BCC Minutes 01/11/2011 R MINUTES
BCC
Regular
Meeting
January 11 , 2011
January 11, 2011
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, January 11,2011
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:
CHAIRMAN:
Fred Coyle
Jim Coletta
Georgia Hiller
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager
Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney
Ian Mitchell, Executive Manager to BCC
Mike Sheffield, Business Operations Manager - CMO
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB)
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
AGENDA
January] 1, 201 ]
9:00 AM
Fred W. Coyle, BCC Chairman Commissioner, District 4
Jim Coletta, BCC Vice-Chairman Commissioner, District 5, CRAB Vice-Chairman
Donna Fiala, BCC Commissioner, District 1, CRAB Chairman
Georgia Hiller, BCC Commissioner, District 2
Tom Henning, BCC Commissioner, District 3
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE
COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENT A TION OF THE AGENDA
ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE
UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE
CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53, AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
Page I
January 11,2011
PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A
MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3329 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMP AIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1 :00 P.M.
1. INVOCA TION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Pastor Curt Ayers - Capri Christian Church
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and
summary agenda.)
B. Selection of Chairman and Vice-Chairman
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation recognizing the Community Foundation of Collier County on
their 25th anniversary. To be accepted by Colleen Murphy, President and
CEO of the Community Foundation ofColJier County. Sponsored by
Page 2
January 11,2011
Commissioner Fiala.
B. Proclamation designating January 22,201 I as WINK News Feeds Families
Hunger Walk Day in Collier County. To be accepted by Lois Thome from
WINK TV. Sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation of the "Bus Mechanic of the Year" award by Florida Public
Transportation Association to Stephen Hayes of Fleet Management.
B. Recommendation to recognize Samantha Moran, Training Coordinator,
Human Resources Department, as the Employee of the Year for 2010.
C. Presentation by Robert Halman, Director, University Extension Services on
the Impact of the Recent Freeze to the Agribusiness of Collier County.
D. This item to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Presentation of the Blue Ribbon Panel
Report regarding the Prehospital Emergency Medical Treatment and
Transport (PEMTT) System.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request by Anton Karaba and Eva Karabova seeking Board
approval to retain the 10-foot fence they've built on their property.
B. Public Petition request by Keith M. Sowers requesting that the Board of
County Commissioners consider his request to participate in the Impact Fee
Payment Assistance Program for the proposed U-Save Grocery Store in
Immokalee.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m.. unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. This item continued from the December 14,2010 BCC Meetine:. This
item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure
be provided bv Commission members: Resolution amending Resolution
Number 2005-235 (Development Order No. 2005-01), as amended, for the
Page 3
January 11, 2011
Town of Ave Maria Development of Regional Impact (DR!) located in
Sections 31 through 33, Township 47 South, Range 29 East and Sections 4
through 9 and 16 through 18, Township 48 South, Range 29 East in Collier
County, Florida; by providing for: Section One, amendments to the
Development Order by revising Exhibit C: SRA Master Plan to divide Town
Center 2 into Town Center 2a and Town Center 2b, to relocate Town Center
2b to Oil Well Road and to relocate an access point on Oil Well Road;
Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Conclusions of Law; and
Section Four, Effect of Previously Issued Development Orders, transmittal
to Department Of Community Affairs and effective date. (Petition: DOA-
PL201O-l751) [Companion to SRAA-PL20l 0-1988](CTS)
B. This item continued from the December 14, 2010 BCC Meetine:. This
item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure
be provided bv Commission members: A Resolution amending Resolution
Numbers 2004-89 and 2005-234A for the Town of Ave Maria Stewardship
Receiving Area to revise the SRA Master Plan to divide Town Center 2 into
Town Center 2a and Town Center 2b; to relocate Town Center 2b to Oil
Well Road and to relocate an access point on Oil Well Road. The property is
located north of Oil Well Road and west of Camp Keais Road in Sections 31
through 33, Township 47 South, Range 29 East and Sections 4 through 9
and 16 through 18, Township 48 South, Range 29 East in Collier County,
Florida. (Petition: SRAA-PL201 0-1988)[Companion to DOA-PL20 I 0-1751]
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
B. Appointment of members to the County Government Productivity
Committee.
C. Request to consider suspending all further action on the part of County Staff,
and any further spending of public funds related to the Jackson Labs project
in light of Jackson's withdrawal of its application for funding to the State.
Additionally, a separate request is proposed for a full accounting of all
public funds spent on this project to date, including but not limited to the
expenditure of public funds for County Staff time incurred in dealing with
Page 4
January 11,2011
the project; such accounting to be presented to the BCC at the first meeting
in February. (Commissioner Hiller)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to adopt a resolution seeking authority to acquire by gift or
purchase those perpetual and temporary easement interests necessary for the
construction of stormwater improvements for Outfall #3 and #4 segments of
the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project. (Project No. 5110 1.)
Estimated Fiscal Impact: $1,556,500. (Norman Feder, Administrator,
Growth Management Division)
B. This item continued from the December 14, 2010 BCC Meetinl!: and will
be heard after Items 7 A and 78. This item requires that ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission Members. Should a hearinl!: be
held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in.
Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Eastern Collier
Research Park Unit 18, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance
security. (Nick Casalanguida, Deputy Administrator, Growth Management
Division)
C. In support of the Golden Gate Beautification MSTU, recommendation to
award Bid #10-5595 for, Coronado Parkway and Hunter Blvd. Median,
Curbing and Landscape Installation Part One: Curbing to Bonness Inc. in the
amount of $764,985.16, and Part Two: Landscape & Irrigation Installation to
Hannula Landscape & Irrigation Inc. in the amount of$290,879.86.
(Norman Feder, Administrator, Growth Management Division)
D. Recommendation to review and approve projects and policy priorities
proposed for the Collier County Fiscal Year 2012 Federal Legislative
Agenda which will be presented to the Congressional Delegation and to
advocate for federal funding consideration as well as pursue eligible 2011
Grants and any applicable federal programs that become available. (Debbie
Wight, Legislative Affairs Coordinator)
] 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
Page 5
January 11, 2011
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. That the Board reviews the Non-
Binding Arbitration Decision related to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area
Overlay and establishes whether the creation or amendment of a
Stewardship Receiving Area requires an affirmative vote of three or four
members of the Board of County Commissioners.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. Recommendation to the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to
complete the 20 I 0 annual performance evaluation for the Immokalee CRA
Executive Director.
B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the
Airport Authority, adopts a Resolution approving the proposed rate
schedules for the Everglades Airpark, Immokalee Regional Airport and
Marco Island Executive Airport for 20 II.
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
]6. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
1) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission Members. Should a hearinl!: be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. This is a recommendation
to approve for recording the final plat of Biscayne Bay at Heritage
Bay Unit Four, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
Page 6
January 11,2011
performance security.
2) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Hammock Bay with the
roadway and drainage improvements being privately maintained and
authorize the release of the maintenance security.
3) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of 3500 Corporate Plaza with
the roadway and drainage improvements being privately maintained
and authorizing the release of the maintenance security.
4) Recommendation to approve Release and Satisfactions of Lien for
four separate Code Enforcement cases.
5) Recommendation to award RFP #10-5483 an agreement between
Collier County and Tindale-Oliver & Associates, Inc. for Phase 2 of
the Master Mobility Plan. Estimated contract amount of $315,700.
6) Recommendation to award Bid #10-5491, Fiber Optic Cable
Installation, Maintenance & Repair to Aztek, Inc.
7) Recommendation to approve the request by Creekside West, Inc. to
allow for the future transfer of Road Impact Fees paid for one parcel
within the Creekside Planned Unit Development (PUD) to another
parcel within the same PUD, as the subject development on the
original parcel is changing from construction of a shell building to the
construction of a parking garage, which does not require payment of
Road Impact Fees.
8) Recommendation to award ITB #1 1-5602 for a Traffic Signal
Upgrade at the intersection of Airport Pulling (CR 31) and Pine Ridge
Road (CR 896) to Itran Partners, Inc. in the amount of$344,763.95.
9) Recommendation to award Contract #10-5586 for the installation of
an emergency generator at Collier Area Transit Facility at 8300 Radio
Road to Wm. 1. Varian Construction Co. Inc., in the amount of
$90,223.85 plus ten percent contingency ($9,022) to total $99,245.85.
Page 7
January 11, 2011
10) Recommendation to award RFQ #09-5220, Vanderbilt Beach MSTU
Roadway Grounds Maintenance to Florida Land Maintenance, Inc.
d/b/a Commercial Land Maintenance, Inc. in an estimated annual
amount of$61 ,079.
] 1) Recommendation to approve the FY I I Program of Projects and
authorization to submit an application for Federal Transit
Administration Section 5307 FYII Grant Funds estimated at
$2,578,927.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
to approve and execute a Commercial Building Improvement Grant
Agreement between the CRA and a Grant Applicant within the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle Area. (17 I 2 Commercial Drive, $50,000)
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to award Contract # I 0-5599 to Stantec Consulting
Services, Inc., in the amount $34 I ,534, for Construction Engineering
Inspection Services for the first stage of Phase IV of the South RO
Wellfield Raw Water Transmission Main Repair Project No. 70030.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
]) Recommendation to approve submittal ofa 4-H Foundation, Inc.
Grant Application requesting $63,825 for 4-H Outreach Coordinators
and enhance outreach activities managed by the Collier County
University of Florida /IF AS Extension Department.
2) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign four
(4) releases oflien for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees
for owner occupied affordable housing dwelling units that were
transferred from the developer to the new owner.
3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign five
(5) releases of lien for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees
for owner occupied affordable housing dwelling units that have been
Page 8
January 11, 2011
repaid in full.
4) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign nine
(9) Satisfactions of Mortgage for owner occupied affordable housing
dwelling units that have satisfied the terms of assistance.
5) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign six
(6) Satisfactions of Mortgage for owner occupied affordable housing
dwelling units that have been repaid in full to Collier County.
6) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign three
(3) Mortgage and Note Modification Agreements for Single Family
Rehabilitation to correct the total funds disbursed on previously
recorded security instruments.
7) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign three
(3) lien agreements for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact
fees for owner occupied affordable housing dwelling units located in
Collier County. Approval of this item will transfer previously
approved deferral agreements from developer to owner occupants
with a continuing fiscal impact of $45,083.78.
8) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
agreement in the amount of$258,667 wjth the Agency for Health
Care Administration (AHCA) and Collier Health Services (CHS)
to participate in the Medicaid Low Income Pool Program (LIP).
Participation in this program will generate an additional $452,907 in
Federal matching funds to be paid directly to CHS for services for the
most medically needy in Collier County.
9) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign
certifications required by the State of Florida, Department of Children
and Families (DCF) in order to be eligible to be awarded 2011
Challenge Grant funding.
10) Recommendation to accept an additional list of equipment to be
purchased with the Health Care and Other Facilities Special
Congressional Initiative Earmark from the US Department of Health
Page 9
January 11, 2011
and Human Services accepted by the County on September 29,2009,
Agenda Item # 16D6.
11) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
Agreement with the David Lawrence Center to operate a post-
adjudication, court supervised, substance abuse treatment program
known as the Collier County Drug Court Program. Funding has been
provided through Grant #201O-DC-BX-0016 from U.S. Department of
Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance. No general funds are associated
wi th this project.
12) Recommendation to approve an amendment to the Homelessness
Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) Administrative
Plan, which provides guidance on the programmatic design, eligibility
guidelines and assistance limitations for agencies participating in the
HPRP program. The proposed amendment would increase the amount
of medium term HPRP financial assistance a client could receive from
the maximum $3,000 to $5,000 per client over an 18 month period.
13) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
amendment to a 2009-20 I 0 Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Subrecipient Agreement with the Shelter for Abused Women
& Children (SA WCC) approved September 15,2009. The amendment
revises Exhibit A, Section B - the Budget, updating the budget to
facilitate reimbursement.
14) Recommendation to reject solicitation (ITB) #1 1-561 I for East Naples
Community Center Roll Down Shutters and associated proposals that
were submitted and authorize the Purchasing Department to re-solicit
for services. FYII impact associated with solicitation is $166,954.
15) Recommendation to approve an award for Invitation to Bid (ITB)
#10-5568-R for Fitness Equipment Repair and Purchase to
Tropic Gym Tech, LLC. ($70,000 approximate annual spending)
16) Recommendation to approve a revised Resolution of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, supporting the
County's Four Grant Applications to the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP) for Long Range Grant Funding
Page 10
January 11, 20]1
Requests for FY 2011-20 I 2, agreeing to be the Local Sponsor and
committing Local Cost Share Funds, and authorizing necessary
budget amendments.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to ratify an addition and a modification to the 20 I I
Fiscal Year Pay and Classification Plan made from October 1,2010
through December 31, 20 I O.
2) Recommendation to accept reports and ratify staff-approved change
orders and changes to work orders.
3) Recommendation that the Board approve, and authorize the Chairman
to sign two Lease Agreements with the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FWC) to allow FWC to conduct Youth
Hunts for Collier County residents at Pepper Ranch Preserve in
January and February, 2011.
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the
submittal of a Volunteer Fire Assistance Grant Application in the
amount of $4, 125 to the Florida Division of Forestry for the purpose
of purchasing a fire hose for the Brush Vehicles and Class A Foam.
2) Recommendation for the Board to approve an economic development
agency report required by Section 125.045, Florida Statutes and
authorize the County Manager to submit a copy of the report to the
Office of Economic and Demographic Research.
3) Recommendation to approve after the fact approval for submittal of a
Volunteer Fire Assistance grant application to Florida Division of
Forestry for required wildfire protective clothing & firefighting foam.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners award
Bid #11-5623 for the Purchase and Delivery of Pine Straw Mulch to
Custom Pine Straw, Inc.
Page 11
January 11,2011
5) Recommendation to award Bid No. I I -5607, for the construction of a
boat dock at the Isles of Capri Fire Station, Project 50070, in the
amount of $97,776 to M. E. Gose Inc. and authorize the necessary
budget amendment.
6) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the fiscal Year 201 0- I I Adopted Budget.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the Naples Press Club Holiday Party at the Bellasera in
Naples, FL on December 9, 2010. $40 to be paid from Commissioner
Fiala's travel budget.
2) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the East Naples Civic Association Monthly Luncheon on
December 16, 2010 at Hamilton Harbor Yacht Club in Naples, FL.
$18 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
3) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the United States Coast Guard Auxiliary Flotilla 95 Change
of Watch on January 8, 2011 at Hideaway Beach Club on Marco
Island, FL. $50 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
4) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Will attend the Friends of the Library Member Appreciation
Reception on January 14,2011 in Naples, FL. $25 to be paid from
Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
5) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Page 12
January 11,2011
Attended the Marco Island Area Chamber of Commerce Annual
Installation Celebration and Leadership Marco Graduation on January
9,2011 on Marco Island, FL. $75 to be paid from Commissioner
Fiala's travel budget.
6) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the Everglades City Hall Annual Christmas Party on Friday,
December 17,20 lOin Everglades City, FL. $15 to be paid from
Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
7) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the ULI Southwest Florida 14th Annual Winter Institute
Real Estate Trends Conference on January 13,2011 in Naples, FL.
$25 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
8) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Commissioner Henning attended the Collier Building Industry
Association's 2011 Installation Dinner. Held at Olde Cypress Country
Club - 7165 Treeline Drive, Naples, FL., on December 8, 20 I O. $45 to
be paid from Commissioner Henning's travel budget.
9) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Trip to Washington, DC including airfare and hotel. $434.16 to be
paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
] 0) Proclamation recognizing Edward "Ski" Olesky for his contributions
to the residents and visitors of Collier County. To be presented at the
TDC Meeting January 24, 2011 by Commissioner Tom Henning.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
]) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
Page 13
January 11,2011
1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
November 27, 2010 through December 3, 2010 and for submission
into the official records of the Board.
2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
December 4, 20] 0 through December 10, 20 I 0 and for submission
into the official records of the Board.
3) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
December I I, 20 I 0 through December 17, 20 I 0 and for submission
into the official records of the Board.
4) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
December 18,2010 through December 24,2010 and for submission
into the official records of the Board.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
]) Recommendation to Approve a Stipulated Final Judgment as to
Parcels 156FEE and 156TCE in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v.
Katheryn Moreno, et at., Case No. 10-274] -CA (Collier Boulevard
Project No. 68056). (Fiscal Impact: $38,570.)
2) Recommendation to approve an increase in the purchase order for
Grant, Fridkin, Pearson, Athan & Crown to the total of $115,000 for
the case Ker Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Armadillo Underground v.
APAC-Southeast, Inc. v. Collier County, Case No. 09-8724-CA, now
pending in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and
for Collier County, Florida, (Vanderbilt Beach Road Project No.
63051) (Fiscal Impact: an additional $50,000).
3) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $50,500 for Parcel 811 in the lawsuit styled Collier County
v. Myrtle Preserve, LLe., et at., Case No. 07-0463-CA (Lely Area
Stormwater Improvement Project No. 51] 01.1) (Fiscal Impact:
$40, ]40)
4) Recommendation that the Board (I) authorize the County Attorney to
take all necessary steps to Voluntarily Dismiss Without Prejudice
Page 14
January 11,2011
Collier County's Bond Validation Complaint, and (2) Rescind
Resolution No. 20 I 0-2 I I, which Resolution authorized issuance of
$130,000,000 in Bonds for acquisition, construction and to equip a
scientific research and services facility to be operated by the Jackson
Laboratory.
5) That the Board of County Commissioners approves, and authorizes its
Chairman to sign, a Tri-Party Developer Contribution Agreement with
E's Country Stores, LLC, and Roberto Bollt, with respect to certain
road improvements located generally at the southeast comer of
Immokalee Road and Oil Well Road.
] 7. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: ]) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. Recommendation to approve Petition: V AC-PL201O-2039, Lowes South
Naples, to disclaim, renounce and vacate County and Public interest in that
portion of a IS-foot wide utility easement originally recorded in Official
Record Book 1872, page 1444 of the Public Records Collier County, Florida
and in that portion of a 15 foot C.U.E. (County Utility Easement) created by
the plat of Capri Commercial Center No.2, Recorded in Plat Book 49, Pages
5 through 8, all located in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County Florida being more specifically shown and described in
Exhibit A.
B. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
Page 15
January 11, 2011
Fiscal Year 2010-1 I Adopted Budget.
C. Recommendation to amend Ordinance No. 75-16, as amended, relating to
meetings of the Board of County Commissioners, clarifying the time frame
for the election of a Chairman and/or Vice-Chairman, as applicable, after the
General Election and designating who shall serve as temporary Chairman in
the absence of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman with respect to all matters
outside of meetings.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 16
January 11, 2011
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, the Board of
County Commission meeting is now in session.
I would like to start the meeting with a moment of silence in
honor of those who were killed and wounded in the senseless shooting
in Tucson, Arizona, and as we ponder the relationship between acts
such as that and the vitriol which seems to accompany political
discourse, even in our own community. So please join me in a
moment of silence.
(Moment of silence.)
Item #lA
INVOCA TION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much. And we will
have the invocation by Pastor Curt Ayers. Will you please all stand.
p ASTOR AYERS: Father, we thank You for this moment that
we could be silent before You and we could be thinking of others who
are suffering right now, those who are in great pain because of loss,
because of injury and because of the senseless act that was taken
towards those people.
And we just pray, Lord, that You would bless them and help
these families and watch over them. And help us to realize that when
we see things like that, that we have a pretty good life and we have
good things happening to us. And all the storms that happen around
us don't compare sometimes to the suffering of others. And help us to
remember that.
We ask today that You would give us Your understanding. Help
us to see things the way that You see them. Help us to set our
priorities that way so that we'll know what You want us to do and
when You want us to do it. Help us forget about the little things and
to be thinking -- majoring on the important things in life and to keep
Page 2
January 11,2011
those at the top of our list.
We ask You also, Lord, help us remember that during these tough
times we still have a lot that You have given us. Help us to be good
stewards of that. Help us to be good stewards of our ideas, of our
opportunities and of our resources. And I pray with Your wisdom and
guidance, if we do that then we'll be able to make things work and be
able to pay for the things that need for to be paid for.
Again, Lord, I ask You to help us to be able to work together.
Sometimes that's a difficult order. We have a difference of opinions,
we have a wide range of ideas. Help us always to remember that what
we're doing here today is for the higher good of this community, and
we must forget about pride, must forget about egos, and let's think
about what is best.
Again, Lord, we thank You for all these things. We thank You
for this moment and for these people on this Commission, and for all
those who are being a part of this meeting. In Jesus' name we pray,
amen.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Pastor Ayers.
Would you please join us for the pledge of allegiance.
(Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Please be seated.
County Manager, do you have some changes for the agenda
today?
Item #2A
TODA Y'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA AS
AMENDED - APPROVED AND OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES
MR. OCHS: Sir, I do. Good morning, Commissioners. These
are agenda changes for your Board of County Commissioners meeting
January 11,2011.
Page 3
January 11,2011
First change is to withdraw Item 6B. It was a public petition
request for impact fee payment assistance. The petitioner will go
through your normal impact fee payment application process through
your EDC and then back to the staff.
Next item is a request from the petitioner to continue Items 7 A,
7B and lOB. These are all zoning and development order actions
related to the Town of Ave Maria. These items have been requested
to be continued by the petitioner until your February 22nd board
meeting.
Next item is a request for an add-on to today's agenda. If
approved, it would become add-on Item 9D. It's a recommendation
that the Collier County Airport Authority rescind Collier County
Airport Authority Administrative Code Policy No. 631, and require
that all rates and fees charged at the airports be set and all airport
related agreements and leases be approved by the Collier County
Airport Authority. And that add-on is requested by Commissioner
Hiller.
Next change is to move Item 16C1 from your consent agenda. It
would become Item lOF. It's a recommendation to award a contract to
Stantec Consulting Services for construction engineering, inspection
services for the south reverse osmosis well-field raw water
transmission main repair project. And that item is being removed at
staffs request.
Next change is to move Item 16F2 from the consent agenda to
become Item 10E. It's a recommendation for the Board to approve an
Economic Development Agency report required by Florida statutes.
And that item has been moved at Commissioner Hiller's request.
Next item is to withdraw Item 16H5. It was a reimbursement
expense request from Commissioner Fiala for valid public purpose.
Withdrawn at Commissioner Fiala's request because she was not able
to attend that event.
Next change is to withdraw Item 16K2. It's a recommendation to
Page 4
January 11,2011
approve an increase in a purchase order for an outside legal firm in the
case of Armadillo Underground versus AP AC-Southeast versus
Collier County. This is withdrawn at the County Attorney's request.
He intends to bring this back at a later date.
Three agenda notes. First is there's a correction to item 16D7
that Commissioner Fiala brought to our attention. In the executive
summary the staff recommendation section should read: To approve
and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached three lien agreements
for deferral, rather than two lien agreements for deferral. Thank you,
Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: No changes, sir.
MR. OCHS: I'm sorry, there's two time certains I wanted to note.
Item 5D, just a presentation of your Blue Ribbon Panel, is at
10:00 a.m.
Item 12A under the County Attorney's agenda will be heard at
1 :00, time certain.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you very much.
And now we will start with ex parte disclosure and any changes
to the agenda by commissioners for the consent and summary agenda
for ex parte. And we'll start with Commissioner Hiller today.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you all hear me?
On Item A.1 under the consent agenda, meetings and e-mails.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have nothing on the consent nor
the summary agenda to disclose at this time, and I have no changes to
the agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And I have no disclosures for the
consent or summary agenda. And I have no additional changes for the
agenda.
Commissioner Coletta?
Page 5
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir, good morning.
No changes to the agenda, and I have nothing to declare.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
And Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good morning. I have no
changes to -- further changes to today's agenda, and I do have ex parte
communication on 16A 1, which is a Heritage plat. I spoke to County
Manager and his staff about that issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you very much.
Now, before I take votes on the approval of the agenda, I would
like to ask a question concerning the add-on item of 9D.
Was that advertised, County Manager?
MR. OCHS: No, sir. It was not part of your printed agenda. It
came afterwards.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then I think that in the public's
best interest, I would ask Commissioner Hiller if she would be willing
to make the same motion to place this on the next agenda, and that
way we can advertise it and permit public input. Okay?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have no problem with that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Then with respect to all of the
other changes to the agenda, I will accept a motion to approve the
regular consent and summary agenda.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion to approve --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- the agenda as modified by the County
Manager.
And second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
Page 6
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes.
Any opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is approved.
And Commissioner -- was Coletta first?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm fine, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, then Commissioner Fiala?
Page 7
Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
January 11, 2011
Withdraw Item 6B: Public Petition request by Keith M. Sowers requesting that the Board of
County Commissioners consider his request to participate in the Impact Fee Payment Assistance
Program for the proposed U-Save Grocery Store in Immokalee. (Petitioner's request)
Continue Companion Items 7A, 7B and lOB to Februarv 22, 2011 BCC Meetin!!: The Town of Ave
Maria DOA-PL-2010-1751, SRAA-PL2010-1988 and Final Plat. (Petitioner's request)
Add Item 9D: Recommendation that the Collier County Airport Authority rescind Collier County
Airport Authority Administrative Code Policy No. 631 and require that all rates and fees charged
at the airports be set, and all airport related agreements and leases be approved, by the Collier
County Airport Authority. (Commissioner Hiller's request)
Move Item 16CI to Item 10F: Recommendation to award Contract 10-5599 to Stantec Consulting
Services, Inc., in the amount of $341,534, for Construction Engineering Inspection Services for the
first stage of Phase IV of the South RO Welltield Raw Water Transmission Main Repair Project,
Project No. 70030. (Staff's request)
Move Item 16F2 to Item 10E: Recommendation for the Board to approve an economic
development agency report required by Section 125.045, Florida Statutes and authorize the County
Manager to submit a copy of the report to The Omce of Economic and Demographic Research.
(Commissioner Hiller's request)
Withdraw Item 16H5: Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement regarding
attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose. Attended the Marco Island Area Chamber
of Commerce Annual Installation Celebration and Leadership Marco Graduation on January 9,
2011 on Marco Island, FL. $75 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
(Commissioncr Fiala's request)
Withdraw Item 16K2: Recommendation to approve an increase in the purchase order for Grant,
Fridkin, Pearson, Athan & Crown to a total of $115,000 for the case of Ker Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a
Armadillo Underground v. APAC-Southeast, Inc. v. Collier County, Case No. 09-8724-CA, now
pending in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida,
(Vanderbilt Beach Road Project No. 63051) (Fiscal Impact an additional $50,000). (County
Attorney's request)
Note:
Correction to Item 16D7: In the Executive Summary, the Staff Recommendation section should
read, "To approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached three (3) lien agreements for
deferral" rather than two (2) lien agreements for deferral.
Time Certain Items:
Item 5D to be heard at 10:00 a.m.
Item 12A to be heard at 1 :00 p.m.
1/11/20118:35 AM
January 11,2011
Item #2B
SELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE-CHAIRMAN -
MOTION TO APPOINT COMMISSIONER COYLE AS
CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONER COLETTA AS VICE-
CHAIR - APPROVED
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. We go to the selection of the
chairman. Now, I don't know how this is going to hit you, but I would
like you to stay on as chairman for one more year.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just -- and I don't know, can he not
accept it ifhe doesn't like that idea? But being that we're embroiled in
this thing right now, I would like to select you to stay on as chairman.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may add to that, you know,
this has been vetted with people through the ringer this past year. So
we're going to reward him by allowing him to go through the ringer
for an extra year. But, you know, like there's an old saying, you don't
want to change horses in midstream, so I think it's a wonderful idea,
and I'd like to include that in my second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I can't tell you how much I appreciate
that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I kind of thought you'd be
overwhelmed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I -- okay, we may as well take a
vote. We need to have -- Commissioner Coletta, your light is on, then
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That was looking to make the
motion. That's fine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just for clarification from
Commissioner Fiala. When she stated that we're embroiled in this, I
Page 8
January 11,2011
don't know what that means. Could you clarify that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, we've been working on this
biomedical village for some time. We don't know how it's going to
come out yet because we haven't heard from the Governor. And -- but
the person who has led us and I think masterfully through this through
the ups and downs has been Commissioner Coyle. And not only that,
he's done a great job as chairman, and I would like to see him continue
on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So if you're talking about
Jackson Labs and Commissioner Coyle's work, what's the difference
between that and being chairman?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Doesn't make a difference.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Doesn't, okay.
You know, I think it's good to have different leadership styles on
this board. And we have done that in the past. I don't see where it has
anything to do with biomedical or commissioner --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, scratch that comment, I
would just like to see him stay on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- Commissioner Coyle's work
on Jackson Labs.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know. And I would like
for us to proceed like we have historically. Commissioner Coletta is in
the ranking for being the Chair, and I think it's well deserved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to nominate him as vice
chair.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, being that Commissioner
Henning brought up Commissioner Coletta, I'm just saying that then I
would like to nominate him as vice chair. But I don't think that that's
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want to do this on a single vote, the
Page 9
January 11,2011
chair and the vice chair at the same time?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We can do that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a second to Commissioner
Coletta?
Commissioner Coletta, are you going to second yourself?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Why don't you second it?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'll second it.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can someone take care of the
static? My fault. Sorry about that.
It is absolutely essential that we have rotating leadership. The
whole idea is to allow for different ways of getting things done and
also for allowing for the various districts to be fairly and equally
represented in that leadership role.
What I'm seeing in Collier County as a pattern is entrenched
leadership and cronyism. I'm seeing it on the advisory committees
and now I'm seeing it at the board level. And that's a real problem.
We need fresh approaches, we need new ideas. And so to suggest that
Commissioner Coyle remain chair for the next year goes contrary to
the public's interest. The rotation should continue as it has
historically.
In the past, if Commissioner Halas were sitting here today, he
would be the next chairman. However, given that I am new to the
board, I would like to see the rotation continue in that fashion with
Commissioner Coletta being the next chair and Commissioner
Henning being the vice chair. And anything else I think is contrary to
the public's interest.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you very much.
We have a motion for the chair and the vice chair for me to
continue as the chair and Commissioner Coletta to be the vice chair
for the next year. All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 10
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the motion passes 3-2, with
Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Hiller dissenting.
Just as a note, I will have some requests relative to that, and
perhaps some recommendations of appointment to certain of our
advisory committees or councils next time for the board to consider.
Because there are certain things about the schedules of advisory
committees that actually do interfere in the process of performing the
functions of the chair. And I'll present those to the Board for
consideration next time, since I am not prepared to do so now.
So let's move on to service awards. We don't have any.
MR. OCHS: No service award this morning, Mr. Chairman.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE COMMUNITY
FOUNDATION OF COLLIER COUNTY ON THEIR 25TH
ANNIVERSARY. ACCEPTED BY COLLEEN MURPHY,
PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
OF COLLIER COUNTY. SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER
FIALA - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, proclamations.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. 4A is a proclamation recognizing the
Community Foundation of Collier County on their 25th anniversary.
To be accepted by Colleen Murphy, president and CEO of the
Community Foundation 0 Collier County. This proclamation is
sponsored by Commissioner Fiala.
Page 11
January 11,2011
Would you please come forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Colleen.
MS. MURPHY: It really is a proud moment for our organization
to be in this county.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Go to the microphone --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, so we can get you on record.
MS. MURPHY: Thank you. This is my first time in front of all
of you, but I just would really like to say, you know, our organization
is so proud to have served this community for 25 years. And today we
have our 25th anniversary celebration luncheon at the Naples Beach
Club. And I just want to assure you that the proclamation will be read
today and is very much appreciated. Thank you again.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for all that you do within
our community, by the way.
Item #4 B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JANUARY 22,2011 AS
WINK NEWS FEEDS FAMILIES HUNGER WALK DAY IN
COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY LOIS THOME FROM
WINK TV. SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER COLETTA-
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, next item is 4B. It's a proclamation
designating January 22nd, 2011 as WINK News Feeds Families
Hunger Walk Day in Collier County.
The proclamation will be accepted by Lois Thome from WINK
TV, JoAnne Bradshaw, Harry Chapin Food Bank, Al Brislain, Harry
Chapin Food Bank, and Armondo Galella, District Director, Catholic
Charities. Please come forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If any of you would like to make any
comments, please go to one of the podiums.
Page 12
January 11,2011
Lois is accustomed to talking.
MS. THOME: It's very gracious of A1 to let me come forward.
Weare so proud to be in front of you this morning accepting this
proclamation. As you know, so many people in our community are
suffering right now. And the Harry Chapin Food Bank is there for
them every -- 365 days of the year. And so many of them are needing
help now more than ever, many for the first time through no
circumstance or problem of their own.
And so we are so proud to have the Harry Chapin Food Bank in
our community. And they're one of the best investments in town.
You give them a dollar and they'll give you $6.00 worth of food. Who
can do that for you immediately?
So thank you so much for allowing us to be in front of you today,
and we hope everyone out there will join us at the Hunger Walk, raise
some money and help those in need in our community. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you for all the good work you do.
MR. GALELLA: I just quickly want to recognize also Catholic
Charities as one of the great organizations here in Collier. We partner
with a lot of organizations and they do an incredible job. Thank you
very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Item #5A
PRESENT A nON OF THE "BUS MECHANIC OF THE YEAR"
AWARD BY FLORIDA PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
ASSOCIATION TO STEPHEN HAYES OF FLEET
MANAGEMENT - PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to Item 5 on your
agenda, presentations.
Item 5A is a presentation of the Bus Mechanic of the Year award
Page 13
January 11,2011
by Florida Public Transportation Association to Stephen Hayes of
Fleet Management.
Steve, if you'd come forward.
