
the land, to love the boas, the trees, the butterflies. That's why we
would like to live free -- to live our lives free like the Seminoles.
A country that has many languages is rich in culture. That's why we
love our country which is Ecuador. Before there was never an Ecuador,
Colombia, or Peru. It was one continent of the Indian. The
politicians divided us, the indigenous people. My grandfather walked
from the continent of South America all the way up to North America
which is actually now the United States, but now he has come with an
airplane. We would like to have that freedom again to come by walking
or in canoes. By what I've observed, I'm going to take that message
to my country which is Ecuador, a multi-national and a multi-cultural
country. When we speak of independence, we're not talking about
freedom within a country. We are talking about the state of the
world. Our world is different. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Toner.
MR. TONER: My name is Thayer Toner. I'm a businessman,
and I'm a 23-year civic-minded resident of Collier County. My wife's
family has been in Florida since before the civil war. I'm very proud
of our community here, our community standards, and our community's
ability to solve problems. I've seen it happen over and over again.
Sooner or later someone forms an organization to solve a problem like
no other community I've ever seen. An example would be we have more
volunteers at Naples Community Hospital than any other hospital in the
world. I formally represent no one except myself, yet at the same
time, I feel I do represent the fundamental common sense feelings of
the majority of the non-Indians and voters of Collier County.
Our county administration is presently trapped in the
legally required enforcement of standard building codes with the
independent Seminoles and their non-conforming chickee-style
dwellings. Because the Seminoles have lived in chickees since time
and memorial and because for many years this particular group have
resided in their remote Oil Well Road village apart from the rest of
us, the majority of us non-Indians feel that we should simply continue
to leave them alone. These chickees are not harming us in any way.
We feel that this matter should be resolved by you in a common sense
practical way very quickly so that we and they can get back to work.
I'm embarrassed for my government that this item has had
to come up on your agenda, but now that it has come to your attention,
I have confidence that your personal consciences will do the right
thing for us all, whether it's in a meeting or phone call. I
sincerely believe that the will of the people of Collier County is
that the code not be enforced with the Seminoles. We respectfully
request you give us your essential proactive leadership to eliminate
this conflict so that we may continue to be very proud of Collier
County in the eyes of the world. Thank you.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Gagnon. Then, Mr. Madrid, if I could
have you stand by, please, sir.
MR. GAGNON: Hello. My name is Bruce Gagnon. I live in
Gainesville, and I'm state coordinator of an organization called the
Florida Coalition for Peace and Justice which is a 13-year-old
organization with organizational membership in 40 cities across the
state, churches, peace groups, and environmental groups, and I've been
walking the last couple of days in support of the Billie family.
We've come to know this family over the past two years, and we've been
helping in every way we can in recent times as this issue over the
chickees has come forward.
I too noticed that seal earlier, and I wondered what the
artist intended with that Seminole woman there and the ships coming
in. I wondered if it was a sign of the conquest of -- of the white
men as the white men began to push these people, the first people, the
native people out of that -- out of that -- out of this whole state.
I'm not sure what the intent of that seal is, but -- but it's sort of
ironic us having this discussion today with that seal there.
You know, the other irony for me today is to listen to
some of the topics that came before you as we waited, one of them
being evacuation. We can't evacuate. It would take -- what did he
say -- weeks? Months? It made me wonder about the lifestyle that
we've created. You talk about growth and development. You know, when
we were walking down 41 yesterday, I was sick to my heart. You know,
frankly, I can't stand to go to the east coast anymore, but this place
doesn't at all seem any different from the east coast. I mean, what
are we doing? So we've been pushing. We've been pushing the
Seminoles away, but we're pushing nature away. And now there's a
discussion before you today about, well, let's see if we can save just
a little swatch here and a little swatch there and a little swatch
there. What kind of future are we talking about for our children? My
15-year-old son is here today skipping school because I knew he would
learn more today by being here than -- than he would for years in
school. He would learn something about people. He would learn
something about priorities. He would learn something about his own
future, that if he was going to have future, he needs to get in the
middle of all this stuff now.
One other observation I want to make was that earlier
one of you said, well, you know, the tourist development commission is
only sort of advisory and that, you know, we can disagree with them if
we have to. I'm sure your planning and zoning people have more of a
-- of a mandate than that. I -- I -- I'm guessing on that, but I
think it's probably so. But I do know that you have powers in this
community, and for you to push it off to them I think is unfair.
I think this last gentleman was correct in saying that
the people of your community -- I feel confident in saying the people
of your community don't think this is a crucial issue for you to be
wasting your time and their taxpayers' money on. When we saw the
response we got as we walked three days in your county, it tells us
that there's a lot of people supporting this family. So I hope you'll
hear that and you won't let stubbornness or egos or whatever come in
the way of making a real common-sense decision, a human decision. I
think these people have a lot to offer all of us, not only people in
Collier County, but people in this whole country. All indigenous
people have a lot to offer us all. If we can only listen to them for
a while, I think we'd all benefit. Thank you.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Madrid. And then, Mr. Queen, if I
could have you stand by, please, sir. Go right ahead.
MR. HADRID: I'd like to introduce myself. My name is
Mark Madrid of the Huskogee Nation in Oklahoma. Mr. Norris, I believe
we have a common thread in our families --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Really?
MR. HADRID: -- in that you are from Oklahoma City.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Ada, actually.
MR. HADRID: Ada?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Hmm-Hmm.
MR. HADRID: So as I speak here, at this time I would
like to say that I came down here in 1978, and I lived with Seminole
Tribe of Florida, the political entity, and worked with them over in
Broward County and watched as that area filled up, and most of the
discussion today by the concerns of this august body of commissioners
is the concern for the quality of life in the future, development of
your families and your well-being, and essentially I find myself
speaking for these people. I am the information director for the
American Indian Movement, AIM, for Florida, the central Florida state
coordinator, and I've known these people for a number of years now. I
respect how they are. I've traveled to Guatemala, I've traveled to
South America, I've traveled to the northern parts of Canada, and I've
seen a lot of indigenous communities, and I see the impact that this
type of development has on the quality of life, and this is our
concern, our concern for our children, our grandchildren just as
yours, just as your family came in during the territory and they made
a living for themselves, and look at you now, sir, sitting here in a
respected position because of your family's concern for the well-being
of their offspring, but you may have some understanding for native
peoples. You may have in your youth or through your life in Oklahoma,
you may have encountered some indigenous peoples. I'm speculating
only. But my speculation is that within that relationship, maybe at
one time you or the other members of this body have considered your
relationship to the Earth, your relationship to the natural world,
your relationship to your families. Things all are tied together, and
this is all these people are asking, the only thing.
I've been to the jungles of South America where the
people have first contact within a matter of so many years. Myself,
my family had first contact in the 1800s -- actually, before that, but
our families were walked out there. My great grandmother, Hulcie, was
born on the removal to Oklahoma.
When -- I came to this area because our language is
similar. Our clans are similar. First contact was just a little
while ago for some of these families, into the '50s for some of these
families. This traditional way of life is just that. They want this
quality of life, and I think that that spills over into your
community. I think that there's an unstated message along with this
with a number of people who stood out on the sides of the roads who
dropped by and gave us something to drink and made sure we were cared
for, to the schools for learning disabled adults that came out and the
people there, they came out and showed support, all levels of people,
and that's all we're asking, for some consideration for a quality of
life, a green space of our mind and our hearts and our future. That's
all we're asking. These are the real considerations. These things
can be handled by you, sir. You can do anything. You can do that.
It is within your power, and that's what we're asking, to seek that
spot that you could make this a point of quality of life to ensure a
green place for your urbanization development. You could do those
things. You're concerned about all the things that have to do with
bringing economics to this area, but what if this area were to look as
though it were some sort of bastille of mind-set of where you couldn't
accept a natural way of life, possibilities of people not showing up
for tourism because they didn't want to come to an area that didn't
show consideration for a natural way of life? There are people
standing in this room who have stood in this struggle through the
years all the way from AIM inception in the '70s, and standing up for
the defense of their people, but, again, what I ask for is these
considerations for this family, for their children and their
grandchildren. I thank you for -- those of you who have just recently
had children, and I want to say thank you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Queen.
MR. QUEEN: My name is David Queen. I reside in
Tallahassee and part of the time in Jax, Florida, over on the other
coast. I speak today for myself. I also am a member of the national
task force for the national Sierra Club, the largest environmental
organization in the United States.
What we see here today is not just a clash over an
alleged technical violation of the county building code. It's a clash
of tradition and of cultural values. It is unwise, arrogant, and
disrespectful for white civilization which stole some 39 million acres
of the Seminoles' homelands through coercion and broken and fraudulent
treaties to tell traditional Seminoles that they must live in a way
endorsed by the white society and that is foreign to them and even
sacrilegious to their spiritual laws.
There is no practical reason why the Traditional
Seminole Nation should not be allowed to live in peace in their
chickees on a little 5-acre parcel of land. They have lived in their
chickees and in these dwellings for generations. Now they are being
told that they must comply with the county building codes or move.
Where would they move? Are the Collier County commissioners -- are
you willing to restore to the traditional Seminoles some of the 39
million acres that were originally taken from them? Living in a
chickee or in a slightly modified chickee as some of these are at the
Traditional Seminole Nation village is not for everyone, but it is --
it is an important part of the cultural heritage for the Traditional
Seminole Nation. It is because of a lack of respect and ignorance
about the importance of our environment by the majority or the
dominant EuroAmerican society that massive environmental damage has
occurred which threatens the health, safety, economy, and the future
of Indians and EuroAmericans.
I urge you to bend your rules a little bit if necessary
in order to accommodate and be respectful to the rights of the
indigenous people of the Traditional Seminole Nation. They should be
commended for their contributions to our society which include living
in harmony with nature, not harassed by ordinances which once again
threaten to rob them of their lands, their way of life, and their
dignity.
I will do everything within my power, including, if
necessary, putting my body in front of bulldozers and landscrapers if
they come to tear down this village. That's how strongly I feel about
this. Those feelings have been strengthened further by walking with
the Billies and with other members of the Independent Traditional
Seminole Nation the past three days. I think you have better uses for
the taxpayers' money than to put me or others in prison for standing
up for these proud people.
I urge you to take whatever steps are necessary to
resolve this conflict to the satisfaction of the Independent
Traditional Seminole Nation members. I might remind you that it is
actually you who reside on their lands. Thank you very much.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Tribble. Mr. Tribble, are you still
with us? If not, I believe the next speaker is Mercian,
M-e-r-c-i-a-n. Paula Mercian, Estero, Florida.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: She's gone.
MR. DORRILL: Ms. Larkins. Larkins.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Coming.
MR. DORRILL: Then, Ms. Peterson, you'll follow Ms.
Larkins.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: How many more do we have?
MR. DORRILL: I've got three more, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay.
MS. LARKINS: Hello again. Good afternoon. Okay. I
live 40 mile -- no -- trail -- I live about 65 years. I'm still here.
Anyway --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Name, please.
MS. LARKINS: -- I'm concerned about money. Y'all have
been spending my money. I have been paying tax close to $2,000 a
year, the whole family, and y'all have been spending the way you want
it. I work my -- I work to death over there, hot sun every day. I
give you money. Y'all got it made and turn around against us. I
don't think it's right, you know. I pay -- support Naples. I support
schools. I support everything. Everybody call me up, hey, support
us. Give us $15 a year, even sheriff departments too, asking about
$15 all the time. They aggravate the hell out of me. Every time I
turn around they want more money.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: That's those phone calls at
dinnertime.
