BCC Minutes 07/28/2009 R
July 28, 2009
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, July 28, 2009
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board( s) of such
special district as has been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Donna Fiala
Fred Coy Ie (via speakerphone)
Jim Coletta
Frank Halas
Tom Henning (via speakerphone)
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
Leo Ochs, Deputy County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Dwight Brock, Clerk of Courts
Sue Filson, Executive Manager for BCC
Page 1
", ~~."._"."""~_~._'".,".N
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
and
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB)
AGENDA
July 28, 2009
9:00 AM
Donna Fiala, BCC Chairman Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Chairman
Fred W. Coyle, BCC Vice-Chairman Commissioner, District 4
Jim Coletta, BCC Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Vice-Chairman
Frank Halas, BCC Commissioner, District 2
Tom Henning, BCC Commissioner, District 3
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF
THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED
SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE
TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53, AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE
NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH
EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS
PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD
Page 1
July 28, 2009
.~-_.._._-_....._-
UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS
BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING
THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A
VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH
RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH
THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS
PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE
PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE
COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
LOCATED AT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112,
(239) 252-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING
IMPAIRED ARE A V AILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS'
OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend William J. Oakley, East Naples United Methodist Church
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended
(Ex Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent
and summary agenda.)
B. June 9, 2009 - BCC/Regular Meeting
C. June 23, 2009 - BCC/Regular Meeting
D. June 29, 2009 - BCC/Budget Workshop
E. June 30, 2009 - BCC/Budget Workshop
Page 2
July 28, 2009
~,"------"_.- --'-""-- ~-_. .~,"...,.~",
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD
MEMBERS)
A. 20 Year Attendees
1) Cindy Erb, Facilities Management.
2) Russell Greer, Water Department
3) Heather Sweet, Utility Billing & Customer Service.
4. PROCLAMA TIONS
A. Proclamation acknowledging the Naples Rockets Girls Softball Team
Ages 9 to 10 for their participation in the District 27 Championship
Games. To be accepted by Chuck Bender, Manager, and Tim
Cartwright, Assistant Coach.
B. Proclamation recognizing the Golden Gate All-Stars for winning the
District 27 Girls Ages 9 to 10 Softball Championship. To be accepted
by Brian Creel, Coach.
C. Proclamation designating August 2 to August 8, 2009 as Stop on Red
Week. To be accepted by Bob Tipton, Traffic Operations Department
Director, and staff; Kevin Rambosk, Collier County Sheriff, and staff;
Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Department Director, and staff.
D. Proclamation designating the month of August, 2009 as Breastfeeding
Awareness Month. To be accepted by Laurie Owens.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. 1-75 Everglades Interchange Update by Nick Casalanguida, Director,
Transportation Planning.
B. Contractor's Presentation of contract #08-5136, 951 Boat Ramp
Parking Lot Expansion Proj ect, Proj ect #80071.1, Contractor Quality
Page 3
July 28, 2009
......_---.~-^ ,_,_~-""",_"_,.,,,,,,"'b-~"'_M'"""""''''-''''''''-'
Enterprise, USA, Inc.
C. Recommendation to recognize Gilbert Moncivaiz, Operations
Analyst, Public Utilities Operations, as Employee of the Month for
July 2009.
D. This item to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Clerk of Courts FY-2010 budget
presentation.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public petition by Rick Lussy to discuss Loyalty Oath for existing and
prospective employees.
B. Public petition request by John Brugger to discuss pre-abatement
agreement for property at 5513 26th Avenue SW, Naples, FL.
C. Public petition request by Jose Colina to discuss construction and
warranty issues with Designers Home Group, Inc.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1 :00 p.m., unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. CU-2009-AR-
14137 St. Monica's Episcopal Church, Inc., represented by Heidi K.
Williams, AICP, ofQ. Grady Minor, Inc., is requesting two new
Conditional Uses pursuant to the Land Development Code Section
2.03.0 l.B.1.C., in the Estates Zoning District. The conditional uses
being requested are as follows: LDC 2.03.0 1.B.1.C.3, to allow a child
care center; and 2.03.0 l.B.1.CA, to allow a private school related to
the existing religious facility. The subject property is located at 7070
Immokalee Road, on the south side of Immoka1ee Road, west of the
Logan Boulevard Extension, in Section 29, Township 48 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (CTS)
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Page 4
July 28, 2009
~_..__--.._o.., , ''<'"..'-
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the County Government Productivity
Committee.
B. Appointment of member to the Habitat Conservation Plan Ad-Hoc
Advisory Committee.
C. Appointment of member to the Collier County Health Facilities
Authority.
D. Appointment of members to the Environmental Advisory Council.
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC)
approves a project charter directing staff to proceed with the
development of a county wide Master Mobility Plan (MMP). (Nick
Casalanguida, Director, Transportation Planning)
B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners (Board)
consider the options to respond to a Public Petition request by Mr. Bill
Klohn, MGD Capital, where he requests a three year extension to the
developer commitments as codified in Arrowhead PUD, Ordinance
No. 05-13, further amended by Ordinance No. 08-36. (Joseph K.
Schmitt, Administrator, CDES)
C. Recommendation to consider a Proposed Settlement providing for
Compromise and Release of Liens in the Code Enforcement Action
entitled Deutsche Bank Trust Co., CEB No. 2007080008 relating to
property located at 2414 58th Avenue NE, Naples, Florida. (Diane B.
Flagg, Director, Code Enforcement, CDES)
D. To receive Board approval of staff's recommendation to resolve sewer
back charges within the Tall Oaks community with property owner,
Hill Crest Estates, Inc., in the amount of $180,000. (Joe Bellone,
Manager, Utility Billing and Customer Service)
Page 5
July 28, 2009
--~"'_.--
E. This item to be heard immediatelv after 14A. Recommendation that
the Collier County Board of Commissioners (BCC) approves a
Resolution authorizing the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to enter into a $13,500,000 Term
Loan Agreement with Fifth Third Bank; approving the actions taken
by the CRA with respect to its approval of the Loan Agreement; and
authorize all necessary budget amendments. (David Jackson,
Executive Director Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA)
F. This item to be heard at 10:30 a.m. Recommendation that the Board
of County Commissioners adopt a resolution establishing Proposed
Millage Rates as the Maximum Property Tax Rates to be levied in FY
2009/1 0 and reaffirm the Advertised Public Hearing dates in
September, 2009 for the Budget approval process. (Jim Mudd, County
Manager and Mark Isackson, Senior Management and Budget
Analyst)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
A. Recommendation that the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
approves a Resolution approving the form of a Loan Agreement with
Fifth Third Bank for a $13,500,000 term loan; authorize the CRA
Chairman to sign and make payments as needed to purchase real
property and finance various capital improvement projects within the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA; pledge Bayshore Gateway Triangle
CRA Tax Increment Funds (TIF) and other legally available monies
as the loan repayment source; and authorize all necessary budget
amendments. To be heard before Item 10E. (David Jackson, Executive
Director, Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA)
Page 6
July 28, 2009
-,_..._~~~-<.-- ,
B. Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
to approve the purchase of an assemblage of six (6) commercial
properties located in the Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area;
authorize the CRA Chairman to execute the real estate contract and
Addendum; approve payment from Fund (187) and authorize the
Executive Director to make payment in the amount of $6,386,000 plus
cost and expenses to complete the sale of subject property; and
approve all necessary budget amendments. Site address: 5.358 acres
within the Gateway mini-triangle (Fiscal Impact $6,386,000). (Jean
Jourdan, Project Manager CRA)
C. Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
to approve the purchase of a commercial property as part of an
assemblage of commercial properties located in the Gateway Triangle
Redevelopment Area; authorize the CRA Chairman to execute the real
estate contract and Addendum; approve payment from Fund (187) and
authorize the Executive Director to make payment in the amount of
$1,114,000 plus cost and expenses to complete the sale of subject
property; and approve all necessary budget amendments. Site address:
0.935 acres within the Gateway mini-triangle (Fiscal Impact
$1,114,000). (Jean Jourdan, Project Manager CRA)
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered
to be routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate
discussion of each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the
Board, that item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda and
considered separately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and
sewer utility facilities for Mediterra Parcel 118.
Page 7
July 28, 2009
____~W_"_......
2) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway
(private) and drainage improvements for the final plat of
Valencia Golf and Country Club Phase 1 with the roadway and
drainage improvements being privately maintained.
3) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway
(private) and drainage improvements for the final plat of
Valencia Golf and Country Club Phase 1A with the roadway
and drainage improvements being privately maintained.
4) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission Members. Should a hearine be held on this
item~ all participants are reQuired to be sworn in. This is a
recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of City
Gate Commerce Center, Phase Two, approval of the standard
form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of
the amount of the performance security.
5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water
utility facility for Arielle at Pelican Marsh.
6) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and
sewer utility facilities for Fiddler's Creek Phase 5 Unit 2.
7) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and
sewer utility facilities for Mediterra Parcell 05.
8) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and
sewer utility facilities for Mediterra Parcel 107.
9) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and
sewer utility facilities for Mediterra Parcel 108.
10) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and
sewer utility facilities for Mediterra Parcel 109.
11) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and
sewer utility facilities for Mediterra Parcel 11 O.
Page 8
July 28, 2009
.",,--",,"-.---., ,
12) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water
utility facility for Rubell Dialysis Center.
13) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water
utility facility for Hawthorne at Lely Resort, Phase 1.
14) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway
(private) and drainage improvements for the final plat of Indigo
Preserve. The roadway and drainage improvements will be
privately maintained.
15) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfactions of
Lien for payments received for the following Code
Enforcement actions.
16) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
(Board) receive and approve the Progress Report for the Year
2008, Collier County Floodplain Management Plan, Section 7
of the Collier County Hazard Mitigation Plan.
17) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment to increase
appropriations and recognize revenue increase to the General
Fund for payment by Lender Fifth Third Bank for costs
incurred for Nuisance Abatement associated with the Vita
Tuscana Proj ect.
18) Recommendation to approve budget amendments to loan Fund
131 (Developer Services) a total of $1 ,400,000 from Fund 306
(Parks & Recreation Capital Improvement).
19) Recommendation to approve expenditures exceeding $50,000
for Bid #06-4013 --Background Check Annual Contract to
Sterling Info Systems, Inc. and Ad-Vance Screening Solutions,
Inc. as a secondary vendor for an estimated additional
expenditure of $8,000 for the balance of the 09 fiscal year
relating to Vehicle for Hire Program, and extending through the
balance of the contract.
Page 9
July 28, 2009
. < ....^..,..".._~..~""'",,.>,..,~.,....~'""",._,,"','___._'_"_"'_'_..__""_,_.",_"~,,"_o...,,..~__~~..__.,_,, "" ,. '~~m,_"~"",_
20) Recommendation to accept a proposed settlement agreement
providing for Release and Satisfaction of Lien in the Code
Enforcement Action entitled Collier County v. Empire
Developers Group, LLC, relating to property parcel ID
186000005 located within, Collier County, Florida.
21) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approve Change Order #5 in the amount of$190,437.50 to
contract #06-3962 New Divisional Software System For
Community Development and Environmental Services.
22) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water
utility facility for Colonial Bank.
23) To provide the Board of County Commissioners with a preview
of the upcoming 2009 cycle of Land Development Code (LDC
Amendments by distributing a copy of the master list of
proposed LDC Amendment requests for LDC Amendment
2009 Cycle 1.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve and execute the 2009/2010
Transportation Disadvantaged Trip & Equipment Grant
Agreement FM #20724618401/20724638401 and a Resolution
Authorizing its Chairman to execute the agreement for a total
project cost of $635,312.00.
2) Recommendation to reimburse The Villages at Emerald Lakes
Four and Five Condominium Associations, Inc., the total
amount of$9,800 for the demolition and removal of the sound
barrier wall and to approve any necessary budget amendments.
3) Recommendation to approve the sole source purchase of
Wavetronix Data Collector Appliance, as well as the Data
Translator Plug-in from Transportation Control Systems, Inc.,
in the amount of $78,690.00 from the PUD Monitoring/Traffic
Page 10
July 28, 2009
<...._....."..~".,. ,.. "'-'"'_."--~""",,, ,'-' . ...., _ ~,,,,,,,,,,,__,,,,-,__,,,,_,,_,^_"~"h__ ... ~. _.,~..,_......,. _ __ ....,,_,... ,__"_,_,__",_,_,_,,,^'~"~',_
Counts Project No. 69124.
4) Recommendation to approve a Right of Entry to allow
Speedway SuperAmerica, LLC to complete an environmental
site assessment.
5) Recommendation to approve the purchase of 2.27 acres of
unimproved property which is required for the construction of a
stormwater detention and treatment pond for Phase II of the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project. Project No. 60168,
Phase II (Fiscal Impact: $62,837.50).
6) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves and authorizes its Chairman to sign a Resolution and a
Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP) Agreement
with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), under
FM #425477-1-58-01, that provides $6 Million in State funding
for improvements to Oil Well Road from Immokalee Road to
Everglades Boulevard. County project #60044.
7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
authorizes a transfer of $250,000 from Fund 313 (Reserve for
Contingencies) to Project #60166 (Logan Boulevard) for legal
fees associated with Case No. 09-2451-CA, G.L. Homes of
Naples Associates II, Ltd. vs. Collier County.
8) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves the Landscape Maintenance Agreement between
Collier County, Florida and Hole in the Wall Golf Club for
landscaping within the right-of-way on Goodlette Frank Road.
9) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to
approve a budget amendment to recognize revenue for projects
within the Transportation Supported Gas Tax Fund (313) in the
amount of $360,939.50.
10) Recommendation to approve a change order to a work order in
the amount of $43,950.00 to Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan,
Page 11
July 28, 2009
,._---_._-'--.,".,_._~_.~_.~'_.",.."~--~,,. ,. ~ '" '.,,, ._,- '~'~."-,, "'~""'-~~;""'--'---'"",--'--''''"-~-~-'''~'-''''--^''''
Inc. (PBS&J) for contract #06-3969 Fixed Term Professional
Engineering Services for the Lely Area Stormwater
Improvement Project (LASIP), Whitaker Road Improvements
(Project No. 51101) necessary to relocate utility pipelines in
conflict with stormwater improvements due to unforeseen
conditions.
11) Recommendation to approve a Resolution certifying the
statutory dedication and acceptance ofa portion of Weber
Boulevard by virtue of the County's continuous and
uninterrupted maintenance of the roadway in excess of seven
years and authorize the filing of a Right of Way map. Project
No. 68056 (Fiscal Impact: $45.00)
12) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approve the use of the new Bank Drivein rate, effective June 8,
2009 for the purpose of re-calculating the applicable Road
Impact Fees for the American Momentum Bank.
13) This item reauires that all participants be sworn in and ex
parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Recommendation to approve a Developers Contribution
Agreement (DCA) between Pulte Home Corporation and The
Bryan W. Paul Family Limited Partnership (The Developers)
and Collier County to grant temporary drainage and
construction easements for the programmed expansion of Oil
Well Road.
14) Recommendation to adopt a resolution requesting that the
Florida Department of Transportation quitclaim to Collier
County certain right-of-way, being the North fifty feet of the
South one hundred feet of Section 31, Township 49 South,
Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, required for
construction of the Wilson Boulevard Extension. Estimated
fiscal impact: None.
15) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to execute an
easement instrument to convey a utility easement and sign
Page 12
July 28, 2009
..__..........'~~.~,..,-"'._,~..~"'." ._",," .,,,.' ...
related conveyance documents to the City of Naples at the
Freedom Park (aka Gordon River Water Quality Park).
16) Recommendation to approve a contract between the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection through its Office of
Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas (CAMA), and Collier
County, for the paving of Shell Island Road.
17) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approve an Interlocal agreement with the City of Marco Island
for the landscaping and irrigation maintenance on SR 951 and
north of the Marco Island Bridge. (Estimated annual fiscal
impact: $92,500)
18) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
issues a resolution approving and authorizing the Chairman to
sign a Landscape Maintenance Agreement between Collier
County and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT),
for landscaping being installed in the medians on SR 951 at
Bridge No. 030148 Marco Island Bridge North. (Estimated
annual fiscal impact $10,000)
19) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to
approve a budget amendment to reallocate funding from
Transportation Engineering's operating funds into their
personal services budget.
20) Recommendation to award RFP #09-5239 Annual Contract for
Landscape Maintenance Vendors under Category I: Landscape
Maintenance and Irrigation to the following firms: Hannula
Landscaping Inc., Florida Land Maintenance, Vila & Son
Landscaping, Corp., Busk and Associates and Caribbean Lawn
Service; Category II: Mowing and Right-of-Way Maintenance
to the following firms: Hannula Landscaping Inc., Florida Land
Maintenance, Vila & Son and Caribbean Lawn; Category III:
Tree Service to the following firms: Davey Tree Service and
Signature Tree Care; and Category IV: Pest Control Services
not to be awarded.
Page 13
July 28, 2009
_~~_'>""^h~_..,.,,,,.w,,~..,...~.,._,..~e">~' ~"_"'^"''';_'_''''~''.~,",'',,",",' __'_"'''.__~'''4"_'",,'''''''''_''''''____"''''''_W''''_~'''''*' ,., > "
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment to transfer an
amount not to exceed $342,000 from Project No. 71058, Initial
Water Legal to a new Project No. 70015, titled General Legal
Services.
2) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the
Satisfactions of Liens for Solid Waste residential accounts
wherein the County has received payment and said Liens are
satisfied in full for the 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996 Solid
Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessment.
Fiscal impact is $78.50 to record the Satisfactions of Liens.
3) Recommendation to approve the Satisfaction for a certain
Water and/or Sewer Impact Fee Payment Agreement. Fiscal
impact is $18.50 to record the Satisfaction of Lien.
4) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution approving Special
Assessment Hardship Deferrals for certain Sewer Special
Assessments for the 2009 tax year.
5) Recommendation to award purchase orders to the two lowest
bidders for each chemical category under Bid #09-5170, titled
Purchase and Delivery of Chemicals for Utilities, which are
required for potable water, wastewater, and irrigation quality
water treatment by the Water and Wastewater Departments.
6) Recommendation to exempt from formal competition and
approve a Legal Services Contract with de la Parte & Gilbert,
P.A., for Litigation Related to Orangetree Utilities Case No. 07-
2333, Legal Services for Litigation Related to Orangetree
Utilities vs. Collier County for a proposed cost not to exceed
$550,000, Project No. 75010, and approve necessary budget
amendments.
7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
Page 14
July 28, 2009
"__,,~>_~""_"""'"A_'4___,,,_,~,,_,'^'A"'_ ..",<,.. _,,'_,,_,,_'__..m_. ..""..""..,.,,,.,,...~,,._._"_=..,....,,,,,",__-,,,,,,.~_, ~~'" .....--..,--
approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a Pre-Award Cost
Request Form requesting pre-award credit of $5,796.00 in staff
time and expenditures as an addition to the grant application to
the Florida Department of Community Affairs for the Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program for up to $50,000 to install aluminum
roll down shutters and supporting equipment on the Collier
County Environmental Compliance and Landfill Scale House
facility.
8) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a Pre-Award Cost
Request Form requesting a pre-award credit of $54, 164.80 in
staff time and expenditures as an addition to the grant
application to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for
the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program for up to $320,000 to
construct a six-inch High Density Polethylene leachate pipe at
the Collier County Landfill.
9) Recommendation to approve a Certification of Financial
Responsibility in the amount of $1,112,400 required by the
Department of Environmental Protection for the renewal of the
operating permits for the Deep Injection Well Systems at the
North and South County Water Reclamation Facilities.
10) Adopt a Resolution to set the date, time and place for an
Advertised Public Hearing where the Board of County
Commissioners will adopt Fees (Special Assessments) to be
collected on the Property Tax Bills for Curbside Trash
Collection Services for the 2010 Budget Year, approve the
notification to customers, and approve a budget amendment for
$50,700.
11) Recommendation to approve Amendment One (1) to the
Franchise Agreement between Collier County and Waste
Management Inc., of Florida, for Solid Waste, Recyclable
Materials, and Yard Trash Collection Services, to provide
debris removal services after a natural or man-made disaster.
Page 15
July 28, 2009
.,.-----_.-.."~-<->^.,."-_.,-._~,-~--"'~."'..._.,-._..._." _, . ", .~_.._ .___._...".~._..__"~",_,__,,-...._...~_,",_.._.__,_,_._.._,,,"___....._..,"'._""._~;"".."'"_.,__u.,__..,,...._.'";~~~m'"'''=_"_'''..'~,,","..-"__.~""~"'_~'~.'_'''.__'~' ""
12) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to
sign a Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Innovative Recycling and Waste Reduction Grant application in
the amount of $343,070.00 to fund the "Implementing
Recycling at Temporary Events Ordinance" program.
13) Recommendation to award Bid Number 09-5267 Rehab
Reactor #1 - SCRWTP in the amount of $97,400 to Douglas N
Higgins, Inc. to complete the rehabilitation of the Reactor # 1 at
South County Regional Water Treatment Plant. Project No.
71065.5.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves a Budget Amendment in the amount of$104,220.57
consolidating current funding for Fixed Term Physical
Monitoring of designated beach, inlet and interior channel
locations under Contract #08-5124 to Project No. 90536.
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
provides after-the-fact approval for the submission of the 2010
State Challenge Grant Application, which was submitted to
Department of Children & Family Services Office on
Homelessness in the amount of$144,000.00.
3) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment totaling
$264,905 that will provide additional funding for 2009 Summer
Food Grant Program.
4) Recommendation to approve an Agreement regarding the
conveyance of a portion or all of the access easement acquired
for the Delasol Neighborhood Park at a cost not to exceed $42.
Project #800605.
5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves and authorizes the Chairman to sign an amendment to
project number FL14B50-6001 Continuum of Care (CoC)
Page 16
July 28, 2009
._"~~__."'H ".-.,....... ,.._",,,~..~_._.,...,...,..._,-""""-_.._,.....-_.,','--.._'-..-. --~,..--
Supportive Housing Program (SHP) Subrecipient Agreement
with the Shelter for Abused Women & Children (SA WCC) for
the Construction and Services for the Transitional Housing
Program.
6) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment recognizing
$20,023.80 in revenue from an insurance reimbursement for
netting at two softball fields at Max Hasse Community Park.
7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves and authorizes the Chairman to sign three (3) grant
agreements accepting the Continuum of Care Homeless
Assistance grant award from the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) totaling $330,763 and approve
the associated budget amendment of $330,763 recognizing the
funding associated with this award.
8) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to
approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an agreement
between the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
and the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. and
approve a budget amendment to reflect a decrease of$5,125 in
the Alzheimers Disease Initiative (ADI) grant program.
9) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
provides after-the-fact approval for submission of the
Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 application to the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development for funding
under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 in
the amount of $10,000,000.
10) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a modification
to Disaster Recovery Initiative Agreement #08DB-D3-09-21-
o l-A03 between the Florida Department of Community Affairs
and Collier County. This modification will add new activities to
utilize grant funds previously awarded to the Housing
Development Corporation of Southwest Florida, Inc. (f.k.a.
Page 17
July 28,2009
_~,_~""-'''''-r'~.'+.^ '...m'_,,_~"_'_""'~' "---
Collier County Housing Development Corporation) and
Immokalee Helping Our People in Emergencies, Inc.
11) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to
approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an agreement
between the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
and the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. and
approve a budget amendment to reflect a decrease of $17,514 in
the Community Care for the Elderly (CCE) grant program.
12) Recommendation to authorize acceptance of the conveyance of
a Sovereignty Submerged Lands Lease Renewal and
Modification to Reflect Change in Ownership, Reflect Change
in Description of Use, reflect Change in Term, Increase and
Reflect Correct Square Footage from the Board of Trustees of
the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida at a
total cost not to exceed $146.00 for recording fees, Project No.
80611.1.
13) Recommendation to approve the conveyance of an Easement to
Lee County Electric Cooperative for installation of overhead
electric distribution lines to provide electric service to the
Margood Park located at 321 Pear Tree Avenue, Goodland at a
cost not to exceed $27.00.
14) Recommendation to approve the conveyance of an Easement to
Lee County Electric Cooperative for installation of
underground electric distribution lines to provide electric
service to the Margood Park located at 321 Pear Tree A venue,
Goodland at a cost not to exceed $27.00.
15) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to
approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an agreement
between the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
and the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. and
approve a budget amendment to reflect an increase of $382 in
the Home Care for the Elderly (HCE) program.
Page 18
July 28, 2009
""---~<-",.".,-.-"-,,..,,.._,.~,. --- ""''>."."",."".",.'i'''''''_""."",_,","",,,,,,,,,,,,~,,~______,""""'_~__"'_"_""'__'_'"'"_"'__"'""'__"""'""'_~;~"C
16) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves and authorizes the Chairman to sign a proposed land
lease agreement with the Collier County Senior Resource
Center, Inc. to use the old (existing) Golden Gate Branch
Library site for a Senior Resource Center.
17) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a grant
agreement and certification statement from the U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) accepting a
Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program
(HPRP) grant award in the amount of $888,850 and approve the
associated budget amendment recognizing the funding and
appropriating the expenditures associated with this award.
18) Recommendation to approve a temporary Right of Entry for
Lee County Electric Cooperative, Inc. (LCEC) to stage, off-
load and load electric transmission poles, associated materials,
and for access on, over and across County property at 9800
Isles of Capri Boulevard at no cost to the County.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
ratify modifications to and deletions from the 2009 Fiscal Year
Pay and Classification Plan made from April 1, 2009 through
June 30, 2009.
2) Recommendation to name six acquired Conservation Collier
preserves.
3) Recommendation to approve budget amendments to move
operating funds within the IT Departments adopted FY09
budget to cover staff salary and benefits expenses.
4) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment that will
allow a transfer of $48,600 from Conservation Collier Land
Management Fund Reserves to Conservation Collier Land
Page 19
July 28, 2009
...._-"~._",..,.,_.,..'''~,,--'~ ,,-.,.--
Management Fund Operating.
5) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to
sign a contract for the sale of internally developed software to
Sarasota County and to approve a budget amendment
recognizing revenue of $25,000.
6) Recommendation to approve a First Amendment to Lease
Agreement with Gerald T. and Catherine L. Berry for the
continued use of office space used by the Clerk's Office at a
cost of$39,323.
7) Recommendation to enter into an interlocal agreement with the
City of Bonita Springs to mutually extend local preference to
vendors within both entities.
8) Recommendation to approve the Brochu Preserve Final
Management Plan under the Conservation Collier Land
Acquisition Program.
9) Recommendation to award RFP #09-5255, SAP Document
Management System Consulting and Implementation Services
to LeverX, Inc. and authorize the Chairman to execute the
standard contract documents. Total project costs for hardware
and services are not to exceed $360,000.
10) Recommendation to approve a Budget Amendment
appropriating additional funds received in the Freedom
Memorial Fund (Fund 620).
11) Recommendation to approve Budget Amendments to recognize
and appropriate miscellaneous revenues totaling $103,668.75
for computer hardware and IT services.
12) Recommendation to award Bid #09-5240 Locksmith Hardware
to multiple vendors listed; Interline Brands, Inc. D/B/A
Sexauer, Independent Hardware, Inc., Accredited Lock Supply,
Southern Lock & Supply Co., and Clark Security Products, Inc.
Page 20
July 28, 2009
_..<.o.....*..'._m.___"." ._,._~.",_....~~,....".'.',."..._~"......_..,~....""'""'~"",........._.._,_""""_'_'.."'..._""""'.''''''''F'''...._..,~,....,_~...__"'~;_''____"...._,,_~..,;.._.,"'_.,""'.,....~~".._;,,__<. 0"
(Estimated annual fiscal impact $60,000)
13) Report and Ratify Staff-Approved Change Orders and Changes
to Work Orders to Board-Approved Contracts.
14) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to sign
Modification No.4 to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
Cooperative Agreement No. 40l8l5J02l to fund habitat
restoration at the McIlvane Marsh Preserve in the amount of
$21,500.
15) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to
approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the Assumption
Agreement from Corporate Express Business Interiors (CEBI)
to Staples Contract & Commercial, Inc., d/b/a Staples
Advantage (Staples) for Janitorial Supplies for Emergency
Medical Services (EMS) Department, Office Supplies for
multiple departments, and Systems Furniture for the New
Emergency Services Center (ESC).
16) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to
approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the Assumption
Agreement from M/A-Com, Inc., to Harris Corporation for
equipment purchases, maintenance, software licensing and
services for the operation of Collier County's 800 MHz trunked
radio system.
17) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to
sign a second addendum to the County Manager Employment
Agreement for the purpose of correcting conflicting provisions
in Sections 12(B) and l2(C) of the agreement.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Recommendation to approve the submittal of a Volunteer Fire
Assistance Grant Application to the Florida Division of
Forestry for the purchase ofVHF radios and authorize the
Chairman to sign the application. (Fiscal impact 500/0 County
Page 21
July 28, 2009
..,,"....~~~,".~'.'."m,.~..~._.,_ .....__..... .".. ,.. ~""...~ ,,,._-,,.__..<...."'~,.,.,""~,,'~..,,.._,_.,-"'._..,-,.-..."- ,,,--,,-_._-.' ,'."
match: $2,721.25)
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
award Bid #09-5235 for Lake Bank Geotextile Tube
Installations for the Pelican Bay Services Division, in the
amount of $100,000 to Erosion Restoration, LLC.
3) Recommendation to approve a Budget Amendment to
recognize and appropriate Grant administrative revenues
totaling $54,716.97 for reimbursement of personnel and
operating expenses.
4) Recommendation to approve an amendment to Contract # 1904
between the Board of Collier County Commissioners and
Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,
Division of Forestry, for fire protection of forest and wild lands
within Collier County.
5) Recommendation to approve the application sponsored by the
Collier County Bar Association to officially recognize the
name, "The Honorable Hugh D. Hayes Courthouse Annex" for
the new courthouse annex at the Collier County Government
Center.
6) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance
proceeds) to the Fiscal Year 2008-09 Adopted Budget.
7) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to
sign a Modification to the Fiscal Year 2009 Emergency
Management Preparedness and Assistance Grant accepting
$77,198 in grant funds and approve a Budget Amendment to
recognize and appropriate the revenue.
8) Recommendation to approve replacement agreement for
contract #09-5268 "Professional State Lobbyist Services" with
The Closure Group, Inc., (J. Keith Arnold and Associates) in
the amount of $80,000 annually.
Page 22
July 28, 2009
c.,,,....,'"....,,"''''"''""<.,.__,.,.__,_-._"'-'_.i'''''~''.",~._~_o_""..;,...,.."._,'^_,.....^"".~*'.',..<~...'." ,..".,.'"""_"___~........,.""'___~^._,~~.".,.,,...,'"...,.._,.. .,.N~_.~.."__._,,,._,~, ~"~~-,-_..,.,..,,._~-".__
9) Approve budget amendments.
10) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
provides the after-the-fact approval for the attached American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Assistance to
Firefighters Fire Station Construction Grant Application that
was submitted by the Ochopee Fire Control District for the
renovations to Fire Station 61 at Port of the Islands in the
amount of $452,474 funded by the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 and accept responsibility
for the additional transparency, accountability and reporting
compliance requirements of these funds.
11) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves Change Order #3 on Contract #06-4007 with Paradise
Advertising and Marketing, Inc. for up to $918,000 in
additional billing at gross in accordance with their agreement
with Collier County and authorizes the Chairman to execute the
Change Order.
12) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves a Tourist Development Tax Category B Grant
Application for a Mexican Independence Day Celebration
Event in the amount of $14, 112 and authorizes the Chairman to
sign said agreement.
13) Recommendation that the Board approves prepayment of the
Caribbean Gardens Commercial Paper Loan in the amount of
$1,735,000.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves an after-the-fact acceptance of the attached Federal
Aviation Administration (F AA) grant offer for $247,000 for the
acquisition of 2.73 acres of land (Tract Q) purchased from WCI
Page 23
July 28, 2009
",,,- ,-...~."._~--,"-,-~ ~"^' .,..,"-,..- -.. , '."
Communities, Inc. on November 18,2008 required for Phase I
of the Taxiway Project at the Marco Island Executive Airport,
and associated budget amendments.
2) Recommendation for the Board of Collier County
Commissioners acting as the governing body of the Bayshore
Beautification Municipal Services Taxing Unit (MSTU) to
approve an Agreement with Florida Power and Light (FP&L)
for the installation and service of lights on sixty eight (68)
existing power poles located on side roads lying east and west
of the Bayshore Drive corridor; authorize the BCC chairman to
execute the Agreement on behalf of the Board; approve and
authorize the CRA Executive Director (Administrator of
activities of the MSTU) to make payment from MSTU Fund
163 for the costs of associated monthly fees. (Fiscal Impact
$89,760.00 over 10 years).
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
accepts and authorizes its Chairman to execute a Grant
Agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration in the
amount of $49,158, and approve all necessary budget
amendments, for the installation of storm water management
structures required by the South Florida Water Management
District for the expansion of the aircraft apron at the Immokalee
Regional Airport.
4) Recommendation that the Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA) approves the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Local CRA
Advisory Board hosting a Bayshore Cultural Festival of the
Arts event, approve up to $25,000 from the Bayshore Gateway
Triangle Trust Fund (Fund 187) FY10 Marketing & Promotions
budget to financially support event costs, and declare that the
event serves a valid public purpose. (Advisory Board, Bayshore
Gateway Triangle CRA)
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for
Page 24
July 28, 2009
~ ,_~,~,.._"...___~_..",...~,.,~_,_,~u_.__"'"
reimbursement to attend a function serving a Valid Public
Purpose. He attended EDC's 2009 Post-Legislative Luncheon at
Hilton Naples, 5111 Tamiami Trail North on 18th June, at
11 :30 a.m. $20.00 to be paid from Commissioner Henning's
travel budget.
2) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for
reimbursement regarding attendance at a function serving a
Valid Public Purpose. Attended the EDC Post-Legislative
Luncheon on June 18, 2009 at the Hilton Naples in Naples, FL.
$20.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
3) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for
reimbursement regarding attendance at a function serving a
Valid Public Purpose. Attended the F AC Sunset Dinner Cruise
on June 23, 2009 on board the Marco Island Princess at Marco
Island, FL. $50.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel
budget.
4) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for
reimbursement regarding attendance at a function serving a
Valid Public Purpose. Attended Immokalee Rotary Club with
staff on June 3, 2009 at Immokalee, FL $40.00 to be paid from
Commissioner's Coletta's travel budget.
5) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for
reimbursement regarding attendance at a function serving a
Valid Public Purpose. Attended the Eastern Collier Chamber of
Commerce meeting with staff on June 3, 3009 at Immokalee,
FL. $45.00 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel
budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as desired.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
Page 25
July 28, 2009
^'~"--~-'~-~" ,....~.......",.."._". <_...~",,_...~,-,-,_.,._..,-"- .....,__._"~.._."_=,,,..~....i"'._-".'_"",,._;_.,""'."'.,..,,...__"___,,~rlri.."'m_"""',.""""h,_.,,,""'''''"''-''~' --...--".-..-
1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
June 13, 2009 through June 19, 2009 and for submission into
the official records of the Board.
2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
June 20, 2009 through June 26, 2009 and for submission into
the official records of the Board.
3) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
June 27, 2009 through July 3,2009 and for submission into the
official records of the Board.
4) Request that the Board of County Commissioners accepts and
approves capital asset disposition records for time period April
1, 2009 through June 30, 2009.
5) Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners serve as
the local coordinating unit of government for the Federal Year
2009 Florida Department of Law Enforcement Edward Byrne
Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) funds, execute the
Certificate of Participation, designate the Sheriff as the official
applicant, approve the CCSO Finance Director as the grant
chief financial manager and the CCSO Grant Coordinator as the
grant contact person; approve the grant application when
completed, authorize acceptance of the award, and approve
associated budget amendments.
6) Approve a budget amendment recognizing $1,770,000 in
revenues for miscellaneous services provided and expenditures
in the Sheriffs FY2009 General Fund budget.
7) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
July 04, 2009 through July 10, 2009 and for submission into the
official records of the Board.
8) Recommendation that the Board approves a partial prepayment
of the Naples Park Area Stormwater Improvement Assessment
Bond, Series 1997 in the amount of$185,000 and the requisite
Page 26
July 28, 2009
~__<'''_''1'_'''''''_'''~''.' - ~ --_.~.."._-
budget amendment.
9) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
July 11,2009 through July 17,2009 and for submission into the
official records of the Board.
10) Recommendation to approve an Integrated Criminal Justice
Information System Cost-Sharing Agreement with the Collier
County Clerk of Circuit Courts, the Public Defender for the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit, the State Attorney of the Twentieth
Judicial Circuit, and the Chief Judge for the Twentieth Judicial
Circuit and approve necessary budget amendment in the
amount of $600,000.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to send to
the National Park Service affidavits of 5 employees which will
end a dispute with the National Park Service over the
ownership of a portion of Burns Road.
2) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Property
owner, 524 Broadway Company, L.P., for Parcel Nos. 122 and
123 in the amount of $40,320 in the lawsuit styled Collier
County v. William Pilger, et al., Case No. 06-1125-CA (County
Barn Road Project No. 60101) (Fiscal Impact $6,720).
3) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent,
Waterways Joint Venture, IV, for Parcel No. 178RDUE in the
amount of $5,040 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Jorge
A. Romero, et al., Case No. 07-2681-CA (Oil Well Road
Project No. 60044) (Fiscal Impact $840).
4) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent,
Cornelia Jones, for Parcel No. 811 in the amount of$24,015 in
the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Myrtle Preserve, LLC, et
al., Case No. 07-463-CA (Lely Area Stormwater Improvement
Proj ect No. 51101) (Fiscal Impact $4,415).
Page 27
July 28, 2009
=---,._.,._..."~--"._~~-_._~..,--~-_.,~---"-~~,,---,,,/.~~,,~ -,',-, . '~""""'~-'^"""'"'-""''''"''''-'''''"''~'~'-''''''''---'''''--''-'''-^''~"-_..""'".--""'-"......,......_,..',."',..~."....'"--".._.._,,",",-,"'.,..,,-.. ."-",,,,,~,,,,,".,....,.~_.._<,,..,..,,,~,....__._..,-.-.,,, "., '- - ""'~""'--~
5) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent,
Janet R. Messineo, for Parcel No. 161RDUE in the amount of
$4,000 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Patricia K.
Carlyle, et al., Case No. 07-2829-CA (Oil Well Road Project
No. 60044) (Fiscal Impact $2,200).
6) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondents,
Charles R., Helen J. and Betty J. Wilson, for Parcel No. 142 in
the amount of $26,280 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v.
Charles R. Wilson, et aI., Case No. 02-5164-CA (Immokalee
Road Project No. 60018) (Fiscal Impact $4,380).
7) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent,
Naples Bridge Center, Inc., for Parcel No. 151 in the amount of
$49,900 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Tech
Foundation, Inc., et aI., Case No. 03-2499-CA (Golden Gate
Parkway Project No. 60027) (Fiscal Impact $5,000).
8) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent,
Eden Institute Foundation, Inc., for Parcel No. 128 in the
amount of $88,200 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v.
Charles R. Keller, et aI., Case No. 06-876-CA (County Barn
Road Project 60101) (Fiscal Impact $14,700).
9) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent,
Seacrest School, Inc., for Parcel Nos. 829A and 829B in the
amount of$69,600 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v.
Charles R. Keller, et aI., Case No. 06-876-CA (County Barn
Road Project 60101) (Fiscal Impact $11,600).
10) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent,
Jorge T. Torres, for Parcel No. 209FEE in the amount of
$48,700 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Pablo M.
Sardinas, et al., Case No. 07-2824-CA (Oil Well Road Project
No. 60044) (Fiscal Impact $22,200).
11) Recommendation to approve a Mediated Settlement Agreement
Page 28
July 28, 2009
'_'f_____.ry .._,-
and authorize a Stipulated Final Judgment incorporating the
same dollar amounts in the amount of $2,265,900 for Parcels
113FEE, 114FEE, 114TCE, 116FEE, ll6TCE, 116DE, and
118FEE, plus $180,000 in attorney's fees, expert fees and costs
in the lawsuit styled CC v. Andy Morgan, et al., Case No. 07-
4400-CA (Santa Barbara Boulevard Extension Project Number
60091) (Fiscal Impact: $914,270.00).
12) Recommendation to approve Releases relating to seven (7)
Orders of the Special Magistrate against properties owned by
Centex Homes.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING
CRITERIA: 1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM
STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL
BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR
OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF ALL MEMBERS
PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER
AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE
COMMENCEMENT OF THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE
ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD; AND 4) NO
INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO
THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-JUDICIAL
IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. Recommendation that the Board approve an Ordinance Creating the
Radio Road East of Santa Barbara Boulevard to Davis Boulevard
Municipal Service Taxing Unit.
B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission Members. Should a hearin!! be held on this item~ all
participants are required to be sworn in. SNR-2009-AR-14205
Marbella Lakes Associates, LLC, is requesting to rename a street from
Marbella Boulevard to Hermosa Way. Subject property is located in
Tract A-1 of the Marbella Lakes Subdivision, according to the plat
Page 29
July 28, 2009
~...,...-~.,.._.-".~-<~<~". -,', ~ '^"W'_'
thereof recorded in Plat Book 46, Pages 77 through 93, of the Official
Records of Collier County, Florida, which is in Section 19, Township
49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
C. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. V A-2008-AR-
13671, The Collier County Parks and Recreation Department,
represented by Heidi Williams, AICP, ofQ. Grady Minor and
Associates, is requesting eleven variances from LDC subsection
4.06.02 regarding buffer requirements and one variance from LDC
subsection 4.02.03 regarding standards for location of accessory
buildings and structures, with all 12 variances being for a community
park to be known as the Mar Good Harbor Park in the Residential
Single-Family (RSF-4) and Village Residential (VR) zoning districts
with a Goodland Zoning Overlay (GZO). The 2.62-acre subject
property is located in Goodland, in Section 18, Township 52 South,
Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. CTS
D. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, tranfers and supplemental revenue) to
the Fiscal Year 2008-09 Adopted Budget.
E. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 92-
40, as amended, which created the Immokalee Beautification
Municipal Service Taxing Unit, to expand its boundaries to match the
urban boundary within the current Immokalee Community
Redevelopment Agency (ICRA) boundaries.
F. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. RZ-2008-AR-
13967, the Collier County Department of Parks and Recreation,
represented by Heidi Williams, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor &
Associates, is requesting a Rezone from the Residential Single-Family
(RSF-4), Village Residential (VR) and Goodland Zoning Overlay
(GZO) zoning districts to the Public Use (P) Zoning District for a
community park. The approximately 2.62-acre waterfront property is
located on the north side of Pear Tree A venue in Good1and, in Section
18, Township 52 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. CTS
Page 30
July 28, 2009
o,___,_,_""~,,,,__"_~~__~,"__"___""_'_"'__" ., "-'~"'''''''~''-'"''''''''''',--',",,,,,_,,,,,,",,",-,,_._-''-''-''''''''-''-~'-"''^'-~;._""",,,~,---,---
G. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. CU-2008-AR-
13679, Edward Larson of Messiah Lutheran Church Inc., represented
by Dwight Nadeau of RWA, Inc., is requesting a Conditional Use in
the Estates (E) Zoning District to expand an existing church pursuant
to Subsection 2.03.0 1.B.l.c.l of the Land Development Code. The
5.l5-acre subject property is located at 5800 Golden Gate Parkway in
Section 29, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida. CTS
H. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopts an
Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2004-43, by increasing the
surcharge imposed for non-criminal traffic infractions set forth in
Chapter 318, Florida Statutes, and those offenses enumerated in
Section 318.17, Florida Statutes, from $15.00 to $30.00, in order to
implement recent legislation amending Section 318 .18( 13), Florida
Statutes.
I. Recommendation that the Board approves an ordinance imposing civil
fines and penalties for the patently false reporting of violations of
County and State laws to public officers and law enforcement officers,
which require the unnecessary exhaustion of public resources.
J. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv
Commission Members. Should a hearin2 be held on this item. all
participants are required to be sworn in. SNR-2009-AR-14206
Marbella Lakes Associates, LLC is requesting to rename a street from
Green Boulevard to Marbella Lakes Drive. The subject property is
located in Tracts A-2 and A-3A of the Marbella Lakes Subdivision,
according to the plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 46, Pages 77
through 83, of the Official Records of Collier County, Florida, which
is in Section 19, Township 49, Range 26, Collier County, Florida.
K. To conduct a public hearing to review and adopt revisions to the sign
regulations of the Collier County Land Development Code (Ordinance
No. 04-41) as a result of the legal challenge asserted in Bonita Media
Enterprises, LLC versus the Collier County Code Enforcement Board.
Page 31
July 28, 2009
.""-~~."<-..,,..
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA
SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-
8383.
Page 32
July 28, 2009
,~"...,",,,,,,,,,,--,,,,,,,,-,,~,'.....,,--> ~,""_...".".__......--_....."._.".~..--,-"_.,...,._-,.-.,,,,~.-,,-..,...,-...,.. ",' -, ~-,
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would everyone please take their seats.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much for being here
today. I'm calling the meeting of the Board of County Commissioners
to order for this fine day, July 28th.
Would you-all please stand with me. We're going to first hear a
prayer. Jim Mudd, will you be conducting--
MR. MUDD: I believe the Reverend William Oakley is here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. Thank you.
REVEREND OAKLEY: Let's pray. Holy God, creator of the
universe and of this section of paradise known as Collier County, we
seek your blessing on this day and on this session of the Board of
County Commissioners, guide and direct those persons elected as the
chief legislative body of our county who are responsible for providing
services to protect the health, safety, welfare, and quality of life of the
county's citizens.
We thank you for the privilege of living in a country that is free,
that encourages the participation of its citizens in their government.
We ask that you enable us to manage and protect the resources both
temporal and natural that allow us the full pleasure of life for
ourselves and for future generations.
While at times the tasks before us seem insurmountable, we
know that with you all things are possible. We seek your counsel, we
invoke your wisdom, we embrace your mercy, and we abide in your
grace.
In your eternal name we pray, amen.
Now can we pledge?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now I ask you to take your hats off, put
your hands on your hearts, and say the Pledge of Allegiance with me.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Very good.
First, before we begin, shall we check to see if we have anybody
Page 2
'""""~-"-~~~'~' ....,--
July 28, 2009
on the telephone joining us?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Henning.
MS. FILSON: The telephone is hooked up.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So we have Commissioner Coyle.
Are you here?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. Can you hear me okay?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Barely.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we can barely hear you.
So Commissioner Coyle, are you on the phone?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I'm here.
MR. MUDD: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Klatzkow, I think there's a motion that's
needed?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. We need a motion to -- by the board
to find that due to unusual circumstances, that the two commissioners
could not be here at this point in time.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So moved.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All those in favor, signify by
.
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
Page 3
~-_._-----,.--'--"'-'-"""- ~ .--_. -"'....,_..._.._..~,.~'~.... ","--"...__. _.~._.,_.._-_.....--,_,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,',---',,,"'~-'~-'-~""~"'""""',^",;.,~,.~-. ... _, I ... ,,",-,"""'","''';-~''""'-".''''''-'-''''-'--"'-
July 28, 2009
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We're going to have to be paying really
close attention because there's only three of us right here sitting, so we
have to listen for the people on the telephone this morning.
Now, I need to hear from you, County Manager.
Item #2A
APPROV AL OF TODA Y'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND
SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED - APPROVED AND/OR
ADOPTED W/CHANGES
MR. MUDD: Agenda changes, Board of County
Commissioners' meeting, July 28, 2009.
First item is to add on Item 4 E, which is proclamation
recognizing the week of August 17,2009, through August 21,2009, as
Florida Water Professionals Week, to be accepted by Paul Mattausch,
Collier County water director, with the members of his staff. This
add-on item is at Commissioner Fiala's request.
The next item is to move Item 16A 18 to 10H, and that's a
recommendation to approve a budget amendment to loan Fund 131,
developer services -- development services, a total of $1 ,400,000 from
Fund 306, parks and recreation capital improvement. That item is
being moved to the regular agenda at Commissioner Henning's
request.
The next item is to move Item 16A21 to 101. It's a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
change order number five in the amount of $190,437.50 to contract
06-3962, New Divisional Software System for community
development and environmental services. This item being moved at
Commissioner Henning's request.
The next item is Item 16D 17, and there's two notes on 16D 17,
Page 4
" ~-~-~"-~'-''''--'-
July 28, 2009
and it will be the next two paragraph remarks that I have.
16D 17, the resolution regarding ground lease for the senior
resource center for this item was omitted from the agenda package.
Copies have been distributed and made available for review. That
clarification's at staffs request.
In addition to 16D 17 that I just read, in the resolution modify the
wording in the second whereas to read as follows: Whereas, the
board, at its July 28, 2009, regular meeting, determined that the
property that is the subject of the ground lease is not otherwise needed
for the county senior health purposes. The words senior health added.
That clarification is at Commissioner Henning's request.
The next item is to move Item 16F12 to lOG. It's a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
tourist development tax category B grant application for a Mexican
Independence Day celebration event in the amount of $14, 112 and
authorizes the chairman to sign said agreement. This item is being
moved to the regular agenda at Commissioner Halas's request.
The next item is to withdraw Item 16J10. It's a recommendation
to approve an integrated criminal justice information system
cost-sharing agreement with the Collier County Clerk of the Circuit
Courts, the public defender for the 20th Judicial Circuit, the state
attorney of the 20th Judicial Circuit, and the chief judge of the 20th
Judicial Circuit, and approve necessary budget amendment in the
amount of $600,000. This item is withdrawn by the request of the
chief judge of the 20th Judicial Circuit.
The next item is to move Item 1 7 A to 8B. This is a
recommendation that the board approve an ordinance creating the
Radio Road east of Santa Barbara Boulevard to Davis Boulevard
municipal service taxing unit. This item is being moved to the regular
agenda at Commissioner Halas's request.
The next item is to move Item 17 J to 8A. This item requires that
ex parte disclosure be provided by commission members. Should a
Page 5
<'__~~M.__~_.~'_"' "<,'
July 28, 2009
hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn
In.
It's SNR-2009-AR-14206, Marbella Lakes Association, LLC, is
requesting to rename a street from Green Boulevard to Marbella Lakes
Drive. The subject property is located in tract alpha two and alpha
dash three alpha of the Marbella Lakes subdivision, according to the
plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 46, Pages 77 through 83 of the
official records of Collier County Florida, which is in Section 19,
Township 49, Range 26, Collier County, Florida. This item is being
moved at the request of Commissioner Coletta to Item 8A.
The next item is Item 17K. Page 87 of 103, in parens, Page 73 of
88 of the ordinance, paragraph 5.06.05, exceptions (sic) from these
regulations, paragraph alpha dash two and alpha dash three, should be
renumbered to alpha dash one and alpha dash two as noted below.
That clarification's at staff's request.
Okay. Now we do the renumbering. A, signs authorized to be
displayed by law or by governmental order, rule of regulation. So A
(1), prohibitory signs, no dumping, no trespassing; 3 feet in size or
less they may be allowed without a permit.
Alpha two, reasonable repairs and maintenance.
Note -- and that ends the item on 17K.
Now there's a note. Item 16E2, Conservation Collier will be
presenting a plaque to the Estates Elementary School at a later date to
recognize their efforts in naming Panther week -- Panther Walk
Preserve, and that clarification's at staff's request. Again, this is 16E2.
You have a series of time-certain items today, Commissioners.
First is Item 5D to be heard at 10 a.m., and that's the Clerk of Court's
FY -2010 budget presentation.
Due to -- next item, due to advertising requirements, Items 10E,
14A, 14B, and 14C will be heard after one p.m.
The next item that has a time certain is Item lOF to be heard at
10:30 a.m. It's a recommendation that the Board of County
Page 6
_.____,~,.,,_'"' ....__.....8'"'............... -,,--"<,,~...._._- ..._",.
July 28, 2009
Commissioners adopt a resolution establishing proposed millage rates
as the maximum property tax rates to be levied in FY -2009/2010 and
reaffirm the advertised public hearing dates in September, 2009, for
the budget approval process.
That's all I have, Madam Chairman and Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
I'd like to welcome Dwight Brock to our meeting this morning,
by the way.
MR. BROCK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you for being here.
County Attorney, do you have anything to add?
MR. KLATZKOW: I have no changes to the agenda, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta, anything
further on the agenda?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could you give me just one
second? I'm looking for my ex parte.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. I'll come back to you last.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, Madam Chair.
On the consent agenda, I do not have anything to come forward
with as far as ex parte. On the summary agenda, 17C, I've had
meetings, correspondence, emails, and phone calls, and I also met with
Connie Fullmer and Rich Pappy and Jim Graham, January 12,2005;
meeting with Mimi Wolock and Tom Fellows (phonetic) of the
Goodland Civic Association, December 9,2004.
And also I have ex parte on 1 7F in regards to meetings,
correspondence, emails, and phone calls in regards to the rezoning of
residential single-family RSF -4, village residential in Goodland
zoning overlay.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Coy Ie, any -- any changes to the agenda or any ex
Page 7
July 28, 2009
parte?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No additional changes to the
agenda, Madam Chair, but ex parte disclosure is relevant for me on
Item 16A4. I had a meeting on April the 20th, 2009, with Mr. Ron
Rice concerning the City Gate Commerce Center.
And with respect to the summary agenda, 17 C and F, I have had
a total of six meetings between February the 18th, 2004, and January
the 3rd, 2007, about 150 pieces of correspondence, 37 emails received
and phone calls received for each of those 17C and 17F.
And for 17G, I have received the Collier County Planning
Commission staff report, and I have reviewed that.
And that concludes my ex parte disclosure.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. I have no ex parte
disclosures. I don't think I need to do that on the Land Development
Code changes.
I do have some -- I need some clarification on 16 David 1, 16D 1,
so I'd like to move that to the regular agenda, and also a simple
suggested change to an agreement 16 frankly 8, 16F8.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So you wanted to bring those onto the
regular agenda, you say?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Okay. Then 16Dl would be 10J, and 16F8 would
be 10K.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. 10J is already assigned, right, to
16A21 ?
MR. MUDD: That's I.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry.
MS. FILSON: Madam Chairman, they changed that all around
since I printed that for you.
Page 8
"".,~,-,.,-".,_..."
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh.
MS. FILSON: I'm in the process of reprinting it right now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. Thank you very much. So would
you restate that; I'm so sorry.
MR. MUDD: No, it's no problem. 16Dl is 10J; 16F8 is 10K.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: I promise you we'll get it all squared away for you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. Well, we'll kind of make our way
through this agenda yet.
Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Thank you, Commissioner
Fiala.
Yes. I have one item I was going to just discuss briefly, but I'm
going to bring it -- I'm going to have it pulled just so we can discuss it
a little more fully, 16C6, having to do with litigation that's takes place
with Orangetree Utility. I'd like to have that item pulled.
And as far as my disclosures, under the -- I have nothing on the
consent agenda to disclose. Oh, wait, I do. B 13, I've received emails;
and under the summary agenda, 17C, I've had correspondence and
emails; under 17F, I have correspondence and emails; under 17G, I've
had correspondence. And that just about concludes it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: And that item that Commissioner Coletta would
like moved will go to 10L, and that's 16C6.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. And as far as I am concerned,
as for any ex parte, I have nothing to the consent agenda. On the
summary agenda, I have -- 17C, I've had meetings, correspondence,
emails, phone calls, and many of them, and they're all in my file for
the public to see.
1 7F, again, meetings, correspondence, emails and phone calls,
and nothing else on the summary agenda.
And with that, Commissioners, may I have a motion to approve
Page 9
July 28, 2009
the agenda as amended?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion so made.
MR. MOSS: Excuse me, Madam Chairman, if I may.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
MR. MOSS: I just wanted to make a clarification on the record.
I'm not sure if you were aware of it or not, but for Item 17C, the
Margood Harbor variance, there was a notation in the staff report
regarding the Planning Commission's recommendation.
The LDC required a hedge row in a certain portion of the site,
and the Planning Commission -- or excuse me -- the applicant
contended that the residents of that area didn't want the hedge row.
The Planning Commission motioned that if they received letters
from these property owners, that this requirement could be waived.
As of the writing of the staff report, those letters hadn't been received,
but since then they have been. And so I just wanted to make that
clarification.
It says that there are three properties. Two of the properties
happen to be owned by the same person. So we did receive the two
letters, and they have been included in your packet.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: J.D., thank you so much for bringing that
forward. I was supposed to mention that, and I'm afraid I did not. I
really appreciate it.
MR. MOSS: No problem. And for the record, John David Moss,
department of zoning and land development review. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Thank you very much.
And now with that, may I hear a motion to --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: There was a motion, yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I made the motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Were you the motion, and you--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I seconded.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And you were the second, okay.
Any further discussion?
