BCC Minutes 06/03/1997 R REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 3, 1997
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 9:03 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building
"F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the
following members present:
ALSO PRESENT:
CHAIRMAN:
Timothy L. Hancock
Timothy J. Constantine
Pamela S. Hac'Kie
Barbara B. Berry
John C. Norris
Hike HcNees, Interim County Hanager
David C. Weigel, County Attorney
Item #3
AGEND AND CONSENT AGENDA - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Good morning. I'm going to call to order the
June 3rd, 1997 Board of County Commissioners meeting. We have Pastor
Carl B. Orr of Golden Gate Presbyterian Church here this morning.
It's our pleasure to have you here to do -- perform our invocation
this morning.
If I could ask everyone to please stand for the invocation
followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
PASTOR ORR: As I read in the paper last night, I noticed that
other commissioners are changing to a Tuesday morning. It sort of
impacted me by the realization that you folks have been doing it.
Others are catching on and joining in, and how we impact other
communities and other counties. So as we have our prayer this
morning, I do not want it to be just limited to our work here, but
really, we are a large community and so we pray for one another, other
county commissioners at their meetings this morning too.
Oh, God, judge of all people, we lift up this body and other
bodies of commissioners, their managers, their advisors. We invoke
your divine presence and blessing upon their work as decision makers
in our community. Grant to each commissioner the inner dignity and
courage to make moral, ethical and financial decisions based upon
honesty and integrity.
Help them to say a firm no to wrongs. Help them to rise above
social, ethnic and financial injustice and prejudices. Hay their
actions bring confidence and credibility, not only to their individual
leadership, but to the community that we love.
Knowing how difficult working with people under stress can be, I
pray for the gifts of wisdom and understanding and patience. Hake
each of us a force for good, this day and each day. In Christ's name
we pray. Amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Pastor Orr, thank you for taking the time to
be with us this morning and thank you for your words and invocation.
Good morning, Mr. HcNees.
MR. HCNEES: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, commissioners. Hope
you'll forgive me. I'm going to double the length of your agenda this
morning. We have one item to add, which will become item 8(E)(2),
regarding the extension of your cable television franchises, back to
your discussion of a few weeks ago where you told us to go back to
work on the cable ordinance, and we are wanting to extend the existing
franchises pending that completion.
The other is a continuance of a consent agenda item, item
16(A)(1), and I don't have a date certain -- oh, continued to June the
10th, continued for one week, item 16(A)(1). Those would be the only staff changes.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Okay. Commissioner Hac'Kie?
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: No changes. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Commissioner Norris?
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: For the record, I'm abstaining on 16(A)(3).
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Okay. Commissioner Berry?
COHMISSIONER BERRY: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Commissioner Constantine?
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: No changes.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: And I have nothing either.
COHHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
motion we approve the agenda and consent agenda as amended.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK:
signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK:
minutes.
Motion and second. All those in favor,
Hotion carries unanimously, approval of
Item #4
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 6, 1997 AND MAY 13, 1997 - APPROVED
AS PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we
approve the minutes of the regular meeting, May 6th, 1997 and May
13th.
COMMISSIONER BERRY:
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK:
signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK:
Constantine.
Second it.
Motion and second. All those in favor,
Seeing none. Proclamations. Commissioner
Item #5A1
PROCLAivLATION DESIGNATING JUNE 2-8, 1997, AS JEWISH WAR VETERANS WEEK -
ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, I believe we have Herb
Luntz with us this morning. Herb, come on up. How are you this
morning, sir?
MR. LUNTZ: Good morning, sir. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: If we can get you to face the
wonderful people in television land.
MR. LUNTZ: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: We have a proclamation proclaiming
this week as Jewish War Veterans Week. And it reads as follows:
WHEREAS, from Colonial times to the present, Jews have played an
important role in the defense of the United States of America; and
WHEREAS, in 1896, a group of Jewish Civil War veterans organized
the Hebrew Union Veterans, an organization that was later to become
the Jewish War Veterans of the USA; and
WHEREAS, thousands of Jews have died in combat for their country
and thousands more have been awarded combat medals for the performance
of their duty in time of war. A study of Jewish participation in the
military during World War II indicates very clearly that the Jews
served in the Armed Forces beyond their numerical proportion to the
general population, and they received more than 52,000 awards,
including the Medal of Honor, the Air Medal, the Silver Star and the
Purple Heart. More than 51,000 Jews were listed as casualties; 11,000
died in combat; and
WHEREAS, today, the Jewish War Veterans of the USA combats
anti-Semitism in -- in all its forms, carries on an extensive program
committed to upholding America's democratic traditions, and fights
bigotry, prejudice, injustice and discrimination of all kinds; and
WHEREAS, the Jewish War Veterans assist veterans and their
dependents through hospital rehab and veterans' service programs and
maintains Veterans' Service Offices, staffed by professionals, in
major cities throughout the country; and
WHEREAS, the Jewish War Veterans of the USA represents a proud
tradition as the oldest active veterans' organization in America.
NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of June 2nd
through June 8th, 1997 be designated as Jewish War Veterans Week.
Done and ordered this 3rd day of June, 1997.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion we approve this
proclamation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: We have a motion and a second. All those in
favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Luntz, thank you very much.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Time's up.
MR. LUNTZ: Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Mr. McNees, on
behalf of Post 202, which is the local post of the Jewish War Veterans
that I'm proud to be commander of, and the Southwest Florida Regional
District, of which I happen to be commander, I thank you for the
resolution.
This is going to be hand carried to Fort Myers today because the
State of Florida convention is being held this weekend up in Fort
Myers, first one on the west coast. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Thank you, Mr. Luntz.
(Applause)
Item #5C1
KEVIN HENDRICKS, REAL PROPERTY DEPARTMENT, SUPPORT SERVICES, DIVISION,
RECOGNIZED AS EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR JUNE, 1997
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: I have the distinct pleasure next, under
presentations, to recognize the employee of the month for June 1997,
which is Mr. Kevin Hendricks.
Kevin, if I could ask you to come on up here so we can duly
embarrass you, sir. If you'd be kind enough to come on all the way up
to the front, turn around and face the camera. We get to read your
accolades here before presenting you with the -- the plaque.
Kevin represents the Real Property Management Department, most of
which are here with us today, thank you, in all land value issues. He
is responsible and provides project cost estimates and market analyses
to client departments for proposed land acquisition projects. Kevin's
also the "Web Coordinator" for Real Property, which I just had a
request for that yesterday, so someone should be calling your office
with -- with our web address, and is coordinating efforts with
Information Technology and Community Development to provide a GIS
(mapping) computer system for the benefit of the county.
Kevin has originated five IDEAs, and that's an acronym for
cost-saving measures to the county, within the last six months alone,
and although the program no longer is being implemented, he continues
to recommend improvements to better the county.
He also contributes his time to help with community activities,
such as the drive for food and needed supplies for the Shelter of
Abused Women, and also with activities to help other county employees
in need.
Kevin has also served as the division representative to the
Employee Advisory Committee and assisted in the establishment of
Channel 54 (our local government channel).
Kevin is not only a superior professional, but also an overall
superior individual by assisting others in need. He continues to
provide superior customer service and assistance in the improvement of
government efficiency. Without any reservation, he was nominated and
selected as employee of the month for June 1997. And I think in that
summary, the word superior was used no fewer than ten times, Kevin, so
congratulations. It's a pleasure this morning --
(Applause)
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: It's a pleasure to present you with a letter
signed by me as the chairman expressing the Board's pride in honoring
you as employee of the month, and a $50 check, which I'm sure you have
some idea how it may be used, and a plaque suitable for proper hanging
on your wall. Kevin, congratulations.
MR. HENDRICKS: Thank you very much.
(Applause)
Item #BE1
RESOLUTION 97-263 RATIFYING AND APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF COUNTY
FUNDS FOR SPECIFIC EXPENDITURES INCURRED IN THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS FOR
THE POSITION OF COUNTY MANAGER, AS SERVING AS A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE -
ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: All right. Now we're on to the meat of the --
the meeting. Item 8(E)(1) under county manager, recommendation to
approve resolution ratifying and approving the expenditure of county
funds for cost incurred in the recruitment process. Mr. McNees.
MR. MCNEES: Yes, sir, this item, you previously approved a
budget amendment, the list of the items that you wanted spent -- or
that you were approving to spend for recruitment and selection during
the county manager search process. The finance department felt like
that executive summary approval of budget amendment wasn't enough of
an approval and they need you to declare by resolution that those
expenditures actually were a public purpose, the ones that you have
already spent and --
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion approved.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Second it.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion?
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Seeing none. I think it's important to note
that -- that search process cost us, among few other things, $15,500.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: As compared to --
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: As compared to about a quarter of a million
for a head hunter firm, if I'm not mistaken.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: Would it be that?
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: It can be if they go nationwide.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: Really?
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: There's no need to have a lengthy discussion
on that.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: Which one should we choose?
Item #8E2
RESOLUTION 97-264, 97-265, AND 97-266 RESPECTIVELY, AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF EXTENSIONS FOR CABLE FRANCHISES FOR COLONY COHMUNICATIONS,
INC., MARCO ISLAND CABLE, INC., AND TIME WARNER CABLE - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Anyway, item 8(E)(2), resolution extending
cable franchises.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Reminds me of a time when I was a
small boy --
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Your record is safe, Commissioner Norris.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Yes, it is.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: It's 9:15. You're safe.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Nineteen.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: Nineteen.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Miss Herritt, come on up.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: So we have a motion --
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: She's going to be doing the Robert
Bird filibuster here in a minute.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: This is, I believe, a request just to extend
the existing contract until we can get a resolution on the full
telecommunications ordinance that the board has debated in the past?
