Loading...
BCC Minutes 10/20/1998 R REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, October 20, 1998 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 districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRPERSON: Not Present: Barbara B. Berry Pamela S. Mac'Kie John C. Norris Timothy L. Hancock Timothy J. Constantine ALSO PRESENT: Robert Fernandez, County Administrator David Weigel, County Attorney Item #3 AGENDA, CONSENT AGENDA AND SUMMARY AGENDA - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Good morning. I'd like to call to order the Tuesday, October 20th meeting of the Collier County Board of Commissioners. This morning we're pleased to have with us the Reverend Dr. Les Wicker from the Naples United Church of Christ. If you would please stand for the invocation, remain standing for the pledge of allegiance. REVEREND WICKER: In our prayer time today, we want to remember Commissioner Tim Constantine on the death of his mother, so let us have a moment of silence. Oh, mighty God, we give thanks for the gift of living in a land of democratic process and elected leadership. We pray your divine guidance for the concerns of this meeting of commissioners of our county. Give to all sound understanding, farsighted vision and integrity and judgment. As we gather to begin important deliberations, help us to remember the blessings of living in such a wonderful community. Make us eager to make good decisions for all our people, that the concerns of all might be to their and the community's best benefit. May we be so guided by your spirit in this and every time of need. Amen. (Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Thank you, Dr. Wicker, for being here. Mr. Fernandez, do we have any changes this morning to our agenda? MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, Madam Chairman. Good morning, commissioners. The first is to add item 10(B), which is approval of the county attorney contract. Request of Commissioner Berry. The second is to continue to the November the 3rd meeting, item A -- 8(A) (2), that's 8(A) (2), which is determination of emergency medical services impact fees to be paid by the Cleveland Clinic. It's a staff request. The third is to move item 16(B) (3) to 8(B) (1) . That's from consent to regular. This is petition for the Hunters Road paving assessment district MSBU. A staff request. Also, under staff communications, I'd like to let the board know that I intend to bring up an update on negotiations with the Golden Gate Fire and Rescue Control District regarding the Collier County Fire District service contract. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. Commissioner Mac'Kie, any changes? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, ma'am. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Commissioner Norris? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: No changes. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Commissioner Hancock? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: No, ma'am. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay, I will be just bringing up an item probably under -- well, it's a good question where we're going to bring it up. But it will probably come under Board of County Commissioners' communications, perhaps, but it's a question I have in regard to the TD -- some TDC funds. If you can think of a better place to place that, I just -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We'll be able to take action. I -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I just have a question about it, so what -- MR. FERNANDEZ: Madam Chair? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Let's put it under BCC item C, because -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- ducktailing with that, we have been holding on advertising for a non-voting position on the TDC, pending Commissioner Constantine's quote, unquote, plan. I think we need to move ahead with that, so I'd like to have that direction from the board also. If we could join those two items -- COMMISSIONER NORRIS: 10(C) you're talking about? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: 10(C), right. That would probably be the best place. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Okay. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay, if there are no further changes, do I have a motion? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Motion to approve the agenda and consent agenda and summary agenda as amended. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Second. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Also, the regular agenda, I guess. That's everything. Okay. We have a second. Ail in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Motion carries four-zero. Item #4 MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 28, 1998 VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD - APPROVED AS PRESENTED COMMISSIONER NORRIS: And I'll make a motion that we approve the minutes of the September 28th Valve (sic) Adjustment Board. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Second. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Motion carries four-zero. Item #5Al PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF OCTOBER 23 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 1998, AS RED RIBBON WEEK - ADOPTED This morning, our proclamation, Commissioner Hancock. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Yes, it's my pleasure first to read a proclamation regarding Red Ribbon Week, and Bob Troesch -- there you are, sir, thank you, if you'd come forward -- with Catholic Charities of Collier County, so I can duly embarrass you and we can get your face on television. Bob, if you'd turn around and face the audience and the cameras, I'll read the proclamation. WHEREAS, alcohol, tobacco and other drug abuse has declined over the last two decades. Thanks to steadfast prevention and intervention efforts, it still remains prevalent in every Florida community, regardless of size and location; and WHEREAS, with the reduction of prevention resource programs and community based efforts are asked to do more with less; and WHEREAS, substance abuse is the most common risk factor impacting the behavioral and physical health, particularly for our young people; and WHEREAS, families face unprecedented pressures and stress imposed upon them by the overwhelming nature of today's society; and WHEREAS, use of alcohol, tobacco and other drug abuse remains prevalent throughout Florida, in spite of prevention and intervention effort; and WHEREAS, research and data reflect unquestionably that prevention works and that our commitment to education, prevention and positive lifestyles is imperative; and WHEREAS, the red ribbon represents the nation's united effort to support prevention and build healthy and safe communities; and WHEREAS, the 1998 Florida Red Ribbon celebration asks that the citizens of Florida become motivated and involved in alcohol and other drug abuse prevention. NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of October 23 through October 31st, 1998 be designated as Be Like Me, Stay Drug Free, and encourage every Floridian to wear a red ribbon to symbolize our commitment to establishing healthy and safe communities for our citizens, especially our children, and to participate in events throughout the week that support positive lifestyles. Done and ordered this 20th day of October, 1998, Barbara Berry, Chairman. I would like to move acceptance of this proclamation. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Motion carries four-zero. (Applause.) Item #5A2 PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF OCTOBER 25-31, 1998, AS 150TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE WOMEN'S RIGHTS MOVEMENT WEEK - ADOPTED CHAIRPERSON BERRY: And our next proclamation, Commissioner Mac'Kie? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm thrilled to get to read a proclamation today, and I'd like to ask Chris Straton, who's president of the American Association of University Women, to come forward and accept this proclamation. It's an awfully exciting one, if you ask me. WHEREAS, 1998 will mark the 150th anniversary of the Women's Rights Movement in the United States, a bold and courageous civil rights movement that began in 1848 in Seneca Falls, New York City, at the first Women's Rights convention; and WHEREAS, the Declaration of Sentiments issued by that convention represents a work as fundamental to our nation's commitment to liberty and personal freedom as does our Declaration of Independence; and WHEREAS, the declaration launched a movement that has changed this nation and the hopes of its women irrevocably; and WHEREAS, the resulting Women's Rights Movement has had a profound and undeniable impact on all aspects of American life, and has opened new opportunities for women in all fields of endeavor; and WHEREAS, the girls and boys of today, together, have lives far richer and far fairer as a direct result of the Women's Rights Movement; and WHEREAS, the 21st Century will find an ever-increasing need for both women and men to share in the fundamental responsibilities for our national life and the benefits that must result from full and equal participation in society; and WHEREAS, the promise of full equality and freedom for women in this nation is yet to be fulfilled. NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida that the week of October 25th through 31st, 1998 be designated as 150th Anniversary of the Women's Rights Movement week. Done and ordered this 20th day of October, 1998. Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Barbara B. Berry, Chairman. I'd like to move acceptance of this proclamation. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Second. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: We have a motion and a second. Ail in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Motion carries four-zero. (Applause.) MS. STP~ATON: Thank you. It's indeed an honor for me to accept this on behalf of the American Association of University Women, and also all the men and women who have benefitted as a result of the Women's Rights Movement. You know, you may not know that AAUW was founded in 1881 on the idea that education was the key to equity. And in 1885 we released our first study which refuted the theory that higher education was harmful to women's health. Now, we're still involved in studies, we're still involved in education, and we're still involved in issues of equity. And we also have a very active voters education campaign. And it's particularly gratifying for me to accept this proclamation just two weeks before the electorate of the State of Florida has an opportunity to go to the polls and decide whether or not Florida's constitution should remove gender specific language, and whether the rights and privileges of our Florida constitution should clarify that it's extended to males and females alike. Now, regardless of how people may vote on that particular issue or any of the issues that are on the November 3rd ballot, on behalf of AAUW's voter education campaign, we urge everyone to get informed and then vote based on your information. And for the women out there, 150 years ago the most contentious issue at the Women's Right convention was whether or not there should be an attempt to give the women the right to vote. Now we have that right, and I urge women to use that right. And joining me today is Pat Clark, who's the president of the Collier County Audubon -- Collier County League of Women Voters, and Jean Brooker, who's a past president of AAUW. And we thank you and we do urge everyone to vote on November 3rd. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Thank you very much. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The amendment she referred to is amendment nine, and on my personal behalf, I urge you to vote yes on amendment nine. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: And I guess if this hadn't happened a few hundred years ago, we probably wouldn't be sitting here today. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We wouldn't be here. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Does that mean you're thankful, or -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, yeah. Very, very, very. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: We can debate that at another time. Item #5A3 PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING OCTOBER 20, 1998, AS RSVP OF COLLIER COUNTY RECOGNITION DAY - ADOPTED And now it's my pleasure to read our last proclamation today. If I could have Betty Stuver come up, please. This is the RSVP of Collier County Recognition Day. Good morning, Betty. WHEREAS, the Retired and Senior Volunteer Program of Collier County received a grant from the Corporation for National Service with local sponsorship provided by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County to administer a program that provides the senior citizens of Collier County the opportunity to put their skills and life experience to work for our communities; and WHEREAS, RSVP of Collier County has 950 volunteers that donate over 100,000 hours of service each year to various agencies in Collier County; and WHEREAS, the Retired and Senior Volunteer Program received the 1998 J.C. Penney Golden Rule Award for exceptional volunteer service to our community; and WHEREAS the Retired and Senior Volunteer Program was honored as one of the 1998 Outstanding Partners in Education by the Collier County Education Foundation; and WHEREAS, the Retired and Senior Volunteer Program of Collier County was chosen as the RSVP Project of the Year by the Corporation for National Service, and will be the subject of a nationally produced video that will be shown to members of congress, corporate sponsors and serve as the recruitment tool for the 800 Retired and Senior Volunteer Programs throughout the United States; and WHEREAS, it is fitting and proper to bring special recognition to this outstanding group of volunteers during October, which is National RSVP month. NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that October 20th be designated as RSVP of Collier County Recognition Day. Done and ordered this 20th day of October, 1998, Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Barbara B. Berry, Chairman. It's my pleasure to move this proclamation. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: We have a motion and a second. Ail in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Motion carries four-zero. (Applause.) CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Jennifer? MS. EDWARDS: We also have a brief video that we'd like to run at this time. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. MS. EDWARDS: Please watch the monitors. (Whereupon a video was played at this time.) (Applause.) MS. EDWARDS: My name is Jennifer Edwards, I'm Human Resources director. I'm going to ask Betty to come forward again. What you just saw is one of the programs that Betty has developed. We have been the proud sponsors of this program for only two years. And during those two years, Betty has accomplished everything that has been read in the proclamation today. She's increased the volunteer base from 400 to over 900 volunteers. So in recognition of that, I have a plaque for Betty, and the plaque reads, in recognition of your enthusiastic leadership and devotion to RSVP and the individual volunteers. Thank you very much. (Applause.) MS. STUVER: This is a great honor, and I thank you very much. It's been a wonderful two years having Collier County as the sponsor of this group. And that has brought tremendous exposure, tremendous feelings from everybody in this county that want to do more for our kids and for our older people and for every program we do. And I can't do it without those 950 volunteers, so this is for them, too. Thank you very, very much. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Betty, I know that you have two of the volunteers -- MS. STUVER: I have three, actually. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: You have three of them? Okay, two of them I recognized and I saw them recently on regular cable TV being interviewed. If you would introduce them, I certainly would appreciate it, and I think the folks at home need to know who they are. MS. STUVER: Otto and Dale Blauert. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: If they would stand and face -- I think the cameras will pick you up. (Applause.) MS. STUVER: And also, Eda McCarthy. All of these folks work within the school system. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Thank you very much. And our thanks certainly go to the volunteers that are here with us today, and certainly those that are at home, or who are probably out volunteering in some capacity at this point in time. So our thanks certainly is extended to all those people, and I know certainly from the school point of view they couldn't do some of the things they do without your help. And it is just -- it is so great that you choose to go out and share your experience with the kids in the classroom. I thank you so much for doing that. Well, that's the fun that we had, and the good part of this whole thing. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Now the work part. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Now we have to get down and do the work of Collier County. I do have one other thing that I need to do. Unfortunately, I don't have the check in front of me, but I held a very high number check today that our tax collector presented to us in the amount of over two million dollars that he has refunded to Collier County. I held it briefly and then we marched it right over to the clerk's office to get it deposited. But I certainly want to thank Guy Carlton for presenting that check to Collier County. It came in on Friday. And as I said, it's two -- I think it was 2.8 million dollars or something like that. So our thanks are extended to him. Item #8Al CARNIVAL PERMIT 98-6, OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE CATHOLIC CHURCH, REQUESTING A PERMIT TO CONDUCT A CARNIVAL FROM NOVEMBER 25 THROUGH NOVEMBER 29, 1998, ON THE CHURCH GROUNDS LOCATED AT 219 SOUTH 9TH STREET IN IMMOKALEE - APPROVED Okay, moving on then to item 8(A) (1), petition number C-98-6, the -- COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Second. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay, this is for a carnival to be conducted November 25th through the 29th over in Immokalee, Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church. We have a motion and a second. Ail in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Motion carries four-zero. Item ~8A2 Continued to 11/3/98 Item #8B1 PETITION FOR THE HUNTERS ROAD PAVING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT MUNICIPAL SERVICE BENEFIT UNIT (MSBU) IN SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - STAFF TO FORWARD FEASIBILITY STUDY BUT NOT TO RECORD EASEMENTS UNTIL MSBU OR MSTU IS FORMED Next item is item 8(B), which was 16(B) (3) moved off of the consent agenda for the Hunters Road paving assessment district. MR. MULLER: Good morning, commissioners. For the record, my name is Ross Muller, and I'm an engineer with your transportation department. Item 8(B) 1), formally 16(B) (3), is for the consideration of a petition for a municipal service benefit unit for the paving of Hunters Road. The locatzon of Hunters Road is between Livingston Road and 1-75, south of Daniels Road. We received a petition and verified that there's 50 percent plus one of the property owners on the petition. The next step would be to perform a feasibility report, and our public works engineering department has estimated the cost of that to be $11,000. As far as right-of-way acquisition, we -- there's 41 parcels and we've received 23 conveyances, leaving 18 outstanding. Two years ago, in 1996, when this came before you before, there were 41 parcels with 37 conveyances, four of them were outstanding. So we've lost a few easements. Either through sales or property owners requesting their easements be returned, 14 conveyances no longer exist. This is a concern for the petitioners who have spent time, money and effort to acquire the easements. In an effort not to lose any more easements, the petitioners are requesting that the Board of County Commissioners record the ones that we have received. And I -- Dr. Kriston Kent is here to speak in favor of this. The county attorney's office has concerns about recording the easement, as that may be considered acceptance, and the board may conceivably have some liability, not to pave the road, but for the road as it exists today. And there may also be multiple condemnations required. The recommendation of staff is to accept the petition, direct staff to prepare the feasibility report, direct staff to acquire the remaining easements, approve any budget amendments, and give staff direction on recording the conveyances that we have in hand. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. And what action are you looking for? MR. MULLER: To accept the petition and direct staff to prepare the feasibility report, and give us some direction of what you want -- record the conveyances that we have, or wait until we create a district or initiate a district, or whatever the pleasure of the board. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Seems to me the conveyances should be recorded at the time the district is physically created and not beforehand. I don't know that we should jump ahead and do that now. If that is the only question, then -- do we have speakers on this? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Do we have any -- MR. FERNANDEZ: Just Mr. Kriston Kent. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I'd like to get advice from the county attorney, because I don't really understand how this comes to be our decision, frankly, instead of just a staff recommendation. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Right. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd like to get your recommendation. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay, let's have our speaker, and then we'll go ahead and talk to our attorney. MR. KENT: Thank you very much. Dr. Kriston Kent. I have kind of been appointed by the road to go out and do what I could to get the road paved. I met about three years ago with Mr. Archibald, as well as with our commissioner, Mr. Constantine, as well as us having several homeowners' meetings to determine the direction we should take, and they told us that we could save quite a bit of the county's money and our own money by obtaining these easement deeds. I therefore took it upon ourselves and spent countless hours and lots of money talking to Switzerland, for one of the owners, and Arizona and Pennsylvania, spending several hours sitting in people's homes around town that own lots there, explaining to them what was going on, so they would understand the process. We got within -- as we were told by Mr. Muller, within four, 37 of the 41. Two of those four actually live on Livingston Road, which is paved, and desired not to be assessed since they're not gaining anything by getting a second paved road that's not where their driveway is. Those people would not -- it was subsequently decided, would probably not be in the taxing district. We would exclude them from the taxing district. So really, we only need two -- only needed two at that time. And one was selling their property and was hoping the next people would sign it. Unfortunately I've been quite disappointed that all that time and money and effort that I've put into it has gone to waste in that they've sold so many of the lots since then. And, in fact, those people who have bought the lots are on the petition that we now have, and so they're certainly in favor of it and certainly were -- bought that based on the fact they thought the road would soon be paved. So I'm just very disappointed, I guess, that we've lost so much of our money and time that we've spent when we were directed by our commissioner and our county road man to go out and get those for the county. And that would be the step they would want us to do prior to us doing something more. And so I was hoping that we might be able to go ahead and record the ones that we have so that all the time and money that we put forward at their direction wouldn't be lost completely. So we were just hopefully -- number one, hoping that we would -- you guys would start the feasibility study for us, and number two, that we could record the ones that we have so that we don't lose further. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Thank you very much. Mr. Weigel, what's our advice here? MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. It was our office request to make this a discussion item. Really, the issue of attention is the fact that an MSBU, or MSTU -- I think in this case we're talking MSBU -- has not been created yet. Much activity has occurred prior to its creation, but we would just admonish or -- perhaps that's too strong a word, but just -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Wait 'til we do something wrong to admonish us. You could just warn us at this point. MR. WEIGEL: Yeah. -- to put a little sign out there that could be a potential for liability or at least being entangled in the defense of any road issues that would occur if the county were to formally accept the deeds for recording at the present time. Right now we are a holder of them, kind of a trustee or bailee of these things, but we don't have the formal link to the road easements; that could make it a little problematical if something comes up. I know that road. I also want to state for the record that I have in-laws who live on that road. I have no connection with them other than by relation, nice people that they are. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Is that a good connection, Dave? MR. WEIGEL: It's a good connection. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. MR. WEIGEL: But there is no remunerative or other interest that I have in this road. In fact, if there were, the argument would be that I wouldn't be speaking up at this time. But the road is one that I think the county can go forward with the feasibility report and the other elements, but I think the gentle advice is not to record at this time, because if we do go forward and record, I do want the board to also -- as Mr. Muller indicated, we may have -- if we have abstentions from conveyance, to make the road come into fruition may require condemnation actions and multiple condemnation actions, which will be more expensive for the county or the people through assessment unit that would be created later. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I remember about three years ago the county went in and we got quote, unquote, voluntary easements along the roadway. And then it came time to actually do the roadway, and we were going to have to go through condemnation, and the cost went up, and then we were kind of stuck with the situation of what do we do with the right-of-way that was granted to us for a roadway that we're now not going to build. It was -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Like Santa Barbara? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I don't know if it was Santa Barbara. This was north -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Plan A. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- of Immokalee in the Willoughby Acres area. There was an easement up there. MR. MULLER: Lakeland Avenue. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Thank you. So I think -- Dr. Kent, I understand -- I have a real good feeling of how much work you've put into this, and I understand you have a little side business that you actually have a living going, so I appreciate all the time that you've spent on this. 25 out of 40 signatures I think is enough that if we put a little push on the feasibility study so that we kind of move this to the top of the heap, we're not going to lose the work that you've done in getting to that feasibility study to make sure the numbers match up to what people have signed onto. And I think that is something we need to do. So I don't think there's as much an urgency to accept those today, with the possible legal ramifications of doing so when the numbers are significant enough that -- how long do we expect the feasibility study to take, Mr. Muller? MR. MULLER: I checked with public works engineering before I came up this morning, and I thought it could be done in 90 days to six months. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Ninety days being better than six months. I would be much more comfortable seeing those numbers -- and again, your work is not going to be wasted, Mr. Kent. It's before us today. There has to be a lot of sales that go on between -- in the next 90 days for it to invalidate what you've presented to us and what you've worked so hard to accomplish. So I'm comfortable with giving staff direction to move ahead with the feasibility study and to withhold recording of the easements until such time as we know we will be able to form an MSTU as a proper vehicle to accept them. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Is that a motion? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: That is a motion. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Second. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: We have a motion and a second to direct staff to move ahead with the feasibility study. And -- Mr. Weigel? MR, WEIGEL: Okay, one point for clarification on the motion. Mr. Hancock said MSTU. I think previous discussion apparently had MSBU. Do you want to say MSTU or MSBU to keep the flexibility there? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: On the either MSTU or MSBU assessment district, whichever is deemed appropriate. MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay, we have a motion and a second. If there's no further discussion, all in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Motion carries four-zero. Direction has been given. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Dr. Kent can actually go back to work now. Item #gA FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF STIRNS V. COLLIRE COUNTY, CASE NO. 98-2288-CA, WHEREIN STIRNS CHALLENGES THE COUNTY'S DENIAL OF A SOCIAL CLUB CONDITIONAL USE IN A RURAL AGRICULTURAL ZONED DISTRICT, AS ORDERED BY JUDGE TED BROUSSEAU IN THE ABOVE-STYLED CAUSE PURSUANT TO RULE 9.600(B), FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE - PROCEEDING HELD AND COUNTY ATTORNEY TO RESPOND CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay, moving on then to item 9(A), further proceedings in the case of Stirns versus Collier County. MS. STUDENT: Good morning, commissioners, Marjorie Student, assistant county attorney for the record. And these are further proceedings pursuant to Florida rule of appellate procedure 9.600(B) . Just by way of brief background, this board, sitting as the Board of Zoning Appeals, on May 26th heard a petition for a social club clothing optional conditional use. That petition was denied by unanimous vote. Subsequently, Mr. Stirns petitioned the circuit court for a writ of certiorari, the court issued its summons in certiorari, and the county responded to that summons. And Mr. Siesky filed a reply to our response. In the interim, Mr. Siesky petitioned the court under this appellate rule for further proceedings. And the parameters of the proceedings are outlined in an order signed by Judge Ted Brousseau that's been made a part of the packet. And if Mr. Siesky wishes to read those parameters into the record, he's free to do so. I also wish to state for the record that Commissioner Timothy Constantine is not present today as a member of the Board of Zoning Appeals, because there has been a death in his family. And with that, Mr. Siesky? MR. SIESKY: Thank you, Ms. Student. Jim Siesky, representing the Stirns. And thank you for the background. I'm sure I would have had to say that anyway. I won't bother reading the order into the record, as long as the board has read it and is familiar with it. And for the record, I am Jim Siesky. I guess I did say that. After the May 26th meeting where the conditional use was rejected, Mr. Stirns met with the media and it was reported in the newspaper that he would be seeking a similar use in a C-5 district, which zs where it was currently permitted. And that fact was made known to the commission at the May 26th meeting where Commissioner Mac'Kie questioned Mr. Milk and got that response. I became aware that the County Commission had requested the county attorney to explore the exclusion of clothing optional clubs even in the C-5 district without a conditional use by an article that was in the Naples Daily News. And subsequently, I became aware that at its June 2nd meeting, 1998, Commissioner Norris stated, "I would just like to ask the board if anyone besides me has any interest in making nudist type operations a conditional use in any zoning district." And the result of that discussion was that Mr. Weigel was directed to come back with some kind of proposal or some thoughts on this issue. And my purpose in being here today is to first ask that the board be placed under oath so that they can respond to my questions. (The Board of County Commissioners were duly sworn.) MR. SIESKY: And I would like to start with Commissioner Norris, since it is he who made this request to the board. Commissioner Norris, is it true that your action -- or your request to the board to consider a conditional use for clothing optional in all areas of Collier County was the result of Mr. Stirns' stated purpose to use the C-5 district for a clothing optional resort? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, that certainly was an opportune moment to bring it up. The reasoning to go to a conditional use is that it forces a public hearing. MR. SIESKY: And I direct most of these questions to you, Commissioner Norris, for now. Is it your intention to force other social clubs to public hearings then, if they wish to have a conditional use, or have any use in a C-5 district? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: The direction given to the county attorney specifically mentioned clothing optional clubs. MR. SIESKY: I understand that. But my question to you is, is it your purpose to have other social clubs be subject to these same rules? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Not at this time, no. MR. $IESKY: Then could you tell me then why you are singling out the clothing optional clubs? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I certainly will. The same reason that we singled out, for example -- if that is the phraseology that you choose to use -- homeless shelters, for example. Because there are certain uses that can be construed as sometimes controversial, depending on location and proximity to certain neighborhoods and, therefore, it's in the public's interest to have a public hearing before any of these uses are allowed anywhere in the county. MR. SIESKY: Do you have a list of those uses which you consider to be controversial? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I'm not in charge of making that list, sir. MR. SIESKY: Do you know if the county has such a list? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: The Land Development Code has all conditional uses listed within it. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Norris, it's now four months after your request, and the commission's request. Has Mr. Weigel or any of his staff come back to you with a proposal or some thoughts on the issue? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Not yet. MR. SIESKY: Have you had any occasion to discuss this issue with anyone since June 2nd? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Anyone on the staff? MR. SIESKY: With anyone. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: With anyone? Probably. Not to my recollection, but probably so. MR. SIESKY: I would ask that same question to the other board members, have you had occasion to discuss this matter with anyone since June 2nd? Commissioner Mac'Kie? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Commissioner Mac'Kie. I don't recall having any discussion with anybody about it, no. MR. $IESKY: Commissioner Berry? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I don't recall having any discussions. There may have been some comments that may have been made, but I don't recall having any pertinent discussion. MR. SIESKY: Do you recall the comments? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Not offhand, other than -- MR. SIESKY: Do you know who made them? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- and other than what people have said regarding what they had read in the newspaper kind of thing. That was all. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Hancock? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Likewise, I don't recall having any specific conversations about this matter. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Norris, if the -- if the county attorney comes back to you and says that making a conditional use requirement for clothing optional resorts or clubs is permissible throughout the county and all zoning districts, would it be your intention to adopt that stance? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, Mr. Siesky, it's hard for me to sit here today without seeing any material presented to me and make that determination. Obviously, I would favor the consideration of that. But as to whether I will finally vote yes or no would have to be determined at the meeting when the material is presented. MR. $IESKY: Commissioner Mac'Kie, would you have the same response? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Berry? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Same response. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Hancock, I will not ask that question of you. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Thank you. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Norris, what investigation have you performed regarding clothing optional clubs? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Investigation? Would you clarify that for me, please? MR. SIESKY: Well, you've stated that there is a controversial use. What about it makes it controversial? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, it could be controversial, I believe I said, depending on location. For example, if one were to go in next door to an elementary school, that could certainly be considered controversial. If it went into the middle of a single-family residential neighborhood, that could be considered controversial. I think those people have the expectation that they should be able to have a public hearing in an instance such as that. MR. SIESKY: You sought to exclude it, though -- to consider the exclusion of it from a C-5 area, which I understand to be, from the minutes -- COMMISSIONER NORRIS: No, Mr. Siesky, that's not correct. A conditional use does not exclude one from anywhere, it just forces a public hearing, more than anything else. MR. SIESKY: Well, excuse me, excluded as a matter of right in the C-5 district, which I understood to be typically along major arterials, collector roadways, and a near industrial zoning category. What do you think would be controversial about placing it in a near industrial zoning area? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, that's very speculative. It would depend on the specific location. And that is precisely the reason for going to a conditional use is so that each case can be looked at individually on its own specifics. MR. SIESKY: Have you ever attended a clothing optional facility? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: No, sir. MR. SIESKY: Do you know anyone who has? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Yes, sir. MR. SIESKY: Who do you know? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Mr. Stirns. MR. SIESKY: Other than Mr. Stirns, do you know anyone? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Yes, I do. MR. SIESKY: Who would that be? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I don't know that I would be at liberty to tell you that. That may be a private matter. MR. SIESKY: Would it be a friend of yours? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Yes. MR. SIESKY: Somebody you respect? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Sure. MR. SIESKY: Do you know anything negative about clothing optional resorts and their uses? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Yes. MR. SIESKY: What do you know? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, I know that it could be construed as negative because some people may not consider that to be an appropriate lifestyle, and that would be a negative. MR. SIESKY: Are you aware that there are homosexuals in this community? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Sure. MR. SIESKY: Are you aware that some people don't consider that to be an appropriate lifestyle? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Of course. MR. SIESKY: Do you zone those people out of this community? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Pardon me? MR. SIESKY: Do you zone those people out of this community? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Once again, Mr. Siesky, I don't think we're zoning anyone out of anything. We're just -- MR. SIESKY: You'd require them to have a public hearing to live here? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I don't believe you're making a fair analogy here, Mr. Siesky. MS. STUDENT: I object to the line of questioning about sexual orientation. That has nothing to do with land use issues or clothing optional clubs, and I object for the record to that line of questioning. MR. SIESKY: Have you discussed this matter with your constituents? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: As I said before, I don't recall any specific conversations. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Mac'Kie, are you aware of any negative information regarding clothing optional resorts? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Berry, are you aware of any negative information? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: (Shakes head negatively.) MR. SIESKY: Is that a no? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: That's a no. MR. SIESKY: I'm sorry, we have to -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I understand -- MR. SIESKY: -- put that on the record. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- that, they don't get head nodding. I appreciate that. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Hancock? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I think the public hearing we had showed that there is an issue of perception with the public out there, and that would be the one negative that I have become aware of. MR. SIESKY: Could you explain what you mean? COMMISSIONER HAiqCOCK: I think it's in the record. I think the individuals who live in that neighborhood expressed concern about how their children's friends' parents had already become aware that their neighborhood may receive this type of use, and had made comments. Again, it's clearly in the record as their comments, not mine. But those statements, I think, are probably the only real sign of negativity that I am aware of, and that is the perception of the individuals that are affected by it. MR. SIESKY: And you would agree, would you not, that that was a speculation, since none of those people had experienced a clothing optional group in their neighborhood? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I don't think you have to work in an asphalt plant to know you don't really want one next to your house. So I'm not so sure it's as speculative as you state, Mr. Siesky. MR. SIESKY: Well, I think you're probably right about an asphalt plant, but it appears here that no one really knows about a clothing optional resort; wouldn't you agree? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: No, sir. MR. SIESKY: You don't agree? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I don't think you can make a statement about what the four individuals up here do or do not know. MR. SIESKY: Well, I've asked all of them and I've heard none of them knows anything about one. Do you know something about a clothing optional resort? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I have never attended one, no, sir. MR. SIESKY: Have you ever lived near one? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: No, sir. MR. SIESKY: Have you ever talked about any -- or talked with anyone who's lived near one? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: No, sir. MR. SIESKY: Thank you, have I no further questions of the board. MS. STUDENT: I have a couple of questions for the board. We've discussed public hearings, and I'll ask each -- I'll ask the question once, and then I'll ask each member of the board. Isn't it generally understood and understood by the Board of Zoning Appeals individually and collectively that the purpose of a public hearing for conditional uses are to -- is to evaluate that particular use in light of criteria in the land code, to wit, consistency with the comp plan, traffic impacts, noise, odor, glare impacts and compatibility with adjacent properties -- MR. SIESKY: I object. Excuse me, finish your question. MS. STUDENT: Commissioner Mac'Kie? MR. SIESKY: I object to the question based upon its being beyond the purview of the examination conducted and outside the purview of the order. MS. STUDENT: Well, we think it is connected to the purview, because in asking the commissioners about the reasons -- MR. SIESKY: My objection is noted. Go ahead and have the answer. MS. STUDENT: Okay. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Clearly, conditional uses are judged by the criteria that are present in the code for their evaluation. MS. STUDENT: Commissioner Norris? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I agree. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: And I -- MS. STUDENT: Commissioner Berry? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- would agree with the other commissioners' statements. MS. STUDENT: Commissioner Hancock? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Ms. Student, I agree with your statement, yes. MS. STUDENT: Okay. And one other question: Has Southern Exposure or any other clothing optional facility ever been before this Board of Zoning Appeals Zoning Appeals for a conditional use approval, or any other zoning petition, for that matter, relating to the parcel of land that was the subject of the May 26th hearing, or any other parcel of land? Commission -- MR. SIESKY: I object to the question as being beyond the purview of this order, irrelevant to this matter, since Southern Exposure is not a party to this case. MS. STUDENT: Oh, Mr. Stirns, I beg your pardon. Mr. Stirns is what I meant to say. I thought that he had some connection with Southern Exposure, from my review of the record. But I believe it is within -- just for the record, I need to state this. I believe it is within the purview, because Mr. Siesky is trying to prove some kind of bias, and you do that by looking at surrounding circumstances and how similarly situated persons have been treated. Our case law tells us that. So I'm trying to determine factually from this board if anyone situated like Mr. Stirns or Mr. Stirns has ever been before it before. Commissioner Mac'Kie? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The only -- I'm not -- I'm not sure of the identity of the party who made the application that -- whether that was Southern Exposure or some other company, but the only clothing optional case that I've ever reviewed in my four years on the board was the one involving Mr. Stirns. MS. STUDENT: And Commissioner Norris? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: That's correct, I believe. MS. STUDENT: Commissioner -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: The only case -- MS. STUDENT: -- Berry? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- I know about is the Stirns case, since I've been on the commission. MS. STUDENT: Thank you. Commissioner Hancock? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Yes, Mr. Stirns in this particular matter is the only one in a clothing optional manner I've reviewed in my four years on the board. MS. STUDENT: Thank you very much, commissioners. MR. SIESKY: I have one more question for each board member. Did -- prior to the meeting today, did you discuss the subject matter that was to come before you today with either Mr. Weigel or Marjorie Student? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I had -- MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Mac'Kie? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you, I had a meeting with Ms. Student. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Norris? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: As did I. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I had a meeting with Ms. Student. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I met with Ms. Student for -- to understand the explanation of why this particular proceeding was going to occur today, yes. MR. SIESKY: Did you discuss your testimony today? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: No. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Berry? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: No, sir. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Norris? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: No. MR. SIESKY: Commissioner Mac'Kie? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. MR. SIESKY: Thank you very much. MR. WEIGEL: Thank you, commissioners. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's a little history-making moment. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: It's kind of one of those situations you're not sure at this point what to say other than I would like to ask Mr. Weigel, what happens next? If I might do that. MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Well, the procedure just entailed was obviously pursuant to the order of Judge Brousseau in the proceeding in court following the termination of the board for land use in this matter earlier. And county attorney office, on behalf of the board members, as the BZA, will be responding to the questions that were asked today by Mr. Siesky on behalf of his client. And the argument is actually purely in front of Judge Brousseau at this point forward. We don't expect a remand to you for anything of this nature again until -- there might be a determination of the court potentially that might bring it back before you, but we just don't know at this point in time. But this is rather unique, it's different, never heretofore requested on behalf of an appealing party. And just by virtue of the fact that the judge entered an order to allow this opportunity to go forward in no way is to be taken at this juncture as an indication or predisposition of the Judge as to the matter that's been before it up to this point. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Thank you. Item #10A RESOLUTION 98-427, APPOINTING DAVID CORREA TO THE HISPANIC AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD - ADOPTED Ail right then, moving on to the next item, item 10(A), appointment of member to the Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board. one member -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Motion to approve. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: We have a motion to -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Motion and a second. All in favor? Opposed? We have approve the appointment of David Correa. (No response.) CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Motion carries four-zero. Item #10B COUNTY ATTORNEY'S CONTRACT - APPROVED WITH CHANGES The next item on the agenda is the county attorney's contract. This is most difficult when one starts talking about contracts and it involves people and money and service and what have you. I think this is a very difficult area to get into. Not an area that I necessarily like to do, but it's one of those things that goes with the job. Before you -- you should have a hand-out in front of you that has a very long sheet which is kind of like a spreadsheet which you can look at in terms of county attorneys' salaries in other counties in the State of Florida. And there's all sorts of little notes attached to this, different benefits and deferred comp. and all those kinds of things that are placed in their contracts. This is just as a matter of reference for your own benefit to take a look at. If you'll go back to the very first page that you have. Mr. Weigel and I discussed this particular area. We had to have some basis, and I felt that I needed something which was supportive of a position that I took in terms of justification for salary. We come up basically with what the county has kind of done this year, more or less inaugurated the pay for performance and the pay plan maintenance, which we issued and the county administrator discussed in terms of other administrative people in our county. We came up from the base salary of Mr. Weigel, which is currently at 86,993.92 -- this is all public information -- and taking those two, the pay for performance at 3.6 percent and the pay plan maintenance of eight percent, brought him up to a total salary then of 97,085.21. And then the total -- all of the increase altogether, the total dollars, were 10,091.29. The question that I have that I think the board needs to rule on is the deferred comp. at three percent or four percent. And you have those numbers in front of you. And also, Mr. Weigel is eligible to go into the senior management class in the retirement. We have, I believe, eight people currently in that class. We can have up to 20 something -- or 16 or 24, is it? MR. FERNANDEZ: Madam Chairman, the number was 11, but was recently amended by the statute, and -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: It's been increased. MR. FERNANDEZ: -- I think it's been doubled. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: It's been -- right. And Ms. Edwards can talk perhaps a little bit more about that. MS. EDWARDS: Jennifer Edwards, human resources director. We are eligible for one per 1,000, so we have -- we may have 13 plus one. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. MS. EDWARDS: And we have about eight right now, so we can accommodate him. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. Commissioner Mac'Kie? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just a couple of questions. I assume the division heads and the county administrator are currently in the senior management class? MR. FERNANDEZ: That's correct. The division heads were added with the budget you just adopted. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I certainly think that the county attorney belongs in that senior management class, so I'll just go ahead and tell you that right up front. And the only other question I have is the 3.6 pay for performance, that was the sort of across the board -- it wasn't an across the board. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: No. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Help me with that. What was it? MR. FERNANDEZ: That's based upon the criteria we used for all other employees, based upon their last evaluation and determined by the amount of funds available for each department. Decisions were made on how much should be granted for each category of evaluation. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And so my question is, 3.6 percent was at what category of evaluation? MR. FERNANDEZ: Superior. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It was superior. MR. FERNANDEZ: Superior. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And the pay plan maintenance, the eight percent, I had not understood that the county attorney's office was included in that -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: They were not. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: They were not. It was to get -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: In the survey is my question. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I don't believe they were included in the survey. They did not participate in that survey, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Then I'm not sure how that eight percent comes into play. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Because it was a number to get to. I wanted to see what was -- what we did in the county, okay? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Gotcha. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: And that's why I used that number. Because other than just arbitrarily grabbing a number out of the air, whether it's five percent, six percent, it gave me a basis of something that I could start looking at some terms of dollars. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I frankly thought it -- you know, like you said, this is an uncomfortable conversation, but I frankly thought it looked like a high raise, until I looked at the survey information that you did gather, and I certainly think that our county attorney ought to be compensated in the range of surrounding -- I mean, Lee County -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: One of the things that we did not -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Charlotte. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- we did not go into, we had discussed a car allowance. We did not go there. Basically I talked to Mr. Weigel, we said, you know, if you travel on behalf of the county to any place or whatever, then certainly put in for compensation for that. So we stayed away from the car allowance part of it. But as you'll see with that survey, many of the counties do have some kind of an allowance in there. We have not gone there. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll tell you what my support will be -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- for the 3.6 and the eight percent. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Because I see how that was substantiated by the survey that you did. As I said, I do think he belongs in the senior management class for retirement. The deferred comp. issue, three to four, I need more information about who gets deferred comp. at three and who gets it at four. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: He's currently at three percent. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And on our staff -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I believe. Is that -- MR. WEIGEL: I'm currently at two percent. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: You're at two percent. I'm sorry, two percent. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: On our staff, what level of employee has deferred comp. at three versus four? Give me a benchmark I guess is my question. MR. FERNANDEZ: Madam Chair, I'm at four, and I believe we just added the division administrators at four; is that correct? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: So that gives you some -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So he belongs in that category, as far as I'm concerned. If they're all there. MR. OCHS: For the record, Leo Ochs, support services administrator. Only your contract employees right now are eligible to receive any deferred compensation that's provided by the employer. As part of your budget process, we had earmarked some money, it will be coming to the board later this year, with a fringe benefit modification for your division administrator level staff positions and your assistant county administrator. But you'll see the specifics on that probably in November. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could that be tied -- I mean, I'd like to have Mr. Weigel at the same level as other division administrators. MR. OCHS: The only other comparable contract position would be your county administrator -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, I'm clear on that -- MR. OCHS: -- that has deferred comp. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- but I mean, when you come back with this fringe benefit -- MR. FERNANDEZ: What's the dollar amount that we put in the budget. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are you proposing three percent, four percent, two percent? What was in the budget? MR. OCHS: What was in the budget was a recommendation that the board match an individual's personal contribution to their deferred compensation plan up to a maximum of $1,500 per year, so that's different than -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Than this. MR. OCHS: -- than the percentage payment made by the employer right now on behalf of your contract employee, which would -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And the difference here -- MR. OCHS: -- be your.county -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- ms about $1,000 a year. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Let me tell you, if you look at the deferred comp. section, we had it figured at three and at four. If you were to take the 97,085.21 and include it in there, you'll see then the base salary, the two numbers are at the end, okay, and that's what we did at both of those percentage levels. So that's -- I just wanted you to see exactly -- if you were to include it in that 97,085.21, that's how it could be figured. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd personally be comfortable at the three percent, since that's a one percent increase over current, and since that would still in all likelihood be higher than -- well, yeah, it would be double what other division heads will be entitled to if we adopt the $1,500 matching request that we're apparently going to get later in the year. So -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- that's my position. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. Commissioner Hancock? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: What troubles me about what's been said so far is our county attorney is not a division head. We have three contract employees. We as a board assess their value individually, irrespective of what our division heads do. Their positions are more volatile, are more public, are more tenuous than division heads. Therefore, recognizing that and looking at the average life span or time in position of a county administrator, and to some degree a county attorney, I think that's why you see deferred compensation higher. I think that's why you see senior management class issues being raised, because there are going to be times in their careers when they are asked to move on with -- you know, against their will, or -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The contract people are more likely to have that happen? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Yes. If you look state-wide, particularly at county administrator positions. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Longevity in the position is usually not there. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Because unfortunately what happens is if two years from now three people on this board are replaced, the most popular thing to do in government is to fire everyone that used to be there to make yourself look good. I think Mr. Fernandez saw a similar situation in Alachua County where an entire board was almost replaced and if you don't like and you've been complaining about everything that's going on, the first thing you do is you fire the highest person. That's a reality of working for political bodies. So we can compare to division heads as a baseline, but quite honestly, Mr. Weigel, in his position, is an individual. I don't think it's fair to compare two division heads. I think it's more fair to compare it to Mr. Fernandez's compensation package and to other county attorney positions throughout the state. I certainly don't want to be paying less than Lake County, for God's sake, for a county attorney that deals with a lot of land use matters that they aren't finding elsewhere. That being said, I think we got Mr. Weigel on his initial year at what I will call a bargain basement price. I think we actually kept his salary at a lower level in a trial period intentionally to see how he did. And I think today we're being asked whether or not we are satisfied with the job performance he has done and whether or not we want to bring him to a salary level that is consistent with his peers and the balance of the state. My personal opinion is that yes, there, as with anyone, have been bumps in the road and adjustments. I think Mr. Weigel's had some staffing issues within his office that have been a little more difficult than we've seen in the past with people moving in and out of positions. Whether he is or isn't responsible for that is -- I don't have any personal knowledge of. But I believe his deferred compensation should be equal to that of the county administrator. I don't want to pre-judge the division head position, that will come down the road. I think his retirement class should be comparable to that of the county administrator here. So I'm going to want to go that way. I'm also going to attach to that something that I think we need to value in Mr. Weigel and that is that he doesn't always tell us what we want to hear. And when it comes to somebody sitting in that chair, that's probably one of the most valuable things a board could have is for a county administrator or a county attorney to tell us what they honestly believe is right, as opposed to tailoring it to what we may want to hear. So with that, I would encourage Mr. Weigel to continue doing that, and would like to support him with what's been presented here, including the four percent compensation and the senior management class retirement. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. Commissioner Norris? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I pretty much agree with those comments. Whether the deferred comp. is three or four is not a major issue to me. If the board settles on four, that's fine. I'm happy with the other items as well, the senior management class and the pay as suggested in the top line there. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. And you want the deferred comp. added on to the 97,085.217 COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: MR. WEIGEL: Yes. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: MR. WEIGEL: He did. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: comp. Did Mr. Conner have deferred comp -- just for precedent? His was at two percent at the time. And you have presently two percent for MR. WEIGEL: That's correct. I followed his contract very closely -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I see. MR. WEIGEL: -- coming in at $5,000 less than his salary at the time that he left in 1995. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Pam, the deferred compensation -- I learned a lot about that when I was negotiating Mr. Fernandez's contract. And if you look at this list, at four percent we're one of the lowest, comparatively. It's a balance between salary and deferred compensation. We historically have paid less deferred compensation than pretty much anywhere else in the state with the exception of counties that have 50,000 people or less in them. So it's kind of a balancing act. I chose with Mr. Fernandez's contract to bring back to the board something that had a salary a little bit higher than I think the board was really looking for, but with a deferred compensation that was a little bit lower than Mr. Fernandez was looking for, and that was kind of a negotiation point. So I understood it with Bob's contract, and I'm comfortable enough with that that if we were paying Mr. Weigel 105, $107,000 in this, I would see the deferred compensation as being less, but I think because he's at or just below probably a medium range for similar counties, I think the deferred compensation of four percent is a reasonable step. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It does -- I appreciate you pointing me to that section of this evaluation. I think you're right, some are seven, some of five, six, seven. Some are more than that. So yeah, I think you're right, four percent is the right number. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: We've always -- and Bob heard me say this in discussing his contract. I don't want people to come to work at Collier County because we simply pay the best. I think there's something to be said for getting the type of quality people we get and not really paying the best. It says something about our government and our community, and it means the people are probably going to want to stay here. There's a kind of a balance there. If they're coming just for the money, they probably aren't going to stay that long. So I think we need to stay competitive in the medium range. I think Mr. Weigel's salary does that. And I think it will ensure we keep good people -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is that a motion? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Are you making a motion? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I will move that we approve the salaries presented by Chairman Berry, with the deferred compensation of four percent retirement at senior management class level. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay, we have a motion and a second. If there's no further questions, all in favor? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Excuse me. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Yes. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: You may want to clarify how your county deferred compensation -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Thank you. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: This would be the pay for performance and pay plan maintenance adjustment plus the four percent -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Correct. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- deferred comp. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: That's correct. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Which is an increase of two percent over the current contract. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Right. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: That's right. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's what I -- my second. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay, we have a motion and a second then. Ail in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Motion carries four-zero. We will plug those numbers into the contract. Most everything else is pretty much standard, I believe, in terms of where we are on that; is that correct, David? MR. WEIGEL: I think so. Just for clarity, can you tell me the number then that would plug into page two of the agreement there, which is the -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: On section three? MR. WEIGEL: Yes, that's right. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Section three salary? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I need to -- I'll need to get that recalculated, David, I believe. MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Because if I understand correctly -- and pardon my discussion, but purely for clarification -- is that with the motion made in the past, that we would have the figure in there upon which the four percent will be applied. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: That's right. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Correct. MR. WEIGEL: And the idea was not to net it down so it's clear back down to the initial figure that we had. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Commissioner Berry, correct me if I'm wrong, in case I misunderstood the way you laid this out, but the base salary that would go into. 3-A would be the 97,085.21 number? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. That would be the base salary on which the four percent would be based. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: That's right. COMMISSIONER H3LNCOCK: So it actually -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Because if you go down then to where it has the deferred comp., the 97,085.21 plus the 3,883.41 equals the 100,968.62. MR. WEIGEL: Okay, fine. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Correct. MR. WEIGEL: That is clear to me, and I want to say I thank the commission -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: But wait a minute. Then I don't know how they go ahead and figure then the deferred -- or the senior retirement. I don't know if that's shown in the contract. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: That's base salary. MR. WEIGEL: It's just a calculation made -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: It's just a -- MR. WEIGEL: -- against the salary. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. Ail right. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: And you've already done that here in this CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Right, and it tells you what -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- Madam Chairman -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- that is. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- to 7,368. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Right, yeah, yeah. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay, so the base salary is 97,085.21, deferred compensation of four percent equals $3,883.41, and the senior management class retirement has a valuation of $7,368.77. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. That was the intent of my motion, so -- MR. WEIGEL: Again, I thank the commission. And I wanted also as a post-note state that Commissioner Berry, Chairman Berry, is just as rigorous in private negotiation as she is in the conduct of the meetings themselves. Thank you. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good job, Barb. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: So does this mean you've had a discussion with Bob and he calls me a pushover now, or what? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: We all think so. MR. FERNANDEZ: I never said that. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We all said that. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: In a few weeks it will be safe to say. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: As I said, though, it's -- when you start talking about contracts and what a person's performance and so forth is worth, it's a very difficult thing to do. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Particularly in the public domain. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Yes, it is. Yes, it is. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: And just as some people relish on taking the negative side of that, I also think it's an opportunity for us to mention the positives -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Right. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- and we should take that opportunity. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Am I the only person who is yet to do their evaluation of the county administrator? MR. FERNANDEZ: No. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Because I haven't done that. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: This is another -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- this is another point I want to raise. We must get this done. And the reason we have to, our county administrator did not realize any kind of a pay adjustment because the Board of County Commissioners has not taken this item up at a public meeting. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: So that means -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: So we need to -- you need to meet with him, give him -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We need to do one first. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- give him your evaluation, talk with him, and then we need to put this on an agenda item ASAP. He's not going to be out the money, because it will be retroactive, but, you know, Christmas is coming, so let's try and get these things taken care of quickly. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I apologize for not -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Bob, would you -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- doing it sooner, but I will. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- would you reschedule our -- MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, I'm sorry -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- meeting? MR. FERNANDEZ: -- we had a meeting scheduled. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Ours was hurricane interrupted, but -- MR. FERNANDEZ: It got interrupted. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: But yeah, we do -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: But we need to get these taken care of quickly. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: You do have a copy of mine? MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes. Item #10C DISCUSSION RE TDC FUNDS - STAFF ANALYSIS TO BE PRESENTED AT LATER DATE CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. An item last night -- and this next item is item 10(C) and I brought up regarding the TDC. And I have to tell you my concern. The more I thought about it, the more concerned I got about it after last evening's meeting, which we had another marathon -- what I considered a marathon session. There's a disaster fund that we used for advertising, which you all recall, and the amount of money in there at this point in time is like 700 and some thousand dollars, I recall, from last night. Maybe it's wrong. I'm not sure. Mr. Mihatic -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: It's supposed to be maintained around a million dollars. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Well, it's in that category. But one of the concerns was that they activated that fund -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: During Georges? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- after Georges. And my concern is that I believe -- I'm concerned, it was to the tune of how much, Greg? MR. MIHALIC: $137,000. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Was spent on what? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Well, this is my concern. And the more I thought about it, the more it wrangled at me last evening, and I didn't sleep very well after I thought about this, because we didn't deal with it. And Greg, if you can just elaborate a little bit on that situation, please. MR. MIHALIC: Yes, commissioners. That's set aside to try to change the perception of post-hurricane recovery. The tourism alliances surveilled the hotel owners and looked at what the cancellations were after the storm passed, and they implemented a stage one advertising parameters to the tune of about $137,000 that they already had pre-bought and have in place at all times to recover from any natural disaster that might hit the area. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I have a real problem with that group spending public money without this board knowing about it. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I was going to say, who's got oversight? Who can authorize that expenditure? MR. MIHALIC: It can be authorized by the county manager or his designee, but it really is pre-authorized by purchase orders so that it's ready and in place. And the advertising space is actually pre-bought. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay, I'm clear on that, but what -- I know it's pre-authorized, I know we talked about what it buys and all that kind of stuff -- MR. MIHALIC: Yes. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- and we blessed that plan a long time ago. MR. MIHALIC: Yes. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My question is, who's got the red phone to say spend the money? MR. MIHALIC: They have the authority to implement that, and the county manager or his designee, and that's me, has the authority to pay those bills when they are submitted. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So you made that decision, Greg? MR. MIHALIC: Yes, I did. I -- we have not paid them yet, but we've told them to submit their bills. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Did you receive advance notice that they were going to do a stage one, or did they just go ahead and do it? MR. MIHALIC: They gave us advanced notice that they were going to make the buys and they sent us the information on the buys that they had made and were going to implement. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay, we need to change that -- we need to change that procedure. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I agree with that. But at this moment what I would like to hear is, from Greg, your professional opinion about how you decided to tell them yes, this is appropriate to spend. Because maybe there's something here that I don't know. MR. MIHALIC: In my opinion, the decision was theirs to make as they talked to their hoteliers and decided they need some assistance to be sure that people knew Collier County and Naples was here and would come back. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So I absolutely agree that the decision shouldn't be theirs to make. We've got to change that. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I agree, guys, because as far as I'm concerned, any time we get a major -- we could get a no-name storm that could create more havoc than what this storm did, and they could decide to exercise that particular part of the contract. And I am -- I was really concerned about this. And it came to us last night as an information item only, and I was very, very uncomfortable with that expenditure. And I still am. I am not -- I'm not pleased about this at all. We weren't a Key West. That was on national TV. Yes, there were hotel cancellations, yes, the hotels on Marco Island, some of them were closed, obviously, for a couple of days. But for the most part, that was -- they were back up and running again, and there was not anything that was damaged. If people had merely called and inquired of the hotel, they would have gotten word that things are okay, come on down, if they already had a reservation. I'm just extremely -- to me, this is a license to get some extra bucks. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Barb, you missed -- you weren't -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: And I just don't like it. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- here when we had the original discussion on this, but the reason why we set this aside is even more glaring, and that is when Andrew came through, there were incorrect reports that Collier County was devastated. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And this was -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: And I can -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- to rebut that. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- understand that. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Right, this was really to come out and -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Sure. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- counter a media perception that Collier County had been affected tremendously by the storm was the impetus for creating this fund and for it to sit there for that purpose. So there are two problems here: One, there was no media report that I'm aware of that Collier County was adversely affected -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Quite the contrary. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- in this storm, okay? People were wise enough to cancel their reservations a week after a hurricane was targeted to hit a general area. That's going to happen in Florida, okay? But my guess is two to three weeks after, those reservations were holding. I don't know that, but I would have liked to have the opportunity to review that information before allocating any funds. So I don't think the shoe fits, so to speak. But the second part that concerns me is now those funds have to be replenished. And I tell you what, they're not coming from category A and they're not coming from category C. They're coming from category B. I mean, what are we going to do, are we going to rob other events and beach renourishment to replenish disaster funds -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I don't think so. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- for marketing? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, that's -- we should put that on an agenda and make that decision about -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: That's my personal opinion, obviously. But I just -- I feel like we were completely out of the loop, and it was structured in such a way that -- to be ready. But I wasn't aware that it could be activated by someone presenting the information to Greg and putting Greg in a position of being the gatekeeper. I mean, I don't think you necessarily want to be in that position, and I don't think it's an appropriate one, even if you do. I think that should come at least at the county -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I do, too. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- manager level more -- and ratified by this board. MR. FERNANDEZ: Madam Chair, as fate would have it, I received a memo across my desk this week that really gave me the same kind of reaction. The memo was from Visit Naples, I believe, to Ken Pineau, apprising him of the emergency plan. And as I read that, it struck me that it was an autonomous kind of plan, it seemed. And my reference and my routing comment was for Mr. Pineau to apprise me of whether that plan was a subset of our emergency management plan or was independent of that. And I was heading -- if this conversation had not taken place today, I was heading zn the direction of making sure that whatever emergency plan they had was consistent with our emergency plan so that if the Board of County Commissioners makes a determination to declare emergency, or whatever, that it also address the decision that would trigger the expenditure of these funds. That's where I was heading, if that connection wasn't in place. I didn't know whether it was or not from the memo that I had seen. So we were in the process of making sure that there was a coordination; that didn't appear to be taking place, from what I saw. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Commissioner Norris? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, what I would suggest is that since obviously during a hurricane situation or other type of emergency we have our emergency operation center going, and we have the Board of Commissioners ready for emergency meetings at all times, that we have to authorize these expenditures in advance through the Board of Commissioners. To have Visit Naples independently decide that they're going to spend money -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Right. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: That's wrong. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: -- I think we need to change that policy immediately. And as soon as Mr. Weigel can get that redrafted and brought to us, I think that's what we need to do. And COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Just for direction purposes, I agree to give that task to Mr. Weigel and Mr. Fernandez to -- COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- to make that the outcome. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I think the point being that the Board of Commissioners is here for emergency meetings anyway CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Absolutely. MR. FERNANDEZ: That's right. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: -- all through the event, so why not? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: But I just don't think an outside group like that should -- and actually -- I mean, it's -- you know, we've now contracted with them, the TDC, through TDC. I don't believe that they make those decisions. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: You know what floors me -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I just -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- is here we sit how many weeks after? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Right. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: And this is the first I even heard of it. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: That's what COMMISSIONER NORRIS: And that's what's wrong. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: If I were with Visit Naples, and I activated $130,000, I'd be back here as soon as I could, showing you just what great good we did with that $130,000 for the tourism community of Collier County. Instead, I've heard zippo. And that's -- it's almost like -- I feel like one got snuck by us is how I feel. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Yes, Mr. Weigel? MR. WEIGEL: In regard to the direction in bringing back an ordinance amendment, under chapter 252 of the Florida Statutes, which provides for the emergency prerogatives of local government, as well as our own ordinance 84-7 for local emergencies, it provides that the commission shall act, proclaim and declare an emergency and do all those other things that are appropriate. In the default or the inability of a quorum of the commission to meet, our ordinance, as well as statute, authorizes the chairman or the vice-chairman to act unilaterally. And then it ultimately defaults to the county administrator. I don't know if you want to have that built in as additional flexibility to this ordinance or not, or we can draft it and if you don't like it, you can sift it out -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. MR. WEIGEL: -- and keep it for the commission as a commission quorum to do. But -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Let's draft it, because if it's that bad that we can't even get five -- or three county commissioners together to make a decision, then I think our tourism industry is going to be affected, and that's what the money's intended to help with. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Right. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: So I would like to see the same language apply here. MR. WEIGEL: Okay, fine. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Thank you. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thanks for your help. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay, thanks, Greg. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: And Madam Chair, the other issue I wanted to raise on this is, you may remember, this board agreed to add a non-voting member to the Tourist Development Council that has expertise in the area of management of tourism projects, special events and whatnot. It was a -- it must have been a year ago when we did this. And as we were about to advertise, Commissioner Constantine requested we put a hold on that because he had some grand plan that was going to fix the TDC funds. Well, that -- he had, I think, originally envisioned eliminating category C. That hasn't happened. As a result, we still sit with the same issues in category C we had prior to the marketing issue. And I would like to ask the board to direct Ms. Filson to go ahead and advertise for that position, because we still are going to be faced with the same evaluative criteria issues on category C, as long as it exists. And I don't know if the person that was willing to volunteer is still out there. I've had two other people call me whose resumes are quite extensive in the area of doing marketing plans for countries, I mean -- you know. And they're willing to volunteer their time. And that's what we need on the TDC, we need that third person view that's not in the industry but has experience in planning these types of events and knows what questions to ask. And we already went through all that and decided to do it and put a hold on it. I'd like to release the hold and direct Ms. Filson to advertise for that position. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I agree with that direction. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I agree that we need the position -- we've needed it, from my standpoint, all year long, okay. My only concern about doing it right now, Commissioner, is that when this study comes back that's being done, I don't know how this is all going to affect how the TDC -- how we handle business in the future. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Let me offer this -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Because I'm really hoping that we're going to come up -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: With a real plan. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- we need some real overhaul, guys. I didn't realize it until I sat as the chairman of the TDC. And I have to tell you, it's been a most difficult task, number one. And number two, it just doesn't function, in my opinion, the way good government ought to function. It's just too -- it's very -- in my opinion, it's very loose, there's a lot of money that flows through there. And I'm not talking about the beach renourishment portion of it, okay? That's pretty much cut and dried. There's some things there, it's pretty well spelled out. There's not a lot of wiggle room there. But when you get over into the other side of it, in my opinion, it gets real messy. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Commissioner Berry, I think that makes -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: And I'm just not pleased at all with what I've seen. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- the case for that third person view -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- more so. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Well, but -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Because if you're going to have a restructuring of sorts, how that restructuring is done in such a way that marketing, promotion and whatnot are more streamlined and made more efficient and effective, someone who does that for a living would be the kind of person we'd like to have input from. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: When do we expect to get that report back? I know -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I believe November. I think -- I thought they had said the first week in November. Is that COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: We wouldn't be -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- correct, Greg? MR. MIHALIC: Yes. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- able to appoint this position for two to three weeks, anyway. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Why don't we get that and then -- why don't we schedule the two for the same meeting? CHAIRPERSON BERRY: That's fine. I mean, we could go ahead and advertise and get everything in place, Commissioner, and then go ahead and we get the report -- MR. MIHALIC: The chamber -- excuse me. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: If we're going to have some huge change, I'd rather have as much input from true professionals in the marketing side than from folks who are used to marketing their property or their industry -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Oh, I agree. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- as opposed to someone who's got a broader background. MR. MIHALIC: The Chamber of Commerce's survey is -- should be completed in early November. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. MR. MIHALIC: Staff's analysis is pretty well done except for the recommendations, and we would be on the same timetable as that. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. But there needs to be some work done in this area, and it's -- it's one of those things when you walk out you just don't feel real good about everything that's COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It kept you awake. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- taken place. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I've often CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Yeah, it did. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- felt that sometimes we would have been better off taking that money and bidding out a single firm to do a promotion -- COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, that's still an option. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- you know, rather than going through a middle group who then -- I mean, it's just -- it's so convoluted. And there are firms out there that you hire to do this stuff. Why are we doing it? You know, government is not in the business of promotion and marketing. That's really not what we do best. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No kidding. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Well COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: But I think we'll see those kinds of recommendations and those kinds of streamlining coming from people who know what they're talking about. And that's not me, quite frankly, not on this issue. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I think that we need to -- there are other counties -- we don't need to reinvent the wheel, guys. This isn't something we need to sit here and ponder and decide how -- the best way to do it. There's plenty of expertise out there that can certainly guide the process. We need to tap into it, figure out what we like, and do it. It's not rocket science, but it needs to be done. Because there's just too much money that flows through the group, and there's so much that can be done with it, if it's used effectively. I'm not casting anything disparagingly on the current operation. I frankly don't know how their -- I'm talking about the Visit Naples group, we gave them over a million dollars to do what they're doing for this next year, so I'm not -- I'm not saying anything negatively about them. But I'm not sure that we're doing this in the best possible way that it should be handled. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Agreed. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just one thought is with the productivity committee, one of the things that they are interested in doing, or creating a mechanism for doing -- and I know they've been working with Mr. Fernandez about it -- is communication with other counties about, you know, not reinventing the wheel. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Right. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: How is it done somewhere else effectively? And that might be something that we would have our staff look into as CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I do have to tell you, when we had the meeting with Porter Goss, the delegation meeting which I was able to attend up in Fort Myers, and the morning session, the convention and visitors bureau -- and what's the lady's name? MR. FERNANDEZ: Elaine McLaughlin. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Elaine McLaughlin is their executive director, I guess, for the CVB up there? MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: And I have to say that I was very much impressed with what they have done in terms of how they market all of Lee County. It's not just one section -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Not just the coast. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- all the entire county. And it's very, very impressive. That's what I said, I think the expertise is out there. Certainly all of you had the opportunity to talk to the two gentlemen that came down. I think most of you did, talked to one or two of the guys. And they certainly have expertise as well, that if we need -- if we need some outside help, I think there's plenty of help out there to give to us. We just need to get everything in motion. Enough said on this. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Well, I just have -- I'll tell you folks, what I told Commissioner Berry this morning. I worked at a CVB when I was in college. I worked for a convention of visitors bureau. I've seen how it's done, you know, on that side, and it just gives me even greater cause for concern on how we're doing it here. So, you know, I think we're moving in the right direction to getting some additional input and maybe need to look at wholesale changes in the future. I won't be here for that, but I wish you luck. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: But I think it can be a real plus, I really do. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sure. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I think we can come up with a first-class operation, which is -- we should expect nothing less than that. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's a lot of money. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I believe we're down to the Ty Agoston portion of our -- CHAIRPERSON BERRY: I think we are. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: -- agenda. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Public comments. MR. FERNANDEZ: No registered -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Ty. MR. FERNANDEZ: -- speakers, Madam Chairman. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Ty, you don't want to talk to us today? Nothing? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's a short agenda, Ty, come on. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay, then we'll -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I can't believe we're sitting here asking, begging Ty to spend five minutes of his time speaking to us. It's -- you know, I mean, do we have nothing to do this afternoon, what? MR. AGOSTON: You guys want to play cards? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I learn so much. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: We can -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: We'll play cribbage afterwards. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: -- sing, dance, you know, do any of those kinds of things. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: You have to remember, Ty, if you refuse an offer to speak, that you're disallowed for the next six months. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's it. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Sometimes those things happen, you know. Item #14 STAFF COMMUNICATIONS - UPDATE ON NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE GOLDEN GATE FIRE AND RESUCE CONTROL DISTRICT REGARDING THE COLLIER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT SERVICE CONTRACT - STAFF TO BRING CONTRACT BACK AT FUTURE DATE Okay, going on to item 14, staff communication, Golden Gate Fire and Rescue. Mr. Fernandez? MR. FERNANDEZ: Madam Chairman, we do have a very brief presentation that we can fill a little bit of time with. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. MR. FERNANDEZ: We've asked Mr. Ochs to be prepared to speak to you about the Golden Gate Fire Control District and their contract with us. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. MR. OCHS: Thank you. For the record, Leo Ochs, support services administrator. Good morning again. Very briefly, I understand is the operative word, so I will be brief. As you know, last week at the end of the board meeting, Commissioner Constantine raised a few questions about the status of the negotiations for the contract between this board and the Golden Gate Fire and Rescue Control District for fire protection service to Collier County District 1. As a result of those questions, I've had several conversations over the past few days with Chief Peterson and pleased to report to the board this morning that the parties have resolved any outstanding issues. The chief will be bringing the contract to his board at their meeting of November llth for approval subsequent to that action by the fire district. Your staff, as always, will bring that contract back for ratification and approval by this board. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Great news. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Good. Thank you very much. We're down to -- anything, Mr. Fernandez? MR. FERNANDEZ: Madam Chairman, I'd just like to take a minute to acknowledse and thank the board for the flowers and expressions of sympathy in the passing of my dad, and also, the division administrators and really the entire organization. I was very comforted by the expressions of support from the organization. Thank you very much. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: You're very welcome. Anything else? Mr. Weigel, do you have anything for us? MR. WEIGEL: No, thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to work with you an additional period. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Thank you. Commissioner Mac'Kie? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I can't resist the opportunity to thank the board for its general fund budget amendment in the consent agenda today of $1,500 in support of United Way. Good job. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Commissioner Norris? COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Nothing further. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Commissioner Hancock? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I can resist. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: You can't resist? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I can. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Okay. And this morning we're happy to have Ms. Chris Brighton with us, who is sitting in. As you know, we have done this to make sure that everybody, in case something disastrously would happen to Ms. Filson, we have someone else that can come in and sit in. And all of them will be going through this. So this morning we're happy to have Ms. Brighton sitting with us. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: That's Lieutenant Brighton in place of General Filson. CHAIRPERSON BERRY: At any rate, if there's nothing further to come before this board, we stand adjourned. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:40 a.m. ***** Commissioner Hancock moved, seconded by Commissioner Norris and carried 4/0 (Commissioner Constantine absent), that the following items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted: ***** Item #16Al PETITION VAC-98-024, TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A 20' WIDE PARCEL OF LAND CONVEYED TO COLLIER COUNTY AS AN ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT, RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 1889, PAGES 2393 AND 2394 AND BEING LOCATED IN SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND EXECUTION OF THE QUITCLAIM DEED Item #16A2 PETITION VAC-98-020, TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A PORTION OF A 10' WIDE PARCEL OF LA_ND CONVEYED TO COLLIER COUNTY AS A UTILITY EASEMENT, RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 1297, PAGES 1161 THROUGH 1164, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, LOCATED IN THE COURTHOUSE SHADOWS SHOPPING CENTER IN SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RA~NGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA A_ND EXECUTION OF THE QUITCLAIM DEED Item #16A3 ACCEPTANCE OF $12,176.43 AS THE FAIR SHARE CONTRIBUTION FOR DEDICATION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR CHAMPIONSHIP DRIVE AND APPROVAL OF THE SATISFACTION OF DEDICATION CONDITION Item #16A4 FINAL PLAT OF GUILFORD ESTATES Item #16A5 RESOLUTION 98-424 AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "SILVER LAKES PHASE TWO-C" Item #16A6 FINAL PLAT OF PELICAN STR3LND REPLAT 5 - SUBJECT TO CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND ESCROW AGREEMENT Item #16A7 ACCEPTANCE OF A CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND ESCROW AGREEMENT IN EXCHANGE FOR A LETTER OF CREDIT FOR PELICAN STRAND Item #16B1 SUBORDINANTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTYY AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THE U.S. 41 EXPANSION PROJECT FROM RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD TO EAST OF SR-951 Item #16B2 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH HOLE, MONTES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD BRIDGE PROJECT AT JUNCTION IMMOKALEE ROAD - IN THE A/~OLYNT OF $143,826.00 Item #16B3 Moved to Item #8B1 ACCEPTANCE OF THE PETITION FOR THE HUNTERS ROAD PAVING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT MUNICIPAL SERVICE BENEFIT UNIT (MSBU); STAFF TO PREPARE AN ENGINEERING FEASIBILITY REPORT; AND PURSUE ACQUISTION OF REMAINING RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENTS Item #16B4 PETITION TM-96-18 FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TO TRAFFIC CALM THAT PORTION OF ST. ANDREWS BOULEVARD FROM THE VICINITY OF FOREST HILLS BOULEVARD NORTHERLY TO THE VICINITY OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD; APPROVAL OF $8,025.00 WHICH IS THE COUNTY'S SHARE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT; A_ND STAFF TO OBTAIN THE AGREED UPON MATCHING FUNDS FROM THE LELY COUNTRY CLUB PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION; AND SCHEDULE THE INSTALLATION OF THE SPEED HUMPS BY PHASES AS REQUESTED BY THE COMMUNITY Item #16B5 APPROPRIATION OF A PORTION OF CARRY FORWARD FROM FUND 136 FOR THE COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION ON CR 951 (PROJECT 69116) SO THAT GOLDEN GATE MSTU CAN COMPLETE A NEW LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT Item #16B6 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 5 WITH HOLE, MONTES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR THE IMMOKALEE ROAD SIX LANE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 69101 - IN THE ANOUNT OF $66,766.00 Item #16B7 BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING REVENUE TO BE RECEIVED FROM WCI IN FISCAL YEAR 1999 AND APPROPRIATING RESERVES IN THE FISCAL YEAR 1999 CLAM BAY RESTOP~ATION FUND Item #16D1 RESOLUTION 98-425, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND COLLIER COUNTY REGARDING EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ENHANCEMENT Item #16D2 RESOLUTION 98-426 PJtTIFYING A_ND APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR ACTIVITIES AND INCENTIVE PRIZES ASSOCIATED WITH COUNTY STAFF PARTICIPATION IN THE UNITED WAY CA~MPAIGN PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 87-5, AS SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE Item #16G1 MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR REFERRED The following miscellaneous correspondence as presented by the Board of County Commissioners has been directed to the various departments as indicated: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL BARBARA B. BERRY, CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK These minutes approved by the Board on , as presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY CHERIE' R. LEONE, NOTARY PUBLIC