Page 10
July 28, 2009
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Who is that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Commissioner Henning, can you tell
me why you opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, considering I think there's
going to be three votes to raise taxes for the property owners in Collier
County, I find it hard pressed to pay for a dinner cruise on Marco
Island.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm sorry, I couldn't -- could you speak up
a little bit more. I could barely hear you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I said, considering that three
commissioners will probably vote for a tax increase to the property
owners in Collier County, I find it hard pressed to pay for a dinner
cruise on -- that happened on Marco Island.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you. So that's why you're
opposing the agenda?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'd be glad to pull it off,
but I --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nope, that's all right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's not going to go anywhere, so
--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So I have a motion and a second
to approve the agenda as it appears. That's a 4-1 vote. And all those in
--
Page 11
~'--'-"'- .~.
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You already did it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have already. The 4-1. And with that,
we move on. I'm sorry. I'm moving around this thing like -
Page 12
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
Julv 28.2009
Add On Item 4E: Proclamation recognizing the week of August 17,2009 through August 21,2009,
as Florida Water Professionals Week. To be accepted by Paul Mattausch, Collier County Water
Director, with members of his staff. (Commissioner Fiala's request.)
Move Item 16A18 to 10H: Recommendation to approve budget amendments to loan Fund 131
(Developer Services) a total of $1,400,000 from Fund 306 (Parks & Recreation Capital
Improvement). (Commissioner Henning's request.)
Move Item 16A21 to 101: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
Change Order #5 in the amount of $190,437.50 to contract 06-3962 New Divisional Software
System for Community Development and Environmental Services. (Commissioner Henning's
request.)
Item 16017: The Resolution regarding Ground Lease with the Senior Resource Center for this
item was omitted from the agenda package. Copies have been distributed and made available for
review. (Staff's request.)
Item 16017: In the Resolution, modify the wording in the second "whereas" to read as follows:
"WHEREAS, the Board, at its July 28, 2009, Regular Meeting determined that the property that is
the subject of the ground lease is not otherwise needed for County Senior health purposes. . .
(the words Senior health added). (Commissioner Henning's request.)
Move Item 16F12 to 10G: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves a
Tourist Development Tax Category B Grant Application for a Mexican Independence Day
Celebration event in the amount of $14,112 and authorizes the Chairman to sign said agreement.
(Commissioner Halas' request.)
Withdraw Item 16J10: Recommendation to approve an Integrated Criminal Justice Information
System Cost-Sharing Agreement with the Collier County Clerk of Circuit Courts, the Public
Defender for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, the State Attorney of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit,
and the Chief Judge for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit and approve necessary budget amendment
in the amount of $600,000. (This item withdrawn by request of the Chief Judge of the Twentieth
Judicial Circuit.)
Move 17A to 8B: Recommendation thatthe Board approve an Ordinance Creating the Radio Road
East of Santa Barbara Boulevard to Davis Boulevard Municipal Service Taxing Unit.
(Commissioner Halas' request.)
Move 17 J to 8A: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in.
SNR-2009-AR-14206 Marbella Lakes Associates, LLC is requesting to rename a street from Green
Boulevard to Marbella Lakes Drive. The subject property is located in Tracts A-2 and A-3A of the
Marbella Lakes Subdivision, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 46, Pages 77
through 83, of the Official Records of Collier County, Florida, which is in Section 19, Township 49,
Range 26, Collier County, Florida. (Commissioner Coletta's request.)
7/28/20099:00 AM
-"'...........--.-....-
Item 17K. paae 87 of 103 (paae 73 of 88 of the ordinance): Paragraph 5.06.05 Exemptions from
these regulations. Paragraph A.2. and A.3. should be renumbered to A.1. and A.2. as noted
below: (Staffs request.)
A. Signs authorized to be displayed by law or by governmental order, rule or regulation
1. Prohibitory signs (e.g., no dumping, no trespassing) 3 square feet in size of less
may be allowed without a permit.
2. Reasonable repairs and maintenance.
NOTE: Item 16E2: Conservation Collier will be presenting a plaque to the Estates Elementary
School at a later date to recognize their efforts in naming "Panther Walk Preserve". (Staffs
request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 50 to be heard at 10:00 a.m.: Clerk of Courts FY-2010 budget presentation.
Due to advertisina reauirements. Items 10E and 14A. 14B and 14C will be heard after 1 :00 p.m.
Item 10F to be heard at 10:30 a.m.: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
adopt a resolution establishing Proposed Millage Rates as the Maximum Property Tax Rates to be
levied in FY 2009/10 and reaffirm the Advertised Public Hearing dates in September, 2009 for the
budget approval process.
7/28/20099:00 AM
July 28, 2009
Item #2B, #2C, #2D and #2E
MINUTES FROM JUNE 9, 2009 - BCC/REGULAR MEETING;
JUNE 23, 2009 - BCC/REGULAR MEETING; JUNE 29, 2009 -
BCC/BUDGET WORKSHOP AND JUNE 30, 2009-
BCC/BUDGET WORKSHOP - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I make a motion that we
approve June 9, 2009, BCC regular meeting; June 23, 2009, BCC
regular meeting; and the June 29, 2009, BCC budget workshop; and
the June 30, 2009, BCC budget workshop.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did both of you vote for that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I did.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good, thank you.
We move on to service awards.
Item #3A
SERVICE AWARDS - 20 YEAR ATTENDEES - PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir -- yes, ma'am. It brings us to 20-year
attendees. Our first awardee -- ma'am, are you going to do this up
front?
Page 13
July 28, 2009
MS. FILSON: I have them down here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, you have them down here. Very
good, thank you. I'm searching around here for all of this stuff. My
desk is so full.
MR. MUDD: Our first awardee, service awards, for 20 years.
It's Cindy Erb from Facilities Management. Cindy, if you could come
forward, please.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why don't you stand right next
to Commissioner Fiala.
MR. OCHS: Congratulations, Cindy. Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Thanks, Cindy. Congratulations.
Our next awardee is also a 20-year awardee, and that's Russell
Greer from the Water Department.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Russell, thank you for your 20
years.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thanks for all your service.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The next 20 will be a lot easier.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You-all do such a terrific job. Oh, my
goodness. I'm so impressed.
MR. GREER: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Russell, thank you. Congratulations.
MR. MUDD: Big moment, buddy.
Our third recipient today is also a 20-year awardee, and that's
Heather Sweet from Utility Billing and Customer Service.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for your service.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you so much for all your service.
MR.OCHS: Heather, congratulations.
Page 14
July 28, 2009
MR. MUDD: Heather, congratulations.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's it?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
MR. MUDD: That concludes our service awards for today and
brings us to the proclamation section of your agenda, Madam Chair.
Item #4A
PROCLAMA TION ACKNOWLEDGING THE NAPLES
ROCKETS GIRLS SOFTBALL TEAM AGES 9 TO 10 FOR THEIR
PARTICIPATION IN THE DISTRICT 27 CHAMPIONSHIP
GAMES. ACCEPTED BY CHUCK BENDER, MANAGER, AND
TIM CARTWRIGHT, ASSISTANT COACH - ADOPTED; ONE
MOTION WAS TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL PROCLAMATIONS
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. And our first proclamation?
MR. MUDD: Is 4A. It's a proclamation acknowledging the
Naples Rockets girls softball team, ages nine through ten, for their
participation in the District 27 championship game. To be accepted by
Chuck Bender, Manager, and Tim Cartwright, Assistant Coach.
Tim, if you could come forward.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Come on up.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Come on up?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, come on up.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Coach Tim Cartwright could not
make it because he is currently on vacation, but he wanted to thank
you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, I'm so glad that you're here, and
you, too. You're a bright spot.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Why don't you bring all these
young ladies up so --
Page 15
_.,~- ,,-~-"~--.~-'-
July 28, 2009
MR. MUDD: That's another one.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And they'd like to take your picture, so
stay right there.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you for your service to our
community .
MR.OCHS: Congratulations.
Item #4B
PROCLAMA TION RECOGNIZING THE GOLDEN GATE ALL-
STARS FOR WINNING THE DISTRICT 27 GIRLS AGES 9 TO 10
SOFTBALL CHAMPIONSHIP. ACCEPTED BY BRIAN CREEL,
COACH - ADOPTED; ONE MOTION WAS TAKEN TO ADOPT
ALL PROCLAMATIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to our next
proclamation, which is 4B. It's a proclamation recognizing the Golden
Gate All-Stars for winning the District 27 girls age nine through ten
softball championship, to be accepted by Brian Creel, who's the coach.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Girls, come on up. Come on up.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas and Commissioner
Coy Ie -- I mean, Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Coy Ie, I
wish you could see these beautiful ladies right here today. All of the
All-Stars.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Come on over.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're watching them. We've got
the live feed.
Page 16
-_._~>...",..,
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Shallr -- shallr have you take a picture
without, and then give them all a certificate, and then you can take a
picture with each one holding the certificate? Very good.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now we've got certificates. And
Commissioner Halas? Here. Take one. Hello. Hopefully we have
enough here for everybody.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You want to turn them towards
the camera. And don't cover your faces with them.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And fellows, thank you for all you're
doing for these teams. Thanks for all you're doing for all of these
teams, men.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I bet you it was a fun
experience, right?
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Look at Paula over there. Which -- Paula?
MS. SPRINGS: Over here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Which one?
MS. SPRINGS: The third one from the right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Third one from right. Did you
want to say a couple words, honey?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Gentlemen, do either one of you want to
say a little something at the podium? Okay.
MR. CREEL: I just want to congratulate all the girls for the hard
work, all the parents for helping us out, Coach Matt. We also have
another coach, Bobby Nocera, that wasn't here today that helped out a
lot, too.
The girls worked hard, lost by one run in sectionals. What it
usually comes down to, so -- one run in softball, snakes (sic) a lot. So
I'm very proud of you, girls, and come back next year. Be ready to go.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: You guys did good.
Page 1 7
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING AUGUST 2 TO AUGUST 8,
2009 AS STOP ON RED WEEK. ACCEPTED BY BOB TIPTON,
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR, AND
STAFF; KEVIN RAMBOSK, COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF, AND
STAFF; DIANE FLAGG, CODE ENFORCEMENT
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR, AND STAFF - ADOPTED; ONE
MOTION WAS TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL PROCLAMATIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to our -- brings us
to our next proclamation, which is 4C. It's a proclamation designating
August 2nd through August 8, 2009, as Stop On Red Week, to be
accepted by Bob Tipton, Traffic Operations Department Director, and
staff; Sheriff Kevin Rambosk, Collier County Sheriff, and staff; Diane
Flagg, Code Enforcement Department Director, and staff.
Ladies and gentlemen, if you could please come forward.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't know who gets this. Well, Sheriff.
Would you like this?
Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would somebody like to say something?
Good, thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to -- I'm sorry.
SHERIFFRAMBOSK: Good morning, Commissioners. Kevin
Rambosk, Collier County Sheriff.
On behalf of all those who you just bestowed this proclamation
on and all law enforcement in Collier County, I'd liked to thank you
for your support. It's quite evident that there is a law against running
Page 18
July 28, 2009
red lights, and stopping appropriately. So we shouldn't need this, but
the recognition is very good.
There's a lot of hard work by everyone in transportation,
engineering, other county offices, state law enforcement, local law
enforcement. But most importantly, I'd like to thank the residents of
Collier County who have joined with us over the last several months
to make Collier County safer with regard to this program. So thank
you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Kevin, do you have any statistics on any
of the results so far, a reduction in accidents or anything?
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: We're currently working on the
six-month numbers now. As I mentioned to you at the end of last
year, we actually had a reduction in number of traffic accidents in
Collier County. So we're hoping to stay exactly in that spot.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4D
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE MONTH OF AUGUST,
2009 AS BREASTFEEDING AWARENESS MONTH. ACCEPTED
BY LAURIE OWENS - ADOPTED; ONE MOTION WAS TAKEN
TO ADOPT ALL PROCLAMATIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that would bring us to our next
proclamation, which is designating the month of August, 2009, as
Breastfeeding Awareness Month, to be accepted by Laurie Owens.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Boy, you've been at this a long time; have
you not, Laurie? How many years have you been doing this?
MS. OWENS: Thirty years.
Page 19
",,'-..'
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I knew it was a long time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Laurie.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations for your 30 years
of dedication.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We want to take a picture with you.
Did you want to say a couple words, Laurie? You have to go to a
microphone.
MS. OWENS: Oh, okay. World Breastfeeding Month might
sound like an odd thing -- and this is Collier County Breastfeeding
A wareness Month -- but as far as what has happened with
breastfeeding is it seems to have eroded over the years in favor of
formula, but there is a distinct difference between mother's milk and
cooked canned cow milk, and really, that's what the formula is.
So I think in light of emergencies and hurricanes, I mean, it really
is the only safe way to feed babies, and so we would like to have that
be brought to everyone's attention. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Laurie.
Item #4E
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE WEEK OF AUGUST 17,
2009 THROUGH AUGUST 21,2009, AS FLORIDA WATER
PROFESSIONALS WEEK. ACCEPTED BY PAUL MATTAUSCH,
COLLIER COUNTY WATER DIRECTOR - ADOPTED; ONE
MOTION WAS TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL PROCLAMATIONS
MR. MUDD: Our final proclamation for today is a proclamation
recognizing the week of August 17, 2009, through August 21, 2009, as
Florida Water Professionals Week, to be accepted by Paul Mattausch,
Collier County water director, and members of his staff.
(Applause.)
Page 20
,~",_~_"-r
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Hi, Paul.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I just wanted to do this in public. I
thought we should see. I'm just so proud of what you guys are doing
in that department for all of us here in Collier County. You're
wonderful.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. Appreciate your
dedicated service.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Paul. Let me give a couple of
these -- well, here. Let me give each of you one of these, and you can
take one over to Paul if you'd like.
MR. MATT AUSCH: Commissioner, while my management
team is shaking hands here -- thank you, Anthony.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But I need you all to come back then so I
can take a -- get a picture.
MR. MATTAUSCH: Understand that.
On behalf of the management team and all of the people right
now that are out doing their jobs, the hundreds of people that work for
you that are out making sure that we're providing water and
wastewater services and storm water services, all of those things that
deal with water, all of the water professionals, I proudly accept this
and appreciate your time this morning.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Paul, would you like to tell people about
this award?
MR. MATTAUSCH: Well, this proclamation?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Uh-huh.
MR. MATT AUSCH: This proclamation is -- actually, Governor
Crist just signed a similar proclamation in Tallahassee, and this is
being put together by the Florida Water Pollution Control and
Operators Association to ensure that water professionals across the
state are recognized.
This award, the proclamation itself, will actually be part of a
traveling display that will go around the state at different meetings to
Page 21
July 28, 2009
ensure that water professionals across the state are recognized for
providing services to all of our customers, and we greatly appreciate
it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Get a picture there, gentlemen.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: If we could just get you guys to smile. Ladies,
too.
MR. OCHS: All right.
MR. MUDD: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, I'm going to need a motion to
accept the proclamations, A through D.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve today's
proclamations.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Item #5A
1-75 EVERGLADES INTERCHANGE UPDATE BY NICK
CASALANGUIDA, DIRECTOR, TRANSPORTATION
PLANNING - PRESENTED
Page 22
July 28, 2009
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that would bring us to the
presentations section of your agenda.
The first presentation is the 1-7 5/Everglades interchange update
by Nick Casalanguida, Director of Transportation.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you. Good morning,
Commissioners. Nick Casalanguida.
This is an exciting project, so whatever opportunity we have to
give you more information to get you up to speed, we'd like to do that.
We just recently had the public meetings, so it's appropriate to
give you an update as to where we stand.
What you see on the screen right now is the approximate study
area, and it rides all the way from State Road 29 to the east, follows
1-75 to the south, and then up 1-75 heading north into Lee County. It's
a large study area. It encompasses multiple interchanges because of
the shape and coordination of 1-75.
If we go through the process, Commissioners, there's four or five
critical steps that we received in that process of going forward. We do
an existing conditions report, we look at reasonable alternatives, we
look at future years traffic, and environmental fatal flaws. We look at
level of public support and consistency with our local plans.
And I have to tell you with this project, we've received
tremendous public support and with no really inconsistencies at all
with our local plans and what we see as no fatal flaws. Although
some folks are pushing against this, we're going to work with the
environmental groups to make sure we address any of their concerns.
As far as the schedule, we're about halfway through the process,
and I know the county manager has pushed me aggressively to
accelerate this as much as we can. It's a top priority for him. We
received tremendous support from Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart
and from the community.
So we're about halfway through. We've done our public meeting
on June 3rd. We have done all the modeling, all our traffic analysis,
Page 23
,-"-~".",,"'"
July 28, 2009
and we are proceeding with our submittal to federal highway and our
draft submittal to FDOT. And we're looking to get this approved by
the end of the year so FOOT can begin their PD&E phase.
As far as the full proj ect from beginning to end, we've done our
feasibility study. Weare in the middle of the IJR process. That's
funded. The PO&E phase is funded. It's approximately two years.
But we are not funded for our design, construction, and permitting.
And as you can see, if all things went well, we're looking sometime
about 2015 for that interchange to open up if we receive funding.
We had a public meeting on June 3rd at Palmetto Elementary
School. We did an em ail blast to everybody that was located in the
area and all the stakeholder groups. We did direct mail to the abutters
of the interchange project at Everglades and DeSoto, newspaper
advertisement, variable message boards, and news releases.
We had almost over 400 people attend that meeting, 345
registered. And amazingly, 286 supported the project. Only nine said
no. So you can tell that the people that are out there that are directly
affected by an application for an IJR and a new interchange are
tremendously in favor of this project.
Most of the comments were, why are you doing the studies?
Most of the people that expressed comments were, frustration that it
took so long. And as staff, we walked them through the process and
explained that, you know, a new interchange is a long and tedious
process and requires multiple phases.
We looked at several alternatives, and this is one of them right
now, which is your typical diamond interchange with no modifications
to the canal and bridge structures approaching on both sides.
To be also noted, we coordinated with the Water Management
District and the project manager for the rehydration projects. No
physical impacts from our proposed interchange would impact any of
the rehydration project that's going on right now to the south.
A second alternative, we looked at relocating the canal and
Page 24
-.._~---...,-"'~'".. ,
July 28, 2009
putting in bridge structures. And the third alternative, which -- free
flow alternatives going both on the highway from south Everglades to
west 1-75 and coming east 1-75 to north Everglades. We provided the
same alternative to DeSoto Boulevard, but we noted that any
alternatives can be constructed there as well, too.
One note, a few emails came in and asked why we'd stopped
looking at the third location, which is possibly Big Cypress. And as
staff, we responded and said, if they had been farther along, if they
had a development order that was approved, if they had plans to build
a spine road, we could have kept that project looking at that location.
But since that project has not moved farther and it's not in our
long-range transportation plan, we had to focus specifically under the
existing roads that are there. And while we have an existing
interchange at 1-7 5/Everglades, that was the most viable alternative for
us.
Next steps, the draft IJR is going to FDOT for review. It has
already been sent, and they're being looked at with a final to go to
federal highway.
Project development environmental study to begin the spring of
2010 pending approval of the IJR, and then we're seeking additional
funding. And that's important because through the county manager's,
you know, incentives and enticements to us as staff to proceed and
apply for grants, we are applying for TIGER grants, we're applying for
ARRA grants, we're applying for the next surface transportation bill,
and we've sent packages to both our congressmen with that
interchange as a possible funding source location for it.
So right now, that's the phase we're in right now, and we're
hoping that, you know, we get approval for the IJR, you know, this
fall, move into the PD&E in the spring.
And with that, I'll answer any questions you may have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's me.
Page 25
_".."'__"_.w....,
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know it's confusing because
I'm sitting in Commissioner Henning's seat.
Nick, thank you, and thank you, Norm Feder, for all the work
you've put into this. I -- people are -- of course, they expect this to
happen a lot sooner, and any way we can cut down on that time frame
to make it sooner would be much welcome.
And I want to thank my fellow commissioners for the past five
years for making this the number one federal priority to keep it going
forward.
We do have to be cognizant of the fact that we are going to run
into some problems down the road shortly, especially with some
environmental groups out there.
And what I would like to do is in October or November hold a
workshop out in the -- out in the Estates, the far Estates. What is that,
Sabal Palm that we had the meeting before? It was an excellent
location.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Palmetto.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Palmetto Palms (sic), excuse
me.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Palmetto Elementary School.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Palmetto -- okay, fine. I would
like to have a workshop there to be able to bring the people together.
Because I mean, there's tremendous support for it, but I'd also like to
be able to involve the legislators, not only the federal, but also our
local state legislators. Matt Hudson is very, very interested in this
particular project, and he's very supportive of it.
And I'd like to bring in the environmentalists so that we can start
the dialogue going now, and we can also emphasize the amount of
support that's out there for this particular project so that we don't get to
a fork in the road and we find ourselves suddenly delayed by some
unforeseen circumstance regarding some environmental group.
Page 26
,,-,.--,..---
July 28, 2009
I think it's important that we do this, and I hope that my
commission will allow this to take place. I'm not talking about a
workshop where the commissioners would have to attend, but it would
be an open meeting for the public, and we'd able to hear presentations
from the different environmental groups and also be able to recognize
the efforts of Mario Diaz-Balart and other people that have put
forward the best foot to keep it going.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, I think that's a great
idea, because we're going to be meeting with the agencies that
received -- that sent in comments that -- with concerns, and we're
going to present our responses to those concerns. And by the fall we'll
have a pretty good package to put together and explain to everybody
what's going on and what the impacts would be.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. This is a -- this is a real
big item for the people that live out in the area. The response that you
showed, close to 400-some people, there was a lot more people there
than that, and they just didn't want to wait to register at the table. I
know I walked through a side door and went in along with probably
another 20, 30 people. So the room was completely filled, the parking
lot was filled beyond capacity. People were parking at the far end of
the complex to be able to have entrance to it.
So there's definitely interest, and I'd like to be able to keep that
interest alive and make sure that all the stakeholders out there are
totally informed and the board so we can keep it going forward.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's a good idea.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. Just so that people know
what the IJR is, that's Interchange Justification Report, I believe it is.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And so I'm glad that we've
completed that; is that correct?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's being submitted now.
Page 27
,,---~...,.
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And so hopefully that will
help in regards to getting federal funding to address this interchange.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can I get my commissioners to
agree to allow this workshop to take place?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question, comment.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, first of all a comment.
This is not a new interchange. It's an establishment of an interchange
that was closed off. The access roads are there, and they -- they were
closed off when -- the expansion of Alligator Alley from two lanes to
four lanes. So I really believe that people need to get that right.
Environmentalists are saying it's a new interchange, and it's really not.
I have a question. The -- is it going to be a full interchange, or is
it going to be a partial interchange?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The way we submitted it,
Commissioner, is as a full interchange, because as part of the Picayune
Strand Forest, they're supposed to have direct access for the public as
well, too. Now, obviously when you get into the PD&E-type phase,
we get into a more detailed analysis of what the structure would cost
and what it would look like. That would be decided at that stage.
What we submitted to the public was probably the most
comprehensive interchange that could be placed there, which was a
full interchange.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I've heard concerns about
a full interchange, and particularly access to the east. I don't know,
Nick, have you had those same concerns shared with you?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Most of the concerns, Commissioner,
have been access to the south. They wanted to restrict access to the
south, maintaining public access to the forest but not make a full
interchange to the south.
Page 28
-- ---^--,
July 28, 2009
Concerns I've received is that that would drive the forest -- or
new road going to the south, which we've explored as part of our
Wilson Benfield study. And as that moves forward, you'll see that that
option will be eliminated as a viable option for that roadway.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No questions right now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you. And my only one, as
we move forward -- because this is -- I think this -- without a question,
everybody is totally in favor of this. I worry though. As we open this
thing up -- you know, my worries. I can see your smile already -- and
we release these people from having to just use one exit out of the
Estates, that as they come along the Alligator Alley, what's going to
happen when they hit that terribly impacted interchange I-75/Davis
Boulevard/951 where right now -- what is it? It's the worst
intersection they said in the entire district for FDOT. Are we going to
be addressing that so that then these people can continue to move out
of the Estates or -- and not stuck there?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, Commissioner, I'll take every
opportunity we can to spread the good news, is that that project is
funded. Right now Collier County, in coordination with DOT, State
Road 84/Davis, in that section of Collier, we're still planning on letting
that project within the next six months. So we're looking at
tremendous expansion of the capabilities of that location both at Davis
and 951, and 951 one mile north.
The project is funded, it's still in our capital program, and we are
securing our final permits right now as we speak.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's just -- and it would be able
to handle this traffic that would be generated once we open this up?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes. The preliminary modeling and
the long-range modeling show that they can handle that traffic.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good. Thank you.
Page 29
<,---"-
July 28, 2009
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you for your report.
Any other questions, Commissioner?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
Item #5B
CONTRACTOR'S PRESENTATION OF CONTRACT #08-5136,
951 BOAT RAMP PARKING LOT EXPANSION PROJECT,
PROJECT #80071.1, CONTRACTOR: QUALITY ENTERPRISE,
USA~ INC - UPDATE PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that would bring us to our next
presentation, which is the contractor's presentation of contract number
08-5136, the 951 boat ramp parking lot expansion project, project
number 0- -- excuse me -- project number 80071.1, which is a
Contractor Quality Enterprise USA, contract, Inc., and I believe
introductory remarks will be by your project manager, Clint
Perryman, on this particular item.
MR. PERRYMAN: Good morning, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good morning.
MR. PERRYMAN: Clint Perryman, Project Manager, Collier
County Coastal Zone Management Department.
Commissioners, I'm here this morning to introduce the
contractor's presentation of the 951 parking lot expansion project.
Give you some pertinent details associated with the project. The
project management team consists of Quality Enterprise, which is a
contract of record; Q. Grady Minor & Associates, represented by
Dave Schmitt, the project manager and vice-president; and, of course,
myself.
Mr. Lou Gaudio, I'm going to present to you, will come forward
Page 30
~--~~,-' ,..
July 28, 2009
and give you a full presentation associated with the scope of work, and
staff remain on standby to address any questions outside of that.
With that, Mr. Lou Gaudio.
MR. GAUDIO: Good morning. Lou Gaudio, Quality
Enterprises. I'm the Project Manager for this project. For some reason
my slide's not coming up on the --
MR. MUDD: Well, for some strange reason, I'm dead up here. I
think we have a --
MR. GAUDIO: Great, thank you. All right.
Some of the information that's up on the screen now Clint has
already spoken about.
The current project right now, the current parking lot, has 19
parking lot -- spaces. The new project, when it is complete, will have
a total of 88.
The project has been broken up into three phases. Phase I, which
is the north section of the new parking lot currently underway. Work
completed in that phase is, clearing has been completed, installation of
the underground drainage system, and the soil stabilization.
Weare currently working on the installation of the sheet pile
wall. And the upcoming work for that phase will be the replacement
of the limerock, asphalt paving, fencing and guardrail and planting of
the new mangroves.
Phase II of the project is the south end of the parking lot. That is
currently underway also. Work completed in that section, again, is
clearing, the drainage system has been installed, soil stabilization.
Currently working on the installation of the sheet pile wall. And
again, upcoming to complete it would be the limerock placement,
asphalt paving, fencing and guardrail, and the planting of the
mangroves.
And then finally, the last phase of the project is Phase III. That's
being done last to -- since that's the existing parking area. That work
will start August 17th. And then we have an overall site plan of the
Page 31
July 28, 2009
parking lot.
And then just a few facts on the project itself. The project started
on March 16, 2009. Substantial completion date is set for September
12, 2009. Final completion would be October 12, 2009. Original
contract amount, 1,393,279.65. We're approximately 60 percent
complete with the project.
Just a general overview. The project includes underground
stormwater management systems, signage, traffic light signalization,
mangrove replanting, new medians, guardrail and fencing. One item
that is not on that list is something that we're working on currently,
and county staff is currently working on modifying the project to
enhance the site with a fish-cleaning station.
That's it. Any questions?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, I -- just for the audience, because we
kind of started in the middle here. This is the boat ramp that's on 951,
the boat ramp parking on --
MR. GAUDIO: Correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- 951 on the way to Marco Island. Right
now it has 19 parking spots?
MR. GAUDIO: Eighteen.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Eighteen?
MR. GAUDIO: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And it's going to what, 86?
MR. GAUDIO: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You are right. It is 19.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. From 19 going to 86?
MR. GAUDIO: Eighty-eight.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Eighty-eight.
MR. GAUDIO: Eighty-eight.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So it's going to be giving our boaters a lot
more access close in. So I just wanted everybody to be familiar with
that. Thank you.
MR. GAUDIO: Thank you.
Page 32
.c,.,""""""_,"'_.__-_
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any other questions?
MR. MUDD: One more pubic service announcement. Clint,
now this ramp is shut down here for the next couple of weeks in order
to do the finishing touches; is that correct? Is that what I read in the
paper?
MR. PERRYMAN: It will be on August 17th, County Manager.
Clint Perryman, for the record.
It will be shut down on August 17th for approximately two to
three weeks, as Lou mentioned, in order to start on Phase III, which is
the existing parking lot, that's correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And there is a press release and so forth?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. I read it in the paper.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, great. And I know there are signs
already posted there because I've seen them flashing letting people
know that, no parking around that time. Thank you.
MR. GAUDIO: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question, if I may. Ifwe could,
I'd like to get a little bit into the fish-cleaning station that you're
planning to have at this location. It's a great concern, I'll tell you why.
When people come back from fishing, they're not allowed to clean the
fish out in the open waters. They have to do it at a location. So --
other -- on land. In this case here, it's been traditional that these boat
ramps open -- have fish-cleaning stations.
I know that there's -- there was some controversy going on for a
while. I do know that the state has dropped their push to do away with
the traditional fish-cleaning stations that deposit the fish into the
water, and it's been open for discussion.
What are our plans with this particular boat ramp?
MR. PERRYMAN: Again, Clint Perryman, for the record,
coastal zone management.
Page 33
July 28, 2009
Commissioner, we are very aware of the fish-cleaning station
issues associated with the various strategic locations throughout
Collier County. What we're currently doing now is making
modifications to incorporate fish-cleaning stations by looking at the
existing utilities on site.
And of course, as Lou mentioned, we have to find a good
location on site in order to incorporate that fish-cleaning station. And
one of the biggest things is to look at the utilities that are available.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
MR. PERRYMAN: We want to make sure that fish clearing
stations are incorporated not just for this project, but for our future
projects that we have on the map.
The Goodland boat ramp project just mentioned, of course, in
Bayview Park, we are very much aware of that. Weare working
vehemently overtime to associate that issue.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, here's my concern is, the
old way of doing it was a fish-cleaning table with a brush on it and a
hose, water of some type to be able to clean it down afterwards, and it
would empty into the water with a hose, a large duct going down into
the water so the pelicans couldn't get it.
Why aren't we offering that simple amenity rather than going to
the expensive way of having to put in grinders and put everything into
the sewer system at a great expense? Why can't we just go back to the
old way? I mean, all over Florida this is the traditional way of doing
it.
MR. PERRYMAN: Well, to answer your question,
Commissioner, the DEP regulates that -- that condition, and
unfortunately the preexisting fish-cleaning stations that we had at
these sites, in order to get our DEP permit, DEP required and
mandated that we remove these fish-cleaning stations because of the
side effects that it has to breaking down the oxygens in the water.
And so, consequently, we have to have a self-contained type of system
Page 34
July 28, 2009
in order to provide the discarding of the carcasses.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's amazing this web that we
weave that just costs so much. I mean, presently when the fish --
remains of the fish go down to the bottom of the waters, the crabs eat
them. And I don't know where the issue is. There never has been an
issue. But, you know, we have to do what we have to do, but it
doesn't mean we can't question it along the way.
MR. PERRYMAN: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Henning.
Commissioner Coletta brings up a valid point, and what the agency is
doing is tremendously increasing the cost to the taxpayers in the State
of Florida. What I would recommend is that we have a -- ask our
delegation to propose a bill to bring a real simple change to the
agency's direction. And Commissioner Coletta is right on track; it
actually helps out the ecology of -- you know, the crabs go down there
and eat. And then the crab fishermen go out and catch the crabs and
they put it on our table.
But anyways, that's what I would like to do is address it through
our legislation delegation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree with that. Ifwe can get
one more person, maybe we could get that on the agenda for--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, but then --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You got another one.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Would that stop us from moving
forward with this?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, not at all.
MR. MUDD: No, ma'am. What you're basically asking is part
of the legislative delegation agenda that you'll have in September, one
of the items that we'll have is to review the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection regulations as far as fish-cleaning stations to
Page 35
"------~ <
July 28, 2009
try to alleviate some of the -- some of the new requirements that are
cost prohibitive in this particular regard.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You've already got three nods, yes, but
that doesn't affect this one --
MR. MUDD: Nope.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- as much as -- you know, it would be
nice. But anyway, but we can still move forward with this.
Okay, fine. I've got three nods, and here's a fourth, a fifth, too.
Okay, all five.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
MR. PERRYMAN: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Thank you very much for
your report.
And Mr. Mudd, I know -- our county -- or Clerk of Courts, would
you indulge me for a moment so we can award the Employee of the
Month? That will only take a second, then we --
MR. BROCK: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- can go forward?
Okay. Thank you very much.
Item #5C
RECOGNIZING GILBERT MONCIV AIZ, OPERATIONS
ANALYST, PUBLIC UTILITIES OPERATIONS, AS EMPLOYEE
OF THE MONTH FOR JULY 2009 - PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Okay. The next item is presentation, 5C. It's a
recommendation to recognize Gilbert Moncivaiz, operations analyst,
public utilities operation, as Employee of the Month of July 2009.
And if -- Gilbert, if you'd come forward, please.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Gilbert Moncivaiz, Operations Analyst, has been
Page 36
__o..~^ --
July 28, 2009
nominated as the Employee of the Month of July, 2009. Gilbert, an
employee of the county since 2007, serves as the Impact Fee
Operations Analyst for the Public Utilities Division.
Gilbert's primary duty is to research, calculate, and apply water
and wastewater impact fees to building permits. These calculations
are often complex, and the resulting fees frequently result in customer
inquiries. Gilbert is excellent at explaining the process to customers in
a way that helps them understand how fees are arrived at and why
they are charged.
In the current economic environment, through questions about
impact fees, often lead to requests for alternative impact fee
calculations. These calculations are not only labor and time intensive,
but can also be contentious.
Recently Gilbert was instrumental in bringing an intricate and
protracted alternative impact fee calculation to conclusion, allowing
the county to begin collecting approximately $120,000 in outstanding
water and wastewater impact fees.
Gilbert is responsive and diligent and consistently demonstrates
professionalism and dedication to his job. He is always available
when called upon to assist staff, and most importantly, members of the
public.
Gilbert is able to single-handedly manage a function that at one
time required the efforts of three full-time employees. Gilbert is an
asset to the public utilities division and the county. He is truly
deserving of this award.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to present to you Mr. Gilbert
Moncivaiz, public utilities operations, as Employee of the Month of
July, 2009.
(Applause.)
MR.OCHS: Congratulations.
MR. MUDD: Congratulations.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Why don't you hold this in front of you
Page 37
July 28, 2009
for a picture, a little letter from me, and a check from our county
government for all your fine work.
MR. MONCIV AIZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Here, I'll take this just a
minute.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Always a stickler for detail, I'm
telling you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you again, Gilbert.
MR. MONCIV AIZ: Appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We appreciate all your hard work. Thank
you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, Mr. Mudd. Now we go on to our
10 o'clock time certain.
Item #5D
CLERK OF COURTS FY-2010 BUDGET PRESENTATION-
PRESENTED; MOTION TO SET CLERK'S BUDGET AT 3.5
MILLION - FAILED (COMMISSIONER FIALA,
COMMISSIONER COLETTA AND COMMISSIONER HENNING
OPPOSED): MOTION TO SET CLERK'S BUDGET AT 4.7
MILLION - FAILED (COMMISSIONER HENNING,
COMMISSIONER HALAS AND COMMISSIONER COYLE
OPPOSED): MOTION TO FUND CLERK NOT TO EXCEED 5
MILLION (3.5 MILLION FROM AD VALOREM AND 1.5
MILLION FROM INTEREST) - FAILED (COMMISSIONER
COYLE, COMMISSIONER HENNING AND COMMISSIONER
HALAS OPPOSED); MOTION TO APPROVE THE CLERK'S
BUDGET AT 3.5 MILLION, WITH THE REMAINING BUDGET
NEEDS TO REMAIN PENDING THE INTEREST INCOME
RETURNED BY THE CLERK AND FOR A REQUEST AT THAT
Page 38
..,---.."""".-"
July 28, 2009
TIME FOR THE REMAINDER NEEDED AND FOR THE
COUNTY MANAGER AND STAFF TO WORK WITH THE
CLERK - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. And that item's the Clerk of Court's
FY -2010 budget presentation.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, you have at 10:30 scheduled the
adoption of the budget at the same time. If you want to take them
both at the same -- in the same process, it's part and parcel, one in the
other, essentially the same. Leave it at your choice, however you
want to do it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you like to first make your
presentati on?
MR. BROCK: Doesn't make any difference.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And then we'll just attach that
right onto the end of that, if that's okay.
MR. BROCK: You want me to do it first?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
MR. BROCK: Perfect.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is that --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just one more time, we're going
to go from this to the budget?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, fine. I understand.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Because they're both intertwined.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They are.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, my name is Dwight Brock, I'm
the Clerk of the Circuit Court in Collier County. I've had
conversations with a couple of you. I came, I think, two weeks ago
and discussed the clerk's budget.
The clerk is asking the Board of County Commissioners to enter
into an Interlocal Agreement for money to operate our office. And we
Page 39
.......-,--,~."_.'..._'- -_.,-
July 28, 2009
have submitted to you our expectations of what we would need to
operate the non-court portion of our office for the next coming fiscal
year.
In conjunction with that, ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to show
you the history of that portion of the clerk's budget over the years. As
you can see, in -- for year 2005, that portion of the clerk's budget was
$10,545,900. It was -- 2006 it was 10 million 676; 2007 is was 9
million 611; 2008, it was 10 million 364. This current year it was 9
million 319; and we are looking at, for 2010, an anticipated 8,312,300.
That's for all of the non-court portion of our budget.
The portion -- the budget is made up of different portions. We
have multiple functions that take place in the Clerk's Office. They're
broken out into funding departments, finance and accounting, board
minutes and records, recording, MIS related to the operation of the --
that's the computer system related to the operation of the board,
general administration or general overhead, clerk's accounting,
internal audit, records management, satellites, and court-related
required Article V funding that is required by statute of the board.
That comes to 8 million 312.
If you look at the side, for example, MIS, the total MIS cost of
the Clerk's Office, only 32.9 percent of the operation of that particular
department is allocated to the operation of the board and non-court
functions.
General administration is 35.4 percent; clerk's accounting is 35.4
percent; internal audit, 66.6; records and management is 35.4;
satellites are 52.4, and all told you come up to the total budget
amount.
There are revenues generated by our office through the services
that we provide for such things as recording of documents, selling of
documents. All of those things we anticipate will come up to about
$2,135,000, for a total cost of6,177,300 that we are asking the board
to fund.
Page 40
"-""--~-"'^-'" ,
July 28, 2009
The next slide, ladies and gentlemen, is an FTE equivalent of the
personnel staffing each of the departments. And obviously we have
not cut people in half, so -- where we come up with the fractions there.
What we have done is, that is based upon a full-time equivalent that is
allocated across the entire operation of the Clerk's Office.
Finance and accounting, clerk's accounting, internal audit,
satellite, recording, records management, minutes and records, MIS
and administration and SAVE.
F or those that do not know what SAVE is, SAVE is an acronym
for Support, Alimony and Visitation Enforcement. That is basically
the only discretionary function that I have in that entire process. The
SA VE program is a program that we implemented in conjunction with
the chief judge many years ago.
What we were encountering was, when we were trying to collect
child support for people, one of the most common threads that we had
from time to time was complaints from the noncustodial parent to the
effect of, why should I have to pay child support? They won't let me
have visitation.
So we implemented this program which includes visitation
enforcement, which is not done by the State of Florida, to resolve that
particular issue. People can sign up with our program, and we then
assess in the process -- we don't represent either side. We represent
the court's order. And we have one person involved in that. And the
-- I have an attorney that is involved with that also. That's the role that
the attorney plays predominantly in our office is to perform the
functions of that SAVE program.
If you come up to the allocation of all of the employees that
function for the purpose that they're non-court related, it's 91.12
employees.
Now, to give you just a sampling of the functions that we
perform. We do the obvious preparing the comprehensive annual
financial statement for the county and all of assimilated for all of the
Page 41
^-~..'~-"""'_.,._^
July 28, 2009
constitutionals. We have, for 22 years, received the GFOA
distinguished progress award for that particular presentation. We do
all of the compliance reportings for the financial statements with all of
the state and federal agencies that are necessary. We do the impact
fee attestations associated with the impact fees that are required to go
to the state.
I'm not going to go through all of them, but there is a list there of
all of the things that we do.
The internal audit department. The role of the internal audit
department, clerk is required to make a determination of the legality of
the expenditures. Whenever the finance department gets the bills and
there is a question, we then send them to the internal audit department
to make the determination of the existence of legality of those before
we can pay them. That is the role.
Actually, I have three people in the auditing department. One of
them serves the court side, and two of them serve the board function.
We pay the payroll for all of the employees of the county, and we
also pay the payroll for the Clerk of the Circuit Court, and we pay the
payroll for the Supervisor of Elections. We do all of the accounting
for the Supervisor of Elections through contractual agreement with the
Supervisor of Elections.
Years ago the Board of County Commissioners made the
determination that the books and records of Collier County would be
kept on a computer system called SAP. We operate and maintain that
particular computer process throughout the county. That means that
we deal with the hardware that drives it here on this floor, we deal
with the network that disseminates it to your staff, to our staff, and to
everybody else. We also do the security associated with that.
In addition to that, I have a series of five or six employees -- six?
Yeah, but how many do I have that actually deal with the SAP
programming? About seven or eight employees that do absolutely
nothing except work with the SAP programming building interfaces
Page 42
"..n_....-.,..,_"'~,._..,.__,..,,_ ',.,' .,.
July 28, 2009
and things such as that to make those financial records function
properly.
We do the Value Adjustment Board, we do your board minutes
and records, and at your request, we do the verbatim transcript. The
lady who is over here taking the verbatim transcripts of this meeting is
a contract employee of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. We take care of
all of those functions associated with your operation.
Over the years, over the past few years, there has obviously been
a scenario in which the economy has turned down, and we have
recognized that. We did recognize that. And here are some of the
things that the clerk has done to try to deal with the downsizing of
economic growth, down sizing of government in general.
And in 2008, we implemented a hiring freeze. As you can see,
we eliminated some positions. In 2010 we have eliminated an
additional number of position, 14.4.
The COLA and merit or base pay in the Clerk's Office was
frozen in 2007 and has been that way through today.
In the middle of2008 I gave the employees a non- -- nonadjusted
base increase of 3 percent. That means that that 3 percent that we gave
them in the middle of 2008 was not an adjustment to the base but was
a -- just a 3 percent raise. The middle of this year, we took that raise
back away from them, and I will discuss that further in a little bit.
We have eliminated all travel except for absolutely necessary
travel. We closed one satellite, which was the City of Naples satellite.
Weare contemplating evaluating other satellites and their viability
around the county. And we essentially eliminated any overtime pay
for employees based upon limited resources that were available to
governments.
Now, one of the things that we did in our budget, or in our
preparation here today, was we went in and took some departments
that are already in the budget and determined the cost per FTE or
full-time equivalent employee.
Page 43
"._.'__..~_..C._"
July 28, 2009
Now, before I show you this, I want to make something just as
clear as I possibly can. You know, to sit here and to try to say, you
know, I'm looking at this department and the FTE for this department
as X and this department as Y and saying that the one for X is higher
and the one for Y is lower and, therefore, there is a lack of efficiencies
in the one that is higher, there is nobody that can do that, because
you're not comparing apples to apples.
What takes place in anyone department is totally different from
what takes place in any other department. What takes place in one
agency is totally different than what takes place in any other agency.
And I am showing you these simply for the purpose of reasonableness
comparison, okay. I want you to take it in that vein. It's not being
presented for purposes of being a criticism of anyone.
But let's take, for example -- now, this is out of your budget for
this year. You look at the budget for the Supervisor of Elections, the
cost for FTE is $147. The budget for the property appraiser is 109,
and the budget for the Clerk's Office is 91, okay.
You then move to accounting department. I can't get it right, can
I?
MR. MUDD: That's okay.
MR. BROCK: If you look at--
MR. MUDD: If you think we're close, we'll move it up as you
want.
MR. BROCK: That one is the --
MR. MUDD: Public services division service fund.
MR. BROCK: Public services division. Public services, you
look at them, it's 95. BOCC office of management and budget, 96;
BOCC purchasing department is 76.
The entire purpose of me showing you that is that they are
functionally the same. They are within the same reasonableness
standard. There's not a difference. But don't be trying to compare one
cost to another one from the perspective of saying that payroll or
Page 44
_.--~...'-,"
July 28, 2009
budget or anybody else, you know, should all be the same, because
you can't do it that way because there are different factors taken into
consideration.
But the point that I am trying to make is that the Clerk of the
Circuit Court at $91 is not out of line with everyone else. Okay.
Now, I talked to you about what we had done to save the
taxpayers money in terms of our salaries and employees. This is an
analysis of a three-year comparison of the Clerk of the Circuit Court
to the Board of County Commissioners. Over that three-year period,
the Board of County Commissioners had given its employees a
cost-of-living increase of 13 percent. They had given an average
merit increase of between 2.8 percent and 9.6 percent.
Over that same period of time, the Clerk of the Circuit Court had
given a 2.4 percent cost-of-living increase, and average merit increase
is between 3 and 5 percent.
In addition to that, the Clerk of the Circuit Court has, in fact --
and I've broken it down -- required all of its employees to take a
one-day per month furlough, which is functional equivalent of 5
percent. That's simply the detail associated with the employees' pay
and from relation to the clerk to the Board of County Commissioners.
In the process of dealing with trying to work on an Interlocal
Agreement, we presented our information to the county staff, and the
county staff came over and met with me. Mr. Ochs and two people
from the budget department came over and met with me and Crystal,
my finance director, to discuss the issue, okay. What they told us was
that they had -- or that they were going to propose, they thought, $3.5
million as funding for the Clerk's Office. We had presented a
$61-million request. They had told us they were going to propose 3.5.
They, in that process, asked us some questions with regard to our
budget. One of the questions that they asked us was, does -- doesn't
the treasury manager or manage treasury management department
invest money for the Supervisor of Elections and the Clerk of the
Page 45
July 28, 2009
Circuit Court? And the answer to that is no, they do not. They do not
invest for the Clerk of the Circuit Court. They're all kept in a bank
account, and that bank account is the interest that is earned for both
the Supervisor of Elections and the Clerk of the Circuit Court.
But I would like to take an opportunity to show you the benefit
that has taken place as a consequence of the clerk's investing the
resources of the taxpayers of Collier County over the period of time
2005 to 2008.
We have generated $143,452,141 worth of interest that has gone
back to the benefit of the taxpayer. The question that one might ask
is, well, I mean, that might be well and good, but I mean, if you didn't
do that at a reasonable or fiscally appropriate cost, it doesn't make any
difference. And that is, in fact, a very good, legitimate question.
So we took the liberty of looking around the state to determine
what other people were paying. If you look at what it cost Collier
County to invest its between 700, $800 million in its portfolio, you
will see that we spend $142,113. That is the cost of investing the
county's funds.
Orange County -- and if you know anything about investments,
that essentially means that we have spent less than two basis points to
manage the funds. If you look at Orange County, they spend between
ten and 20 basis points to manage the funds. You look at MBIA,
they've made an offer to do it at six basis points, or about $420,000.
PFM, well, that's just the financial managers of Collier County, a
separate division of them gave us a potential quote of four basis points
or $280,000. The City of Naples right here in Collier County pays
eight basis points to manage their portfolio. So as you can see, you're
getting a pretty good deal for your buck.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Dwight, I hate to interrupt, but I'm going
to anyway. I'm going to ask you, are you close to being finished?
Because what I plan on doing before any questions come from
commissioners or anything, I plan on taking a ten-minute break. So if
Page 46
,--- _.....,~
July 28, 2009
you're close to being finished, that's what we'll do next.
MR. BROCK: I've got a few more.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. BROCK: Going back to the questions that were asked in
the meeting, one of the questions was, where is the payment from the
Supervisor of Elections reflected in your budget? And we pointed out
to them that it was reflected in the miscellaneous fees in our budget.
Another one was, where is the revenue from the Value
Adjustment Board budgeted? In 2008, ladies and gentlemen, we sent
the school board a bill. As you know, the statute requires the Board of
County Commissioners pay two-thirds of our -- three-fifths of our
costs and the Supervisor of Elections (sic) to pay two-fifths.
In 2008 --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You mean the school board pays?
MR. BROCK: School board. Who'd I say?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Supervisor of Elections.
MR. BROCK: Supervisor of Elections doesn't pay anything; the
school board.
In 2008 we sent the school board a bill. School board paid the
bill. It went into your funds. And when we sent you our invoice to
pay for those, they never got paid. So there were none reflected in the
budget. That's part of the invoices that have not been paid.
The big question from my perspective was, what are the benefits
to the board of the indirect allocations from, for example, the clerk's
accounting? Well, ladies and gentlemen, if I didn't have clerk's
accounting, I wouldn't be able to pay the salary of any of the
employees. That's where that is paid. So the cost of that particular
department is allocated across the entire organization. It's sort of like
your indirect cost allocation that occurs in your budget when you bill
or indirect allocate costs for the operations of purchasing to your other
departments. Same thing is true.
Human resources is in there, my purchasing is in there, my
Page 47
"."~---~.~--
July 28, 2009
secretary is in there, I'm in there. All of those particular costs are
associated there.
One of the things that was brought up was -- you remember me
telling you a few minutes ago that -- why should we have to pay for
more than the people that are assigned the function of doing the
programming of the MIS? Well, the answer to that is real simple. If I
only had them, we wouldn't have a network to be disseminating that
information all across the county. We would not have security on that
process. It is all of those functions that are being allocated based upon
that percentage allocation.
Without going into all of those particulars, I will tell you that the
external auditor reviews, that auditor reviews that allocation process
on an annual basis. And as you are all aware, we receive some of our
funding from the State of Florida, and they also send people down to
evaluate that allocation, and the Department of Revenue for child
support does the same thing.
So the allocation of those particular costs are spread between
multiple agencies and -- in its evaluation process. So it's not as if it is
being done in a vacuum. It's being done with a lot of different eyes on
it.
I can -- I could go into -- and I don't think it's necessary -- that the
cost of my human resources, the cost of my purchasing is not out of
line. It is probably less per employee than the Board of County
Commissioners has.
But, you know, the indirect costs associated with my office are
spread everywhere relating to the operation of the office as a whole,
and that's where those costs come from.
I'm asking you to fund 6.1, as I have discussed with, I think,
Commissioner Coletta and Commissioner Fiala. There is -- some of
that is related to legal expenses. And I would love for us to come to
an agreement that that case is fixing to go away and we can strike
those legal expenses from that budget to the tune of about $400,000
Page 48
'---""
July 28, 2009
and move on here. Let's get back to doing the people's business, let's
get back to -- I think we showed Commissioner Fiala an excerpt out of
the minutes that -- the discussion with county manager at one point in
time, and what a relationship we did have. We want to go back to that.
Let's move on. That's my request.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And, boy, I so heartily agree. But right
this very moment, we're going to take a ten-minute break and give our
court reporter, court stenographer time to rest those fingers.
Everybody, we have ten minutes. I'll see you back here at 10:47.
Thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, would you please take your
seats.
Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
Now we have a 10:30 time certain, and that is the proposed
millage rates and -- oh, no, I'm sorry. First we had some questions
from commissioners for Dwight Brock. Do you -- now, we can
incorporate that all together, or would you like to -- let me think.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to go with Dwight Brock
first.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Then I have Commissioner
Halas, and I'm sure that your button is on there, even though it isn't
showing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, it is. I have to turn
Commissioner Henning's button on, but that's all right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, Dwight.
MR. BROCK: Good morning, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I appreciate you taking time out of
your schedule to make your presentation.
Again, as I brought up in the budget hearing that you -- when you
Page 49
July 28, 2009
came in at the 11 th hour presenting a budget, and then after the
hearings, I finally received your budget on my desk. At that time we
had already gone through very diligently looking for areas that we
could come up with the cuts that were made, and I believe we ended
up with about a $6 million cut so that we could end up with a tax of
about 5.3 percent, and -- or 3.5 -- millage rate of3.5. And now you're
here at -- past the time that we have addressed the budget stating that
now you need the $6.1 million.
I find it somewhat difficult in some of the things that you just
presented when I find out that for every paycheck for the employees
of the county you charge $7. I find that a little hard. And I'm hoping
that once we can come up with -- establish some type of an Interlocal
Agreement, that we can go out on the outside and see if it may be
cheaper for the taxpayers in this county to get the payroll at a
substantially lower amount of money to the taxpayers.
The other thing that I've talked with our budget management
group, and they state that they still feel that there's a 42 percent
overhead in your department, and so I have some concerns about that.
I think that the county manager has said, and some of the people
that he -- that work for the county manager have pretty much made it
clear that about the only place that we can come up with the funding
of about $3.5 million -- question I have for you is, how much interest
rate -- interest money are we going to get returned back to us before
October 1 st? That's -- if we can have some additional interest money
that's turned back to us, that will probably help address some of the
issues that you have so far as a budget.
The other thing that kind of bothers me is the fact that you've
made it very clear in a court of law that you're a fee officer and not a
budget officer. So why you're in here telling us that you need a
budget of $6.1 million is -- just blows me away since you're a fee
officer.
Now, we have someone in the county under the county manager's
Page 50
"_...-~_.,.._'~""
July 28, 2009
jurisdiction that's a fee officer. Now, this person has probably lost
probably better than -- all he's got left is probably about 33 percent of
his workforce left.
So, I would hope that -- you would probably need to take lessons
from him to lower the head count to make your office more efficient.
And the other thing I'm concerned about is, in this proposed
budget of $6.1 million, how much money have you allocated for that
to address lawsuit issues with the Board of County Commissioners?
MR. BROCK: The--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This has been an ongoing
free- for-all, and I believe that finally we've gotten some restitution by
the legislature up in Tallahassee in regards to all of this going on, and
you have showed that through the years you've had to use $10 million,
$8 million. And my concern is, how much of that $10 million, $8
million was used to pay your legal fees in regards to lawsuits that have
been brought before the county?
And I believe we've been fairly successful on most of them
except one that I think is still pending, but we'll see how that works
out.
MR. BROCK: Was there a question there?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. The question -- there's a
number of questions. One is, how can you justify $7 for a paycheck
for each employee?
MR. BROCK: Okay. Commissioner, I do not set that $7 per
paycheck. That is set by the Florida legislature. Florida Statute --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You're telling me that every --
you're telling me that every Clerk of the Courts charges $7 for a
paycheck in other counties?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: This -- okay. We want to make sure to
move this forward --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- in a spirit of cooperation and not in
Page 51
~H __
July 28, 2009
attacking in any way.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm not attacking. I've just -- I've
got some questions that have been on my -- have been on my mind for
a number of years, and I'm very concerned about what it costs the
Clerk of Courts in this county.
I'm not sure what the other clerks charge, but $6.1 million to me
is out of line, especially after we've worked so hard to address issues
on the budget, even though we didn't -- some commissioners didn't get
what they were hoping we would get, is a millage neutral. We ended
up hopefully closer to between tax neutral and millage neutral, and
now we have the Clerk of Courts who's come before us after we've set
the millage and says, guess what, I need $6.1 million when he's a fee
officer.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, I think that was your main question,
Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- throughout all of your questions. I
think they all boil down to fee officers. That's been a sticking point
with all of us. You know, are you a fee officer or a budget officer.
And you're trying to say something here, too?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It was related to that, but you go
first.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And so I think, you know, once we clear
that up, it wouldn't be a problem, but -- and if you want to address that
now, or maybe we could just hear from Commissioner Coletta now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, first off, whether we've
got a fee officer or budget officer, we've been in this process for a
little while now. I'd rather see a budget officer, but if we've got a fee
officer that's here with an lnterlocal Agreement, we still achieve the
same end.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So, you know, I'd like to look at
Page 52
'-"~~ ".~-
July 28, 2009
this as a new day, a new beginning. For whatever reasons that we're
here today, they're good reasons.
And so let's agree to a couple of things. One, Dwight Brock has
got the invitation to come here numerous times, and I'm glad he
accepted it, to come here now. We offered before, to sit at the end of
the dais. He's here today. And I've discussed this with him several
times. We've had several meetings. And Mr. Brock has agreed that
when issues come up that are important to his office, that he'll make
every effort to personally attend these meetings in the future and
interact with us. The reason being is, why leave anything to a later
date to have to be settled in the court system.