MS. LARKINS: I think they going to buy lunch or
something, a cup of coffee or something. I don't know. Anyway, I
just complain about the money. They cost me a lot of money to my
family, and I got the right to be here. I got the right to speak and
everything. I don't go to school, but I learn for you people. Okay.
Easy to learn. All right. And I don't hate nobody but I don't -- I
know you don't like my faces, especially that one, but I don't hate
you. Even you get hurt down the road, I'm going to come over and help
you, even you hate me -- my face. It's okay. It don't bother me.
I'm not mad at you. I can help you anytime. I can help anybody.
Even the traffic, flat tire, run out the gas, I'm the one that help
moving on all the time every day. I change tires of the tourists,
help everybody, and I don't like it harassing around my brother, the
whole family. I'm the oldest family, and I support everybody. I been
support every one of you over there too. I put food on the table for
you and you and you. I put your suit -- nice suit -- you've been
wearing it. I gave money for you to buy it and a nice place to live.
I'm the one that supports you. I'm the one who feeds you. You have
to think about that.
I live in both ways. My grandfather told me -- teach me
Indian way. I learn white peoples' way. I put together. I keep
going. I'm 65 years old today, nothing new to me. I can't raise hell
with you. If you want to, I don't care. You hate me, I don't care.
I don't hate you. My grandmother told me, you never hate nobody.
That's what I've been doing today. That's what I live 65 years old
today, but lives going to end maybe. Something is going to happen a
couple more years. You can't get out of this world because something
is going to happen. Think about that. I don't know you know it or
not, but I was a little girl because my grandmother 150 years old,
they teach me a lot better than the school. Something is going to
happen pretty soon. We all be gone.
You got power. You got money. You think you got it
made. Kick somebody's behind all the time. You can't do it no more.
If I'm going, you going too. Everybody's going or the world is going
to stop turning. The Earth the same time I been going because I'm
part of nature. The good Lord put me in this Earth. I got the right
to be here. When I'm going, you going, Earth be going. They ain't
going to be -- turn no more. Let's see what happen two more years.
You see that plane go by, blow up, whatever? Now it in the middle of
the Everglades now sinking. You have to realize looking around what's
going on outside, not inside the building look at the people all the
time. Okay. My time's come. That's all I can say. Thank you.
MS. PETERSON: My name is Ellen Peterson. I'm from Lee
County. So I -- I think -- I think this is kind of funny. You might
not. I sort of shook my head this morning listening to you all and
your pyrotechnics fireworks discussion. So I went outside and I said,
I thought Lee County had the lock on dumb, and there was -- there was
a reporter out there, and he said, no, no, no. He said, Lee County's
got corrupt. Collier County's got dumb. So -- But I do think you're
kind of missing something, and I think what you're missing is you've
got a real treasure. You've got a natural resource. You've got a
group, nation that's independent. They don't take money from the
government. Nobody helps them. They are fiercely and strongly
independent, and you should help them be that way. I think that
instead of giving hundreds of thousands of dollars for some fireworks
or a golf tournament that already failed once, maybe we ought to chip
in a little bit and set these people up in something where they can
support themselves royally like using their crafts, their beautiful
jackets, their pottery, and those kinds of things, and you have that
power. I ask you to use it.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Perkins.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: You might as well sit back down.
You're not going to follow that act.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I don't think even A1 can top
that one.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Aaron, you'll follow Mr. Perkins.
MR. PERKINS: You guys have heard it all here today.
You've heard it all, and they've told you exactly how they feel, and
they're telling you from the heart. For the record, A1 Perkins, Belle
Heade group, citizens for constitutional property rights. I advocate
liberty, freedom, and justice. You spend millions. The government
will spend millions. A1 Gore; right? Bruce Babitt, babbling brook.
About the endangered species, we have endangered species
right here in this community. These people need to be preserved for
the next generation and all the rest of them. She just hit it with
the tourist tax and the Internet. If you would, call them tourist
attractions, if you would, but there's a lot of people who come down
here who have curiosity about how it really was in the beginning, and
they can show you, and they can tell you because they live it.
Codes. Every one of the codes are manmade. Every one
of the codes can be changed. The last time I heard, the big deal was
the National Electric Code that had been adopted by Collier County
that's being forced on the Indians. National Electric Code is being
sponsored and always has been and being endorsed by the insurance
companies. You have the power to change the codes. You have the
power to exempt these people in certain categories because if you're
going to compare these people and chickee, I want to apply the same
thing to an igloo because where are you going to stop? COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: It would melt.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: It would be tough to build an
igloo here, A1.
MR. PERKINS: Yes, but at the same time too, the point
that I'm making is when you apply your laws and your rules, where do
you stop with it, and we're being overregulated as it is. You have
the power to fix this problem. You have the power to take and make
this problem beneficial to everybody involved. I'm proud to know
these people. I hope they're around a long time. Thank you.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Aaron and then Mr. Tobin. Go ahead.
MR. AARON: (Native language spoken not herein
transcribed) Greetings, my friends. I'm an Oglalakota from Wounded
Knee, South Dakota, and my colonistic name is Aaron Two Elk. I'm the
southeastern regional coordinator for the International Indian Treaty
Council which has NGO status at the United Nations. We were invited
down to look into violation of senate bill 851, the international
convention and prevention of genocide. As we continued to get
involved, we find many violations that we feel would be inappropriate
for Collier County come 60 days from now when the world will be in
Atlanta, Georgia, for the Olympics to be pointed out as a racist
county that denies indigenous peoples of the western hemisphere the
right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness guaranteed to us
by our birthright. We ask in behalf of conscious citizens of a free
and independent democratic country to understand that there's enough
time for everybody. There's enough room for everybody, that one
segment of society cannot deny because of their lifestyle the right to
exist.
A long time ago my father's father once told me there
was a Lakota holy man who visioned what was to be, and this was long
before the coming of the Washeechoos. He said there beside those gray
buildings a strange race of people will spin a spider's web around you
and you shall starve. He said it was sorry when he visioned the
forlee (phonetic) going back into Mother Earth that killed him.
We cannot stress enough to you the opportunity in your
represented positions to show the world when it comes to Atlanta 60
some odd days from now that you're conscious of social ills, that you
have a humanitarian side of you that would be respected and agreeing
and understanding with the Independent Seminole Nation their common
wishes that you when you left Europe were trying to get away from the
oppression. You cannot reserve that oak of oppression that your
ancestors fought to throw off by imposing upon the Traditional
Seminole Indian people municipality codes that are not the law of the
land. They're local traditional values. They are not international
law, and they are not national law. So you have to understand. And
we're here to educate you in any capacity we can, everything you ever
wanted to know about Indians but was afraid to ask because we have a
good heart. If it wasn't for our goodness, you would not be here.
You would have starved a long time ago on the east coast of this
country, your ancestors when they asked the Indian people for help,
and all we ask in return is to understand and recognize our identity,
our identity as indigenous people.
I fought a war for the white man, 13 months in Vietnam.
I paid my price. I come back, and I see these kinds of acts of
genocide, and it makes me wonder why I even respected the white man's
efforts to spread democracy in this world. So you have to understand
where we come from. The Amnesty International -- International Land
Treaty Council has made it a priority this year to keep abreast of
these types of situations in this country. So on the Lakota way, we
say -- (Native language spoken not herein transcribed) Thank you very
much for your time and attention. CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you.
MR. DORRILL: Mr. Tobin is your final speaker.
MR. TOBIN: My name is Jack Tobin. I'm from Fort
Lauderdale, and I wasn't going to speak today, but I felt very, very
humble to even come up here and actually say anything, but the last
three days of walking with this beautiful family and interrelating
with the people in your county and then now with you compels me to
come forward and say a few words in support of what they represent.
I come from a very technologically advanced background.
I'm an aviation professional, mechanic, inspector, pilot, just buried
my father who was a 30-year airline pilot for United Airlines, and
somewhere along the line I had to ask myself where have we gone wrong
technologically. We're so advanced seemingly, able to do so many
wondrous things in space and particularly in aviation, and yet in
walking the last three days with these beautiful, spiritual people, my
sign said, may we all live so peacefully, so simply, so beautifully,
and thought about that for the three days, and it's getting back to
our roots, who we really are, where are we spiritually in this country
throughout this land, and it really made me ponder a lot on who I am
and what I represent and in seeing the way they live and experiencing
their way of life has very much humbled me, very much. And there's a
beautiful poem that I memorized years ago when my older brother died.
He was an aviator as well. And it speaks to the spirit of these
people and what they represent, and it's the closest that I can come
in just humble words as to what the Billie family represents to me and
all of these beautiful, loving people that have shared so much with
me.
The title of the poem is High Flight, and it was written
by John Gillespie McGee, Junior, who died in 1941 in a train accident
in Canada preparing for war.
Oh, I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth and danced
the skies on laughter's silvered wings. Sunward I've climbed and
joined the tumbling mirth of sunsplit clouds and done a hundred things
you have not dreamed of.
Wield and sword and swung high in the sunlit silence,
hovering there I've chased a shouting wing and flung my eager craft
through footless halls of air.
Up, up the burning blazing blue, I've topped the
windswept heights with easy grace where never lark or even eagle flew.
And while with silent lifting mind I tried, the high
untrespass sanctity of space put out my hand and touched the face of
God.
And that's what these people represent to me. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: That was the last speaker, Mr.
Dotrill?
MR. DORRILL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I would like to thank everyone for
coming and participating today. That concludes our morning agenda.
So we'll take a five-minute break and start our afternoon agenda.
(A short break was held.)
Item #12B1
ORDINANCE 96-22 RE PETITION PUD-96-1, MICHAEL FERNANDEZ, OF AGNOLI,
BARBER & BRUNDAGE, INC., REPRESENTING RD2 PARTNERSHIP FOR A REZONE FROM
"A" RURAL AGRICULTURAL TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR A PROJECT
CONSISTING OF 40,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMHERCIAL DEVELOPMENT FROM THE
C1/T DISTRICT AND MEDICAL OFFICES AND RELATED LAND USES ATTRIBUTABLE TO
PROXIMITY TO A HOSPITAL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF IMHOKALEE
ROAD AND VETERANS DRIVE - ADOPTED WITH STIPULATIONS
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We'll reconvene our county commission
meeting, and we'll start with the afternoon agenda. Item 12(B)(1).
MR. NINO: For the record, my name is Ron Nino.
Petition PUD 96-1 is the petition that asks you to zone 3.2 acres of
land at the southwest corner of Veterans Drive and Immokalee Road.
Currently the property is used as a produce stand and as a landscape
contracting facility. The land is 3.2 acres in area, currently zoned
agricultural, and I'd ask you to zone it to the PUD classification
embodying two components. One component is the component that says
land located within a quarter mile of a medical facility has the
ability to come to you and -- and seek medically related uses,
primarily of an office nature for various practitioners and -- and
related medical facilities such as pharmacies and paraphernalia having
to do with medical supplies. And, two, under the commercial under
criteria provisions of the future land use element, this petitioner is
saying that they meet that criteria of continuity-- contiguous
relationship on one side to commercial development existing or zoned
and that, therefore, by virtue of those two relationships are asking
for 15,000 square feet of medically related space and 25,000 square
feet under the commercial under criteria provisions of the future land
use map.
If you'll note, Commissioners, in the staff -- in the
executive summary, staff is advising you that it has opined that this
petition does not meet the criteria for commercial under criteria and
that it is not contiguous to an existing commercial or development or
existing zoned commercial area. There is separation, and that
separation is called Veterans Drive.
Furthermore, staff has also opined that it does not
consider an ACLF which is the use of the property immediately east of
Veterans Drive as a commercial facility. We do agree that it meets
the criteria for the relationship for medical -- medical land uses.