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, Steve Hayes was selected as the
Florida Public Transportation Association's Bus Mechanic of the Year
for 2010 out of the many candidates considered for transit bus systems
throughout the state.
Steve was one of Collier County's top producing mechanics
during the past year. This was an amazing feat, considering his
additional shop management duties and responsibilities included
setting and monitoring daily shop priorities, quality control, parts
management and shop administration. He constantly looked for
means to reduce costs and frequently shopped outside of existing
contracts to find the most effective sources for our parts and services.
His efforts resulted in considerable savings to the operating cost
of our transit and para-transit systems, while providing notable
improvements to the quality and reliability of our bus fleet.
Steve was key to the success of Collier County's public
transportation systems in the past year to include completion of both
Florida Department of Transportation and Federal Transit
Administration audits with no findings on either.
Commissioners, we're very proud and pleased and thankful for
Steve's effort this past year. Thank you, Steve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thanks, Steve.
MR. HAYES: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, I failed to ask for a motion
approving the proclamation. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, and I failed to ask for it. It was my
fault.
So could I have a motion for the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- two proclamations.
Page 14
January 11,2011
Motion by Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The proclamations pass unanimously.
Item #5B
RECOGNIZING SAMANTHA MORAN, TRAINING
COORDINATOR, HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, AS
THE EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR FOR 2010 - PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Thank you. Our next item is 5B. It's a
recommendation to recognize Samantha Moran, Training Coordinator,
Human Resources Department, as the employee of the year for 2010.
Sam, come on forward.
Commissioner, Sam is the Training Coordinator of our Human
Resources Department. She was selected by a committee of her peers
from a list of all of the employees of the month this past year as the
employee of the year.
Sam has been with the county for five years working in the
Human Resources Department managing our training program. She
consistently goes above and beyond to make sure that each employee's
training experience is positive.
One of the courses that Sam leads several times throughout the
Page 15
January 11,2011
year is the ICMA supervisor training course. Through this 10-week
course she has successfully mentored over 100 employees on all
aspects of supervision. Very important for our succession planning.
She leads her classes with competence and enthusiasm, inspires
participance and incorporates the lessons learned in their everyday
work activities. She continues to be the go-to person for them and
many others. Always available to offer advice, creative solutions and
innovative ideas to reduce training costs.
Sam's also an active member of our Step-Up Committee, working
on business process improvement projects throughout the
organization. And she successfully contributed to numerous projects
during the past year. She's obviously highly regarded and respected as
a leader and a human resources professional, and we are truly
fortunate to have such a dedicated employee, and certainly Sam is
very deserving of this award.
So Commissioners, I present to you Sam Moran, our employee of
the year for 2010.
Item #5C
PRESENTATION BY ROBERT HALMAN, DIRECTOR,
UNIVERSITY EXTENSION SERVICES ON THE IMPACT OF
THE RECENT FREEZE TO THE AGRIBUSINESS OF COLLIER
COUNTY - PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to item 5C on the
agenda. It's a presentation by Robert Halman, Director, University
Extension Services on the impact of the recent freeze to the
agribusiness in Collier County.
Robert, good morning.
MR. HALMAN: Good morning, Commissioners. Robert
Halman, Director of University Services, Extension Services.
Page 16
January 11,2011
I have some bad news, some good news and then some bad news,
unfortunately. I gave a presentation just in January about this same
issue with our crop freeze. The bad news is that a crop damage was in
all five counties in the southern southeast -- southwest region of the
state. That includes Hendry County, Glades County and some of the
other countries.
The good news is that the major damage was in the northern part
of Collier County, which didn't affect a whole lot of our vegetables
and fruits. But it was a damaging crop to Lee, Hendry and any of the
counties above us.
The other bad news is that this is the same thing that happened
earlier this year. The other bad news may be that I heard just this
morning that we probably will have a temperature of 30 degrees or
less over the weekend. So we're hoping that this does not occur, and if
it does, this will affect our crops again.
Although the late November and December cold weather was not
devastating as it was in January, it was hurtful to a lot of the same
crops that we had in January of this year. So the crop losses --
estimated financial losses from the specialist up at the university, the
loss of production of somewhere around $140 million for the seven
major vegetable crops. These include: Tomatoes, peppers, green
beans, eggplants and other crops such as this.
The growers, we're talking about $140 million. But when you
look at the tomatoes that were approaching maturity, these had a full
load on them. And much of the fruit is already starting to drop or has
dropped already. And the yields will be reduced somewhere around
50 percent. So this could be even less than that if the plants tend to
die even more.
So we're looking at some frost damage on our citrus. There was
trees all over being frosted, especially the small trees. The young
trees were fairly well affected. And some of the older trees.
As you can see from this slide, we had a lot of fruit drop on these
Page 17
January 11,2011
trees. These estimates will probably increase by some 10 to 20
percent, because the more damage were (sic) uncovered as losses.
On the non-sellable items such as frozen fruit, we are -- most of
our citrus crop here is carried to juices. And because the crop is
frozen, the juice amount is less, so the producers will get less from
these crops. So we're looking at a major drop in sellable items.
You didn't ask a whole lot about the marine industry, but it is
affected here, just as it was last year, the grouper crop and also some
of the other fisheries.
What we have heard is that there haven't been any major fish
kills. There's been a couple around, and I put that in your narrative.
But as we look at these fisheries, we find that most of the information
that we're getting is not so much that it came from the freeze, it's just
that there may have been some fish varieties out there or species that
were susceptible due to stress from the cold weather.
Some of the groups that were impacted. We really talk about a
domino effect here, because we have not only the crop itself, but we
have the farmers themselves, the producers, the farm laborers, many
of the families, either the area of field farm workers, the packing
house workers, all of those people are affected.
We're looking at the farm workers loss of income of somewhere
around $33 million with agribusiness sales losing somewhere around
23 million.
On December 23rd, Governor Crist, in one of his last acts as
Governor, declared a -- sent a request to U.S.D.A. to declare all of
Florida agriculture a disaster area. So that declaration would make
growers eligible for low interest loans and possible financial aid.
The only problem with that is a lot of these farmers are already in
debt already from just establishing their crops for the upcoming
growing season, and also they're still in debt from establishing their
crop from last year's freeze. So this is not a good situation for any of
our farmers out there.
Page 18
January 11,2011
So what is the future impact on Collier agricultural? Some of the
plants that survive will probably regrow, although there will be
decreases in yields.
Again, the good part about this is that a lot of our fruits and vege
-- a lot of our vegetable crops are grown below Immokalee, and they
didn't yield such a bad or disastrous time over the cold weather. It was
mostly what happened above Immokalee.
Although we had some fruit drop from the citrus, this increased
mainly due to the wheat plants, and that has to do with the diseases
that are already out there in our citrus crop such as citrus greening and
citrus canker. So some of the fruit from these trees which were
already weak had problems and stress when it came to fruit drop. And
so that's also a decrease in dollars for growers.
Frozen fruit again --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sorry. Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I just ask you one thing? When
you said above Immokalee, what does above Immokalee mean? Just
so I can understand how this relates.
MR. HAL MAN : When we're talking above Immokalee if --
really, the temperature and even the topography up in that area
changes as you get above the town of Immoka1ee and go into Hendry
and Lee Counties.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, thank you.
MR. HALMAN: Anything above that, yes.
The frozen fruit, as I talked about earlier, won't be packed, so this
is a decrease in dollars for growers.
And so if you look at the whole situation, it's a domino effect.
Most of the issues that we have are with fruit decrease in production
from last year as -- well, January of last year, the freeze. And so what
we also have is now we have people that are out of work. We're
looking at people being out of work probably not until maybe end of
March, April when the packing houses start up again, if there is fruit
Page 19
January 11,2011
to go into the packing houses.
So this is a domino effect, not only affecting the growers, but it
affects the field workers, it affects the truck drivers, it affects the
packing houses. It's just a domino effect on the whole situation.
Good news is it wasn't quite as bad as it was last year. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Thank you very much for your
report.
Questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Robert, if I may? Might
light is on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is very disconcerting. Not
just this year, but it seems like there's a pattern that's been picking up
steam as we go forward. I know originally many years ago parks
citrus used to be grown all the way up to the Florida/Georgia line.
And then they started experiencing freezes and then that line for
growing citrus was moved farther and farther south over the years.
I don't know if this is an ongoing trend that's going to continue,
but agriculture is a base for the community. It seems to be a weak
argument anymore. I'm beginning to question the validity of -- I don't
know how these people can exist, other than the fact that the few times
that they really get a crop out it must be worth an absolute fortune to
be able to offset the losses they suffer year after year.
At some point in time we're going to have to look at this
rationally to be able to figure out where we stand as a community as
far as agriculture as an economic engine.
What I'd like to talk to you off-line is coming to the Regional
Planning Council, making your presentation, and maybe we can get
the university to sponsor a study to be able to come up with some sort
of cause and effect that's been taking place over the years so that we as
a community can be prepared what's (sic) going to be happening in the
Page 20
January 11,2011
future.
Whenever we go into these declines of the agriculture due to
diseases or most likely freezes, we have a profound effect upon the
community that's never ending. And Immokalee being dependent
upon low cost labor to be able to harvest these crops, people are out of
work so then we have to turn to the private sector non-profits to be
able to keep them going until the next crop comes in again. It seems
to be a never-ending repetitive situation.
Now, we're not going to come up with a solution here today, but
what I'd like to do is at least be able to get a better understanding of
where we are with this and where we're going to be in the future.
So when we get together, we'll talk about it and then I'll see if I
can get you in the Regional Planning Council and we get some
thought process going forward with our sister counties.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. There really is no need for
concern. Global warming is going to make the entire state perfectly
suited for growing citrus all the way up to Jacksonville.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, Al Gore.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. rfwe have another awful
winter like we had last year -- I think it went to historic levels as far as
sustained cold weather goes. Last year we lost quite a few people as
they had to move to other areas in order to find work.
Will -- do you project that that will happen again? And how is it
going to affect the communities in which they live? Do you have any
idea? I love the idea of Commissioner Coletta's idea of a study, by the
way. Because I guess I'm asking questions along that same line.
MR. HALMAN: Well, one of these things that we get from a lot
of the growers is that they're having to move their employees
elsewhere where there is work for them to do. Again, they -- the
weather, they can't control the weather, so they're trying to control
where their workers are. As in earlier this year, we have a lot of
Page 21
January 11,2011
farmworkers that are out of work, of course, and so they move to other
areas.
We've been seeing over the years a trend toward people trying to
use other countries to bring in fruits and vegetables. So that hasn't
been a good thing for this area. So actually the specialists at the
university are looking at this trend also.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
And my other question is to Leo. Leo, what's happening with
these lights?
MR. OCHS: Commissioner Hiller has reported some sensitivity
to the lighting and we're trying to balance her concerns against having
enough light to project this onto the TV screen so people can see it.
So Troy is trying to balance those two issues right now. That's why
we're trying to get the lighting adjusted.
I apologize. We'll get it right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Robert.
MR. HALMAN: Thank you.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION BY ANTON KARABA AND EVA
KARABOV A SEEKING BOARD APPROVAL TO RETAIN THE
10-FOOT FENCE THEY'VE BUILT ON THEIR PROPERTY-
MOTION TO BRING BACK W/STAFF REPORT AFTER
REVIEW OF ALL FACTS (PETITIONER GIVEN INFORMATION
REGARDING THE VARIANCE PROCESS) - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, 5D is the 10:00 a.m. time certain,
so we'll move to item 6A on your agenda, public petitions.
6A is a public petition request by Anton Karaba and Eva
Karabova seeking board approval to retain the 10- foot fence they built
on their property.
Page 22
January 11,2011
Please come forward to the podium, sir.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Chairman, we've also got someone who's
asked to speak to this, but they should be aware they're not going to be
able to speak until agenda item 11.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Has that been explained to them?
MR. MITCHELL: No, because I just got --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Our policy is that only one person must
speak under public petition. If your wife wishes to speak, she will
have to speak under another public input, which could be later today.
Is there any way you could combine the re --
MR. MITCHELL: No, Commissioner, it was another person
altogether.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Another person.
MR. MITCHELL: A Mr. Kalua (phonetic) Harris.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The public petitions will allow only one
speaker.
Would you prefer the other person speak on your behalf or --
MR. KARABA: No, no, I'll --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want to do it?
MR. KARABA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, that will be fine.
You may go ahead.
MR. KARABA: Yeah, first I would like to say it's not 10 foot
high fence. By the code enforcement it's about eight feet high, which
IS --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Could you try to speak into that
microphone so that we can get you on record? Thank you.
MR. KARABA: What I said, it's not 10-foot high fence by the
code enforcement. It's about eight feet high, which is main problem.
It's like -- as we stated in request to speak under public petition, we are
asking for a variance to regulations for our project of wood fence.
And it's about six years ago we ask for permit to build this fence and
Page 23
January 11,2011
we tried to build it our best knowledge in the conditions we live and
where we live to protect our family and our property and privacy, so
we tried to build it strong.
Also, hurricane I think it was Wilma, in 2005, it withstood that.
It stay and didn't do any damage, so it's hurricane proof.
Looks like the main problem is it's not going down like copying
the property or the terrain down to the canal. So if I built a fence in
the canal there is might be two feet water, it's going to rot in a few
years, maybe. And the water was coming up to our property so we
had to deal with this problem.
So we're living in an area built by Habitat for Humanity of
Collier County.
When we asked the management of this Habitat for Humanity to
build our property right, that's mean fill the property with more dirt so
the water is separated or it's built kind of canal for the water going
away, we got an answer, no.
So then we spend a lot of money and hours of labor to fix this
and other problems for our safety and fighting crime in our place
where we live.
When we complain about the conditions from the beginning
where we live, our reward was hate and retaliation at any chance, and
nothing changed to better.
I would like to mention a few examples. When we built the
fence, we had to do it because next door neighbor, they got three big
dogs running around, sometimes on the streets, picking up dust under
our windows because we have very close houses. And if it's a nice
weather, we would like to enjoy the Florida weather, you know, open
the winds and fresh air.
So barking, mess, stink, anything from the dogs. So we had to
build something really good.
The other thing was stealing of our properties by neighbors
gangs. And a few times it was in the night, nights. Sometimes it was
Page 24
January 11,2011
when we been absent from our house. They make damages. When
we been away from our house. That was maybe during the day or
something. We don't know.
So I have copy of the letter, I can leave the letter here.
We have also damages to our house. Mostly doors, windows.
When we left for summer last year, that was in 2008. We put
hurricane shutters on the windows. Next day we had letter from
Habitat and code enforcement, we have to put it down on the fine.
Next day somebody broke a lot of house. Broke window,
damaged doors, and did lots of damages. We found out later. So that
was like game.
You know, we are trying to make some kind of normal living
conditions where we live. So we notified first the Habitat for
Humanity management, do some kind of rules because they can do it.
And if they do it, the people will listen, I think.
And then they said call police. Okay, we call police. And they
didn't help us. We call code enforcement, animal control. Sometimes
they did something if the animals are running from (sic) the streets and
doing this really unpleasant and health problem also. I don't want to
name it, but everybody knows, I think.
So when we had these problems and called police, nobody was
found guilty. And we were not compensated for our damages.
Big concern is also loud dirty music and other noises. You
know, picking up dust, smells. I don't know, sometimes it's like
somebody's burning tires or something. So if you open the windows,
you get it in, you cannot get it out. So it's also kind of -- and
chemicals. I don't know, somebody spraying something.
So it's noisy. Is like loud trucks and blowing horns. And noisy.
It's late or early in the morning, parties and this bad behaviors. They
are not kind of regulated in the our place. Nobody was stopped to do
these activities or fined. Police or -- I don't know if it's code
enforcement. Because they said it's code enforcement problems,
Page 25
January 11,2011
police problem, whatever. But nobody measure anything, nobody fix
this problem, nobody was fined. So the people do these activities
ongoing basis.
I have one example also about these problems here. I don't want
to read it because I don't know if I can say name or number of the
house and this information. So I'll just leave this letter here so you can
look at it.
So we mostly can say we that separate our property from the
canal because of the water. Especially over the summer, the water
stays for long time. If anything if can -- like mosquitoes, snakes and
anything, it's a health hazard.
So we would like to ask the Commission to approve our project.
And if there is any unpleasant like fees or payments or any kind of
threats (phonetic) or I don't know how to call it, you would like to,
you know, abate it.
And what I can say, it's really bad economic times, so we
sacrificing a lot. And this is not any pleasant thing to deal with, the
stinks. In the past and these present days.
All I can say, that the fence is built strong and was fixed and
painted. You know, we trying to make our property nice, about two
years ago. So -- I think we trying to do the place safe also for the
neighbors.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Your time has expired.
I think we get the gist of your concern. So that you understand
how these proceedings take place, it is not normal for us to solve these
problems today. This is a public petition to see ifthere's sufficient
support on the board to bring this issue back for a full hearing where
we would have the staff investigate and provide information to us.