That's one of the things. It's been very contentious for many
years now, and I think now we're at the point where we're willing to
put all this behind us and go forward with a new day.
Let's remember a couple things. Why do we have these legal
conflicts where we have to spend millions of dollars in attorneys' fees?
It's because of the inability to communicate.
Mr. Brock said he's more than willing to come here and work
with us on a one-to-one basis face to face, elected official to elected
official, to be able to work through these things, through these issues.
If we can do that, even though we might not agree on everything at the
end of the day, we all have the taxpayers' best interest at heart.
And I'm not saying that his $6.1 million budget is flawless. I'm
saying that it's going to take some real serious scrutinizing to see what
can be done to make everything work, but it's got to work for the good
of the public.
But what we need to do in the future is we need to be able to
discuss it back and forth. And when we get to issues that are a
question of legality, that we carry it jointly to some court system to be
settled and accept a final outcome, or in the case of Florida Statutes
that are less than clear, shall or may as opposed to will do, that we
engage our legislative delegation to take it back and work it out on the
Page 53
,._-0 -,...,_..._',
July 28, 2009
floor of the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Let's make this a little bit simpler. Let's make it less
confrontational. Let's remove the attorneys from the equation.
We have a couple of things in the hopper right now. Those
things should be worked through because they have to deal with items
of constitutionality, what the rights of Brock's office is versus the
County Commission. Those things can be resolved in a friendly
manner till the answer comes forward that we can all go on with it.
Meanwhile, we've got a real issue. How do we keep the taxpayers of
Collier County whole as far as services go, and what is a reasonable
amount of services.
What I suggest to you that we might want to consider -- and this
is purely a suggestion. I haven't had a chance to bounce it off budget
or Mr. Mudd yet -- is that we give consideration to adjusting the
millage ever so slightly to be able to meet what may be a necessary
service that wants -- has to be restored or kept in place to be decided
in September when we come back.
Now, this is -- the proposal will be based on several things. One,
when we come back in September, we're going to be tasking staff to
find some of these funds out there, whether it be the interest funds,
whether it be from some other sources that we haven't identified.
There's always something coming in, be it turnback money or
whatever, to be able to see what the possibilities are. By September
we'll have a better idea.
Meanwhile, we would task the County Manager's Office to work
directly with the Clerk of Courts to go back and forth on all these
issues, and at the end bring back a proposal. Doesn't mean the
proposal will agree, but at least it will be something that will be in the
best interest of all.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You have to remember today we
have to set the millage rate. You can raise it -- or you can -- you can
set millage rate. You can lower it, but you can't come back in
Page 54
~>"---*'.
July 28, 2009
September and raise it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's absolutely correct, but
you could lower it in September.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So you are looking at somewheres
between 3.5 mill and 6.1 mill. So now you have to figure out where
that leaves -- and who is going to sacrifice the remaining money that's
going to be needed to take care of the Clerk of Courts; you
understand?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand we might never
find that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, then at some -- if you don't
find the additional funding, then it's got to come out of someplace.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's one of the questions I
wanted to know, how much more interest rate, interest money, was
going to be turned back to the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Between now and September,
we would have that answer?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: To set the millage rate.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Anybody can help me with this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question.
MR. BROCK: I don't have that figure off of the tip of my tongue
at the present time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I mean, between now and
September when we meet again.
MR. BROCK: Absolutely. The number -- whenever it is earned,
we will be able to give you the final number of what it will be.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And just to make it absolutely
clear, I think that we have done a remarkable job of cutting back on
our budget. I think we've done a remarkable job of reaching our goals.
In some cases I don't like how we reached it by laying off about 22 to
24 percent of our employees, but we have cut every department back.
Page 55
--
July 28, 2009
Over the past two, three years, it's been over $80 million.
And so I'm not proposing that we do further cuts within the
county side of the equation, but we do look at other revenue sources
that haven't been tapped yet to see what has to be done, and that also
we identify what services are absolutely needed. And in some cases,
Mr. Brock, we may come back with a suggestion that you cut back on
certain elements out there to be within the boundaries of funds that are
available. But I would like to keep this discussion alive till
September.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You had mentioned also -- I'm going to
call on Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Coyle in just a
moment.
You'd mentioned something about an Interlocal Agreement with
the Clerk of Courts, and the BCC and -- so that we can determine, you
know, the fee and budget and get that all straightened out. Can we do
that, do you think, while we're off here this summer, that you can get
together with the county manager and establish that agreement so we
can move forward in a spirit of cooperation; what do you think?
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, I think the courts have settled that
for us. I think the courts have told us in a final order from the second
DCA in which a mandate has been issued that I'm a fee officer. That
interest belongs to the clerk.
Now, I mean, if, in fact, we're still fighting over that particular
issue -- you know, I thought that that one was essentially, by virtue of
the ruling from the DCA, that that issue was over.
Is that issue not over, Jeff?
MR. KLA TZKOW: Well, I disagree with the assertion that the
interest is owned by the clerk. I think the legislature --
MR. BROCK: No, I understand --
MR. KLATZKOW: -- took care of that issue.
MR. BROCK: -- that now after the legislative change.
Page 56
"---,~
July 28, 2009
MR. KLA TZKOW: It's always been my view that it's your
election whether or not you want to consider yourself a fee officer or a
budget officer. You have elected to consider yourself a fee officer. I
think the end result, if we do an interlocal between being a fee officer
and a budget officer, is practically nil. I mean, I think -- I don't think
there's a practical difference between the two.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. You know, I just want to settle this
so that we can march forward and be working together. Of course,
that's been my objective all along. I was hoping that we could do that.
I think a few of the points that were established -- and I totally agree --
communication has been nil amongst us. We're not talking to one
another, election -- elected officer to elected officer. Instead we're
talking through the newspapers or we're talking through lawyers, and
lawyers aren't going to sit down and say, here's how I feel about
something. They're going to tell you, don't talk to each other.
So Dwight has said he would like to have that open form of
communication, you have said it, I have said it. I think we all agree
on that, and that's one way for us to move forward.
We're going to have to -- no more lawyers. We've all said, it's
about time we start -- stop funding all of the lawyers. And again,
communicate with one another. That's a way to go.
And so anyway, I'll stop talking here because we can say more a
little bit later.
But Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Let me just put this
in a perspective, and Dwight, correct me if I'm wrong. You're just
asking the Board of County Commissioners to budget your fees to run
your department to provide that -- that provides services to the Board
of County Commissioners, and those fees are set out by Florida
Statutes; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
MR. MUDD: No.
Page 57
> .._~"_..__..~ --.-.--"
July 28, 2009
MR. BROCK: No, Commissioner. That's not correct at this
point in time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What--
MR. BROCK: What I'm asking to do is to enter into an
Interlocal Agreement to the Board of County Commissioners to pay
the Clerk's Office the -- if we're going to resolve the litigation, 5.7, or
if we're not, 6.1, in order for us to provide the accounting and other
services that we provide to the citizens of Collier County.
You know, the history of this process has been one of -- from
1993 through 2008, we submitted our budget, and the Board of
County Commissioners, in essentially the process that I thought was
the functional equivalent of an Interlocal Agreement, the Board of
County Commissioners paid for the services of the clerk. There was a
decision not to any longer do that by the board in 2008.
In 2008 we began submitting bills not based upon the cost of
providing the services, but a bill based upon the statutory fee
schedules which are created by the Florida legislature. And the
county never paid those. So then I understood that you-all wanted to
do an Interlocal Agreement. I tried to go through the process of using
the Interlocal Agreement, and here's where we find ourselves today.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, let me ask -- I
don't know if any of our financing department staff is there. What is
budgeted for 2010 board interest that the Clerk of Court invests for us?
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, Mark Isackson with the office
of management and budget.
Right now there is $9.5 million in the budget for interest income.
Prior to the clerk's submittal of the budget, there was $6 million
budgeted for interest income. We've put a plug number in of 3.5
million on the expense side, and $3.5 million in interest income was
adjusted to provide for that to offset.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You changed it based upon the
clerk's submission of his proposed budget?
Page 58
--<.__.~".,.",-,- --~~"-,-""""_.<"",",,,.,..,,-~~.=,.,. ..w_._",,__
July 28, 2009
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, the -- our office was asked to
look at what the direct benefit for the operations of the Clerk of Courts
was, and that's what we did. The number that was decided upon was
$3.5 million.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I understand that. And
that's a difference of opinion between the Clerk's Office and the
County Manager's Office.
But what I'm trying to get to -- I mean, the $9 million for interest
to me seems to be very low.
Dwight, is there any anticipation that it's going to be more than
$9 million?
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, the interest that we have
generated is about 13 million, Crystal?
MS. KINZEL: Sixteen total.
MR. BROCK: Sixteen total million. In addition to that, there
was three million that came in in the first part of the year from last
year's that came out of the registry. So the total interest is in the
neighborhood of 19 million. Some of that is allocated to particular
operational units based upon the -- where the corpus came from, and
other portions of it wasn't.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you should still have control
of that, those funds yet?
MR. BROCK: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You still have control of those
interest moneys?
MR. BROCK: No. Some of those moneys have been turned
over to the Board of County Commissioners pursuant to an order of
the court --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. BROCK: -- which has now been stricken.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But you have like $13 million of
.f)
1 .
Page 59
.,.--.,-
July 28, 2009
MR. BROCK: Well, I mean -- yeah, we have about 13 million.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Well, so, you know,
what's the big deal here?
MR. BROCK: That's right, 13 million total, between 12 and 13
million.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, all the county manager's
department -- or the budgeting has to do is recognize that, and we
have the funds to fund the Clerk's Office.
Mark, is that a correct statement?
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, I think we're talking about
fiscal year '09 and fiscal year' 1 O. Those are two different -- two
different issues.
What we -- what we budgeted for in '09 was $20 million. We're
only forecasting $15 million -- so --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But here's the thing. We haven't
-- we don't have control of those interest funds for '09. So why can't
you budget them for '01 O? Do you see my point?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. It -- I see your point, but if it's money
that you don't have and you're going to budget, you're basically taking
an empty bucket of dollars and putting it over into a next FY and say,
well, fine, it's still an empty bucket of dollars.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, no. Up until this year, it
was the clerk's interest moneys to run his department. Now, with the
legislative changes it's our moneys and we should budget it on our
side of it, of the allocation.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, but you've had a partial year, and some of
that money was spent by the Clerk's Office that you don't have.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You still have $13 million, and
you're only recognizing $9 million.
MR. MUDD: Yeah, but you still -- but you have a hole of some
$5 million in '09 that you're basically counting as revenue that you've
got in reserves for ten, and it doesn't exist, and that's the issue. And
Page 60
_L__........_.__~_ _. ~_.__.,.-_.-.._---,,~_.-
July 28, 2009
based on our conversations earlier, I said, it doesn't make a difference
if it's $3.5 million or if it's $6.1 million. In order to have the
guaranteed revenue that you need in order to fund the clerk at
whatever level that you want, you're going to have to raise the millage
rate in order to make that happen.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, did have you any
comments?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I do. I think the fundamental
question in my mind is whether or not there are less expensive ways of
getting the services that are currently performed by the clerk done for
the Board of County Commissioners. We have challenged our own
staff to find more efficient and less costly ways of getting their job
done.
What I would like to understand in more detail is how the clerk's
payroll costs and charges to the board compare with the services,
similar services we could get from the private sector. Many
companies have their payrolls processed by a separate company. And
without having some specific information about the costs of the
services, it's hard for us to make a decision as to what is the most
cost-effective way to proceed. And that's the only way that we're
going to be able to develop a millage rate that is realistic.
I'm still opposed to raising the millage rate, and I don't want to
approve an even higher millage rate based upon our failure to
understand what is necessary to run the Clerk's Office.
I have absolutely no problem providing funds to help the clerk
operate, but I need to have some way of comparing the costs of getting
those services from the clerk with the costs of getting them from
private industry, the private sector.
I'm continually perplexed by the great divergence in opinion and
understanding between the clerk and our staff about these things, and
it's very hard to make a decision about a millage rate with all of these
Page 61
July 28, 2009
questions still floating around unanswered.
So to summarize, here's my question. Is there any way we can
compare the costs that the clerk -- the costs of the services that the
clerk performs for the board with the costs that we would have to pay
if we went to the private sector to have some of those services
performed? And if so, which services are appropriate for that kind of
comparison?
MR. MUDD: Okay. Jim Mudd, for the record, County
Manager. Try to answer your question, Commissioner Coyle.
First, what we did is we were provided a budget to look at the last
day of the workshop. I had my staff look at it. If you remember my
words, there are -- there are functions that the clerk provides to the
Board of County Commissioners and which we should pay for, okay,
and I basically said that on the record. And that -- and I'll mean it
today. He doesn't -- he shouldn't work for free if it has a direct benefit
to the Board of County Commissioners.
There are some things that were provided in that $6.1 million
detail when I had staff go about it -- and we looked at all the different
issues that were there, the different departments to try to figure out a
direct benefit.
There are items in that detail budget that I can't find a direct
benefit for. Five hundred thousand dollars for outside attorney fees; I
don't find any benefit at all to the Board of County Commissioners on
that, and we've already -- and this county has already dropped over
three point umpty-ump million dollars on attorney fees over the last
years in the process. And I'll give you the exact amount, and I
provided this to the Board of County Commissioners a while ago, and
we just got an update on the May charges that are sitting there. But
it's $3.2 million. And all of a sudden you want to budget another
$500,000 on the clerk's side of the house so he can have outside
attorney fees? I find -- and on top of that you've got a staff attorney
that's already on his particular staff that you're funding as part of his
Page 62
,-,,_.-
July 28, 2009
overhead rate.
One of the things that were mentioned was satellite offices.
What county function gets done in a satellite office? None. They're
court issues. So there's $400,000 in the budget that the clerk wants
you to pay because he's got overhead charges and he can't fund
because the fees aren't coming in like they were years ago.
So what I had staff do was go and look at those particular items
that are there that have direct benefit to the Board of County
Commissioners. We were able to itemize $3.5 million of the 6.1. If
you look at direct benefit, 3.5. What's left over, 2.5. Overhead rate of
about 42 percent. Little bit high in the business circles as far as that's
concerned, but there's kind of where it is.
So I felt comfortable telling staff to put $3.5 million in that
budget particular issue. I don't know where the revenue's going to
come from because I could not get a detail breakdown as far as what
interest is left that's going to come in versus what's been put in the
budget already in order to balance the budget that we had the first two
workshops.
I've asked staff to go out there and I -- and RFPs are a little bit
tough to do because you're basically fishing around out there in the
sector, and you get yourself into a predicament with -- when you go
out and ask for a request for proposal, there needs to be a conscious
effort that you actually are going to award that contract so that you're
not asking for a company to provide a work product when there is no
expectation on your part that you're going to award.
So I've got staff out there doing requests for information, as Mr.
Brock had done on one slide that he talked about different accounting
firms as he was comparing Mr. Kanengeiser's effectiveness -- I think
it's Mr. Kanengeiser is the gentleman -- his effectiveness versus
different organizations that were sitting out there, and his person that
he has working on that along with the software product turns out to be
very reasonable. That's a fee, and that's one that's pretty well
Page 63
July 28, 2009
documented and it's pretty well locked down. And what
Commissioner Coyle's asking for is to have those other fees as locked
down as Mr. Kanengeiser's fee is.
Now, you have a court reporter that's sitting here in this room.
You have a contract for that court reporter. That fee is pretty well
locked down on an annual basis based on the number of opportunities
that she or he is going to have -- we've always had a she, so I'll say she
__ has always had in order to type her fingers off during one of these
board meetings. That is a fee that you can pretty much pin down.
I can't pin down what overhead charges are and how that equates
to a direct benefit to the Board of County Commissioners; therefore,
we didn't include those in that -- on top of that 3.5 that we had there.
As I stated, when I was talking to Commissioner Henning, just --
MR. BROCK: I'm sorry. You didn't include what? I'm sorry. I
didn't hear your last statement. You didn't include what?
MR. MUDD: I didn't include the overhead charges in the direct
benefit issue, sir, is what I said.
MR. BROCK: Overhead for? Can you identify that?
MR. MUDD: Yeah. The direct benefit that the staff had
basically come up with turned out to be $3.5 million, and I haven't
been able to ascertain exactly if the overhead gives a direct benefit,
and we still have to go after that particular piece.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Jim, if I could, let me interject a
question here, and I'll direct it to Mr. Brock.
Is there any disagreement, Mr. Brock, that the county should try
to get the best possible price for certain services that we can? Would
you object to participating with us in trying to find less expensive
ways to get certain things done such as, perhaps, a payroll? And that's
my question. Would you participate with us in trying to do that?
MR. BROCK: And Commissioner, to answer your question as
succinctly as possible, the answer is emphatically no, keeping in mind
that there are certain legal issues that have to be addressed. For
Page 64
0",',"",''''__''_'
July 28, 2009
example, if I could find a vendor which would provide the services
under the tutelage or contract with the Clerk of the Circuit Court for
less than we are providing it, I would be an idiot not to jump at that
opportunity .
The same thing is true with accounts payable so long as there was
the capability of carrying out those constitutional and statutorily
mandated requirements that are associated therewith.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Let me --
MR. BROCK: I would be the last person to object to trying to
find the cheapest way for the Clerk of the Circuit Court to deliver the
services that we provide.
But, you know, we can give you some -- we can shed some light
on some of the costs that have already been obtained by your board.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. BROCK: By your staff, if you would like.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's not leave this issue. Are you
saying to me that you believe that the mere function of performing a
payroll service for the Board of County Commissioners is legislatively
mandated as the purview -- the specific purview of the Clerk's Office?
MR. BROCK: The writing of any check requires the audit of the
Clerk of the Circuit Court, whether it's for payroll or any other
expenditures of funds by the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So if we are --
MR. BROCK: But that doesn't mean, Commissioner, that you
couldn't go through the process and we perform the preaudit function,
and if you could figure out a way to do that cheaper that it wouldn't
make sense to do it.
But let me explain to you the problem associated with your
discussion in particular with payroll. You've already bought the
financial package, the SAP, so you've got the capital investment
already associated with that. I pay your payroll essentially with one
employee, or is it -- two employees -- two employees that does the
Page 65
".~.o.~ ".~,-~--~.,,-"'..,..".~'~. ~
July 28, 2009
payroll. They do everything essentially that takes place with the
payroll, and the cost of that's what?
MS. KINZEL: 220,000.
MR. BROCK: For two employees?
MS. KINZEL: Two-and-a-half allocations.
MR. BROCK: About $200,000 for those two employees' salary,
benefits, and the operating costs associated therewith. When you
compare that to the numbers that we have seen that your staff got,
you-all can't compete with that from ADP.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, where does the $7 per
transaction come in here?
MR. BROCK: The what?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sorry?
MR. BROCK: The $7 per transaction?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. Where does that issue arise
here? I've heard that number thrown around.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, Florida Statute provides, the
Florida legislature has said, the clerk shall be paid $7 per preparation
of any document not greater than eight-and-a-half by 11. That is -- I
think it's eight-and-a-half by 11 -- but $7. That's not a number that I
have made up. That is not a number that we have been through some
time and motion analysis to generate. That is a number given to us by
the Florida legislature.
You know, I can't --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, are we being--
MR. BROCK: It talks for --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- charged for payroll services
based upon a $7 per document --
MR. BROCK: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- or are we being charged based
upon the actual number of employees and the costs of their overhead?
MR. BROCK: No. You are being charged $7 per preparation of
Page 66
July 28, 2009
a document pursuant to Florida Statutes. There is no connection that I
have made between the application of that statutory fee that's
established by the Florida legislature and the providing of the services.
I mean, let me give you an example, okay. There's a statutory fee
for the purpose of filing a civil case, so I charge a fee for that
particular service when you file a civil case. Now, there is a cost for
providing the clerk's function with regard to that particular case.
On the other hand, there is a cost associated with filing a criminal
case as well, but there is no fee for filing the criminal case. The
legislature has come up with the funding formula associated with the
operation of the office, not me. So there's no relationship that I have
established. Now, whether the legislature has established that
relationship, I was not part of that decision. But there's no relationship
between the fee that I provide for a service that's charged in the
billings that are submitted to you and the cost of providing that
particular service.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But if I were a contractor
and I came to you and gave you a bill and then said, there is absolutely
no relation between this bill and what it cost me to do the job, would
you write a check for the -- to pay the bill?
MR. BROCK: I would if the Florida legislature had passed a law
that says that that contractor shall charge X amount of dollars for
providing that service.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then let's go back to the
payroll processing. You said you had two employees and it costs us __
you $200,000 to provide the payroll processing. Now, compare that
with the $7 for each document that you prepare. For each paycheck
you would be charging $7, I would presume, and that turns out to be
somewhere in the range of $14,000 for 2,000 employees. I'm sure
there are other documents that are associated with that paycheck, other
kinds of documents.
Page 67
'~'--..",~, -_.~ _..Q'..-._......_---'"--,.,..~~.,-
July 28, 2009
So do you take the $7 per document and multiply that by the
number of documents that are associated with processing a payroll,
and is that how you come up with the cost for the payroll that you
charge the board?
MR. BROCK: The use of the term cost is not a correct
phraseology. That's a fee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right. Let's say fee. That $7
fee --
MR. BROCK: That is the way that we calculate the fee. We
take the statutory rate times the number of the statutory events for
which that fee is applicable, and as a consequence of that, then you
come up with the total billing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now--
MR. BROCK: Even though there is a $7 fee for preparation of a
document -- let's take an example. When we write a check for
accounts payable, there is a $7 fee for that process. In that entire
process as you go through it, we take that invoice that comes in, we
compare it to the PO, we go back to the Board of County
Commissioners to ensure that the Board of County Commissioners
have, in fact, approved that expenditure through some process.
We confirm that that invoice is in conformance with what has
been approved by the board, that that is then in conformance with the
purchase order, that the goods and services are then received, that it
has been signed off by some staff member with the expenditure
authority, and we have, up to this point in time, not received one
penny in terms of fees for all of the functions that we have provided.
Then when we cut that check, there is a fee provided by statute
not that we have calculated in some time and motion study as
applicable to the services that we provide, but simply it is a fee that
the Florida legislature has established that we then bill for.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, let's see if we can't zero in
on this and get this thing taken care of, because this is dragging out an
Page 68
July 28, 2009
awfully long time, and we've got a lot of stuff on this agenda. We
haven't even touched the budget yet, and so we've got to move this
forward.
Commissioner Halas, you asked to be --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to make a motion that we
approve a budget of $3.5 million as the county manager and the
budget office has recommended, and I hope that we get a second on
this and move this along.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll tell you, my concern with that is, I
don't care whether he calls himself a fee officer or a budget officer,
and that seems to be the sticking point here.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Nope.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't quite understand it. I talked with
Crystal about it. I still don't really understand it. But he is a
constitutional officer. All of them submit budgets to us. We pay all of
their budgets, and at the end of the year, they give us the money back
that they haven't used.
He's got to run his office. And I mean, we've got to have a Clerk
of Courts and -- just like we have to have an elections officer and a
sheriff.
I don't know how we're going to get there, but we need to do that.
We need to fund them.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My motion is $3.5 million. That
will fund them. And we work on an Interlocal Agreement, and maybe
we can go on the outside and see if we can't get other things cheaper.
So -- no second? I guess it dies.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, not yet. I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I will second it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Move this along.
Page 69
----_._,_.._~ 0'''-
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I understand where we're
going with this and I, too, have concerns over the clerk's budget and
necessity of it. I also -- one question right off the bat. Are you
mandated to charge us that fee that the legislative (sic) set, or is that
the high mark that you have to charge, or is that the fee you absolutely
have to charge by legislation? That $7 for the -- per check per
transaction.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that's a fee that's been allocated on
the court side as far as the statute is concerned.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The court side.
MR. MUDD: The court side.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What about on our side?
MR. MUDD: There is no fee on your side, okay. So that -- all of
a sudden that $7 fee got put in there in a series of vouchers and actions
that transpired as it happened through last year. We have -- we have
six months' worth of vouchers in that particular case which total $1.8
million. Multiply it by two, you've got a year's worth, and that's $3.6
million, okay.
Our estimate based on staff and my examination comes out to
about $3.5 million worth of direct benefit to the Board of County
Commissioners to the $6.1 million that's been submitted as of the last
day of the workshop.
There's where it sits, and I believe that vouchering system was
done more for court action than it was to really get at the -- how much
it really costs to do anything but to have something when we got to
testify -- or when the clerk had to testify in the thing. I don't want to
get into court actions. We're done with that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Coyle again. I
understand your interest in getting this moved along, but I never got to
Page 70
'-"~"~---'<'-
July 28, 2009
the bottom line of my line of questioning. And I'll just cut it short and
I'll say that I, too, believe that the clerk's functions and services to the
board should be funded, but I do not believe that the taxpayers of
Collier County have the responsibility of funding court-related or
clerk-related functions that do not provide a direct benefit to the Board
of County Commissioners.
As a fee officer, he has the right to charge fees for those kinds of
services. And if there is a shortfall in the clerk's budget for those
kinds of services, then ad valorem property taxes should not be used to
cover up for that shortfall. And that is the reason that I believe that the
staff is recommending the $3.5 million is that they believe that -- they
believe that that is sufficient to pay for the services that the court --
clerk provides to the Board of County Commissioners.
And if -- that shortfall that might occur on the court side or the
clerk's side of responsibilities, we should not be underwriting. So if
that, in fact, is the case, then I would -- would support the $3.5 million
motion. We can't subsidize the other functions of the clerk merely
because his fees are down or his fees aren't set high enough. So that's
why I am seconding that motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Yes, I have a -- Commissioner
Henning, I have Commissioner Coletta first, then I'll call on you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Brock, you see how this
discussion's going at the moment. Let's play what-if. What if $3.5
million was all that the county commission would come up for you;
what kind of actions would have to result from that?
MR. BROCK: I don't know, Commissioner, but I would have to
look at it and see where we would go from there. I mean, I can't
operate my office off $3.5 million, and I think that's obvious. We will
have to take whatever actions we have -- we have to take in order to
be able to fulfill our constitutional and statutorial responsibility.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right at this point, 3.5 is on the
Page 71
.'_'",,--~.
July 28, 2009
table. What I would propose is that we direct the county manager to
look into it with Brock over the next month or so to see if we can
identify other parts of this that are a direct benefit to the Board of
County Commissioners so that rather than locking it in with an exact
fund, I was wondering if you'd consider amending your motion to be
able to --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, that's -- is that a firm no or
just a maybe no?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's a definite no.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Well, I haven't got
anything more to add to the discussion right now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, thank you. Well, just an
observation. In years previous, before we went to the Court, we've
always funded the clerk at a much, much higher level. I remember
one year it was $10 million, and I think that was the year of the
implementation of the SAP. But now one constitutional officer's --
we're to determine whether it's a benefit to the Board of
Commissioners. I just find that very odd, but yet all of the other ones
got funded to what they were asking or negotiated with the Sheriffs
Department.
If it was good then, where isn't it good now even at a lesser
amount? It just seems like, you know, I'm hearing people want to get
along, but in reality, they want -- still want to have some control over
the constitutional officer.
That's -- I just can't support the motion the way it is. And I don't
want any debate on what I just had to say, I just wanted to share my
feelings.
MR. BROCK: Madam Chairman, may I make an observation?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
MR. BROCK: The -- one of the difficulties I'm having with the
Page 72
'-"~'-"~"-'""'" . "~_.--.,-
July 28, 2009
entire discussion is, we have asked, what is the function that you
consider not to be related to the providing of services to the non-court
aspects of our organization? And we haven't gotten an answer.
I've heard two here. One, which is the attorney that works in the
SA VE program, and he actually does some work in relation to
enforcing bonds, which is Article V. He also defends the actions with
regard to tax certificates that we issue that's directly related to the
Board of County Commissioners.
The other function that I heard is the satellites. The
overwhelming majority of the work provided to the satellite
department is to a non-board related function, which is the selling of
passport, the selling of marriage license, things of that nature.
Do you have any others that you would like to point out that you
don't think relate directly to the operation of the board?
I can tell you that the allocation of the cost of operating my office
is evaluated on an annual basis, as I said, by both the external auditors
and the State of Florida and its cost allocation as it relates to the
funding of Article V. There are specific aspects of Article V that you
are required by statute to fund. Give me that slide, the cost allocation.
As a matter of fact, in 2007, your auditors did a cost allocation,
indirect cost allocation for the Board of County Commissioners, in
which they allocated the costs of your various and sundry departments
as it related to the operation of the clerk's -- Clerk of the Circuit
Court's function, and it's essentially a similar allocation process that
we are doing here today.
So, you know, Commissioners, it all boils down to a question of,
you know, whether we're going to fight over funding further or
whether we're going to move on from this point and carry out the
people's business. So we're ready to go.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: May I ask, if you reduced those particular
items that you just mentioned off of the budget that you submitted to
us, what would the figure be then; do you know?
Page 73
.'.."".,."'-
July 28, 2009
MR. BROCK: I can close the SAVE department, and that would
probably be -- where is SAVE?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Say, for instance, reducing the satellite
offices, which probably are paid for by themselves by the fees
anyway.
MR. MUDD: No, ma'am.
MR. BROCK: Partially funded by fees.
MR. MUDD: No, ma'am, and what's happening is in the budget
that was submitted, the satellite offices, because they weren't bringing
-- generating enough fees, basically the additional cost to operate and
man those offices were switched over to the Board of County
Commissioners' responsibility to the tune of over $400,000.
So if you take the satellite offices off, you take the outside legal
counsel for half a million dollars -- so you asked the question, how
much do you think you could save? About a million dollars right off
the top in that particular request. So it's kind of where you're sitting.
Now, let me go down just a little bit farther. I did state that the
only way to guarantee any kind of revenue source -- because we still
have due-outs on interest and where expenditures are and where
they're coming forward, and we probably won't have a good handle on
that for a month or so -- I know we'll have a good handle on it at the
end of October because there's a mandatory requirement that he have a
good handle on it in that particular juncture.
But you have to set some kind of a millage rate to get you
someplace, may it be 3.5 or 6. Someplace in there you've got to set a
millage rate.
Now, what does that millage rate increase equate to off the top of
my mind as I sit there? Okay. Well, I've got a sheet that tells me, and
it's sitting here right beside me. So if you're talking about 3.5 million,
million, you're looking at a .05 millage rate increase to the general
fund. If you're talking about $6.1 million, you're looking at .1 mill
increase to the general fund.
Page 74
_.,,,,,,~.."~M~'_.."_~~
July 28, 2009
Now, we still have to figure out what the interest rates -- or the
interest rate revenue is going to be, and it might come in a little higher
than expectations or estimates. Doesn't mean that we can't go through
negotiations and try to get an Interlocal Agreement that works around
that particular issue.
My recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners is,
you better set the millage rate at least to have $3.5 million guaranteed
coming in or -- because if the interest rates don't -- interest rates. If
the interest revenue doesn't come in in sufficient quantities, then
you're basically dealing with the clerk functions that directly benefit
the Board of County Commissioners having a zero budget, and I don't
believe -- in my original statement before in the workshop and again
today, there are legitimate functions that the clerk provides to the
Board of County Commissioners, payrolls, accounts receivables and
payables, court reporting, Mr. Kanengeiser's benefit for investment,
that the board should fund.
And so, my recommendation as the county manager is that your
millage rate that you set -- which is your next item -- you set it in the
general fund at .05 mills higher than what the board had approved the
millage rate to be at the end of the workshop in June, and then we
work on what the revenues are, keep working on the Interlocal
Agreement in order to get all that stuff worked out and get as close to
-- we can as far as actual costs and benefits to the Board of County
Commissioners, and at least you have a fallback and you're not sitting
there with a wing and a prayer.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Or we could raise it .1 to pay the Clerk's
Office. We have to raise the millage rate to support the Clerk's Office,
.1, and then if we find money that came back in September, we could
reduce that?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am, you could.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is that right?
MR. MUDD: That's right.
Page 75
-
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd just like to make a final
comment. The thing that makes this so difficult with respect to the
Clerk's Office is that he really gets his funding from different places,
and he wears two hats. That's not true of the other -- other
constitutional officers. So I want to try to dispel the idea that we are
somehow making the clerk jump through hoops that we don't require
for the other constitutionals.
That is -- the real problem, in my estimation, is that the clerk gets
some of his money from fees over which we have absolutely no
control -- and I have no problem with that -- and he gets some of his
money from the Board of County Commissioners, and that we should,
in fact, pay for the services he provides to us, but we should not pay
an additional amount of money to cover any of his shortfall for
services that he performs while he's wearing his other hat. So that is
my only concern here.
I'm not trying to shortchange the clerk on reimbursing him for the
services he provides to the board. It's just that I don't want to
underwrite with taxpayer funds any shortages he is incurring on his
fee side of his business.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, I would like to finish.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Go ahead, Mr. Brock. I don't
want to get in front of you.
MR. BROCK: The statement as it relates to satellites. The
allocation of the costs of my satellites is based upon revenue generated
by those satellites, and there's approximately $400,000 in the
satellites. There is -- and for the SAVE program, there's probably in
the neighborhood of 80- to $90,000 in the SAVE program. So you're
dealing with 500,000.
Page 76
...... 'H"____
July 28, 2009
And as I told you, there's about $400,000 in the legal fees
associated with the lawsuit that you all filed against me that I thought
was essentially over that I'm now hearing is not, and that's what is
related to satellites, the SAVE program, and the outside counsel. So
we're talking 5 -- about $900,000.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. Yeah, I understand. It's pretty
much consistent with what the county manager had said earlier so --
but we have a motion on the table. I would really ask that the
commissioners support the motion because if it doesn't, we're going to
be increasing the millage rates for our taxpayers unnecessarily in my
opinion. But I'm going to probably vote against any increase in the
millage rate anyway. So nevertheless. That's all I have to say about it
this.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I just want to cut to the
chase and get to where we need to be. I heard -- I heard Mr. Mudd
make some very good suggestions about how we haven't identified the
whole situation yet. There might be still something to work, and that
we should give consideration of adjusting the millage ever so slightly
up with the idea that when September comes, we can move it back
down again. We can look at other funds that are available. We can
send the county manager back to get into a discussion again with the
Clerk's Office to be able to -- to identify very exactly what is the
benefit to the county commission to try to reach a little bit better
understanding than we have now.
I think it's only fair that we go into negotiations. The final
outcome of it may not be favorable to anyone. But at this point in
time I can't support the motion. I kind of hope that we can bring it to a
conclusion and maybe a secondary motion be made so that we can get
on with the people's business.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
Page 77
..,.-,--...,.-.....,.,
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I think that we need to stand
firm on this particular motion, and I'm hoping that we have enough
votes to carry this at 3.5 million. And I also will not increase the
millage rate that's already been proposed at our workshops, which is
3.5148. So that's where we stand.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Then I have two questions. If -- if
Commissioner Halas just said he would not increase the millage rate --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: For the use of the three-and-a-half
million that's going to be allocated to the Clerk of Courts.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You wouldn't increase what's already
been established to pay the 3.5 million that you just have --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, because we're going to -- I'm
hoping that we'll find the money, and hopefully the clerk will turn
over some of the additional interest that may be there that he's got
prior to him being told that he can no longer handle that interest, or to
use that interest, and I think that was dedicated as of the start of July
1st of2009.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Mr. Mudd, right now if we establish that
millage rate that Commissioner Halas was just speaking of that we
voted for at the last meeting, can we pay the Clerk of Courts anything?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, Commissioner Halas used the
word hope, okay. I have a saying, hope is not a method. And what
I'm going to say to you is, to answer your question, and yours was
more a rhetorical question, what I will tell you is, you don't have any
money unless that -- unless that interest revenue comes in above
expectations in order to fund the Clerk of Court's operation that has a
direct benefit to the Board of County Commissioners.
That's why I've made, in my last statement, that I would make a
recommendation that the board increase the millage rate in the general
fund to handle the $3.5 million, and then we'll deal with whatever
interest revenue comes in above -- above what estimates are as we
work the Interlocal Agreement out and come back to the Board of
Page 78
___._._.,..w_. --
July 28, 2009
County Commissioners with it in order to get it resolved.
But if you're going to set the millage rate, you can -- today you
can set the millage rate higher and reduce it in September. If you
don't set it higher, you can't raise it in September without a long,
drawn-out process of advertisement to all the taxpayers of Collier
County .
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But Commissioner Halas, you just said
you wouldn't vote for that increase.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, after hearing that additional
information -- after hearing that additional information from the
county manager, I will use that and weigh in as we discuss the next
step in regards to the millage.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Setting the millage.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd just like to ask a question. I'm
somewhat confused by what the county manager just said. We agreed
upon a tentative budget last meeting and a millage rate which would
result in roughly a 11.3 or 11.5 percent increase in taxes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Not taxes, millage rate.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What is the county manager
saying? Is he saying we should increase even that amount --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: By .05.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- that figure? Because I thought
the $3.5 million for the clerk was included in that budget. Is the
county manager suggesting that we increase the millage rate even
higher than we had preliminarily decided at our last meeting?
MR. MUDD: Sir, what you were basically told during the
workshop either by Janet Vasey and/or side conversations that were
made, that the millage -- that the fees for the clerk would come in with
an increase in interest revenue that we cannot -- we cannot guarantee,
nor can the clerk at this particular time.
Page 79
~~_. ..
July 28, 2009
So if -- based on the budget that was -- the estimate that was
provided to the board the last day of the workshop by the Clerk of
Courts for $6.1 million broken down, I can ascertain with staff that
$3.5 of that 6.1 have a direct benefit to the Board of County
Commissioners, and I can say that is the best I can based on the
estimates that were provided in that budget by the clerk.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Can you tell me what the
millage rate was at our last meeting when we approved the
preliminary budget?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. The proposed maximum general fund
millage rate was 3.5148.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: 3.5148?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, what millage rate are you
proposing that we consider now?
MR. MUDD: If you're considering a $3.5 million budget for the
clerk -- and that's my recommendation at this particular time -- you
would have to increase that rate .0497, and that would give you a total
new millage rate of 3.5645.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right. So right now
Commissioner Halas's motion would hold us at the 3.5148 figure; is
that correct?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, no. His motion on the floor is to
approve a budget for the clerk at 3.5 million. It has nothing to do with
the millage rate.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, yes, it does.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm saying, not included in the motion
was the millage rate.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. So the -- Commissioner
Halas's motion will increase the millage rate to 3.5645?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, it would.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. Now, if the clerk is given his
Page 80
,-'..---.._",_. .... ---.._-_.._~....,,- '~__"'._;'-""""".'''''C
July 28, 2009
entire $6.5 (sic) million --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: One.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- budget request, what will be the
millage rate then, County Manager?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. It would be 3.6025.
MR. BROCK: I have not requested 6.5. It's 6.1.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 6.177 is what you requested, right?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Whatever the clerk's request
was --
MR. MUDD: If the request for $6.1 million --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: -- is granted, your millage rate, based on what you
had when you closed at the workshop -- which, again, I'll state it one
more time, is 3.5148 --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
MR. MUDD: -- you would have to increase that by .0877.
Those two numbers added together, your new millage rate would be
3.6025.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now let me just recap here.
We started out at our last meeting with 3.5148 millage rate.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Ifwe -- if we approve
Commissioner Halas's motion, it will go to 3.5645. Ifwe do not
approve Commissioner Halas's motion and we go for the entire
amount requested by the clerk, the increase will be 3.-- or the new
millage rate will be 3.6025.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So I just want to make that
clear that the motions have an effect on that millage rate.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So now--
Page 81
-"---~_.......
July 28, 2009
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, before you vote, I have one more
comment. The Clerk of the Circuit Court obviously cannot operate its
office with $3.5 million. And I can tell you that that action is certainly
not going to bring peace and harmony. But that's a call that you have
to make.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I'm sorry, but the motion
itself has nothing to do with the millage rate. So even if we approved
this -- which I'm not going to vote for it the way it's set up -- nothing
can happen until we approve the millage rate?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Of course it affects the millage
rate. We just went through that. It increased the millage rate --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It does.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- from 3.5148, which we've
already preliminarily established --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's not part of the motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The motion will increase the
millage rate, because the motion is approving money to be put into the
budget which has to be covered by millage.
County Manager, am I right?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, in order -- in order to be sure that
you have the funds to give to the Clerk of Courts based on the request,
no matter what level it's at, you have to do something to the millage
rate in order to guarantee those dollars.
Now, we can -- we can -- as I stated before, we can start there at
a baseline, and as we get better estimates on interest moneys that are
going to be left over or turned back to the Board of County
Commissioners, there's opportunities to adjust the Interlocal
Agreement to work those particular pieces.
But I'm going to say to you, doing nothing with that millage rate,
okay, leaves the clerk out with zero and hoping that something's going
Page 82
~,- ~~-'-"-"--'" -
July 28, 2009
to happen to the interest rate, and I can't -- and for the life of me right
now, I can't tell you for surety there's going to be enough money to
fund him at 3.5 or 6.1 based on the interest rate turnback money. So
I've a -- we've got a dilemma.
And my recommendation was to get an amount that you're sure
of on the ad valorem side of the house at 3.5 and then work the
differences in the Interlocal Agreement with any kind of interest
moneys that come in, but do it all with the approval of the Board of
County Commissioners in open sunshine so that you get to see what it
is, where it came from, so that you've got the revenue streams and you
understand so that you're basically coming without a balanced budget.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Just a couple of quick
points to make sure I really understand that we're not going to go
down the road and find ourselves in a bad position where it's never
going to work.
Commissioner Halas's motion, that was also seconded by
Commissioner Coyle, specifically helps to set the millage rate now; in
other words, we're not -- it's included in the motion, I would assume.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're not just voting to increase
the budget by three-and-a half million dollars. We're also recognizing
the funding source for it, which would be ad valorem and an
adjustment to that; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. We're just --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So we're right back to zero.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, no. We're -- all we're doing
right now is we're establishing the budget for the Clerk of Courts at
$3.5 million. The next motion that will have to be made is that we'll
have to address -- address the millage rate that was set at the
workshop. We're going to have to address that in order to cover the
additional $3.5 million that's got to be added to the budget.
Page 83
--~-
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I understand, but still it's
a two-step process to be able to get there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's a two -- yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we're not doing it all in one
step.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, the second part that I need
to be able to get resolved, and I brought it up a couple of times and we
heard the county manager say it about two or three times; the 3.5 that
we're talking about, we're also authorizing the county manager to stay
in negotiations with the Clerk of Courts to see if there's something else
that needs to be done with the idea that there may be a turn back of
interest money or something else that we can look at when September
comes; is that part of your motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's not part of the motion at the
present time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would you consider making it a
part of the motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. All we're trying to do right
now is address the budget for the -- for the Clerk of the Courts. What
needs to be addressed is that not only do we look at an Interlocal
Agreement with the Clerk of Courts, but if you want, in my next
motion, along with the -- addressing the millage rate, is that we give
direction to the county manager to go outside and see if the private
sector can do the work -- some of the work that the Clerk of Courts
does at the present time at a cheaper rate for the taxpayers. That may
have a big effect also at the end result in lowering the millage rate
come September when we have to finally set it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: See, my problem,
Commissioner Halas, is everything's predicated on the next motion
and the motion after that, and that's where I'm having a problem. I
don't see any continuance effect that we're going to get to the point we
Page 84
,-------........~"""~"~...." ..
July 28, 2009
need to be with your motion as it stands right now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And here's a point, too. Nobody's
mentioned something in between the 6.177 and the 3.5. Maybe there's
-- like the clerk said, he can't run his office. I mean, you know, we've
-- he's got to run his office. He's the Clerk of Courts. He's elected by
our citizenry. Maybe there's a figure in between that we would feel
more comfortable voting for --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Let's call the question and see
where it goes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Maybe like 4.7 million or something.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Call the question.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Call the question.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All right. Let's call the question. All
those in favor of motion to approve a $3.5 million budget for the Clerk
of Courts, vote yes or no. V ote yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have two ayes.
All opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have three opposed.
Okay. I would like to make a motion that we -- that we allocate
$4.7 million toward the clerk's budget and -- yes, that's it. No second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no, no. Don't be so quick.
I'm sorry. This is a complicated matter and a lot of things depend
upon it.
And, you know, everybody -- everybody's right and everybody's
wrong on this. And what's got me concerned is, if we're coming up
Page 85
.._--_._-~_. -
July 28, 2009
with an amount over and above what the county manager
recommended, where is the justification to get there? I think that we
could probably find it.
But I would okay the original amount that the county manager
come up to, but it would be a cap of 4.7 that you mentioned. That
would be fine by me, you know, to be able to get there, and then put
the Clerk of Courts into negotiations with the county manager,
Interlocal Agreement, and also, you know, to be able to see how
everything's going to work out, then we take the recommendations
that we get back.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Why don't you make the motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just did.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Can you say it one more time?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I sure can. That we recognize
the 3.2 (sic) -- or the 3.5, excuse me, that the county manager's
identified as board related, that we set the tentative millage rate to be
for 4.7 and allow the county manager to get into negotiations with the
Clerk of Court to be able to further identify what is board related and
to bring it back before the commission, and then we can adjust millage
at that point in time in September.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, we've got to set a millage
rate today.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's what he said.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's part of my motion that
we set the millage rate with this in consideration.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: To include a $4.7 million budget, and
then we can reduce it if --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what's the millage rate going
to be at 4.7?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Poor guys didn't know that I was going to
do that.
Page 86
..._._~.,..
July 28, 2009
MR. MUDD: I didn't know you were going to pick that number.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's halfway between the 3.5 and
6 1 . ,.?
. , Isn t It.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I second your motion, by the way.
MR. ISACKSON: The additional millage rate required to raise
$4.7 million is .0667, plus 3.5148, gives you whatever the number is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I love it when he explains it.
MR. MUDD: Let's put it this way. We'll have that number for
you right after lunch when we have to set the millage rate in the next
agenda item because it's a time certain, and we'll have that number
specified specifically because we're going to need it if that is, indeed,
where the board wants to go.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. I have a motion on the floor
by Commissioner Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Opposed.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have three opposed.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Coyle votes no.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle, Henning
and Halas -- I mean -- yeah, Coy Ie, Henning, and Halas vote no.
Coletta and Fiala vote yes. Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Somebody else deal the
cards.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll support Commissioner
Fiala's motion that she made and then, I guess, withdraw it.
Page 87
.,-"..-.....-.."'....-.-
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta made the same
motion really.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no, he didn't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I didn't.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I think your motion was to
fund the clerk's request, give direction to the county manager to fund
the clerk's request.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. Repeat your motion, please.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. My motion was -- is to
recognize the county manager's 3.5 that he identified that -- set aside
in the budget the 4.7 million to be -- to be worked out between the
clerk and the county manager.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What was the total amount on
that, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, 4.7 would be the high
end.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And that isn't what was
requested of the clerk.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. So -- and I thought
Commissioner Fiala stated a motion to fund him at 6.1.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, no, I did not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I said 4.7.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we're not going to resolve
this issue then.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. So that motion fails then.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Your turn again.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you think we ought to go to lunch and
come back and --
Page 88
,---
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, why not? You're not
doing anything for the rest of the day, are you, Mr. Brock?
MR. BROCK: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know, I think that we're going to
take a break, let us clear our heads a little bit, and we'll come back at
1: 15,. okay, and we'll finish this discussion; then we'll take up the
budget discussion, and then we'll move on to the regular agenda.
I can tell you right now it looks like we're going to be here
tomorrow because so many things were pulled off the consent agenda
--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- and put on the regular agenda.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We've got to do what we've got
to do.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. See you at 1: 15.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would everyone please take their seats.
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you could please take
your seats.
Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Commissioner Henning, are you on the phone?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, but I need my water glass
filled. Can you send somebody over to do that?
MR. MUDD: No problem, sir. No problem. I'm surprised
Spencer isn't working that already.
Commissioner Coyle, are you on the line?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm here.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, you have all the commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Where's Mr. Brock?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't know where Mr. Brock is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Well--
Page 89
~<~..._,,_.,"" ""---,.....,......-~^.
July 28, 2009
MR.OCHS: Crystal's here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. Go ahead, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. You know, a little bit of
an impasse on this. I'm going to make another suggestion and that
would be to provide funding in the financial year 2010 budget to the
Clerk of Courts in the amount not to exceed $5 million for the purpose
of discussion towards Interlocal Agreement; 3.5 million of funding
would be paid through ad valorem taxes requiring a millage rate
adjustment of 0.0497 mills. This brings the total millage, general fund
millage rate to 3.5645 mills.
It's understood that the remaining 1.5 million in potential funding
may be paid from the interest income should a surplus of interest
income be realized on our about October 31, 2009.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did you hear all of that, Dwight? Let's
read it again. Yes. You can read it again.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Provide funding in the financial
year 2010 budget to the Clerk of Courts in the amount not to exceed
$5 million for purposes of discussion towards an Interlocal
Agreement; 3.5 million of funding will be paid through ad valorem
taxes requiring a millage rate adjustment of .0497 mills. This brings
the total maximum general fund millage rate to 3.5645 mills.
It is understood that the remaining 1.5 million in potential
funding may be paid from interest income should a surplus of income
be realized on or about October 31, 2009.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's your motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's the motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll second it. Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I do have a question for Mr.
Block.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Brock -- and I don't want to
upset the apple cart. I hope to God we're coming to some sort of
Page 90
'~..",""',---...,"'. ,.-..-..-.
July 28, 2009
resolution on this. But if we grant this budget to you and we come up
with these funds for you to be able to run the necessary offices that we
need to be able to operate, what's to assure us -- would that be part of
the Interlocal Agreement where we'd be assured that the moneys
would be spent in these particular directions that you so identified, and
if it wasn't, that you'd come back before us?
MR. BROCK: Say that again.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. You have identified what
you need for all your different departments, and we're agreeing in part,
you know, to -- well, this motion agrees in part to finance everything
but about a million-one of the whole thing if everyone went along
with it.
Would the Interlocal Agreement that's going to be put together be
so worded that we would have some assurance that the money that
we're giving to you would be expended for the designated items that
we so have listed on there for the different parts, and if there's going to
be a departure where we have to put more than one department over
another, that you would come back before the commission rather than
just get the money carte blanche and be able to spend it as you so
choose?
MR. BROCK: As we go through the Interlocal Agreement, if
that's the process that we go through, I'm certainly willing to look at
that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Well, I'd make that part
of my motion.
MR. BROCK: Okay. I mean, since there is no Interlocal
Agreement --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I know that, but there
would have to be an Interlocal Agreement for this all to come
together. We have to -- we have to put a stick out with this carrot to
be able to make it all work, and we have to make sure that everybody's
needs are met out there. But number one, that we meet the needs of
Page 91
-~~ -~-
July 28, 2009
the taxpayers.
And I've got a second, but I'd love to hear some discussion on
this.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning,
Commissioner Coy Ie?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm assuming because of
the discussion that the satellite offices would be closing and the SAVE
program would no longer be offered to the residents; is that a correct
assumption?
MR. BROCK: Well, again, you know, the entire process would
have to be vetted through the discussion process. But I can tell you
those are the -- the SAVE program is certainly a discretionary
program that we engage in, and the satellites are done for the
convenience of the public. So those would be the first things that I
would look at.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. BROCK: I can't tell you emphatically that I'm going to go
out there and say right now that I'm going to close all of the satellites,
but I will certainly look at that. I mean, I will tell you that -- you
know, just to discuss satellites just for a moment. I have a satellite
that -- in which one of my employees is your librarian. In addition to
that, I have people that are participants in that process that are your
couriers. So, you know, I'm going to have to look at the entire
process.
You know, what I sense is that the Board of County
Commissioners wants to control how I spend the money. And I'm not
opposed to looking at that, but I'm certainly not going to agree to that.
I mean, this entire process, I'm going to have to go back, sit down in
my office, and evaluate where we go from here.
And once that's done, then I'll be more than glad to send you a
letter and tell you what approach we're going to take.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, my question really was
Page 92
~_.....-.
July 28, 2009
based upon the motion.
MR. BROCK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, you know, we have other
constitutional officers with satellite offices that provide services to the
public. And I guess that's getting back to my original comment is, it
seems to be a continued issue with the Clerk of Court, one
constitutional officer, and it's -- we're basing it upon a budget because
of the continuing problems within personalities.
And the second thing is, the SAVE program, Commissioner
Coletta, is -- there are -- it's a program to bring resolutions between
parents that have now separated and have children. And the goal is to
make sure that the children receive the necessary funds for their
existence, so -- anyways, that's my comments.
MR. BROCK: And, Commissioner Henning, that is obviously a
purely discretionary function that I have undertaken over the years.
There's certainly no statutory mandate that we --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, so is limerock roads.
MR. BROCK: But I mean, we're not dealing with limerock roads
today. We're dealing with the clerk's operation, and I understand that.
But, you know, I'm obviously going to look at -- those
discretionary functions will be the first thing that I will begin to
eliminate.
I mean, you have essentially said that if this motion is passed --
you have said a couple of things. You have said -- one is that you
want to control the interworkings of the Clerk's Office; and, two, you
want me to cut out $1.1 million of what was a bare bones budget to
start with. But I'm certainly willing to look at that, and we will
approach, you know, how we deal with it from the perspective as we
move forward.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I would just like to jump in and say, I
would never think of telling you how to -- you say we want to control
the interworkings of your office. Why would we want to do that?
Page 93
'~-'---.,.".-..." ~",~",-"
July 28, 2009
What we're just trying to do is control the taxpayers' dollars. That's
all.
And certainly you can do -- you know, you can do whatever. I
know with us, I mean, we had to cut back our services and some of the
things -- you could call it satellites, for instance, like libraries. So we
just cut back days. We moved our employees around because we
don't want to lose any more employees, just like you don't. We want
to keep our employees. We don't want to just throw them out in the
street.
So maybe you have one day over at this satellite because they
don't do very much and you have two days here and three days there.
But you have to make that decision. That's your job to do. We're just
telling you how much money we have to do it with.
MR. BROCK: Okay. Well, I mean, that was not what I
understood Commissioner Coletta's motion. After he added that to his
motion, he wanted to be able to tell me where I would spend it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You tell us where you want to
spend it. You submit a budget. And if you want to amend that budget
later to be able to take funds that you haven't expended one place and
apply it someplace else, just come before us. We're the authority that's
giving you the money that we're responsible for. So I don't think that's
unreasonable.
MR. BROCK: Oh, I'm not saying it's reasonable or
unreasonable.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that's not controlling your
office, sir.
MR. BROCK: You know, the perception that I have is that
through that financial control, you essentially control the office, but I
--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You have other funds you can
do what you want to do with, too.
MR. BROCK: I am not suggesting to you that I am out-of-hand
Page 94
_._.~ ,,_.~--
July 28, 2009
rejecting anything at this point in time. We will simply have to look at
it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. On the record this
morning you already stated that you could cut out $900,000 out of
your budget, no sweat.
MR. BROCK: That was moving the satellite.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, and $500,000 was--
MR. BROCK: That was removing the satellites, that was
removing the SAVE program, and that was removing, based upon an
understanding that I thought we had, was that we would resolve the
issues in the litigation that dealt with the --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The $500,000 for litigation was
going to be done, too.
MR. BROCK: Well, there's only $400,000.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, whatever it is, 400,000, okay.
MR. BROCK: And, you know, if -- obviously, you know, you're
going to set the amount of money that you are going to give me, and
we will look at it from there.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion on the floor and
a second.
Any further --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Coyle. Could I just
make a comment?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I agree with Commissioner
Coletta's assessment. The intent of his motion was not to control the
expenditure of the clerk but to assure that the money that we approve
for the expenditure for services to the Board of County
Page 95
~"'--,~,---,..> -....-"-.--
July 28, 2009
Commissioners would not be arbitrarily used for some other purpose,
and I think that's only reasonable. So I think we have to understand
the intent of that motion very clearly.
The other thing is, I do not have any real concern with respect to
funding the Clerk's Office at a reasonable level. My primary
argument is that the millage rate keeps increasing. I didn't agree with
the basic millage rate that was approved when we reviewed the
budget, and I'm not going to agree with this revised millage rate,
which is even higher.
So I will vote against it, but I want it made very clear that it's not
because of the clerk's funding, because I think our own funding -- we
just haven't done as good a job as we can do at reducing our own
expenses either.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any further comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor of the motion, signify
by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And was -- Commissioner Coyle, did you
say aye?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I did not. I do not agree with
the motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Did you ask for any opposed?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Not yet. I didn't know -- I couldn't tell if
either one of you --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's not count the votes until
we take a total count.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So I -- there were two yes.