MS. HERRITT: Not exactly.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Okay. I guess we need more -- more info. Go
ahead.
MS. HERRITT: Good morning. For the record, Jean Herritt, Office
of Franchise Administration. As you are well aware, the franchise
agreements with MediaOne under the name of Colony Communications,
Incorporated and the agreement with Time Warner expire in the month of
June. We had hoped to have agreements in place well before the
expiration date of these franchises.
However, the decision was made earlier this year to delay
negotiations with these companies in order to first put a
telecommunications ordinance in place. Since this has not occurred,
staff felt it was necessary to immediately begin the process to renew
these two franchise agreements following the appropriate procedures as
set out in the present ordinance, 8890 as amended.
That process has begun. The respective parties in good faith are
talking, and we feel that negotiations can be accomplished very soon
to the mutual satisfaction of all parties concerned.
However, to be safe, and more importantly, to not jeopardize
insurance coverage, MediaOne has asked us to take this step. We
concurred, and at the same time, concluded that Time Warner should
also be given the same courtesy.
As you know, the situation with Marco Island is somewhat
different and more complicated. The original franchise agreement
which was effective in June '94 was declared null and void by the
Court. However, the company has been operating on a stay issued as a
result of the appeal of that decision. That original franchise
agreement expires June 6.
Although the company has submitted an application for a new
franchise, the public hearing on that application will be held June
17, 11 days after the franchise agreement has expired. Therefore, we
have included it in the request for a 60 day extension. We are also
making every effort possible to treat all providers, present and
future, alike. Staff recommends approval of these resolutions.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Commissioner Constantine?
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Just a little frustrated with the
delay, particularly that that direction didn't come from the board,
and if we have different things that are pending with our land
development code, we don't hold off all developments because something
might change three or four months later, and so I'm -- I'm a little
frustrated that staff took it upon themselves to delay dealing with
any of the franchisors because we might have a new cable ordinance and
-- and that's just not a good way to do business, and it seems to me,
particularly with the Marco Island cable franchise, they've kind of
been strung out and strung out because there might be different rules
to play by and -- and in fairness to the public, if someone comes in
when they submit something, they've done that in good faith under
existing rules, and only government would say, well, those rules might
be different six months from now, so you're going to have to wait and
delay that, and I hope in the future you'll come to the board and ask
if that's what we'd like to do instead of just assuming that on your
own, because we -- we have that happen virtually every six months with
our land development code where rules may change, but unless there's
direction specifically from this board, we don't delay everything
that's in the hopper in the meantime.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Well, the exception would be the architectural
standards. When we --
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: And this board gave specific direction
though.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Yeah, that we were going to develop that
though, although it hadn't been developed. The telecommunication
ordinance isn't an exact parallel, but it's -- it's similar.
The -- the one reason that I am supportive of the extension is
the term of contract for these is extensive, so it's not as if we can
come back this time next year and revisit it should we have an
ordinance that applies in areas that currently don't apply.
Your point's well taken. This board should have the benefit of
discussion as to whether we want to extend or -- or ignore that. I
don't disagree with that at all, but the terms of these contracts is a
-- is unique in that they were, I think, ten years, a ten year term?
MS. MERRITT: Pardon me?
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: The term of these contracts is typically ten
years?
MS. MERRITT: Well, some -- one -- some of the parts of the
contract we have presently in place are 30 years old and we will be
recommending a ten year franchise.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Well, had the Marco Island franchise
been approved last year, it still would have expired, it's my
understanding, with all these and still been up for renewal, but it
would have allowed them to do some business in the meantime, and I'm
not trying to -- they're just an example. I'm not for or against a
Marco Island franchise. I'm just saying, that's not a good way for
government to do business and say, well, something might be different
next year, we don't want to approve the initial one this way and then
have to try to tinker again in a year.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I make a motion to approve the staff
recommendation.
MR. MCNEES: We do have one registered speaker.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Okay. Are there any other questions of staff
at this point?
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Is -- is there no concern from the
rest of the board that our staff just acts that way without it ever
coming to the board of commissioners?
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Well, I think this is our opportunity to deny
the extension and require a different direction, so I -- I think we --
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: And I realize today we are. I'm
saying for future reference, because six months ago, eight months ago,
ten months ago, it wasn't happening that way.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I -- I have some concern if that were a
pattern, you know, that -- and I think you've registered that concern
sufficiently. However, I also understand, the nature of these
contracts, why that decision would be made, and frankly, it matches
with what my recommendation would have been based on the length of
these contracts. So I don't have a problem with this particular
direction that -- that staff took. I think it's a good idea to bring
that back and let the board have a formal policy direction on it in
the future.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: And I can't disagree with that, but at the
same time, Commissioner Constantine's point is that this is a policy
decision --
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Correct.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: -- that would be more appropriate by the
board, and I can't disagree with that either.