Yes, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Nino, what zoning district
allows ACLF as a permitted use?
MR. NINO: All of the residential zoning districts allow
it as a conditional use.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: As a conditional use. As a
permitted use, where is it allowed?
MR. NINO: Commercial districts.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: It's -- It's a permitted use in
commercial districts, yet staff doesn't recognize it as a commercial
use.
MR. NINO: Correct. However, we have opined that we --
if there is an emphasis to be put on that, it's the opinion of staff
that that emphasis is that an ACLF primarily functions more like ares
-- like a residential use or an institutional use at best as opposed
to a commercial facility with an office, retail, or service emphasis.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Wouldn't it then be a permitted
use in residential districts and a conditional use in commercial?
MR. NINO: No, because you have decided -- You have
decided that your technique to your -- your zoning approach is one
that makes it a conditional use in the residential zoning districts
and the permitted use in the -- in the commercial district which is
not to say -- which is not a statement that says, therefore, it's
commercial because it is first permitted as a matter of right in the
commercial district. We don't jump to that conclusion. You may argue
with that but that's -- It's the opinion of staff that -- that that's
not an appropriate linkage to make.
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: I hate to interrupt, but this --
this sounds like there's something wrong. I mean, if -- if -- if we
have a use that's a permitted use in commercial but a conditional use
in residential and -- and we're not going to recognize that use as an
essentially commercial use, it -- I'm sorry, but the logic of it
fails.
MR. NINO: If I might interrupt, with all respect,
however, that argument is largely academic or irrelevant because the
primary requirement for meeting the commercial under criteria is a
contiguous relationship, and we don't have a contiguous relationship
here. It's separated by a road.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The road is part of a county
park?
MR. NINO: A road that is -- we understand is now a
road.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Is that a public road?
MR. NINO: The county has declared it a public road, I
understand, recently.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Doesn't contiguous to take into
consideration intervening public right-of-way?
MR. NINO: And -- and -- and if it's not a road,
therefore, it's land that's zoned agricultural.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: But it -- but it is -- It's a
public road?
MR. NINO: It's a public road.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Doesn't contiguous to under
commercial under criteria take into consideration intervening public
right-of-way?
MR. NINO: No, they do not.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: It doesn't?
MR. NINO: It -- it only does -- It only does,
Commissioner, for -- for that commercial under criteria which is
bounded on two sides. When you're bound on two sides, you get to
enjoy a higher level of commercial, a higher potential for commercial,
and one of the two sides may be an intervening public street, but that
criteria doesn't apply to the commercial under criteria with a cap of
25,000 square feet to -- with a contiguous relationship on one side
only.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay.
MR. NINO: However, the Planning Commission in dealing
with this issue in their wisdom determined that staff opined
incorrectly, and in their opinion this petition does -- does meet both
criteria, and they recommended that you approve the entire acreage for
40,000 square feet of -- of commercial development, 15,000 being of
the medical and related uses, the 25,000 square feet under the C-1
over T zoning classification. That vote comes to you with a -- I
believe it was a five to two --
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: I think it was unanimous if I
remember right.
MR. NINO: Was it unanimous? I can't find that now,
Commissioner.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I think it was unanimous.
MR. NINO: Yes. It would be unanimous. That's correct.
Unanimous vote of the -- of the Collier County Commission. No one
presented any objections to this petition either verbally at the
meeting or in writing. I'd be happy to answer any further questions
you have.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: If I can, Mr. Nino, I'd like to
compartmentalize this as best I can. If you're in a quarter of an
existing medical facility such as North Collier Hospital, you can
request medical space and be consistent with a Growth Management Plan;
is that correct?
MR. NINO: That is correct.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. So if they were to come in
and ask for 40,000 square feet of medical office, they would be
consistent with the Growth Management Plan?
MR. NINO: That is correct, and that was the
recommendation of staff as you recall.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. Since, however, they're
requesting 15,000 of that be --
MR. NINO: C-1/T.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- C-i/T, the lowest intensity
commercial which actually has a lower intensity on traffic volume and
trip generation than medical --
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Than medical.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- technically you're saying it's
not -- it doesn't meet it; however, if you apply the common sense
litmus test, it -- this may be a small piece of property that -- that
the application doesn't -- doesn't necessarily benefit.
MR. NINO: Let me -- I -- I agree, but let -- let me --
let me remind you that it's not degree of intensity that is at stake
here but the concept that C-1/T should be used sparingly because it
introduces, in essence, a commercial district which is inconsistent
with the Growth Management Plan. It doesn't matter whether it's
offices or retail facilities or what it is. It brings to bear the
opportunity for creating a commercial district that is inconsistent
with the Growth Management Plan.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: And if it is -- I might point out
that if it is, it seems to me it's consistent with what I heard a
majority of this board talk about supporting, which was neighborhood
-- you know, light neighborhood commercial and that we hope to be
making changes in the comprehensive plan.
So, first of all, I respectfully disagree with the
interpretation. But, secondly, even if it's going down a path that
this board has talked about is one we all support.
MS. CACCHIONE: For the record, my name is Barbara
Cacchione of your comprehensive planning section, and perhaps I can
clarify some of the issues here. The C-1/T district with the offices
is less intense, and it would be compatible with medical offices.
That's true. But what we're looking at here is the specific criteria
in the plan and does it meet it or not, and does it meet how we have
consistently applied that criteria for the last eight years, and what
precedent does it set. Basically you need to have commercial on both
sides with no -- with an -- and it could have an intervening street.
In this particular circumstance, we have agricultural on the west side
of this property and a community facility which is a nursing home
which is an institutional-type use on the east side which is also
across the street from a roadway which is Veterans' Community Park.
If that interpretation is made that this type of community facility is
considered to be commercial, then it will broaden the scope and
application of the C-1/T provision beyond how it's currently been
applied. It could also then be applied to other community facilities
such as churches, essential services, civic and cultural facilities.
They would then be able to come in if they are adjacent to those uses
and under the C-1/T provision request commercial. That is the
concern. And also in applying this property throughout zoning
teevaluation, we have consistently applied it for eight years. Those
are the two concerns which is why staff did recommend this to you and
recommended at this point in time that all the uses be medically
related. We do understand that this provision needs some work. It
was part of the EAR, and we will be making recommendations to you in
the terms of amendments to this provision because it is difficult to
interpret, and it does have some problems with the current
application, and I will tell you that from our perspective as well.
We've met with the petitioner. We've met with the
petitioner a year ago in terms of how he might utilize this site and,
in fact, assisted the petitioner in looking at the medical offices and
-- and that type of thing, but that is our concern, both the
precedent it sets for other types of uses as well as the
interpretation on the intervening streets which we've applied
consistently for the last eight years.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Miss Cacchione, are churches
listed as a permitted use in commercial districts?
MS. CACCHIONE: I believe they are, and they are
conditional in the residential districts as well. The only thing
permitted in residential are residential uses. Everything else,
churches, parks, civic and cultural facilities, those are all
conditional uses.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Miss Cacchione, the property
immediately to the west of this parcel, what is it currently zoned?
MS. CACCHIONE: Agricultural.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And what does our future land
use call for there?
MS. CACCHIONE: Basically residential, depending on the
size.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And the next property over,
Southwest Professional Health Park?
MS. CACCHIONE: That was also designated as a medical
facility. That was approved because they were within a quarter of a
mile of North Collier hospital.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: So I -- I guess what I'm -- what
I'm thinking is that if we've already approved the Southwest
Professional Health Park and we have this intervening parcel of land
that is right now ag land and the -- the use being proposed today is
100 percent medical facility, then this piece in the middle now meets
the criteria. It's got commercial -- It will have commercial on both
sides. So the fact that that piece in the middle is currently ag and
planned for residential probably doesn't matter.
MS. CACCHIONE: I can understand what you're saying and
the domino effect that would create. That -- That probably is true to
some degree. There are many parcels throughout the county that are
situated in such a way which is the reason we're looking at the
neighborhood commercial that the board suggested that do have the
problems with developing at the low density that our plan permits.
The options that are available to those properties are things like
community facilities. That's not always something a petititioner
would like to do. They probably in a lot of cases rather have
commercial zoning than a community facility district or a -- or
something of that nature, but that -- that is not unique just to this
property. It does occur in other areas in the county, and it would
create that property an ability probably to fezone to a higher
intensity.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: From your perspective and what you're
telling us is that the medical itself is not causing us a problem,
it's the C-i/T?
MS. CACCHIONE: The medical is permitted in terms of
being within a quarter of a mile of a hospital.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Why don't we ask the petitioner if he
would just accept all medical and forget the C-1/T. You'd rather not
accept that and take a chance of losing the whole project?
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Someone needs to step up.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Someone needs to answer the question
because we're getting ready to vote here.
MR. FERNANDEZ: If I may make a presentation, please.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Your name?
MR. FERNANDEZ: I'm Michael Fernandez for the record,
planning director for Agnoli, Barber, and Brundage, representing the
petitioner this morning -- or this afternoon. Excuse me.
The project -- it was submitted as a mixed use from the
standpoint of having both medical and also commercial components. We
believe it does meet the commercial under criteria as well as the
project that's immediately to -- that's already been partially
developed as a commercial project. On the board here, we have a
planned unit development map for Collier County. It shows the Surry
Place PUD as a commercial PUD as stated on the legend, and every
document that the county has says it's a commercial piece of property.
That PUD, in addition to the ACLF, also allows for some twenty
thousand -- 27,000-plus square feet of commercial in office space; in
addition to that, a child care center. Both the child care and the
ACLF require permits from the state that designate on the permits that
they are a commercial permit. So from that standpoint we feel very
comfortable in saying that this is a commercial PUD.
In the projects where you have a partial PUD, commercial
PUD and partially residential, only the commercial portion is
highlighted on the maps, but in this case the entire drawing is shown
as a commercial PUD.
Relative to the issue of the intervening street, as
Barbara said, the language that's in there is extremely difficult to
interpret and -- but I would differ that it's been interpreted
consistently in the last eight years. You'll recall that there was a
project that came before you fairly recently on Airport Road which I
represented that had commercial on the side, north of it in the form
of the Regency House PUD. It's separated by a street to the Airport
Plaza PUD which you approved for commercial. And also from what I
understand that the basis of staff's interpretation is a PUD that --
or an evaluation that was done many, many years ago on a piece of
property on U.S. 41, and what I suggested to them that there's a huge
difference between jumping across the street like U.S. 41 and being
immediately adjacent to another piece of property on the same side of
the street separated by a local road which has the same width as an
access drive within your own development.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Adjacent to me implies the same
side.
MR. FERNANDEZ: So what we're looking for really is just
the common sense approach. I would like to make two corrections to
Mr. Nino's presentation. What we actually request in our petition is
45,000 square feet of which a maximum is 25,000 square feet of
commercial. So what we would -- What the client's looking for is that
flexibility in developing an office building that he can then have his
own office, for instance, as a realtor and a developer, that he can
have lawyers or planners or architects or other professions.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Can we strike lawyers or -- No,
I'm just kidding.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Just from a common sense
standpoint this seems to make sense, and that is, you're going to have
less traffic coming and going from that. It's going to be less
intrusive, less of an impact on the area and -- I mean, I'm very
comfortable, and I've got to assume that -- my recollection has been
faulty from time to time, but it seems to me in the last three years
we've had items where -- on non-main roads on local roads where we've
still considered taking that into consideration so --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: If there's no further questions from
the board, I'll close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I'll make a motion we approve
the item.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second. In accordance with the
Planning Commission's recommendation? COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I've got one -- I've got one
question for Mr. Nino. The access to this will be off of Veterans'
Park Road and not off Immokalee Road?