And those opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
Page 96
----,..._"..- . ~'".._~--. .~---"'---
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I was -- I was opposed.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, so -- and Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I voted against the motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So that's -- the motion goes down
with a 3-2 vote. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make another motion we
continue this to later in the meeting. I don't know what else to do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Motion to continue till later in the
meeting and a second by Commissioner Henning.
Mr. Mudd, did you want to say something along that line?
MR. MUDD: I didn't hear, later in the meeting?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Later this -- later today. I don't
know what time today.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How about tomorrow?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, we could do it tomorrow.
MR. MUDD: No. You've got to set your millage rate. If you're
nowhere near where you're going to be for millage rate -- and so far
what I've heard at least from Commissioner Coy Ie -- I didn't hear it
from Commissioner Henning or Commissioner Halas -- but I think it's
a millage rate issue. If you're not willing to raise the millage rate for
this particular item, then --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Then you can't fund it anyway, huh?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, the only thing I can see to
break this impasse is we had an original motion on the floor for what
the county manager recommended at three-and-a-half million dollars.
We're not -- everything else has been rejected. I've been a swing vote
on this thing. I'm just about ready to go with the three-and-a-half
million dollars and that the clerk can keep talking to the county
manager to see about the interest money that's out there. I don't know
Page 97
,'.--",,---,,-"'~ ,", .~"..._""-,--~ ,.....----
July 28, 2009
what else to do. We're at an impasse. I'd rather not --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Make a motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I'm listening.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Make the motion for
three-and-a-half million.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd rather somebody else make
the motion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion that we go back to
what our original motion was, and that's three-and-a-half million
dollars.
MR. KLA TZKOW: That motion went --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Then we work to have the county
manager and staff work to see if we can come up with an Interlocal
Agreement and also to find out what the turnback money would be
from interest to take care of making sure that the clerk is well funded.
But the clerk will be well funded at three-and-a-half million dollars in
regards to the issues regarding to what he offers us to the Board of
County Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Before I hear a second, the county
attorney has --
MR. KLATZKOW: It's the board's prerogative to make these
decisions, and I don't mean to step in on it. But from what I've heard
from Mr. Brock, if you're going to set his budget at $3.5 million, you
will be in a lawsuit.
Mr. Brock is stating that he needs $6.1 million to operate his
office. Mr. Mudd believes that that figure's probably closer to 3.5. I
don't know what the figure is. But from what I'm hearing, if we're
going to set it at 3.5 today, we will be in a lawsuit.
You don't have to set his budget today. All you have to do today
is set your millage rate, which has the max --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But the millage rate hinges on what
we're going to finance him. Now--
Page 98
~",..-'~-_.' --
July 28, 2009
MR. KLA TZKOW: Your final millage rate does.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Listen to what I said for a motion.
The motion was 3.5 million, and then if there's any turn back money,
that could be used towards the clerk's possibility of increasing his
funding to take care of the issues in his office. It all hinges on how
much interest rate there's going to be turned back.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're talking about
three-and-a-half million, recognizing that as that lower increase to the
millage; is that correct, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And you are leaving the
door open for discussions to take place?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's exactly what I said in my
motion, that if there is any additional money from interest that is to be
turned back, then that's up for discussion as far as how much there is
and to offset any other moneys, and I think we ought to limit to 5.- --
or $5 million is the upper limit. That's hinged on how much money is
going to come back from interest.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What about the budget issue of
--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The budget issue would be, we're
going to set millage, and the millage will be set in regards to the $3.5
million that -- our staff thinks that that is a fair and equitable amount
of money to run the clerk's office in regards to the things that we as
the Board of County Commissioners need.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I think you're real close,
but there's one issue I brought up that you didn't mention was the fact
that about, if the -- what the clerk budgets it to be applied towards
those items, or can he use it indiscretionately (sic) wherever he wants?
I didn't mean to give you a loaded question, but it was something that
Page 99
, . ~,~--~.~"_...._". _._._---~-_...
July 28, 2009
came up a few minutes ago.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Say that one more time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, the clerk's
budget that he gives to us and he says, I'm going to spend X number of
dollars through the Interlocal Agreement here, X number of dollars
there, that if he wants to shift those funds someplace else, he has to
come back before the board.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That will be in the -- that's in the
motion also.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. BROCK: What are we --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Essentially your motion is the same as his
motion.
MR. OCHS: Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's different.
MR. OCHS: Not much.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're setting -- we're setting a
budget at this point in time for the clerk. Let me try to get this thing
straight.
We're setting a budget. Our staff, the county manager, has said
that in their best estimate that $3.5 million covers the expense of the
Clerk's Office in regards to the services that are rendered to the Board
of County Commissioners. The clerk is saying that he can't get -- he
can't -- he needs additional funding.
And I'm saying in the motion that any turn back of interest to the
Board of County Commissioners, then we'll sit down with the clerk
and figure out what needs to be addressed, and it can come back to the
board at a later date to make any amendments to his budget.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I second your motion as
you made it in the entirety the first time.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any comments from
Commissioner Henning or Coy Ie?
Page 100
-_.~--_.~._- "
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not from me.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I'm okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. No further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor of the motion, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye, only because of the increase
in millage.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, you've got to fund the clerk.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yep.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep, I understand that. I just think
the millage is too high and we haven't done all we can do.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. So that's a 3-2 vote. It
passes.
MR. BROCK: Thank you, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's where we are right now.
Now the ball's in your court.
MR. BROCK: I understand that. I think I'll be letting you know
shortly.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Item #lOF
RESOLUTION 2009-188: ESTABLISHING THE PROPOSED
MILLAGE RATES AS THE MAXIMUM PROPERTY TAX
RA TES TO BE LEVIED IN FY 2009/10 AND REAFFIRM THE
ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING DATES IN SEPTEMBER,
Page 101
~-
July 28, 2009
2009 FOR THE BUDGET APPROVAL PROCESS - ADOPTED
W/CHANGES
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our 10:30
time-certain item, which is 1 OF. It's a recommendation that the Board
of County Commissioners adopt a resolution establishing a proposed
millage rate at the maximum property rates to be levied in
FY -2009/2010 and reaffirm the advertised public hearing dates in
September, 2009, for the budget approval process.
Mr. Mark Isackson, your Senior Management and Budget
Analyst will be present. And I've got my name down on this thing in
case you get (sic) it resolved. But you've got to make sure that you
adjust the millage rate for the general fund based on the last motion
that was passed by the Board of County Commissioners in relation to
the $3.5 million out of the general fund as a base for the clerk's
budget.
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, Mr. Mudd.
Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Mark Isackson
with the Office of Management and Budget.
You have a statutory TRIM obligation to establish your
maximum millage rates, and that information was contained in your
exhibit to the executive summary, Exhibit A, covered by a resolution.
Mr. Mudd pointed out there's one caveat to that, that being the
general fund millage rate which was 3.5148. Now becomes -- if I can
flip through my notes here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 3.5465.
MR. ISACKSON: Yeah. And that would then become your
maximum general fund millage rate going forward into your first
public hearing in September, which is September 10th. You will have
a subsequent public hearing on September 24th. The resolution which
is before you also reaffirms the dates that I just mentioned.
That's essentially your obligation today with regard to the
Page 102
"-'~'~'''''-'-'.-
July 28, 2009
tentative budget that's presented before you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I make a motion that we
approve the millage at 3.56485; is that right?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 3.5648.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No -- 45; 3.5645.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Forty-five, okay. I got one extra
figure in here -- five. And the additional millage increase is due to the
funding of $3.5 million to the Clerk of Courts.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a
second.
Any discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, it's funny, the
politics going on and blaming the clerk for the increase when it was
the choice of the Board of County Commissioners to zero out his
budget last year. I brought my budget book up here, and it's amazing
how much more that I'm finding that really needs to be addressed, and
Commissioner Coy Ie pretty much hit on that.
The concerning thing is, Lee County is not having a millage
increase. Bonita Springs is not having a millage increase. Around
those they're not even having a millage increase. And way out west in
the far liberal state of California, there's no more new taxes. They're
finding ways to work within their means, but yet we're going to
increase taxes. And it's just the wrong time to do it.
You know, again there's so many people unemployed, people are
working part time that had full-time jobs. People losing moneys on
their investments.
You know, I would really hope that we can do a millage neutral
Page 103
July 28, 2009
instead a tax neutral. You know, the concerning thing is the Board of
Commissioners' own office can't even come up with tax neutral. So
those are my comments.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. In all fairness,
Commissioner Henning -- and a lot of things you said were true. But
you've got to remember, too, Lee County doesn't have to depend upon
ad valorem for everything. Collier County residents do not have toll
roads put in place by Lee Collier County Transportation like they do
in Lee County. Lee County also has a tax on all the utilities, they pick
up extra money.
So they've been more directed to a multi facet type of collection
where we've been dependent upon either impact fees to be able to
cover part of our infrastructure or ad valorem in general.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we never raised our sales
tax. You know, a couple times that the opportunity presented itself or
dangers of it, we always dismissed it, decided not to do it. And when
it comes to California, I've got to tell you, I can't think of a worst
example to be compared to; a bankrupt state that's dependent upon the
federal government to try to save them from ultimate disaster. They
can't pay for anything. They're issuing script now. If that's the idea
that you want Collier County to go, I'm not going to be there for you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, wait a minute, that --
that's totally wrong. Lee County had a 24 percent decrease in their
property assessed values where Collier County had 11 percent. And if
you'd watch the news, the legislators in the (sic) California says, we're
not going to raise taxes. We're going to work within our means and
we're going to cut our budget.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And they're issuing script.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They're not depending on the
federal government, Commissioner Coletta.
Page 104
,---.,,-.-", -^----
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure. They're issuing script to
pay you later when they do be able to (sic) raise their taxes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They adopted a balanced
budget.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: On the -- on what, by issuing
scri pt?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. You can't -- you can't
balance a budget on paper. They balanced it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, I'm watching -- even up
here in Vermont, you get the news. And, you know, they balanced
their budget.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And we have a motion on the floor
and a second.
Any other comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those if favor, signify -- oh, yes,
Mark.
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, if I may, just for the record, to
make sure that the record reflects that Exhibit A of the resolution, the
general fund millage rate of 3.5148 would then be amended and
changed to 3.5645, please.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETT A: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. Commissioner Coyle
votes no.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's a 3-2 vote. Thank you very
much.
Page 105
...~,.,.....,-,---_."'"~^........~ .----"-.,,......
July 28, 2009
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, you had -- you had mentioned
before right after --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Which commissioner?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Fiala, I'm sorry. Madam Chair, you
had mentioned that you would like to take a look at those folks that
are here to try to make sure that they don't have to sit here all
afternoon.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm sure that they would love to though.
MR. MUDD: To try to get things resolved before we go after
any kind of zoning action at one p.m.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
MR. MUDD: And you have three public petitions that are on
your agenda: 6A, which has to do with public petition by Rick Lussy
to discuss the loyalty oath for existing and perspective employees; 6B,
which is a public petition request by John Brugger to discuss
pre-abatement agreement for property at 26th A venue Southwest,
Naples, Florida, and Mr. Ochs has told me that Mr. Brugger has -- or
asked to withdraw that particular item, so 6B is withdrawn at the
petitioner's request; and the next item is 6C, a public petition request
by Jose Colina to discuss construction and warranty issues with
Designers Home Group, Inc., so I'm going to ask --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I believe that's where these people
are from.
Item #6C
PUBLIC PETITION BY JOSE COLINA DISCUSSING
CONSTRUCTION AND WARRANTY ISSUES WITH
DESIGNERS HOME GROUP, INC - PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: -- I'm going to ask a -- I'm going to ask a question
that's out there for the folks that are sitting here. For 6C, for -- so how
Page 1 06
....-,<--,-~.~,.- ,._~-_._....."'-
July 28, 2009
many people here are in the -- are in the boardroom that want -- are
here for Jose Colina to discuss construction and warranty issues?
Okay. How many people are here to talk about, with Rick Lussy, the
loyalty oath?
MR. LUSSY: One.
MR. MUDD: Okay. So Madam Chair, the--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, let's start with 6C, and then we'll go
to 6A. Sorry to put you off, but we'll get you right after them. We
won't put you off any longer. Thank you.
Okay. Jose Colina.
MS. COLINA: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Good
afternoon, everyone. I'm here to speak on behalf of my husband, Jose
Colina, because he cannot speak the English language and we're not
able to get someone to translate, so I wrote down everything that he
wanted to relate, and I'm going to read it to you.
First of all, he wanted to bring to your attention the statement
from Kelly Roofing. I don't know -- you should have a copy where a
gentlemen, Joe Kelly, came out to the home on June, 2005. Kelly
Roofing was called and -- to look at a possible roof leak and water
intrusions:
When I arrived, Ms. Colina had pointed out some stains in her
ceiling and said that she was seeing water coming in where stains were
located. I then began to inspect above the roof in the area in question
and found that the roof was never completely finished. The valley
details over the front door were left completely open. Leaving a detail
unfinished and open like this will allow water seepage.
I then took a look -- I then took pictures of a repair area and
wrote a proposal for the repair and finished the unfinished work.
Please see proposal. And number -- proposal number J-l 0 145 for
details, and I also have included photos of the original taken. Please--
he says to feel free to email them or call them with any questions.
And now I'll continue to read what he had told me to say to you.
Page 107
July 28, 2009
I was granted to speak in front of the Board of County
Commissioners on April 22nd. I wanted to express how unsatisfied
we both were with the outcome of my public petition request.
I came to present my problem, but none of the commissioners
present even bothered to analyze our problem from the beginning.
The main problem is that the county inspector by the name of Harry
Lawrence Chancy made two mistakes. He signed off on March 25,
2004, the roof completed along with the shutters, March 22, 2004.
The Certificate of Occupancy was also issued March 26th, issued
by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners Office, who
also was deceived by the inspector. The roof to my home was never
completed.
I would like to say something of how we acquired our lot. My
husband and I came with American Prime, the company that sold us
our lot in the year 1987. We gave a down payment and monthly
installments for this following seven years. Sixteen years passed
before we were able to build our home in 2003. With that I am saying
that we are hard-working people and that we are not rich.
I would like to direct something to you, Commissioner Halas. I
remember saying that water was seeping. You could not see the water
where it was coming from. First we thought it was the window. Then
the base of the house. Afterwards we saw drops by the air vent.
Finally we noticed watermarks in the interior where the ceiling was
swelling. That's when we called Kelly Roofing in 2005.
I also wanted to remind you that we did not move in right away
to our home. My husband used to come on some weekends with items
for the home. He moved in sometime in January, 2005.
You made a comment that an inspector cannot look at a roof and
guarantee it will not leak. I'm fully aware of that, but he can say that
the roof is not in compliance.
This is directed to Commissioner Coyle. The fact is that there
was negligence from the county inspector that provoked all of our
Page 108
,- ~--~----'
July 28, 2009
problems. Had the inspector followed the codes of construction to be
in compliance and carried out his job description with professional
ethics and honesty, he should have never had signed off on the roof or
the shutters.
The inspector should have advised the builder, to be in
compliance, he must complete the roof and get correct size shutters.
We would not have encountered any of these problems we have had to
deal with. The entire responsibility to the whole problem we have had
to deal with is the county.
I say this because of an employee of the county who was careless
and irresponsible in his job performance. Weare also taxpayers and
residents of Collier County.
I wanted to say something to Mr. Schmitt. He's not here, but I
will read it anyway. I am not saying that this is not lack of installation
on the contractor's side, but the main issue here is the lack of
inspection from the inspector.
I have been told that according to the Florida Statutes of the
Homeowners' Construction Recovery Fund, conditions for the
recovery exist eligibility articles (sic), which are 489.129, letters G, J,
and K, ignoring all the other articles, making it very difficult for
anyone to recover their funds.
I would like to ask if anyone in their right mind would accept an
offer that is less than half of what the total amount would be out of
pocket.
You also said that I was looking for an award for pain and
suffering. First of all, I am not an attorney. I'm just a hard-working
citizen, and I would not know what to do.
You are completely wrong, sir, because all I wanted to do was
express all the problems and the difficulties I was going through with
my mother in the R V. The only thing that we want is to recover the
amount we have paid to fix our home, plus attorneys fees, to have it
and put it back in the line of credit and not owe anything.
Page 109
~. -""'-......-...., -. -",",-",...-...---
July 28, 2009
Mr. Klatzkow, I would like to ask a couple questions, and I will
also answer, and if I'm wrong, please correct me.
Who do we pay the inspections to? I believe the county. Who
do -- who does the inspector work for? The county. Who pays the
inspector? The county. Then if an inspector does not do his job, he
signs off on something that was not in compliance, something he was
paid to do, what is that called? Stealing, fraud.
You said that neither the inspector nor the county are responsible
for the problem with our home. Then what are you saying is that the
government is licensed to inflict injustice?
This is why the county and its employees have immunity. Then
please explain, why should taxpayers have to pay for inspections that
are not made?
This is for Mr. Dunn. According to the Florida Building Code,
Chapter 9, roof assemblies, Section 109, inspections, numero 109.3,
required inspections, the building official, upon notification from the
permit holder or his or her agent, shall make the following inspections
and shall either release that portion of the construction or shall notify
the permit holder or his or her agent of any violations which must be
corrected in order to comply with the technical codes.
The building official shall determine the timing and sequencing
of when inspections occur and what elements are inspected at each
inspection. My understanding of an inspection is to view closely and
critically; examine, to look at carefully.
The first information on the roof is done when the underlay is
completed. Second inspection is when shingles, tile, or other material
are on the roof and in progress. Then final inspection is, when the
roof is completed, the roofer shall be present and provide the ladder.
This information was given me by a certified roofing company.
Now, can you explain what happened with the inspector with my
home?
Mr. Ossorio told my husband and I on two occasions that the
Page 11 0
----,.,.~~-~,~,.."
July 28, 2009
inspector does not have to go up on the roof to inspect. How can you
do an inspection if you do not see what you're inspecting? Apparently
in my case, the inspection to my roof was done either from the
inspector's house, the office, the car, or he was just paid off.
I was under the impression that the county representatives are
elected by the citizens to represent the interests of the citizens.
Apparently this is not true, and I am not the only one who thinks the
same way. Instead you make very little effort or none to help the
citizens of this county. The -- you only want to remove responsibility
from the county, and we the citizens end up paying for the errors.
We are not the only ones with this problem, and there are others
who are sitting right here in the audience with similar problems, others
that are sitting out there in the community, some don't even have the
means or know what to do or simply don't do anything because they
may be here illegally.
The county has the power and should do something against all
those corrupt individuals and help those families that have been
affected by them. The county does not want to admit and agree that
we are right and that the county is completely wrong. When you have
the truth and all the facts that are staring you right in the face in black,
white, and in color, you cannot justify the unjustifiable.
The county should investigate all cases of fraud against
contractors and companies and not allow these unscrupulous
individuals to work in the county or to swindle taxpayers.
We have been watching President Barack Obama, who is very
clear in his speech. He wants to stop all the bureaucracy and
corruption, and this could be the beginning. The dilemma that we are
suffering from is exactly what he is talking about.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Excuse me. You've had your ten minutes,
okay.
MS. COLINA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you.
Page III
..~-~.~".._.. .'",-.--,,,"',-
July 28, 2009
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll make -- shut off my light.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. I'm not quite sure though,
usually when people petition us, they ask us, you know, to do
something. I heard your concerns, and I'm sorry that you had such a
bad roofer and that there were so many problems, but I'm not quite
sure what you want us to do about it.
And, by the way, no matter what you want us to do about it, we
can't do it today, whatever it is. We have to bring it back to a full
agenda, okay. We -- on a petition, we can't make decisions.
MS. COLINA: Okay, I understand. The only thing that I would
like for you commissioners to do and also somehow improve or
change how inspections are done, because how I can pay for work to
be done, obviously, and it is not done at all? I paid my money for that
roof to be inspected but yet it was not, because if it had been, the roof
would not have been left open like that.
He did not follow the codes to be or -- he was not -- he was
letting whatever -- I don't know what he was doing, but he did not do a
roof inspection. Because had he done it, they would have -- you know,
they would have told him that he's not in compliance.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So what you're actually asking us is to
start doing some in-house checking to see how inspections are actually
taken care of and improve that department so that nobody else suffers
the same problem?
MS. COLINA: Well, yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. COLINA: Because I mean, I cannot understand. How can
you -- if you are the roof inspector, how can you inspect the roof if
you don't actually go look at the roof? You're inspecting it from the
ground? You can't do that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And see, I don't know that answer.
MS. COLINA: No. I'm just saying, if you have a certain job
Page 112
"- -'-_.-
July 28, 2009
description, in order for you to do the job correctly, you've got to see
what you're -- you know, what you're giving the okay to. How can
you give the okay if you're not looking at what you're actually
releasing?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, we're going to have to do some
checking in, but I have Commissioner Halas and then Commissioner
Coletta asking to speak here.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. County Attorney, wasn't this
a court case? And I believe there was a point where the roofer tried to
make a settlement with these people in regards to the problems that
they incurred on this?
MR. KLA TZKOW: I think you're correct, Commissioner, but I
think they've backed away from that issue. I think the only issue
they're bringing up is that, what they're saying is they paid for an
inspection and they never got one. Now, I don't know if that's true or
not. If it is true, I think we, as a county, have a problem. If it's just a
case where an inspector went, looked at it and made a mistake, we all
make mistakes, and that happens.
I mean, I do know that we went through a period of time in this
county where we had an awful lot of construction activity going on at
the same time. And it wouldn't surprise me if we had an inspector
who had more to do than he had the time to do it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We were trying to do 35
inspections a day, I think it was, at one time, 35 to 40.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. And I don't know that that's what
happened. But if that is what happened and the inspections weren't
actually being done, if somebody was simply signing off, that's just
wrong. But I don't know what -- I don't know what the story is.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And it would probably -- we should
probably check into it and make sure whatever the problem was has
been corrected so that no one else has to deal with this.
Commissioner Coletta?
Page 113
,.,.",__x~.___..~.....,...,...._..~,,_.,,~~..."," ..,.,-..,.,.----,~~,_.,..
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I was going to suggest
we have Joe Schmitt come up and comment on this, because, you
know, we want to make sure that we have a balanced report for the
public that is watching that.
Meanwhile, if I'm not -- if I'm not mistaken, it's been the policy
just about forever that inspections are performed from the ground.
And this particular valley that was not filled with the right kind of
shingles or flashing was not -- you couldn't see it from the ground,
from what I understand, and that's the reason why nobody ever caught
it.
MR. SCHMITT: For the record, Joe Schmitt, Community
Development/Environmental Services Division Administrator. With
me today I've got Mike Ossorio, my Chief Contractor Licensing, and
Gary Harrison, Chief Mechanical -- for mechanical plan review and
inspections, and also my assistant building official here to answer your
questions.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I guess, Mr. Schmitt, the only
thing I would like to ask is, something like this is extremely rare that
you would -- normally if you look at a roof, you can see all the way up
to the crown of it.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And everything is evident. But
you do have that problem of -- you do have some valleys that are
hidden, especially those that cover the porches coming out of the
houses because of the angle of sight. You can't possibly see them
from the ground.
Is there any way that we might be able to come up with policy
that would have a brief inspection where a ladder was just pushed up
against the house so somebody could view that?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, let me go into the case so you understand
the background.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure.
Page 114
'~'-""""'''''''-'''",,~~.,~ . ._~._"--
July 28, 2009
MR. SCHMITT: They've been before you before, you know
that. We've discussed this case. This case has been thoroughly
investigated at the state level, it's been investigated at the local level.
It was also handled through contractor licensing. Mike can give
the history on contractor licensing. There was fault that was accepted
by the contractor, the original contractor. And if I'm not mistaken,
there was an offer of $19,000 that was turned down to make any
corrections. That contractor is now out of business. So that money --
I guess we can -- they can still go after the qualifier or the chief
financial officer, and I could have Mike address that.
But the -- so there is that piece. And as I said before, there's --
there is a three-legged stool. When you look at contractor -- when you
hire a contractor, an informed consumer, an ethical and technically
competent and professional contractor and, of course, the government
oversight for inspections.
Our inspections are geared towards inspecting for code
compliance, not specifically geared towards quality control. Quality
control is the contractor's responsibility.
Our inspectors, probably since the late '90s, have not gone up on
roofs. A lot of reasons, most having to do with, the inspector's the last
one on the roof. Any damage that is done to the roof -- especially tile
roofs. And this is a shingle roof -- but a tile roof would be the
county's responsibility. And I know -- if you've ever been up on a
roof and you know what I'm talking about, you can break tiles fairly
easy. And understanding that the tile over a roof is nothing more than
the protection against the sun, the actual roof is underneath, the 30 --
15 weight or 30 weight or 40 weight usually double mopped, hot
mopped paper that's under the roof -- your first layer roof -- roofing.
So -- but in short we haven't gone up on roofs and done
inspections since the mid '90s. A lot of reasons for that. One is, of
course, liability; second is the ladders; and third, frankly, single story
is not a problem, but three or four stories, you can't get up on a roof
Page 115
'N"_,~____._"_.,. ._~"~--~"_.
July 28, 2009
unless you have a cherry picker or some other type of device to get up.
F our stories and above there has to be access to the roof, which we do
go up and inspect if there's roof access.
But the short of it is, in this particular job the inspector went out
the first time, failed the inspection. It was not complete. Called for a
final. It was rejected because it was not complete, and there was
debris, and then called for the -- they called for a reinspection. The
reinspection of the roof was complete and it was passed.
No, the inspector did not get up on the roof and walk the roof to
inspect to ensure that it was done in accordance to the technical
standards, as normally -- well, as required by the manufacturer, but
that's the contractor's responsibility. The contractor's responsibility,
there's some inherent responsibility of the contractor in this regard. It's
not all government.
If you want to now require that our inspectors go up and walk a
roof to make inspections, we'll have to come back and discuss the pros
and cons of that and deal with -- certainly there's a potential liability
issue and other issues we'll have to come back and address through
risk and some other -- at least from that regard.
But the issue here with this petitioner is, her claim is that the
inspector didn't go up on the roof; therefore, it's the inspector's fault.
The inspection was done. There was no fraud. There was no deceit.
There was certainly no payment or payoff or anything that I heard
mentioned.
The inspector conducted the inspection. On the second call, the
inspection was passed. And it resulted in a leak. From what I
understand, it was along the valley of a certain pitch of the roof. Even
if the inspection was performed by walking the roof, I pretty much
guess that that wouldn't have been detected.
Now, this has all been vetted, this has all been discussed. I can
have Mike talk about the details if you want the details of exactly
what was investigated, but it was investigated at the state level --
Page 116
'~-~-,,-
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. No, that's fine, Mr.
Schmitt. Just one last question. How common is this type of
occurrence?
MR. SCHMITT: Let me ask my inspector -- or Mike, go ahead,
either one. Mike, you deal with contractors, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Hi, Mike.
MR. OSSORIO: Thank you. Good afternoon. For the record,
Mike Ossorio, Collier County Contractor Licensing.
I would say it's not common, but this case is not unfamiliar to our
office. We get complaints of code issues after CO, and how we
handle it -- there is a procedure licensing board has under 4.2 in the
willful code violation, and we address it. So I would assume we
probably get four or five a month either from a state certified
contractor or a state registered contractor, one of the two.
It happens. The inspector can't be there 24/7 watching this
building be inspected. Florida Building Code is broad, and that's why
we have our licensing office.
Unfortunately, in this particular case, Mr. Colina charged -- we
didn't have an opportunity to have the contractor repair it due to the
fact that we did not know there was a code issue. At the time I talked
to Mrs. Colina, my assumption was that it had already been
completed, and now we're in the phase of mitigation phases. That's
what we are in the process of doing.
But it's not uncommon. It's not unusual. We take it seriously.
We do what we can under 4.2, under our code.
Just remember when you deal with state contractors, qualified
business license, you're dealing with about 100 pages of state statute.
Mrs. Colina announced she has a judgment. There's a section in there,
and I'll read it to her -- I don't know if she knows this or not, but it's
409.129Q, and it says, failing to satisfy within a reasonable time the
terms of a civil judgment obtained against a licensee or a business
organization qualified by a licensee relating to the practice of this
Page 11 7
'~""''"'---'~'--'-"--''- -~.~__w__,
July 28, 2009
licensee's profession.
So now that she has a judgment, she can go back to the state and
she can go after the gentleman's license. Yes, that -- while that
business is defunct and gone, the qualifier's still around. He might
qualify another company. But that qualifier's still, in my eyes, is still
responsible for Mrs. Colina's issues.
Pertaining to the recovery fund, you're dealing with a totally
different animal. The state is broke. There's a waiting list; you know,
25 to 30 people waiting to collect money for that. She is correct, the
state is very narrow in the scope of work when you deal with a
recovery fund, and we've talked about that, Mrs. Colina and me.
lt's a shame. I don't personally like it, but that's the state statute
and that's what they do, and we have a strong association to try to
work with the state, but sometimes the state doesn't always take our
suggestions and do what we ask them to do. With that --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can't think of anything else to
offer.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Me neither. I don't know what else to
say, but thank you for coming and telling us this problem, and we will
certainly be talking to our staff members behind the scenes and see
what we can do about any way that we can improve inspections for
future --
MS. COLINA: I'd like to address -- I don't know his name, I
think it's Schmitt.
MR. SCHMITT: Mr. Schmitt, yes.
MS. COLINA: Mr. Schmitt.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
MS. COLINA: The inspectors don't necessarily have to get up
on the roof. I would not like anyone getting hurt myself; personally,
no. But my suggestion would be at least put the ladder against the
Page 118
"'"'<"-'-'~"'"'-'-'''
July 28, 2009
roof and he can physically see if everything is complete or not. If that
had been -- if that had been the case, if that had been done in my case,
my home wouldn't have had all the damage that occurred.
I know you cannot see it from like just looking straight up. But if
you stand far enough, I'm sure you can see.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Ms. Colina, we will talk to our staff
members about that.
MS. COLINA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Joe, maybe we can put together an
appointment, okay.
MR. SCHMITT: Yep.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you very much. Okay.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION BY RICK LUSSY DISCUSSING LOY AL TY
OA TH FOR EXISTING AND PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYEES -
PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that takes us to 6A, which is a public
petition by Rick Lussy to discuss loyalty oath for existing and
perspective employees.
MR. LUSSY: I am Rick Lussy, MAI/SRA, a property appraiser
for 36 years; in South Florida since 1988; and in Naples, principally
using Naples/Collier County as my home base, for 11 years.
I'm the author of the loyalty oath I submitted to you requesting an
enlargement of your existing loyalty oath.
Both timely and relevant, I follow Dwight Brock as the Clerk of
the Courts as a Florida Bar Association monopoly member number
347248, whose Florida Bar Association organization quid pro quo
only purpose is to transfer wealth from the executive of the legislative
branches and myself to their own Florida Bar Association monopoly.
Page 11 9
.', ....,.._.~,...".....~.."'-_.,-""-~"'..,..._--..,,. ~'-" ~'-""'"'~'.,--.-
July 28, 2009
And I -- I'm here. I'm listening. And Clerk Brock was
threatening another lawsuit if he doesn't get what he wants in terms of
his request of the '010 budget.
So it seems to be Brock's way or the highway with a smirk to the
Collier County attorney, which is an interlocking directorate. So I
mean, that's the problem, and I'm addressing the loyalty oath to
include the Collier County Attorney's Office as members of the
Florida Bar Association, and I'll explain more.
But I just say, as a matter of presence, my unsolicited
small-person comment is, I'd just go straight to a jury trial verdict,
excluding a judge trial by five and a ten-cent piece of paper, which is a
1.430 demand for jury trial, and then you don't have to drag it all out
and churn, which is a circumstance. And this is my unsolicited
little-person opinion to stop more payments of the over 3.2 million of
attorneys fees that have been wasted and unproductive to date.
An Interlocal Agreement is an expanded loyalty oath for all
government employees. And so my solution is timely relevant to our
discussion that preceded. And it's free with existing staff.
The -- I would like to thank all five commissioners for
individually sharing your precious time. I request you consider my
recommended loyalty oath on Page 3 to be renamed after yourselves
as an enlargement to the existing Collier County Government Loyalty
Oath that follows Page 4 of Exhibit B, compliments of Honorable
Mike Sheffield, the assistant to the county manager. And to see if the
judge/lawyers have a loyalty oath I -- Mr. Sheffield recommended I
email Mr. Middlebrook, and I did not get a reply. So in accord to --
effective failure to deny civil rule procedure 1.110, little e, it means
that, you know, you don't answer, you don't have one. And so -- other
than the fact that they have an oath to the admission of the Florida Bar
Association, which, of course, does not help loyalty to yourself as
county commissioners.
They're working for you. They're not working for Florida Bar
Page 120
~~---~....-_."..._..~ ,-",_..._,-,~<......." -"_.""._.~,~--
July 28, 2009
Association. So it's obligatory. It's a mandate. It's a fiat that they sign
this loyalty oath as lawyers working for the Collier County
Commission, especially in this precarious circumstance with the
budget, and Clerk Brock, who is also a member of the Florida Bar
Association, which is an interlocking directorate and is not helping
you, the public purpose, or myself.
The -- my proposal only enlarges for the public purpose to -- is
for government for the good. All the documents are jointly copied to
you and to the inspector -- Honorable Inspector General Steven
R-U-M-P-H, as I'm looking for their sponsorship as insider
government officials so that I can get a positive reading, and then, of
course, go to the representatives and the senators for sponsorship there
on a state-wide basis.
But the loyalty oath subordinates all government workers to
existing law without discretion to overreach and void the existing law
which exists at presence (sic) because judges refuse to do jury trials
flat out, unfortunately, and that's -- this honorable, respected,
successful, respect -- Collier County Board of Commissioners are the
highest authority in Collier County as chief in the Florida Castle
Doctrine defined in Exhibit C, Footnote 14 on Page 4. All other
constitutional offices, Clerk of the Courts, Property Appraiser, Tax
Collector, regardless of fee, constitutional or salaried officer, they are
subordinate to the policy established by the Collier County
Commissioners and exist in outlying little fiefdoms in little castles
with individual registered voter such as myself in the smallest castle
within the Florida castle doctrine, defined as I mentioned. If you're
not a registered voter, you have no power.
Quickly I wanted to summarize some of the documents I've
provided you already. There's the Collier County Government
existing loyalty oath that follows immediately your Page 4, Mr.
Sheffield was very timely and prompt in providing. There is the
waiver of sovereign immunity, which is Florida Statute 768.28 for
Page 121
"'---'--""""-'-' ..~.--._~"-
July 28, 2009
which Clerk Brock is a Florida Bar Association member number
347248.
He can't sue you again because there's no bad faith or malice,
because that's the only premise you can file any lawsuit, should have
been filed -- should not have been filed to begin with, personal input,
unsolicited comment.
Then Exhibit 2 -- A-2613 is the loyalty oath of subordination of
law that -- where notary publics cannot sign their own name as being
above the law.
Then the Exhibit A-2832 is a lawyer of distinction, Mr. Yale T.
Freeman. He's a superb gentleman. He advised me that the Florida
State Supreme Court authored a 1978 constitution revision voiding
jury trials. It's not in the public record. It's for Florida Bar Associate
(sic) members only.
I say it is against Article II oath and it's against a public purpose
and against the public policy as a predator power monopoly that
targets the executive and legislative branches demonstrated here with
3.2 million wasted attorneys fees payments, and they never allow
lawsuits against themselves, and I call them deadwood floating judges
because they're not applying the existing law, and it's a circuitous
churn of paperwork for which they survive by 100 percent omissions
and 100 percent concealment, and there's nothing we can do about it
because they're independent and separate. And that -- there's no public
record, but this one gentleman was kind enough to tell me that as far
as answering a question.
There's Exhibits A-2481-2-3 and A-2490. They're excerpts from
a book from which collaborative, anecdotal evidence is provided by a
Wyoming lawyer, Gerald Spence -- Jerry Spence, and it just basically
supports what I'm saying in that -- as a sidelight, you know, Alexander
-- it's far, far from the Alexander Hamilton's quote where the judiciary
is the least dangerous branch because now Florida's facing judges as
being major policy -- full policymakers, which is -- again, it's a power
Page 122
July 28, 2009
grab, brass-knuckles politics from the Collier County Commission.
So I dovetail -- this loyalty oath dovetails the circumstance and to
the benefit of you, as a layperson to you in the best interests for
government for the good.
Then there's the -- I can't audit you, you can't audit me, a Naples
article saying -- and then, of course, there's the lawyers saying that,
you know, I can sue you, you can't sue me.
And there's a last article here, it's May 9 of the Naples Daily
News, where it allows the -- at least some favorable good news for the
Collier County Commission. And then there's another exhibit saying
that the oath is also an affirmation. Uniform commercial code says
anything over $500 must be in writing, which is -- of course, includes
a loyalty oath because a salary would be typically more than $500 in
value.
The 1968 Florida Constitution is -- I cite two things: A jury trial
verdict, which is A-2252, and then the oath, the Article II oath, which
is Florida State Constitution 68. It's -- this -- we're not nailing Jello to
the wall here. It's black-letter law. It's no-brain, easily read and
understood law, and I'm stating here -- adding the fact that Charles
Crist, and Bill McCollom as attorney generals, supported the bogus
illegal 1978 constitutional revision which prohibits jury trials.
Jury trials are fast and expeditious. The longer you churn -- let
the jury -- let the lawyers carry on, naturally the more money they're
going to make. So you go right to jury trial verdict and you get it over
with with unbiased objective, independent decision makers.
And in fact -- the oath of admission to the Florida Bar
Association is Exhibit A-2337. It's -- a subcategory here is a canon
where the lawyers cannot sue judges that are sitting or retired, which
is, of course, against the public interest because they can certainly sue
us over and over again.
A sample loyalty oath, as a candidate property appraiser, which
was mine, for office. There's a Florida Republican Code of Conduct,
Page 123
.-.......""'--*'''''...," ..,~-...."-,-
July 28, 2009
which is a subordination to existing law for -- as a loyalty oath, and
then there's like the appraisal journal where there's three pages.
An appraiser is the expert and in the best position to judge what
is necessary for a credible result, which is subordinate to existing law
as within the loyalty oath, and then I see my time is passing quickly.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's actually up.
MR. LUSSY: Okay. But in passing then, the other -- the rest of
the exhibits stand for themselves. I'd just like to close with the fact
that past-President Ronald Reagan stood tall, walked tall; John
McCain was about duty and service; President Obama was hope -- has
hope; myself, I'm Honorable Rick Lussy, Esquire, honorable because
nobody's proved otherwise; Esquire by a Florida state supreme court
entitlement exhibit that's available.
So with 100 -- with 100 percent JTV/JTV, you read jury trial
verdict with one camera on the judge television pursuant to no-brain,
easy-to-read, understand (sic) Florida Statutes 68.084, that --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, sir.
MR. LUSSY: -- request the -- to rename the loyalty oath,
enlarge it by adding your names as Collier County Commissioners to
that loyalty oath for expansion, and I recommend that for the best
interests of the county and to lower costs and allow the process to
work as is it should be, as intended, as written.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you here this
afternoon.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. And maybe our county
attorney can take a look at that, and then when we return you can talk
to each of us individually and give us your comments?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'd be happy to, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All right. Thank you very much.
Thanks.
MR. LUSSY: Thank you for your time and your --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Made a lot of things -- you did a
Page 124
- -,~-_.._---".._..,-, --.,.~~-
July 28, 2009
lot of work for us, thank you.
MR. LUSSY: Well, it's pertinent to the budget process ongoing.
Item #7 A
RESOLUTION 2009-189: CU-2009-AR-14137, ST. MONICA'S
EPISCOP AL CHURCH, INC., REPRESENTED BY HEIDI K.
WILLIAMS, AICP, OF Q. GRADY MINOR, INC., REQUESTING
TWO NEW CONDITIONAL USES PURSUANT TO THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 2.03.01.B.l.C., IN THE
ESTATES ZONING DISTRICT. THE CONDITIONAL USES
REQUESTED ARE AS FOLLOWS: LDC 2.03.01.B.l.C.3,
ALLOWING A CHILD CARE CENTER; AND 2.03.01.B.1.C.4,
ALLOWING A PRIVATE SCHOOL RELATED TO THE
EXISTING RELIGIOUS FACILITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
IS LOCATED AT 7070 IMMOKALEE ROAD, ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD, WEST OF THE LOGAN
BOULEV ARD EXTENSION, IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA -
ADOPTED W/STIPULATIONS
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to your advertised
public hearings. First item being Item 7 A Board of Zoning Appeals.
This items requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by commission members.
CU-2009-AR-14137, St. Monica's Episcopal Church, Inc.,
represented by Heidi K. Williams, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor, Inc., is
requesting two new conditional uses pursuant to the Land
Development Code, Section 2.03.01.3.1.C, in the Estates zoning
district.
Conditional uses being requested are as follows: LDC
2.03.01.B.l.C.3 to allow a childcare center and 2.03.01.B.1.C.4 to
Page 125
"""-~,_,_'_''',".,.,,,.., '.-...---.----
July 28, 2009
allow a private school related to the existing religious facility.
The subject property is located at 7070 Immokalee Road on the
south side of Immokalee Road, west of the Logan Boulevard
extension in Section 29, Township 48 south, Range 26 east, Collier
County, Florida.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Would you swear in all those
wishing to speak on this subject.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. And now Commissioners to
declare any ex parte.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll be happy to, if you'd like.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I would love it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. On 7 A I had a meeting
yesterday with Heidi Williams, and I've also received email and talked
to staff about it. That's it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know, my ex parte says I've only had
a staff report. I don't know that I've met with anybody on this. I know
I didn't meet with you on this so -- and Commissioner Halas will be --
let me -- he has his report here. It says no disclosures for this item.
MR.OCHS: The other commissioners, ma'am?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. Had some email
correspondence, spoke to Mr. Klatzkow about it, and received the
Planning Commission's staffs report.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have received the CCPC staff
report only, and I've reviewed that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Okay. Go ahead, Heidi.
MS. WILLIAMS: All right. Good afternoon, Commissioners.
For the record, my name is Heidi Williams. I'm a Certified Planner
with Grady Minor & Associates in Bonita Springs.
Page 126
".._--~.~",._..."....". ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-,-,"'.<'-
July 28, 2009
I'm pleased to be here today on behalf of St. Monica's Episcopal
Church. And on the screen you have our full project team from our
office, Michael Delate and myself. We also were joined by Jim
Banks, who is the transportation engineer and, again, we're on behalf
of St. Monica's.
Reverend Schillreff could not be here this afternoon, but her
senior warden at the church, Barbara Metcalfe, is here in case you
have any questions.
Because you have a long agenda, I'll try and just keep my
presentation brief. We have a couple of things to ask you today, but
we'll go -- I'll go through a few of the items about the project first.
As you've read in the reports in the executive summary, this
subject property is on -- located on the south side of Immokalee Road.
It is west of the newly completed Logan Boulevard extension an east
of the interchange with 1- 7 5.
This aerial photograph is a little bit out of date because there his
been some additional clearing approved and completed on the project.
Some of the trees on the eastern side have been recent cleared. But
what you can see here is the existing structures.
There's a church, offices, and Sunday school classrooms there
today. The church is very excited to be expanding. They have been
approved to add a new sanctuary to the east side of the existing
buildings.
The reason we're here today is because the church would like to
add a private school or day care to their facility. And currently they
have the Classical Academy of Naples planning to open in August if
we gain approval today. They are agreeing to a maximum enrollment
of 100 students in the long-term. In addition to that, they are agreeing
to limit the first class to 20 students, or first enrollment to 20 students,
and each year thereafter they could add 20 students per year, and that's
stipulated in your agenda packet.
Eventually that school hopes to outgrow the facility. They'd like
Page 127
~_...",,-,-~.~--". . ._.----,""
July 28, 2009
to expand and become a very successful, private school in Naples. If
that should happen, the church would like the opportunity to either
then form their own private school or possibly use their existing
building for a day care. If that is the option that they choose, then that
would be limited to 90 students instead of 100.
One of the major things about this project is this can be
accomplished in the existing buildings that are already there. They are
expanding, but that expansion is for the church. So the Sunday school
classrooms they currently have would be then converted to the use for
the private school.
So what you'll notice in our conceptual plan is that the footprint
doesn't change from what they've already got approved. We only
have a couple things on this conceptual plan that might be revised.
There's a chapel that is not approved by the site plan yet. It is
shown on the conceptual plan. And there is a caretaker's residence or
home for either the minister or some other staff that is not being built
at this time. Those are both located on the east side of the property.
Right now the site is approved for a Site Development Plan and
has a recorded conservation easement shown in green there. With the
approval of this conditional use, we will be moving forward to add
some preserve to this site, a little additional corner of vegetation, and
that area is the area I've mentioned had not been cleared previously.
And I also want to just put up this little star on here. That shows
the location on the property where students will enter the building for
the school use. It is possible to, with the arrangement they have now,
to isolate the school from the church functions.
In addition to your support, we're asking for three things today
and would like you to consider each one. The first one is that the
applicant has agreed to all of the conditions placed on this petition but
would like you to consider removing condition number seven. This is
a condition that limits the after-school programs that will be provided
at this site to students that are in the school on the property.
Page 128
~'_.._N' ..^-_.~--
July 28, 2009
And the church has a mission to -- has a lot of community
outreach, and one of the things they would like to do is have that
after-school program available to students from other schools, from
either public schools or, you know, various locations around the
county, and they have asked me to come and request that today. They
feel that this would really meet a community need to be able to do
that.
The second thing that I'd like for you to consider is the school is
ready to go. Weare here today on your agenda, but we've been asked
to alter the Site Development Plan. We're hoping that you would be
amenable to allowing the school to open prior to the plan actually
being approved by community development as some kind of
temporary use.
The church knows that they have to change their plan and intend
-- fully intend to do that and get that completed, but it is a process that
takes time. And as you know, the calendar is moving right along. So
we were hoping that we could have your support for that.
There are no interior changes that have to be made to the
building. Any amendments to the Site Development Plan are to
record that new preserve area and really boil down to paperwork in
our opinion. And, again, they do intend to follow that process and
make sure that this does occur, but they want to make sure that the
school can open this fall.
And finally, the third thing that we'd like to ask your
consideration is an administrative matter. We've been asked to
complete a Site Development Plan amendment process. We've talked
to staff about doing that as an insubstantial change. We have basically
the preserve issue is one of the holdups. And I know that staff will
want to respond to that. So that is something that we'd like to ask for
your consideration.
This really comes down to timing and it comes down to fees that
would -- that the church would have to pay for one process over the
Page 129
~ . '"'-"....,_.__...,~.~< . --...,~.....--
July 28, 2009
other.
And with that, we do appreciate your support today, and I'm
available for any questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Fine. We'll hear from staff now, and then
stay available for questions. Staff?
MS. ZONE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Melissa Zone,
Principal Planner with the Department of Zoning and Land
Development.
St. Monica's Episcopal Church is requesting two new conditional
uses in the Estates zoning district. And as you know, that -- the
conditional uses are to allow a private school or a day care center.
The subject property is designated on the Future Land Use Map
of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan as Estates, mixed-use district,
residential Estates subdistrict. This designation allows certain
nonresidential uses through the conditional use process, such as a
private school or a day care.
With the analysis that staff provided into the staff report and your
executive summary, we reviewed for consistency with the Land
Development Code and the Growth Management Plan, and we found
that the request, after the Planning Commission and working out
certain issues, that this request now is consistent with the Growth
Management Plan, the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, and the Land
Development Code.
And if the Board of Zoning Appeals approves the conditions
proposed by staff and the Planning Commission, this project will
remain in compliance with the applicable provisions of the LDC and
GMP.
The effect that the conditional use would have on neighboring
properties in relation to the noise, glare, economical (sic) odor effects,
the subject site has to adhere to all regulations of the LDC regarding
preserves, height, restrictions, setbacks, buffer requirements, to ensure
that the surrounding area has a certain degree of access to light and air.
Page 130
h'__'_
July 28, 2009
During the Collier County Planning Commission, there were
several recommendations which are part of -- they're attached to the
resolution as conditions of approval to ensure that the neighboring
properties do not have any adverse effects to these two new
conditional uses.
Of them are, number one, which is that no pick-up, drop-off, or
parking shall be allowed on Autumn Oaks Lane for the kindergarten to
12th grade school and child day care along St. Monica's Episcopal
Church.
They put that in because staff received letters of opposition or
concern from adjacent property owners, and what they were
concerned with was that they've noticed parking along Autumn Oaks
Lane and people waiting to pick up students or to go to the church
down the road. So Planning Commission decided to put this in to
resolve those issues.
Subsequent from this being submitted into Novus, we had a
preapplication meeting with the applicants, and there was discussion
on how they would carry out condition of approval number one in
terms of no pick-up, drop-off, or parking on Autumn Oaks Lane, and
it was mostly for addressing not just the residents' concerns, but for
the care and safety of the children.
One of the suggestions by staff was that the St. Monica's Church
or the school provide no parking signs. This is something we will be
working out during the Site Development Plan process.
We also put in a number two condition of approval that the
maximum building height shall not exceed -- or I'm sorry -- the square
footage shall not exceed 28,700 square feet for the entire site.
Condition number -- approval number three talks that the
structure shall not exceed an actual building height of 44 feet to keep
it in compliance with the surrounding buildings in that area.
And number four, the applicant had agreed to limit the school
functions to five days a week and not to conduct school activities
Page 131
_..._....",""_W"_~.. .-.-.......--
July 28, 2009
before 7:30 a.m. and no later than nine p.m.
If you have any questions, we'd be happy to address them.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. The petitioner made a
statement that they'd like to open the school ASAP, and our traffic
department basically said that it was going to be limited to a
maximum of 20 students for the first year.
MS. ZONE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And when the -- that's one question
I have. Okay. So we're going to adhere to that, I hope.
MS. ZONE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No more than 20 students for the
first year, because we have some problems in regards to the
intersection of 1-75 and Immokalee Road. That's number one.
And then the other issue that 1 have a concern about, since this
was vetted with the Planning Commission, number seven, the
petitioner has asked that the after-school programs are limited to
prekindergarten to 12th grade functions for the registered students
only. That's what was discussed at the Planning Commission, and I
would assume that at that point in time when the discussion was up or
going through the process, that the petitioner agreed to this.
And so I'm concerned about us changing in the middle of the
stream here after this has been well vetted by the Planning
Commission. Now, maybe you can shed some light on this and how it
would affect the surrounding community, or would they be in favor of
that particular issue?
MS. ZONE: Well, I know is that number seven had sort of a
two-part, why it was placed in there as a condition of approval. One,
because of the interchange at 1-75 and that the students who would be
bussed in or driven by parents or an approved adult to get them to that
site would add extra traffic.
The other part too was because of the residents' concerns that
Page 132
. ..~._--
July 28, 2009
people tend to park on Autumn Oaks Lane, they idle there waiting to
get into the church. They were afraid that for the school, parents
might be idling there waiting and that for the after-care program or
school program that there might be buses or schools -- or parents
waiting there.
And we don't really have a set-up process within the county. The
only way it would be would be with the Sheriffs Department to
monitor if people are idling on Autumn Oaks Lane, and that's where
the suggestion if they might provide no parking along that portion of
the property to remind not only their constituents, but other people in
the neighborhood who might be idling there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, what it says here is
after-school programs are limited to prekindergarten to 12th grade
school functions for registered students only.
MS. ZONE: Correct, to limit --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What the petitioner wants is that
this is opened up to everyone whether it's high school students or
whether they're not. And so wouldn't that impact what the traffic
department said that, first of all, if you want to open this up, that it's
only limited to 20 students? So this and item number seven basically
conflict with one another in regards to the traffic if you open it up for
more than the people that are presently registered there.
Nick, maybe you can make --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. Commissioners, good
afternoon. For the record, Nick Casalanguida with Transportation.
Our stipulation was simple: 20 students the first year or until the
1-75 interchange is completed. So it should be that regardless of how
they change it or structure that.
Now, we've also told the applicant, and I'll be happy to tell the
board, it looks like they're ahead of schedule and they expect to be
opened by the end of this year, so there's not that big of a wait. Six
months approximately we're looking to open that up if, you know,
Page 133
."..._-~,-_..,..,. ,-_."..-
July 28, 2009
weather holds and construction holds. So that's not an unreasonable
request, and I think the applicant has agreed to that.
While I'm up here, I also want to point out I've spoken to the
applicant, that the egress and access point, the way they come in and
the way they come out, the first entrance point should be an in-only
and the second entrance point will be an out-only. That's to facilitate
the traffic circulation within the site, and they have no problem with
that. So I want to make sure we put that on the record as well, too.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Then to feed off the question that
Commissioner Halas just asked -- because I had another question
about the after-school program. I figure if you have a prekindergarten
all the way through 12th grade and you only have 20 students, so, you
know, that's -- even if you get one for each grade, that's 13 kids. It's
kind of -- so then you only have seven kids left that you can spread
out. It's kind of hard to have an after-school function with two
children, I mean, if it's limited to just those kids, especially if you're
having a fifth-grade dance or, you know, you're having some type of a
-- an event to keep the teenagers there and involved in that type of an
atmosphere rather than at the mall.
So I personally would hate to limit them, and I would prefer to
lift that restriction, item number seven. Does that work for you, Nick?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioners, you could lift the
restriction if the board feels that way. We've been trying to be
consistent with other projects in the area to limit anything until that
interchange was done, so --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But after the interchange.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: After the interchange there was no
restrictions for us. We have enough capacity on the road. If they
change the circulation, we have no issues.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. ZONE: Commissioner, if you'd like, could add -- with
Page 134
~.--
July 28, 2009
condition of approval number five talking about the phasing of the
students, that it says until the expanded capacity as designed in the
current FOOT IROCs relates to that intersection, so we could add that
portion of that sentence to condition number seven, and that might
help because it will keep -- you know, making sure that the 1-75
project at Immokalee Road is resolved, and then it doesn't limit the
school for its entirety, if that --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great.
MS. ZONE: -- might work.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's going to have to work
because of the fact that there's a huge amount of congestion at that
intersection both in the early morning and at night when people are
trying to get back into the Estates. It is unbelievable. It's horrendous.
And I can understand why transportation was very concerned about
that particular issue.
So I have no problems of having them have the max of 100
students there after we've completed the construction and gotten all
the construction out of that particular intersection, because then I think
the capacity will be there.
MS. ZONE: Okay. I will make sure that is included as a
condition of approval for number seven.
1 wanted to address the -- what Heidi Williams had brought up
about an SDPI, which is a Site Development Plan insubstantial change
which is -- goes through the administrative process, or a Site
Development Plan amendment which goes through all the reviewers to
look at the project as a whole; whereas, if we did improvement, the
SOl, it's very limited in the review.
And to ensure compatibility with the area, we would like to keep
it as a Site Development Plan amendment, and we're hoping that the
board agrees with staff on this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
Page 135
"',--~~'''~''~'' ,,_.,..."-~,
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I have several
things. First of all, the compatibility should have already been done in
this review. It is adding two uses, and those uses either are compatible
or they're not compatible.
But I have some questions for Heidi Williams. If we can go to the
conceptual plan presentation you had -- and I have somewhat of a
delay here, so you'll have to excuse me. Can you identify the
properties and the uses abutting or adjacent to?
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. And again, for the record, Heidi
Williams with Grady Minor.
To the west of the property is the -- is a fire station.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. WILLIAMS: North of the property is the six-Ianed
Immokalee Road, and beyond that is Longshore Lakes subdivision.
East of the property is a vacant lot, and again we're -- we -- the eastern
portion of this property is parking lot, and then at a minimum 80 feet
of preserve until you get to that vacant lot.
To the south we have 55 feet of vegetation, 30 feet for Autumn
Oaks Lane that's within this property ownership, and then another 30
feet for Autumn Oaks Lane, so a total of 60 for the road. And then
there are single-family residential homes to the south of that that are
zoned in the Estates.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, they're Estates lots.
Now, the property to the east, is that zoned Estates lots, or is there a
conditional use on that?
MS. WILLIAMS: To the east is zoned Estates. I do not believe
there was any conditional use on that. It is vacant. And even if they
had something in the past, they would not have acted on that, so I
don't think there's anything but the Estates zoning that is valid there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So the -- and there's no
impact on the fire station?
MS. WILLIAMS: We do not think that there is any impact on
Page 136
,"",^,"-,,--"""''',".",'',,",,,,'''''''
July 28, 2009
the fire station. It is separated between the existing building, existing
parking, and then the required landscape buffers are in place. We
would not expect that there's any impact there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. The -- now, you have a
50-foot vegetation in between Autumn Oaks and on the property?
MS. WILLIAMS: Actually, we have a 55 minimum
requirement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fifty-five minimum?
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. On the site plan that
you're showing, on part of that 55 foot, it appears that it is -- the
density is changing of that vegetation? It's actually to the -- on the
west side of that buffer?