MR. HCNEES: Mr. Chairman, if I may, from the staff's point of
view, what I'm understanding is, as we try to strike a balance
between, in a case like this, what is protecting the public and
granting a long-term franchise under -- under what are antiquated
rules in this case that are certain to change and making sure that
you're involved in the policy decision, we need to make sure we strike
that balance more towards making sure you're -- you're informed of the
issue and -- and make sure that we're acting consistent with your
direction.
I think what we're asking for you this morning is exactly that,
let us extend under the old rules until we can have the new rules in
place.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: I think what you're asking for --
MR. HCNEES: So we -- we get your point and we won't --
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: More of a Chinese menu of options to establish
that policy direction before going to the extent of preparing the
documents, is that really --
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Norris boiled it down
better than I did. It's just -- it's the idea -- this is a -- every
-- everyone is absolutely correct, this is a large issue, this is an
important issue, this is a long-term issue, and it's one that the
policy should be set by the board, not arbitrarily by staff, and for
eight or ten months, staff has decided the direction, and now it's
gotten to us, and I'm just -- it's exactly as you said, it's a policy
issue and the best I know, the Board of Commissioners are the ones
that set policy.
MR. HCNEES: We understand.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Okay. Let's go -- we do have a motion on the
floor, but let's go to the public speaker. MR. HCNEES: Ken Fuchs.
MR. FUCHS: Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak
with you today. Ken Fuchs, Colony Communications, doing business
today as MediaOne. The primary purpose for coming to the podium this
morning is to encourage the board to embrace Florida State Statute
166.046, which is the level playing field state statute, which, as
Hiss Herritt may have been alluding to, is treating all of the
applicants fairly, and I'd like for you to visit that if you would
just for a moment.
I -- our company truly believes that is a very important factor
for consideration as we move forward through negotiations, as each
company negotiates with the county, and as this very important matter
comes before the board.
Another note that I believe is important for you to be aware of
is that the process for renewal is one which is spelled out very
clearly, very succinctly and in great detail in the cable act. It is
-- the details are many pages in length and each of the -- excuse me,
each of the operators in Collier County, to the best of my knowledge,
have notified the county in accordance with Florida -- with Federal
Statutes 35 months ago, triggering the negotiation and renewal process
for cable television renewal.
Through that period, the county has experienced some personnel
changes and some -- which affect, in some way, the relationship by and
between the cable operators and the county, and to Miss Merritt's
credit, she has -- her and her staff have really tried to put their
arms around this -- this monster --
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Speeding train?
HR. FUCHS: Pardon me?
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Speeding train is the term I always use.
MR. FUCHS: Yes, the speeding train, thank you, and quite
frankly, have done an admirable job in that. Has everything been
perfect from a timing perspective? No, but I believe we're at a point
today, speaking on behalf of Colony Communications, doing business as
MediaOne, where we are in -- having good solid communications with the
county, could quite frankly, I believe, come to an agreement next week
and be prepared to come before the board on the 17th for a speedy
renewal process.
That which we're speaking about is not rocket science. It is not
foreign to those of us who -- who deal with these matters on a daily
basis, but the 60 day extension is supported by this company as a good
faith gesture to make sure that the Florida State Statute 166.146 is
embraced by the county and that that be the underlying theme moving
forward.
We are supportive of competition. We are not afraid of
competition. However, the level playing field statutes require equal
and fair competition. That is what we are most concerned about.
Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Thank you, Hr. Fuchs, and I think the board
has shown its concern and willingness to work with the industry by not
adopting a telecommunications ordinance that appeared to have some --
some problems in it. I think this is probably our best effort of,
rather than imposing a cumbersome ordinance on you without proper
time, that's the result of this extension. So hopefully we can get
all those things worked out in the interim and everyone will be fat
and happy when it's all over.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Motion and a second. Is there any further
discussion on the motion? Seeing none. All those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
Opposed?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Motion carries unanimously. Thank you, Miss
Merritt.