I would like to suggest, though there are two commissioners who
would like to make comments. But I would like to suggest that the
two commissioners consider the possibility of us providing guidance
to the staff to work with you about solving some of those problems.
Page 26
January 11,2011
And then if necessary, if the staff believes it's appropriate to do so, to
bring it back for a full hearing.
But the two, the now three commissioners would like to speak.
We'll start with Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, thank you, I do want to
speak.
I did take the time to pull up their permit on this, the 2005 permit.
And according to our staff, not only do we have a height issue, but the
posts were not four-by-four. And you applied for a six-foot wooden
fence. I asked staff for some more information, and they provided
pictures. Even if this was a public petition, I would really question
whether I would approve the construction of this fence. Not because
of the height so much as it's the way it was constructed. I don't think it
belongs in any neighborhood.
So I can't support bringing this back unless -- you always have
the right to apply for a variance, and I will listen to it.
MR. KARABA: I understand.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It didn't need a comment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a time to talk, okay. All right?
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: My button was on because I thought
that's what he was doing was asking for a variance. And I was going
to ask him is that what he's here for, or ask staff, is that what he's here
for is a variance?
MR. KARABA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So then you would need to
bring that back in order to have a variance considered.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Since it is a variance that you're
looking for, there is a process in place for addressing variances. And I
think that the board as a matter of policy should not be using the
public petition process where another form of established -- another
Page 27
January 11,2011
means of redress has legally been established for the public to avail
themself in a situation like yours. It really isn't fair when everyone
else in the public is applying for variances, going through that avenue,
and you are circumventing that process and coming to the board
through the public petition process to avoid those types of hearings.
So my suggestion is that you apply for a variance through the
established legal process for that particular issue.
MR. KARABA: I don't understand. I don't know what you're
talking.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What I would recommend --
MR. KARABA: I don't know the rules or whatever.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. And that's what we have
staff for. And I think the director of that division, Mr. Casalanguida,
can explain how to apply for it.
Has no one told you that you can apply for a variance through a
variance process?
MR. KARABA: No, no, I talk to building department or zoning
department. Nobody gave me straight answer. Only somebody said
you go and do the petition for the -- to the Commissioners. That's
what they told me if.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mr. Casalanguida, did your
division not explain to him?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I believe that we did. For the record,
Nick Casalanguida.
And if there's clarification, we'll gladly sit with the gentleman
and walk him through it. But I think we clearly explained there is a
variance process and application fee. And I think both code explained
that and our staff did. And I'm happy to walk him through it very
clearly and detailed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
That being said, I am very concerned what I'm hearing about
your neighborhood. Is yours a Habitat neighborhood?
Page 28
January 11,2011
MR. KARABA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And you have gangs?
MR. KARABA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And you have dogs roaming the
street freely?
MR. KARABA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And you have drainage issues?
MR. KARABA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think that's very disconcerting. I
think that's an issue that has to be very carefully looked into. This is
the first I've heard of something like that.
The police were not helpful to you with respect to the gangs that
vandalized your property?
MR. KARABA: To our property, not at all. They like throw out
some people, you know, whole families because somebody was in the
gang. So they throw whole family out of the house. So they lost the
house. I think that was last time about five houses.
It is sad. It is sad. But they did it this way. And I don't know any
other, you know, steps to take, you know, protect people in our
community. Just they did it this way.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: 1 think this is a matter that the
sheriff has to be made aware of. And I would like to know what is
going on with respect to gangs in those and in any other type of
community. Because obviously it's disconcerting. You obviously
work very hard to try to buy a house for you and your family.
MR. KARABA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And you should be properly
protected. You shouldn't feel threatened in any way in your home.
And to hear that you have to put hurricane shutters up to protect your
family just is incomprehensible.
MR. KARABA: You know, also, the height of the fence is a
question of also the privacy and security. Because really, the property
Page 29
January 11,2011
is not finished properly. There is no canal, because the canal is like
this and going up to our house. So it's not really --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And actually that's a second issue.
The fence should not be the reason -- I mean, you should not have to
build a fence to protect yourself against water damage if there's
improper drainage with respect to that property.
Mr. Casalanguida? At the same time, could you help him with
his drainage concerns? Obviously if you've got a canal that's not
being adequately maintained and you don't have sufficient drainage
and they're being threatened by potential flooding, that's another very
serious public safety issue that needs to be looked into, beyond the
issue of the fence.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, I will sit down with
the applicant, the petitioner, and go through in detail what his
concerns are and we'll see where we can help him.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The next issue you brought up was
the issues of these dogs. And you said that you contacted Animal
Control and they did nothing to help you with that?
MR. KARABA: I cannot say nothing. But the problem was
solved after they moved out.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, so the individuals moved out
of the community --
MR. KARABA: They moved out --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm glad to hear that.
MR. KARABA: You know, after two, three years of bothering
for I don't know how many years.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Was Animal Control-- when you
called Animal Control before these people moved out, were they
responsive? Did they help you with seeing that the dogs --
MR. KARABA: Sometimes--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- were contained?
MR. KARABA: Yeah, when the animals were out of the cage or
Page 30
January 11,2011
something, running on the streets, yes. But if they were inside, you
know, and they've been barking and this stuff, there was no help. That
was ongoing problem.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But that isn't an issue any longer.
MR. KARABA: Not now with the neighbor.
But the dogs are running on the streets, barking --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we don't want to spend the
afternoon --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I don't, but --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- talking about this.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- this is -- these are important
issues. I mean, this gentleman has a home that obviously, you know,
has been at risk.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, that to me is solved simply by
asking staff to take a look at it and come back and report to us about
what action has --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I think we need to --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- been done.
So we don't have any support so far for bringing this back for a
full hearing. I think there is support for getting the staff to talk with
you and work through this process and find out what is a current
concern and what is a past concern. And that would include
coordinating with the sheriffs agency.
But Mr. Casalanguida can do that. He has said he is going to do
that. And as far as I'm concerned, that is the solution.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, might I suggest to Nick also,
right before your meeting with them, get a sheriffs report from that
community. It's -- I had one yesterday and it went missing. But it's a
very interesting report. And not only from organized crime, but also
other crimes. And then you'll see why he's asking for this. Okay?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And then you'll give us a report, right?
Page 3 1
January 11,2011
MR. CASALANGUIDA: If that's the direction of the board.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, we would like to have a report as
to how this turns out.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Very good.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, would you like that report back to
the board in this format, or would you like a memorandum?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: A memorandum will do it as far as I'm
concerned.
I don't know, any other -- do other Commissioners disagree?
You want a public hearing on this?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think we should have a public
hearing. I mean, we're talking about very serious questions of public
safety. And I think we want this fully vetted so we're assured that
residents in communities like Habitat and other communities that
might be similar are, you know, not subject to these type of public
risks.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then that has to be a motion for a formal
public hearing, okay? If we want to do that, I can consider that a
motion, if you wish.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Please do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
MR. KARABA: I can do the steps if somebody tell me what to
do, but I don't know.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Don't worry, we're going to take care of
this. I'll summarize this in just a second.
Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Hiller, a seconded by
Commissioner Fiala to bring this back for a public hearing to hear a
report from staff, after consultation with you and an inspection of the
site itself and a review of the police reports and coordination with the
sheriffs agency, and all the agencies within our purview that are in
any way concerned with these issues. And bring that report back to us
Page 32
January 11,2011
in a public hearing and we will discuss it then.
So Commissioner Coletta, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETT A: Yes, just one comment. If for
some reason this starts through the process and the petitioner finds that
he gets the answers he needs, he understands that he can end the
process at that point and withdraw coming forward before the
Commission. So in other words, staff will make every effort to
resolve this with you. If they can't resolve it, then you come before
us. If they do resolve it, then we go on with our lives.
MR. KARABA: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Everybody clear?
MR.OCHS: No, sir, I'm not. I thought we had a decision that
staff was going to bring back a report on the concerns of this
gentleman. If nothing more than bring it back and say that we've
addressed his concerns and he seems to be satisfied, we'll still --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think Commissioner Hiller's intent was
to have it brought back and have a full public hearing on it. And then
I suspect Commissioner Fiala's intent and seconded was the same. So
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: May I?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, Commissioner Hiller, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to the clarify something
for the benefit of the petitioner.
Your petition for a variance will go through the variance process.
And Mr. Casalanguida will assist you in that regard. What we are
going to bring back to the board, after Mr. Casalanguida organizes the
investigation and compiles the conclusions of his investigation in a
report, is essentially for the purposes of discussing all these issues that
you have brought before the board today unrelated to your fence. You
have a fence issue which is whether or not the fence is built according
to code as permitted, and then separately you have these other issues.
Page 33
January 11,2011
While I understand you built the fence because you had these
problems, that is separate and apart from what you are legally
permitted to do with respect to fencing.
And Mr. Casalanguida will help you. And he will repeat
everything that we discussed today. If you have any questions, he'll
assist you in that regard.
MR. KARABA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all in favor of the motion, please
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I hear the motion?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I think the motion is clear. It's
clear that we bring it back for public hearing with a full report by staff
on the whole --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nick, do you understand the
motion?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I believe I do. You want a formal
staff presentation that details each one of the topics discussed and tells
you where that community stands, where he stands and what action
the board could take if any on each of those items.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nick, we might need a little bit on
that too, because I have some other information you might need to do.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Very good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 34
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes 4-1, with
Commissioner Henning dissenting.
Thank you very much and good luck to you.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, you have a 10:00 a.m. time certain.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MR. OCHS: Would you like to go to that, sir?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. We're ready.
Item #5D
PRESENTATION OF THE BLUE RIBBON PANEL REPORT
REGARDING THE PREHOSPITAL EMERGENCY MEDICAL
TREATMENT AND TRANSPORT (PEMTT) SYSTEM - MOTION
TO ACCEPT REPORT AND HAVE STAFF ANALYZE REPORT
AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD -
FAILED; MOTION TO ACCEPT REPORT AND BRING BACK
FOR DISCUSSION AT FUTURE WORKSHOP WITH ALL
PARTIES INVOLVED AND CHAIRMAN TO WRITE LETTER
OF THANKS TO THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE -
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: That's Item 5D on your agenda. It's a presentation
of the Blue Ribbon Panel Report regarding pre-hospital emergency
medical treatment and transport systems.
MR. MOEBIUS: Good morning, Commissioners. My cohorts
are sitting down. I'm Jeff Moebius, and I chaired the Blue Ribbon
Panel.
Behind me is Ed Morton; he was the Vice chair. Mike Reagan,
CEO of the Chamber, he was very instrumental in helping us get
through this. In fact, we really were very appreciative of the
Page 35
January 11,2011
Chambers' support on this.
What we're going to go through today is the recommendations
that we put forth in our report to you. Ask any questions, obviously, as
we go through it.
Preface: There are approximately 1,300 public safety
professionals -- the Sheriffs Department, fire rescue, emergency
service officers -- on call to risk their lives to help protect and serve us
here in this community. In fact, yesterday we saw with the City of
Naples with the fire down there with the police and the firemen who
were very supportive in that incident there. And these men and
women are -- just go beyond the call of duty.
Collier County ranks first in Florida for life expectancy and
fourth in the U.S. What an achievement for this county. We live in
one of the safest and healthiest communities in the U.S., thanks to
these men and women and others.
I'd like to acknowledge the Board of County Commissioners for
their support in this, the sheriffs office, fire and EMS leaders as they
helped us through this whole project over the past year; hospitals, both
NCH and Physicians Regional Hospital, and the emergency
department medical leaders who sat with us and listened to us and
gave their comments through this.
We also want to thank FGCU with professors that -- who looked
at the data report that we provided for that, overseen it, did the
analysis, et cetera.
I'd also like to thank on the data Deb Chester from the Sheriffs
Department. She was exemplary on being able to put together the
maps and stuff that was in the report.
I again, want to thank our Blue Ribbon Panel members who
worked with me through this process.
Our recommendations: The first recommendation is the Board of
County Commissioners should designate and delegate an authority
and responsibility for all PEMTT services to the public safety
Page 36
January 11,2011
authority. PEMTT is Public Emergency Medical Treatment and
Transport.
Reappointment the medical director to report to the designated
PSA. The medical director will work closely with the leaders of the
three hospital emergency departments. Those three hospitals are
NCH, Physicians Regional and Lee Memorial, since they handle our
trauma services here in Collier County.
Establish a PEMTT council to report to the designated PSA.
That council should be chaired by a hospital administrator to
collaborate with the medical director and the directors of the
emergency departments on all PEMTT training, QA/QI credentialing
and testing.
We would look -- we support the outsourcing of all test design,
administration, evaluation, dispute resolution to professionals at a
local college or university to ensure independence and objectivity.
The PEMTT council could support the continuous coordination,
and where possible integration of county and City of Naples 9-1-1
dispatch centers, including coordination of AED programs.
BCC should set general policy. The PSA should implement and
manage/coordinate the system. The designated PSA should propose
administrative procedures and policy to the BCC after thorough
vetting of such council.
The BCC should evaluate the clinical and financial efficacy of all
proposed procedures and policy.
With the guidance from the PC -- PEMTT council, the
designated PSA should develop a five-year strategic plan which
includes a three-year audit provision.
We should establish a two-tiered countywide PEMTT model.
Tier one is timely delivery of basic life support, BLS, services, and
tier two is to timely delivery of advanced life support, ALS, services.
Should mandate all agencies providing ALS services; also
provide transportation.
Page 37
January 11,2011
Establish a mandatory automated external defibrillator, that's
AED, placement and training program for all staff at appropriate
public locations.
Encourage the discussion of functional consolidation of fire
service districts in Collier County.
Use the Productivity Committee to study all costs and services.
We recommend encouraging discussion of a pilot program for
functional integration of county EMS into the fire service districts.
This includes using position control for certain positions, such as
paramedics, EMT's, et cetera. And the use of smaller ambulances. I'd
like to say Ford 350's and 450's, but Toyota also has a vehicle,
according to Ed Morton.
Encourage all PEMTT agencies within fire services to develop
common response protocols and elimination of district boundaries.
Encourage all PEMTT agencies and fire to designate one leader
to be the voice for all PEMTT matters.
And mandate all PEMTT vehicles to be equipped with the same
equipment compatible with hospital emergency departments.
That concludes the recommendations.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MOEBIUS: Questions?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Questions?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For Mr. Klatzkow.
I don't think the word was properly stated, delegating the board's
authority. But legally creating a public safety authority or a medical
authority, have you done any research on that?
MR. KLATZKOW: We've done a little bit of research on this.
The issue's going to be really for the board to decide in what
form to do this. I mean, one potential form is going to Tallahassee for
a special act to create a countywide entity that will do this. Another
form would be to get with the municipalities and enter into local
Page 38
January 11,2011
agreements. There are a number of ways to do this.
At this point in time I would need direction from the board which
way you'd want to go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we create a medical
authority?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't know what medical authority means.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Or public service
authority -- public safety authority.
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't know what that means.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I don't either.
MR. KLATZKOW: I mean, if you created a special district, yes,
you could do it that way. Again, you're going through Tallahassee.
Or -- and there are a lot of vehicles to do it. But, you know, simply
creating another advisory board, they would ultimately report to you.
And I suppose the advisory board could manage some of it with your
approval.
But again, I'm going to need direction from you as to what form
you want this authority to take.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, knowing that the public--
and this is to the board members -- through a straw ballot wants to
consolidate the fire district and the board's -- a majority of the board's
wishes to bring in EMS into that consolidation, I don't want to do
anything to deter the efforts that are ongoing now to make that
happen.
But I do see the need for definitely some improvements in
communications on every level.
But I do want to say, I want to thank the expertise that we have in
our leadership, and I think they did a very good job.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have one speaker. Do the
Commissioners want to hold their opinions till after the other speaker
speak?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm willing to wait.
Page 39
January 11,2011
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have no problem waiting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then who is the speaker?
MR. MITCHELL: Robert Metzger.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. METZGER: Good morning, Commission. For the record,
I'm Robert Metzger, I'm the President of the Collier County Fire
Chiefs Association, and I am very pleased to be here today to support
the work and the recommendations done by this fine team of three
public servants, basically.
These leaders here have provided us with a document that we and
my association believe can be a significant template for you to move
forward with the improvement of emergency medical services in
Collier County. And I'd like to thank them for all their hard work.
The primary mission of the emergency services is saving of lives
and the preservation of property. The delivery of emergency medical
services should be a seamless system from the moment that 9-1-1 is
called, pre-hospital care is initiated, and transport of the patient takes
place and their discharge ultimately from the hospital.
We support the utilization of all trained personnel in the delivery
of pre-hospital medical care, including paramedics assigned to fire
response units and EMS transport vehicles.
All trained people should be able to utilize their skills to the
maximum benefit of the patient, whether assigned EMS vehicles, fire
apparatus or other public safety units. This approach makes both
economic and practical sense.
The Fire Chiefs Association supports efforts that will result in
improvement to the overall quality of emergency medical care to the
visitors and residents of Collier County, and we further support the
continuous evolution and evaluation of pre-hospital emergency
medical care to identify those practical best practices that will have the
greatest impact on a positive outcome for the patient.