MS. WILLIAMS: What I have shown here is, the area in light
green is under a recorded conservation easement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MS. WILLIAMS: The area west of that is not under a recorded
conservation easement. It is maintained as native vegetation -- or
vegetation to remain in perpetuity on -- according to the site plan;
however, it's -- historically it had some water management and things
in there. So that area is not under a conservation easement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, my opinion, I'd much
rather have that in conservation instead of that additional preserve to
buffer the residents. I mean, that's where your impacts are is the
residents in the Golden Gate Estates area.
Now, can you tell me the setbacks of the building and to the
property that would be to the south?
MS. WILLIAMS: I don't have those measured in front of me
but, again, to the south, the Autumn Oaks Lane right-of-way is 60
feet; vegetation is 55; the building is, I would estimate, 15 feet from
that. So if you add those things together, you're well over 100 feet
already away from the nearest point. Anything to the south, any
Page 137
"'-~-'-'-"-_." 0._"".'_
July 28, 2009
single- family residences to the south would have their own setback as
well in addition to that. So I think you could easily say that homes
would be 125 to 150 feet away at the closest.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm trying to determine if the --
if the property has -- complies to the Land Development Code as far
as setbacks.
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, it is -- all of the existing buildings and
the newly approved buildings have been reviewed according to all the
setback regulations and would meet those.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What are the setbacks?
MS. WILLIAMS: They would be standard Estates zoning
requirements, so 75 feet from the property line.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Seventy-five feet. That would
be the south?
MS. WILLIAMS: Along the south and Immokalee Road.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Does it meet the setbacks?
MS. WILLIAMS: I'm sorry. I didn't hear your question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Does it meet the setbacks?
Because we were talking 55 feet plus 15.
MS. WILLIAMS: Again, that was an estimate of how far the
building was from the vegetation, but the property line actually
includes 30 feet of the right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, I see.
MS. WILLIAMS: And so that -- that does exceed --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That does exceed it. Well, that's
the only problem that I have with the site plan is -- and furthermore,
there shouldn't be anybody -- there's no driveway on Autumn Oaks to
the church, so I don't know where we're using that for a staging area to
pick up students.
MS. WILLIAMS: And I'd like to clarify that particular point.
Some of the residents in the area have noticed people waiting for
students from a different school on Autumn Oaks Lane and were
Page 138
fu,"-",~_",;,,",",.,..., ^--"-,-.._..-
July 28, 2009
afraid that would happen on this property.
We did not feel that would occur because we have 55 feet of
vegetation whereas the other school only has 10 feet of landscape
buffer. It's not even existing vegetation. It's a created landscape
buffer. So we didn't think that that would happen here. We felt that
the administration for the school would not allow students to go
walking through 55 feet of vegetation to get to a car they couldn't see
from there, but because it was something that was easy to concede, we
did agree to that elimination.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And I do see on the maps
what property you are talking about, and it would appear that that's
where the issue is.
Yeah, I -- Commissioner Fiala, I don't have any problems with
the request. It definitely is needed in the area. And I agree with your
comments about, have some limitations until the I-75/Immokalee
Road corridor is complete, which Nick Casalanguida has stated it
would be done in short order.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great, great. Would you like to make a
motion on this?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I want to address -- make
sure that all the other commissioners' comments or questions are
addressed.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I don't think anybody else has any
questions over here, do they?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Nope.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: How about Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm okay, Commissioner Fiala.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know you are.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think you've discussed it very
thoroughly, and I think the CCPC has done a good review of this, so
I'm ready to go.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Would anybody like to make
Page 139
July 28, 2009
a motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, if you close the
public hearing, I'd be happy to make a motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, thank you. You know what, even
though you're in Vermont, you still keep track of me. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Somebody has to.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I will close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I'd like to make a
motion to approve this conditional use, Item 7 A, that there be no
pick-up on Autumn Oaks and signs -- no parking signs to be placed
upon the property on Autumn Oaks, a maximum of28,000 square
feet.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 28,700.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pardon me?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 28,700.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 700, yes, ma'am. Maximum
height of 44 feet, and day care five days a week.
And Heidi, if you can help me with the -- your -- the items that --
part of your PowerPoint presentation about -- oh, the temporary use
for the school I think is imperative, in particular, that school's going to
be starting soon, for staff to issue a temporary use permit for that.
What was the other ones?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Twenty students to start with --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Twenty students.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- until we get the I-75/Immokalee
Road interchange.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, and that is a part of my
motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And eliminate number seven, which is the
after-school program limitation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Page 140
.,------
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And -- but the -- the site plan --
if we can get back to the site plan. I want that vegetation to remain to
the south.
MS. WILLIAMS: Am I allowed to clarify?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. For the record, Heidi Williams.
That vegetation will remain. Environmental staff I think initially
did not think that it could be in a conservation easement. That is an
issue I was not involved with. But it is my understanding that it didn't
qualify because of some water management constraints. But I can
assure you that the Site Development Plan does not allow us to
remove the vegetation. It is -- in its final condition, that vegetation
wi II remain.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's part of my motion.
MS. WILLIAMS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, you know, to be
maintained at its present state.
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. Yes, we can agree to that.
Nick Casalanguida asked me to mention again that the applicant
has agreed to modify the access point so that the existing entrance and
exit becomes only an entrance, and the second access point becomes
an egress only. The applicant has agreed to that.
The other items that we had asked for in addition to allowing the
school to open early were the administration -- administrative issue of
the amendment versus an insubstantial change.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. That's -- that's all a part
of my motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And do I hear a second?
I'll second it. Okay.
Any further comments on this item?
Oh, Susan, I'm sorry.
Page 141
..~-_.,
July 28, 2009
MS. ISTENES: I'm sorry to interject, but I just -- I do have to
explain the third request, and this came as quite a shock actually. We
didn't realize this was going to happen today.
But that process, the SOP versus -- SOP A versus SDPI process.
The Land Development Code spells out the criteria upon which a
project scope qualifies for either an insubstantial change or an
amendment. Based on that criteria, the reviewers and the costs are
afforded accordingly.
So whether this -- if this was to come in as an insubstantial
change and it didn't qualify, we would be obligated regardless to
review it with all the reviewers associated with an amendment, which
means essentially we don't collect the fees that cover our costs to
review the plan in accordance with the Land Development Code.
So that's -- that's our objection to that, and that really is, in my
opinion, an inappropriate request of you in this type of setting.
Thanks.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I address that?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I hear a little cat fighting going
on. The -- Susan, I -- tell me why you need an SOP instead of an
SDPI.
MS. ISTENES: Commissioner, it's the difference between an
amendment and a type of an amendment. So an SDPI would be a
minor amendment, so to speak, and an SDP A would be more of a
major amendment. Depending on what they're proposing -- and I
honestly can't stand up here and tell you today that what they're
proposing will qualify either as a minor or a major amendment. I
don't know until they submit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you're adding two uses.
MS. ISTENES: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're adding a couple uses.
MS. ISTENES: Right. That has nothing to do with it. I mean,
Page 142
"-"."-
July 28, 2009
the uses, if the conditional use is approved, they're going to be
approved. It's the development of the site and the impacts on the site
that are evaluated to determine who of the staff needs to review it.
So, for example, I know we mentioned altering the ingress and
egress of the property. That may trigger -- that obviously would
trigger a transportation review; whereas, under a minor process, that
might not necessarily be the case.
So what happens is, when the plan comes -- when a
preapplication meeting is held, the petitioner shows us the scope of the
work and we determine whether or not it qualifies as a major or minor
amendment, and that determines who reviews the project.
That's all defined in the Land Development Code. That's not
staff just kind of making things up when they sit in the meeting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I didn't say you were making it
up, Susan. I mean, I don't know why you're being so defensive. I'm
just asking a question.
MS. ISTENES: I'm not being defensive, Commissioner. I
apologize. You're not here. I'm smiling as I'm talking.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. You've seen the site
plan.
MS. ISTENES: No, I haven't. This is a conditional use. I've
seen the master plan for the conditional use, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And then that's in our
packet?
MS. ISTENES: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you see anything in there
that would create a full-blown Site Development Plan?
MS. ISTENES: I can't tell because that's not defined enough at
this process of the review to determine what they're changing.
Initially what Heidi stated was that they only needed to do minor
internal changes. That sounds like just an insubstantial change at the
most. And we don't have an objection to the school opening prior to
Page 143
.-""-'.'-'-',-
July 28, 2009
their site plan being changed. I think Nick put a stipulation on the
record, and that's not an issue.
The issue really is, when you get the plan in front of you and
you're looking at a preapplication meeting, it is often different than
what somebody states at a meeting like this or prior to submittal.
And all I'm asking is that we have the opportunity to look at the
proposal and make that administrative determination as the code
currently states.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, thank you for the
explanation. I'm going to remove, Madam Chair, that part of my
motion that the review would be an insubstantial site development
change.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. ISTENES: And one more item, just for clarification. You
don't need the -- you don't need a temporary use permit. I think
Commissioner Henning mentioned that. If you want to grant them
approval to open prior to approval of the site plan, that's good enough.
We don't have a process for that in the code, and we'll certainly just
abide by that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And my second will include that
as well.
Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm all done. I'm all set.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Got to close the hearing, I guess.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I already did.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, did you?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yep, but thank you. Commissioner
Henning reminded me.
Yes?
MS. ZONE: Chair, sorry to interrupt. I just need clarification. I
Page 144
~,.".,--,~' -
July 28, 2009
received all of the recommendations, except for number seven. I
know the board was going towards initially to just limit the
after-school programs to register students until 1-75 interchange was
completed, but are we now going with elimination completely? Just
for clarification for me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have to get to that. It is
after-school programs are eliminated -- yes, that's only until 1-75 is
completed.
MS. ZONE: And then they can expand to off-site students as
well. Very good, thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you for that clarification.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. That is a 5-0. Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, your next item is Item 8A. It was
previously --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. You know what, Leo Ochs?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We'll take a break right this very moment.
MR.OCHS: Very good.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Ten minutes?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, ten minutes.
Page 145
---
July 28, 2009
MR. OCHS: Ten minutes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Twenty-three minutes, no, no.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What -- Leo, what is the next
item?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 8A will be 17J.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And then after that would be 17 A.
MR.OCHS: Correct.
(A brief recess was had.)
Item #8A
RESOLUTION 2009-190: SNR-2009-AR-14206 MARBELLA
LAKES ASSOCIATES, LLC IS REQUESTING TO RENAME A
STREET FROM GREEN BOULEVARD TO MARBELLA LAKES
DRIVE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN TRACTS
A-2 AND A-3A OF THE MARBELLA LAKES SUBDIVISION,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK 46, PAGES 77 THROUGH 83, OF THE OFFICIAL
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, WHICH IS IN
SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 49, RANGE 26, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Madam Chair, we're on 8A. It's your advertised
public hearings.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 17J. And you pulled this, Commissioner
Coletta, didn't you?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I did. How about that,
huh?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you like to tell us why you pulled
it and maybe just carry on?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I would absolutely love to
Page 146
"~-"_..- -'..~--
July 28, 2009
tell you why I pulled it. I pulled it for a very simple reason. We have
a situation where we have a continuous road that's named Green
Boulevard from beginning to end. We're talking about a community
that wants to name the road after their particular community, which is
normally great.
We got in here about the fact that they're more than willing -- that
when we get ready to continue our plans on to take Green Boulevard,
move it across 75 and continue it all the way to tie into Whippoorwill,
that they'll allow us to change it back to Green Boulevard, probably
ten years from now, maybe 15. You know what's going to happen at
that point in time, whatever commissioners are here -- I know you and
I will still be here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure we will.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I know that for a fact.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll be here, too.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But what's going to -- well, we
might invite you.
What's going to happen is you're going to have a meltdown at
that point in time where they're going to say, I wasn't part of this
agreement. This is part of our community, how dare you want to
change the road to a name that represents, what do you call it,
low-cost housing which is on the rest of the road going down farther
when you get towards 951. How dare you take this road, which is our
personal road, and continue it across 75.
And no matter what they say in this agreement now, it's going to
mean absolutely nothing ten, 15 years from now. Why do we want to
put people through this where they're going to have to, you know,
have to take this up as an issue? And it's going to become a real big
issue for us to deal with at that point in time. So I make a motion that
we deny this request.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
MR.OCHS: Madam Chair?
Page 147
"'-.~----"~~_.
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. It's not called Green
Boulevard now, so there's no confusion at the present time. I
understand that it's a future extension of Green, but we might call it
something else besides Green Boulevard. Might call it Red
Boulevard, or Whippoorwill, what it is now, Whippoorwill east/west.
So I don't see where the confusion is. Maybe what really needs
to be done to address the issue is, at some point in time in the future, is
have staff put a sign there that says future east/west Green Boulevard,
and then you -- you would have an opportunity to fully vet this.
I mean, it's just like a petition that we had on the agenda at our
last meeting where we had 30,60, 90 meetings, and the people didn't
know that they was losing their median access. By placing a sign
there in the future and saying, future Green Boulevard extension, then
the public has full knowledge of it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, to be honest with you,
Commissioner Henning, I don't think that's a bad idea, but think about
it for a moment. You live there in the community, the road is changed
to Malibu Lakes. Everybody identifies it, and every day you've got to
drive in and out and see a sign that says, future Green Boulevard
extension. It's probably going to cause all sorts of conflicts, where if
you just left it Green Boulevard -- now, is this a big issue that's going
to make or break the whole community? Absolutely not, and it might
be important to them. I just can't see the benefit for a limited period of
time to change a name and change it back again.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it's not Green Boulevard
now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What is the name of now?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Whippoorwill East, or
something like that. I drive by it, but it's definitely not Green
Boulevard.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, it says here under
Page 148
-~~_.. 0' "._~,.~.
July 28, 2009
objectives, it says, recommend that Collier County Board of
Commissioners approve the resolution renaming a portion of Green
Boulevard to Marbella Lake Drives (sic) from the intersection of
Whippoorwill Lane to the intersection of Livingston Road. It's calling
it Green Boulevard. Maybe somebody from transportation could clear
up this misconception, if there is one.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And you know what, before we go
any further at all, this was an ex parte item so -- I didn't even realize.
The county attorney alerted me. So let's just please declare any ex
parte on this item. We'll start with you, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The only ones I've talked to
about this is staff.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I have no ex parte.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have no ex parte on this particular
item.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no disclosure at all.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: None.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And we don't -- are there any
speakers on this subject?
MS. FILSON: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So there's -- do we need to swear in
anybody then? Anybody here -- okay. Anybody who will be speaking
on this subject.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you very much. And thank
you, County Attorney.
I know you have a motion on the floor, and it hasn't been
seconded yet.
Yes.
Page 149
,-~--
July 28, 2009
MS. CASERTA: Hello. Ashley Caserta with the Department of
Zoning and Land Development Review.
The subject street is named Green Boulevard, and that has been
confirmed with the addressing department within CD ES and is shown
on the zoning map in your packet.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: As Green Boulevard?
MS. CASERTA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm looking at the aerial on it
right now. And you see the sign, it says Whippoorwill Way. So
maybe it's just like the street that's -- that I live on, it changed the sign
back to 10th A venue Southwest and didn't realize that the Board of
County Commissioners changed it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Susan Istenes?
MS. ISTENES: Thanks. For the record, Susan Istenes, Zoning
Director. I think I can clear this up.
I believe in the past somebody did make an application to change
that to Whippoorwill Way; however, they did not pursue it through the
proper application process; however, it's my understanding in
confirming with the addressing department that some notices were
sent out, namely to the property appraiser, and I believe that's why it's
shown on the property appraiser's aerial as Whippoorwill. But the
official name currently is Green because it has not been formally
changed. It was planned to be, but was not.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Never was consummated?
MS. ISTENES: Yep.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It doesn't really matter as far as
what Commissioner Henning is getting at, you know, whether it's
Green or it's Whippoorwill. Same thing. I mean, it there a reason to
do this that's justifiable?
Maybe transportation might give us some ideas about this, what
Page 150
July 28, 2009
they see as possibly an issue later. Have you known any situation
where we've ever named a road temporary (sic)?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Not since I've been here,
Commissioner. And our concern -- when we do a review like this, the
first thing we do is look at the long-range transportation plan, look at
the five-year capital plan that you guys bless every year and then we
see if there's any conflicts.
And right now, since the DCA with the developer to construct
that road has gone away and now it's the county's responsibility, if and
when we find the funds to build it, ours was no objection but with the
note that we would rename it at a later time, and that obviously brings
up the question, when is that time? Are we going to build that
Whippoorwill connection in the next two years where there's going to
be a conflict and you want it to be Whippoorwill Way or
Whippoorwill East/West? Green is a long ways off. So you're
looking at 10 -- probably 15, 20, or 30 years before something like
Green could materialize.
So we put no objection with the understanding that if the road is
connected, we want the ability to rename it and not have to fiscally
pay for that. And the applicants agreed to that, and that's kind of
where we stand right now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And even if the applicant sells it
to another party, a third party, and they sell it to another party, this is
something that goes in along with the ownership of the land?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We put the stipulation to be its
successors and/or assigns. It will run with the ownership of that
development.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if I don't get a second, it's
a moot issue. And -- well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if I can make a
suggestion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
Page 151
.->--.-----._^ 0_
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If there's that much of a concern
by the commissioners -- and it sounds like the applicant wasn't noticed
that it was coming off the consent and onto the regular agenda --
nobody's there. And the applicant did pay money. At least you ought
to afford the applicant to be there to explain their side of the story.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He's here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: He's here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I didn't see him, or her.
I'm going to make a motion to approve the item.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, Commissioner Coletta, did you
make a motion to approve?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I made a -- no, I made a motion
not to approve.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I see.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: To deny, and I didn't get a
second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And you made a motion to
approve, Commissioner Henning. Hold on just a minute and let's hear
from the -- you did swear in, I saw you.
MR. FENNO: For the record, Bill Fenno, GL Homes.
It presently is marked today in the field as Whippoorwill Way.
The explanation was correct, but the transportation department, my
understanding from addressing, did change the name in the field. And
we would be willing to pay for any cost to change the signs back when
and if. If we need to post a cash bond, we would do that at this time.
So there would be no cost to change it back in the future.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just hope somebody keeps this
on record, maybe even a tape at the time, you know, be it 15, 20 years
from now when that thing is built out and everybody and his brother--
hopefully by then you're retired and they won't find you.
MR. FENNO: I hope so.
Page 152
~..",'~~-
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor to
approve. Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: To what?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, to approve changing the name to
Marbella Lakes Drive.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Wow, this is exciting. I mean,
we couldn't get a first not to, and now we can't get a second -- or
second not to, now we can't get a --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I might -- I might second it. Let me ask.
There have been so many names for this street. Green, Marbella
Lakes, Whippoorwill Way. What is it really? I mean, you said there's
a sign up that says Whippoorwill Way, but then it hasn't been changed
to Whippoorwill Way, it's really Green. What is it?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's officially platted and recorded as
Green Boulevard.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Green Boulevard.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now, where does Green Boulevard, this
Green Boulevard, start?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It starts on Livingston Road on the
west side. It terminates at their driveway on the east side right now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Terminates at their driveway?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And on the other side of Livingston Road
-- does Green Boulevard go to the other side? I mean, are they --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, ma'am. It would be -- the future
connection would be to the east over the interstate, to the east of
Collier Boulevard, to the east of Collier Boulevard to the Green side
on that part of the county.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let me help everybody. I make
a second to approve it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Page 153
""__~e.' ",,,""'_.,-
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's get on with the show here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I was just trying to get my
bearings.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's okay. It's not that big of
an issue. I just want everybody to be aware of what could be a
problem.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
MR. KLA TZKOW: Just a clarification, because 15 years from
now somebody's going to have to read this record, because the
recommendation is that it goes back to Green Boulevard if and when
the time comes. I'm taking it that is excluded now so the staff
recommendation's done?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
MR. OCHS: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Staffs recommendation --
approve staffs recommendations.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
MR.OCHS: The recommendation is to approve the name
change, and if it -- if it at some future becomes Green again, that the
developer will pay for the costs of --
MR. KLA TZKOW: Whoever the developer, successor, or the
homeowners association.
MR.OCHS: Correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let me just read: The staff recommends
that the Board of County Commissioners approve the petition
changing the name of Green Boulevard to Marbella Lakes Drive.
And that's your motion; is that correct, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And is that your second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's my second.
Page 154
.~_..~... -,_."-
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And that's your second. Okay. Now
we've clarified it on the record for 15 years from now.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's a 4-1 vote, and thank you
very much.
MS. FILSON: Is Commissioner Coyle still with us?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm still here.
MS. FILSON: Oh, thank you.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2009-44: CREATING THE RADIO ROAD EAST
OF SANTABARBARA BOULEVARD TO DAVIS BOULEVARD
MUNICIP AL SERVICE TAXING UNIT - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, that takes us to 8B. 8B was
formerly agenda Item 1 7 A, and this is a recommendation that the
board approve an ordinance creating the Radio Road east of Santa
Barbara Boulevard to Davis Boulevard municipal service taxing unit,
and it was moved at Commissioner Halas's request.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. And I have nothing that's in
-- not in favor of this MS TU, but what I think would be good, if the
homeowners association could not only put the landscaping in and
everything else, but take over the maintenance of this, and -- until
such time as we are out of this problem of meeting budgets and so on,
and then it could be readdressed.
Page 155
_..~--<<=~--_._" . --~"~._,-"-
July 28, 2009
But I think, talking with Norm Feder, he's looking at the cost of
this, about $70,000 a year. And I talked with the representative of the
homeowners group -- in fact, that's my ex parte, because that's the
only person I have talked to on this. And this person I think will stand
up and say that they would take on that cost until at such time as we --
because what we've done is taken away so much maintenance money
from Norm Feder, and we have a tremendous amount of roads that
presently are landscaped.
And if we can have a homeowners group that has an MSTU and
is willing to put the landscaping in if they could just help us in regards
to getting by the next couple of years, I think we could probably
readdress this whole issue, and then it would be taken out of their
hands.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And you said some key words. Ex parte.
We didn't declare ex parte on this either, or do we need to?
MR. OCHS: Not required.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. It was on the summary
agenda, but I don't think I had any --
MR. KLA TZKOW: No ex parte is needed for this.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No ex parte needed, okay. Very good.
And we do have a speaker on this subject; is that correct?
MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am. You have one speaker, Floyd
Chapin.
MS. ARNOLD: I'd just like to -- for the record, Michelle
Arnold, Alternative Transportation Mode Director.
I just wanted to note that this will probably take a couple years
before funds are raised for the construction and the actual completion
of the construction anyway. I don't know whether or not that changes
your position on that, Commissioner Halas, but I just wanted to make
note of that for the record.
MR. CHAPIN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. My name is
Floyd Chapin. I reside at Sapphire Lakes. I'm representing the
Page 156
._n.n.__._._
July 28, 2009
Sapphire Lakes Homeowners Associations today.
Just to give you a little background. The people in this one-mile
stretch of Radio Road have met over the past three months and have
decided that we want to tax ourselves. And we don't want the people
of Collier County to be burdened with beautification of our road.
I'm asking you to approve this as recommended by the
transportation department and everyone else involved so we can move
forward on redefining our stretch of road. It really is -- it's a beautiful
completed highway now, a road, whatever you want to call it. And we
want to make sure it stays beautiful after we get our landscaping in.
We had all the stakeholders involved, including the largest
commercial property in the area, enthusiastically endorse this. So I'm
asking you today to you approve the recommendation as proposed,
and Michelle did mention the fact that it's going to take at least two
years for us to get the funds to start this project unless someone wants
to -- unless you folks in the county want to give us the money.
But we would appreciate you recommending approval of this
today. And if you have any questions, I'd be happy to -- thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My question is, if we are still in a
situation where we don't have the funds to address this issue because
we've taken away so much of the transportation maintenance funds,
would that -- this group of individuals that are in this MSTU, would
they be willing to pay for the watering and so on after you put the ir-
__ you know, all the irrigation, all the landscaping in for a year or so
until hopefully we get turned around?
MR. CHAPIN: I think that was the plan, but we're two years off
from starting it. We have no money.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Well, no. The way I read it
was that you were just going to do the -- put the landscaping in and
then turn it over to the county to take care of the actual maintenance of
that project that you're going to include in the Radio Road MSTU.
MR. CHAPIN: I think that was after a five-year period, if I'm
Page 157
.,...~,."""...~,,."
July 28, 2009
not mistaken. And at that time we were going to review the situation
and go from there. I mean, we're willing to do whatever we can to
keep our area beautiful.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good, all right. I'm set.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I just want to tell you, I
can't tell you how much I appreciate the fact that you and your
neighbors are willing to step up to preserve what you think's
important, not coming to the county with your hand out looking for
something. That's commendable.
And I hope that eventually we have more neighborhoods coming
forward to do the same thing. At the end of five years, I think we need
to review it. We don't know what our situation will be at that time.
The maintenance on these things is absolutely tremendous.
But the nicest thing about it being your MSTU, you can make it
just as beautiful as you like.
MR. CHAPIN: And we're going to.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sure you are.
MR. CHAPIN: Thank you very much for your consideration.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Did I hear a motion to
approve?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I make a motion
to approve.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning has made
a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And a second by Commissioner Halas.
Any further discussion?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
Page 158
,..--,-
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2009-191: RE-APPOINTING JOHN BARLOW
AND MICHAEL Y. WU TO THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT
PRODUCTIVITY COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, that takes us to 9A, which is
appointment of members to the County Government Productivity
Board.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve committee's
recommendations.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Wait just a minute. Okay. One second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A question, comment?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir, question, comment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I appreciate the -- Michael Wu
-- I thought we were looking for people who have business and
financial backgrounds. Michael Wu is a doctor. But you do have
some others that has some business background. Is that any concern
of the Board of County Commissioners? Because actually I think we
created categories under the ordinance for the Productivity
Committee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. If I may comment?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, a doctor has tremendous
business background. They have to run a business with many
Page 159
._~.~.",".,.
July 28, 2009
different employees. All the good business common sense that you
would ever hope to find in a small business you'd find in a working
doctor's office.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But he's an emergency
physician.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But they still are in charge of
records, they're in charge of management. It spills over to a bunch of
different disciplines. And I don't have a problem with it myself. I
think he'd be a wonderful choice.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a
second.
Any further.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
We go on to number 9B.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2009-192: APPOINTING NINON L. RYNERSON
TO THE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN AD-HOC
ADVISORY COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: 9B, ma'am, is appointment of a member to the
Page 160
. ._---.~.,..--~
July 28, 2009
Habitat Conservation Plan Ad Hoc Advisory Committee.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Let me stop it right there. Being
that this is -- expires on September 12th, they would only get in and
then they'd have to get out. Is there really a need for us to put
anybody on this -- you know, to -- you know, to put anybody on this
committee when it's going to be dissolved? I'm sorry.
MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am. I understand the question. Staffs
explanation is that they've had some trouble getting a quorum together
for this meeting or this committee to conduct its business.
They have some business they want to get done over the next
several weeks before they close out the committee, and the hope was
that adding a member even at this late date would give them a better
chance of having a quorum through the next five or six weeks while
they move towards sunsetting of the committee.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I see.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This person that would be named
to the committee if we decide to go forward on this -- I understand
your concerns as far as making sure that they have a quorum. My
concerns are, I believe they're in the process of writing a final report to
submit to the Board of County Commissioners; is that so?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So is this person going to have any
influence on this board as far as the results that are going to be
composed and written before the Board of County Commissioners?
Because this person hasn't been involved in this process and is only
going to be there for no more than probably two months.
MR. OCHS: Yes, Commissioner, I think they would have the
opportunity to get up to speed, read the minutes of the prior meetings
and contribute whatever technical support or expertise they could
towards the finished product.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, okay. I just feel it's -- at this
Page 161
"---'+ ~."-
July 28, 2009
point in time I'm not sure if the person could get up to speed that quick
because I think there was a lot of ground that was covered in regards
to addressing the issues of the Red-cockaded Woodpecker and a few
other things that were out in that general area. So whatever the --
MR.OCHS: Pleasure of the board, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, whatever the board decides.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, and being that the committee
recommended that they have this person -- I don't even know if that's a
male or female.
MS. FILSON: It's a female.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's a female. And so -- and if the
committee feels they need that person in order to finish -- maybe -- do
you know if the person has been sitting in some of the meetings?
MS. FILSON: I think she has attended some of the meetings.
And in addition, I believe that they plan to come and ask for the
committee to be extended. That's a possibility.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. That little thing was hiding.
MS. FILSON: And we do have additional vacancies due to
resignations, which I am not going to advertise until they decide
whether or not you will extend the committee.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. That helps. That fills in all
the blanks there.
Okay. May I have a motion to approve?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. A motion by Commissioner
Henning, a second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 162
,~~__e "..~-,,-
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2009-193: APPOINTING TIMOTHY J. REIDY TO
THE COLLIER COUNTY HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY -
ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Health facilities authority.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve Timothy J.
Ready, Reidy.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Second.
All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That was -- and Commissioner
Coy Ie, you voted?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I did. I voted for approval.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. That's a 5-0 then.
Item #90
Page 163
,.._,.,-..__.""..~ ....--.-
July 28, 2009
RESOLUTION 2009-194: APPOINTMENTS TO THE
ENVIRONEMTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ARE AS FOLLOWS:
ANDREW DICKMAN AND NOAH STANDRIDGE TO SERVE
FOR 4 YEARS; JUDITH HUSHON TO SERVE FOR 3 YEARS;
MICHAEL SORELL AND CHRIS STEPHENS (AL TERNA TE) TO
SERVE FOR 2 YEARS AND PATRICK PECK TO SERVE FOR 1
YEAR ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL-
ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Ma'am, next item's 90. It's appointment of
members to the Environmental Advisory Council.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve Dickman,
Standridge, Hushon, H-U-S-H-O-N, Bishof, Sorrell, and Peck.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now say them again, because I
think we might all want to weigh in a little bit on that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. The first one would be
Andrew Dickman.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then Noah Standridge.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then Judith Minno Hushon.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then David Bishof.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: About five from the bottom.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. I see him.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Michael Sorrell and Patrick
Peak (sic).
MS. FILSON: And, Commissioners, on this committee in my
objective on the very top of the executive summary, I indicated that
it's a four-year term and you want to stagger them for the initial
Page 164
'".'-'-"~. ~w~~
July 28, 2009
appointments. And my suggestion was two for four years, two for
three years, and two for two years. Obviously you can make the
appointments as long as you'd like.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I incorporate that into the
motion and recommend that we just arbitrarily go from top to bottom
with four years two years, and one year, is it?
MS. FILSON: Well, there's going to be five members and one
alternate member, and so that's why I said two members for four, two
for three, and two for two years, that way they would all have
alternate terms.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner, can I weigh in a
little on this?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure, please.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Maybe a suggestion for making
sure that we stagger these is, two of these individuals will be for four
years, one would be three years, and then another one would be one
for two years, and then one individual for one, and then the alternate
could be whatever.
MS. FILSON: And that's four.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That way you would -- every year
you would name a new person on this committee. So that's just a
suggestion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's Commissioner Coyle. I am
really uneasy about voting for a block of people who are merely
nominated for the first time by a single commissioner. I can agree
with four of Commissioner Coletta's nominations. But I think one of
the things we were trying to do is to create a -- an advisory committee
that would have fewer potential conflicts and would be, perhaps, more
productive. And I really believe that there are two people included in
Page 165
'-"'->~-'-'-""-
July 28, 2009
Commissioner Coletta's recommendations that would not necessarily
achieve that goal.
And namely, I would say Judy Hushon and David Bishof. So I
would -- you know, can we vote on the other four, and then maybe
argue and debate the remaining two people?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If it would make it easier,
Commissioner Coyle, I'd be more than happy to change my motion to
the remaining four, and then we can come back to the other two or
whatever.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then those four would be
Andrew Dickman, Noah Standridge, Mike --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sorrell--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sorrell.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, Michael Sorrell, and--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Patrick Peak (sic).
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I can support those four.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I could support that, too.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Patrick Peck, he's -- what does he do? I
just see he lives in Immokalee and he supports the Seminole tribe and
he's on the Affordable Housing Commission and part of Habitat for
Humanity, right?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But his education is
environment.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Environmental health experience.
MR. KLATZKOW: Just as a reminder, the ordinance gives you
a guideline of three technical members and two nontechnical
members, with the alternating being technical. You don't have to --
you don't have to go that way, but those are the guidelines.
MS. FILSON: And I have that outlined under considerations in
the executive summary.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll tell you, I really hate to -- I'd like to
Page 166
July 28, 2009
see Judy Hushon. I realize she's been a little bit controversial. She's
also got a great deal of knowledge, and I hate to lose her.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're not.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I agree with you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Ifwe could, if we could just
work with the four first and then we can come back and do the other
two. I mean, she's still on my list.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Andrew Dickman, Noah Standridge, and
Mike Sorrell were on my list as well.
How about you, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's who I had. I had Andrew
Dickman, Noah Standridge, I had Judith Hushon, and David Bishof,
and Patrick Peck.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And Mike Sorrell, or however you
say his name.
Okay. So now, let me -- and Commissioner Henning, you
already seconded the motion for--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The four.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: For the four?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So that -- let me just repeat that
one more time. The four that you -- that you have agreed upon and
you have seconded on, motion by Commissioner Coletta, second by
Henning, Andrew Dickman, Noah Standridge, Michael Sorrell,
Soreel, however you say his name --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sorrell.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- and Patrick Peck. Okay.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 167
._-~
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There's two names here that, in
my opinion, really stand out. They're Chris Stephens and Quin Kurth.
Chris Stephens -- Quin Kurth has been before the Board of County
Commissioners on environmental issues, and Chris Stephens is just an
outstanding person that I would like to have recommendations in the
future about environmental issues.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know, when I read his background
and so forth -- and he had asked to be an alternate, according to this --
he was the only one that had asked to be an alternate and his
background seemed to be quite good. So I felt that he would be
outstanding on this committee as well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. So I'm going to make
that a motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I'll second it. Chris Stephens.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, could I ask you a question?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: For the alternate.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: For an alternate. I'm not sure I
would disagree with that. I do think that he is qualified. My only
concern in looking at all of these applicants is that there are three
people here who do work for companies where they have to recuse
themselves from time to time.
Now, I guess there's nothing wrong with that, but to be -- to
exercise an abundance of caution, I've tried to select people who are
qualified yet would be considered to be fair and impartial and would
not benefit from decisions made by the Environmental Advisory
Council.
Page 168
-._~..-~_...,.. ._~."-
July 28, 2009
And since the Environmental Advisory Council is sometimes
involved in influencing our policy, I've just tried to stay away from
people who might have a potential business conflict.
So -- but other than that, Chris Stephens, I think, is well qualified
and probably could function well as an alternate on the committee.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. I looked at the same things. It said
that sometimes he would have to recuse himself, but if he's an
alternate I figured he wouldn't -- he wouldn't have a problem, so --
being that he would be sitting in on the meetings but just an alternate.
Okay. So anybody else's comment on Chris Stephens?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Then--
MS. FILSON: I can -- I just want to let the commissioners know
that that's going to be four technical and one alternate on the entire
committee, and I believe the county attorney indicated that --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I can't hear what's being said.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. FILSON: The ordinance indicates that there should be three
technical and two nontechnical on the committee, and you have so far
selected four technical and one nontechnical.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, as the county attorney
stated, is -- that's guidance.
MS. FILSON: That's fine. I just wanted to get that on the
record, clear.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And how about Ninon Lynn
Rynerson?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We haven't finished with Chris Stephens
yet.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So Chris Stephens -- we have a motion --
I think I made a -- no, you made the motion, didn't you?
Page 169
'--""'~'
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, I did.
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, Commissioner Henning. And I
seconded it for Chris Stephens to become the alternate.
MS. FILSON: And Quin Kurth.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. We just were talking Chris Stephens.
MS. FILSON: Oh. Well, he nominated the two of them.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. Did you nominate two or one?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Two.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry. Then I have to withdraw
the second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I thought you wanted to get
done today.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, I do, but I want to nominate Judy
Hushon, so I could only go with Chris Stephens. So I'm sorry. Okay.
MS. FILSON: So you withdraw your second?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I withdraw my second, I'm sorry, yes.
Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's sit here for a while.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Well, then I'll nominate Judy
Hushon and Chris Stephens as -- and Chris Stephens as the alternate
for the committee.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you'll split that up, you might get
farther. Try one at a time.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, let's see how this one goes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 170
.^----._~. "'~"-
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Three. Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Didn't go very well.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would like a recount, please.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's a 3-2 vote. Is that a good
vote? Okay, fine. Very good. So we --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They're all good votes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yep. Okay. So we have Chris Stephens
as our alternate, Andrew Dickman, Noah Standridge, Judy Hushon,
Michael Sorrell, and Patrick Peck as our regular members. Now we
have to choose what -- how they are staggered.
Of course we don't have to worry about Chris Stephens because
he's the alternate.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, I thought --
MS. FILSON: No. The alternates have terms, too, Madam
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, do they?
MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The alternate could be whatever we
decide, but I felt that two of the people on the committee should be for
four years, and then as I said earlier, one should be three years and
another one for two years, and then the fifth one would be for one --
for one.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make it a motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I make a motion that the
following takes place that -- two for four years, one for three, one for
two, and one for one, and then the alternate, we can decide whether --
Page 171
_._'h"
July 28, 2009
make that for two years.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. But go ahead and name
them so we can get it done.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, geez. Okay. You've got -- the
alternate is Chris Stephens, and then Andrew Dickman --
MS. FILSON: He's going to be two years?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, that's the alternate. Andrew
Dickman and Noah Standridge for four years, Judith Hushon's for
three years. What's the next one? Michael--
MS. FILSON: Sorrell.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- Sorrell, he'll be two years, and
Patrick Peck for one year.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I make a recommendation?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll second the motion.
Yes, you may make a recommendation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you've got unanimous
votes for certain members of the committee, and I would -- I would
suggest that you give those more time on the committee than the ones
that haven't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So that's your suggestion,
Commissioner Henning.
Anybody else have any comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. The motion on the floor and the
second. Do you want me to read them over again, or do you have
them?
MS. FILSON: I have Chris Stephens, the alternate, will serve
two years; Andrew Dickman, who is a regular member, will serve four
years; Noah Standridge will serve four years; Judith Hushon will serve
three years; Michael Sorrell will serve two years; and Patrick Peck
will serve one year.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Correct. All those in favor, signify by
Page 1 72
~-_.,._."
July 28, 2009
.
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's a 5-0. Thank you.
Item #IOA
A PROJECT CHARTER DIRECTING STAFF TO PROCEED
WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF A COUNTY WIDE MASTER
MOBILITY PLAN (MMP) - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Ma'am, that takes us to lOA. lOA is a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves a
project charter directing staff to proceed with the development of a
countywide master mobility plan. Nick Casalanguida, director of
transportation planning, will present.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
Let's me get this up and running.
Commissioners, we're going to look at something a little
differently in transportation. I think our job, my boss and the fellow
directors in transportation and construction managers, the ops people,
the maintenance, and my boss, Norman, we've been struggling in the
past six months and years to at least find the money to complete our
five-year plan, our long-range transportation plan. We're always
looking at the needs side of things.
So as things kind of progressed over the past year, House Bill
697 was approved last year. Department of Energy has been stressing
Page 1 73
July 28, 2009
us to reduce our greenhouse gases. We said, what if we look at the
other end of the business, and that's the land management. What if we
said, if we know we can't fund the need, why don't we look at a
concept where we reduce the need.
And so we kind of put some thoughts together, and time
progressed, we said, there was a grant available and we applied for it,
and it was to reduce greenhouse gases through vehicle miles traveled
reduction. And we thought, how can we do that?
And what we have in front of you today is the master mobility
plan. I'm going to walk you through that a little bit, if I could.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nick, may I stop you one second and ask,
has anybody else ever tried this master mobility plan?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am, they have. They've done
it in Utah, Colorado, Canada, they've done it in Massachusetts, and
they call them different things; Envision Utah, Envision Colorado,
they call them vision build-out plans, and it's -- what they're trying to
do is build the big picture.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I haven't tried it, but I have tried a
break. When do we think we'll have one of those?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right after this, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You may have to just pull off to the
side of the road.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think we -- our last break was actually
just 45 minutes ago.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It was?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I must have missed that. I worked
right through it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We didn't notice.
Page 174
..-'"-.,.-...
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You don't have streaming video
from here. I'm sorry for the interruption.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So are we.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'll read you only one slide and I'll
take you through the rest. The mission statement. The purpose of the
project will be to develop, obtain consensus, and establish what we
call the master mobility plan. The MMP, for an acronym, will be a
concise and practical plan that will guide the need and location of land
use, public services, multi modal transportation, and various
infrastructure while protecting environmentally sensitive land, habitat,
agricultural lands, with the primary purpose of reducing vehicle miles
traveled.
Now, what is VMT? VMT is -- when you look at VMT you say,
okay, people move into their home, they have to drive so far to get to
their job, and they drive so often to get to the services they want.
Vehicle miles traveled. If they have to drive farther, it's more vehicle
miles traveled. If they have to drive more often for the services, it's
more vehicle miles traveled.
So when you look at what our goal is, it's to provide them a
network and options in land use planning where we reduce that need
for vehicle miles traveled.
So our current situation. We don't have a big picture. What we
have is a Compo Plan and a 25-year land use long-range transportation
plan, and one feeds off the other. What we do now is we take the land
use functions of what we have, and then we try and build a network
around it. When developments come in, we don't have a big picture
and model to work off of. We don't do integrative planning. They're
not linked together. That's the second issue, because we don't go back
and forth and test our ideas against each other to see what work.
And then our funding constraints. If our long-range
transportation plan shows a need of $5 billion, that's the big B, and our
Page 175
....._.----," ...-.~-
July 28, 2009
financially feasible plan is only $3 billion, and yet if we take our
four-year CIE and multiply it out four times, five-year CIE, you only
come up with less than $2 billion. You're know where you're going
isn't going to work. So that's obvious to us.
So what do we want to do? You have to establish a clear,
supportable, big picture. Everybody has to buy into the concept of it.
You have to run those tests back and forth to what you want to do, if it
works. And then you have to work on that demand management side.
If you can't fund the need, lower the demand and look at different
options that go there.
Desired outcome. Reduction in vehicle miles traveled is number
one. Facility cost saving, your third bullet point. Ifwe look at what
Skip Camp does, and he builds infrastructure for the county in terms
of government centers, libraries, parks, we incorporate some of these
options to some of these towns, he gets to build less of those. If we
have these towns that are going to develop out east include some of
those options in their downtown, he builds less. If we look at things
like that, community liveability goes up as well, too.
We have our -- that little slide on the right-hand side kind of
changes as we speak a little bit. It's where the population growth and
the different development kind of proceeds.
And as can you see, as it progresses it continues to build up to the
east. So we need to increase and improve on cost-effective,
environmentally responsible mobility options, and that first kind of
bullet point is the only one I want to touch on in this slide. If you
don't get buy-in from the environmental groups that are working with
you to do these projects, the transportation projects and mobility
projects, you're not going to get anywhere.
We spent four hours with Fish and Wildlife and some of the
environmental folks, and they said, if you had a long-range plan, they
kind of showed the preservation areas and the wildlife crossings and
that mobility network you wanted, we could buy into that plan. We
Page 176
,,_.-
July 28, 2009
just constantly feel like you're ever expanding our transportation
network.
So your long-range transportation plan focuses out 25 years. We
want to look at the build-out of the county, look where is it practical to
build our roads and where is it not. And if we can't fund that mobility
network, what do we need to reduce that footprint?
There's key components of the plan. It's the infrastructure master
plan. It's where you're going to put those services that are in there.
Where you're going to put those facilities, jails, government centers,
things like that. We want to locate them in advance around major
roadway networks and hubs. Immokalee Airport, casino that's out
there, understanding what's down on the East Trail, 6L Farms. Where
do we want to put our services that are out there?
The land use master plan. How we talk to the landowners to
what they put in their towns. You know, what kind of services will go
in those towns if they're balanced? A lot of our Compo Plan already
does this. We want to kind of enhance on that with that goal, again, of
reducing vehicle miles traveled.
Most important probably out of this whole project is the
multimodal master plan. I know Commissioner Halas is always
talking to us about light rail. We're working with Lee County to see if
we can preserve that rail corridor that exists right now. But bus rapid
transit is going to be the key to the future because it's flexible.
And so having a multimodal plan that shows the locations of
where these transit centers need to be around key areas is going to be
important for us. Because as towns develop, as commercial centers
develop, we can incorporate that function in there.
Again, I mention the wildlife and crossing, the habitat master
plan. Ifwe had a roadway network and a land-use network and an
infrastructure network and we balanced that with preserving lands and
showing where those wildlife crossings were going to be, then I think
you're going to get a lot more support on getting that network built.
Page 1 77
,.~,-~
July 28, 2009
And the key to that, that last bullet point. Once you're done
getting everybody that's involved in deciding MOU's -- and it's been
done several times -- is to say, look, we like this. If you can build
what you're showing in these plans, if you can move forward with this
project the way we are, you have our support, and that's key, because
without that you're not going to be able to move forward.
Key steps. The grant becomes available in September, so we
assemble the team now, and that team's made up of your five
administrators and their delegates, the planners from each division.
We're going to go out and reach out and find out where all their plans
are, talk to Marla and find out where her parks need to be, talk to Skip,
talk to Phil Gramatges in public utilities, where is the planning for our
next well sites and things like that, put that all together on one plan,
see where they need to go, because we complement each other. You
know, Vanderbilt Beach Road extension has three schools and it has a
major park area located on that as well, too. So we start to think about
things like that as we move farther to the east.
You run an integrative test once you're done, and then you build
a draft and you take it to the public and you run it again, and then you
quantify, and then it comes back to you. And how does it come back
to you? We're going to work with Joe's shop as part of the EAR-based
amendments that come to you in 20 II.
So you're going to have a set of plans in front of you, a bunch of
signed memorandums of agreements, and that will supplement what
he does for the EAR-based amendments.
Typical reductions. Case histories prove that master mobility
planning results in significant decreases in vehicle miles traveled.
And I won't go through all those, but they talk about how they reduce
vehicle miles traveled.
This is the most interesting part of what we did if you talk about
demand management and money from a business perspective. 2030
LR TP shows 41 million vehicle miles traveled. That's a lot.
Page 178
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Here in Collier County.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Here in Collier County. That's just --
that's not build-out. That's 2030 long-range transportation plan.
That's how many miles are driven on a daily basis between everybody
driving.
Ten percent reduction if you can plan smart. You can call it a 5
percent reduction. At 250 a gallon today, 18 miles per gallon, that's
$645,000 a day in fuel only you would save if you could eliminate a
little bit of travel in your long-range transportation plan. So even if
we're mildly successful with 3 percent, a third of that, it's $200,000 a
day in fuel costs alone.
Accountability. You can't do a plan without being accountable
for what you're doing. We're going to quantify what we talk about.
We're going to identify these vehicle miles reduction tasks in each one
of these things, and we'll show you what they'll do if they're
implemented.
So when a town comes in for approval as part of the RLSA or
DR!, and if they're willing to do X through Z, we'll give you a field in
that review that says, by doing this, they will reduce vehicle miles
traveled and this is roughly how much, so we'll give you a good idea,
mostly by multimodal, sample multimodal master plan.
With a plan of accounting, GIS format, and we'll show all the
existing road networks and proposed, we'll show where we think all
the new towns will be with coordination with the RLSA and the land
use map, and we'll start locating some of these transfer stations.
And we all want that Jmmokalee Airport to be a success, and we
all know the casino out there some day is going to be a driving factor
out there; and Immokalee, as part of the CRA, is expanding, and they
want to be their own community.
Well, we'll help with them. We'll work with them. We'll identify
where the bus stops should be; we'll identify where the transfer
stations should be; we'll identify the routes in advance so as new roads
Page 1 79
.-.,~..__.,
July 28, 2009
come online, as development comes online, we can say, this is a plan
to follow.
This is a master plan of Ave Maria. Now, Ave Maria's done a
good job as far as land use. They have a downtown; it's very
walkable. They didn't include any transit in Ave Maria, none at all.
Now, again, when that started, we didn't really have a master
plan to tie into it. But if you can think of what we envision in the
sense of a downtown, whether it's Big Cypress or Ave Maria, imagine
the coffee shop downtown that's also incorporated as a transfer station
where you've got public utilities, a place to get a bite to eat in your
air-conditioning waiting for a bus that comes every half hour to take
you, whether to the airport or downtown Naples. People will use that
bus.
If it's a bus stop on the side of the road in 90 degrees, you're
going to have less use. It wasn't built into the downtown.
And if as part of the downtown we put in a lot of the government
services where people wouldn't have to go out of the town to get those
services, people would drive out less. So those are the things we've
learned from those projects. Again, I have to give them credit.
They've done well on some things, but we'll learn from what they
haven't done and we'll improve on that.
Innovation. This is a sample of bus stops where they have
headways on a little timer. Tells you when the bus is coming right
now. Different bus stop ideas and different bus stop types. And what
we've said to people --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: The little strawberry.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- as part of that customization factor,
is we're not going to tell you the details. This mobility plan is not to
tell you what the bus stop should look like. Incorporate it into your
town design and your town feel. Make it what you want it to be, but
plan for it.
A sample crossing and preservation master plan. We're going to
Page 180
July 28, 2009
look at all the existing roadway networks, all the future roadway
networks, and we'll put that on the map, and we'll show the
environmentally sensitive areas, where they are, and we'll say, as part
of us building the road program, we know we're going to have to build
some wildlife crossings, and we'll work with the development
community to fund those as part of impact fees and separate dollars as
well, too.
But if we do that now in advance, you're going to get people
supporting the project, and that mobility network that we need to
identify will have a lot more support with something like this in place.
And a couple samples of wildlife crossings that have been done.
The coordination of residential, commercial, industrial,
government services needed to result in an effective and efficient
decision-making process. We're going to put together tables that pretty
much say, depending on what you build, these are the kind of things
you need to incorporate in your town, depending on size, because it
will all be size driven. A small town of I ,000 people or a small
development may not have to do as much as a larger town of 10- to
20,000 people.
And so we'll give them some guidance of what they want to do,
but we want to be flexible because the only way the plan works is if
it's flexible.
How are we paying for this? Well, we received a funding grant
from our Department of Energy for $473,000, and that's going to fund
the plan. County matches, existing planning fund varies. We have
dollars right now that we're using right now for different planning
projects that we just -- we can lump into what we're doing here right
now.
We go to the east of 951 horizon study that we've funded, the
bridge study that's funded and completed, the interactive growth
model that's been funded and completed and updated.
The long-range transportation plan that right now is going
Page 181
'-~._-
July 28, 2009
through it is funded and underway and the EAR-based amendments
coming forward as well. So we're going to leverage all the work that
everybody else has done and we're going to kind of, you know, steal
their information and compile it together and put it as a good project.
By doing that, we significantly save on what this project will cost.
Kind of the schedule as to what we're working on. Grant funding
will be available sometime in September. So we'll be organizing the
team and getting that started.
We have about 18 months. What we think to do is to get the
project done. We've got up to 36 months to complete it. We think
we'll be done in 18 to 24. And I promised Joe we'll be ready in 20 II
to supplement the EAR-based amendments so we can come together
and not take up the board's time and make it a separate project.
You RMP oversight. I'll be directly responsible for the front end
of that, along with Mike Green and Claudine in our office, and we're
going to work with Mike Bosi in comprehensive planning. His
interactive growth model with Dr. Van Buskirk, his update on
long-range transportation plan will be important because it will get us
through that EAR-based amendment.
We're going to coordinate with the MPO as part of the LR TP,
and then each division administrator will assign a delegate to work
with us to give us their master plans. Out of that we'll have some GIS
consultants and environmental consultants to put it all together. Their
work will be to compile the information and help put that plan
together.
Stakeholders. We plan on dealing with the public extensively on
this. There's been some comments that we're not going to do that. Far
from that. We're going to have two very large public meetings and
charettes where we vet to them what we want to do. We want to plan
to be extremely flexible. We also want it -- for them to get a chance to
put their comments in.
Lee County, Seminole Indian Tribe, Audubon, Hendry County,
Page 182
-",-_....
July 28, 2009
we're going to talk to everybody on this and get a feel for what's going
on. Again, you're going to have your five administrators who support
it as well, too.
We've also received letters of support from various parties that
are here right now. I know Clarence has talked about doing some
wetlands planning and things like that, and we're going to go out and
get those letters and get those memorandums from Fish and Wildlife,
so when we're done, you'll know that staff hasn't done this in a
vacuum, that we've really gone out and reached out to everybody and
put together a good project.
That's the end of the presentation. I want to tell you, we're really
excited about this, because we think when we're done, we're going to
have something that's innovative. And we're not going to come out
with something new. And we're going to look at what other places
have done and been successful, and then just tailor it to Collier
County.
So with your blessing, we'll move forward on this project starting
in September.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, comment?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm looking at our agenda
packet, and it states the plan intends to stimulate the economy through
a creation of need of infrastructure and improvements, development of
public, residential, and commercial/industrial establishments.
You know, to me that's a combination of more commitments of
the county tax dollars and a little bit of Senate Bill 360 to where they
were saying where the infrastructure is, you want to encourage
redevelopment and higher density and intensity.
You know, the Rural Land Stewardship plan is coming forward.
If it needs -- if it needs amendments to add bus lines to those towns,
we can do that real easy. My fear is what -- the recommendations that
we're going to get is the increases, intensity and density. And there's a
Page 183
---......_--~_.. ."-------.-
July 28, 2009
lot of resistance right now in Golden Gate Estates of what the private
sector is doing. And I can just see what's going to come out of it when
the public starts making recommendations for those type of things.
So, you know, I think it's well intended, but I believe the
outcome of it is not going to be what the citizens are going to want in
Collier County.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Nick, first of all, I want to
commend you for all the time and effort that you put into this. I
thought your presentation was very well thought out and your slide
projection was very good. It answered a lot of questions for me.
We all know that the build-out of this county's going to be such
that with the Rural Land Stewardship Area, there is already talk about
other towns and villages that are going to be built in that area.
I really think that we need to look at this plan, I think we need to
address this, and I think we need to approve this. And I'm hoping that
not only with this plan can -- if we get it into place, that when the time
comes when development starts to take place out there, that the
landowners out there realize that there has to be some type of a modal
system out there to move people and that then we can hopefully
negotiate whereby we can get the right-of-way needed so that it cuts
down the cost of moving people, whether it's by bus or by car. But if
we get the right-of-ways and we have an idea of what we want to --
what it should look like out there, the pig picture, a think we're going
to be a lot better off in this county.
And I commend you for looking at what other areas of the
country have done to address their transportation needs, and I think
this is something that we really need to address. And I'm hoping that
we've got the votes here in this Board of County Commissioners to
move forward with this. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, Nick, what I like
Page 184
'~_,_<n' -'-----
July 28, 2009
about this is the fact that it involves everybody and his brother. Every
stakeholder you can possibly think of is invited to the table, including
the civic associations, Indian tribes. I don't think you left out
anything. And I'm sure by the time you have some of your first
meetings, they'll all be playing a part of it, and that's what it's all
about.
It's not a Board of Collier County Commissioners making
decisions blinded by what the public wants. It's the public sending it
to us and bringing it up through it. This is just another way to be able
to address the situation. How do we make best use of our lands in the
future so we really meet the needs?
So I think it's great, and I'm going to make a motion that we go
with staff recommendations.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Second by Commissioner Halas.
I'd just like to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Coyle. I just have a
comment.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have absolutely no doubt that this
is a really good planning concept. My only concern, is right now the
time we should be spending money on it. We already know that we
have extended a number of our capital improvement projects because
the growth rate has been reduced substantially. So if this program
wasn't absolutely essential four or five years ago when we had a
booming economy and we have extended our build-out period, why
must we rush into a fairly expensive planning process during a time of
economic recession?
I believe that there are greater needs for this money right now
and we could take up this planning concept another year or two down
Page 185
July 28, 2009
the road when, perhaps, the economy looks a little brighter. It won't
put us behind because the build-out period has been substantially
extended.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nick.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner Coyle, if I could
respond to that. Thank you though. I appreciate your comment.
First of all, it's a Department of Energy grant. And I'm not
saying using somebody else's money justifies wasting money because
we're certainly not.
What I can tell you is this. The past five years I've been here, we
have been in reactive mode. We have been responding to
development coming at us, and we're just now starting to catch our
breath and say, let's do an autopsy of what we've done wrong in the
past five years and say, okay, part of it is, we didn't have a plan to
follow.
And as this turns around a couple years from now, I'd like to be
able to say, we have something to look at. We've taken the time and
looked at what makes sense for the future for the county, and we have
a guide to follow.