MR. NINO: Yes. As a matter of fact -- As a matter of
fact, if I may, if you'd like --
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I'd like to cut those curve --
cut down as much as we can.
MR. NINO: If you're going to approve the PUD, I'd also
like to suggest that -- because we -- we hadn't anticipated this
action. There are some conditions that need to be considered in this
PUD.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Do you have a right turn lane, Mr.
Nino?
MR. NINO: Yes, we do. A median cut there.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: You want to share that with the
petitioner too?
MR. NINO: These were the stipulations that were -- that
were proposed by our transportation division. They have to do with
the normal arterial level street lighting, access.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Presented to the Planning
Commission and incorporated into their recommendations?
MR. NINO: No, they weren't.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Why was that?
MR. NINO: The -- Because the Planning Commission
decided to approve the PUD as it was.
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. We're --
MR. NINO: We had -- We had anticipated --
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry, Mr. Nino, but the
motion was to -- to endorse the Planning Commission's recommendation
so -- so --
MR. NINO: We -- we -- we -- They were not in the PUD
that was presented to the Planning Commission.
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: These -- These stipulations were
not in the PUD?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Fernandez, the public hearing has
been closed.
MR. FERNANDEZ: We don't have any problems with these
five.
COHHISSIONER MATTHEWS: I'd like to hear whether --
whether the petitioner has any problems with these.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: He just said on the record he
doesn't.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: He doesn't. Mr. Nino, number three
says the southbound right turn lane shall be required on Veterans'
Park Road, but it doesn't say who's going to fund it. Who's to fund
that right turn lane?
MR. NINO: It would be the petitioner.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: The petitioner will fund it?
MR. NINO: Should -- Should that become necessary.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Does this project as proposed --
and I don't see anyone from transportation, but does this project as
proposed meet the warrants for a right turn lane on Veterans Road?
There's a minimum warrant for -- I think it's 30 vehicles an hour
making a right turn that creates -- it's a minimum -- There's George.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: It could at times with the
parking there.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: If it meets the warrant, then it
should be required. If it doesn't, it shouldn't.
MR. ARCHIBALD: Board members, I don't have the figures
for traffic generation, but I would guess that if it's built out for
medical, it probably will warrant the southbound left. If it's built
out for a combination of commercial and medical, it probably would
not, but, again, the ordinance would control. There it sets forth the
procedure for the leftbound or the southbound left, and what we're
asking is that the developer provide that if it meets the warrant.
The board has the option of going ahead and making it a requirement in
consideration of the traffic going to and from the park.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: My question, Mr. Nine, has
anybody from the agricultural industry objected to the rezening from
agricultural to --
MR. NINO: No. No one did. No one did.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: I'd like to ask the motionmaker
to incorporate these -- these five stipulations into the motion, if
only for the reason that the access will be off of Veterans' Park
Road, and there is a lot of park activity that goes on, and between
medical use, commercial use, and park activity, there could easily be
a traffic -- traffic buildup fairly quickly, especially after school
hours and Saturday mornings.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I'll amend the motion to
reflect the five items on the sheet which we were just handed by Mr.
Nine of the county staff.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: The second amends?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I need to hear from Miss
Student, please.
MS. STUDENT: I just -- As far as the southbound -- I
believe it was the southbound turn lane, if you could just incorporate
into that when that would be required. For example, there have been
problems when we had this type of stipulation if we don't put a time
line in there, so when requested by the county would do. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Or concurrent with construction
or '-
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Prior to CO being issued.
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: Prior to CO?
MS. STUDENT: Prior to CO would be fine.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I think that's a good idea.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Add another amendment to my
motion to include prior to CO.
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: And accepted by the second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Motion and a second. All those in
favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
That seems to have passed five to zero.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #12B2
ORDINANCE 96-23 RE PETITION R-96-1, GEOFFREY G. PURSE, REPRESENTING
GERMAIN PROPERTIES OF COLUMBUS, INC., REQUESTING A REZONE FROM
AGRICULTURAL TO C-4 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE
GERMAIN AUTOMOTIVE PUD AND THE WEST SIDE OF TAMIAMI TRAIL - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Next item, petition R-96-1.
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows of current
planning staff. Geoffrey Purse representing Getmain Properties of
Columbus, Inc., requesting a rezene from agricultural to C-4.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Bellows, has anybody from
the agricultural industry objected because they're losing agricultural
land?
MR. BELLOWS: No.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Okay. Thank you.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Are you making a record?
MR. BELLOWS: The petitioner currently operates an auto
body paint shop on the adjacent parcel to the north. This auto body
shop has access to Wiggins Pass Road and is zoned C-4. To the south
of the subject site is the Getmain PUD. This petition would unify his
development to change that agricultural piece to C-4 so he can
continue his operation on that piece of property.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: This is Germain property to begin
with?
MR. BELLOWS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Or is this Germain --
MR. BELLOWS: It's Germain property to begin with.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: You have to use your X-ray
vision, Mr. Bellows -- MR. BELLOWS: Yes.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- from the podium.
MR. BELLOWS: As you can see, the subject property in
red is surrounded by C-4 to the north, PUD to the south, U.S. 41 and
C-4 to the east, and RHF-6 to the west. This unified -- filled a
doughnut, so to speak, in his development so he can have continuous
operation from the northern property to the PUD.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Does the petitioner have anything to
say for themselves here?
MR. KOBZA: Mr. Chairman, members of the board, for the
purposes of the record, my name is Kim Patrick Kobza. I represent
Getmain Properties of Columbus. Here with me are Mr. Purse, the
engineer, and Mr. Robert Getmain, Senior, of Getmain Properties.
They're available to answer any questions that you have; otherwise, I
would stand on the record -- record of the Planning Commission. This
is -- This truly is a technical rezoning in the sense that it's the
hole in the doughnut. The complete site functions in one manner.
It's got a common water management plan for the whole site and --
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: So the answer is, no, you
don't have anything to add. COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Right.
MR. KOBZA: Well, I have an obligation -- I'm sorry, but
I do have some obligation to clear the record for purpose -- Two
individuals appeared at the Planning Commission --
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I'm really sorry to interrupt
again, but just -- just so you're aware, as soon as the public hearing
is closed, I intend to make a motion to approve the item. COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: And I'll second it.
MR. KOBZA: Mr. Chairman, I will conclude my remarks.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I have one question before that
happens.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Yes, a couple of questions, Mr. Kobza.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Germain, please don't take
offense to this, but is this going to create a better looking
development on that corner than what we currently have? Are you going
to do something comprehensive there, or are you just going to do
something on this piece? Because, quite frankly, the intersection of
Wiggins Pass and U.S. 41 could use a little sprucing up. MR. GERHAIN: I agree.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: You moved everything to the new
PUD and what's kind of left behind is -- is -- is not real attractive.
So I guess what I'm asking is, if this fezone moves ahead, can we
expect general site improvements to that corner outside of the
confines of this property?
MR. KOBZA: As a matter of fact, if this proposal goes
forward, that's part of those improvements, and we currently are in
the site development planning process for a commercial center building
there to replace existing buildings that you see. So there's going to
be a complete renovation of that site if this rezoning allows that to
go forward.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Good answer.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I think he answered my question.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Close the public hearing.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Motion to approve petition
R-96-1.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second to
approve. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed?
Being none, that does pass.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: With that comment, I probably
won't be getting that discount on my Lincoln Mercury anytime soon.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You'd have to disclose it if it
was over 100 bucks.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: The next item is --
COHHISSIONER MATTHEWS: Are you buying a new car?
Item #12C1
RESOLUTION 96-232 RE PETITION SNR-96-4, G.E. CAPITAL REALTY GROUP,
INC., REQUESTING A STREET NAME CHANGE FROM HEADOWOOD CIRCLE TO CORAL
PALMS LANE LOCATED IN THE GOLDEN GATE VILLA PUD (MEADOW WOOD
APARTMENTS) - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: -- SNR-96-4. It's a street name
change.
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes, sir. Good afternoon,
Commissioners. Chahram Badamtchian from planning services. This is a
street name change for Headowood Apartments in Golden Gate City. They
have changed the name of the development to Coral Palms, and they wish
to change the name of the street serving those apartments. Staff
recommends that approval.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: This is consistent with all
the improvements that have been done to that property? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Close the public hearing.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Motion to approve.
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Motion and a second. All those in
favor, signify by saying aye.
And opposed?
There are none.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Compliments on the
improvements that have been done.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Ditto.
Item #12C3
PETITION AV-96-003 COLLIER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT AS AGENT
FOR OWNER, DOANE-KEHPFER JOINT VENTURE, REQUESTING VACATION OF ALL
PUBLIC INTEREST IN A PORTION OF AN EIGHTY FOOT (80') ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY
KNOWN AS TRAIL BLVD. - CONTINUED TO HAY 28, 1996
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Next item is AV-96-003.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Do these two go together?
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yeah. Do they go together?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: And -- And AV-96-010.
MR. ARCHIBALD: Board members, for the record, George
Archibald representing the transportation department. These two
agenda items are two public hearings that the staff is having some out
-- or some problems that are a series of outstanding issues that
haven't been resolved yet, and staff is going to be asking the board
to open each public hearing individually and then ask that each public
hearing be continued for a period of two weeks to HAy the 28. And,
again, both items do deal with the vacation of Trail Boulevard just
north of Vanderbilt Beach Road.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to
make a motion we continue petition AV-96-003 for a two-week period --
COMMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Second.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- May -- May -- May 28.
COMMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Second.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Does that include AV-96-0107
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: No. No. No.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: No.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Separate one.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I had previously closed the public
hearing before you did that.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I hope you didn't close the
public hearing because I wanted to continue it while it's open.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We'll continue -- the motion is to
continue it for two weeks. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
And opposed?
There are none.
Item #12C4
PETITION AV-96-010, JOHN M. PASSIDOMO AS AGENT FOR OWNER, STS
PROPERTIES, REQUESTING VACATION OF ALL PUBLIC INTEREST IN A PORTION OF
AN EIGHTY (80') ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY KNOWN AS TRAIL BOULEVARD - CONTINUED
TO HAY 28, 1996
Petition AV-96-010.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to
make a motion we continue petition AV-96-010 -- COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Second.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- for a two-week period to
HAy 28, 1996.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second to
continue. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
We don't seem to have any objection to that.
MR. ARCHIBALD: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you, Mr. Archibald.
Item #13A1
PETITION V-95-28 ROGER E. CRAIG, ATTORNEY, REPRESENTING ANTHONY C.
GNERRE, REQUESTING AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE FOR TWO METAL CANOPIES
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3584 PROGRESS AVENUE - DENIED
Petition V-95-28. What was the problem here? Why do we
have canopies where there shouldn't be canopies?
MR. REISCHL: Fred Reischl, planning services. Well,
it's a request for an after-the-fact variance. The canopies were put
up without a building permit, and when the code enforcement official
came to look at the canopies, he was told to get a building permit,
and then it was found that the canopies encroached into the setbacks.
Before I go into the petition, I would just like to also
say that this public hearing is now being considered under the new
revised Land Development Code for conditions for variance. Staff's
recommendation and the Planning Commission recommendation were under
the old Land Development Code requirements. However, the -- today's
requirements are not as strict as the old; therefore, since the
Planning Commission recommended approval, we don't -- staff doesn't
believe that this should have to be reheard by the Planning
Commission.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Can I ask a couple of
questions?