Page 40
January 11,2011
The Chiefs Association supports the process for change and the
recommendations contained within the Blue Ribbon Panel report as a
vehicle for improving the efficient delivery of pre-hospital medical
care in Collier County.
Weare encouraged by the creation of a fair oversight group. We
believe the system must have representation, communication and input
from all levels of care.
But here's the crux of it, folks: We believe that this report
represents a significant opportunity for system improvement, the likes
of which will not be seen again, certainly at any time in our near
future. This opportunity must not be squandered.
We recommend that the Board schedule a public workshop to
explore the various ways to implement these recommendations to give
them their due consideration.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much, Chief Metzger.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I agree with what Chief Metzger
says. I think he's absolutely right. I think your Blue Ribbon
committee has done an excellent job, particularly in making an effort
to compile statistics. We've never really had the numbers that we need
to determine whether the system is or is not working. Numbers are
still missing; specifically the numbers that are most important to
determining whether or not this system is working, and that is how
many lives are being saved in cardiac situations. We don't have those
numbers. We need those numbers.
MR. METZGER: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Otherwise, we don't know if the
system is broken or not.
Unlike the private sector, when it comes to a question of
emergency services, we're looking at building to Christmas Eve as
opposed to just a regular church service day, if you will. I mean, we
Page 41
January 11,2011
absolutely have to work to save lives 100 percent. That is the goal.
Not 95 percent. We can't have a threshold where we say okay, five
percent of the population is allowed to die, we don't have to have
standards that high. That's unacceptable. Every single life must be
saved. That's our standard, okay. And whatever it takes to make that
happen is essential.
I think what you have here are ideas. I don't think that the board
today can accept what you're recommending because of what Mr.
Klatzkow raised. We don't know what type of a committee would be
the right form of a committee, what type of authority would they have.
You know, does it need to be a committee that's separate and apart
from the board where the board no longer has responsibility over
public safety, and that would be determined by Tallahassee, or
whether it's a committee that administers the ministerial tasks and the
Board of County Commissioners retains public policy
decision-making authority, which are the discretionary decisions.
To that end I think we should make a motion today to accept the
report, not what your recommendations are within the report. And
secondly, to have workshops to address the recommendations that you
have made. And I'm not sure one workshop is enough. Because you
have a lot of issues that need to be separately discussed. For example,
the issue of an AED program within Collier County which many cities
in Florida have already adopted -- I've actually seen the ordinances
that the communities have adopted and which are very effective -- can
be done in a separate workshop and can be implemented, irrespective
of all the other debates. For example, like consolidation or whether it's
a fire-based EMS system or a separate -- you know, you have separate
fire and separate EMS. So that's what I would suggest.
And then lastly, I think it's essential that all the players -- fire,
EMS, the cities, the county -- all come together in a separate forum to
address these issues. And I feel it's essential that you have someone
who is neutral who is essentially the broker or mediator on these -- in
Page 42
January 11,2011
these discussions. And I'm not sure who would be best to do that. But
I think that is essential. Because unless you have consensus among all
the affected parties, you will not be able to achieve your objective.
I don't think that doing that would interfere with the question of
consolidation. And I'm not sure that everyone in the community
wants consolidation. I think people want consolidation only if it's
going to achieve a higher level of service at a lesser cost. Because that
was the terminology in the straw ballot. And I think it was a very
narrowly drafted question. So it doesn't really give us a gauge of what
people want, only that they want the best under all circumstances,
which is what they're entitled to.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Excepting taking a look at the
report on face value, I think it's a wonderful start. And, you know,
how you pull all the elements together, I wouldn't expect you to be
able to figure that out.
The suggestion made for a workshop, keeping all parameters
open, all opportunities open, is the very best idea that I've heard so far.
Bringing everybody into it. Are we going to get 100 percent buy-in
from everybody? Absolutely not. But you've got to start someplace.
I see this as a positive move towards functional consolidation and
eventually consolidation.
The group that's been meeting on the sidelines regarding
consolidation does not feel threatened in any way by this particular
effort. They endorse it as a positive step to start bringing all the
entities together, not only to offer a more cohesive service that will be
a benefit to everyone in Collier County, but it would most likely save
millions of dollars in the long run. But we won't know that till we
have the workshop and we can start to explore how (sic) the structure
this would follow.
What I'd like to do is if the motion -- has the motion been made
for a workshop?
Page 43
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, because we're still in
discussion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if the time does come for
a motion for a workshop, I would strongly recommend that we base it
upon this report and allow staff and the other entities out there that
would be involved to play into it with other scenarios that would fit
into it so that we have a complete menu of options to pick from.
But one things that we got to make sure that happens, I know that
you were looking forward to disbanding the Blue Ribbon committee.
I'm sorry, sir, but there's too many heads on this snake to kill it in one
swipe. You're going to have to be involved in that workshop in some
form or fashion to be able to share your ideas with us in more detail as
we go forward and ask questions and be part of that thought process
that brings us to a final result.
I see it's a very positive thing and I would give this one ofthe
priorities for our government to move into.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
First of all, let me tell you that I've been around the community
recently since I've gotten your report, talking to people. I spent a few
hours with the Marco Island Fire and EMS group who, by the way,
work beautifully together. And they're a fine example, in case you
want to use them as the group to show an example of how it can run
with fire and EMS. Without even consolidation, you've got a fine
example right there. And of course I offered that to you before, but I
wanted to just tell you again.
I think there -- I'm glad you kept the politics out of this report.
And I think we have to continue that effort to keep politics out of the
decisions that we move forward with.
I love the idea from Commissioner Hiller about agreeing with
neutral and also about consolidation isn't mandatory. It can work
without consolidation if that's how they want to come up with.
Page 44
January 11,2011
And I love the idea of Commissioner Coletta who said don't
disband yet because we have some more things that we have to
discuss, like, for instance, how did these people get chosen, are they
sunshine, are they not sunshine, and what are their duties and so forth.
I think that you've done so much work on this already. You have all
the background and knowledge, and you've done it so fairly that I
would like to have you continue on a little bit.
And then of course also we do need to have a workshop, I agree
with that. And so those are my comments.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And okay, I'm going to take my turn
here. And we're going to do one other thing. We're going to adjust
your compensation for this.
MR. METZGER: I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we're going to double your salary.
And we will need to depend upon you in the future.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Without raising taxes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. And we can do that easily.
But I would like to point out something to my colleagues. We
have been studying this problem for 20 years, maybe longer. That's
just about as far back as my memory goes. If we launch into another
study of the study of the study, we will be doing this for another 20
years.
I disagree with the observation that you've just come up with
ideas. You've come up with solid recommendations based upon
information you have gleaned from people throughout the community,
all of the stakeholders, and my perception is that almost all of the
people, firemen, EMS people and others agree with your positions.
Studying it further is not going to achieve the goal except to delay
action and confuse the process.
I believe that the most effective way to proceed under these
circumstance is that we, the people who are responsible for
implementing these recommendations, should study them, come up
Page 45
January 11,2011
with ways to do that, and then present those in public hearing so they
can be debated, people can express their opinions, they can be
modified. But to do it in a series of workshops -- I have no problem
with a workshop, but to do it in a series of workshops where we can't
make decisions -- we can't do that, we can't take votes in a workshop
-- gets us nowhere toward solving this problem.
We can accept public input in a public hearing once we have
fleshed out the questions like what kind of structure are we talking
about, what are the legal parameters associated with that, how do we
create one of those, how do we select the people for it. Let's not
debate the fact that we're going to do it, let's just round out the
proposal and fill in the gaps and then present it publicly where it can
be examined and debated and changed.
So -- and I would also like, before we get too wrapped up in
discussion about this, to thank Jeff Moebius, Ed Morton and Mike
Reagan. And one person who always seems to stand out in all of these
discussions, Jim Bloom from the sheriffs agency.
So I think that there's been wonderful input, wonderful
participation by lots of people that the public doesn't even see here
today. And they don't know who they are. But it's been a great panel,
you've put together great people and you've done a really really good
job, in my opinion.
And I would urge that this board would task our staff to start
rounding out some of the issues, fleshing out the proposals, and then
come together with a set of recommendations that we then would
involve all of the stakeholders in and hopefully reach some decision as
how we proceed further, rather than just continually studying the
study of the study.
So with that, Commissioner Henning, it's your turn.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If the Blue Ribbon committee
can communicate through staff what the specific advisory council
authority's responsibilities and duties would be and what the board's
Page 46
January 11,2011
responsibilities -- well, that's already spelled out by law.
I agree, and let's not bring it back and -- what is the best vehicle
to implement. So I'll make that motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In my motion I would like to
amend to ask the chairman to write the Blue Ribbon Committee a
letter of thank you for their time and production, and accept the Blue
Ribbon Committee's report. It's not adoption, but accepting their
report.
Direct staff -- ask the Blue Ribbon Committee to provide more
information on what the authority/council/advisory board duties would
be. Staff to provide the appropriate vehicle, bring it back to the board
for consideration. Also ask Chairman to write a letter to the Blue
Ribbon Committee thanking them for their duties and report. And
within the motion, the last was to approve or accept the committee's
report.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And if I could just ask for clarification.
The committee probably doesn't have the representatives necessary to
decide for us what is the legal entity that would work for Collier
County government. If we could have the County Attorney work with
the committee to discuss those options and reach a consensus on what
is the best vehicle to accomplish that goal, would that be acceptable?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That was.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Understanding -- Jeff, did you
understand it was your legal team or somebody else's legal team?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, my understanding is I'll work with
Leo's staff and the committee and we'll bring back some
recommendations to the board, or alternative recommendations, I
suppose.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And work with the --
MR. KLA TZKOW: Yes, we'll work --
Page 47
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Blue Ribbon --
MR. KLATZKOW: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have a motion. The
clarification's okay?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-hum.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have a motion by --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Point of order.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just a moment.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, there's --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're not going to take a vote. I'mjust
announcing we've got a valid motion on the table.
Motion by Commissioner Henning to approve -- accept the report
as he has stated, and seconded by me.
Now, for discussion.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So as I understand, the motion is
only to accept the report but not the recommendations within the
report; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. What -- is there going to be
any further discussion as to, you know, what we're going to direct staff
to do and whether or not we're going to have a workshop, or is that no
longer an issue, we're going to accept the report and that's it and do
nothing more?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, we're going to -- we direct
staff to work with the Blue Ribbon committee to bring back some kind
of vehicle to create an advisory/council/authority, whoever the best
legal vehicle is to do this, to come up with protocol pre-hospital care.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: There are many, many more issues
in this report that go above and beyond the creation of this council.
There's a question of services. For example, they're recommending a
two-tier system, BLS, ALS. They go on to say that only agencies
Page 48
January 11,2011
providing ALS services will provide transport.
You know, you've got -- you know, talking about the functional
consolidation of fire districts in Collier County, you've got a lot of
issues in here that need to be elaborated on in a very big way. I mean,
these are recommendations for discussion, not recommendations per
se.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There is recommendations for
discussion. And the discussion would flesh out with the -- Mr.
Moebius' Blue Ribbon committee to staff of what that actually is
going to look at (sic). Set up parameters for, for example, advisory
board. What are your duties, goals and objectives. That's what I
enVISIOn.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But while -- before we start
wasting public tax dollars and having staff decide what, you know,
should or shouldn't work and then us reject it, wouldn't it make sense
for us to sit down with the Blue Ribbon Committee, let them tell us
what they recommend in terms of the details under these different
points of discussion, and then based on that have the board direct staff
to research those issues that we think are worthy of moving forward?
Because I think what we're doing is we're putting the cart before
the horse. I mean, I think there are a lot of issues in here and there's a
lot of education that's needed for the board to make a decision. And,
quite frankly, since we're dealing with the motion important function
of the Board of County Commissioners, which is public safety, I don't
think one three-hour workshop is enough to address how we can best
save a life. We're not talking about a workshop on, you know, the
spending of tourist development dollars for advertising, we're talking
about life and death.
And I quite frankly think that this needs to be publicly vetted in
discussion by the Commissioners. I think they need to be educated
about all the details underlying the elements of discussion to be able to
make an informed decision. There's tremendous liability at issue here.
Page 49
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, let me just ask, you just asked
a question, and I didn't understand. I thought he said that he wanted to
accept the report. You said without the recommendations, he said yes.
Is that what I heard?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, so you want to accept the
report but without the recommendations. And that's what you
seconded?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I did not understand it that way.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, see, I didn't either. So I was
just wondering.
Now, the second thing is, our -- say for instance the report was
accepted with or without the recommendations. There's nothing in
here that's mandatory anyway. You can take these recommendations
and pick up and choose, right, and move them around?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Because one of the things, it
says mandate all agencies providing ALS services to also provide
patient transport to hospitals.
Well, now, we're talking about Marco. Are they supposed to
transport in a fire vehicle to the hospital or do they have EMS? You
know, some of these things are not very clear. I'm sure that they will
be fleshed out. But I just thought that -- we want to make sure of what
we're actually voting on.
Is there anything mandatory here?
MR. MOEBIUS: No. I mean, I believe Commissioner
Henning's recommendation is very valid. Each of these
recommendations, it's a pathway. And you can't do all of these things
at once.
You know, the AED program, like Commissioner Hiller says, is
Page 50
January 11,2011
something we could jump into very quickly and move without even all
these other recommendations. So there's things in here that you can
do very quickly. You could have somebody start looking at the
vehicles. You could have, you know, a team looking at the supply
piece of coordinating pre-hospital care with the emergency rooms.
There's a lot of things in here that could be done very quickly that are
separate from an authority, per se.
So there's a lot of things that can be going on. And we can
multitask, what a novel idea, and move through some of this stuff.
The key thing is to, just like Commissioner Coyle has said, is
we've been messing around with this thing for 20 years in this
community. I've talked with the people that were part of those task
forces previously. And a lot of the things we said here has been said
before.
This community has an opportunity at this point in time to move
forward. And I think if we don't start moving forward on this, we're
going to lose it just like Chief Metzger said. We have the opportunity,
let's seize it and movement forward.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was my next comment. We're
not going to be studying it further, we're going to be moving forward
with it. And I wanted to make that point as well. It was mentioned
that we shouldn't have any further study. I agree with that, we want to
move forward with this.
I spoke this past week with EMS, with fire, with different areas
around the county, not just Marco, and everybody agrees that the
report is fair, by the way. And I think that's a really good acclamation,
that the report is fair and they agree with it.
And I think there are some parts that are better than others and
we can work on those and let the other ones sit for a while. But I think
we definitely need a workshop to know which ones we're going to do
and what's most important to move forward with.
And you talked about an example, and I still think Marco Island
Page 51
January 11,2011
would be the best example to see how it can be done and work
beautifully.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can I jump in for a second and see in
can't clarify something here.
By accepting the report and asking the staff to study the detail of
the report for the purpose of coming up with concrete
recommendations, we are asking to move forward with this and to
present those recommendations in a public hearing, and to receive
input during the public hearing before we make any decisions.
My understanding of Commissioner Henning's motion was to
accept this report, but not to approve all of the recommendations as
they currently stand. Is that correct, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Nods head affirmatively.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then the intent of the motion as I
believe it and as I seconded it was to allow this study with its
recommendations to go to the staff and to instruct the staff to analyze
them and come up with specific proposals about how to implement
these recommendations or perhaps even recommendation that they not
be implemented, and that that be presented in a public hearing so it
gets a full airing, everybody gets to take a shot at it, and that way we
get moving along.
So that's -- that was the intent of my second. I believe that was
the intent of Commissioner Henning's motion. And a lot of these
things are things that are well known to all of us, and they have been
well known to us for at least a year.
There is a two-tier system now, BLS and ALS. This is not a new
concept. It is not a new concept, in my belief, even among the
firefighters, the firefighter paramedics, that you separate transport
from ALS care. Who's going to go in that ambulance if you don't have
a paramedic? You know, you don't do that. That is a fundamental
conclusion of the desire to provide the best care for people who are in
emergency situations.
Page 52
January 11,2011
So these are not new controversial unanticipated conclusions
with respect to administration of emergency medical care. So there's
no need to debate those. We just have to debate how we implement
them more efficiently, and we do that in coordination with all the
people who are stakeholders.
And so that's what I would -- that's what I seconded, that's what I
would intend to try to accomplish.
And with that, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
Everybody seems to be on the same page. But in this case, I kind
of agree with Georgia, we got a little bit of a problem in the fact that
we got a wonderful plan here, we're not endorsing up front. I agree
with Commissioner Henning, you can't endorse something when it
doesn't have the facts and figures and the buy-in of the community.
It's a big element. Absolutely correct.
The problem I'm having is whether this should be an item that
our staff works on and brings back to us to be able to discuss with the
community. I think the idea of a workshop is more valid. Because
this thing should be done in an open forum. It's not Collier County
government, it's Collier County in its entirety that we need to involve
in this.