Not to mention, Commissioner Coyle, we've got probably the
most amount of leveraged funds right now through other projects that
we're going to take advantage of so this doesn't become a $2 million
planning exercise. It really uses no county dollars but grant dollars,
and we take the leverage of using the LR TP and the other studies that
have been done recently and compiling all those into that mobility
plan.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nick, can you assure me with
absolute certainty that there's no way we can use these funds on
something else that we really need, for example, like building bus
shelters? You know, I just have some problems with the priorities that
we are establishing at a time when we really don't have any funds.
And to take a grant is great, but I -- what I would prefer to do is
Page 186
.._.....-~....
July 28, 2009
to take the grant and use it on something that is absolutely essential
right now.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, these are Department
of Energy grant funds, and the board already approved the allocation
on June 9th, I believe, as part of this project as well. So they'd be --
have to be used on energy reduction projects.
I know Skip in facilities is doing some work with that money to
upgrade or facilitate some projects where energy reduction would be
involved. But the board approved this grant application on June 9th,
and it's for a Department of Energy grant.
Part of that, Commissioner Coyle, as well, too, is, House Bill 697
says in the next year I have to come back with concepts like this and
include them in my Compo Plan as part of what I'm doing anyway.
And so it brings me to that compliance section as well, too. I'm
going to use a DOE grant to leverage other funds that are being spent
right now to come back and comply with already mandated growth
requirements in the next year or two.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I commend you for using the
funds efficiently. I just would feel better if somebody could reassure
me that this is the only purpose for which we can expend such funds.
I could make an argument to you that building bus shelters would
encourage greater use of mass transit, and that would be an
energy-saving investment. I'd be willing to bet we could come up
with a dozen or more others so that we wouldn't have to spend some
of our money on things that we need to do right now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And now I'll weigh in. I just want to say,
I think it's a wonderful thing that we're doing. It's much needed. It's
too bad we didn't do it 20 years ago so that you guys wouldn't have to
be playing catch-up for all of these past years. Let's face it, we never
even had a grid because nothing was ever planned for us.
And I think in the end -- in fact, probably near to the beginning,
it's going to start saving us money already just by -- not only for
Page 187
_"~__.,_._m
July 28, 2009
gasoline and for fuel, but also as we're planning for the future with all
of the new development still about to be approved or has been
approved that hasn't been built. If you can work this into the plan, it's
going -- it's going to save us all money, so I'm just thrilled with that,
so --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Actually, there's not going to be
any need for roads out in the long-term. We're going to have four feet
of water over this entire area once global warming finishes with us.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's climate change.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, yeah, okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Climate change.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion on the floor and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's a 3-2 vote again.
Thank you. Okay.
Item #IOB
TO CONSIDER THE OPTIONS FOR RESPONDING TO A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY MR. BILL KLOHN, MGD
CAPIT AL, WHERE HE REQUESTS A THREE YEAR
EXTENSION TO THE DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS AS
CODIFIED IN ARROWHEAD PUD, ORDINANCE NO. 05-13,
FURTHER AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 08-36 -
PETITIONER TO WORK WITH STAFF IN CONSIDERING
Page 188
."'-~<~~."
July 28, 2009
OPTION #3 WITH A TWO YEAR EXTENSION TO COMPLY
WITH SB360 - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, that takes us to lOB. It's a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners consider
the options to respond to a public petition request by Mr. Bill Klohn,
MGD Capital, where he requests a three-year extension to the
developer commitments codified in Arrowhead PUD ordinance
number 05-13, further amended by ordinance number 08-36.
Mr. Joe Schmitt will present.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve option three.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to approve option
three and a second -- two seconds, actually. First second was from
Commissioner Halas, the second was from Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Forgive me. It's option three is
the one that Bill has agreed to?
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct. Bill has agreed to option three,
and that was the staffs -- for the record, Joe Schmitt -- and that was
the staffs recommendation as well. It's a compliance agreement. Had
we gone to code enforcement or anything else, we'd be at the same
place, so this is -- this is the best way we could go.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And what am I missing here?
MR. KLATZKOW: Your Senate Bill 360 arguably would tie
into this. It would require a two-year extension. So my
recommendation would be that the compliance agreement do a
two-year extension of the commitments.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I include that in the
motion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Page 189
^-~.~.,...
July 28, 2009
MR. SCHMITT: Yeah, It's not a DR! though, Jeff. This is not a
DR!.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's fine. Senate Bill 360 arguably, okay,
controls.
MR. SCHMITT: Well, yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So that's a two-year extension,
okay, to satisfy SB360.
MR. SCHMITT: Yeah. And we'll work -- negotiate with
Norman's staff, my staff will negotiate and bring that compliance
agreement back to you for approval.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is two years going to be
enough? I mean, they were looking for three years to begin with, even
though the Senate Bill there says two years.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's a minimum of two. If you want to do
more than that, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to stay right with the
three years. We're in very tough economic times.
MR.OCHS: Why don't you let us bring the agreement back and
we can see what all the terms are.
MR. SCHMITT: Yeah. We're fine with three years. I mean,
three. It's minimum two, but three years. We know there's not much
work being done out there and hopefully this development will get
back on track, and this is a way of, again, with us --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine. I'll leave it right at
two.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Nope. I'm all set. Thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All those in favor, signify by
.
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 190
~,-_.,,,-", ,,~-
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 5-0, thank you.
Item #IOC
A PROPOSED SETTLEMENT PROVIDING FOR COMPROMISE
AND RELEASE OF LIENS IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT
ACTION ENTITLED DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST CO., CEB NO.
2007080008 RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2414
58TH A VENUE NE, NAPLES, FLORIDA - MOTION TO
DISAPPROVE THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, 10C is a recommendation to
consider a proposed settlement providing for compromise and release
of liens in the code enforcement action entitled Deutsche Bank Trust
Company, CEB number 2007080008, relating to property located at
2414 58th A venue Northeast, Naples, Florida.
Diane Flagg, Director of Code Enforcement, will present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I'd like to make
recommendations that we take -- ask our staff to take this item to our
Code Enforcement Board. We had not only this item but also an item
on the public petition, and we appoint the Code Enforcement Board to
either reduce those fines or make them stay.
I mean, they heard all the history of this one and the previous one
that was on the petition. We don't have that ability to have all that
Page 191
____.0,'.._
July 28, 2009
information.
So I don't know if we really want to be dabbling in the Code
Enforcement Board's business. At least I don't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you for your comments,
Commissioner Henning.
I do have Diane Flagg at the podium, and we have one speaker.
MS. FLAGG: Let me take it. Good afternoon, Commissioners.
Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director, for the record.
Commissioner Henning, just to clarify, you're absolutely correct,
the Code Enforcement Board does have all the history and did actually
assess a lien to this property. At the point that the Code Enforcement
Board assesses a lien, then the only entity that can release the lien is
the Board of County Commissioners, and that's the case in this
property today.
This property is owned by Deutsche Bank. And what we're
going to start seeing is, quite a few of the properties coming forth now
are going to be bank owned where the banks have foreclosed against
our community members for their property.
In the last year we've -- the board has released a lien for 50
percent of the lien amount with HBSC Bank, and then today they
received a -- released a lien amount with Fifth Third Bank for 50
percent of the lien amount.
Deutch Bank is requesting that they be released from this lien for
less than 5 percent of the lien amount.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I make a motion that we
disapprove this proposal to settle the lien for 5 percent.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You got a second, and I'd like to
add a comment to that, if I could, just to put on the record.
Today bloomberg.com mentioned that Deutsche Bank profits
Page 192
July 28, 2009
rises. On trading gains in the second quarter, the profit rose 68
percent. So here they are trying to come before us and want the
citizens to pick up the difference on this. So I've got a problem when
a bank can make 28 -- excuse me, 68 percent in the second quarter.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I have one speaker.
MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am, we have one speaker, Ryan Shipp.
MR. SHIPP: Good afternoon. My name is Attorney Ryan
Shipp. I'm from the Law Offices of Marshal C. Watson in Fort
Lauderdale, Florida. We represent Deutsche Bank, owner of the
property address 2414 58th Avenue in Northeast Naples.
We gave a settlement offer for a release of the lien and in that we
requested that you consider the offer to reduce the lien to $2,979 .19.
As stated in our settlement offer to Ms. Diane Flagg, the property
was acquired through a foreclosure action. The bank did not receive
ownership until July 8th of '08.
The previous owner committed the violations. The violations
were corrected, and the property was set into compliance.
The bank has incurred the costs and repairs and corrections of
upwards to over $ll ,000, and the bank has and continues to incur the
costs of the property maintenance.
Basically we're here trying to provide a marketable title to new
ownership. We don't want to burden the potential sale, because we do
have a contract right now, and we don't want to lose a prospective
buyer.
Further, we paid upfront in good faith all the costs required. The
property had extensive damage, and our firm has put countless
manhours into the particular property.
So we're here to ask that the lien be -- to release the lien. We've
already paid $2,979.19, and we're just trying to make the title clear
and marketable so we can have somebody else purchase the property.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MS. FLAGG: Commissioners, if I may offer, 50 percent of the
Page 193
.<.--<-~. --
July 28, 2009
lien amount would be 35 thousand, seven. If you take into
consideration the II ,620 that they advised that they spent to bring the
property into compliance, then the balance would be $24,080.
MR. SHIPP: It actually cost us II ,000 in -- let's see the exact
amount.
MS. FLAGG: I used the information you gave us.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I have a question.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Just a minute, Commissioner Henning.
I'll get to you in just a second.
MR. SHIPP: It was $11,620 to bring the property into
compliance. And, you know, my main argument that I'm stressing
here is the previous owner was the one who committed all the
violations. As soon as we received title to the property, we went in
there and made the necessary corrections to get the property into
compliance.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And Commissioner Henning, and
then Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
Diane, I'm confused. I thought -- I thought the Code
Enforcement Board issues liens and fines, and once the item is
corrected, the owner has the opportunity to petition the Code
Enforcement Board to reduce the fines.
MS. FLAGG: Commissioner, absolutely correct. Prior to the
placement of a lien by the Code Enforcement Board, so it's prior to. If
a community member comes forth and says, I've brought the property
into compliance, the Code Enforcement Board, in most cases, are
waiving the fines.
This case is much different. This case is actually a bank case
where there's a lien already on the property where the bank foreclosed
against the community member. The bank took ownership of the
property. The bank has subsequently brought the property into
compliance, and there's an outstanding lien balance of71,399.
Page 194
-"---^
July 28, 2009
If the board follows the same path that -- and albeit, only one
today at 50 percent and one previously at 50 percent -- and we also
take into consideration what the bank spent to bring it into
compliance, which is the 11,620, it would be a balance of24,080.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: My point is, again, why are we
hearing this? Code Enforcement Board can meet in an emergency to
deal with these issues. Why are you bringing this to us instead of the
Code Enforcement Board?
MS. FLAGG: Commissioner, unfortunately, once -- the process
is that once the lien is placed, the only agency that can release the lien
is the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I understand that. I understand
that, but you're not (sic) asking us not only to release the lien, you're
asking us to reduce it. Reduce the I ien that the Code Enforcement
Board has put on.
MS. FLAGG: Yes, sir. The only entity that can accept a
settlement agreement for a lien is the Board of County
Commissioners.
MR. SHIPP: If I may, we've already made an offer and have
paid $2,979 .19, and we're just asking that the Board of County
Commissioners does release the lien today so we can go ahead and set
this property up for sale. It's already in contract through July 31 st.
We're just trying to get the lien removed --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. SHIPP: -- so we can sell the property to a potential buyer.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioners Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I understand your concerns, but
you also said that you're the ones that carried the paper on this thing,
that you carried the mortgage, and obviously somebody was in
default, and so that's part of doing business. And when a bank comes
in here and tells me that they want to take -- want us to address the
issue of putting back or taking away 95 percent of the problem that
Page 195
~.~--.."...~... ..,
July 28, 2009
you incurred as a bank, and then you turn around and make 68 percent
profit in a second quarter, I'm telling you, you don't have any -- you
don't have any sympathy from me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. SHIPP: What I'm basically trying to say is these, regardless
of what --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't care.
MR. SHIPP: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The problem is, that's not -- I'm not
there -- I'm not here to have the taxpayers pick up the remaining
portion of this. Somebody's going to have to pick up this thing, okay.
MR. SHIPP: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And you're not willing to step up to
the plate and yet you are the ones that gave this loan out originally,
and maybe the person didn't quite qualify.
MR. SHIPP: I'm saying, aside from the default, sir, all of these
violations were to the property itself. It has nothing to do with them
paying their mortgage. This was the property owner. When we, you
know, got title to the property, we came in and immediately corrected
those --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And you know what? I commend
you.
MR. SHIPP: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I commend you for doing that. But
as far as coming before the Board of County Commissioners and want
to get a reprieve on this to where it's only 5 percent of the total -- the
total amount of the assessed problem of the property, I've got a
problem with that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion on the floor and
a second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And the motion is?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: The motion is -- would you repeat the
Page 196
.--
July 28, 2009
motion again?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It was to deny the item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, do we need to add to that,
being that it's been pointed out that what is still owed is -- I mean,
being that they fixed the property up, is that what the Code
Enforcement Board would do then is subtract that from the amount
owed or --
MS. FLAGG: The Code Enforcement Board, this is out of their
hands. They cannot -- they've already ruled on this, and their ruling
was to put a lien on the property.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. FLAGG: So now this case is in the hands of the Board of
County Commissioners. I can't remand it back to the Code
Enforcement Board. It's out of their -- once they put a lien on the
property, then it has to go to the Board of County Commissioners for a
release.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. FLAGG: So at this point, the --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: The motion is to deny then.
MS. FLAGG: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor to
deny and a second.
Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just one question. At this point
in time that it's denied, and it looks like that's the direction it's going,
with no further communication from us, is that -- what does that
mean? They have to pay the full amount?
MS. FLAGG: No, sir. They can make another settlement offer,
and then we would bring that to you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if it was like a 50 percent
Page 197
.-~,,,-._..," ---,
July 28, 2009
settlement offer, it would probably be on the consent agenda --
MS. FLAGG: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and this gentleman wouldn't
have to come all the way from the other coast --
MS. FLAGG: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and probably save his client a
lot of money.
MS. FLAGG: Correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's 5-0. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I think Commissioner
Coy Ie wants a break.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now that I've heard that I had a
break 45 minutes ago, I'm okay.
Item #IOD
ST AFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO RESOLVE SEWER BACK
CHARGES WITHIN THE TALL OAKS COMMUNITY WITH
PROPERTY OWNER, HILL CREST ESTATES, INC., IN THE
AMOUNT OF $180,000 - MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S
RECOMMENDATIONS - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Ma'am, that takes us to IOD, and that's a
recommendation to receive board approval of staffs recommendation
Page 198
July 28, 2009
to resolve sewer back charges within the Tall Oaks community with
property owner Hillcrest Estates in the amount of $180,000.
Mr. Joe Bellone, your Manager of Utility Billing and Customer
Service, will present.
MR. BELLONE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Joe Bellone, Manager of the Utility Billing, Customer Service.
I think the package you have in your board package today is
fairly comprehensive, but I do want to just point out a couple -- a few
points that I feel like are very salient to this discussion today.
First thing is that the utility has one and only one relationship in
this matter, and that's with the property owner, not with tenants that
reside on the property. And that -- the basis for that is the uniform
billing ordinance, Section 1.2D I, which states accounts shall be
established in the name of the property owner. That establishes the
basis.
The second thing is, we're here today because this is a very
unique utility infrastructure in that it's one property owner, but there
are many individually metered lots that are rented to the residents of
the Tall Oaks community.
I want to remind the commissioners that the special act of the
Florida legislature that created the water/sewer district prohibits free
water and sewer service and shall not discriminate for users of the
same class, and that phrase is in there to ensure that everyone pays
equally for the services rendered. And there's no dispute that the
services have been rendered.
The Uniform Billing Ordinance in another section, 1.3E, states
that the rates that the utility charges to all of the users across the entire
district shall ensure that adequate revenues exist to cover the district
system operating, maintenance, renewal, replacement and debt service
costs, and that if we forgive debt, in this instance, then it's got to be
covered by other ratepayers because there is no profit. We need to
cover those costs.
Page 199
""-~.~"--
July 28, 2009
Lastly, we do have in attendance today the attorney that is
representing the Hillcrest Estates, the property owner. He's here to
answer any questions that you may have.
MR. BOBO: That's Allen Bobo.
MR. BELLONE: He was very kind to send last-minute
correspondence that's not in your package, and I have handouts that
you can have but I'll put on the visualizer for you.
And in essence what the attorney for the property owner is saying
in item number one is that -- let me step back. When the -- we had the
June 9th meeting, Item -- agenda Item 6B, public petition, petitioners
asked that you look at this again and, perhaps, relieve some of the
debt.
And you instructed staff to meet with the property owner and
tenants in the utility to resolve the issue. Well, first of all, we did meet
with the homeowners association in January, staff did meet, and we
did attend the meeting on April 30th to explain this.
Point number one in the attorney's letter that you see on the
visualizer does say that the park owner did meet on several occasions
with the homeowners association. That's the homeowners association
that represents the tenants in that park, not individual tenants. They
declined to attend the meeting that you instructed us to have because
that meeting would serve to undermine the authority of the
association.
Point number two really is the critical point though. And they
state that their client acknowledges the authority of the district to
impose the back-billing charges for sewer services rendered for a
period of up to four years and actually to seek those charges from
Hillcrest Estates, Inc., as the property owner.
They go on to say that nonetheless, pursuant to terms of
agreements that the property owner has with their tenants, they may
pass those on to the residents in the park.
But what's really critical is the last statement on the second page,
Page 200
~-+''''-
July 28, 2009
and that states that the issue really today deals with the obligations of
the park owner with the utility, and that's why I brought up the
relationship at the beginning of this discussion, and not the ancillary
issue of any obligations that the residents may have with the park
owner.
And with that, I can take any questions, you can direct any
questions to the attorney who's here, or you can hear from the -- one
of the tenants in the park as well.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have four speakers registered, so we'll
call on the speakers and we'll go from there.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Diane Walsh. She'll be
followed by Naomi McFarland.
MS. WALSH: Excuse me. Ms. McFarland was ill and she won't
be here. We have another one who's going to take on for her. That
would be Mr. Richard Ruse. That was the third one I gave you.
MS. FILSON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You'll need to speak into the microphone.
MS. WALSH: Yes, ma'am. For the record, my name is Diane
Walsh. I am a homeowner at the Tall Oaks. I want to say very briefly
here that I am not a board member nor am I a paid member of the
homeowners association. This is a follow-up from the June 9th
meeting when Mrs. McFarland, a Tall Oaks homeowner, asked for
your help with the back-sewer charges.
No meeting was held by the park owner, no meeting was held by
the homeowners association, and no meeting was held by the utilities
company. We were kind of like shut out. They've given us no other
alternative but to come to you and appeal again for your help.
I would like to thank the utility company and the county attorney,
Jeff Katzklow (sic), for extending the installment requirement date to
August I st, allowing us the time to come in and speak with you.
Several of our homeowners are back north for the summer, so I
was not able to get a complete list of homes privately purchased
Page 201
".~--"~ .._-~
July 28, 2009
during the years '05 through '09. The following is a list of
homeowners that were charged back-sewer charges for the full four
years regardless of when they purchased.
I can't express enough why they have to pay for usage when they
did not receive it. I'm at a loss to understand that. If possible, I would
like to ask the commission to request the utility company to provide
an accurate list from their records.
I purchased my property in May of 200 I.
Would you please show the lease.
This is the date of my lease. You can see it. It is -- was it June?
MR.OCHS: June,2001.
MS. WALSH: It's June, yep -- June, 2001. And my prospectus,
which would be the next thing, is what I got at the time. I'm trying to
do three quickly -- okay -- where it states -- can you -- just the top one
where I have it highlighted.
Yeah, it's where the homeowner -- the park owner is responsible
for the sewer. I never received a letter from the park owner, never. I
never received any acknowledgment that the responsibility of the
sewer was mine from the utilities company.
I called in, I said I was a new tenant, I got my bills. That's
number four. Thank you.
Okay. I -- all of a sudden I receive a letter in May telling me that
I am responsible for X amount of dollars in sewage. I believe the
Collier County Water/Sewer District assumed responsibility for the
source in Tall Oaks in September of 1989.
On September 24, 1999, ten years later -- those are the two next
ones -- an agreement was signed by Tall Oaks management and the
homeowners association stating that they approved, I believe what I
would call, the turnover. I view this as a simple turnover from the
park owner to the utilities company.
The accounts for the homeowners were already in place.
Hillcrest, the park owner, and the homeowners association relies on
Page 202
July 28, 2009
the utilities to follow through with the sewer charges.
I think we'd all agree that if we were not to have this, the utilities
company would have canceled us -- canceled service for sure.
Did we have water and sewer service based on the agreement? I
would have to say yes; however, usage was with the permission of the
utility company. They had several options over a ten-year period,
including termination of service.
The utilities publicly admitted responsibility for the billing yet
we are to pay for their mistake.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. I hate to stop you.
MS. WALSH: I know. Could I take on Mr. -- I have another
three minutes with Mr. Ruse. May I continue.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. You're going to give your time up?
MS. WALSH: Yeah. He's going to give -- he's going to give me
-- he's going to give me another minute, and then I'm going to give it
to him.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Who is he? I'm sorry. Who's the next
speaker?
MS. FILSON: Richard Ruse.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is that you, sir?
MS. WALSH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And you want to give some of your time
to her?
MS. WALSH: Yes.
MR. RUSE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. No, he has to tell me yes, not you.
MS. WALSH: I'm sorry. I'm trying so fast to get this done
quickly.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So we'll start your time -- his
name now.
MS. WALSH: May I?
MS. FILSON: Yes.
Page 203
-"',~,....~ -.~.-
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And he can come up here.
MS. WALSH: If usage is an issue, how can they charge for
service never received because you did not own the home?
We were required to sign an agreement -- of number six -- with
Hillcrest to take sole responsibility for the back-sewer charges.
Number seven, we were under threat of disconnect from the CCU,
which is the utilities company, if the back-sewer charges were not
paid or the agreement was not signed.
This is a community of 55 and older, our retirees or a
combination of veterans, disabled men and women, single women,
single men and couples ranging in age from 55 to 85, majority over
62. Many homeowners paid and signed out of fear of disconnect.
The park owner, Hillcrest, is now receiving all 200-plus
homeowner water/sewer bills. I believe they are considering a
monthly report from the utilities company. This would allow the
homeowners to receive the monthly statements, again, without the $2
charge.
I strongly urge the commissioner to consider this as some form of
accounting. Just show the two statements. This is the first statement,
this is mine. You will see it's in my name, my account number.
There's no amortization schedule, no balance amount after payment
received.
Not everybody has a computer. Your choices are limited. Pay
by computer or pay by phone. Pay by phone and you have no
accounting. The $2 duplicate charge is adding insult to injury.
Due to the errors from the utilities company, I am now paying
$40 a month in addition to what I normally pay.
You are on fixed income in this community. You do not receive
increases to cover costs. You're supposed to learn from your mistakes,
not get paid for them.
I understand that you are the governing arm of the utility
company. I do not think I have to remind the commission of the
Page 204
-
July 28, 2009
economic depression our country is in and how it affects the elderly in
our community, nor do I have to remind the commissioners
foreclosures are on the rise and they cover all ages.
I don't believe we are going to receive the annual cost-of-living
increase from social security in 20 I O. Fixed-income retirees have
nowhere to turn when faced with additional monthly costs without the
annual increase. I realize this might be a gray area, and you're the
only one that can help us.
This gentleman here, please allow him to speak.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You didn't leave him much time.
MS. WALSH: I know. Hurry, hurry. Come on up here,
Richard.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm sorry.
MS. WALSH: I'm trying, I'm trying.
MR. RUSE: I bought my residence on the 23rd of February of
this year, and I did not incur any of the debt for the sewer bill;
however, I'm being billed $1,300 in -- $1,309.20 for a sewer bill that I
didn't incur.
MS. WALSH: No usage. Didn't use it.
MR. RUSE: I didn't use it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Boy, I don't know what we do about
something like that.
MS. WALSH: Well, I think the whole thing was, if you used it,
you paid for it; am I right? Is that basically how it went?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't know. I'll have to talk to our
utilities.
MS. WALSH: Okay. Because if you don't use it, I don't see how
you can charge somebody.
MS. FILSON: Madam Chairman, your final speaker is Allen
Bobo.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I thought you had four speakers.
MS. FILSON: Well, the other lady went home ill.
Page 205
.'A'~.""_""""~,_,,,, .----
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. And then Joe, I'll have you
back up to answer that question, if you would.
MR. BOBO: Commissioners, I'm really just here to answer any
questions you may have regarding this. Basically, the county billed
138 of the customers correctly and apparently didn't billl32 of those
customers.
From the park owner's perspective, in 1999 we entered into a
comprehensive agreement with the homeowners association that
resolved a number of issues in the community relating to rents. One
of those issues was, we agreed with the homeowners association that
the homeowners would individually pay for their sewer cost. In return
for that, we would reduce their rent by a negotiated amount.
We have provided them the rent reduction, then they are
responsible for the sewer bill as it comes due. So we recognized the
authority of the commission to recover this sum of money. And our
preference would obviously be to soften the financial impact as much
as possible to the residents who will ultimately bear the responsibility,
but that's basically our contractual relationship with the homeowners
through the homeowners association.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you. Joe?
MR. BELLONE: And for clarity, Commissioners -- again, Joe
Bellone, for the record. We were pursuing the payment of those back
charges from the park owner, Hillcrest Estates, Inc.
They, in turn, are requiring their residents to sign -- to cosign the
agreements. The agreement that Mrs. Walsh put up there showed you
that what was in her name, it said property owner was Hillcrest
Estates, and that's who we're pursuing the payment from is actually the
property owner, and -- the property owner, Hillcrest Estates.
We provided the service to the property, regardless of whose
home was on it at the time.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So let me just see if I understand what
you just said, okay?
Page 206
~--..- ..........-
July 28, 2009
MR. BELLONE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So you're pursuing the payment for the
back -sewer charges from the property owner -- and I'm going to ask
you in a second so you can answer this. I'm going to ask you if you're
going to be paying that. That's going to be my question to you -- not
from these residents and yet this gentleman who just moved in in
February has received a bill for sewerage that he never even used.
MR. BELLONE: When we met with the park manager at the
time, the resident manager for Hillcrest Estates -- Tom Wides, myself,
and my customer service manager met with him in early April. Once
we did all our audits, found out how many accounts had not been
billed, at their request, at the park owner's request, we prepared the
letters saying, these were the back charges, these are the accounts,
these are the addresses where the service was provided. We delivered
those to the park owner, and the park owner then passed that
documentation on to the residents in the park, their tenants, along with
the agreements that the park owner requested that they cosign.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So what you just said was, you sent the
bill to Hillcrest, they then sent the bill on to whomever was living on
the property at that time to pay all the back expenses; is that what you
just said?
MR. BELLONE: That's correct, Commissioner. The -- as I
explained before, the property owner is the relationship that the utility
has per our billing ordinance, and any relationship they have beyond
that with tenants, the utility is not a part of that type of agreement.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So in other words, the tenants then
really have a problem with the property owner, not with our public
utilities, because our public utilities is trying to get the money from
the property owner; is that correct?
MR. BELLONE: That's correct, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And then they're trying to get the money
from whomever it is that is living on the property.
Page 207
---
July 28, 2009
MR. BELLONE: Today.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Today, okay, no matter who lived on it
before.
Okay. Fine. So now, sir?
MR. BOBO: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now that I've -- I understand what we're
just talking about. Commissioner Halas, I'll get to you in a second.
What are you going to do about that?
MR. BOBO: We have an agreement that dates back to 1999 with
the homeowners association which established rents and established
the responsibility to pay for sewer service. We reduced the residents'
rent in return for their agreement to pay for their own sewer usage.
We have continued to give the residents the monthly rent
reduction that we promised even during the months in which the
county was not billing them directly for their sewer use. So we have
fulfilled our contractual relationship. We have given the residents the
rent reduction to which they were entitled.
Now, under the terms of this settlement agreement that we've
reached with the homeowners association, yes, ma'am, we will expect
them to pay any sums of money that are due the county for sewer
usage.
MR. DAMOND: Can I ask why we got a letter from the county
saying if we didn't pay this, our service would be discontinued? Why
from the county --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know what, sir, you can't talk from
the audience. Please, come up here.
MR. DAMOND: I'm a resident. I've lived there for nine years. I
-- lost my train of thought.
We -- why then did the county send us a letter with the county
headline on it saying that if you didn't pay this, you didn't sign this and
be responsible for this in full, that your service would be terminated?
This scared a bunch of people. This is why some people paid.
Page 208
_e__"' ,---~
July 28, 2009
You're dealing with a bunch of older people, and they're intimidated
by this. If this is the case, then why did the county send me personally
a letter?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't know that, so I'll let --
MR. BELLONE: The utility bills -- and, again, talking with
County Attorney's Office. We've had questions before about why all
of our utility bills have a notice on them that say, failure to pay the bill
may result in -- may result in termination of service. Failure to notice,
in other words, if you don't tell someone that if they don't pay their bill
they might be -- if you don't tell them, you have no way of actually
collecting that revenue.
So for many, many years we've had that notice. I know every one
of our utility bills and every one of our agreements that go out for
installment plans -- and by the way, we have -- we do realize that this
is -- it's a financial burden to anyone to have to pay back charges.
We initially offered several payment options. If you have it and
you could pay in full, by all means. If you couldn't, we'd be amenable
to interest-free payment plans. We originally offered a four-year,
48-month deferred payment plan, divide the amount you owe up into
48 equal payments.
Based on the meeting that we had on April 30th in the
community center with the residents who were affected, they did say,
please, can you help us out some more. And we can extend that to
seven years. So we have some payment plans out there that are eight
-- dividing those -- the payment that's due or the amount due into 84
equal installments.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Joe, my last question to you. Those
people who used to live there -- and there could have been two or
three that lived on that property before this gentleman moved in, right,
Mr. Ruse, before he moved in. Everybody got the benefit of the
discount that Hillcrest has offered them, so they had to pay lower rent
but they never paid any sewer charges.
Page 209
-~~"" ~.-
July 28, 2009
Now, this guy, unknowingly, buys the property, and all of a
sudden he's stuck with everybody else's back bill that really Hillcrest
gave them a discount for. Who's going to collect it from those people?
Why should this guy have to pay for it?
MR. WIDES: Commissioner, for the record, Tom Wides,
Operations Director. Just to -- just to -- as I've kind of listened here, I
want to keep the record along the line of, these tenants, okay -- these
are tenants that have an agreement with the property owner. Weare
looking to the property owner for payment, because that property
owner has not left. That property owner that we have the relationship
with has been here since -- all the way back to 2004. So in terms of
who's left and who is not left, the property owner is there.
The entangled part is between the property owner and their
tenants. It's not between the water/sewer district and the tenants. We
look to the property owner for payment. He turns around and has an
agreement with the tenants that they will pay his utility bills.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And yet I see from the paperwork that
you've put into our packet here that even though the tenants tried to
get a meeting with the property owner, they never bothered to show
up at all. Now, how are the tenants supposed to be talking with the
property owner if they'll no-show each time? You leave them in a
terrible bind.
MR. BOBO: I appreciate the relationship, ma'am. In -- under
the Mobile Home Act, the homeowners association is the
representative of the individual homeowners. So our dealings are
through the homeowners association.
What you're seeing here today is not the homeowners association
objecting, because the homeowners association recognizes that 138 of
the people were billed and did pay for their monthly sewer costs. Our
relationship, thus our contract, is with the homeowners association.
We respect that relationship and we deal through the homeowners
association.
Page 210
~. i"""._'.-.'.-' ---,,-,,~-
July 28, 2009
Also in your package is a letter from the president of the
homeowners association whereby he said he does not, or the
homeowners association as an entity, as the representative of the
homeowners, does not support nor does the homeowners association
oppose the efforts of the county.
So we respect our relationship with the homeowners association
and the fact that that is the statutory arm for the homeowners, so that
is who we have been dealing with. We can't necessarily deal with
every single resident in a mobile home park. That's not possible.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So then, County Attorney -- I mean, I
don't know what we're doing here. Where does this go? How does
this get resolved?
MR. KLATZKOW: You've got two primary choices here. One
choice is to go with staffs recommendation and basically tell the
disgruntled tenants that they need to go after the owner in a different
forum. That's why we have Small Claims Court. That's one approach.
And from a legal standpoint, the relationship is between the utility
and the owner, which makes this a very difficult conversation.
The other way is more of a sense of fairness. And if it strikes you
as palpably unfair that somebody's paying for usage that they didn't
use, all right, well, the mistake was ours, all right. I mean, at the very
beginning -- this doesn't happen unless we messed up on the billing.
And it would be within your purview if you wanted to to say, well, it
would be unfair for anybody who didn't use this to have to pay that.
Now, this may be an accounting nightmare for your PUD
department because we're talking about an awful lot of residents here.
But those are your two choices.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. WALSH: Excuse me. May I --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, ma'am. We're done, thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, let me get this straight. First
Page 211
'==-"--..-- ""...., .... -~,..~,.. .^ --~,-""'"._,
July 28, 2009
of all, this is a mobile home park. The people do not own the property
under their double wide or whatever they have, okay, manufactured
home, and the owner of the park way back when this was turned over
to the sewer district basically said, I'm going to help offset your costs
for using the sewer, and that is, I'm going to give you $9 a month, and
that $9 a month is to be used to pay the sewer bill.
So, what happened was, there was people that just ignored the $9
a month and felt that that was a gift, and those people that lived in that
manufactured home were using the sewer and weren't paying for it;
am I on the right track here?
MR. BOBO: They were not being billed by the county for it,
.
yes, SIr.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right. And it was -- but you were
being billed -- you, representing the landowner -- he was being billed,
and so really this needs to go to a Small Claims Court to take care of
this. If these -- and if these people want to carry this forward.
Now, the homeowners association, which is made up of residents
in this mobile home park, realize that there is a commitment that has
to be met. Whoever had the mistake, it's the idea that there was __ they
were supposed to be paying the sewer, and they weren't paying the
sewer even though they got the $9 a month.
So the end result is, some of these people left, and new people
moved in. And it's like, guess what? You have a problem with your
property that you didn't know about. And we have tons of that
throughout the county.
And in this case, the problem doesn't lie with the county. The
problem lies with the owner of the land in which the manufactured
home is sitting on; am I correct?
MR. BOBO: In this particular situation, Collier County actually
billed the residents directly, so Collier County sent bills to the
residents.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. But does the __
Page 212
'"~'---_._..
July 28, 2009
MR. BOBO: In many instances -- you're correct, yes, sir. In
many instances the park owner is billed, and then the park owner
generates a co-bill or a new bill to the residents. In this county, under
this community, billed the residents directly. They billed 138 of them
but apparently didn't bill 132.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. WIDES: Commissioner, if I may, just want a slight
correction of that. In fact, every one of those bills has Hillcrest
Estates as the payor on the bill, or the payee on the bill.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They own the land.
MR. WIDES: Now, Hillcrest Estates has requested us to send
duplicate bills to the individual tenants on their behalf, okay.
But, again, there's no question here, the owner has been there.
The owner, in our minds, has allowed the use of the sewer. So we
really, from a fairness point of view, they were there, okay. They had
the ability to enforce payment, okay. We actually did a service.
That's the duplicate bill that's sent to the individual tenants, an
agreement that we're not party to. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas -- or I mean
Commissioner Henning or Commissioner Coyle, any comments?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, this is an internal
problem, Commissioner Fiala, and I'm not sure that we really need to
get involved. I understand the comments of the residents, but we
didn't create this problem. It's been -- it's been there, and it sounds
like internally the community's been working on it. Why should we
get involved?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I could just make one statement.
I would hope that the people who are -- who have been treated
unfairly in this particular case understand that our job is to manage the
Page 213
~"--="~.....-..~,
July 28, 2009
taxpayers' money in the wisest possible way. So when they -- when
we -- even if we have done something wrong, we must be careful
about taking taxpayer money from other people and giving it to people
who have suffered some wrong, particularly if we don't have a legal
obligation for doing so.
And so, we're in a very difficult position here. If we failed to bill
these people over a long period of time, we just can't arbitrarily turn
around and punish the other taxpayers by our error.
So -- but I do believe that the very least we can do is prorate
those billings based upon the period of occupancy by the residents. I
do think it's unfair that they should pay for some prior resident,
although theoretically the proper due diligence would, perhaps, have
revealed this problem. But I am not even sure of that since we failed
to do the billing.
So this is not an easy issue to resolve, even though we might
sympathize with the people who are caught in this bind.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now, the staffs recommendation, from
what I can review, is to pursue collection of the back sewer charges
from the Tall Oaks community property owner, Hillcrest, in the
amount of$180,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I help you?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coyle brings a
good point, is, we shouldn't punish the people who purchased into this
problem; therefore, I make a motion that we direct staff to offer those
adjustments to residents that can prove a time line of when they
occupied the property.
So what I'm saying is, if a person has purchased into the
Page 214
'''''''--'''''''''
July 28, 2009
community in 2005 but they have outstanding balances with Collier
County Utilities, the clock started in 2005, not in 1999. You see what
I mean?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, I do. And then would they collect
the rest of it from Hillcrest themselves?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I mean, Hillcrest __
Hillcrest did not receive the benefit. It was the -- it was the occupant
who received the benefit, whether they're there now, can -- we're
going to have to collect from them, or if they're -- if there's new
people in there, it's just -- it's part of doing business. You can't go
back on somebody who wasn't there previously or the homeowners
association.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So--
MR. WIDES: Commissioner, may I respond?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
MR. WIDES: First off, what we've already done is, our statute of
limitation allows us to only go back four years. This goes back
actually eight years. So, in essence, we've forgiven four years of that
billing anyway due to the statute of limitations, number one.
And number two, I believe the property owner, Hillcrest Estates,
has received that benefit over time because they did -- they were able
to maintain their lots and have them occupied and gain the rent from
that.
So in the worst-case scenario, what I would propose is that the
utility, in fact, directly applies any of those remaining charges back to
Hillcrest, as you had suggested, for that period of time. We will put it
on their common account and charge them back directly, and then
they can deal with the property owners as -- excuse me -- with their
tenants as they wish.
The unfortunate part here is that there's all individual meters on
each one of those locations. So if we turn the water meter off, that
means the tenant receives the penalty as opposed to the property
Page 215
.-.-._"--
July 28, 2009
owner.
So, again, my suggestion then is that we revert all these charges
to a common account with the property owner and let the property
owner deal directly with their tenants.
MR. BOBO: Madam Commissioner, in fairness, if those bills go
to us in any respect, under the terms of our mediation agreement and
our agreement with the homeowners association, they will be passed
through to the individual residents.
See, in a mobile home park situation, oftentimes the park owner
is not involved in a tenant-to-tenant sale. There's no requirement
under the Mobile Home Act that one resident come into the park and
broker the home through the park. The residents sell among
themselves.
So ultimately, it will be going back, and it will go back to the
tenant who is occupying that lot under the contractual arrangement.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And would you go back and collect from
all the tenants that you didn't collect from before?
MR. BOBO: No, ma'am. Under the Mobile Home Act, a tenant
who buys a home assumes the tenancy of its -- of the resale seller. So
resale buyer assumes the tenancy of the resale seller or vice versa.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I think we've heard enough of
this. I'm going to go -- make a motion that the board approve staffs
recommendation to pursue collection of the sewer back charges within
the Tall Oaks community from the property owner, Hillcrest Estates,
Incorporated, in the amount of $180,000.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do I hear a second?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm still thinking about it. I wanted to hear
Commissioner Henning's motion again.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, my motion,
Commissioner Fiala, is to direct staff to collect the funds from the
Page 216
"~..~-,,,_.~,.~
July 28, 2009
individual homeowners unless they can prove that they moved in in a
period of time that they was not directly responsible for that bill.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I like that, but I don't think
they can do it. We have to go to Hillcrest.
So I second your motion, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is your motion what staff
recommendations was?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any further comment?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye, opposed.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, 3-2.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Another 3-2.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yep. Okay. And we'll have a break right
now.
MR.OCHS: Ten minutes?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Ten minutes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, you're sure this is going to be
a break, right?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, it is, and we're going to check on
you to make sure you're taking one.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. You call me every minute
Page 217
-_~_'"~_,~C _
July 28, 2009
while we're on this break, and if I answer, remind me that I should be
taking a break.
(A brief recess was had.)
Item #14A
CRA RESOLUTION 2009-195: APPROVING THE FORM OF A
LOAN AGREEMENT WITH FIFTH THIRD BANK FOR A
$13,500,000 TERM LOAN; THE CRA CHAIRMAN TO SIGN
AND MAKE PAYMENTS AS NEEDED TO PURCHASE REAL
PROPERTY AND FINANCE VARIOUS CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WITHIN THE BA YSHORE
GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE CRA; PLEDGE BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y
TRIANGLE CRA TAX INCREMENT FUNDS (TIF) AND OTHER
LEGALL Y A V AILABLE MONIES AS THE LOAN REPAYMENT
SOURCE; AND ALL NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS _
ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, you have a live mike.
We're going to move at this point, Madam Chair, with your
permission, to the -- Item 14 on your agenda, which is your Airport
Authority and Community Redevelopment Agency, beginning with
14A. 14A is a recommendation that the CRA approve a resolution
approving the form of a loan agreement with Fifth Third Bank for a
$13,500,000 term loan; authorize the CRA chairman to make
payments as needed to purchase real property; and finance various
capital improvement projects within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
CRA; pledge Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA tax increment funds
and other legally available moneys as the loan repayment source; and
authorize all necessary budget amendments.
This item to be heard before Item 10E or, conversely, 10E will be
heard immediately after this item.
Page 218
~---,
July 28, 2009
Mr. David Jackson, your executive director of the
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle will present.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Halas and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any comments? How about from the peanut gallery? Anything,
Commissioner Coyle, Commissioner Henning? Hello? They're still
on break.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MS. FILSON: You have no speakers.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Hello.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle, I hope we
didn't disturb you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's like he fell out of --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're ready to vote on this item.
This is 14 --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: According to my watch, I still have
another seven minutes. No, I have -- I have no comment. I am in
support of the request.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay, thank you.
And with that, no other comments, all those in favor of the
motion, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
Opposed.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0.
Page 219
.~~-'''"--
July 28, 2009
Item #10E
RESOLUTION 2009-196: AUTHORIZING THE COLLIER
COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA)
TO ENTER INTO A $13,500,000 TERM LOAN AGREEMENT
WITH FIFTH THIRD BANK; APPROVING THE ACTIONS
TAKEN BY THE CRA WITH RESPECT TO ITS APPRO V AL OF
THE LOAN AGREEMENT; AND AUTHORIZE ALL
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners. We're going to ask
you to put your BCC hats back on now and move to Item 10E, and
that is a recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners approves the resolution authoring the Collier County
Community Redevelopment Agency to enter into a $13,500,000 term
loan agreement with Fifth/Third Bank approving actions taken by the
CRA with respect to its approval of the loan agreement and authorize
all necessary budget amendments.
Mr. Jackson's available to present.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Coletta, a second by Commissioner Halas.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
Page 220
".._---~".,
July 28, 2009
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good, 5-0.
Item #14B
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF AN ASSEMBLAGE OF SIX (6) COMMERCIAL
PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE GATEWAY TRIANGLE
REDEVELOPMENT AREA; AUTHORIZE THE CRA
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE REAL EST A TE CONTRACT
AND ADDENDUM; APPROVE PAYMENT FROM FUND (187)
AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO MAKE
PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,386,000 PLUS COST AND
EXPENSES TO COMPLETE THE SALE OF SUBJECT
PROPERTY; AND APPROVE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS. SITE ADDRESS: 5.358 ACRES WITHIN THE
GA TEW A Y MINI-TRIANGLE (FISCAL IMP ACT $6,386,000) _
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Okay. Now we're back to the CRA with Chairman
Coletta. Takes us to 14B. And this is a recommendation for the
Community Redevelopment Agency to approve the purchase of an
assemblage of six commercial properties located in the Gateway
Triangle redevelopment area; authorize the CRA chairman to execute
the real estate contract and addendum; approve payment from Fund
187; and authorize the executive director to make payment in the
amount of $6,386,000 plus costs and expenses to complete the sale of
subject property; and approve all necessary budget amendments. Site
address, 5.358 acres within the Gateway Mini-triangle.
Ms. Jean Jordan, your Project Manager from your CRA, is
available to present.
Page 221
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Fiala, we have a second by Commissioner Coyle -- or
Halas, excuse me. Commissioner Halas.
Any comments or questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 50-0.
Wonderful presentation.
MS. JORDAN: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
Item #14C
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO
APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
AS PART OF AN ASSEMBLAGE OF COMMERCIAL
PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE GATEWAY TRIANGLE
REDEVELOPMENT AREA; AUTHORIZE THE CRA
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE REAL EST A TE CONTRACT
AND ADDENDUM; APPROVE PAYMENT FROM FUND (187)
AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO MAKE
PA YMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,114,000 PLUS COST AND
Page 222
~."__~'h>~.
July 28, 2009
EXPENSES TO COMPLETE THE SALE OF SUBJECT
PROPERTY; AND APPROVE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS. SITE ADDRESS: 0.935 ACRES WITHIN THE
GATEWA Y MINI-TRIANGLE (FISCAL IMPACT $1,114,000)
- APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 14C is your next item. It's a recommendation for
the Community Redevelopment Agency to approve the purchase of a
commercial property as part of an assemblage of commercial
properties located in the Gateway/Triangle redevelopment area,
authorize the CRA chairman to execute the real estate contract and
addendum; approve payment from Fund 187; and authorize the
executive director to make payment in the amount of $l, 114,000 plus
costs and expenses to complete the sale of subject property; and
approve all necessary budget amendments. Site address is .935 acres
within the Gateway mini-triangle.
And again, Ms. Jordan is available to present.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETT A: I have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Fiala, second by Commissioner Halas.
Any comments, questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Hearing none, all those in favor, indicate
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETT A: Aye.
Opposed?
(No response.)
Page 223
<''''--~-'''-'-
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I didn't hear Coyle, but I heard
Henning's.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I said aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. We just want to make sure
you're still awake.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: See, that one wasn't 3-2.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: About time.
Item #10G
A TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX CATEGORY B GRANT
APPLICA TION FOR A MEXICAN INDEPENDENCE DAY
CELEBRATION EVENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,112 AND
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN SAID AGREEMENT
- MOTION TO BE AN ADVERTISING EXPENSE FOR A MULTI-
CUL TURAL EVENT - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: That takes us back, Madam Chairman, to I tern lOG,
and that is an item that was previously 16F 12. It's a recommendation
that the Board of Commissioners approves a tourist development tax
category B grant application for a Mexican Independence Day
celebration event in the amount of$14, 112 and authorize the chairman
to sign said agreement.
MS. FILSON: And, Madam Chairman, I have one speaker on
this issue.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Maybe we could clear this up
quickly. My concern is that we have a lot of nationalities in this
community, and it didn't set right with me when we say that this is the
American Independence (sic) Day celebration -- Mexican
Independence Day celebration. We don't celebrate Bastille Day, we
Page 224
---^'
July 28, 2009
don't celebrate Canadian holidays when they got their independence
from England, and so on and so on.
And so my only concern is when we put forth taxpayers' dollars
that represent Mexican Independence Day when this is the United
States of America. And that's -- that's why I pulled this.
I felt that all of us -- I understand that you may want to celebrate
your heritage. Myself, I'm Hungarian descent, and we sure haven't
come to the Board of County Commissioners looking for money to
have a celebration of any kind. If we want a celebration, then we step
up to the plate and raise our own money for the celebration. So that
was my concern.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I, too, had a concern. Oh, Commissioner
Henning, okay, I'll call on you in a second.
I, too, had a certain, and that was, one other time -- and this is
maybe unfair -- but one other time when there was a big Mexican
celebration, they were holding the American flag upside-down, and I
felt that that was an insult. Well, it was an insult to us. And I thought,
Independence Day, would they feel they were independent from
Americans -- and, you know, I would never want to see them hold a
flag upside-down, hold our flag upside-down again.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Disrespect.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's right. So anyway, that was my
concern.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I guess I have to
agree with Commissioner Halas. It might be the first time this year. I
might even go out and celebrate that I agree with Commissioner Halas
the first time this year.
The -- but it does make a very valid point, is, we do have so
many nationalities out there, and if we start celebrating those, we're
going to run into a problem. Now, we do recognize Cinco de Mayo.
Page 225
~v",-~_,..,__.,..
July 28, 2009
In fact, we have placed a service tax on that previously, I believe, but
-- and that's not just about, you know, one nation. It's about the
Hispanic nation. So I guess I'd support denying the item.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Whoa. I got to tell you, this
isn't about Mexican Independence Day. This is about an economic
incentive to bring people to Immokalee under tourist development. I
mean, let's get real on this. I mean, Mexicans holding the flag
upside-down in California or whatever, and we're going to bring it all
the way back to this? I mean, that's a far stretch from where we're
trying to be.
Once again, it's not designed to be able to honor the Mexicans
that died in Independence Day or whatever it is. This is to bring
people to Immokalee under tourist development to be able to get them
there to be spend their dollars to be able to carry it to the next point.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I could weigh in on this. I
happen to agree with what appears to be the majority of the
commissioners on this.
As I understand this, this is a request for a Mexican
Independence Day celebration. And while I certainly respect the
interest of Mexicans to celebrate their independence, I don't view that
as necessarily an economic incentive.
If we're going to spend money on an economic incentive, let's try
to do it on behalf of all of the nationalities that we have in the United
States and do it at one time and try to bring everyone together. If we
start funding celebrations by every ethnic group in the United States,
we're going to soon run out of money.
It's far better to spend the money on a -- an event that will bring
all of the ethnic groups together and not do it under the banner of a
single -- single group.
Page 226
,."--,,.-
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Our speaker is Penny?
MS. FILSON: Yeah. I have one speaker. Penny Phillipi.
MS. PHILLIPI: Penny Phillipi, the director of the Immokalee
CRA, for the record. I want to give you a bigger picture of what
you're looking at here. This is really an initiative that was catalyzed
by the lmmokalee CRA, and the initiative is called a celebration of
cultures.
And within that celebration of cultures, there are many, many
partnerships. Our CMA is one of them. The census folks at Chamber
of Commerce. There isn't one piece of Immokalee that isn't
incorporated into the celebration of cultures.
And if you'll look at the website, it's called Immokalee
Celebration dot com, and it's called el grito. It's a greeting. And what
will happen on this -- during this event will be, on Friday night at six
o'clock, there'll be a parade, and it will end at the -- down Main Street,
it will end at the airport, and there the Mexican consulate will be there,
and hopefully a lot of our officials and representatives will be there as
well to greet the evening -- bring the evening in with mariachis.
On Saturday there will be an arts show, there will be a children's
pavilion, there will be many Hispanics artists, not just Mexican and so
on. So the whole event goes on for the three days.
Later during the year there's another group that's part of this that
wants to have Haitian celebrations. So as this board of directors of the
celebration of cultures develops, more and more -- yes, more and more
cultures do become incorporated in it.
Currently, Immokalee is 87 percent Hispanic. So predominantly
they will be South American. What they're calling this is honoring
our Mexican heritage, celebrating our American future. And it's been
made really plain that anyone with a political agenda wouldn't be
welcome. There's no alcohol. It's a family friendly three-day event
where people will be dancing and hopefully displaying their goods
and vending and having a wonderful get-together.
Page 227
. .--~"."'--...........-...,..,"~^-
July 28, 2009
The advertising, as you know, for the TDC cannot be done within
the county. This is to bring other people from other counties into
Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can you -- can I ask one?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Go ahead, sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The thing that -- as I said, as you
and I talked outside in the hall, the thing that didn't set well with me is,
then you should have called it something else; because in our staff
report, it definitely says, application for a Mexican Independence Day
celebration. And if you would have come up with another name that
incorporated all of the heritages of Haitian and everybody else -- you
just made a statement that you're going to have a Haitian day, so does
that mean that you're going to come back again and say, now we need
some more funding, TDC funding, to have a Haitian day? This is --
MS. PHILLIPI: I don't know. What I do know is there's many,
many sponsors putting in lots and lots of funds. This -- I had no
control over this executive summary or what we -- I did help with the
application to the TDC, but beyond that I didn't have a great deal of
input into this.
What I'm trying to do is just give you the bigger picture of yes,
there are a lot of cultures in Immokalee and, yes, they have historical
events that they want to celebrate.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But I'm hoping that we're not
opening up Pandora's box to whereby we're going to have -- you're
going to be coming forward and saying, now we need some funding
from TDC for a Haitian day, and then the next one might be for --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Guatemalan.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- Guatemalan or whatever, and
that's what I'm concerned about. If you just would have come in--
because now this is -- basically you're -- you've pointed to one thing,
and that is Mexican Independence Day.
MS. PHILLIPI: And that is the first event that is correct. It will
Page 228
>-""-#."",--,-~,,,,...,..
July 28, 2009
be el greto, which is the greeting day of the Mexican people.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But do you understand where I'm
going?
MS. PHILLIP I : I do understand, yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We don't want to end up having to
fund for 30 different nationalities for -- because now we've opened up
Pandora's box here saying, guess what, we're going to have Mexican
Independence Day. Somebody else is going to come in and say, hey,
wait a minute. You just okayed this, so now I want my nationality and
I want to get some money so we can have funding and a party or
whatever else for my particular nationality. That's what my concern
. k ?
is, 0 ay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. You know, let's
talk about realities here. We're not funding the damn thing. The thing
is already paid for. What we're funding is advertising outside of
Collier County to bring more people into Immokalee to try to help the
economy, to try to keep everything going forward. This is the off
season for them, too.
I don't see anything wrong with it. You know, I mean -- the only
thing that we need to judge, are we going to be able to have a
sufficient return for the investment that we put out there, like we do
for every event, whether it be an art festival or swamp buggies or
whatever. Are we going to bring enough people in to be able to justify
the expense.
The event itself is totally covered by private donations and by the
community itself. The only thing you're paying for is advertising
outside of Collier County. You're not paying for the event. That's a
misconception you keep repeating.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let me -- okay. Let me ask a question,
because maybe this will help clear it up for me. Is this something the
CRA is sponsoring?
Page 229
July 28, 2009
MS. PHILLIPI: Well, we catalyzed it actually.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Tell me what that means.
MS. PHILLIPI: It began probably about a year ago when a
group of elders came into my office and wanted to talk about how --
what can we do as people who live here, because we aren't actively
involved in the master plan process. They don't have a lot of input
and yet they've lived in the community for as many as 50 years.
These are very elder persons.
Their concern was that many of the second and third generation
children in Immokalee don't speak Spanish. They also don't know
very much of their history or their heritage. So this is a concern to
them, and asked me, would I help them work through getting some
things going so that they could have these -- this heritage, you know,
passed on to them.
Well, as you know by education, I'm an anthropologist. That
seemed pretty important to me. And when the Mexican consulate
stepped forward and said he would put up a kiosk and help with, you
know, historical information and things like that and to bring dancers
from the different -- and artisans from the different states in Mexico to
the event at no charge to us, then it seemed almost as if it were
possible to start having this kind of event.
And what this -- what this group -- and I mean, they really went
to work on it. Usually when you're on a committee, you have to really
pull teeth to get people to -- okay, you get the dancers, you do the
parade. With this group, that didn't happen. It was, let me go get the
dancers. Let me work on the parade.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So this wasn't inspired by the CRA?
MS. PHILLIPI: No.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's something that you've been invited to
participate in.
MS. PHILLIPI: More or less. That's probably a better way to
put it, yes.
Page 230
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And they then turned to the TDC and
said, we need some advertising dollars for this portion. Everything
else is funded. Is that -- is that what I'm hearing?
MS. PHILLIPI: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, okay. Because I don't think that
that was made clear at all. Until you came up, I had no idea that CRA
was even involved in that. Is the CRA putting dollars into this?
MS. PHILLIPI: What we're doing is we're helping with staff
time, we're helping do the permits, we're helping, you know, the
parade permits, the event permits. We're helping them find sponsors
and that sort of thing.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I see.
MS. PHILLIPI: We're sponsoring the meetings, providing
meeting places where they can meet and things like that, yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This thing is very misleading, as
evidenced by our conversation here, but maybe there's a way we can
clear it up. I do -- like most of the other commissioners, I don't think
it's a good idea for us to set the precedent of supporting, either through
advertising or any other medium, to support specific celebrations for
specific ethnic groups.