Item #10A
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE UTILITY AUTHORITY - STAFF TO READVERTISE
FOR POSITION AND REQUEST THAT APPLICANTS HAVE UTILITY EXPERIENCE AND
BRING BACK WORDING OF ORDINANCE FOR REVIEW
And we are -- next item, 10(A), appointment of member to the
utility authority.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, there -- there's only
one name here, and -- and Mr. Coletta's certainly a good community
activist. My only question is, he lives in an area that has no
utility service, and I'm wondering if it's appropriate that we have
someone setting policy for our utility board that isn't serviced by
either water or sewer.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Oddly enough, I'm not sure that's not a good
idea, and I'll -- I'll tell you why. Shortly after the Twin Eagles
project went through, some people in the Corkscrew area, that I was
unaware of, were very unhappy that water and sewer were not going to
be extended out that way. So, you know, someone who is in a bordering
or adjacent area not receiving service may offer -- again, you know --
you know that committee's work better than I, but --
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I think the -- really the only thing
-- the primary exercise of the utility committee is with the rate
setting and those issues as opposed to -- and -- and I know on some of
the franchise -- individual franchises other than the county where
they can expand, I'm not -- maybe I'm mistaken, I'm not sure, a
primary activity is whether or not we'll expand or do those things. I
think rate regulation is the primary activity.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Point well made. Mr. Wallace, could you
provide us any guidance on this -- are the rest of the members of this
committee all customers of the district?
MR. WALLACE: Yes, sir. For the record, Bleu Wallace. I'm the
executive director of the Collier County Water and Waste Water
Authority and the utility regulation manager. There's no -- there's
no requirement for these individuals to be served by a -- a particular
utility. We have -- there's one member on the authority now, Mr.
Bennett, that lives in -- that does not live in any area that is
served by utilities.
There are two members on the authority from Marco Island that are
served by Florida Water, formerly SSU. There -- there were two
members of the Golden Gate community, one that was served by utilities
and one that was not. So really that's not a prerequisite for them to
set -- and be qualified to -- to set boundaries, to establish rates
and to take those specific actions tied to the regulatory arena for
these utilities.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Motion to approve Mr. Coletta's
appointment.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: There's a motion on the floor. Is there a
second?
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: I'm going -- I guess your -- your argument
makes sense to me, Mr. Constantine, in that if Mr. Coletta had in --
on his resume, operation of the utility service in, you know -- you
know, in Upper State New York or something to bring to the table
outside of the rate payers that are -- are in that area, I would be
compelled to second your motion, Commissioner Hac'Kie, but, again,
that really being the bailiwick of probably you and Commissioner
Berryws district more than -- than mine, Iwm going to -- Iwm going to
trust your judgment on that.
Without -- without a proper motion and second --
COMMISSIONER MACwKIE: Youwve got a proper motion, just not a
second.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Okay. Well, the two kind of go together.
Wewve got to have both to move ahead.
COMMISSIONER MACIKIE: I understand.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: If there is not a second for the motion, the
motion will fail. Iill ask the board to give direction to staff on
the issue of readvertisement on this matter.
COMMISSIONER MACIKIE: Are we going to change the criteria for
the committee?
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: I think if welre going to make decisions on
those bases, they -- they should be folded into the criteria. I donlt
disagree with that. That will have to come back at a later time.
COMMISSIONER MACIKIE: Iid like to suggest that.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Maybe Commissioner Norris can help
with this, but my recollection is this -- it really folded out of
problems on Marco Island and Golden Gate with the private utilities
specifically, and I donlt know how the current ordinance -- creating
ordinance reads, enabling ordinance reads, but --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I think that we could probably, and Mr.
Wallace you may want to help on this one, but perhaps we could put
into the application process some request, maybe not an iron clad
requirement, but some sort of a request that -- or a preference that
the candidates or applicants have some utility experience or some
other executive experience in finance or something like that, because
thatls really what welre dealing with is -- is finance and utility
matters.
MR. WALLACE: Yes, the -- the ordinance does require that the
authority be made up of three technical members -- COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Uh-huh.
MR. WALLACE: -- and two lay persons. This particular vacancy is
for a layman, and they should have some knowledge of business,
accounting --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Is that spelled out in the ordinance --
MR. WALLACE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: -- just to refresh me? Is that a -- is it
-- is it spelled out as a preference or as a requirement or --
MR. WALLACE: Itls somewhat vague, to my knowledge.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Perhaps we could do a little wordsmithing
on it and clean it up a bit or -- or improve it a bit with -- with the
stipulation that -- that that type of experience would be a
preference.
MR. WALLACE: Yes, sir. We can do that.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: And bring that back to the board?
MR. WALLACE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: In the meantime, Miss Filson could
readvertise.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Is that sufficient board direction to bring
that back for -- for review and then to readvertise for the position,
and letls -- letls summarize that statement, Mr. Wallace, in a letter
to Mr. Coletta, what the board is asking for today.
Item #10B
RESOLUTION 97-267 APPOINTING CLIFFORD FLEGAL, JR. TO THE CODE
ENFORCEMENT BOARD - ADOPTED
Okay. Hove to the next item, to appoint a member to fulfill the
remainder of a vacant term on the Collier County Code Enforcement
Board North.
I have a question before we get to this. The idea of the two
code enforcement boards was to drop the backlog of cases. Where are
we on that, Mr. Cautero?