And so I'd like to see if the motion maker would reconsider the
motion to make that a workshop so that we can start to go over the
devil in the details.
Because at the end of the day if we come up with a plan, it's
going to be slanted slightly towards the county's benefit and what
they've been doing. No offense, but all government entities out there
seem to have the same objectives to hold on to what they got.
It has to be something that's in whole. It has to bring everybody
into the mix. So I'd be more inclined to go with a workshop than to
have staff just bring it back.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If I could make a point here. Earlier we
Page 53
January 11,2011
asked the County Attorney how was he going to put up -- how would
we put together this structure. County attorney said I don't know, we
haven't taken a look at it. There probably are several ways of doing it.
Now, let's suppose this is a workshop and we haven't instructed
staff to review this and come back with recommendations. We're
going to sit in a workshop for hours saying well, how are you going to
do this? And the staff is going to say, well, I don't know. You haven't
asked me to apprise you with any recommendations.
So the very least you need to do is to instruct the staff to come
back to the board with recommendations about how you could
possibly do that. You can hone these recommendations any way you
want to. But for goodness sakes, let's get started with doing something
rather than studying it and going through a series of -- a single
workshop doesn't cause me any problems at all. But if the objective is
just to continue studying and studying and studying, what I would like
to see is the staff come back with recommendations about how we do
this. And we do all of these, or if we do all of them. And then if you
want to have a workshop, I'm fine with that. But let's find out from
the staff where --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can I make a suggestion how
we can marry the two together?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why -- I agree with you, to just
have staff sit down with a blank agenda, which is the one we got in
front of you, it's totally wrong, it'll never work. You're absolutely
correct, Commissioner Coyle.
What we need to do is instruct staff to do the meetings with the
different entities out there and come back with some sort of format,
like a Chinese menu, where we got everybody playing into it. That
would work, to be able to get to where we need to be.
Or else what's going to happen, it's going to be another county
idea, we're going to get the resistance from the other end, and this
Page 54
January 11,2011
thing will end up going up on the shelf and it will never be
implemented. It's going to take a buy-in of a number of people to
make it happen.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Most of the people have already bought
in to most of these recommendations. It's not like you're starting with
a blank slate.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Absolutely correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just let us begin the process of getting
staff input about how we could implement these, and then let us
schedule a workshop and present them to all of the stakeholders and
see what they've got to say about them. And then we hone those and
then we bring it back to the board for a final public hearing and a vote.
But to start out without staff recommendations on these issues is
just going to lead us into a series of meaningless discussions.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner, who do you mean
by staff?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I mean County Attorney to talk about the
organizational structure and what is legally required and/or acceptable.
I mean the EMS people with respect to how the two-tiered system will
work and who will -- how it will be integrated with the fire districts.
The fire district representatives, we would talk with them, of course.
The county always -- or should always do that. The Blue Ribbon
Committee will still be on board, they will be consultants. They've
already talked with all these people about this.
So I don't see the problem here. But if you want to just continue
studying it, then by all means, let's set up a workshop next week, staff
will come in, we'll ask them the same questions we're asking today
and we'll get the same answers we're getting today, and we will have
wasted the time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You'd waste maybe two weeks.
I don't know if two weeks is proper time to be able to get staff and the
different independent fire districts together to start going over the
Page 55
January 11,2011
details. Staff can have their opinions, they can have theirs, but at some
point in time we're going to have to bring everybody into the mix.
And I just think it makes a lot more sense to do it with a workshop up
front. Staff involved, the fire departments involved, the EMS
involved, the Sheriffs Department involved, whoever. Whoever the
players are, they come into it in some form or fashion.
I just -- I got a fear that this is going to look like it's just nothing
more than a county idea that from beginning to end and we're going to
have one of these rejections out there where they're not going to buy
into it.
So I'm going to support basically what we're talking, with the
form of a workshop for the first one, to be followed by a meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, I've got to clarify one thing then.
You're not going to ask staff to reach any conclusions or develop any
recommendations whatsoever?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: On the contrary. I'm going to
ask staff to -- I would ask staff to work with the other entities out there
to come up with different options that are available. It could be staffs
option for one thing and the fire departments, North Naples for
another, maybe Golden Gate for another. Everybody come into it. So
when it gets before us, at least this idea has been vetted to the point we
got some working format to go with. At the very most we're going to
have one more month into it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: May I?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, forever.
Okay, are you finished?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We're talking about life and death.
This is a very serious matter. And I think this needs full analysis and
full public vetting.
I agree with Commissioner Coletta, we need to be presented with
Page 56
January 11,2011
all possible options on all the issues that have been brought out in this
report. We have 9-1-1 issues, we have BLS/ ALS issues, we have
AED issues, we have transport issues, we have consolidation issues,
and we have authority issues. We have authority with respect to
discretionary decision-making, public policy, we have authority (sic)
with respect to administerial decision-making and execution.
Your recommendation, for example, establish a two-tier wide
model for ALS/BLS, does that mean we're going to have firefighters
who are ALS and BLS? Does that mean we're going to have certain
firefighters who are only BLS and certain who are only ALS? Are we
going to have firefighters that are even ALS or BLS, or is it going to
be only EMS?
I mean, there are so many options, there are so many variations
that could be adopted. And what we need are all options presented.
And what I would hope is that the Blue Ribbon Committee speak
with all the various parties, come up with all the options under all of
these categories for us to discuss in a workshop and see which leads us
to what our legal obligation is, and that is to save lives.
We have to live up to the standard of care provided by law. And
whatever means we have to employ to get to that is the means we
legally have to adopt. So we need to see all the options. And having
staff come back to us with one recommendation and us voting 3-2 that
that's the one to go with, without vetting all the other options and then
lives are lost because of it? No way.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That of course wasn't the proposal.
Nobody's discussed it that way. But nevertheless, you can portray it
any way you like.
If there is a majority of this board who wishes to have a
workshop, you have a chance to vote on it. Because Commissioner
Henning has a motion to accept the report and to ask staff to analyze it
and provide recommendations. It's been seconded.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
Page 57
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, it fails, with Commissioner
Coletta, Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Hiller dissenting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to do the same thing
except for have a workshop.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, have a workshop.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we can move on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to clarify.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It failed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I'm talking about the new
motion that's being made.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want a clarification on what his
motion is?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For the Chairman to write the
Blue Ribbon Committee --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, I'll do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- a letter of thank you for their
fine work and the report. Accept the report. Ask the Blue Ribbon --
because we cannot direct the public to work with our staff -- and
division of advisory/authority/council duties, goals, missions, and
direct the County Manager to provide a workshop with those duties,
goals, admissions. And there you go.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm completely lost. Can I --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I comment?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The purpose of the workshop is to
have the Blue Ribbon Committee -- Mr. Moebius, I need to talk to
Page 58
January 11,2011
you. I mean, if you want to take a minute and talk to him.
MR. MOEBIUS: No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. The purpose of this
workshop is to have the Blue Ribbon Committee come back to address
the Board of County Commissioners in a workshop with all the other
affected stakeholders present -- in other words, the Sheriffs Office,
9-1-1, all the fire districts, county EMS, transport, all the transport
people, the County Attorney -- to provide us with all the options
available to us to satisfy what our legal duty is with respect to public
safety. And then we will discuss and question you and educate
ourselves on all the various options so that eventually when it comes
back to the board we will have narrowed down which options under
each of these categories will best serve the public's interest and
promote public safety to its highest level. That is how the workshop
will be structured.
So we need to define today that this workshop will be led by the
Blue Ribbon Committee, what the Blue Ribbon Committee will bring
back to the table to discuss in this workshop, and how everyone will
be prepared to properly educate the Board of County Commissioners
on these options and on this subject, and then who will be invited to
this workshop so that no interested party is left out.
MR. MOEBIUS: Who is going to set up the workshop,
communicate with all of these people?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mr. -- I would recommend that
County Manager Ochs be the point person for coordinating it. The
decision as to who should be invited to that workshop should be
decided here today. Because we don't want anyone to be
unintentionally left out for any reason.
And I really think that these are, you know, very, very important
decisions. Because who is involved in this discussion will be very
important as to what information we get to allow us to make the right
decision.
Page 59
January 11,2011
Like for example, I mean, I see some people, you know, from the
fire districts here today. Are we going to limit it just to a chief or are
we going to, you know, include the medical protocol person, which I
think we should, from the various fire districts? This may be a big
meeting. There might be a lot of people present. And maybe -- and
this is why I say multiple meetings may be necessary. I don't think
with as important as these issues are that you can address all these
issues with all these people with all the options in a single meeting.
You know, 9-1-1, I mean, that is a big deal. Transport, that is a
big deal. ALS/BLS. We could -- one workshop alone should address
ALS/BLS, okay.
So maybe the recommendation is -- maybe the recommendation
today should be that the Blue Ribbon committee come up with how
this workshop ought to be structured and come back and tell us who
should participate in this workshop. Because I mean, this is what
count it government is about, number one, public safety.
MR. MOEBIUS: Could I ask for 10 minutes to confer with my
other Blue Ribbon Panel members?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely.
MR. MOEBIUS: Because when we put this together, this is --
we've met our charge. We truly have met our charge. The idea was to
move on this panel. And those individuals, which are the experts that
you're talking about, would go ahead and start doing exactly what
you're talking about, whether it was the AED program or transport, et
cetera.
So I just need a few minutes to talk with --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I respect that that was
historically your role and that, you know, you've fulfilled your
obligation. And I think what's come out of to day's discussion is that
we see that there is tremendous value in your role continuing but in a
different manner. And I see Mike shaking --
MR. MOEBIUS: Mike Reagan just said this is a lifetime
Page 60
January 11,2011
opportunity.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mike, you just said yes, it's a
marrIage.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're going to take a 15-minute break,
because the court reporter is getting a little tired of listening to this, as
am 1.
So we'll be back here at 11: 17.
(Recess.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, Board of County
Commission meeting is back in session.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're up.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: First I think I wanted to here from
Ed. Actually, I was going to say something else, but I wanted to hear
from Ed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Mr. Ed Morton.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Morton, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Morton, sir, you are recognized.
MR. MORTON: Thank you, sir.
F or the record, my name is Edward Morton, and I've had the
privilege of working with Jeff and Mike and the Blue Ribbon Panel
for the better part of a year on this.
Two thoughts: One was would the Commission reconsider the
original motion. The logic behind that had been that all of the counsel
from Commissioner Hiller and Coletta in particular were well
understood and well heard, that we need to be assured that everyone
has the appropriate opportunity to express themselves, and we feel
very strongly about that.
The purpose behind the construction of an authority, and that's
subject to a lot of definitions, but it's basically an entity or a group that
would be assembled pursuant to your direction and that that group
Page 61
January 11,2011
would then begin the process of public hearings and/or adjudicating
the facts and determine both the financial and the clinical efficacy of
recommendations that could be made to the County Commission.
The efficient and the effective way to do that, we believe, or I
believe personally, or obviously our Blue Ribbon committee hasn't
had a chance to deliberate this or to vote on it, but my personal belief
is that if we were to follow the intent of that original motion that we
create a group and that group itself would be charged with the
responsibility of conducting exactly what we're trying to talk about.
But without that formal structure, I personally am concerned it
will begin to go looping. I've been in this town for 40 years, and I've
been here long before we ever had an ambulance and we used to ride
in the vehicles that used to service the funeral homes. And we've seen
significant progress. We have a great deal of progress that can be
made.
I think Ms. Hiller brought to my attention something that I had
not I think fully appreciated, which was the role of AED's in a certain
respect. There's enormous potential to save lives in this community.
But I think the establishment of that group would give you structure as
opposed to just a giant free-for-all. And that group could then begin to
bring back to you concrete recommendations. That was the way that I
looked upon it when I was chatting with Commissioner Donna Fiala.
Those who don't know, Donna worked with me for almost 15
years, very closely. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Mr. Morton.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I was just going to say, and I
mentioned to the fellows there, we've got a road map -- but I like their
idea right now. I was going to say, we have a road map with all these
recommendations for a workshop anyway. We can just take each one
as it goes and discuss them and add whatever other things we feel are
missing or whatever we hear from the community. But I think we can
Page 62
January 11, 2011
go forward with Ed's suggestion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, is there a motion to reconsider?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like further discussion first.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we'll have discussion. I'mjust
asking if Commissioner Fiala would make a motion to reconsider the
earlier motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The motion failed. The motion
failed, but I had a motion to include a workshop. I'm not sure if it was
seconded. Just--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I did.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So did you have
something for the motion maker?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There is a motion on the floor then.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And would you restate that motion so
that there's clear understanding of what we're dealing with?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Reagan? You and I had a
discussion to -- for the Blue Ribbon committee to get together with the
County Manager's staff, formulate what's going to be in this
workshop, and specifically would be the duties of the authority.
MR. REAGAN: For the record, Mike Reagan, Chamber of
Commerce.
We would be delighted to work with the County Manager for the
structuring of one three-hour, whatever, workshop that would focus on
the various definitions and possibilities for establishing the authority
that the Blue Ribbon commission has recommended.
Other matters may come out of that for further inquiry and
exploration. And all my colleagues and everybody else agrees that
clearly there are a whole host of topics and issues that you can focus
on in the future. But without the authority, frankly, I think the next 30
years, in all due respect, ladies and gentlemen, you're going to go
round and round.
Page 63
January 11,2011
So we would be delighted to work with the County Manager and
your County Attorney to structure that conversation, which would be a
workshop, and you can get public input and that sort of thing as a
start.
Frankly, beyond that we'd have to -- we've really spent at year on
this and we don't -- as we're currently -- I can't talk for everybody, but
I think the sense is that we're pooped and we would be happy to be
helpful and continue that. But you need to make some progress,
Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So to answer your question, was
to have a workshop, the Blue Ribbon committee will get together with
the County Manager to develop what the goals -- or the authority
would be doing.
MR. REAGAN: And the various forms that you might consider,
yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the various forms. The
thank you letter. What else was it?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's easy.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can we have a separate motion on
the thank you letter so we can get that done and at least make some
progress?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'll tell you, I'm going to write them a
thank you letter anyway, you don't even have to make a motion.
Okay, is that fair?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right, I'll take that out. So
we'll just do that in the formal workshop.
All our meetings are well noticed and advertised in the Naples
Daily News. The Naples Daily News does a very good job I think
covering the topics that we're going to talk. We have all the
stakeholders here. They are going to be informed. It's not in a
vacuum. Whether it be a workshop which we cannot take action, or
our meetings, I believe it's advertised well.
Page 64
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And we have a second?
Commissioner Coletta, you seconded that motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I seconded the original motion.
I need some discussion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm going to second his current motion.
So Commissioner -- and now we're having discussion.
Commissioner Hiller, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have no problem with first
addressing the creation, if there is a need, of this commission. The
problem I have is limiting the decision of what the options presented
to the board will be in this workshop to county staff working with a
Blue Ribbon committee. I want the input on all the options to come
from the various stakeholders. So the Blue Ribbon committee should
go to all the stakeholders: The police, all the fire districts, transport.
Because we need all options on the table for discussion. I spoke to the
County Attorney about this, and, you know, we looked at the various
options out there. There are a whole bunch.
And just to give you an example of how complicated this issue is,
your report has contradictory statements in it. On the first
recommendation you say the Board of County Commissioners should
designate and delegate authority and responsibility to all PEMTT
services to a public safety authority. Okay, on another page you have,
the BCC should set general policy and the PSA should implement and
manage/coordinate the system.
Completely contradictory statements in your own
recommendation. That is why it is absolutely essential that we vet this
very, very carefully and consider all possible options before a decision
is made. So I think all -- everyone who is affected, all the agencies
affected and all the individual fire chiefs should be consulted. EMS
should be consulted. The sheriff, Chief Bloom, 9-1-1 should be
consulted. Their view of what options should be considered or what
structure should be considered should be presented to the board in this
Page 65
January 11,2011
workshop.
MR. REAGAN: Well, may I respond, Mr. Chairman, or is it
appropriate?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, please. Go ahead.
MR. REAGAN: We believe that we have spent a year in
dialogue with the leaders of all those entities, and hours and hours.
Please understand that many of the -- that which you have reflected in
that report was not done in a vacuum by a ba1dheaded old man.
Rather, there were a number of baldheaded old men in the room. We
had police, fire, physicians. It was an enormous amount of, no
kidding, activity. And you could vet that individually or collectively
with all of them in the room, and who they represent.
So the -- and there -- it's a matter of definition as to whether
there's inconsistencies or whether -- how you read the report. And
frankly, it was done permissively to give you broad range. We could
have been very specific, we chose not to do that. That's on purpose.
Because you guys, excuse me, in all do respect need to make some
decisions.
There are some things over which you have control directly right
now. Given, as I understand it, the way this government is formed
and your powers.
On the other hand, or also, you have a bully pulpit collectively
where you could encourage other people to do other kinds of things.
Clearly there are some aspects that you do not have aegis over.
And that needs to be done collaboratively.