MR. REISCHL: Sure.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: One of the things I always
appreciate in our packets are the analysis of the application of
special conditions or is it consistent and so on. There's one here --
there's -- There's a couple I see. Are there special conditions and
circumstances? No. Will a literal interpretation deprive the
applicant of rights commonly enjoyed? No. Will granting the variance
requested confer special privilege that's denied others? Yes. But
then the one down at the bottom, will granting the variance be in
harmony -- I always like that one -- with the general intent and
purpose of this Land Development Code and not be injurious to the
neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? We don't
really get an answer there. It says, the petitioner has obtained no
letters of objection, but that doesn't answer the question of will
granting the variance be in harmony and general intent with the LDC.
MR. REISCHL: Well, since staff's original
recommendation was denial, staff does not believe it will be in
harmony with the neighborhood; however, I put that sentence in about
the petitioner receiving the favorable letters, and, in fact, that's
what the favorable vote was based on for the Planning Commission, that
they felt that it would not be injurious to the neighborhood.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Thanks.
MR. REISCHL: And I do have photos supplied by Mr.
Gnerre.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm always alarmed when I see a
40-foot variance on a 50-foot setback.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Eighty percent of the setback.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: What we have here is something
that if you came in before the fact and asked for probably would not
be granted for the simple reason that it could be located elsewhere on
site. Is that true? If we were on the front end of this, would you
have located this somewhere else?
MR. CRAIG: No. As a matter of fact -- Roger Craig,
attorney for Mr. Gnerre who is proprietor of the property in question.
As a matter of fact, that's exactly why we were approved below because
had we asked for advance approval, it would have been given. The
setback is totally consistent with what we have. We have an annexed
building already on the -- on the site, and, Commissioner Hancock, the
-- the annex building is the same setback as the -- the carport that
covers the property. You have copies of the photograph, but with your
permission, I'll show you two more that are the --
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Isn't that -- Isn't that annex
building on another property line all together?
MR. CRAIG: No. It's the same -- It's the same property
line. I'll show you a picture of it here.
MR. REISCHL: If I can just make a clarification I'm
sure to help Mr. Craig, the -- there were approximately ten building
permits pulled on this property through the years. Staff was not --
or building review staff was not required to keep all the records for
them. We couldn't research all of them. The last two are on there
which were for sewer hookup, et cetera, but staff was working under
the assumption that the prior improvements were made with building
permits, that these two canopies were the only ones which were not.
The code had changed regarding side yard setbacks which would have
allowed the placement of these buildings previously.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I've got to agree with
Commissioner Hancock. I -- I've got a concern, A, that we're looking
at an 80 percent variance and then just adding on top of that the fact
that it's after the fact. I don't know.
MR. CRAIG: Commissioner, let me -- let me show you the
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Craig, we need you on
the microphone, but you can hand those photos to us, but when you
talk, we need you on the microphone for the record.
MR. CRAIG: The -- the photographs -- Let me indicate to
you that what we have, members of the commission, is an affirmative
response to these structures by the property owners on the north, on
the south, on the east and the west because, frankly, they improve the
appearance of the property. There's no -- There's been no question to
the fact that this is a -- Hideaway Storage Company is the name of the
company, and the proprietor, Mr. Gnerre, is present here today.
There's no question about the authority or the propriety of the
storage of the vehicles and -- and the boats and so forth. All that
we've done really is both improved the profitability of the property
and the appearance by putting a canopy over the -- the vehicles and
the boats that are stored thereon. And if you'll -- if you'll notice,
all of the property owners on every side have agreed that actually the
appearance of the property is improved by -- by the structures, and
the structures themselves are not -- you know, they're not major
buildings. They're just canopies over top of the -- over top of the
stored vehicles and over top of the vessels. It -- It does no harm.
It improves the property. It improves the profitability and --
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Do you know -- Do you know why
permits weren't sought?
MR. CRAIG: My client went down and did seek permits.
He sought -- He discussed the problem several times. And as he
explained below, his problem was he thought he was running into a --
He asked for help. He asked for assistance. He thought he was not
getting it. He finally --
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: So he built them anyway?
MR. CRAIG: He -- He --
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: He wasn't getting assistance --
MR. CRAIG: You got it exactly right.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: He didn't like the answers he
got, so he built what he wanted.
MR. CRAIG: He did, and he would have been -- according
to the panel below, he would have been approved had he gone through
the process and they decided in their wisdom, which I think is not
inappropriate, that that being the case, they would put in the
penalties that are ordinarily imposed for that kind of conduct, and
they did impose those penalties as you'll notice in the recommendation
to the -- to the commission, and as a consequence, they approved and
recommended that you approve and put a resolution before you that
would do that.
The -- I guess the question is whether or not you would
propose to punish the proprietor for his frustration that he expressed
I thought very well at the panel below, and their position was they
would have -- they would have approved this had he -- had he gone
through the process. In frustration he did not. He will pay an
additional penalty as a consequence, and I would ask the commission to
approve the resolution that's been submitted.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you, Mr. Craig. Any further
questions from the board?
Close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to
make a motion to deny petition V-95-28 based on the fact that special
circumstances and conditions do not exist, and a literal
interpretation would not deprive the landowner -- the applicant to
rights commonly enjoyed and that granting the variance requested would
grant special privileges not allowed others.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm going to second it for an
additional reason which is finding a process difficult or cumbersome
is no reason to thumb your nose at the procedure and do what you want
anyway. I find that to be -- particularly after this morning's
lengthy discussion, to be something that I can't support personally.
So I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second. If
there's no further discussion, call the question. All those in favor,
signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
That motion to deny carries.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: So what happens with this now?
It's been through code enforcement. What happens now?
MR. REISCHL: I'll send your vote back to code
enforcement, and they'll follow up.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What that means is they'll either
-- They can impose a penalty. They can -- They can do daily fines --
MR. REISCHL: Give them time to remove --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- until it's removed.
MR. REISCHL: Right.
MR. GNERRE: Mr. Chairman, may I address the commission
for a moment? I'm the owner, and I'm the one that caused this action.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We closed the public hearing.
MR. GNERRE: I understand that. I would like the
opportunity just to make a comment.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: You'll have to come back in under
public comment at some point in time because -- you know, you were
just denied because you wouldn't want to follow the process. Here you
are trying to come out of the process again, sir.
MR. GNERRE: I just wanted to make a statement. You let
everybody else make statements this morning.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Yes, under public comment. If you had
wanted to make one, we would have let you too.
MR. GNERRE: I wasn't aware I needed to.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay.
MR. GNERRE: I apologize.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: That's fine.
MR. GNERRE: But I think there's a certain fact that you
should have listened -- you should listen to what I wanted to say. It
was going to be short and brief.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: You're welcome to come back next week
and say it if you'd like.
Item #13A2
RESOLUTION 96-233 RE PETITION CU-96-4, MICHAEL HUBBS REPREENTING TRACT
B, INC., REQUESTING CONDITIONAL USE "1" OF THE "C-3" ZONING DISTRICT
FOR A MINIATURE GOLF COURSE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 599 SOUTH COLLIER
BOULEVARD - ADOPTED SUBJECT TO STIPULATIONS AS AMENDED
Our next item is petition CU-96-4.
MR. REISCHL: Fred Reischl, planning services. This is
a conditional use request on Marco Island for the northeast corner of
the intersection of Winterberry and South Collier on a parcel that's
occupied primarily by Mission Plaza Shopping Center, and this is an
unbuilt area immediately at the intersection of those two roads,
approximately three-quarters of an acre in size. The petitioner is
proposing a miniature golf course on the site which under the C-3
zoning district is a conditional use. Staff has looked at various
aspects of the conditional use, including -- One of the most important
would be traffic, and it was staff's analysis of traffic that has
shown that this use will not be -- will not generate any more trips
per day than permitted C-3 uses that would be allowed to go into the
site without going through the conditional use. It is within an
archaeological and historical probability area. The petitioner has
obtained a waiver from staff. There were -- There was one
environmental concern brought up by one of the letters in opposition
which was that lights from the miniature golf facility may reach the
beach and cause to misdirect baby sea turtles. One of the conditions
of the resolution was that the lights be limited to 20 feet in height
and be shielded. So staff believes that that has been addressed.
We -- As I said, we did receive letters in opposition.
Approximately ten letters were received in opposition, and I received
a phone call from the petitioner this morning that one of them has
been withdrawn, but I haven't seen that. I'll let the petitioner
address that. I did receive two letters in favor and one phone call
with no objection to that.
Some of the opposition in the letters was pedestrian
safety which we believe is addressed in the stipulation requesting
that the petitioner work with transportation services. If crosswalks
are needed or need to be updated, the petitioner will supply those.
Another thing was that landscaping would impede traffic flow. That is
taken into consideration in the site development plan. There are site
triangles that do not allow landscaping to be placed within visibility
from the right-of-way.
One thing that was addressed in the letters of
opposition was inadequate parking. Several months earlier -- January
of this year American Engineering did a study for the Mission Plaza
Shopping Center under the Land Development Code's parking regulations,
and with all the current uses in the Mission Plaza Shopping Center by
county regulation, there are 328 required spaces, and 348 are
provided. So with the spaces that the petitioner is proposing to add
plus the additional 20 spaces at Mission Plaza, staff believes parking
-- adequate parking is not a concern.
There was another question that brought up several -- in
several letters that the miniature golf facility would negatively
affect the ambiance of the area. Planning Commission in their
approval motion did put in a stipulation that the architectural theme
be consistent with the rest of Mission Plaza, and staff recommended
approval, and Planning Commission recommended approval.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Reischl. We've
had -- I think probably all of us have received some letters of
objection from the public on this. My understanding is that the
petitioner has worked very hard with MICA, and I have here in my hand
a list of eight stipulations from MICA that would gain the approval
then of MICA, and we need to have on the record the petitioner will
not only accept the conditions put on by the Planning Commission but
also the conditions set forth in the MICA agreement. If they will
agree to all these conditions, then we need to discuss that.
MR. REISCHL: For the record, staff hasn't seen those.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Can the petitioner's representative
make a statement on that?
MR. KOBZA: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, for
purposes of the record, my name is Kim Patrick Kobza representing
Tract B, Incorporated, the owners of the Mission Plaza. I had -- I
did have conversation with Mr. Kramer who is the representative for --
or is the legal representative of MICA yesterday afternoon. It was my
understanding we did reach agreement and stipulation. I faxed him a
letter. I have not seen the specific letter that's in front of you,
and before we agree to the actual conditions, I would like to have an
opportunity to review that letter, but absent that, it is my
understanding, consistent with yours, that we have satisfied MICA with
respect to all of their issues, and that was a very important part of
coming before you today. We've also, by the way, tried to address any
and all other issues of any neighbors, and we -- we understand that's
important to this board.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: You're welcome to a copy of this.
This is the only one I have.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Chairman, while he takes a
look at that, can I ask Mr. Reischl a question, please? CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Fred, just something raised a
concern for me. When I looked at page 15 of our exhibit, it shows
somewhat of a layout and so forth. I looked at the parking right
adjacent to it, and it's not designed to code.
MR. REISCHL: That was several of the stipulations. In
the resolution engineering staff reserved the right to basically amend
that. They -- and we agree that there are several unsafe parking
spaces.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Are we comfortable bringing it
into code to still have sufficient parking?
MR. REISCHL: Still have adequate parking. Yes.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. Thank you.
MR. KOBZA: Mr. Chairman, with items one through eight
in this letter, let me maybe just go at it this way. These are
consistent with what I put in my letter to Mr. Kramer in which I spoke
with Mr. Kramer about yesterday afternoon, but there are two things
here that Mr. Kramer represented to me would be -- actually, one --
one major thing on the bond. They're requiring a bond for two years
on removal of structures. I don't believe that's a major issue. I
don't know why we would require a bond for removal of structures.