MR. CAUTERO: Vince Cautero, for the record. There's currently
three or four cases pending for each cycle that comes up with the code
enforcement boards. At this time, they don't see a need to meet more
than once a month for each board.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: At such time, and this is just my opinion, at
such time that we feel like the caseload can be handled by one code
enforcement board, I'd like to -- to go back to avoiding the
duplication. We had a couple of cases that backed things up, and I
think two boards are -- are not absolutely necessary. We can make --
we can have that discussion at a later time, but if you would kindly
let me know when that backlog is -- is to a point that you think one
-- one board can handle it --
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: Mr. Chairman, if I may, that's one side of
the coin, and that's certainly a valid point. The other valid point
would be that perhaps we could encourage more code enforcement cases
to be filed --
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Ditto.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: -- and that way, keep the -- both of these
boards busy because --
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: If they're busy.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: If they're busy, fine, but, if it -- you
know, if -- if there's a way, and Mr. Cautero you could help us on
this, if there's a way to -- or in your opinion, if -- if perhaps you
think we could -- we can actually file more cases, that would help us
in our decision here.
MR. CAUTERO: Two things to say. First, I believe the board did
give direction when you appointed the second code enforcement board to
bring back a report within one year, and I believe that time frame is
in the fall and
we -- we certainly would follow with that board direction.
Second thing to note is that when a notice of violation and order
to correct that violation is issued, which is -- they're issued every
day by a number of code enforcement investigators, the time frame
between that notice of violation and the actual hearing is sometimes
30 to 45 days, depending on advertising requirements by law, a lot of
violations are abated, and one of the things that I keep track of is
the percentage of the abatement time between the actual notice of
violation to the board, and I believe that's why you don't have a lot
of cases going to the Code Enforcement Board.
In all candor, the cases that go to the Code Enforcement Board
are ones where the owner is absent or we cannot get cooperation or
they refuse to cooperate and they want to have their day in court.
That's when you really get to the board. A lot of this stuff is done
behind the scenes.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Okay. I'll just wait for the report at one
year then. Commissioner Constantine?
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I -- I was just gonna throw in, there
is no guarantee when we will or won't have other big cases that may
slow things down and -- and just the nature of what the county does,
from time to time we may have that, and at least we'll have the
opportunity to still keep moving and not get mired down when that
happens.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: If we weren't -- if we weren't subject to
additional legal costs due to the existence of a second board, then I
-- I would just leave it alone, but again, just looking at the cost
versus the need, but we can do that at the one year time frame. Thank
you.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Mr. Chairman, I'll nominate Mr. Flegal.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: I did want to ask, do we have, on that
particular board, any other realtors that are represented? I don't
know the makeup of the --
MS. FILSON: Charlie Andrews, but he's a retired realtor.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: So Charlie's going off?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, he is a retired realtor.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Retired realtor. Okay. All right. That's
fine. Mr. Flegal has a strong resume. Are there any other
suggestions or questions?
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Motion and second. Any discussion on the
motion? All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: None. Okay. That is it. We are to public
comment on general topics. Any registered speakers?
MR. MCNEES: No, sir.
Item #15A
COUNTY ATTORNEY REQUESTING TRAVEL EXPENSES FOR HIM AND JUDGE BROUSSEAU
TO GO TO WILLIAMSBURG, VIRGINIA TO LOOK AT THEIR IT SYSTEM FOR COURT
HEARINGS - COUNTY ATTORNEY ONLY AUTHORIZED TO TRAVEL TO WILLIAMSBURG,
VIRGINIA, CONSISTENT WITH COUNTY POLICY
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Seeing none. Advertised public hearings,
nothing. We are to staff communications. Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, one -- one thing of interest to our office is
that the county attorney is working with the Collier County judiciary
who's working with the whole circuit concerning upgrading
inefficiencies with the courtroom and attorney offices, prosecution,
defense matters. It's all I.T. or computer related, as well as court
reporting related, and there is a, I think a desire and -- and a
genuine need, if we were to go forward and be a part of seeking
efficiencies with the county attorney in the court -- in the
courthouse here locally to work with Judge Brousseau and his I.T.
committee to travel to -- to Williamsburg, Virginia, where they have a
full state of the art courtroom and integrated facility in operation
for the -- for the county there.
Any travel that I would do outside of the state requires board
approval. My budget, county attorney budget under business travel
does have the funds. I would expect that very possibly Judge
Brousseau would also be a part of this travel and I would be looking
for you today, if you find this of -- approvable, to approve my travel
or a person in my office in my stead and potentially a member of this
local judiciary I.T. committee, which I expect would be Judge
Brousseau, to travel to Williamsburg during the month of June.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Mr. Weigel, sometimes when we talk state of
the art, it translates into expensive and fancy. We do have a
courtroom problem over there, according to Mr. Middlebrook, and so
forth. Is the focus of this trip such -- an idea that -- that with
increased technology we can reduce either caseload, time spent? I
mean, help me understand what the -- the goal is of this fact-finding
mission.