So I want to make it very clear, there are two threads that run
through this. One is that we purposely were euphemistic, we
purposely were nonspecific, and that's to be catholic in a small sense,
that's a Czechoslovakian phrase, Commissioner, to bring more people
in under the tent.
Number two, we purposely also wanted to make this as collegial
as possible.
Page 66
January 11,2011
I for one am not willing, in all due respect -- and I think that the
men and women who do pay my salary are not willing to have me
spend a good bit of time visiting one more time with every other
appointed and elected official in Collier County to discuss that which
we took that data and we sat down and we made some decisions. And
with all due respect we've tried to submit them to you in that form.
Now, having said that, we are perfectly willing to work with your
two direct reports, two of your three direct reports, your County
Manager, who's quite competent, and your attorney who's quite
competent, and structure an intelligent decision, a conversation that
will be public for everybody, to look at different alternatives for
setting up, quote, that kind of an authority that was meant to do a
number of the things that you're discussing. We'd be very happy to do
that.
We believe that that should be open and public to everyone, and
you arrange it the way in which you wish under the laws and the
procedures that you have to allow public input any way you wish.
That we'd be happy to do.
I think we're saying the same thing. But if we're not, then we --
let me make it very clear. I don't for one as an individual believe that
we can go ring around the rosy again with every other individual. I
think we've tried to the best of our ability to do that. That does not
mean that fire chiefs, EMS chiefs, chiefs of police, other elected
officials should not have input. That's not our purpose.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, then, you know what? I'll do
it. I will go and I will meet with the leaders of all these different
agencies and I will find out what they view as options. And I will
bring those to the workshop.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's a good thing.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because I think the views -- and
again, I'm not asking for consensus, I'm not asking for you to go out
and get consensus among all these different entities. I just want all the
Page 67
January 11,2011
options presented to this board before the workshop, so that when we
get into the workshop we will have had time to think, evaluate,
research the various options, and then question the respective agencies
and their expert, whoever they want to bring to the table.
I also want to see each agency given the permission to bring who
they want. If 9-1-1 -- if Chief Bloom has an expert he's working with
on 9-1-1 protocol, let him bring that person to the table so that we can
have as much information as possible so then when we're making the
decision about the creation of this commission we are fully educated.
MR. REAGAN: Mr. Chairman, if! may, I think that's very
laudable. And I would obviously as an individual and citizen
encourage all public officials, particularly elected ones, to do as much
appropriate study and evaluation on themselves of everything that
goes on.
But please do something --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But this is not independent study.
I'm going to ask for all the various options. I will summarize it and
then I will present it to the Board of County Commissioners in a
one-way communication so they have this information. And anybody
else who wants a copy of these various positions.
MR. REAGAN: Well, forgive me, I don't want to overstep my
bounds. Wonderful. Thank you. As a person, as a citizen, I
congratulate -- I think it's very important, if we're going to work with
the County Manager and the County Attorney, that you give some
general guidance as to how you wish us to move forward and we will
consider that. Sir.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what I would then do with
whatever information I collect is I will submit it to the Board of
County Commissioners and the County Manager, and he can include
it in that package which comes to the workshop on the discussion of,
you know, what is the appropriate authority and structure of this
commission. And the first workshop will be only this issue.
Page 68
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You got that, the first workshop.
MR. REAGAN: In addition to having no hair, I have a hearing
deficit as well, okay? The one that we will participate in is this one.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mike?
MR. REAGAN: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You don't have to come to any of
the other workshops. Because once that commission is created and we
start having other workshops, you can go on vacation.
MR. REAGAN: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Michael, before -- you know, I
don't want you to get too comfortable.
If I could, sir, what we're talking about is a workshop that will be
dealing with the structure, not the details; is that correct?
MR. REAGAN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So what we're talking about --
MR. REAGAN: Suggested alternative structure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I seen the structure that you
had proposed on your original proposal. And, you know, in basis it
sounds fine. I really don't have a problem with it. And I understand
what you want to do is bring it forward to the Commission.
Now, let's see how we can marry this all together so that -- and
it's always easier to be able to put something together with a small
group of people and then reach out to a larger group afterwards.
I think Commissioner Hiller's suggestion to be able to be the
conduit between your group and the rest of the emergency service
community is admirable and it will probably go a long ways.
But possibly what may be done, now -- because I'm just trying to
bring this to some sort of conclusion so we can go on, and I want to
make sure that their voices are heard. And I understand what you're
saying, at the workshop they will be heard. They'll be there.
Hopefully we'll have the table set up in some sort of fashion that will
Page 69
January 11,2011
allow for the representatives of the different factions out there to be
there at the table to be able to go back and forth with it.
So what would come up between your group and the county
would be a -- nothing more than a suggested hierarchy of how it could
work. And then it would come before us in the workshop for
everybody to play into it.
I can see how you're trying to keep this thing simple in the
beginning and then open it up at the end. I mean, in the best of all
worlds I'd love to have everybody at the table from day one.
However, the way this is going now, it seems that the alternative that
you have offered is probably going to be the way we're going to have
to go.
One suggestion that I would have is at the point in time that you
reach something in the way of a final report that you're going to
present at the workshop, that it be made available without hesitation to
the full community out there so they can prepare their response --
either acceptance, denial, amend it in some way that would be more
agreeable -- in a timely fashion, rather than showing up at the
workshop and being handouts at that time.
What do you think's going to be a time line between --
MR. REAGAN: Well, Mr. Coletta, let me first make a comment,
if! may.
Please understand, for the record and each one of you
individually, I did not mean to be meant to in any way to try to stifle,
input or -- I spent my whole life in public life in one way or another.
So I'm not trying to limit anyone's participation. I'm just saying that
this has been studied a great deal, the general parameters.
Number two, it would seem to me that the workshop ought to
have at least two alternative designs that you look at. So you have a
couple of things in terms of how the structure of such an authority
might be.
We'd be happy to have that kind ofa -- be happy to work with the
Page 70
January 11,2011
County Manager and the attorney to explore that. Any input that
anyone would want to give to us would be fine.
I'd rather have you use the word design of a workshop than
anything else so that it doesn't limit anyone's thinking.
If you wanted us to have that agenda disseminated, we would
share that with you. You've got a very large public policy apparatus,
public information, you could share that publicly.
As far as time and everything, I don't really know at this moment
when -- that would be something that I would take your manager's
direction on.
Is that helpful in any way?
We're not trying to stifle anybody's input. We want it. Number
two, you ought to have two or more equally valued alternatives.
Otherwise you have nothing to make a decision about. And we'd be
happy to design some conversation around that, taking input from
everyone. The design of the actual format should be up to your
manager with appropriate input from your counsel.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But then when it came to the
workshop, at that point in time everything would be on the table and
you'd be able to --
MR. REAGAN: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- have everybody exercise an
opinion and help to craft --
MR. REAGAN: You tell your manager how you want it
structured, sir, please. Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. REAGAN: No people hiding in the closet here. You know,
we're trying to admit the public input.
I just, however, would hope that you would not stimulate a big
group grope with -- 550 people for the last 30 years have talked about
this. Let's move forward in some way.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I don't want to continue to beat
Page 71
January 11,2011
this dead horse.
Commissioner Hiller, are your comments going to be reasonably
brief?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is there a motion object the table
now?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, there is.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you restate what that motion
is? Because after this discussion --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I am not going to restate it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't know what it is. I mean,
there's been so much discussion --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, I said it clear,
Commissioner. You want it be something else, that's fine, you can
have it something else. But 1 said it clear. We're going to have a
workshop. The Blue Ribbon Committee is going to get together with
staff. Staff is going to put down the items for discussion. It's simple.
We've been discussing this item for an hour and a half now, you know,
and.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And it's --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I finish?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: An hour and a half to save a life--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I finish?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- is nothing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, Commissioner
Henning has the floor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For an hour and a half we've
been discussing this. Nothing has been decided. Okay? We're going
to have a workshop and nothing will be decided in that workshop.
After that we will give hopefully direction. There will be public
-- interested public there to help us formulate that direction, and
hopefully that we can move on from there.
Page 72
January 11,2011
As a former fire commissioner that had to deal with these issues,
the strife between EMS and fire, and now as a county commissioner, I
would like to separate those emotions and best serve the publicity for
public safety with the professionals of the community. So let's get her
done.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay with me.
All right, I'm going to call the question. All in favor of
Commission Henning's motion, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Should I spell that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Please.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to clarify --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't think I can.
Yes, go ahead, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner, I'd like to clarify
for the record that I will be talking to all the interested parties. I will
be getting what they consider as the options. I will provide that to
County Manager Ochs and he will include it in the report as part of the
options package.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's wonderful.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, the only clarification there, and I'm
sure Commissioner Hiller would agree, that the communication or any
tasking for my staff needs to come through me than to the staff.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm not going to be dealing with
Page 73
January 11,2011
your staff, I'm dealing with you. I like you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You've got at least one friend up here.
MR. MOEBIUS: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, gentlemen.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You've all done a wonderful job, and
thank you for being willing to stick with us a little while longer.
MR. MOEBIUS: That's doubling the pay, too, right?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, it is, double the pay. I'll put that in
my letter.
Okay, County Manager, let's-
Item #9 A
RESOLUTION 2011-08: APPOINTING GARY DAVIS AND RE-
APPOINTING PHILLIP E. BROUGHAM AND EDWARD R. (SKI)
OLESKY TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY
BOARD - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, move to Item 9 on your agenda.
Board of County Commissioners, 9A is an appointment of members to
the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner, I'd like to just jump
in here, if I may.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: First of all, the committee
recommendation, Ski Olesky just remain in, he's already an
incumbent; Bill Brougham to remain in, he's already an incumbent.
But then I was reading the rest of these things. Lenice DeLuca,
she sounds like a great person. But as I was reading through, a guy
that I know who lives in Commissioner Henning's district, his name is
Gary Davis, his things were so odd. So I read it further, and I found
Page 74
January 11,2011
that the backs of all ofthese things were all messed up. Like Gary
Davis, the back of his thing said he was in electronics management,
yet he was a school administrator. And he's part of the East Naples
Civic Association, and yet East Naples Civic Association is on the
back of Lenice DeLuca and Gary McNally. Both of them have that
same thing. And I thought maybe there was some confusion when
they discussed this.
And so I would like to make a motion to include Gary Davis as
the third appointee to this thing, because I think he'll be great. He's
also in District 3. It doesn't say that on here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We've got--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Olesky, Brougham and Davis.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. So you've got a
recommendation to appoint Ski Olesky, Phillip Brougham and Gary
Davis, rather than Lenice DeLuca.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: She's wonderful too. I think they're
going to have another opening, and I'm hoping that when they have
that opening she can be on there.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do you know Mr. Davis
personally?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Okay. So you know him to be a
good guy.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, actually.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good, good.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And he's worked with children his
whole life, because he was in the school administration.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Very well.
I'll second your recommendation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Also in this thing, just one more
little correction. It was showing behind his thing that there was -- it
said something about ACLU and so forth. But that wasn't his either.
Page 75
January 11,2011
Page 23 really belongs --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: With another one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- behind Page 14. So, I mean, it
was all kind of messy there.
But I just wanted to make sure that everybody understood, it
didn't read the way it shows in our book.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I noticed the same problem.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we have a motion and a second. Is
there any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by me.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes unanimously.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2011-09: APPOINTING GINA DOWNS
(DISTRICT 2) AND RICHARD G. FEDERMAN (DISTRICT 2) TO
THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT PRODUCTIVITY COMMITTEE
- ADOPTED (THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND COUNTY
MANAGER TO BRING BACK A POLICY REGARDING
BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND VERIFICATION OF
ADVISORY BOARD APPLICANTS)
Page 76
January 11,2011
MR. OCHS: 9B is appointment of members to the county
government productivity.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I make a motion that we
approve Gina Downs and Richard Federman.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Coletta to
approve Gina Downs and Richard Federman for appointment to the
Collier County Government Productivity Committee. Seconded by
Commissioner Fiala.
And there is discussion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. You know, there is really a
problem with our advisory committees' voting for themselves. We
have self-perpetuation of like-minded people going on with the same
people being reappointed over and over again to these advisory
boards.
Maybe one of the reasons why we can't effectuate positive
change in Collier County is because these people who are advising us
are always the same people. Mrs. Downs has been on this committee
several times. The opportunity has to be opened up to others in the
community.
The candidates that applied were absolutely amazing. There's
one gentleman by the name of Joe Wall, an MIT grad, a high-level
manager in a major multinational corporation, administering multi,
multi million dollar budgets, a graduate of Leadership Collier. His
credentials eclipse Mrs. Downs credentials many, many times over.
That is who I would recommend.
It is unacceptable to have this type of entrenched membership in
our committees. Our county is suffering as a result. We need new
blood, we need new people with new ideas so we can stay cutting
edge.
The Productivity Committee is a very important committee. This
Page 77
January 11,2011
committee advises the Board of County Commissioners about the
operations of the County Manager, about whether or not there are
financial efficiencies and economies that can be gained. Large
organization experience is required. Mrs. Downs does not have that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, that is certainly your opinion.
But I would take exception to some of the comments. Your
comment that the failure to replace people on the Productivity
Committee is one of the reasons that we can't effect positive change in
Collier County, we have been effecting positive change in Collier
County for many years. That's why it's such a wonderful place to live.
And for a county commissioner to make allegations that we have not
had positive change in Collier County is a significant misstatement, to
be charitable.
So secondly, to demonstrate that your statements are entirely
incorrect, Mr. James Hoppensteadt has been on the committee and
was not reappointed.
There are a number of new people on the committee, including
Leslie Prizant, Ms. Cheryl Pavlick, John Kerns, and Vladimir Ryziw.
There is turnover on that committee and the committee itself knows
the kinds of skills that it needs in order to develop balanced reports
and audits for Collier County. And they've done an excellent job,
even though I also disagree with some of the positions of the people
on that committee.
But I accept their recommendations, and I think they've done a
wonderful job. And we have a motion on the table.
Commissioner Fiala, were you next?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I was just going to say that it
looked like none of these people voted for themselves because none of
them are on the committee at all, so it isn't perpetuating themselves.
And I just went by the number of votes that each one got. This Mr.
Walls sounds like a great guy. I don't know why he only got two
votes. I just -- I don't know that. But maybe he didn't interview well
Page 78
January 11,2011
or something like that.
But it seemed -- and then Mr. Hoppensteadt actually got one vote
but then he withdrew. So I don't know, I'm with the committee's
recommendation because none of those people that they recommended
are on the committee anyway.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: County Attorney, in some of
these submittals they provide experience such as degrees and that.
Are we allowed to ask for that type of information, such as a degree?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So, I mean, I'd get
together with Ian and verify some of the public's concerns about
somebody's experience?
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller, did you
want to speak again?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. I would like the same
information on work experience. Verification. Verification of her
work experience.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll send you some smoke
signals to read later on.
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir.
Sir, I'll work with both of you to provide the information you're
requesting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are we going to do this for all the
members of the Productivity Committee or just specific people?
MR. MITCHELL: My assumption --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are we targeting somebody; is that what
MR. MITCHELL: Well, what I'm assuming is that it's -- as we
deal with vacancies on the advisory committees, not just this
committee, if any particular commissioner wants this kind of
Page 79
January 11,2011
information, they would come to me and ask me to review it for them.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't see anything wrong with that, I
just would like to make it a standard practice for everyone, rather than
targeting a particular individual that you mayor may not approve of.
So if we're going to do it, let's do it for all of the committee members.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can we bring this back as an
agenda item? I don't think a decision should be made --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's a good idea. That's a good idea.
Okay, we have a motion on the table now for Gina Downs and
Richard Federman to be appointed to the Productivity Committee.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, it passes 4-1, with Commissioner
Hiller dissenting.
With respect to the other issue about collecting the information
and verifying information on applicants for these committees, let's put
that on the agenda the next time and see if we can't come up with a
policy that is fair to everybody and also make sure we get the best
qualified people assigned to the committee. Right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I make one suggestion?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We have the County Attorney
advise us so if somebody does deliberately lie on their application,
what would be the ramifications for that. We could also have that.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Chairman, I'll work with the County
Attorney and we'll bring something back at the next --
Page 80
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good.
MR. KLA TZKOW: I'm assuming this is a going forward basis --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- you don't want us to--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay. So in that case, if somebody lied on
their application and it was found, you wouldn't see the application,
we would just not forward it to you. I assume that will be the policy,
but we'll take that back to you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right, bring it back to us and let us
consider it.
All right, thank you, let's move on to the next item.
MR. OCHS: Next item is 9C. It's a request to consider
suspending --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sorry, Commissioner Hiller, did I
ignore you?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: As a matter of legal right, any
commissioner should be able to ask for verification of any information
provided on these submittals.
We just took a vote relying on the information that's being
presented. That's problematic. We should be able to verify this
information at any point at any time. There's no way that any action
by the board could chill a commissioner's right to have staff verify the
truth of what's being submitted.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's what --
MR. KLATZKOW: We're going to be bringing this back.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- we'll determine when we bring it back,
right?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm asking the County Attorney.