It's not really consistent in the context of this type of use -- just
obviously if there's any -- it's in the interest of the center not to
have a project that's not working there or anything that's not
aesthetically pleasing and enhances the project. So if there's a
problem, they're going to take care of it, but to require a bond, I
think that's a little excessive, but we'll do it if this board
requires it, but I just think it's excessive.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Let me ask you a question, Mr. Kobza.
MR. KOBZA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Is there a representative from MICA
here that intends to speak? Anyone representing MICA's interests?
MR. KOBZA: The other thing with respect to MICA deed
restrictions, I was very -- I was a little more detailed in the
context of the deed -- the application of the deed restrictions to
this property. We recognize MICA's ability to impose deed
restrictions or to enforce deed restrictions. We intend to abide by
those deed restrictions. What I said in my letter -- and I think it's
important for this board -- up until two years ago, MICA didn't even
enforce deed restrictions on commercial property. So there are many
uses on the island that include uses in the plaza that in theory or
arguably could be inconsistent with those. So what we said was that
we will stand as all other property owners -- commercial property
owners stand in deference to those deed restrictions as long as
they're applied equally across the island. We're not asking for
anything different than what anybody else would ask for.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Kobza, with all due respect, I
don't think that's what they're asking of you. They're asking of you
to -- to agree to abide by the MICA former Deltona deed restrictions.
MR. KOBZA: And -- and we -- Right.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: You need to tell me whether you're
going to do that or not.
MR. KOBZA: We are going to do that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: As previously required or as
presently -- As previously enforced or presently enforced?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I don't think that's important. He
said he was going to comply with them.
MR. KOBZA: Right. I think the important thing -- For
instance, there are -- the MICA deed restrictions, for instance, a
commercial property's prohibited real estate offices because Deltona
didn't want to have real estate offices in a plaza. Well, that plaza
has real estates offices, and it's not in the interest of MICA not to
have real estate offices in the plaza. There are other uses that are
there currently today that arguably MICA could say well --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Yeah, but we're -- we're not talking
about other people. I want to get that clear. We're not talking
about any other business. We're talking about this particular
project.
MR. KOBZA: We recognize their ability to enforce the
deed restrictions, and I've represented that to Mr. Kramer. CHAIRMAN NORRIS: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: On the issue of the two-year
bond, I have a feeling that arose out of the celebrity golf location
down on east trail. I'd venture to say the location of this golf
course would get enough money in three months out of the year that it
could shut down the rest, so I don't think we're going to have a
similar situation. I'm -- I'm not as -- as big on that two-year bond
because I think the location and the use is going to be pretty
successful.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Do we have public speakers?
MR. DORRILL: We may, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Nolan, do you
wish to speak? And then following Mr. Nolan, I have Mr. Somers.
MR. NOLAN: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, as an aside,
this is my first attendance at one of your meetings today, and I
didn't expect you to bring the Seminole nation to greet me.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: We thought you brought them, sir.
MR. NOLAN: For the purposes of the record, my name is
Tom Nolan. I'm the president of the Sandcastle One board of directors
which is 94 owners, slash, taxpayers. I'm not going to go into the
obvious things that the -- your staff would have done such as the
uncontrolled intersection, there's no traffic light there, the
pedestrian problem, the vehicular problem.
I happen to have sat on the board of appeals in Long
Island one time in your chairs just as you are there. One of the
criteria we used was, does Marco Island in this case need a miniature
golf course, is there a necessity for it. The zoning board is looking
to all residents of the particular area. This facility is, in
essence, a mini commercial amusement park. That's what it's going to
be. It's also a facility that for the most part will be used at night
and weekends. I can't envision the residents on Marco Island or the
tenters coming down and paying the rent they do to go play miniature
golf across the street. So it's a lighting situation that comes into
play here. If any of you have come across the bridge to Marco Island
at night, you obviously have seen now that we have what looks like Las
Vegas with the signs that are electrified, in addition to a store that
has lighting, I think actually has more candle power than your ball
parks. This facility is going to need lighting. The question is, how
long is it going to be lit up.
I guess in summation I came here in 1985 to Marco
Island. I settled here as a permanent residence five years ago. It
is changing. If you approve a miniature golf course, there are other
parcels of land along Collier Boulevard that could support a go-cart
track, a carrousel, a ferris wheel, that type of small amusement park.
So we at Sandcastle are opposed to the change in the condition, and to
paraphrase what I heard this morning, don't east coast East Collier
Boulevard by granting the petition. Thank you. MR. DORRILL: Mr. Somers.
MR. SOMERS: My name is David Somers, and I live at 970
Lido Court which is located directly behind the shopping center, and I
guess I'm here today to -- certainly what's being handed out, just
voice some concerns I have regarding this. The pictures that you have
before you are pictures from my front yard showing the three vacant
lots that sit across from me that are currently zoned residential.
Those three lots are owned by the -- by the Town Center there, and
there have been some suggestions that they bought those lots in
anticipation of needing additional parking somewhere in the future.
My concern obviously as a homeowner on that piece of property is that,
you know, they were required by the county to clean off the Brazilian
peppers that were located on there which on the top photo shows what
the current state is. Before that, we certainly had a nice lush
greenbelt area that didnwt cause us any problem, we were extremely
happy with. I know Mr. Henning has been in contact with me to try to
relandscape some of that area to get back to some sense of hedge or
something for the street lights and the traffic lights that shine into
our house at night, and I appreciate his efforts. But I guess what
Iwm saying is that by using the additional 25 spots that they have for
parking at the existing mall, they really are eliminating any -- any
possibility of any additional growth in that mall and any additional
parking being available, and I just donwt want to all of a sudden see
them now coming before you to request the change of residential units
into parking-zoned areas.
Also within that mall you have four restaurants, a
coffee shop, a movie complex. I know there have been some talk of the
movie complex expanding. Theywre now looking somewhere else on the
island to do that expansion. Therews about 142 outside seating or
seats in addition to the seating that is available within the
restaurants, and I know they did a comparison for the parking. The
Planning Commission -- they said they took that into consideration,
but, again, a lot of people use that area. I have a small child.
Lido Court, as you can see, is a dead-end cul-de-sac. We have a lot
of people that drive down there. Itws not lit by a street light, and
they end up trying to go through the alley over to Collier because
they see the headlights and whatever that are over there. The
alleyway thatws shown on the -- on this particular diagram is 30 feet
wide. Itws probably maybe 14 to 16 feet of asphalt. Itws really a
third entrance for that particular area. Itws used by all the
delivery trucks as well as employees and people who know how -- what
the back way is to get in, and all I see is more and more congestion.
The bottom photo unfortunately is during our rainy
season, but thatws where the new Club Marco is located with about 60
-- I believe theywre called cottage homes over there, and all Iwm
saying is that therews going to be additional traffic and not just to
look at the corner where this proposed golf course is going to go up
but just the whole area, that -- you know, something needs to be
addressed in the front as far as pedestrian crosswalks and street
lights, and something also needs to be addressed in the rear, I think,
as far as some better ways of ingress and egress as well as handling
the water thatws there. And unfortunately my wife didnwt come with me
today, but she voices those same -- same opinions. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Reischl, what type of buffer
is going to be required on tract B between that and the residential
lots?
MR. REISCHL: In the residential -- oh, the entire
Mission? This conditional use is --
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Iwm looking at a picture here,
and I donwt see much of a landscape buffer on that back side which if
you're standing in this gentleman's front yard and look across, there
should be between a residential area and a commercial area a
landscaped buffer, at least type B.
MR. REISCHL: Yes. However, this conditional use is
only for the outparcel. So the scope of my presentation didn't
include the rest of Hission Plaza.
MR. HULHERE: But, in addition, this was already
approved and developed in 1989 or '88, and there's parking right up to
that buffer. So the width that they have is all that they have. We
could enhance it with vegetation, but I don't think we can make it
wider. There's a wall and parking right up to the edge of that -- I
think what you're looking at in the rear along the alley -- CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Could you identify yourself for the
record?
MR. HULHERE: I'm sorry. For the record, Bob Hulhere
with the current planning. So the only thing that we could do is
enhance it with some vegetation. There is a hedge. I drove by it
yesterday. There is a hedge down there. It's about 3 feet in height,
and there's some trees.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: It doesn't go across the whole
property line from what I can see though. I was just trying to find a
way to restore something of what the Brazilian pepper provided the
homeowners that are -- that we are requiring people to remove.
I wonder if the petitioner would be willing to look at
-- at maybe canopy trees at an 8- or 10-foot center within that --
that buffer that -- Right away it's not going to help a lot, but down
the road it may help shield.
MR. KOBZA: Commissioner Hancock, we've -- we've already
agreed to do that as a part of our stipulations to landscape all the
lots in the back and to -- to make a nice hedge there and especially
to address Mr. Somer's concerns. He -- He stated those concerns at
the Planning Commission, and right away we have tried to contact and
make sure we would address those.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. And my apologies. I
didn't -- I didn't see that in the document.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: It wasn't in our package.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: It wasn't in our packet.
MR. REISCHL: Staff's not aware of it either.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Then we need to reiterate it.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Somers.
MR. SOHERS: The landscaping of the three lots, I guess,
you know, they have made an offer to do some landscaping there. I
don't have a problem with that. My concern is that the landscaping
they offered was on Lido Court which would then allow obviously any
overflow from the parking to take place on the three vacant lots, and
I just don't feel any of you need to get phone calls from my wife
because she's not going to be appreciative of cars parking on those
empty lots.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: No, sir. We don't allow that in
Collier County.
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Phone calls from the wife?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I'll close the public hearing.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Chairman, I just want to
clarify what I think I heard Mr. Kobza say, is that Tract -- Tract B
Associates, whoever it is, has agreed to landscape the back side of
these three residential lots?
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: On tract B, not on the
residential lots.
MR. KOBZA: For purposes of the record, Mr. Ted Henning
is the representative of Tract B, Incorporated. I would like him to
answer your question correctly.
MR. HENNING: I'm president of Tract B. I represent the
ownership of Mission Plaza. Once the -- those three lots were cleared
of the pepperwood and other things, much to our chagrin as well as Mr.
Somers, I approached -- approached him and told him that we would do
everything possible to make it a pleaseable sight from his front door
over to the plaza. We have a hedge row now that grows along that
alleyway. We are going to let that extend probably another 2 or 3
feet so that it looks good. We are also immediately going to be
planting probably 10 or 20 feet of tall shrubbery of some sort at the
bottom of the driveway that goes out so the headlights don't go into
his front door at night, and eventually we'll put a hedge row along
the entire parcel of the property, not on Lido Court, but on that
alleyway. Okay? So that when he look out his front door, he's going
to be looking across the lot that's going to have a grass base to it
over to this hedge row on the back side of the property looking
towards Mission Plaza.
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: I think that describes it.
You're going to be -- You're going to be landscaping the rear of the
three lots that are on Lido Court?
MR. HENNING: The rear of the three lots on Lido Court.
That is correct.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I'll now close the public hearing.
MR. REISCHL: Mr. Chairman, just to get on the record,
staff has not received the stipulations from MICA, or we don't have a
record of that --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Kobza is going to return that to
me here.
COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: Should we read that into the
record?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We'll just -- We'll just make them
part of the record. The petitioner has agreed to accept these
stipulations from the Marco Island Civic Association. I think we need
to recognize that the civic association worked very diligently with
the petitioner, and -- and both sides were very cooperative and came
up with a lot of safeguards for the neighborhoods that I think will
sort of ameliorate their concerns that they had at that time. So I
guess we need a motion.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: As much as the gentleman from the
Sandcastle painted this as Pandora's box, I think if this were a golf
cart -- or a go-cart track or a ferris wheel, you wouldn't see much
discussion on how to get it accomplished so -- I'm sorry. There was
no -- no chance to --
MR. NOLAN: I understand your public hearing is
finished.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: It's finished.