And I think we should -- if we're going to approve something,
let's approve this as an advertising expense on behalf of the tourist
development organization to encourage attendance at a multicultural
celebration in Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if we do that, we can -- we can
provide the money for advertising and essentially put everybody on
notice without disrupting their current plans that we want it to be
multicultural, it should be all inclusive, and -- so that we don't get
Page 231
"'-'---',~
July 28, 2009
ourselves in a trap that requires us to spend money on virtually every
celebration somebody wants to have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I think by having the CRA as a
sponsor, what that says is, all kinds of different groups can't come in,
you know, but you're like the umbrella. That changes the context, I
believe.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's the point I was trying to
make earlier on, that because Penny -- and I didn't mean to put her in a
bind, but she made a statement that later on they were going to come
back with the Haitian celebration, and obviously that was going to be
-- so if we can incorporate the Haitians and everybody else out there in
Immokalee into one big party, I think that will cover all aspects of this
problem.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the Hungarians, too.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And the Hungarians.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Don't forget the Irish. I have not
seen a St. Patrick's Day celebration in Jmmokalee in a long, long time.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The gypsies will be there. The
Hungarian gypsies will be there with their wagon.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Those are not Irish.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: The two Hungies are sitting here, right? I
know you didn't sign up to speak, but --
MS. DeBENEDETTO: Debbi DeBenedetto, for the record, and
I'm with the tourism office, and I think this is viewed as an arts and
culture event. It was recommended by the TDC, so we're here to
support it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So I have a motion on the floor
from Commissioner Coy Ie and a second from Commissioner Coletta.
So further discussion?
(No response.)
Page 232
<<'-~'^ ,-..~...,._._..,...
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a 5-0.
MS. PHILLIPI: Thank you, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This is going to be a multicultural
event, right?
MS. PHILLIPI: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, did you see? The redness has all
gone out of Commissioner Coletta's face? That steam has died down.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That was the Mexican in me.
Item #IOH
BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO LOAN FUND 131 (DEVELOPER
SERVICES) A TOTAL OF $1,400,000 FROM FUND 306 (PARKS
& RECREATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT) - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, your next item is 10H. It was
formerly 16A18. It's a recommendation to approve budget
amendments to loan Fund 131, developer services, a total of
$1,400,000 from Fund 306, parks and recreational capital
improvement.
Mr. Mullee from your Development/Environmental Services is
here to present.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Who pulled this, Leo?
MR. OCHS: Commissioner Henning requested this move.
Page 233
..^--=.~.,.~,-'^
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Before we even get into it, Gary,
Commissioner Henning, would you -- did you want to talk about this
particular one?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And I don't have any
questions from staff, but what are we thinking here? I mean, this is --
you're taking taxpayers' money to fund an operation that should be
operating on fees, and now we're taking money from parks and rec,
$1.4-million loan, which is property tax moneys. What kind of
message are we sending to the public?
You know, you want to resolve this issue and be at a fee
operation. If they can't operate off their fees -- which I can't see how
they're going to pay it back unless they create fees that are not
justified -- that's the only way you're going to get back is charge more
than what you are, is either downsize that department or privatize it.
Go out to bid.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Go out to bid and let them --
let's compete and see what kind of best value we can get.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Just a minute. Let me get Commissioner
Halas, then you will be next, Commissioner Coy Ie.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. We had a discussion early
on today in regards to a certain individual that claimed that he was a
fee officer, and obviously he doesn't generate enough fees to warrant
his department to be fully functional.
In our case, we got a department that's under the Board of County
Commissioners, that obviously he's told us a number of times that he
has -- he needs to raise his fees in order to make sure that he is
solvent. And I think that that individual is going to be coming before
us in September with a new fee schedule so that he can adjust that
Page 234
<,-"",--,~,."
July 28, 2009
accordingly.
So I understand where you're coming from, Commissioner
Henning, and I think that there's been some communities not too far
away from here who have looked at the ability of going out and
privatizing the same -- the same type of department as we're talking
about in this particular budget or this particular item and agenda, and I
believe that that city has found out that it's cost them -- it's cost them a
lot more than they anticipated.
So I think what this is, it's a loan, and I believe that since there's
been reports that the housing has increased by II percent the last
month, that should be an indication that maybe we're rapidly getting
out of this downturn in the economy and hopefully that the -- this loan
will be paid off at a very rapid rate.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would just like to make the
observation that if we could -- in development services, if we could
charge $7 per transaction, we could probably fund the entire
department without any loans. You think that would be possible? If
the clerk can do that and it seems to be acceptable, why couldn't we?
But on a more serious note, whatever you do with this, I think we
need to start charging interest on these loans; because if we're loaning
this money to somebody, we are, in fact, not receiving interest on
money and it is thereby a cost to the department that is loaning the
money.
So we do a lot of loaning between departments nowadays
because we're having to make up for shortages in impact fees and
other things. So I guess I wouldn't be seriously concerned about the
loan if two things occurred. One, we start charging interest on all of
these loans that we make between departments; and number two, that
we, in fact, take a real hard look at privatizing these kinds of services.
So with those two caveats, I would not have a problem approving
this particular loan.
Page 235
'.-.--....,.,...,-...."...,,,''''.
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. You know, privatization
is not something I'm opposed to, but I'm having a hard time
understanding the benefit of charging our different departments
interest on money that we transferred back and forth. I mean, it's the
way we make the whole thing work. And to charge an interest on top
of it, it's just going to complicate it. I don't know, maybe somebody
from staff -- how about you, Leo, can you comment on that?
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, I'm going to ask Mark Isackson.
He's had some research the he did on this item about charging interest
in inter-fund loans.
Mark?
MR. ISACKSON: I would -- Commissioners, for the record,
Mark Isackson with the office of management and budget. If 306,
which is where the loan is originating, if 306 had received interest, and
they do not, then I would be more inclined to agree with
Commissioner Coyle's analysis. But 306 doesn't receive interest.
That money's all going to the general fund right now, all the interest
proceeds when we did the MOU 2003.
There are only a select number of funds that are receiving
interest. So if there was a fund receiving interest, then -- and they
were loaning money, then I would, in fact, agree with the assumption
that interest should be charged and paid back to the fund where that
loan was originating and where the -- that fund was receiving interest.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I don't quite understand what
you just told me, that this money is going back to the general fund. I
would certainly hope that unexpended funds in the general fund are,
indeed, generating interest because they're being invested, I hope?
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, all I'm saying is that there's no
interest deposit in the -- in Fund 306 where the loan is being
originated. The -- when the Memorandum of Agreement was put
together back in 2003, the general fund was going to be the recipient
Page 236
.,_._-~._...' - ....
July 28, 2009
of all the interest income from a select number of funds. That's the
only point I'm trying to make here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was the money-laundering
deal that the clerk did; is that what you're talking about?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. We're referring to the 2002 resolution of
the board that --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we're referring to the same
thing then, right?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So what we did, and apparently are
continuing to do, is we are taking money from various sources,
investing it, and then returning the money, the interest money, to the
general fund which, in my estimation, is -- borders on being illegal,
but I suspect it's not. And in this -- in these cases, some of this money
very well could be impact fees that are paid by developers. Their
moneys are being invested in interest-bearing accounts, and the
interest earned on their money is given to us through the general fund,
and then we can spend it on anything else we want to. It doesn't have
to be spent on impact- fee-related issues. Do I have that right?
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, these were funds back in 2002 that
the board and the clerk got together with the resolution so that we
would have funding available and the flexibility for this board to fund
its backlog in the road program. And certain funds, the interest on
those funds were returned back to the board from the clerk into the
general fund. Others, like your public utilities division, those funds,
the interest stays with the principal on those moneys. But some stay
with it, some don't.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. We're talking about the
same thing. You guys are just being very, very careful not to tell
people what's really happening here.
MR.OCHS: No. This was brought up during your budget
workshops, and we had originally talked about this loan in your two
Page 237
,-,,---".....~_.,' ~ """"~~~~~,..,~"
July 28, 2009
days of budget workshops with a loan from your Fund III to this
fund, and the Productivity Committee and Ms. Vasey in particular
didn't want you to make that loan out of Ill, so you directed us to go
find that -- another fund and make that loan.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
MR.OCHS: So that's what we've done, and we've brought it
back to you now for approval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But the thing I'm dealing
with here now is the interest issue. And the allegation that this money,
Fund 306, doesn't generate any interest, that the interest goes into the
general fund, well, it goes into the general fund because we're
laundering the money.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That sounds so --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we're stripping the principal of
its interest rather than returning the interest to the principal which
generated the interest.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, did you want to
make a motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll make a motion that we
approve staffs recommendation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion on the floor to approve
staffs recommendation and a second.
Any further communication?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. These are clearly
moneys for projects within parks and rec. They're not impact fees.
They're tax dollars, all right? And you're loaning it to an organization
that is fee generated. And something that should have been done a
Page 238
"---~~,"..-
July 28, 2009
long time ago, that division should have taken care of its own a long
time ago. Two or three years ago, there's a recommendation to hire a
whole bunch of more employees when clearly it was a downturn.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know, we're one whole family here,
aren't we?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, we're not.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, yes, we are, and we're all here --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So if I can finish, Commissioner
Fiala --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- because the ordinance says,
once a commissioner starts a conversation, that commissioner cannot
be interrupted.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, does the ordinance say that? I'm
sorry. I didn't see that ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll be glad to share that
with you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, we're considering raising
taxes on the public and doing away with some services but yet we're
taking moneys, their tax dollars, and giving them to community
development, which a lot of people don't benefit from. It's just a
wrong policy to do. And it's not being responsible.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a
second.
Any further discussion.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by significant
aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 239
".."._--~....-
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 3-2. Okay.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, ma'am.
Item #101
CHANGE ORDER #5 IN THE AMOUNT OF $190,437.50 TO
CONTRACT #06-3962 NEW DIVISIONAL SOFTWARE SYSTEM
FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 101 is formerly 16A21, and that was a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
change order number five in the amount of $190,437.50 to contract
063962, New Divisional Software System for Community
Development and Environmental Services. This item was moved at
Commissioner Henning's request.
MR. MULLEE: For the record, Gary Mullee, manager of
operations support, and I'll be happy to address your questions.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, this is actually an
after-the-fact approval?
MR. MULLEE: To be honest with you, the majority of items
here have not occurred yet. There's one or two items in the planning
department which were engaged by Municipal with the understanding
that this was going to go to the board for approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, looking at the change
orders that you have here on the list, some were done last year?
MR. MULLEE: Initially were proposed last year. We were
obviously running behind on the project schedule, so --
Page 240
_ ..~____.'....'_M'"
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And here we've got one in July
II, additional administrative assistance, $6,000. So that was already
done, right?
MR. MULLEE: When the proposal was put together and dated,
that does not necessarily mean the change order's been engaged.
That's when we got the quote.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, how much of it hasn't
been done?
MR. MULLEE: All the items in your executive summary, from
number two, number three, number four, have not been done. Two of
the items on number one have been done, and the remainder, one, two,
three, four, have not been done.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, is there -- is there
any way in the future that we can get approval before they're done?
MR. MULLEE: Absolutely. There was some confusion about
the rules, and a couple items were engaged, but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And how much do we have into
this?
MR. MUDD: This particular bunch of change orders total
$190,000. When we had this budget approved originally, it was
actually in 2003 when the software budget was approved when we
engaged Hanson. That implementation, the company failed, and we
engaged this one on the same budget.
At that time the board approved $454,000 for contingency
change orders anticipating this. With this set of change orders, we
will have spent $388,000. With the project winding down, this will be
the last request.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the total amount that we
have spent for the software?
MR. MULLEE: With this group of change orders, it will be 2.3
million.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: $2.3 million?
Page 241
July 28, 2009
MR. MULLEE: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Was the change orders that we
have on the agenda now, are they really needed?
MR. MULLEE: Absolutely. There's really primarily two major
categories of change orders with the project, and the major category is
essentially staff assistance from Municipal. What has happened over
-- obviously it's a different world over the last two or three years since
the project has started. Within these two modules, the building
module and the planning module, we've lost 50 percent of our staff.
Our operating funds have been cut by 80 percent. That remaining
staff we have have been put on 32-hour workweeks with 20 percent
pay cuts.
And to be honest, nothing has changed in the amount of work it
takes to implement the software system. And, in fact, the same people
we have left who are implementing the software system are the same
people, as you can see with me, who are doing the budget process,
who are doing the financial process in CDES, which has actually
become more complicated.
And so, in an effort to get this project done, especially since there
are significant carrying costs to this type of operation, it is -- it
actually saves money to go ahead and hire Municipal to engage some
tasks that we were planning to do with staff but we no longer have the
resources to do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. Well, the bottom line
is, this is it.
MR. MULLEE: This is it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No more change orders.
MR. MULLEE: This is it because you know the availability of
funds.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The program's going to work
with these change orders; you're going to be up and running; you're
not going to request any more change orders?
Page 242
July 28, 2009
MR. MULLEE: Not going to request any more change orders. I
have a goal out date on the last module, which is just three or four
months away, and that's it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I think you answered my
question; did you?
MR. MULLEE: Yes, I did.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to approve and a
second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
MR. MULLEE: Thank you.
Item #l OJ
A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $104,220.57
CONSOLIDATING CURRENT FUNDING FOR FIXED TERM
PHYSICAL MONITORING OF DESIGNATED BEACH, INLET
AND INTERIOR CHANNEL LOCATIONS UNDER CONTRACT
#08-5124 TO PROJECT NO. 90536 - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to IOJ which formerly
Page 243
~-~-^.
July 28, 2009
16D I. That's a recommendation that the Board of County
Commissioners approves a budget amendment in the amount of
$104,220.57 consolidating current funding for fixed-term physical
monitoring of designated beach inlet and interior channel locations
under contract 08-5124, product number 90536, and Commissioner
Henning asked for this item to be moved.
Mr. McAlpin is here to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. McAlpin, in prev- -- two
months ago this contractor submitted their Schedule B, their rate
schedule, and on there their principal engineer hourly amount was
$175, and this new one that they have is 275. So it's a $IOO-an-hour
difference within a matter of two months.
MR. McALPIN: Commissioner, what we try to do, and through
the purchasing department, is take all of the -- on the contracts that are
authorized -- and this one has been authorized -- we look at all the rate
structures from each individual category, and purchasing pulls that
together and equalizes them.
I'm going to let purchasing talk about that. And I'm not aware of
a $275,000 -- $275-an-hour charge per principals for Coastal Planning
and Engineering. I'm assuming that's who you're talking about, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. It was in their contract
that they -- that the BCC approved just a couple of months ago. And
the BVO that they submitted for a principal engineer now is $275 an
hour.
MR. OCHS: This is a board -- a previously board-approved
contract, Commissioner, are you --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. It was on our agenda in
May.
MR. CARNELL: Yeah, okay. To be honest with you, I don't
know the answer on that question standing here right now. Just so that
we're clear, what Commissioner Henning is saying is we have a
Page 244
-,._.~.,.- ~.."._-
July 28, 2009
fixed-term contract that has established hourly rates, and
Commissioner Henning is making the point that whatever the rates
were in the contract, then the B V 0 that came in there, which was the
actual pricing of this particular work, has a different hourly rate. I'm
not aware of a variance between the two rates. I'll have to follow up
and look at that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. The -- Gary's staff
forwarded it to me. Actually there's -- there's submission fee from
Coastal Engineering and Planning, or Coastal Planning and
Engineering. If you look at the noncolored BVO on the left-hand
column on the bottom it says, principal engineer, man-hours 24, rate is
275.
MR. CARNELL: Okay. What I will tell you is that the offer--
the total offer from Coastal Planning and Engineering is lower than
the other two firms that are being considered, and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's another question I
have. You know, looking at these, it looks like it's a total project --
they're submitting two of them. One is $231,000 -- 21 dollars -- 231
thousand twenty-one sixty-four (sic), and the other one is two
thirty-one fifty-one.
So to me it's adding at least two of those up, if not more, for
doing these projects, monitoring projects.
MR. CARNELL: Let me address that. And, Gary, you can help
fill in the blanks here. We've got two pieces of scope of work,
physical monitoring and biological monitoring.
What we're talking about -- in the BVO, at this point in time
we're not intending on awarding the biological monitoring. We've
come up with a much more cost-effective, affordable way of doing
that using a separate staff person under contract to do that. And I'll let
Gary elaborate on that ifhe wishes to.
So we're only, at this point in time -- but the agenda item today is
only to create a budget amendment so that we can fund issuing a
Page 245
>~--"-'.__._- "__.'_M".__'.._"
July 28, 2009
portion of the BVO, and Gary will explain the logistical need on that.
He's got some work that he needs to move forward on immediately.
The balance of the BVO was going to be brought back to the
board for award on the September 15th agenda. And I will -- between
now and then, I'll address the hourly rate issue, and we will ensure that
the winning contractor complies with the contractual rates.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So I guess I'm really
confused, because the information that provided with (sic) me, it was
that it was the total package. So we're only awarding half of the
monitoring.
MR. McALPIN: Commissioner, the item before you is just -- it's
a budget amendment. And all we're trying to do with that budget
amendment, in the past, what we have done is we have awarded
individual monitoring contracts, one for Wiggins Pass, one for Clam
Pass, one for Doctors Pass on an individual basis.
Now what we're doing is we're trying to consolidate those funds
which were in different projects into one project account and -- so that
we can manage it better.
The item that we're -- the only -- we went through the BVO
process for the physical and the biological monitoring, and we set the
budget up such that, in the proposal -- the request up such that we
could either select any and all of those, so we could select the
biological monitoring and the physical monitoring.
The only item that we have recommended award to at this point
in time is the physical monitoring and not the biological monitoring.
And the physical monitoring for Coastal Planning and Engineering
which dealt, was 231 ,021, and those were the -- and they were the
lowest bidder in terms of price, the lowest consultant in terms of price,
and they were also recommended by the selection committee as being
the most qualified.
So they have responds -- and I can't comment about the $275 per
hour per the principal. But based on a fixed scope of work, based on
Page 246
.__~~.,,,.w.,
July 28, 2009
-- that everybody bid on, they were the lowest consultant to do -- to --
for that activity.
And as Steve has said, Steve Carnell has said, we're not
recommending award for the biological monitoring at this point in
time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I understand that. But the two
other bidders had a total price and -- for both of them, so maybe that's
why I came to the conclusion that--
MR. McALPIN: You probably don't have the benefit of the total
spreadsheet, Commissioner. But we bid this on exactly the same basis
for all of them. So there was a total of 15 items. The first 12 of those
were physical monitoring, and the last three were biological
monitoring, and they all filled out the same form in terms of that, and
it was -- that was awarded -- that went through the purchasing process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, you addressed my
questions. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is that a motion to approve?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a -- I have one speaker.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh.
MS. FILSON: Marcia Cravens.
MS. CRAVENS: Good afternoon. You know, on the surface
this sounds like a really good idea. It sounds like fixed term is a
prudent and conservative way to keep costs down. And it appears that
it's cost saving, but when you actually review these contracts, it
actually allows what was termed a fixed-term contract where the term
lowest bidder seems to have no actual use because you don't really
have a lowest bid if that firm then later can actually increase their cost
by 700 percent, in this case through the usage of amendments and
change orders.
It's incredulous to me that there's a policy like that for purchasing
contracts using tax money, whether it's TDC funds or whether it's
some other kind of tax funds. It seems like it -- there's no constraint
Page 247
..,-~~~..- '.-.."< _..""-,,~.~~.. ~~. ._.----
July 28, 2009
here.
An analogy would be if I had a budget where I was going to
spend $l 00 for a project or service or something, and I just decided,
well, you know what, I'm going to spend $700 instead, my husband
would go through the roof.
So all I'm asking for here is for some sanity, some constraint, that
this policy for change orders that seems to have no limits, or at least
very little limits that increases the final cost by such extravagant
amounts, I'm asking for anybody to please take a look at this and
initiate some constraints here.
You have a situation here where, on the surface of this, it
discusses an amount in the amount of$104,220.57, and then it
discusses -- in the contract, it discusses that there's actually no real
fixed terms to any of this, that they can do amendments and they can
do change orders, and that a work order then would not exceed
$200,000 for one particular job, and that on an annual aggregate they
can't exceed $750,000. How far away is that from this amount it first
discusses?
It boggles my mind how you can have purchasing policies that
allow such extravagant increases in what was supposed to be a
fixed - term cost.
So I'm asking for someone to please take a look at these policies
that allow these change orders and amendments that so significantly
increase the cost. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Any further comments?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Madam Chair, it is a -- it
is a doubling from the original contract, and if we don't get a handle
on these, then I don't know how we're going to address future needs of
these monitoring issues.
MR. McALPIN: Madam Chair, if I may. I don't know how
we're saying it's a doubling from the original contract.
We -- all we're doing at this point in time for this budget
Page 248
'"-_.....~ """'"~""~."'__W'
July 28, 2009
amendment is we're taking moneys from different projects, and the
project before would be Wiggins Pass monitoring, another project is
Doctor's Pass monitoring, another project is Caxambas Pass
monitoring, and we're consolidating. There's $104,000 there that we're
trying to consolidate and put into one project with -- that already has
approximately $126,000 in there, which would give us the total of
$231,000, which would allows us to do all of the physical monitoring
for the county.
So this is just a way for us to better manage the monitoring that
has -- we've gone through the BVO process for. We've gone through
it, we've solicited prices for our consultants, and then we've graded
and scored them based on history and quality and performance in the
past.
And Coastal Planning and Engineering, who is the lowest cost for
this work -- and they also scored highest in terms of performance.
So that's what we're trying to accomplish here. I think what's
happening is people are getting the budget amendment mixed up
where we're bringing money in so that we have enough money to pay
the bills and getting money mixed up -- getting that mixed up with the
price of the work that Coastal Planning and Engineering would do.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right. So what we're doing is
we're combining the moneys that you already had for different
monitoring groups such as Vanderbilt Beach, Park Shore, Naples
Beach, South Marco Beach, Hideaway Beach, et cetera,
Delnor- Wiggins State Park Beach; all we're doing is combining all of
that money together so it's in one pool.
MR. McALPIN: That is correct, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I make a motion for
approval.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to approve and a
Page 249
July 28, 2009
second. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those if favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I am voting in favor.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. That's a 4-1 vote.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just didn't want another 3-2.
Item #IOK
REPLACEMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT #09-5268
"PROFESSIONAL STATE LOBBYIST SERVICES" WITH THE
CLOSURE GROUP, INC., (J. KEITH ARNOLD AND
ASSOCIA TES) IN THE AMOUNT OF $80,000 ANNUALLY -
APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, the next item is 10K. It was
formerly 16F78. This is a recommendation to approve replacement
agreement for contract 09-5268, Professional State Lobbyists
Services, with The Closure Group, Inc., 1. Keith Arnold & Associates,
in the amount of $80,000 annually.
Ms. Debbie Wight is here to answer any questions. This item
was moved from the consent agenda at Commissioner Henning's
request.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
MS. WIGHT: Good after, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I actually talked to the
Page 250
_._-..,,_...-~-~.~~-
July 28, 2009
County Attorney's Office on this item and he says, well, you know,
maybe you should pull it and talk about it. What it is -- and I don't
have a problem with the contract, just the wording of the agreement.
And Mr. Arnold's firm -- and Mr. Arnold is to take direction from
the county. Under definition two says, county shall mean the Board of
Commissioners, a political subdivision of the state, and all officials
and employees.
Now, a county official is all the constitutional officers. I'm not
sure if we really want to identify the county meaning, you know, all
officials or any employee. So, you know, an employee of the county
could call up Keith Arnold and say, okay, here's which item I want
you to work on. If we're going to give direction, it should be in the
sunshine and it should be Board of Commissioners giving that
direction through -- to our staff to -- for our lobbyist to carry on.
That's the only thing that I want is just on Page I of 2.1 under
definition, the county shall mean the Board of Commissioners of
Collier County and strike the rest.
Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLA TZKOW: Yeah. I think that's a good idea, frankly.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So I'll make a motion to approve
with those -- that amendment.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Can I -- Leo, you look poised to
say something.
MR.OCHS: Just a little bit of clarification. I want to make sure,
just from a practical level, that the County Manager's Office and our
staff that work during the session on almost a daily basis with the
members of this organization are still able to conduct that kind of
business. If I could get that clarification, that may be helpful.
MS. WIGHT: That we -- County Manager's Office staff would
still manage the contract as staff always manages the contracts, not the
Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, yes, most definitely, most
Page 251
~''-''''-'-_'~'''_''''''''^_''"''"_'__M'~ -~~'-
July 28, 2009
definitely. I just want to make sure that, you know, they get direction
from not one public official, you know, like Commissioner Henning
going to Keith Arnold and saying, hey, I want you to do this. It
should be the Board of Commissioners. That's all. And I think staff
should manage that contract.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that, as far as I know, that's
what's taken place. There's been discussions, and I think what you're
relating to, Commissioner Henning, is in regards to -- with the clerk.
And I know that the number of times that the clerk's issue came
up that there was always a majority of the Board of County
Commissioners that was in favor of hoping to get legislation passed in
regards to addressing an issue that we had here.
And as long as there was a majority, I believe that that was the
direction that was given to the county manager or to staff in regards to
addressing those particular issues that affect the citizens here in
Collier County.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's a separate issue, but I'll
be happy to look at the minutes of any meeting that you had, what you
just said about legislation about the clerk. Yeah, the majority rules.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So--
MR. KLA TZKOW: It's just like everything else, the county
manager implements board policy. Board makes the policy, but out
legislative agenda is -- and the county manager then implements it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's right.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's all we're doing here.
MR.OCHS: Yeah, but let's be clear on the terminology. When
you talk about the legislative agenda, there's a -- there is a formal
legislative agenda that the board adopts every year going into the
session, but there are invariably other bills and other related items that
come up during the course of the session that the staff would have
conversations with Mr. Arnold and his staff on, and if we're going to
Page 252
....,-.._._--~._.., ~~"-,---
July 28, 2009
get into a game here where the staff can't talk about any of those items
because they're not specifically on the formal adopted legislative
priorities from the board, then I think that really hinders our ability to
give you good real-time information during the session and interact
with your lobbyist.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. That isn't what I'm saying.
Leo, you looking -- is the government looking for a lobbyist?
MR. OCHS: Excuse me?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is the government looking for a
lobbyist? Because we're not on the same page what we're saying here.
Unless you're looking for a lobbyist.
Is the Collier County -- County Manager's Office want a -- their
own lobbyist to do the business?
MR. OCHS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. We're on the same page.
It's -- those resolutions in that -- you put it on the Board of
Commissioners agenda, it's not -- the contract says to give guidance to
the lobbyist to support or oppose an issue or introduce an issue.
Now, if we're talking about resolutions that we pass during -- or
consider during the regular business meeting, while the legislators are
meeting, we're -- you and I are saying the same thing. But if you want
to leave this language in here, it sounds like the County Manager's
Office wants a lobbyist.
MS. WIGHT: No.
MR. OCHS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. We're saying the same
thing. By removing this language, it's still going to accomplish it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Why would we remove it if it
accomplishes the same thing?
MS. WIGHT: If I may. Commissioner Henning, this is Debbie.
I think what Mr. Ochs is trying to say, and the commissioners, is that
the contract language is fine the way it is, and the contract is managed
Page 253
July 28, 2009
fine the way it is, and everyone just would like to keep it the way it is,
and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, that isn't what the county
attorney said, and I'll tell you -- I'll tell the public that the County
Manager's Office has -- now has a lobbyist, and that's how that
language got created from the -- that went from the clerk.
I want to see things come to -- before the Board of
Commissioners. I don't want to see any backroom deals to where
we're using taxpayers' money for a lobbyist, and the taxpayers don't
know what the heck's going on.
MS. WIGHT: Commissioner, I was wondering what backroom
deals you're talking about.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the language about the
clerk about the interest money. That never was brought up to the
Board of Commissioners, and I just want to stop that process. Let the
sun shine on it. Bring it -- bring it so everybody has a say-so on it, the
public and all the commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I feel that I've entered in
on every one of these things. I've felt -- I feel that the County
Manager's Office has acted appropriately representing the direction of
the commission.
And with that, I'd like to make a motion to approve this as is.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion on the floor and a second
to approve as is.
Any further discussion?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those if favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 254
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you vote, please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I did vote.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What did you vote?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You didn't see me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. Raise your hand higher.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. There you go. I voted in
favor of the motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Thank you very much.
That's a 4-1 vote then.
Item #IOL
EXEMPTION FROM FORMAL COMPETITION AND
APPRO V AL OF A LEGAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH DE LA
PARTE & GILBERT, P.A., FOR LITIGATION RELATED TO
ORANGETREE UTILITIES CASE NO. 07-2333, LEGAL
SERVICES FOR LITIGATION RELATED TO ORANGETREE
UTILITIES VS. COLLIER COUNTY FOR A PROPOSED COST
NOT TO EXCEED $550,000, PROJECT NO. 75010, AND
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, next item is 10L, formerly 16C6.
It's a recommendation to exempt from formal competition and approve
a legal services contract with della Parte and Gilbert, P .A., for
litigation related to Orangetree Utilities, case number 07-2333, legal
services for litigation related to Orangetree Utilities versus Collier
County for a proposed cost not to exceed $550,000, project number
75010, and approve necessary budget amendments.
Page 255
._--~--_.
July 28, 2009
This item was moved from your consent agenda at Commissioner
Coletta's request. And Mr. Wides is here to address any questions.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And I can't say I'm really
excited about pulling this. I'm taking a look at this thing, and I just
need somebody to give me some assurance that what we're going to be
doing is in the best interests of the people that we represent out there
in the Orangetree area.
If I remember correctly, any cost that's incurred by a utility, be it
the county picking up a utility or a utility that's already existing, any
costs that they run up that's legal is always lumped together and
passed on to the ratepayers as a cost factor; is that correct?
MR. WIDES: That would be correct. Excuse me, Tom Wides,
for the record, Operations Director, Public Utilities.
Commissioner, I believe your portrayal is correct, but the rest of
the story, the agreement which was signed, I believe back in 1991 and
then re-upped a couple times, was for the Collier County -- Collier
County Water/Sewer District to take over the Orangetree Utility.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
MR. WIDES: The way that agreement was written, our legal
folks have interpreted that there is no compensation due to the utility
owners.
Subsequently, as we started to move down the trail of taking over
the utility, they presented us with in excess of a $4 million bill to take
it over.
So these legal services are actually being incurred as a result of
them filing a lawsuit against us because we're saying, no, we're not
going to pay you in excess of $4 million.
So what we're talking about here is approximately a half million
dollars to avoid the ratepayers getting hit with $4 million or more
when we take over.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And forgive me, I just --
I'm approaching this from a couple different directions.
Page 256
'__....m
July 28, 2009
MR. WIDES: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I haven't got my thought
process all together, and that's why I wanted to bring this to you.
We have a -- we have a cost that we're going to incur over a half
million dollars to save for it. Meanwhile, on the other end, Orangetree
Utility is probably going to run up a half-million-dollar cost fighting
us. So there's going to be a million dollars that's going to have to be
absorbed by the ratepayers out there at which time that the utility
changes hands.
In addition to that, these ratepayers that have no impact fees to
pay are going to also have to come up with X number of dollars for
impact fees. I'm beginning to question in my mind, is this really in the
best interests? Is there a possibility that we might be able to broker
some sort of deal to leave the utility intact to keep away from impact
fees, keep away from them having to pay all these legal bills going
into it?
I can see a tremendous cost to these people. I'm concerned. And
I don't know if I got all the answers here. And I do think that what we
need to do is we need to put this together and take it to the community
and say, this is where we are. We're on the horns of a dilemma. If we
go this way, you're going to have the county take over, you'll have
better service, you'll have less complaints with the office personnel, it
will be a little more reliable for the waters; however, you're going to
have likely impact fees between X number of dollars and whatever,
plus we're going to have to take a legal cost that's going to be about a
million dollars and divide it across the ratepayers either as an
assessment or as an addition to the impact fees.
I don't know what these numbers are going to equal. I'm
beginning to question whether I'm acting in the best interests of those
residents by supporting this new utility. Can you give me that answer
now, or is that something that requires more thought?
MR. WIDES: Commissioner, we're going to need to get, really,
Page 257
~._. < ,~..',".~,,"". ~.".".',-_...
July 28, 2009
board direction now, because we've worked these through our master
plans. For probably the last three master plans we've done, we've had
this worked into the -- into our assumptions. You know, we are
working at your direction, okay, and if the board chooses that they
want us to reconsider our direction, we can bring that back to you with
some other thoughts here.
What I can tell you is the rates in the Orangetree area are higher
than the rates in the Collier County Water/Sewer District. And when
we would take them over, what is very likely is we would keep them
at their rates for a period of time, and then gradually, as we've done
with other parts of the county, we would meld them into one district
rate, which should have a leveling effect on their fees.
So from a what's-in-their-best-interests point of view, I don't
want to say bigger is better, but when you have that regional concept
where you have many more customers to serve and you can spread
your cost over many more customers, I think there can be some
benefit there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: See, what happens with these
utilities, the state gives them the right and guarantees them the right
that they'll make a profit. Whatever they do, whatever they spend,
they're guaranteed a profit. Yeah, private utilities, not the county
utilities.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Private utilities.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And it would be a godsend if we
could ever morph over without having to incur all these costs.
I'm looking at this thing, and I'm saying to myself -- and it might
be considered heresy by some members of our staff -- would we be
better served if Orangetree Utility, if we could work a deal out with
them where maybe they would pick up the infrastructure cost that we
put in for the new pipes and everything, and have them as a
private/public partnership with the rest. I don't know.
I'm just looking at the dollar amount. I know when we announce
Page 258
July 28, 2009
at that point in time it's going to take place -- and I know it's a number
of years away -- when it takes place, we're going to have an impact fee
that's going to -- these people are going to come unwound. They're
going to say, I already paid for the infrastructure. Why am I paying
for it again?
If the Orangetree Utility stayed in place, they'll never have that.
Orangetree Utility has improved. I just had the first complaint I've
had from them in about nine months, just received it today. And it
had to do with the water, it had to do with the utility not accepting a
check that was numbered less than 100, brand new account a person
had.
So help me with this. Am I really doing the right thing for the
people I represent if I went ahead and I approved this today?
MR. WIDES: Commissioner, as it stands today, we're locked in
this lawsuit.
Now, we can come back to you at a future point in time, okay, to
help assess is this the best way to go. But we need to do a lot of due
diligence before we take over that utility, which includes going out
there and assessing all the infrastructure in that existing utility to see
what we can utilize to diminish the impact of the impact fees.
But there's no doubt that we've added additional capacity already
in our utility to be able to be take over that -- you know, that utility.
Now, another thing in the -- you know, we're contemplating as
soon as 20 12 to take over the utility, which doesn't mean we provide
service from our facilities necessarily. We may just continue to
operate their facilities for a period of time.
At that point in time, there's no change in the impact. In other
words, we're not using our facilities. Eventually, yes. When we come
on, when we bring them on and we disable their plants, yes, then there
would be an impact.
So we can help -- we can possibly help people -- and this is
another thing we can pursue. We can help people try to lengthen the
Page 259
--'-,"--~,~".,
July 28, 2009
time frame of the payment of their impact fees or we can diminish the
impact fees, but that's a lot of -- that's two year --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And right now they have no
impact fees and they've got water and sewer.
MR. WIDES: I understand. And I do understand that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And they've got a plant
that, if nothing changed, would be able to function probably for way
off into the future, and there will be more roads.
And I'm sorry, let me ask you a couple of other questions, and
maybe we might be able to get some direction on this. Is this so time
sensitive that it couldn't wait till September when I might be able to
get more information and talk to some of the residents in the area, or is
this something you need to move on today?
MR. WIDES: This is something that we've tried to delay until
today. We've actually moved it off for a period of time.
The real issue here is, we're not in control of this lawsuit, okay.
The lawsuit's been filed against us. Their attorneys want to move
forward, they want to gain resolution of this entire issue. Do we
compensate or not? And yes, I'd refer to Mr. Klatzkow to see ifhe has
any other problems --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Mr. Klatzkow, you
understand what I'm talking about?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, I do. Right now you're in a fight.
Because at the end of the day, what's happening here is that we're --
we say, we can take you over for no money, and they say well, that's
unconstitutional, all right.
The end result of this, by the way, could be that we lose the suit
and Orangetree remains independent. That could happen. But we've
got years into this already. We're in the fight.
If the board wants to reconsider the entire situation, we can do
that. But sir, at this point in time, we have to continue with the
litigation.
Page 260
~,._"
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Now, it doesn't mean that the moneys that
the board could approve today, all of it needs to get spent between
now and whenever the board could hear this. But you're in for penny
and for pound right now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'll make a motion to
approve this agenda item with the idea that in September, with the
permission of my fellow commissioners, I would like to have some
report come back at the beginning of the agenda that will give me a
better flavor of what we're up against and what we're looking at and
what the residents of the area can expect in the immediate future and
the distant future. That sound realistic?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed? Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, ma'am, I'll still here. I voted
in favor.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's a 5-0.
MR. WIDES: Thank you.
Page 261
.,.,--~".". ^-,.,----
July 28, 2009
Item #ll
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us to Item II, public
comments on general topics.
MS. FILSON: And Madam Chairman, I have one speaker under
public comment; Marcia Cravens.
MS. CRAVENS: Hi. I know it's been a really long day, and it's
been a contentious day for all of you, and I appreciate your service
here.
And I hope not to make this too much more contentious as we
end this meeting, but I wanted to talk about Clam Bay, and I wanted to
talk about some new information that's been brought forth in regards
to permit compliance and requirements of those markers; because after
the June 23rd meeting where the vote was taken here to approve the
Seagate plan for marking the waterway for power boats, there was
communication from Susan Blass of the Corps where she
unequivocally stated that those kind of markers were not retired.
And the thing is, that I think a lot of the negotiating and
discussion on this subject's been flawed, because county staff had a
misunderstanding about what the permit requirements were. So there
was only one plan, one type of marker that was allowed to be
discussed, and that was the red and green markers, because staff had
an understanding that it was a permit requirement and a compliance
issue but we now have unequivocal information that that is not the
case.
So I'm asking for some further discussion on this and also to
please include the overwhelming users of those waters, which are the
kayak and canoers who come from all over Collier County and also
include tourists. They've never really had a voice in this, and they are
the public who use the waterways the most.
Page 262
<.'_^-"';"'"."_"""""'..~'''m
July 28, 2009
You know, there's one club that has over 400 members. I know
because I'm a member of that club. And there's also people on the
weekends in Clam Pass Park using the waterways.
So I'm asking for a reconsideration and hopefully a Saturday
workshop of some sort that is particularly inclusive of hopefully all
the stakeholders, not just Seagate and Pelican Bay and the Clam Bay
Advisory Committee, but also the kayak and canoeists and people like
that who actually -- it's a benefit to them to use those waterways.
I just don't see any harm in that now that we have this additional
information that says, you know what, there really should have been
alternative plans in the discussion, in the mix. Thank you.
And for the record, I have lot of documents here that support
what I'm saying. They're from the Coast Guard, the Corps, DEP, that
all support that those types of markers were not required, and there
should have been discussion of some alternatives. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That was our only speaker?
MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And we move on to --
MS. FILSON: Communications.
MR.OCHS: Communications, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Well, we'll start with
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. You start with the county
manager.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, you?
MR. OCHS: I'm feeling left out all of a sudden. I'll see how
long I can drag this on.
Page 263
.-.---.-
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Talk slow.
MR.OCHS: Okay. Actually, I only have one item for the board
this afternoon, for the commissioners. If you can see that letter, it's a
letter from the Sheriffs Office that came to me requesting our office
assistants working through your county attorney to work with the
sheriff to revisit the towing ordinance that was worked on jointly by
the county attorney and the Sheriffs Office not too long ago.
The revisions to the ordinance have been generally very
effective, but some of the -- some of the companies in town are
finding some loopholes in the ordinance, and where they were --
where the ordinance had provided some protections against vehicles
being towed without knowledge of property managers out of lots,
apparently some of the providers are now booting those vehicles
making them immobile but technically not violating the provisions of
the ordinance that are designed to stop that kind of predatory towing
practices.
So the sheriff has asked our office to get your direction and
permission to work with Mr. Klatzkow and his office to try come back
to you at a future date with some revisions to your towing ordinance
that will address this particular practice. So we're seeking your
permission to do that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Got a nod from me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Me, too.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You better believe it. I can't
believe how hard some people work at trying to make other people's
lives miserable.
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir, thank you. That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: See if the other two commissioners
agree or got your -- they got --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think we only need three nods, but the
other two commissioners, you agree?
Page 264
'._~_'M___"
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, thanks for asking.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great idea.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner -- I mean -- I'm sorry,
you're not commissioner. County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's been a long day.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Attorney.
MR. KLA TZKOW: I just had one matter, ma'am, and I'll ask
Mr. Ochs to put it on the viewer.
As you know, we're received an adverse decision in the Grider
matter. I have a number of issues I need to talk to you about,
including the possible appeal of this matter as well as certain
settlement offers that have been rendered by the Griders to us.
So I'm going to give a notice of a closed attorney-client session
for the next meeting. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to
286-0118, Florida Statutes, the county attorney desires advice from
the Board of County Commissioners in closed attorney-client session
on Tuesday, September 15, 2009, at a time certain of 12 o'clock noon
in the commission conference room, third floor, W. Harmon Turner
Building, Collier County Government Center, 3301 East Tamiami
Trail, Naples, Florida.
In addition to board members, the county manager, James Mudd,
and in the absence, I suppose, assistant or Deputy County Manager
Leo Ochs; County Attorney Jeffrey A. Klatzkow and assistant County
Attorney Steven T. Willams, will be in attendance.
The board, in executive discussion will discuss settlement
negotiations as well as costs in the pending litigation cases of Craig
Grider and Amber Grider versus Collier County, case number
08-7794-CA, and Craig Grider and Amber Grider versus Collier
County, case number 09-3164-CA, both of which are now pending in
the 20th Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida. And that
Page 265
"--",,",,-""''''''- "'-"'--
July 28, 2009
will be for our next meeting, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great. Thank you very much.
Anything else?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Just the item that Marcia
Cravens was talking about. You know, this always was about
compliance with the -- with the permit. Why would -- why would the
commission spend money that it doesn't have to if it's in compliance?
Nobody wants to take that on? We're just going to spend the
money even though it's not needed?
MR.OCHS: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
MR. OCHS: If you'd like, I can provide --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Please.
MR.OCHS: -- at least some information on this.
There was a communication received from a Ms. Blass from the
Corps. In response to that, the county manager had sent a letter back
to her and to her superiors at the Corps asking for a definitive answer,
and we've yet to receive a response back either from the Fort Myers
office or the Jacksonville district or Atlanta office. We've asked for
clarification from all three of those offices, because the staff, too, is
concerned about some of the fluctuation out of the Corps.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So then when you do receive that
--
MR.OCHS: Oh, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- you'll notify us, right?
MR. OCHS: As soon as we get it, we'll report it, yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good.
Commissioner Coyle? Hello?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whoops, I'm sorry. I don't have
Page 266
.-..-,....=--. ~".ryn'......,,--_..~,-,,"'
July 28, 2009
anything.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't have anything either, but I
just want to commend you for your due diligence today. This was a
huge agenda. I really didn't think we'd get through it today, but hats
off to you, and --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thanks.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- thank you for being the
chairperson and sticking to this, and we got through it. Thank you so
much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I love you, too, Donna. No,
thanks for getting us through today. Yes, I do have something.
Mr. Feder, could I bother you for just a moment?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Limerock roads.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I'd like to get $15 million
for limerock roads. Could you find it from some other -- no, seriously.
Remember some time ago we have a -- we have a road out there
called 13th Street Southwest where the library is and the fire
department?
MR. FEDER: Yes, I do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And when we decided to put the
bridge in at the end of it, and we promised the neighbors a number of
amenities, we couldn't deliver because we didn't have the
right-of-way. We ended up spending a fortune on trying to get the
sidewalk in on one side, and the road became a speed trap. People
were driving like crazy, and so we came up with this very ingenious
way of solving the problem, and it was called chicanes; am I
pronouncing it right?
MR. FEDER: Chicanes, that's correct.
Page 267
"'"-"'~'...
July 28, 2009
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Dynamite works better.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It probably does. We even put
up signs, you know, look out for low-flying aircraft and they might be
taking your picture. But in any case, it's been in place now for what,
six years, seven?
MR. FEDER: At least that, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And it hasn't worked,
and it's kind of an embarrassment to everyone that lives in the area.
Everybody refers to that as the weird street, you know, and no
explanation how it got there.
I'd like us to be able to rethink about that. Would it be a major
expense or would it be an expense of any notable amount to straighten
that road out if the residents there agree that it would be beneficial?
MR. FEDER: It would not be that expensive to do so. And in
real -- realistically, the chicanes is a good concept to try and slow
down or to calm traffic. But where you have as many driveways and
as narrow a right-of-way as we had, you've got to go cart track.
Effectively, everybody's driving down the center of the street instead
of following the basic lanes.
And so I think it would be a good item if we could come back to
the community and see what their interests might be. And I think
probably even the fire department might appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. With the permission of
the commission, can we direct Mr. Feder to start that process going
forward for a community meeting?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: As soon as I can find out what a chicane
.
IS.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's a strange-acting Frenchman.
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, Madam Chairman, basically a
chicane is just basically where you move the road somewhat so that as
you drive, if the road is straight ahead and you can have clear
visibility, you tend to push down on the accelerator. When the road
Page 268
...-........'-"""'-,,,.,,~..
July 28, 2009
has some movement to it which, very limited opportunity on 13th, and
you put little planted areas that the road goes in and out and you have
to go around a little bit, it slows people down some.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It sounds to me like we've got a
great road course out there.
MR. KLA TZKOW: I, in fact, taught two of my girls to drive off
that road.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But if you could include the
Sheriffs Department in those community discussions, because they're
going to want some assurance that there's going to be reasonable law
enforcement to keep the speeding down.
MR. FEDER: Of course. And if that's the board's direction, we'll
be happy to go out and get a community meeting going.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. You've got three here. I
don't know about the two up there --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I can see Coyle nodding.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can too. No, he's nodding off,
that's what it is.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Anything else, Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, that's it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have one thing also. I've been -- I've
been informed that the Emergency Medical Services Policy Advisory
Board has not been able to meet until they get approval from us to
meet. That's the board that we created back in January.
And so I don't know if I need anything else on that to -- is there
anything that you can add to that, Leo?
MR.OCHS: Well, no, Commissioner. Unfortunately, that
advisory board hasn't met often enough yet to establish bylaws or
appoint a slate of officers inside the advisory board. So getting, you
Page 269
-,--..--,.-."
July 28, 2009
know, direction from them on what kind of regular meeting schedule
they want to hold has been a little difficult.
So we've got some questions from a couple of the members that
want to meet to address some issues that they have. And we were a
little bit reluctant as staff to get out in front of that until the board
directed us to go ahead and make that contact with all the members
and go ahead and set up a meeting. But if that's your direction, we're
happy to comply.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, I know we created the committee
expecting them to meet, so --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- I don't see why not. Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I make a comment
concerning that? You know, the people on that committee are
relatively new to this advisory board process, as is our medical
director. And I think what we need to do is to be a little more active
in helping them get organized.
We have by laws for other advisory committees that can be given
to this advisory committee as a format. We shouldn't have to wait
around for them to come up with something themselves. I just don't
think we've been helping them and coaching them as much as we
should in what their responsibilities are.
Now, having said that, I am opposed to scheduling a meeting just
so people can come in and take potshots at each other. That's not the
purpose of the meeting, and that's not the purpose of the advisory
committee.
So I think they should have regularly scheduled times just like
we do and just like every other advisory committee does, and I think
we should establish those. And they would have their meetings, and
they would -- they would do their job, which is to review
recommendations concerning medical policy and the dissemination
thereof, but it should not be used as a forum for propaganda for either
Page 270
..~,--,---,,~-,. ,"",.--, ,.
July 28, 2009
side.
And quite frankly, as far as the fire districts are concerned, when
it comes to fighting fires, I'm going to seek their input because they
are the experts. When it comes to establishing medical policy and
training and medical standards for emergency medical technicians,
then I'm going to listen to Bob Tober.
And I'm going to resist any attempt by either group, either side,
to use that advisory committee for a bully pulpit to undermine and/or
create problems in the fire district and EMS areas.
So I think the only way we're going to save that -- or to solve that
problem is to take them by the hand, get them the by laws, get them
scheduled on a regular basis. They will meet just like every other
advisory committee and do their job and provide minutes and records
that are acceptable to us.
And that's all I've got say about it, but that's my opinion
concerning this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I've got a suggestion.
And Commissioner Coyle, forgive me. I'm not trying to be a
troublemaker, but I actually agree with you 100 percent. You're right
on target. The only thing I'd like to add is that, with your permission,
sir, I'd like to see you be the commission liaison to that advisory --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, I'd like to be.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner
Fiala just volunteered, got you out of it, Commissioner Coyle. I hope
you had a --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why don't you solve it by saying
that it should be the chairman of the Board of the County
Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's you next year.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It is a health, safety, and welfare
Page 271
.,._..~",.-
July 28, 2009
situation. It will put us all in that position over a period of time. We'll
all get a chance at doing it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a good idea.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Rather than just appointing either
one of us, why not just do it by position and say it's the chair who will
serve as the liaison to that committee?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: With the understanding that
you'll be the chair in January.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that still remains to be seen.
There might be a number of votes against that. I don't know.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You're not getting out of it that easy.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're not getting out of it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It might be you; you never know.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And the second is by Commissioner
Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Very good.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor?
Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair? May I speak,
please?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm sorry. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Henning. Can I
speak?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's what I thought. It's a
four-member board.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I didn't see your hand up.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, it's a 3-2.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a 3-2. The correspondence
Page 272
H . ~_"."'.o"""'.'i..."'~_"<" ,,''''--
July 28, 2009
that we all have received is, we have an advisory board member that
wants minutes that is not what we normally take. In fact, that is -- the
fire district that he works for, they don't do it that way.
And now you have the issue about testing of the paramedics, fire
paramedics, and he has problems with that, and now we have a public
records request by that advisory board member on our emails. That's
not going to stop. I can guarantee you that's not going to stop.
And I will not tell the medical director how to conduct his
business. He is there to train and issue medicines for those
paramedics to issue to the public.
Now, I don't want this issue to become political with the fire
departments. And maybe it was a bad idea to have the fire
departments in this. But those are my concerns, and I'm in favor of
the motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. You know, on the composition of
this group, I don't remember that there was any political --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There wasn't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- anything when we put it together. I
remember --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There is now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- that we were -- when we tried to put it
together, we tried to choose people that wouldn't be contentious.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not saying that the board
created it, but that's what it's coming -- that's what it's being. You
have --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: How can it be if they've not been allowed
to meet?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- received the email just like
everybody else.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's just it. They haven't been
allowed to meet yet, but we have -- you know, Chief Metzger has
been very outspoken with his particular point of view to the point that,
Page 273
'^~-_."'_.~ ....~---
July 28, 2009
you know, it's little bit different style of management for -- as far as
advisory boards go, how he's offering his opinion and coming
forward.
And let's be honest about it. Dr. Tober came out and said he
didn't want to work with him. So now we've got to handle this thing
in a way that's -- we want to be able to make sure it goes forward.
Do we think we might be able to meet and that Dr. Tober and
Chief Metzger will be able to work together as a team? At this point
in time I'd say probably not. I mean, I -- some of the letters I got from
the chief have been less than friendly. They've been very outspoken
and right to the point. I wouldn't consider them overly aggressive, but
a certain amount of uncomfortness (sic) is there within what we're
dealing with.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair, can I -- is my light
on?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. Commissioner Halas's is, but then
yours is next.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think this is the reason that we
need to have the chairperson of the Board of County Commissioners
there in attendance, and hopefully the chairperson can act as a
mediator and maybe squelch the fire so that we start to get something
accomplished.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Boy, I'd love to see that happen.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The chair should be the chair. I
don't think there's any other way it's going to work.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That may be the way to do it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner -- yeah, I would
love to see that work, you know, for the safety of us all.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Maybe--
MS. FILSON: I just -- oops. Sorry.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Go ahead, I'm sorry.
Page 274
-........-..-.-~.~".<. ...-..,..-.....--
July 28, 2009
MS. FILSON: I just wanted to remind you that the medical
society appointed one member and the fire association appointed one
member, and then the commissioners appointed three.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. And that was what we had
wanted. We wanted a five-member board that didn't trip all over
themselves and didn't have 12 and 13 and 15 people on there, and we
tried to choose people that would work together so that we could come
to a solution, agreement, so that we could move forward instead of all
of this fighting.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner Coyle, would you
recommend that the chair of the Board of County Commissioners also
be the chair in regards to this group?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wouldn't because -- I sort of
consider that a conflict of interest if the representative from the board
is a voting member of that particular --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, not voting. I don't want to be voting
on anything.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you can't be -- well, you
shouldn't be the chairperson unless you can vote. But I guess we
could draw it up that way, but I would prefer that it be a liaison in very
much the same way that we deal with the Productivity Committee. I
am reluctant in the Productivity Committee to direct them or tell them
what they should be doing because you haven't approved that
direction.
And so I treat myself as a non -- well, I am a nonvoting member,
but I don't get involved in making their decisions for them but -- and I
think that should be the same thing we do in that -- in that Medical
Policy Advisory Committee.
And I think one of the first things we should do is go in there as a
liaison and say, listen, this -- this committee is supposed to operate in
a constructive, professional manner. If there are people who cannot
function that way on this committee, you can either resign or we will
Page 275
.....,"-_._-,,~ ---.
July 28, 2009
replace you. But the medical policy and the health, safety, and
welfare of our citizens is too important for this bickering and
backstab bing.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I don't care who it is.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I agree.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Forgive me. I'm going to -- I
got to come back on this. Commissioner Fiala's probably the most
astute politician I ever met when it came to organized groups. I've
worked with her so many times over the last 20-some years. Every
time I start a new organization, I brought Donna in and her group from
Naples Community Hospital for a visioning session. I've seen her put
these things together.
I still think that she should be, if not the chair, the proletarian,
that makes sure everything stays online rather than sitting on the side
and have to wait for her turn to be able to speak.
This is going to be a very volitable (sic) group, and it's going to
take somebody that has the ability to be able to keep it under control,
and I can't think of anyone better than Donna Fiala.
I'd make a motion that we have her as the nonvoting chair of this
particular group with the understanding that she's going to be not
directing policy so much as directing people to keep them on focus to
where they're going and to keep them in line if they get out of line.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why don't we do the same thing
with the Planning Commission and Environmental --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's not enough hours in the
day for Donna Fiala.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- Committee and all the others that
we have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You want me to serve on all of those
committees, Fred?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. I mean, if we're going to
Page 276
..~-"'_.~'- ^,.,..-
July 28, 2009
create a new committee structure, there must be a good reason for it,
and if the reason is to make it function more efficiently, then we ought
to do that for all of our advisory committees.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think that Commissioner Coletta was
suggesting this because this particular group is so contentious -- not
the ones on this board, because we've -- we've taken care in trying to
create an advisory board with five people who have -- who are
charged with working together, and we didn't get any contentious
people on there.
But what Commissioner Coletta was hoping is that possibly I
could be a peacemaker up there, and --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Facilitator.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, a facilitator.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't have any problem with that
as long as it's a nonvoting position and it is -- it is designated by -- as a
position that is occupied by the chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's exactly what he said.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I do question the wisdom of just
appointing somebody and keeping them there permanently. That is
not the way this should work. All of the commissioners should have
the opportunity.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's what we've said, Commissioner
Coyle. Maybe you missed it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, he didn't say that in his -- in his
motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, he did. You were --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Ifhe wants to say in his motion
that the chairman of the Board of County Commissioners is going to
be the liaison to that particular advisory committee, then I will agree
Page 277
.~..",-.,-_..,,_.,.. .~."..,,",~,,~.-
July 28, 2009
with that.
MS. FILSON: We have a motion and a second on the floor
already that hasn't been voted on before yours.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Wait a minute. I haven't made a --
made a motion. I am merely --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I made the motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- making the observation that --
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Coletta made the motion--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- Commissioner Coletta's motion
--
MS. FILSON: -- a while ago.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- did not say that it would be the
chairman of the Collier County Commission who serves as the liaison
to the Medical Policy Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sure I said it, but if I didn't
I'd like to clarify that now by saying that it would be the chairman of
the Collier County Commission that would serve as the liaison as the
chair, nonvoting chair of this committee, because this committee is
very different than the Productivity Committee, it is very different
than the Planning Commission who has been in existence for years
and they know the ropes and they know the system. It's a whole new
group that has probably got more diversed (sic) opinions than any
other group we've ever run into. And Commissioner Fiala's the animal
trainer that could bring this thing under control.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have a motion on the floor and a
second.
MR.OCHS: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
MR. OCHS: If I might, and I hate to prolong this. All I asked
you for was, could I set a meeting, but we kind of got --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, we're almost there.
Page 278
~-,,-_.-
July 28, 2009
MR.OCHS: If I can get three nods for me to work with the chair
--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have to vote on this motion.