MR. WEIGEL: Sure. It won't reduce caseload because the caseload
is the caseload. However, this is there is a possibility of a
reduction of efficiencies within the courtroom, efficiencies between
attorney offices and the courtroom where we get into the filing and -- CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: You meant increase of efficiency in the
courtroom?
MR. WEIGEL: What did I say?
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: If we're going to reduce efficiencies, then
you're definitely not going. You said a reduction of efficiencies.
MR. WEIGEL: Pardon me. Excuse me. Thank you. At any rate,
part -- part of this concept is -- is related to even our office in
regard to the filing and transmittal of hearings via computer as
opposed to going and sitting in a courtroom waiting for hearings to
occur and things of that nature, so it is a bit of a long term thing
to evolve, but some of these -- some of these practices and procedures
are in fact in operation in Williamsburg, which is considered the
model for the country in this regard.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Commissioner Mac'Kie?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just a question to -- I want to be sure I
understood. Judge Brousseau would be traveling under the judiciary
budget, not under the county attorney office budget?
MR. WEIGEL: No. In fact, the judiciary doesn't have a budget
for this, and the idea would be potentially Brousseau to -- Judge
Brousseau to travel under --
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: I don't think I can support that. I think
it has to be in his budget, that's my vote.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: I -- I kind of have to agree. I'll tell
you why. It seems to me that if he's not a county employee, which
he's not --
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: -- then it would be the same as the county
paying the expenses for any other citizen, and I'm not sure that that
would be appropriate.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I bet we can privately fund raise some --
you know, something like that for him to be able to --
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Or he can pick up the phone and call Judge
Reese and ask for an appropriation. I mean, you know, we're not
talking a lot of money here, but I think there is a -- a protocol
question that individuals under the employment of the State of Florida
traveling under county expenditures, on the surface, is just
inappropriate.
Regardless -- I mean, there is some merit here, but I think, Mr.
Weigel, between you and I.T., the merit to the county can be
established. I don't think -- you know, that information can be
brought back and Judge Brousseau can review it, but I -- I have to
agree, Commissioner Mac'Kie. I think that's a good point. I just
don't think it's appropriate for a state employee to travel under
county dollars.
MR. MCNEES: Just to be clear, some of the operating budgets of
the judiciary are supplied by the county commission and they do travel
on their own budgets with county funds. The only reason I know that
is because all those travel requests come through the county manager's
office, just to be clear.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But it's out of their own budget.
MR. MCNEES: But it's out of their budget, not out of --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah, we know we give them money every
year.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Well, then, much like we do, if he doesn't
have the money in his budget to travel, he either finds it from
another judge, another area or he doesn't go, and that's -- that's how
we operate. I would expect him to operate the same way.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: Take it out of his Leadership Florida
funds.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: You beat me to the joke.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Speaking of which -- no, we'll get to that at
another time.
I think it's proper, Mr. Weigel, to authorize your travel for
that purpose as requested, and I will ask for the board to do that by
way of motion. I'll make the motion to authorize the expenditure for
the travel you've outlined for yourself.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Up to some dollar amount?
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Well, there's a -- there's a -- it's already
somewhat listed in our -- our human resources as far as how you -- you
know, what's qualified expenditures and what's not, so it will be
consistent with county policy. I mean, that's -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I see.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: We don't need to put a dollar amount on it now
because we don't know what the airfares are going to be and so forth.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Seconded you want?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, did you make the motion?
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: I made it in the form of a motion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry. Second. I thought you were
asking for a motion.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Motion and second.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: What's the motion?
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Just to authorize expenditure in accordance
with county policy for Mr. Weigel to attend -- to go up to Virginia to
take a look at this system and see if it can be transplanted here for
the benefit of -- I restated it better than I said it the first time
-- for the benefit of Collier County.
MR. WEIGEL: I appreciate that, and it's not a done deal, of
course, that I would go even with this approval, but in the
discussions that have been had with Judge Brousseau and the committee
that is organized toward this, we know that a time factor is drawing
-- it looks like June would be the month where this would occur if it
were to occur, so I appreciate that, and it's -- it's within our
budget. We have the money.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Is
there discussion on the motion? Seeing none. All those in favor,
signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Point of order, that came under staff
communication. I don't believe a motion is appropriate in that
context.
MR. WEIGEL: It works the same way for --
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Okay. Consider it board authorization.
Okay. Mr. McNees?
MR. MCNEES: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Good answer. Commissioner Mac'Kie?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Commissioner Norris?
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Commissioner Berry?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Commissioner Constantine?
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HANCOCK: Nothing from me. Miss Filson, may
we go? Thank you.