MR. NOLAN: However, I want to restate --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Excuse me, sir. It's finished.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm sorry. We don't have the
ability to do that, but I just wanted to assure you that it's not
amusement heaven and -- and carte blanche on this drive, at least from
my perspective. So I'm going to make a motion that we incorporate the
stipulations from MICA --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: And the Planning Commission.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- and the Planning Commission
and approve the item.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
MR. WEIGEL: Point of clarification with regard to the
stipulations. The stipulations would not appear to be and were not
presented as a part of the resolution that you would be asked to
approve. The stipulations have been part of the dialogue and
consideration and promise rendered by the developer today. Such
things as deed restrictions from MICA, of course, are not within the
specific province of county government but the private property rights
and regulations, and I would like the record to reflect that.
And because the courts have said this is quasi-judicial
in nature, I would appreciate if the commissioners would indicate that
there -- such being the case, that their decision today is based upon
all that came before them today and not necessarily items that were
before them before. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: So indicated.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Me also.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: I am basing my decision on -- on what
I heard today in this proceeding and what I've been presented, the
information I've been presented. Although I have had some contact
previously from both sides of this issue, I am, once again, basing my
decision solely on the information presented today.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I am so behind in my work, I have
to base it on what I heard today.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I too am basing my decision on
what I heard today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think we both already said
that.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay.
MR. REISCHL: Mr. Chairman, one more question on the
stipulations. Is that MICA list -- does that include that landscaping
in the vicinity of Lido Court? Because if so, if you could
incorporate that because that's not in the staff stipulations either.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I will amend my motion to include
the statement from the petitioner regarding the landscaping on Lido
Court.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second amends.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay. And that is then incorporated
into the motion. And we have a motion and a second. All those in
favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
Carries.
And for the record who wants these? These are the
stipulations. You want these photos as well? Mr. Kobza gave those to
us.
MR. REISCHL: Sure.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: You may want those back.
Item #13A3
RESOLUTION 96-234 RE PETITION V-96-8, DAVID AND TAMI Z. WALLACE
REQUESTING A 3.1 FOOT AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED REAR
YARD SETBACK OF 25 FEET TO 21.9 FEET FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOT 149,
VICTORIA PARK WEST - ADOPTED
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Hr. Chairman, this next item
is kind of a difficult one. We -- it -- It's tough when everybody is
dealing with their home to say no, but we have been fairly consistent
in the last couple of years on after-the-fact variances. So I want to
hear the situation, but from reading what was presented to us in the
record, I'm not sure how it's different than other circumstances that
have been presented to us after the fact on variances requested for
homes.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: This is petition V-96-8. Who -- Who
is presenting this? Mr. Reischl, is that you again?
MR. REISCHL: Fred Reischl of planning services. Once
again, this variance was considered by staff and by the Planning
Commission under the previous guidelines, and you are considering it
under today's guidelines, and while I present this again, I have some
photographs to have you look at.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I notice here the spot survey was
performed and not submitted and, lo and behold, it was required and it
showed an error. Can you tell me who -- who the contractor is?
MR. REISCHL: It's owner/builder, and I don't have a
microphone here, but I'll -- I'll come over to the map and show you
that the bottom of the lot on this -- the -- What I have shaded in in
pink on the bottom of the map is land area beyond the petitioner's
platted lot line which effectively led to his erroneous assumption
that he had plenty of room from the addition that he was constructing
to the edge of the property line. As you look at the photos, it
appears to be much farther than 25 feet for the rear yard setback.
The petitioner admits it's an error but says that, you know, he --
once he continued after performing the spot survey and not submitting
it, he put a lot of work into it and admits an error but is claiming
that this is a financial not necessarily land-related hardship.
The property that abuts the rear lot is common property
from the homeowner's association of the two subdivisions involved. He
has received letters of no objection from adjoining property owners
for the continuation of construction. The Planning Commission
recommended unanimous approval of this.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Is the homeowner doing the
work himself, or is there a contractor on this? MR. REISCHL: I believe so.
MR. WALLACE: I'm the homeowner. My name is David
Wallace for the record. I am the homeowner. I'm doing all the work
on it. I had a spot survey done one day after I poured the slab. I
was not aware I had to submit it within ten days. I went on the word
of my surveyor that I did not have a problem and that my slab was in
the correct spot. I did not find out until I went in for my
inspections -- for rough-in inspections that I had a problem with it.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Just a comment. My earlier
thoughts -- one of the things we've done is have -- have had -- we had
had a frequent occurrence with particular contractors coming for
after-the-fact, and I do see obviously a different case here when
you're doing the work yourself so --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: It usually comes by the surveyor. So
who was the surveyor?
MR. REISCHL: No. The -- the surveyor didn't make an
error. The surveyor made the error in telling Mr. Wallace
everything's okay. The survey showed --
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Who was the surveyor? Mr.
Wallace, can you answer that for me? Who was your surveyor?
MR. REISCHL: Was it Portella Rowe?
MR. WALLACE: Portella and Rowe.
MR. REISCHL: Yeah.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Portella and Rowe.
MR. REISCHL: Portella and Rowe.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I just want to get that on the
record.
MR. WALLACE: I just went on his word that it would --
He told me I did not have any problem with where my slab was placed,
and based on that I -- I went ahead and built the room.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Reischl, should a surveyor
have known to submit a spot survey?
MR. REISCHL: Well, for an owner/builder -- he's doing
the work for an owner/builder, so it's not his responsibility. I
don't know if he necessarily should have told him to.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: And because we have an
owner/builder, it's reasonable to assume that this gentleman may not
have known he had to submit the spot survey?
MR. REISCHL: I think that's reasonable.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: The addition is built; is that
correct?
MR. WALLACE: Yes, it is. I would have certainly not
gone as far as I did and invested the money that I did in that knowing
I had a problem. I -- I really didn't do anything here intentionally,
and I -- and I hope that you believe that.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Who -- Do we have a letter from
the association saying there's no objection?
MR. REISCHL: Not from the association. From the
adjacent property owners. It doesn't -- It doesn't encroach into
association property. It just encroaches into the setback.
And one more thing to get on the record with the new
guidelines, one of the guidelines is, are there natural conditions or
physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives
of the regulations such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, et
cetera. Now, this doesn't change staff's recommend -- original
recommendation of denial because it's after the fact; however, we
believe that had Mr. Wallace come in before he started construction,
that staff may have recommended approval on this.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Based on -- Based on the fact
that this is an owner/builder -- Sir, have you ever built an expansion
onto your own home before?
MR. WALLACE: I did a small addition on the opposite
side about seven years prior to this one. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Did that require a variance?
MR. WALLACE: No, sir, it did not.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: What's your general livelihood?
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Occupation?
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Occupation?
MR. WALLACE: I am a lumber salesman for Naples Lumber
and Supply here in town.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Give Ron our very best.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: There are some circumstances here
different than the typical contractor comes in and makes a mistake,
tries to hide it, gets caught, and does it after the fact. That's the
one we typically have been very, very hard on. In this case, if
you'll -- Mr. Chairman, if we can close the public hearing, I'm ready
to make a motion.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Close the public hearing.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Motion to approve the variance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Particularly considering Mr.
Reischl's final comments there.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Likewise, that had it -- had it
occurred before construction got to this stage, the likelihood it
would have been approved I think is an important criteria to
understand.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We have a motion and a second for
approval. Before I call the question, Mr. Reischl, I would like to --
are we keeping track of these contractors or surveyors in this case
that -- that caused these errors? Are we tracking that somehow?
MR. REISCHL: We have started --
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Let me do this. I think the last time
we came up with the situation we had you forward that to the
Contractors' Licensing Board. Would you -- Would you do that again?
MR. REISCHL: Yes, we would.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Forward a copy of this and with --
with the recommendation that the -- that the Contractors' Licensing
Board follow this from the county commission. And there's a monetary
penalty here, is there not, a fine?
MR. REISCHL: Yes. This is after the fact, so it was
double the variance fee of $850.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay. We would certainly encourage
you to try to recover from that your surveyor.
And with that, I will call the question. All those in
favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
Item #13A4
PETITION V-96-6, CHARLES BOHAYCHYK REPRESENTING GOLDEN GATE BP SERVICE
STATION REQUESTING A 7.6 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 15 FOOT SIDE
YARD SETBACK TO 7.4 FEET FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2283 COUNTRY ROAD
951 IN GOLDEN GATE CITY - DENIED
Petition V-96-6.
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Sir, Chahram Badamtchian from planning
services. This is a before-the-fact variance.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: It's a before the fact.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Before the fact.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: We don't see those very often.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I don't see that it necessarily
has a greater likelihood but --
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: BP gas station on 951 in Golden Gate
City is planning to remodel and expand, and they are adding one more
bay to the existing facility. The bay is going to be 6 -- 7.4 feet
from the property line, and the minimum required side setback is 15;
therefore, the petitioner is requesting 7.6 side yard variance.
This petition was reviewed by the Planning Commission
under the old criteria, and they recommend approval by a vote of six
to one, and I don't believe that if they had reviewed under the new
criteria they would have had any recommendation different than what
they have.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Staff recommendation's for
denial?
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Staff recommendation was for denial.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Let me ask a question then.
Under analysis under item A, it says, are there special conditions and
circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size, and
characteristics of the land structure, blah, blah, blah. And the
answer is, yes, the petitioner is expanding an existing building. I
don't consider that to be a special condition or circumstance. There
is an existing business there, and they wish to expand the building.
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: The circumstance is that they cannot
expand toward the other way. They have gas tanks underground, and
that's the only side that they can expand.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: So if I have a 1-acre parcel
of commercial property and have built it out now, if I want to add an
addition, it's a special circumstance just because I've already used
up what's legally allowable?
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: That's --
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: That's how I -- I hear you
answering that question. I just don't consider that to be a special
circumstance.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I think your statement under B
cancelled that out. Are there special conditions and circumstances
which do not result from the action of the applicant? No. All
conditions and circumstances are self-imposed. So I understand your
-- your willingness under A to try and, you know, find a -- you know,
a logical center point, but I think the important statement is under
B.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Yeah. I mean, we have had,
particularly on the residential properties up in Lely Barefoot and
all, areas where there were unique lots and all. This is already an
existing commercial establishment.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Is that alleyway used
considerably, the 40-foot alleyway there? Is it paved and used?
It's not paved?
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: I would like to add one more thing.
This variance request is next to an alley, a 40-foot-wide alley which
is not improved. So it's not going to be 7 foot from somebody else's
property. It's adjacent to an unimproved alley.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Yeah, but that alley is used
-- That alley is used by any number of groups, including Badcock
Furniture around others who are in there literally daily.
MR. BOHAYCHYK: My name is Chuck Bohaychyk, and I'm the
contractor representing the gas station owner. The alley is there,
and nobody's using it. It goes no place. Nobody drives back on it.
It's just a vacant piece of land with a hole about 3 feet deep that
we've tried to get filled up, the owner did, so that it could be even
used. It just sits there. He said, well, we're not going to maintain
it if nobody uses it. It's a big water trap, and we intend to go
ahead and just fill that part up and take care of it.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Do buildings front on that alley
or back on it?
MR. BOHAYCHYK: They side, and then there's a little
strip in the back, but from my understanding it was donated there for
a future road owned by the developer, and now everything is built out,
so it will never be used for a future road.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Across the alley from this
proposed addition, are you looking at the back of the buildings or the
front of buildings?