MR. OCHS: -- to set up a meeting in September sometime to get
this group convened, that would be appreciated.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I make that part of my
motion, include the fact that we'll have the meeting in September.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could we add to that an orientation
session where somebody will explain to the committee that they will
meet on a specified day each month or each quarter, however
frequently you want to do it, set up a regular meeting schedule, get
them to appoint individuals -- I would -- I would prefer that they
appoint somebody as a -- as a chairperson and then have
Commissioner Fiala guide those people through the process so they
get-some experience in administering themselves, because it's going to
be a lot more effective if they learn how to do it themselves than for us
to sit there and watch over their shoulder all the time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a
second.
Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: 5-0.
Page 279
~~-,.--. '~~".'-
July 28, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a 5-0.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Great.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good, unless you turned off the
phones.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good timing.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. It's 7:09.
Item #18
ADJOURN - MOTION TO ADJOURN - APPROVED
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion for an
adjournment.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have two motions to adjourn.
That means a first and a second.
All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And everybody have a great
summer.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we just have a couple hours
now?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. What time zone are you
in?
Page 280
,.. ,,___'_""W_~".. ~.-"--",,._.. -,"-._",,-
July 28, 2009
* * * * Commissioner Coletta moved, seconded by Commissioner
Halas and carried 4/1 (Commissioner Henning opposing), that the
following items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be
approved and/or adopted * * * *
Item #16Al
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR MEDITERRA PARCEL 118 - W/RELEASE OF
ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item #16A2
RESOLUTION 2009-170: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADW A Y (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF VALENCIA GOLF AND COUNTRY
CLUB PHASE 1 WITH THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS BEING PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED -
W/RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item # 16A3
RESOLUTION 2009-171: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADW A Y (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF VALENCIA GOLF AND COUNTRY
CLUB PHASE lA WITH THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS BEING PRIVATELY MAINTAINED-
W/RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A4
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF CITY GATE COMMERCE
Page 281
..~'"--
July 28, 2009
CENTER, PHASE TWO, APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD
FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY - W/STIPULA TIONS
Item # 16A5
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR ARIELLE AT PELICAN MARSH - W/RELEASE OF ANY
UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item # 16A6
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR FIDDLER'S CREEK PHASE 5 UNIT 2 -
W/RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
(UPS )
Item #16A7
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR MEDITERRA PARCEL 105 - W/RELEASE OF
ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item # 16A8
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR MEDITERRA PARCEL 107 - W/RELEASE OF
ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item #16A9
Page 282
''''''",..""""""".-
July 28, 2009
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR MEDITERRA PARCEL 108 - W/RELEASE OF
ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item #16AI0
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR MEDITERRA PARCEL 109 - W/RELEASE OF
ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item #16All
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR MEDITERRA PARCEL 110 - W /RELEASE OF
ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item #16A12
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR RUBELL DIALYSIS CENTER - W/RELEASE OF ANY
UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item #16A13
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR HAWTHORNE AT LEL Y RESORT, PHASE 1 - W/RELEASE
OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item #16A14
RESOLUTION 2009-172: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADW A Y (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
Page 283
>>~--""~_.." ~'_."M_
July 28, 2009
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF INDIGO PRESERVE. THE
ROADW A Y AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE
PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED - W /RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A15
RELEASE AND SA TISF ACTIONS OF LIEN FOR PAYMENTS
RECEIVED FOR THE FOLLOWING CODE ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS - TOTAL COST OF RECORDING $90.00
Item #16A16
PROGRESS REPORT FOR THE YEAR 2008, COLLIER COUNTY
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PLAN, SECTION 7 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN -
PROMOTING AWARENESS OF FLOODPLAIN AND
FLOODING ISSUES, IDENTIFYING KNOWN FLOOD
HAZARDS, DISCUSS PAST FLOODING EVENTS, ASSESS
CURRENT FLOODPLAIN/FLOODING PROBLEMS AND SET
GOALS AND ASTRA TEGY TO MAKE THE COMMUNITY
MORE RESISTANT TO FLOODING
Item #16A17
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS
AND RECOGNIZE REVENUE INCREASE TO THE GENERAL
FUND FOR PAYMENT BY LENDER FIFTH THIRD BANK FOR
COSTS INCURRED FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT
ASSOCIA TED WITH THE VITA TUSCANA PROJECT - FOR
THE COSTS INCURRED DURING THE SUCCESSFUL
ABATEMENT OF VIOLATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS
Page 284
"<<~---_._- ,..~,~.,.".."".".,_..,,,-_..._,.,,,..,...,,.~,,... -"~'._""
July 28, 2009
PROJECT
Item #16A18 - Moved to Item #10H (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16A19
EXPENDITURES EXCEEDING $50,000 FOR BID #06-4013 --
BACKGROUND CHECK ANNUAL CONTRACT TO STERLING
INFO SYSTEMS, INC. AND AD-VANCE SCREENING
SOLUTIONS, INC. AS A SECONDARY VENDOR FOR AN
ESTIMA TED ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURE OF $8,000 FOR
THE BALANCE OF THE 09 FISCAL YEAR RELATING TO
VEHICLE FOR HIRE PROGRAM, AND EXTENDING
THROUGH THE BALANCE OF THE CONTRACT - TO ENSURE
THA T ALL BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR VEHICLE FOR HIRE
COMPANY AND ANNUAL DRIVER ID'S ARE REVIEWED
AND COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH COLLIER
COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
Item #16A20
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR
RELEASE AND SATISFACTION OF LIEN IN THE CODE
ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V.
EMPIRE DEVELOPERS GROUP, LLC, RELATING TO
PROPERTY PARCEL ID #186000005 LOCATED WITHIN,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - THE MORTGAGE LENDER
(FIFTH THIRD BANK) PROPOSED TO SETTLE THIS MATTER
TOGETHER WITH THREE CASES CURRENTLY UNDER THE
JURISDICTION OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
Item #16A21 - Moved to Item #101 (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Page 285
,,"--,.'.
July 28, 2009
Item # 16A22
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR COLONIAL BANK - W/RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES
PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item # 16A23
PREVIEW OF THE UPCOMING 2009 CYCLE OF LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC AMENDMENTS BY
DISTRIBUTING A COpy OF THE MASTER LIST OF
PROPOSED LDC AMENDMENT REQUESTS FOR LDC
AMENDMENT 2009 CYCLE 1
Item #16Bl
RESOLUTION 2009-173: 2009/2010 TRANSPORTATION
DISADV ANT AGED TRIP & EQUIPMENT GRANT
AGREEMENT FM#20724618401/20724638401 AND A
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ITS CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE
THE AGREEMENT FOR A TOTAL PROJECT COST OF
$635,312.00
Item #16B2
REIMBURSE THE VILLAGES AT EMERALD LAKES FOUR
AND FIVE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATIONS, INC., THE
TOTAL AMOUNT OF $9,800 FOR THE DEMOLITION AND
REMOV AL OF THE SOUND BARRIER WALL AND TO
APPROVE ANY NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS - AN
EASEMENT AGREEMENT SIGNED ON MARCH 4, 1998
Page 286
----- ._-~-
July 28, 2009
CONVEYED A PERPETUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT
TO THE COUNTY MAKING THE COUNTY RESPONSIBLE FOR
HE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF THE SOUND BARRIER
WALL
Item #16B3
SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE OF W A VETRONIX DATA
COLLECTOR APPLIANCE, AS WELL AS THE DATA
TRANSLATOR PLUG-IN FROM TRANSPORTATION
CONTROL SYSTEMS, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $78,690.00
FROM THE PUD MONITORING/TRAFFIC COUNTS PROJECT
NO. 69124 - REQUIRED FOR THE DATA COLLECTION FOR
CREATING THE ANNUAL UPDATED INVENTORY REPORT
(AUIR)
Item #16B4
RIGHT OF ENTRY TO ALLOW SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA,
LLC TO COMPLETE AN ENVIRONMENTAL SITE
ASSESSMENT - FOR SITE CLEANUP AND CLOSURE FOR
THE SPEEDWAY FORMERLY LOCATED AT 3280 T AMIAMI
TRAIL~ NAPLES
Item #16B5
PURCHASE OF 2.27 ACRES OF UNIMPROVED PROPERTY
WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
STORMW A TER DETENTION AND TREATMENT POND FOR
PHASE II OF THE V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD EXTENSION
PROJECT. PROJECT NO. 60168, PHASE II (FISCAL IMPACT:
$62~83 7 .50)
Page 287
..--.-.--., ,-,-"~,"_._."_'-'~.' -~_.".",., ,-'. '. '~""""'~'M.,.,_","_,_",,,.....,,__~.
July 28, 2009
Item # 16B6
RESOLUTION 2009-174: RESOLUTION AND A
TRANSPORT A TION REGIONAL INCENTIVE PROGRAM
(TRIP) AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (FDOT), UNDER FM #425477-1-58-01,
THAT PROVIDES $6 MILLION IN STATE FUNDING FOR
IMPROVEMENTS TO OIL WELL ROAD FROM IMMOKALEE
ROAD TO EVERGLADES BOULEVARD. COUNTY PROJECT
#60044
Item #16B7
TRANSFER OF $250,000 FROM FUND 313 (RESERVE FOR
CONTINGENCIES) TO PROJECT #60166 (LOGAN
BOULEV ARD) FOR LEGAL FEES ASSOCIATED WITH CASE
NO. 09-2451-CA, G.L. HOMES OF NAPLES ASSOCIATES II, LTD.
VS. COLLIER COUNTY - FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
LOGAN BOULEVARD BETWEEN V ANDERBIL T BEACH
ROAD AND IMMOKALEE AND CONTEMPLATED 850
RESIDENTIAL UNITS, HOWEVER G.L. HOMES HAS NOT
MOVED FORWARD WITH THE 850 RESIDENTIAL UNITS
Item #16B8
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND HOLE IN THE WALL
GOLF CLUB FOR LANDSCAPING WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-
WAY ON GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD - PERMITTING THE
INSTALLATION OF ENHANCED BERMUDA SOD
INSTALLATION, IRRIGATION, AND PROVIDES FOR
Page 288
r___~
July 28, 2009
MAINTENANCE FUNDED BY HOLE IN THE W ALL GOLF
CLUB
Item #16B9
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE REVENUE FOR
PROJECTS WITHIN THE TRANSPORTATION SUPPORTED
GAS TAX FUND (313) IN THE AMOUNT OF $360.939.50
Item #16BI0
WORK ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $43,950.00 TO POST,
BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN, INC. (PBS&J) FOR
CONTRACT #06-3969 FIXED TERM PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE LEL Y AREA
STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (LASIP),
WHITAKER ROAD IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NO. 51101)
NECESSARY TO RELOCATE UTILITY PIPELINES IN
CONFLICT WITH STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENTS DUE TO
UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS
Item #16B 11
RESOLUTION 2009-175: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE
STATUTORY DEDICATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF A
PORTION OF WEBER BOULEVARD BY VIRTUE OF THE
COUNTYS CONTINUOUS AND UNINTERRUPTED
MAINTENANCE OF THE ROADW A Y IN EXCESS OF SEVEN
YEARS AND AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF A RIGHT OF WAY
MAP. PROJECT NO. 68056 (FISCAL IMPACT: $45.00)
Item #16B 12
Page 289
"-"-"' ,....,.."""""'^"""'"""'....",...."
July 28, 2009
NEW BANK DRIVE-IN RATE, EFFECTIVE JUNE 8, 2009 FOR
THE PURPOSE OF RE-CALCULA TING THE APPLICABLE
ROAD IMP ACT FEES FOR THE AMERICAN MOMENTUM
BANK
Item #16B 13
DEVELOPERS CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT (DCA)
BETWEEN PUL TE HOME CORPORATION AND THE BRYAN
W. PAUL FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (THE
DEVELOPERS) AND COLLIER COUNTY TO GRANT
TEMPORARY DRAINAGE AND CONSTRUCTION
EASEMENTS FOR THE PROGRAMMED EXPANSION OF OIL
WELL ROAD - CONSISTENT WITH THE LONG RANGE
TRANSPORTATION PLAN ADOPTED JANUARY 12,2006
Item #16B14
RESOLUTION 2009-176: RESOLUTION REQUESTING THAT
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
QUITCLAIM TO COLLIER COUNTY CERTAIN RIGHT-OF-
WAY, BEING THE NORTH FIFTY FEET OF THE SOUTH ONE
HUNDRED FEET OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, REQUIRED
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE WILSON BOULEVARD
EXTENSION. ESTIMATED FISCAL IMPACT: NONE
Item #16B15
EASEMENT INSTRUMENT TO CONVEY A UTILITY
EASEMENT AND SIGN RELATED CONVEYANCE
Page 290
-"_....._~,.......
July 28, 2009
DOCUMENTS TO THE CITY OF NAPLES AT THE FREEDOM
P ARK (AKA GORDON RIVER WATER QUALITY PARK) - FOR
ACCESS, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF UTILITY
FACILITIES THAT WILL BE LOCATED IN THE EASEMENT
AREA PROVIDING WATER TO THE BUILDING AND PARK
FACILITIES
Item #16B16
CONTRACT BETWEEN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION THROUGH ITS OFFICE OF
COASTAL AND AQUATIC MANAGED AREAS (CAMA), AND
COLLIER COUNTY, FOR THE PAVING OF SHELL ISLAND
ROAD - IN ORDER TO HELP MAINTAIN MAINTENANCE
COSTS
Item #16B17
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF MARCO
ISLAND FOR THE LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION
MAINTENANCE ON SR 951 AND NORTH OF THE MARCO
ISLAND BRIDGE. (ESTIMATED ANNUAL FISCAL IMP ACT:
$92,500) - BEGINNING 1050 FEET NORTH OF THE JOLLEY
BRIDGE AND EXTENDING TO THE SOUTH END OF THE
MACIL VANE BAY AND TO BE COMPLETED BY DECEMBER
3 L 2009
Item #16B 18
RESOLUTION 2009-177: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
Page 291
.____0__. ."-0__..-
July 28, 2009
AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(FDOT), FOR LANDSCAPING BEING INSTALLED IN THE
MEDIANS ON SR 951 AT BRIDGE NO. 030148 MARCO
ISLAND BRIDGE NORTH. (ESTIMATED ANNUAL FISCAL
IMPACT $10~000)
Item #16B19
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO REALLOCATE FUNDING FROM
TRANSPOR T A TION ENGINEERING'S OPERATING FUNDS
INTO THEIR PERSONAL SERVICES BUDGET - NEEDED TO
REDUCE THE OPERATING BUDGET WITHIN THE
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
COVERING THEIR PERSONAL SERVICES
Item #16B20
AWARD RFP #09-5239 ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE VENDORS UNDER CATEGORY
I: LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AND IRRIGATION TO THE
FOLLOWING FIRMS: HANNULA LANDSCAPING INC.,
FLORIDA LAND MAINTENANCE, VILA & SON
LANDSCAPING, CORP., BUSK AND ASSOCIATES AND
CARIBBEAN LAWN SERVICE; CATEGORY II: MOWING AND
RIGHT-OF-WAY MAINTENANCE TO THE FOLLOWING
FIRMS: HANNULA LANDSCAPING INC., FLORIDA LAND
MAINTENANCE, VILA & SON AND CARIBBEAN LAWN;
CATEGORY III: TREE SERVICE TO THE FOLLOWING FIRMS:
DA VEY TREE SERVICE AND SIGNATURE TREE CARE; AND
CATEGORY IV: PEST CONTROL SERVICES NOT TO BE
AWARDED - PROVIDING FUTURE QUOTES FOR
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE, MOWING AND TREE
Page 292
July 28, 2009
SERVICES THROUGHOUT COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16Cl
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $342,000 FROM PROJECT NO. 71058, INITIAL
WATER LEGAL TO A NEW PROJECT NO. 70015, TITLED
GENERAL LEGAL SERVICES - WHICH CAN BE USED FOR
MORE THAN ONE PROJECT
Item # 16C2
RESOLUTION 2009-178: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE
SATISFACTIONS OF LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE
RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS
RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN
FULL FOR THE 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995 AND 1996 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT. FISCAL IMPACT IS $78.50 TO RECORD THE
SA TISF ACTIONS OF LIENS - FOR THE FOLLOWING FOLIO
NUMBERS: 62045120006,62045120006,62045120006,
77710320003. 77710320003. AND 62045120006
Item #16C3
SA TISF ACTION FOR A CERTAIN WATER AND/OR SEWER
IMP ACT FEE PAYMENT AGREEMENT. FISCAL IMP ACT IS
$18.50 TO RECORD THE SATISFACTION OF LIEN - FOR
FOLIO NUMBER 68341320009
Item #16C4
Page 293
,.,--~~"~ -~.--....,.__."".~....,.....,..,"-
July 28, 2009
RESOLUTION 2009-179/CWS RESOLUTION 2009-01:
RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
HARDSHIP DEFERRALS FOR CERTAIN SEWER SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS FOR THE 2009 TAX YEAR - FOR THE
FOLLOWING FOLIO NUMBERS: 77821360004, 24830680003,
AND 64510680008
Item #16C5
AWARD PURCHASE ORDERS TO THE TWO LOWEST
BIDDERS FOR EACH CHEMICAL CATEGORY UNDER BID
#09-5170, TITLED PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF
CHEMICALS FOR UTILITIES, WHICH ARE REQUIRED FOR
POTABLE WATER, WASTEWATER, AND IRRIGATION
QUALITY WATER TREATMENT BY THE WATER AND
W ASTEW A TER DEP AR TMENTS - FOR THE TREATMENT
PROCESS TO SUCCESSFULLY, COMPLIANTLY, AND
RELIABL Y PRODUCE POT ABLE WATER, TREAT SEW AGE
AND PRODUCE IRRIGATION QUALITY WATER FOR IT'S
UTILITY CUSTOMERS
Item # 16C6 - Moved to Item # 1 OL (Per Commissioner Coletta
during Agenda Changes)
Item # 16C7
PRE-A W ARD COST REQUEST FORM REQUESTING PRE-
AWARD CREDIT OF $5,796.00 IN STAFF TIME AND
EXPENDITURES AS AN ADDITION TO THE GRANT
APPLICATION TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR THE HAZARD MITIGATION
GRANT PROGRAM FOR UP TO $50,000 TO INSTALL
Page 294
_,___".^_M~.."
July 28, 2009
ALUMINUM ROLL DOWN SHUTTERS AND SUPPORTING
EQUIPMENT ON THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPLIANCE AND LANDFILL SCALE HOUSE FACILITY
Item # 16C8
PRE-A WARD COST REQUEST FORM REQUESTING A PRE-
AWARD CREDIT OF $54,164.80 IN STAFF TIME AND
EXPENDITURES AS AN ADDITION TO THE GRANT
APPLICATION TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR THE HAZARD MITIGATION
GRANT PROGRAM FOR UP TO $320,000 TO CONSTRUCT A
SIX-INCH HIGH DENSITY POLETHYLENE LEACHATE PIPE
A T THE COLLIER COUNTY LANDFILL
Item #16C9
CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE
AMOUNT OF $1,112,400 REQUIRED BY THE DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOR THE RENEWAL OF
THE OPERATING PERMITS FOR THE DEEP INJECTION WELL
SYSTEMS AT THE NORTH AND SOUTH COUNTY WATER
RECLAMA TION FACILITIES - THE PURPOSE OF THE DEEP
INJECTION WELLS IS TO DISPOSE OF WATER NOT
SUITABLE FOR DELIVERY TO THE IRRIGATION-QUALITY
WATER SYSTEM
Item #16CI0
RESOLUTION 2009-180 (DISTRICT 1) & RESOLUTION 2009-
181 (DISTRICT 2): RESOLUTIONS TO SET THE DATE, TIME
AND PLACE FOR AN ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING
Page 295
"~~~- ,. ~._-~~""",,,,--,-'...",,,,,.,,
July 28, 2009
WHERE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WILL
ADOPT FEES (SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS) TO BE COLLECTED
ON THE PROPERTY TAX BILLS FOR CURBSIDE TRASH
COLLECTION SERVICES FOR THE 2010 BUDGET YEAR,
APPROVE THE NOTIFICATION TO CUSTOMERS, AND
APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $50~700
Item #16Cll
AMENDMENT ONE (1) TO THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
INC., OF FLORIDA, FOR SOLID WASTE, RECYCLABLE
MATERIALS, AND YARD TRASH COLLECTION SERVICES,
TO PROVIDE DEBRIS REMOVAL SERVICES AFTER A
NA TURAL OR MAN-MADE DISASTER - PROVIDING FOR
ADEQUATE EQUIPMENT AND HUMAN RESOURCES
Item #16C12
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION INNOVATIVE RECYCLING AND WASTE
REDUCTION GRANT APPLICATION IN THE AMOUNT OF
$343,070.00 TO FUND THE "IMPLEMENTING RECYCLING AT
TEMPORARY EVENTS ORDINANCE" PROGRAM - BY
FUNDING RECYCLING SUPPLIES, INCENTIVES, EDUCATION
AND OUTREACH ENHANCING THE COUNTY'S
MANDA TORY NON-RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING ORDINANCE
Item #16C13
AWARD BID NUMBER 09-5267 REHAB REACTOR #1 -
SCRWTP IN THE AMOUNT OF $97,400 TO DOUGLAS N
Page 296
- <<;,..-,,",----'--"'- ,..,.-,-, ..'".....-.--........
July 28, 2009
HIGGINS, INC. TO COMPLETE THE REHABILITATION OF
THE REACTOR #1 AT SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER
TREATMENT PLANT. PROJECT NO. 71065.5 - USED FOR THE
LIME SOFTENING TREATMENT PROCESS
Item # 16D 1 - Moved to Item # 1 OJ (Per Commissioner Henning
during Agenda Changes)
Item # 16D2
AFTER-THE-FACT APPROVAL FOR THE SUBMISSION OF
THE 2010 STATE CHALLENGE GRANT APPLICATION,
WHICH WAS SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN
& F AMIL Y SERVICES OFFICE ON HOMELESSNESS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $144.000.00
Item # 16D3
BUDGET AMENDMENT TOTALING $264,905 THAT WILL
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR 2009 SUMMER FOOD
GRANT PROGRAM - FOR THE CHILDREN OF COLLIER
COUNTY WHO QUALIFY FOR FREE AND/OR REDUCED
SCHOOL LUNCHES
Item #16D4
AMENDMENT TO THE CONTINUUM OF CARE (COC)
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PROGRAM (SHP) GRAND
AGREEMENT FLI4B50-6001, BETWEEN THE U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
(HUD) AND COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS - EXTENDING THE AGREEMENT UNTIL
Page 297
~~m.''''"~*,,"__'''''.'''''''~. ,^
July 28, 2009
JANUARY 31, 2011, AND AMENDING THE AGREEMENT TO
ALLOW SHP FUNDS TO PAY FOR THE INST ALLA TION OF
PLA YGROUND EQUIPMENT FOR THE TRANSITIONAL
HOUSING COTTAGES OPERA TED BY THE SHELTER FOR
ABUSED WOMEN AND CHILDREN
Item #16D5
CONVEY ANCE OF A PORTION OR ALL OF THE ACCESS
EASEMENT ACQUIRED FOR THE DELASOL
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $42,
PROJECT #800605
Item #16D6
AMENDMENT TO PROJECT NUMBER FL14B50-6001
CONTINUUM OF CARE (COC) SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
PROGRAM (SHP) SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH THE
SHEL TER FOR ABUSED WOMEN & CHILDREN (SA WCC) FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION AND SERVICES FOR THE
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROGRAM - EXTENDING THE
AGREEMENT UNTIL JANUARY 31, 2011, AND AMENDING
THE AGREEMENT TO ALLOW SHP FUNDS TO PAY FOR THE
INST ALLA TION OF PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT FOR THE
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING COTTAGES OPERATED BY THE
SHEL TER FOR ABUSED WOMEN AND CHILDREN
Item #16D7
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $20,023.80 IN
REVENUE FROM AN INSURANCE REIMBURSEMENT FOR
NETTING AT TWO SOFTBALL FIELDS AT MAX HASSE
Page 298
July 28, 2009
COMMUNITY PARK
Item #16D8
THREE (3) GRANT AGREEMENTS ACCEPTING THE
CONTINUUM OF CARE HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANT
AWARD FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) TOTALING $330,763 AND
APPROVE THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENT OF
$330,763 RECOGNIZING THE FUNDING ASSOCIATED WITH
THIS AWARD - TO ASSIST NON-PROFIT AGENCIES WITH
PROVIDING FOR THE HOMELESS AND AT RISK
POPULA TION
Item #16D9
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE AREA AGENCY ON
AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. AND APPROVE A
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO REFLECT A DECREASE OF $5,125
IN THE ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE INITIATIVE (ADI) GRANT
PROGRAM - PROVIDING FOR UNINTERRUPTED SUPPORT
SERVICES FOR THE FRAIL AND ELDERLY
Item #16DI0
AFTER- THE-FACT APPROVAL FOR SUBMISSION OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROGRAM 2
APPLICATION TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR FUNDING UNDER THE
AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009
IN THE AMOUNT OF $10.000.000
Page 299
<"~'<-"~"-".'-~--'
July 28, 2009
Item #16Dll
MODIFICATION TO DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE
AGREEMENT #08DB-D3-09-21-01-A03 BETWEEN THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND
COLLIER COUNTY. THIS MODIFICATION WILL ADD NEW
ACTIVITIES TO UTILIZE GRANT FUNDS PREVIOUSLY
AWARDED TO THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. (F.K.A.
COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION) AND IMMOKALEE HELPING OUR PEOPLE
IN EMERGENCIES, INC
Item #16D12
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE AREA AGENCY ON
AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. AND APPROVE A
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO REFLECT A DECREASE OF
$17,514 IN THE COMMUNITY CARE FOR THE ELDERLY
(CCE) GRANT PROGRAM
Item #16D13
ACCEPT ANCE OF THE CONVEYANCE OF A SOVEREIGNTY
SUBMERGED LANDS LEASE RENEWAL AND
MODIFICA TION TO REFLECT CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP,
REFLECT CHANGE IN DESCRIPTION OF USE, REFLECT
CHANGE IN TERM, INCREASE AND REFLECT CORRECT
SQUARE FOOTAGE FROM THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND OF THE
Page 300
July 28, 2009
ST A TE OF FLORIDA AT A TOTAL COST NOT TO EXCEED
$146.00 FOR RECORDING FEES, PROJECT NO. 80611.1 -
LOCA TED AT THE GOOD LAND BOAT PARK
Item #16D14
CONVEY ANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO LEE COUNTY
ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE FOR INST ALLA TION OF
OVERHEAD ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION LINES TO PROVIDE
ELECTRIC SERVICE TO THE MARGOOD PARK LOCATED AT
321 PEAR TREE A VENUE, GOODLAND, AT A COST NOT TO
EXCEED $27.00
Item #16D15
CONVEY ANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO LEE COUNTY
ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE FOR INST ALLA TION OF
UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION LINES TO
PROVIDE ELECTRIC SERVICE TO THE MARGOOD PARK
LOCA TED AT 321 PEAR TREE A VENUE, GOODLAND AT A
COST NOT TO EXCEED $27.00
Item #16D16
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE AREA AGENCY ON
AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. AND APPROVE A
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO REFLECT AN INCREASE OF $382
IN THE HOME CARE FOR THE ELDERLY (HCE) PROGRAM
Item #16D17
Page 301
..."...."-
July 28, 2009
RESOLUTION 2009-182: PROPOSED LAND LEASE
AGREEMENT WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY SENIOR
RESOURCE CENTER, INC. TO USE THE OLD (EXISTING)
GOLDEN GATE BRANCH LIBRARY SITE FOR A SENIOR
RESOURCE CENTER
Item #16D18
GRANT AGREEMENT AND CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (HUD) ACCEPTING A HOMELESSNESS
PREVENTION AND RAPID RE-HOUSING PROGRAM (HPRP)
GRANT AWARD IN THE AMOUNT OF $888,850 AND
APPROVE THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENT
RECOGNIZING THE FUNDING AND APPROPRIATING THE
EXPENDITURES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS AWARD
Item #16D19
TEMPORARY RIGHT OF ENTRY FOR LEE COUNTY
ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. (LCEC) TO STAGE, OFF-
LOAD AND LOAD ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION POLES,
ASSOCIA TED MATERIALS, AND FOR ACCESS ON, OVER
AND ACROSS COUNTY PROPERTY AT 9800 ISLES OF CAPRI
BOULEV ARD AT NO COST TO THE COUNTY
Item #16El
RATIFYING MODIFICATIONS TO AND DELETIONS FROM
THE 2009 FISCAL YEAR PAY AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN
MADE FROM APRIL 1~ 2009 THROUGH JUNE 30~ 2009
Page 302
,~,____a. _...
July 28, 2009
Item #16E2
SIX ACQUIRED CONSERVATION COLLIER PRESERVES -
NAMING EACH PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC LAND USE,
INCLUDING SIGNAGE
Item #16E3
BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO MOVE OPERATING FUNDS
WITHIN THE IT DEPARTMENTS ADOPTED FY09 BUDGET TO
COVER STAFF SALARY AND BENEFITS EXPENSES
Item #16E4
BUDGET AMENDMENT THAT WILL ALLOW A TRANSFER
OF $48,600 FROM CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND
MANAGEMENT FUND RESERVES TO CONSERVATION
COLLIER LAND MANAGEMENT FUND OPERATING - COSTS
ASSOCIA TED WITH CONTRACTING A PROFESSIONAL FIRM
TO DRAFT A FINAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AT PEPPER
RANCH PRESERVE
Item #16E5
CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF INTERNALLY DEVELOPED
SOFTW ARE TO SARASOTA COUNTY AND TO APPROVE A
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING REVENUE OF $25,000
- FOR PROGRAM THAT HELPS TRACK VENDOR
EVALUATION
Item # 16E6
Page 303
~-"-''''_.,,'''".-'-~~'--
July 28, 2009
FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH
GERALD T. AND CATHERINE L. BERRY FOR THE
CONTINUED USE OF OFFICE SPACE USED BY THE CLERK'S
OFFICE AT A COST OF $39,323 - UNTIL AN OFFICE AT THE
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING IS COMPLETED
Item # 16E7
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF BONITA
SPRINGS TO MUTUALLY EXTEND LOCAL PREFERENCE TO
VENDORS WITHIN BOTH ENTITIES - ALLOWED BY THE
RECIPROCITY CLAUSE THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE
COUNTY'S PURCHASING POLICY
Item # 16E8
BROCHU PRESERVE FINAL MANAGEMENT PLAN UNDER
THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION
PROGRAM - FOR THE REMOVAL OF INVASIVE AND
EXOTIC PLANTS
Item #16E9
AWARD RFP #09-5255, SAP DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM CONSULTING AND IMPLEMENTATION SERVICES
TO LEVERX, INC. AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO
EXECUTE THE STANDARD CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
TOT AL PROJECT COSTS FOR HARDW ARE AND SERVICES
ARE NOT TO EXCEED $360,000
Item #16EI0
Page 304
'--".-
July 28, 2009
BUDGET AMENDMENT APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL
FUNDS RECEIVED IN THE FREEDOM MEMORIAL FUND
(FUND 620)
Item #16El1
BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO RECOGNIZE AND
APPROPRIA TE MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES TOTALING
$103,668.75 FOR COMPUTER HARDWARE AND IT SERVICES
- FOR SERVICES INCLUDING LOCAL ADMINISTRATOR
RIGHTS FEES, TELEPHONE NUMBER CHARGES FOR THE
SHERIFF'S OFFICE. AND SPECIAL HOURLY SERVICES
Item #16E12
AWARD BID #09-5240 LOCKSMITH HARDWARE TO
MUL TIPLE VENDORS LISTED; INTERLINE BRANDS, INC.
D/B/A SEXAUER, INDEPENDENT HARDWARE, INC.,
ACCREDITED LOCK SUPPLY, SOUTHERN LOCK & SUPPLY
CO., AND CLARK SECURITY PRODUCTS, INC. (ESTIMATED
ANNUAL FISCAL IMPACT $60.000)
Item #16E13
RATIFYING STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS AND
CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS TO BOARD-APPROVED
CONTRACTS - COVERING THE PERIOD BETWEEN MAY 20,
2009 THROUGH JULY 7. 2009
Item #16E14
MODIFICATION NO.4 TO U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Page 305
July 28, 2009
(USFWS) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. 401815J021 TO
FUND HABITAT RESTORATION AT THE MCILVANE MARSH
PRESERVE IN THE AMOUNT OF $21,500 - TO BE USED FOR
HABIT A T RESTORATION AND TO A LESSER EXTENT
HABIT A T IMPROVEMENT AND CREATION
Item #16E15
ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT FROM CORPORATE EXPRESS
BUSINESS INTERIORS (CEBI) TO STAPLES CONTRACT &
COMMERCIAL, INC., D/B/A STAPLES ADVANTAGE
(STAPLES) FOR JANITORIAL SUPPLIES FOR EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES (EMS) DEPARTMENT, OFFICE
SUPPLIES FOR MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS, AND SYSTEMS
FURNITURE FOR THE NEW EMERGENCY SERVICES
CENTER (ESC)
Item #16E16
ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT FROM M/A-COM, INC., TO
HARRIS CORPORATION FOR EQUIPMENT PURCHASES,
MAINTENANCE, SOFTWARE LICENSING AND SERVICES
FOR THE OPERATION OF COLLIER COUNTY'S 800 MHZ
TRUNKED RADIO SYSTEM
Item #16E17
SECOND ADDENDUM TO THE COUNTY MANAGER
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF
CORRECTING CONFLICTING PROVISIONS IN SECTIONS
12(B) AND 12(C) OF THE AGREEMENT
Page 306
.~._<-"."..
July 28, 2009
Item #16Fl
VOLUNTEER FIRE ASSISTANCE GRANT APPLICATION TO
THE FLORIDA DIVISION OF FORESTRY FOR THE PURCHASE
OF VHF RADIOS AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN
THE APPLICATION. (FISCAL IMPACT, 50% COUNTY MATCH:
$2,721.25) - TO BE USED FOR THE PURCHASE OF
EQUIPMENT TO IMPROVE FIREFIGHTER SAFETY AND
FIREFIGHTER CAP ABILITIES
Item #16F2
AWARD BID #09-5235 FOR LAKE BANK GEOTEXTILE TUBE
INST ALLA TIONS FOR THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES
DIVISION, IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 TO EROSION
RESTORATION~ LLC
Item #16F3
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE
GRANT ADMINISTRATIVE REVENUES TOTALING $54,716.97
FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF PERSONNEL AND OPERATING
EXPENSES - FOR WHICH THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS
CENTER WAS ACTIVATED DURING TROPICAL STORM FAY
Item #16F4
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT #1904 BETWEEN THE BOARD
OF COLLIER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER
SERVICES, DIVISION OF FORESTRY, FOR FIRE PROTECTION
OF FOREST AND WILD LANDS WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY
Page 307
N"","",.__
July 28, 2009
Item #16F5
APPLICA TION SPONSORED BY THE COLLIER COUNTY BAR
ASSOCIATION TO OFFICIALLY RECOGNIZE THE NAME,
"THE HONORABLE HUGH D. HAYES COURTHOUSE ANNEX"
FOR THE NEW COURTHOUSE ANNEX AT THE COLLIER
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER
Item #16F6
RESOLUTION 2009-183: RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS,
CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2008-09 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F7
MODIFICA TION TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2009 EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT PREPAREDNESS AND ASSISTANCE GRANT
ACCEPTING $77,198 IN GRANT FUNDS AND APPROVE A
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE
THE REVENUE (AGREEMENT #09-BG-03-09-21-01)
Item # 16F8 - Moved to Item # 1 OK (Per Commissioner Henning
during Agenda Changes)
Item #16F9
BUDGET AMENDMENTS - FOR SERVICES PROVIDED
DURING THE SPAY AND NEUTERING SERVICES FROM
DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES AND FOR ADDITIONAL
Page 308
July 28, 2009
SUB MITT ALS REQUIRED BY THE COUNTY AND REVIEWS
BY THE CCPC (BA#09-407 AND BA #09-387)
Item #16FI0
AFTER-THE-FACT APPROVAL FOR THE ATTACHED
AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT (ARRA)
ASSIST ANCE TO FIREFIGHTERS FIRE STATION
CONSTRUCTION GRANT APPLICATION THAT WAS
SUBMITTED BY THE OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT
FOR THE RENOVATIONS TO FIRE STATION 61 AT PORT OF
THE ISLANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $452,474 FUNDED BY
THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT
(ARRA) OF 2009 AND ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE
ADDITIONAL TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY AND
REPORTING COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS OF THESE
FUNDS - TO ENHANCE THEIR RESPONSE CAP ABILITY
Item #16Fll
CHANGE ORDER #3 ON CONTRACT #06-4007 WITH
PARADISE ADVERTISING AND MARKETING, INC. FOR UP
TO $918,000 IN ADDITIONAL BILLING AT GROSS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR AGREEMENT WITH COLLIER
COUNTY AND AUTHORIZES THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE
THE CHANGE ORDER - COVERING THE SERVICE FEE AT
THE STANDARD AGENCY COMMISSION OF 15%
Item # 16F 12 - Moved to Item # 1 OG (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16F13
Page 309
July 28, 2009
PREP A YMENT OF THE CARIBBEAN GARDENS
COMMERCIAL PAPER LOAN IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,735.000
Item #16G 1
AFTER-THE-FACT ACCEPTANCE OF THE ATTACHED
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) GRANT
OFFER FOR $247,000 FOR THE ACQUISITION OF 2.73 ACRES
OF LAND (TRACT Q) PURCHASED FROM WCI
COMMUNITIES, INC. ON NOVEMBER 18, 2008 REQUIRED
FOR PHASE I OF THE T AXIW A Y PROJECT AT THE MARCO
ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT, AND ASSOCIATED BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
Item # 16G2
THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE BA YSHORE
BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING UNIT
(MSTU) TO APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA
POWER AND LIGHT (FP&L) FOR THE INSTALLATION AND
SERVICE OF LIGHTS ON SIXTY EIGHT (68) EXISTING
POWER POLES LOCATED ON SIDE ROADS LYING EAST
AND WEST OF THE BA YSHORE DRIVE CORRIDOR;
AUTHORIZE THE BCC CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE
AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD; APPROVE AND
AUTHORIZE THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
(ADMINISTRATOR OF ACTIVITIES OF THE MSTU) TO MAKE
PAYMENT FROM MSTU FUND 163 FOR THE COSTS OF
ASSOCIATED MONTHLY FEES (FISCAL IMPACT $89,760.00
OVER 10 YEARS OR $748.00 PER MONTH)
Item # 16G3
Page 3 1 0
"~"~....".,_._,-
July 28, 2009
GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE FEDERAL A VIA TION
ADMINISTRATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $49,158, AND
APPROVE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS, FOR
THE INSTALLATION OF STORM WATER MANAGEMENT
STRUCTURES REQUIRED BY THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE
AIRCRAFT APRON AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL
AIRPORT
Item #16G4
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) APPROVES
THE BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE LOCAL CRA
ADVISORY BOARD HOSTING A BA YSHORE CULTURAL
FESTIVAL OF THE ARTS EVENT, APPROVE UP TO $25,000
FROM THE BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE TRUST FUND
(FUND 187) FYI0 MARKETING & PROMOTIONS BUDGET TO
FINANCIALL Y SUPPORT EVENT COSTS, AND DECLARE
THA T THE EVENT SERVES A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE.
(ADVISORY BOARD, BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE
CRA)
Item #16Hl
COMMISSIONER HENNING'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
A TTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. HE ATTENDED EDC'S 2009 POST-LEGISLATIVE
LUNCHEON AT HILTON NAPLES, 5111 T AMIAMI TRAIL
NORTH ON 18TH JUNE, AT 11:30 A.M. $20.00 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRA VEL BUDGET
Page 311
q'.-.",.""-..,,,,""-"-''''-"
July 28, 2009
Item #16H2
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR FOR
A TTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE ATTENDED THE EDC POST-LEGISLATIVE
LUNCHEON ON JUNE 18, 2009 AT THE HILTON NAPLES IN
NAPLES, FL. $20.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT 5111 T AMI AMI
TRAIL NORTH
Item # 16H3
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
A TTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE ATTENDED THE F AC SUNSET DINNER
CRUISE ON JUNE 23, 2009 ON BOARD THE MARCO ISLAND
PRINCESS AT MARCO ISLAND, FL. $50.00 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
A TTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. HE ATTENDED IMMOKALEE ROTARY CLUB
WITH STAFF ON JUNE 3, 2009 AT IMMOKALEE, FL $40.00 TO
BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER'S COLETTA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET
Item # 16H5
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
A TTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
Page 312
-""""...,--",,,,,.,-~
July 28, 2009
PURPOSE. HE ATTENDED THE EASTERN COLLIER
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MEETING WITH STAFF ON JUNE
3,3009 AT IMMOKALEE, FL. $45.00 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED
AT 310 ALACHUA ST~ IMMOKALEE
Item # 161 1
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH
ACTION AS DIRECTED
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 313
,-,"-",,,-,-,,,,"--,,..~,,.,,~. "'--~~"''''--'-
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
July 28, 2009
I. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Districts:
1) Big Cypress Stewardship District:
FY 09/1 0 Meeting Schedule.
2) Verona Walk Community Development District:
Proposed FY 09/10 Budget.
B. Minutes:
I) Affordable Housing Commission:
Minutes of May 4,2009.
2) Airport Authority:
Minutes of April 13, 2009; May 11,2009.
3) Board of Building Adjustments and Appeals:
Minutes of April 30, 2009.
4) Collier County Citizens Corps:
Agenda of March 18,2009; May 20, 2009.
Minutes of March 18,2009; May 20,2009.
5) Collier County Code Enforcement Board:
Minutes of April 23, 2009.
6) Collier County Planning Commission:
Minutes of April 16, 2009; May 7, 2009.
7) Contractors Licensing Board:
Minutes of March 18, 2009; May 20, 2009.
8) Development Services Advisory Committee:
Minutes of May 6,2009.
9) Floodplain Management Planning Committee:
Minutes of August 4, 2008; September 8, 2008; November 3, 2008;
November 17,2008; March 2,2009; April 6, 2009.
a) Sub-Committee:
Minutes of September 19, 2008.
b) Staff Sub-Committee:
Minutes of April 1, 2009.
10) Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee:
Agenda of March 10,2009; April 14, 2009; June 9, 2009.
Minutes of March 10,2009; April 14, 2009 Special Meeting.
II) Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee:
Minutes of May 1,2009.
12) Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board:
Minutes of April 23, 2009.
13) Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agency:
Agenda of May 20,2009.
Minutes of April IS, 2009.
14) Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board:
Agenda of May 20,2009.
Minutes of April 15, 2009.
15) Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee:
Agenda of May 20, 2009 joint w/CRA and Immokalee MSTU/
Beautification Committee.
Minutes of April IS, 2009 joint w/CRA.
16) Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Board:
Minutes of April 2, 2009.
17) Land Acquisition Advisory Committee:
Minutes of April 13, 2009.
-..--.-
18) Library Advisory Board:
Agenda of May 20, 2009 regular meeting; May 20, 2009 Annual
Meeting; June 17,2009.
Minutes of April 15, 2009; May 20, 2009 regular meeting; May 20,
2009 Annual Meeting.
19) Parks and Recreation Advisory Board:
Minutes of April 15, 2009; May 20, 2009.
20) Pelican Bay Services Division Board:
Agenda of June 11,2009.
Minutes of April 21, 2009 Special Session; May 6, 2009; May 13,
2009 joint w/Landscaping Sub-committee.
a) Budget Committee:
Minutes of April 1, 2009.
b) Management Review Committee:
Minutes of March 23, 2009; April 1, 2009; April 21, 2009.
c) Ordinance Review Committee:
Minutes of January 27, 2009.
d) Safety Committee:
Agenda of May 15,2009.
21) Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee:
Minutes of March 26, 2009.
22) Utility Authority (Water and Wastewater Authority):
Notice to Customers; Affidavit of Publication / Note of Final Order
No. 2009-04.
C. Other:
1) Clam Pass/Clam Bay:
Minutes of Workshop - Navigational Markers For, and Navigation
On, Clam Pass/Clam Bay.
2) Collier County Public Safety Coordinating Council:
Minutes of March 19,2009.
3) Code Enforcement Special Magistrate:
Minutes of February 20,2009; March 6,2009; March 20,2009;
April 3, 2009; April 17, 2009; May 1, 2009; May 15, 2009;
June 5, 2009.
July 28, 2009
Item #16Jl
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JUNE 13,2009
THROUGH JUNE 19, 2009 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JUNE 20, 2009
THROUGH JUNE 26, 2009 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J3
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JUNE 27, 2009
THROUGH JULY 3, 2009 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J4
CAPIT AL ASSET DISPOSITION RECORDS FOR TIME PERIOD
APRIL 1,2009 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2009
Item #16J5
TO SERVE AS THE LOCAL COORDINATING UNIT OF
GOVERNMENT FOR THE FEDERAL YEAR 2009 FLORIDA
DEP ARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT EDWARD BYRNE
MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) FUNDS,
EXECUTE THE CERTIFICATE OF PARTICIPATION,
DESIGNATE THE SHERIFF AS THE OFFICIAL APPLICANT,
Page 314
","~-,-,...,
July 28, 2009
APPROVE THE CCSO FINANCE DIRECTOR AS THE GRANT
CHIEF FINANCIAL MANAGER AND THE CCSO GRANT
COORDINATOR AS THE GRANT CONTACT PERSON;
APPROVE THE GRANT APPLICATION WHEN COMPLETED,
AUTHORIZE ACCEPTANCE OF THE AWARD, AND APPROVE
ASSOCIA TED BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16J6
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $1,770,000 IN
REVENUES FOR MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES PROVIDED
AND EXPENDITURES IN THE SHERIFF'S FY2009 GENERAL
FUND BUDGET
Item # 16J7
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 04, 2009
THROUGH JULY 10, 2009 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J8
PARTIAL PREP A YMENT OF THE NAPLES PARK AREA
STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT BOND,
SERIES 1997 IN THE AMOUNT OF $185,000 AND THE
REQUISITE BUDGET AMENDMENT
Item #16J9
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 11,2009
THROUGH JULY 17, 2009 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Page 315
.._-<~.,-
July 28, 2009
Item #16JI0 - Withdrawn (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
INTEGRATED CRIMINAL JUSTICE INFORMATION SYSTEM
COST-SHARING AGREEMENT WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY
CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURTS, THE PUBLIC DEFENDER FOR
THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, THE STATE
A TTORNEY OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, AND
THE CHIEF JUDGE FOR THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
AND APPROVE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $600,000
Item #16Kl
NA TIONAL PARK SERVICE AFFIDAVITS OF 5 EMPLOYEES
WHICH WILL END A DISPUTE WITH THE NATIONAL PARK
SERVICE OVER THE OWNERSHIP OF A PORTION OF BURNS
ROAD - RESOLVING THE ISSUE OF OWNERSHIP
Item #16K2
OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO PROPERTY OWNER, 524
BROADWAY COMPANY, L.P., FOR PARCEL NOS. 122 AND
123 IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,320 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V WILLIAM PILGER, ET AL., CASE NO. 06-
1125-CA (COUNTY BARN ROAD PROJECT NO. 60101)
(FISCAL IMPACT $6,720)
Item #16K3
MAKING ANOFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT,
WATERWAYS JOINT VENTURE, IV, FOR PARCEL NO.
Page 316
",'-;","-~'~'~"-'
July 28, 2009
178RDUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,040 IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V JORGE A. ROMERO, ET AL.,
CASE NO. 07-2681-CA (OIL WELL ROAD PROJECT NO. 60044)
(FISCAL IMP ACT $840)
Item #16K4
MAKING AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT,
CORNELIA JONES, FOR PARCEL NO. 811 IN THE AMOUNT
OF $24,015 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V
MYRTLE PRESERVE, LLC, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-463-CA (LEL Y
AREA STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 51101)
(FISCAL IMPACT $4,415)
Item #16K5
MAKING AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT,
JANET R. MESSINEO, FOR PARCEL NO. 161RDUE IN THE
AMOUNT OF $4,000 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER
COUNTY V PATRICIA K. CARLYLE, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-2829-
CA (OIL WELL ROAD PROJECT NO. 60044) (FISCAL IMP ACT
$2,200)
Item #16K6
MAKING AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENTS,
CHARLES R., HELEN J. AND BETTY J. WILSON, FOR PARCEL
NO. 142 IN THE AMOUNT OF $26,280 IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V CHARLES R. WILSON, ET AL.,
CASE NO. 02-5164-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT NO.
60018) (FISCAL IMP ACT $4,380)
Page 31 7
"..--,~_. """"'~~"-"","'--~_"*,-""
July 28, 2009
Item #16K7
MAKING ANOFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT,
NAPLES BRIDGE CENTER, INC., FOR PARCEL NO. 151 IN
THE AMOUNT OF $49,900 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V TECH FOUNDATION, INC., ET AL., CASE
NO. 03-2499-CA (GOLDEN GATE P ARKW A Y PROJECT NO.
60027) (FISCAL IMP ACT $5,000)
Item #16K8
MAKING AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT, EDEN
INSTITUTE FOUNDATION, INC., FOR PARCEL NO. 128 IN
THE AMOUNT OF $88,200 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V CHARLES R. KELLER, ET AL., CASE NO.
06-876-CA (COUNTY BARN ROAD PROJECT #60101) (FISCAL
IMPACT $14,700)
Item # 16K9
MAKING AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT,
SEACREST SCHOOL, INC., FOR PARCEL NOS. 829A AND
829B IN THE AMOUNT OF $69,600 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V CHARLES R. KELLER, ET AL., CASE NO.
06-876-CA (COUNTY BARN ROAD PROJECT 60101) (FISCAL
IMPACT $1 L600)
Item #16KI0
MAKING AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT,
JORGE T. TORRES, FOR PARCEL NO. 209FEE IN THE
AMOUNT OF $48,700 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER
Page 318
"~,~~_.".._",,,,-,~-~.. "~O__~
July 28, 2009
COUNTY V PABLO M SARDINAS, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-2824-
CA (OIL WELL ROAD PROJECT NO. 60044) (FISCAL IMP ACT
$22.200)
Item #16Kll
MEDIA TED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZE A
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT INCORPORATING THE
SAME DOLLAR AMOUNTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,265,900
FOR PARCELS 113FEE, 114FEE, 114TCE, 116FEE, 116TCE,
116DE, AND 118FEE, PLUS $180,000 IN ATTORNEYS FEES,
EXPERT FEES AND COSTS IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED CC V
ANDY MORGAN, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-4400-CA (SANTA
BARBARA BOULEVARD EXTENSION PROJECT NUMBER
60091) (FISCAL IMP ACT: $914.270.00)
Item #16K12
RELEASES RELATING TO SEVEN (7) ORDERS OF THE
SPECIAL MAGISTRATE AGAINST PROPERTIES OWNED BY
CENTEX HOMES - RECORDED AGAINST CENTEX HOMES
BETWEEN FEBRUARY 22,2008 AND OCTOBER 21,2008,
CENTEX PAID ALL ASSOCIATED FEES/FINES AND CAME
INTO COMPLIANCE PRIOR TO THE FORMAL LIENS BEING
PLACED
Item #17 A - Moved to Item #8B (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2009-184: PETITION SNR-2009-AR-14205
MARBELLA LAKES ASSOCIATES, LLC, IS REQUESTING TO
Page 319
.,~_"",",_T"""'___ " ~,-.,..,~--_.~~- "......_..."......_......_.".......,..w ----,.-----
July 28, 2009
RENAME A STREET FROM MARBELLA BOULEVARD TO
HERMOSA WAY. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN
TRACT A-I OF THE MARBELLA LAKES SUBDIVISION,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK 46, PAGES 77 THROUGH 93, OF THE OFFICIAL
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, WHICH IS IN
SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY~ FLORIDA
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2009-185: PETITION VA-2008-AR-13671, THE
COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION
DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY HEIDI WILLIAMS, AICP,
OF Q. GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES, IS REQUESTING
ELEVEN VARIANCES FROM LDC SUBSECTION 4.06.02
REGARDING BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AND ONE
V ARIANCE FROM LDC SUBSECTION 4.02.03 REGARDING
STANDARDS FOR LOCATION OF ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
AND STRUCTURES, WITH ALL 12 VARIANCES BEING FOR A
COMMUNITY PARK TO BE KNOWN AS THE MAR GOOD
HARBOR PARK IN THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY (RSF-
4) AND VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL (VR) ZONING DISTRICTS
WITH A GOODLAND ZONING OVERLAY (GZO). THE 2.62-
ACRE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN GOODLAND, IN
SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 52 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY~ FLORIDA. CTS
Item #17D
RESOLUTION 2009-186: RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD,
Page 320
.=""""'---_.. ~...'..,.". ..__.."",.,;,_",,',"^o"_"'_ .'~'._""-
July 28, 2009
TRANFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2008-09 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #17E
ORDINANCE 2009-39: ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. 92-40, AS AMENDED, WHICH CREATED THE
IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICE
T AXING UNIT, TO EXPAND ITS BOUNDARIES TO MATCH
THE URBAN BOUNDARY WITHIN THE CURRENT
IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(ICRA) BOUNDARIES
Item #17F
ORDINANCE 2009-40: PETITION RZ-2008-AR-13967, THE
COLLIER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND
RECREATION, REPRESENTED BY HEIDI WILLIAMS, AICP,
OF Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, IS REQUESTING A
REZONE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY (RSF-4),
VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL (VR) AND GOOD LAND ZONING
OVERLA Y (GZO) ZONING DISTRICTS TO THE PUBLIC USE
(P) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A COMMUNITY PARK. THE
APPROXIMA TEL Y 2.62-ACRE WATERFRONT PROPERTY IS
LOCA TED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PEAR TREE A VENUE IN
GOODLAND, IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 52 SOUTH, RANGE
27 EAST~ COLLIER COUNTY~ FLORIDA. CTS
Item #17G
RESOLUTION 2009-187: PETITION CU-2008-AR-13679,
EDW ARD LARSON OF MESSIAH LUTHERAN CHURCH INC.,
Page 321
---- .-.,_.~"._. _~_"'."__"""""o_"
July 28, 2009
REPRESENTED BY DWIGHT NADEAU OF R W A, INC., IS
REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE EST A TES (E)
ZONING DISTRICT TO EXPAND AN EXISTING CHURCH
PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION 2.03.01.B.l.C.l OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE 5.15-ACRE SUBJECT PROPERTY
IS LOCATED AT 5800 GOLDEN GATE P ARKW A Y IN SECTION
29, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY~ FLORIDA. CTS
Item #17H
ORDINANCE 2009-41: ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. 2004-43, BY INCREASING THE SURCHARGE IMPOSED
FOR NON-CRIMINAL TRAFFIC INFRACTIONS SET FORTH IN
CHAPTER 318, FLORIDA STATUTES, AND THOSE OFFENSES
ENUMERATED IN SECTION 318.17, FLORIDA STATUTES,
FROM $15.00 TO $30.00, IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT RECENT
LEGISLATION AMENDING SECTION 318.18(13), FLORIDA
STATUTES
Item #171
ORDINANCE 2009-42: ORDINANCE IMPOSING CIVIL FINES
AND PENAL TIES FOR THE P A TENTL Y FALSE REPORTING
OF VIOLATIONS OF COUNTY AND STATE LAWS TO PUBLIC
OFFICERS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, WHICH
REQUIRE THE UNNECESSARY EXHAUSTION OF PUBLIC
RESOURCES
Item #17J - Moved to Item #8A (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #17K
Page 322
_.....'^_,......."".""'="....."...,..,_w~" .... ,--_ . .-_.__.."--,~"._., '",'" ,........ .'" ""-"",_,'_.,,,._,~.'.~',_.. 4d1._~4 .. :_.. _n ~.. .._ T -'-'."'"',"""~.~",,,~....,' ...".~~. ." -, -,. ___._..n....._._
July 28, 2009
ORDINANCE 2009-43: REGULATIONS OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (ORDINANCE NO. 04-
41) AS A RESULT OF THE LEGAL CHALLENGE ASSERTED IN
BONITA MEDIA ENTERPRISES, LLC VERSUS THE COLLIER
COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
*******
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 7:09 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL 'JP,TRlCTS UN~ER ITS CONTROL
'h-~71JU d4. 4-
DONNA FIALA, Chairman
A TTEST${) . FJ~~:'
DWIGliT;.E:'B1roCK, CLERK
,.' 1;~1 . : j', "":" "', ~~ \
~~. f ~~ ~ ~~,:,'i":: \~ '
(J .~It;~~,~ ,,' ,/
.t"~~;il~~Si'~'~", ,
These nilnutes approved by the Board on ~ti. lS,'litH, as presented
~ or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY
COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 323