***** Commissioner Constantine moved, seconded by Commissioner Norris
and carried unanimously, with the exception of Agenda Item
#16A3, which carried 4/0 (Commissioner Norris abstained), that
the following items under the Consent Agenda be approved and/or
adopted with changes:
Item #16A1 - Continued to June 10, 1997
Item #16A2
RESOLUTION 97-259 GRANTING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE,
WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "WALDEN SHORES"
Item #16A3
APPROVAL FOR RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF PELICAN STRAND - WITH
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT LETTER OF CREDIT AND STIPULATION
Item #16B1
BID #97-2651 AWARDED TO PANTROPICS POWER PRODUCTS IN THE A_MOUNT OF
$60,801.00 FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO PORTABLE GENERATORS FOR THE COUNTY
WATER SEWER DISTRICT
Item #1682
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO PAY VINEYARDS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR PINE
RIDGE ROAD MEDIAN MAINTENANCE IN THE A_MOUNT OF $37,000.00
Item #1683
ROAD IMPACT FEE TO BE REFUNDED IN THE A_MOUNT OF $70,785.96 TO BONITA
BAY GOLF COURSE
Item #1684
RESOLUTION 97-260 AND DECLARATION OF EASEMENTS CONCERNING THE COLLIER
COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL SITE LOCATED ON AIRPORT ROAD
Item #1685
APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 5, IN THE A_MOUNT OF $41,293.31, INCREASING
THE EXISTING PURCHASE ORDER WITH AGNOLI, BARBER AND BRUNDAGE, INC. TO
COMPLETE ASSESSMENT, ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SERVICES
FOR THE NAPLES PARK DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Item #16C1
GRANT FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA TO PROVIDE LUNCHES FOR IHMOKALEE AND
NAPLES SUHMER RECREATION PARTICIPANTS
Item #16D1
SATISFACTIONS OF NOTICES OF PROMISE TO PAY AND AGREEMENT TO EXTEND
PAYMENT OF WATERAND/OR SEWER SYSTEM IMPACT FEES
Item #16D2
SATISFACTIONS OF CLAIM OF LIENS FOR SEWER SYSTEM IMPACT FEES
Item #16D3
RESOLUTION 97-261 APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR CERTAIN
RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID
LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1992 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND
DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item #16D4
BOARD EXAMINATION AND APPROVAL OF SUFFICIENCY BONDS OF COUNTY OFFICERS
Item #16D5
APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER OF TIPPING FEES FOR THE CLEANUP OF SALT ALLEY IN
GOLDEN GATE AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16El
AWARD BID #97-2667, FOR ANNUAL BEDDING PLANTS, TO H. H. BUCKLEY IN THE
A_MOUNT OF $18,500.00
Item #16E2
WORK AUTHORIZATION UNDER THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION'S CURRENT
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING AGREEMENT WITH WILSON, MILLER, BARTON & PEEK,
IN AN A_MOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5,000, TO PREPARE THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL
ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE NON-AD VALOREH ASSESSMENTS FOR BEAUTIFICATION
OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND MEDIAN AREAS, AND MAINTENANCE OF
CONSERVATION OR PRESERVE AREAS, U.S. 41 BERHS, STREET SIGNAGE
REPLACEMENTS WITHIN THE MEDIAN AREAS AND LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS TO
U.S. 41 ENTRANCES, ALL WITHIN THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING
AND BENEFIT UNIT
Item #16F1
RESOLUTION 97-262 EXTENDING THE LANDFILL CITIZENS ADVISORY COHMITTEE
THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1997
Item #16G1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR REFERRED
The following miscellaneous correspondence as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Item #16H1
BOARD OF COUNTY COHMISSIONERS ENDORSEHENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
SHERIFF'S OFFICE GRANT APPLICATION FOR CONTINUING FUNDING FOR THE STATE
OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF COHMUNITY AFFAIR'S ANTI-DRUG ACT FORMULA
GRANT PROGRAM
Item #16H2
BOARD OF COUNTY COHMISSIONERS ENDORSEHENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
SHERIFF'S OFFICE GRANT APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FOR THE STATE OF
FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF COHMUNITY AFFAIR'S ANTI-DRUG ACT FORMULA GRANT
PROGRAM
Item #1611
RECOHMENDATION TO REJECT A DEMAND FOR JUDGHENT IN THE LITIGATION CASE
VICTOR A. VALDES V. COLLIER COUNTY, COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND
DON HUNTER, CASE NO. 96-122-CIV-FTH-99D, UNITED STATES FEDERAL DISTRICT
COURT CASE
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 9:41 a.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COHMISSIONERS
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
TIMOTHY L. HANCOCK, CHAIRMAN
These minutes approved by the Board on
as presented or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING
BY: Heather L. Casassa