MR. BOHAYCHYK: Side of the building.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: The side.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I guess I just -- I go
through this, and it says, are there special conditions? No. Will a
literal interpretation of these provisions deprive the applicant? No.
Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that would make
possible reasonable use of the land? No. It's already being used
reasonably. Will granting the variance requested confer the
petitioner any special privilege that's denied others? Yes. Will
granting the variance be in harmony with the general intent and
purpose of the LDC? No. Will granting the variance be consistent
with the Growth Management Plan? No. And staff recommends denial.
There's no hardship here and -- maybe there is a
hardship. It's not in our record here, so maybe you can help us with
what the hardship is.
MR. BOHAYCHYK: Well, the -- the question I had is that
the gentleman has one bay, and all gas stations today to do anything
has to have at least two bays to make it profitable, and what he's
trying to do is to make it profitable, and even if he goes to sell it
some day, that, you know, you've got a one-bay gas station. It's like
an outdated gas station. Who wants to buy it with one bay in it? You
can't -- You just can't operate it.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Unfortunately from a legal
position, financial hardship doesn't qualify. We're looking for a
land-related hardship.
MR. BOHAYCHYK: Well, there's -- the alleyway will never
be used for anything. It can never be used. It's deadlaned, and
we're encroaching on 7 1/2 feet.
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Excuse me. Excuse me. Do the
-- Do the new Land Development Codes still require land-related
hardship for a variance?
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Still requires some kind of
land-related hardship, yes. One more thing. If this alley is not
being used, then we wish to vacate the alley.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: That -- That was my suggestion.
As -- As long as that alley exists, the opportunity for its use is
there, and there are some areas in Golden Gate City that when you
drive down those alleys, those buildings are right in on top of you,
and I don't want to create that situation. So one or two things has
to happen. If that alley truly is not used, vacate it, and your issue
goes away because your property line moves to the center line of that
alley, and you can then expand.
MR. BOHAYCHYK: Well, they've tried -- the owner tried
to purchase it or whatever, but it can never be sold. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Why?
MR. BOHAYCHYK: I don't know. As part of the Planning
Commission, they said that property is donated, and it has basically
-- they own the property.
MR. DORRILL: Would we need to process a petition to
vacate it if it's a part of a platted public alleyway? We -- We might
need to be the petitioner if it's a remedy that we could explore.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: As long as it's on the books, I
have to recognize it as a viable accessway, and that's where my
problem comes in.
MR. BOHAYCHYK: It's kind of like the highway that goes
nowhere. It has no place to go.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: That's fine, but still it -- it
legally exists on the book, and that's our -- that's causing us our
problem.
MR. BOHAYCHYK: That's why we're here for a variance,
because we're not encroaching on the property but just using up --
Like I said, it will never be used.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Okay. Well, I think we understand the
issue, so I'll close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to
make a motion to deny because there's no -- we haven't heard any
land-related hardship. We have a staff recommendation for denial.
There's no special condition, no special circumstances. It doesn't
deprive the landowner. Obviously should have the same setback
required all others, and granting would confer special privilege, and
our packet tells us it's not in harmony with the LDC and not
consistent with the Growth Management Plan. I'm hard-pressed to find
anything in there.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Second?
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Yeah. I was going to second on
the basis that -- that all I continue to see in here is that if it --
if it doesn't happen, the property will be adversely restricted in its
resale value or resaleability and I just -- that -- that's not
sufficient for me to grant -- to grant this variance.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Dorrill, would you work with the
petitioner to -- to find out who owns that alleyway and if it's
possible to vacate it?
No further questions? If not, all those in favor
signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
Motion to deny carries.
Item #14
DISCUSSION REGARDING SHIP FUNDS AND MOBILE HOMES NOT BEING CONSIDERED
AS FIRST TIME HOME BUYERS - STAFF TO CLARIFY THIS MATTER
And that brings us to the conclusion of today's agenda.
We have Board of County Commissioners' communication. Commissioner
Matthews, do you have anything today?
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yeah. I have -- I have one
item, and it deals with our SHIP -- SHIP funding program. I've had a
person who has made application for SHIP funding to build a new home
on a lot that currently has a mobile home on it that -- that they're
living in. They want to remove the mobile home and put up a
single-family dwelling, regular house-type thing, and I'm told that
our requirement -- that to qualify for SHIP funds, it has to be a
first-time home buyer, that the existence of this mobile home is
disqualifying them from SHIP funds. And I -- I guess what I'm asking
this board is I don't believe that was the intent when I voted for
that as a first-time home buyer, and I'm -- I'm asking this board if
that was their intent. And if not, do we need to have staff bring
this back. I -- I -- mobile homes are explicitly specifically
exempted from the SHIP program, yet we do require first-time home
buyers, and -- and I'm -- I'm not sure that we should be saying that
the mobile home is the first home if they want to replace it with a
regular dwelling unit.
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm familiar with this and
thought that there's just no logic to the way it's being interpreted.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yeah. I --
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It was a government program, and
here we go again.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: So can -- can we either give
direction that a mobile home is -- is not to be considered a
first-time home when somebody wants to replace it with a regular,
quote, unquote, "dwelling unit" or --
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: In this instance I understand the
request. Here's my concern. Manufactured homes qualify for SHIP
funds; is that correct?
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: No, they don't.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: They do not?
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: They do not.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: It has to be a wood frame or CBS
construction type home?
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: It has to be attached to the --
to the ground, real property, not --
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I think -- I think suggesting
otherwise would be in direct conflict with our village residential
zoning district in the Immokalee area that says you can put a mobile
home on and start building a home next to it if that's the only way
you can -- you know, so I don't have a problem with trying to
wordsmith that and clarify it.
COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yeah. I -- I think what I'm --
what I'm hearing from the homeowner and the potential home builder is
that the -- the -- they're seeking SHIP funds to help with their --
with their impact fees and so forth, and -- and they're not -- not
qualifying because they currently own and live in a mobile home, yet
mobile homes don't -- don't qualify so where's the -- So with the
board's permission, Mr. Dotrill, can we -- we ask to get this
clarified?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Commissioner Hancock?
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Nothing, sir.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Commissioner Hac'Kie?
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Nothing, thank you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Commissioner Constantine?
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: One short item with some good
news. Lee Port Authority has asked me to serve one more year on
there. The good news is, as soon as the ordinance is amended, we'll
have a vote there starting now. Up until now we've had voice but no
vote. So we're -- we have a little more voice in the regional, slash,
international airport issues now.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: What will it cost us?
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: How much will it cost? How much are
they going to take?
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Never mind.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Dorrill?
MR. DORRILL: I was going to introduce you to the only
other person who is in the audience today who is Terry Wolfson who is
the incoming fair board president if you are not acquainted with him.
He's slipped out in the last five minutes. He sat here all day. I'm
not sure why.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: Nothing, thank you.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: Miss Filson, anything further?
MS. FILSON: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN NORRIS: We're adjourned.
***** Commissioner Constantine moved, seconded by Commissioner
Matthews and carried unanimously, that the following items
under the Consent Agenda be approved and/or adopted: *****
Item #16A1
WATER FACILITIES ACCEPTANCE FOR PINE RIDGE NURSERY - WITH STIPULATIONS
AND CASH BOND
Item #16A2
WATER FACILITIES ACCEPTANCE FOR PELICAN ISLE YACHT CLUB, PHASE IV
(NORTH SIDE WATER MAIN ONLY) - WITH STIPULATIONS AND CASH BOND
Item #16A3
BID #96-2523 FOR A FLAME ATOMIC ABSORPTION SPECTROPHOTOHETER TO BE USED
BY THE POLLUTION CONTROL DEPARTMENT - AWARDED TO PERKIN-ELMER IN THE
AMOUNT OF $22,833
Item #16A4
PLAN TO REMODEL AND RE-ENGINEER THE EAST WING OF THE DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES CENTER ON NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
See Pages
Item #16A5
WATER AND SEWER FACILITIES ACCEPTANCE FOR VILLA LA PALHA AT BAY COLONY
- WITH STIPULATIONS
Item #16B1
AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR ORANGETREE PUD
See Pages
Item #1682
BID #96-2508 FOR THE PURCHASE OF ONE CAB AND CHASSIS TRUCK FOR THE ROAD
AND BRIDGE DEPARTMENT - AWARDED TO WALLACE INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS, INC.
IN THE AMOUNT OF $48,499
Item #1683 - Moved to Item #SB1
Item #1684
RFP #96-2474 FOR A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE NORTH COUNTY
REGIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 5-HGD EXPANSION - AWARDED TO
HAZAN & SAWYER IN THE AMOUNT OF $745,000
Item #1685
CONSTRUCTION CHANGE ORDER WITH WITH APAC-FLORIDA, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF
$86,832.18 FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD FOUR-LANING IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT UNDER BID #95-2438
See Pages
Item #1686
AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH HOLE, HONTES &
ASSOCIATES RELATED TO THE MASTER PUMP STATION 1.04 PROJECT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $44,000
See Pages
Item #1687 - Deleted
Item #1688
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO FILE SUITE, IF NECESSARY, TO RECOVER
DAMAGES AGAINST DESIGN STUDIOS WEST, INC. IN CONNECTION WITH DESIGN
FAILURES AT VINEYARDS COHMUNITY PARK
Item #1689
BID #96-2524 FOR REPAIR OF THREE PROCESS TANKS AT THE SOUTH COUNTY
REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT - AWARDED TO PRESERVATION SERVICES, INC.
IN THE AMOUNT OF $551,737
Item #16C1
RESOLUTION 96-229 APPOINTING OFFICERS TO COLLIER COUNTY AGRICULTURE
FAIR AND EXPOSITION, INC. BOARD OF DIRECTORS
See Pages
Item #16D1
IMPREST ACCOUNT LIMIT FOR FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNTS INCREASED FROM
$5,000 TO $10,000
Item #16El
BUDGET AMENDMENT 96-374 FOR REPLACEMENT OF COMPUTER AND PRINTER FOR
JUDGE BLACKWELL
Item #16E2 - Moved to Item #8E4
Item #16G1
CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION AS PRESENTED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S
OFFICE
1995
REAL PROPERTY
No. Dated
235 and 239 4/26 & 4/30/96
Item #16G2
SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR SERVICES OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER
See Pages
Item #16G3
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR REFERRED
There being no objection, the miscellaneous correspondence was
filed and/or referred to the various departments as indicated on said
miscellaneous correspondence:
Item #16H1
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $115,000 TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM
RESERVES TO REDEMPTION OF LONG TERM DEBT PINE RIDGE INDUSTRIAL PARK AND
NAPLES PRODUCTION PARK SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS 1993
Item #1611
RESOLUTION 96-230 AUTHORIZING THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY OF LEE
COUNTY TO OPERATE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF COLLIER COUNTY; AUTHORIZING
THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY OF COLLIER COUNTY TO ENTER INTO
AGREEMENTS WITH THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY OF LEE COUNTY; APPROVING
THE FORM OF THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT; APPROVING THE ISSUANCE BY THE
HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY OF LEE COUNTY OF NOT EXCEEDING $60,000,000
SINGLE FHAILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1996, TO PROVIDE FUNDS TO
FINANCE QUALIFYING SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE LOANS IN VARIOUS COUNTIES
WITHIN THE STATE OF FLORIDA
See Pages
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:22 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COHMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
JOHN C. NORRIS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
These minutes approved by the Board on
as presented or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT REPORTING
BY: Debra J. Peterson and Christine E. Whitfield