That question was not addressed to you.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Well, you don't have policy -- right, now
we're going to bring it back to you for your direction at that point in
Page 81
January 11,2011
time.
My advice is going to be just do this on a prospective basis.
Because we've got, God only knows, hundreds of people out there
who serve on your boards. I don't know if, you know, Mr. Mitchell
really has the time to be verifying everything they put down there.
But that's something you can give us direction on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We're finished with that one.
Item #9C
SUSPENDING ALL FURTHER ACTION ON THE PART OF
COUNTY STAFF, AND ANY FURTHER SPENDING OF PUBLIC
FUNDS RELATED TO THE JACKSON LABS PROJECT IN
LIGHT OF JACKSON'S WITHDRAWAL OF ITS APPLICATION
FOR FUNDING TO THE STATE. ADDITIONALLY, A
SEP ARA TE REQUEST IS PROPOSED FOR A FULL
ACCOUNTING OF ALL PUBLIC FUNDS SPENT ON THIS
PROJECT TO DATE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE
EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS FOR COUNTY STAFF
TIME INCURRED IN DEALING WITH THE PROJECT; SUCH
ACCOUNTING TO BE PRESENTED TO THE BCC AT THE
FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY - MOTION TO STOP ALL
FURTHER ACTION ON THE PART OF COUNTY STAFF, AND
ANY FURTHER SPENDING OF PUBLIC FUNDS RELATED TO
THE JACKSON LABS PROJECT IN LIGHT OF JACKSON'S
WITHDRAWAL OF ITS APPLICATION FOR FUNDING TO THE
STATE. ADDITIONALLY, A SEPARATE REQUEST IS
PROPOSED FOR A FULL ACCOUNTING OF ALL PUBLIC
FUNDS SPENT ON THIS PROJECT TO DATE, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC
FUNDS FOR COUNTY STAFF TIME INCURRED IN DEALING
WITH THE PROJECT; SUCH ACCOUNTING TO BE
Page 82
January 11,2011
PRESENTED TO THE BCC AT THE FIRST MEETING IN
FEBRUARY - FAILED; MOTION FOR A FULL ACCOUNTING
OF EXPENDITURES OF PUBLIC FUNDS USED FOR JACKSON
LABS PROJECT - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 9C is a request to consider suspending all further
action on the part of county staff and any further spending of public
funds related to the Jackson Labs project in light of Jackson's
withdrawal of its application for funding to the state.
Additionally, a separate request is proposed for a full accounting
of all public funds spent on this project to date, including but not
limited to the expenditure of public funds of county staff time incurred
in dealing with this project; such accounting to be presented to the
BCC at the first meeting in February.
This item was placed on the agenda at Commissioner Hiller's
request.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller, it's all
yours.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. I'd like to make that as the
motion, changing the word suspending to stop all further action on the
part of the county staff.
And so the motion would be as written, which is to stop all
further action on the part of county staff, and any further spending of
public funds related to the Jackson Labs project in light of Jackson's
withdrawal of its application for funding to the state.
The second part of the motion is a separate request, is: Propose
for a full accounting of all public funds spent on this project to date,
including but not limited to the expenditure of public funds for county
stafftime incurred in dealing with the project; with such accounting to
be presented to the Board of County Commissioners at the first
meeting in February, which is a month away.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller, let me just
Page 83
January 11,2011
make a comment concerning this.
I would be happy to support a full accounting of all the public
funds spent on this project to date. I think it's only appropriate that
that be done; I don't have a problem with it.
I would ask that you consider the possibility of splitting this into
two actions. First, let's get the report on the money, see how the
money was spent, and then bring back your motion to consider
stopping all further action on the part of the board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you for your thoughts on
that. However, I don't agree with your suggestion. Right now Jackson
Labs has withdrawn their application for funding to the state. There is
no further action that the county should take in light of that.
You have repeatedly made it clear that if there was no state
funding forthcoming, there would be no action on the part of the
county. That logically ties in with the motion that I am making here
today.
It is absolutely essential that we stop spending any public funds
on this project if there are no state funds forthcoming. And this
project is not deemed to return a positive return on this investment to
the taxpayers of Collier County. And if the taxpayers are not given an
opportunity to vote on whether or not they want to be additionally
taxed to support this project, if there is a positive return, and there is a
valid public purpose, then it makes no sense for any more public funds
to be wasted on this project. We don't have the monies that we can
afford to waste --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: n on something that is not going
forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I appreciate that, Commissioner Hiller.
But it's more complex than you portray it.
I think you will find, if you would wait until the funding report is
available, that most of the funding has gone toward the satisfaction of
Page 84
January 11,2011
public information requests by your supporters who want to fight the
issue and the legal issues. We don't have the option of not responding
to those. So there will be costs going forward associated with this that
are beyond our control.
Weare taking action in the latter part of this agenda to terminate
the court action on the bond validation, and we're doing that because it
makes sense. That's something we can control. We cannot control the
expenses of people who are challenging the project and who have
stated they will continue to challenge the project, even though we
have decided to terminate the court hearing on the bond validation.
So I will vote for a complete full accounting of all the public
funds associated with the project. But to say stop all further action on
the part of county staff leaves the county and the taxpayers at a
significant legal disadvantage, and I don't believe it's responsible for
us to do that.
Not only that, but to make that kind of a decision before we know
what the state intends to do, if anything at all, is simply a knee jerk
reaction and an attempt to stop a project, regardless of what its
potential benefits might be, and none of us can forecast that. Numbers
might be substantially different. And to refuse to let the staff
coordinate with and respond to state requests about what Collier
County could or could not do is, quite frankly, irresponsible.
But nevertheless, you've got your motion. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm not finished. I'd like to answer
and comment on what you said.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Your characterization that the bulk
of the expenditure relates to public records request is completely
incorrect. An inordinate amount of staff time has been spent on this
project. The planning and zoning division, Mr. Casalanguida and his
staff, have spent an inordinate amount of time on this issue. Mr.
Klatzkow and his staff have spent an enormous amount of time. The
Page 85
January 11,2011
commissioners collectively have spent an enormous amount of time.
An accounting is not merely the expenditure of public funds to an
outside vendor or the cost to provide public records. But it is the
hours of staff time, times their rate in addition.
I want a full accounting of all the hours spent by staff, including
the County Commissioners. Because that is an expenditure of public
funds that should be reported.
And as to your comment that we need to not stop this because
maybe some day this might come back to us, at the point in time that
the state decides to move forward, if they do decide to move forward
with this project and we decide to move forward with this, on that
basis the matter can be brought back to the Board of County
Commissioners for consideration. But until such time, all public
spending with respect to Jackson Labs should cease.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning, I'll get to
you in just a moment.
I'm curious about something. You've asked for an accounting of
the public funds, but yet you also allege that enormous amounts of
time have been spent by the County Attorney and by the county staff
and others on the project.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that is a use of public funds.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If you know -- if you have information
to substantiate the statement that an enormous amount of funds have
been spent on this --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How do you know that if you don't have
a public accounting of it? How do you know?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I've actually started
communicating, for example, with the County Attorney. And I've
asked him to start compiling the hours.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Has he compiled the hours to
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not fully.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And has he reported them to you? Then
you can't say there are enormous hours associated with this. You are
exaggerating. And what I'm asking you to do is stop for a moment
and let's get the facts.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm not exaggerating --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then you have no report from the
County Attorney yet?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I do have a report from the County
Attorney --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You do.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- that's not complete.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, County Attorney, have you
provided that report to anybody else?
MR. KLATZKOW: No. I was asked by Commissioner Hiller to
give her hours based on the bond validation arbitration -- not bond vali
-- the arbitration we just went through a few weeks ago. So my report
was with limited to that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So one instance is what you've reported
on; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And in that instance alone, the
County Attorney reported 120 hours, not including his time. We still
have extrapolated the value of that, because you have to take the
hourly rate and multiply that.
On top of that, we have the cost to Nabors-Giblin, outside bond
counsel, that we're still waiting for the bill on. And there are a lot of
other issues out there that have been addressed in a similar fashion.
When you start adding it all up, it will be a large number.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Why don't we add it all up and
let's take a look at it before we start making allegations of enormous
Page 87
January 11,2011
amounts.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That is secondary to issue that no
further expenditure of public's funds should be made. This project is
no longer on the table.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So we have a motion on the table.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's clearly stated here.
Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, let me just say, it's going
to come back in a different forum. Wait till it comes back in a
different forum. The EDC has started another not-for-profit
organization, Collier Get Back To Work, or something like that. You
know, it's a spin of the same thing.
So let's wait for that stuff to come back to us so we can digest it.
It would be something different. In the meantime, let's work on some
real stuff, okay? That's why I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor of the motion, please
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All opposed by the motion, signify by
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So it fails, a vote of3-2, with
Commissioners Coletta, Coyle and Fiala opposing the motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to take lunch.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to just make a comment on
that.
Page 88
January I 1,201 I
Just so the public understands, notwithstanding that Jackson Labs
is not applying for public funding either to the state or Collier County,
three commissioners, Commissioner Fiala, Coyle and Coletta have
decided to continue using public funds to investigate or deal with this
project, notwithstanding that it's not on the table.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We don't have the money to do
that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That simply is a mischaracterization.
We have not said that we intend to spend money on the Jackson Labs
project. We have merely said that staff should have the right and the
flexibility to respond to economic development opportunities in a
reasonable way.
If another project comes up and the staff begins to collect
information in order to make a recommendation to the Board of
County Commissioners, that should be completely acceptable to us.
We cannot manage all of these issues from this desk.
So we have not committed spending any more funds. We haven't
had a meeting with Jackson Labs since I think November. Is that
correct?
MR. OCHS: I believe so.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. So the only things that have
resulted in expenditure have been legal challenges. And the legal
challenges are not something that we have necessarily initiated.
So we are prudently utilizing funds for economic development in
Collier County, and I think we should continue to do so. And the staff
should be free to consider and report to the board any economic
development opportunities that appear to be feasible. Thank you very
much.
And Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just when you say we should be
able to continue to pursue economic opportunities, we just heard this
Page 89
January 11,201 I
morning about what's happening on the farms. And, you know, that's
one of the three legs that we have as far as industry in Collier County,
and slowly but surely we're losing that industry. And so now we're
going to have a two-legged stool. And we must pursue other
economic opportunities. And I don't know what form they're going to
be in, and I don't know who we're going to be dealing with and I don't
know -- hopefully we're going to get into this biomedical field,
because that is the upcoming wave of the future. And I would want to
be on that wave. Whether it -- I don't care who is involved in it. It
doesn't make any difference if it's Jackson Labs, USF or NCH or
anybody else, I just want to see us preparing now for our future
industrial economy -- not industrial economy, our future economy.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. And if I may add to it.
When you talk about the three-legged stool, remember one other part
of it was construction? That's gone. The other part is tourism; that's a
very seasonal type thing. Look what we went through this past year.
We don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to this stool. And
so, you know, I applaud the people that are willing to get in there and
try to find solutions for this rather than say this will not work, there's
nothing that's going to work.
We seen a great sample today of how common objectives can be
reached by a vast majority of people when we had the issue regarding
emergency services. You know, and we've got to get to that point
again in this community. I mean, the objections that are being raised
up on a continuous fashion, the mistruths that are being repeated over
and over again to the point they sound like they're true, you know, I've
had it. When I get a chance to talk to people one-on-one, 90 percent of
the time they understand where we're coming from.
How much money have we personally given to Jackson Labs
since this started? Zero.
Page 90
January 11,201 I
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Zero.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What have we done to be able
to commit this county as far as Jackson Lab coming into Collier
County, what time did we take a vote that says, okay, we have the
door open for Jackson Lab, here's the money, come on it and we'll go
forward. We have never taken that vote.
This has been a work in progress and we've got people out there
making all sorts of claims that we are taking legal positions, that we're
enriching ourselves. I mean, it is so degrading. And it's got to stop. It
has absolutely got to stop. You know, give the process a chance to be
able to work through. I mean, it's not fun to have to stand up to people
that are on an opposition to anythng in this world. But, you know, the
truth of the matter is, we don't know what we got. If it turned out the
way it was originally envisioned it would have been an amazing,
beautiful thing. But we never got to that point. And the naysayers
may be successful in the fact that they'll be able to kill this before it
ever bears fruit. And then we'll have to go back to square one and
start working through again, which we'll do. Because I don't plan to
walk away from this until I find some entities out there that can try to
replace what we have lost out there over the past five years.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want the public to also
understand that Commissioner Coletta, Fiala, and Coyle have just
denied the public their right to an accounting of the expenditures to
date on this project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nobody ever said that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That was part of my motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Where are you coming from?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It was part of my motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, for goodness sake.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You denied it. You opposed it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, the public can see what's
Page 9 I
January 11,2011
happening here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's worth clarifying.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. You know, we -- just to feed
off of what Commissioner Coletta said, we talk -- we spoke of vitriol
this morning earlier in our meeting, and did you see what people wrote
as blogs when -- about this explosion where these people were hurt?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mangrove Cafe.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did you read some of the vitriol?
How could you -- how could people write that? I don't know what
kind of -- we're breeding that anger and that resentment and turning
words to create another impression, and it's so wrong.
And what's happening is, you've got this society now that's angry
about everything, never wants to learn about anything good and just
fights it all, and they do it in a vitriolic way, and it's so sad, because
you see, like this 22-year-old shooting people up, that's what's
happening. And this -- this stuff has to stop. It's just awful.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is.
Commissioner Coletta, you have something else?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm done. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And before we break for lunch, I
would like to make a motion that we have a full accounting of the
public funds for the Jackson Labs project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Seconded by Commissioner
Fiala.
Is there any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 92
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Absent.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously, a vote of 4-0.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let me just -- due by when? Due
by the next meeting in February?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: As soon as he can get it together. Ifhe
can get it together in February, fine; ifhe can't, we'll do it the next
time.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you, Commissioner Coyle.
I appreciate you bringing that back in this fashion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I made that offer in the beginning. From
the very beginning I made that offer to do that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You did.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So with that, we are going to break for
lunch, and we'll be back here at 1: 11.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, the Board of
Commission meeting is back in session.
Will you take us to the next item, Leo?
Item #12A
BOARD REVIEW OF THE NON-BINDING ARBITRATION
DECISION RELATED TO THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP
AREA OVERLAY AND ESTABLISHES WHETHER THE
CREATION OR AMENDMENT OF A STEWARDSHIP
RECEIVING AREA REQUIRES AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF
THREE OR FOUR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS - MOTION TO REJECT ARBITRATOR'S
RULING - FAILED; MOTION TO ACCEPT ARBITRATOR'S
RULING - APPROVED
Page 93
January 11,2011
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. We have a time certain 1 p.m. item.
That's Item 12A. It's under the county attorney's report, and it's that
the board reviews the nonbinding arbitration decision related to the
Rural Land Stewardship Area overlay and establishes whether the
creation or amendment of a stewardship receiving area requires an
affirmative vote of three or four members of the Board of County
Commissioners.
MR. KLA TZKOW: And, Commissioners, I'll keep this short.
You had directed us to enter into nonbinding arbitration with the
Eastern Collier County property owners. We did that. I have included
a copy of the arbitrator's decision, it is nonbinding, a copy of the
transcript that led to this, and we are awaiting your direction on this
Issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. The decision, or the
recommendation, is to terminate the bond-validation hearing.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, this is the--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
MR. KLATZKOW: This is -- we did that on consent.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right. This is a supermajority
versus majority, right?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right.
Any questions by commissioners?
Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Klatzkow, have you found
anything in the record to where it was stated that it takes -- this is a --
the RLSA is a different process from other zoning processes that we
do?
MR. KLATZKOW: The record was remarkably silent as to that
Issue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Did you see in the agenda when
Page 94
January 11,2011
we adopted the Ave Maria, the town of Ave Maria, RLSA to where I
said to the board, who wasn't full, we need four?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, I did, sir, but you were referring to the
DR! at that point.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. And the DR! takes
four?
MR. KLATZKOW: It has been some opinion in the past that it
takes four. My opinion is at that point it is three actually, but it's --
that's what was said, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. How would this affect
the Constitution -- Constitution on the 14th Amendment of equal
protection? And I can recite it if anybody wants to. How does that
affect these two different processes if the board determines it's only a
simple majority versus a supermajority?
MR. KLATZKOW: There will be that issue that's outstanding.
Somebody will always be able to make a claim that the property
owners in Eastern Collier County are treated differently from the
property owners in Western Collier County, and there is that claim
that can be made. Whether that's a successful claim, I don't know.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What is your opinion on the
Constitution and if the board decides it's a simple majority?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think there's a very strong claim that could
be made that it's -- that you're treating people unequally in Eastern
Collier County than you are in Western Collier County.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And it is true that
whether it be a Growth Management Plan for the RLSA or whether it
was the GMP or any zoning action that came to the Board of
Commissioners, it went through the same process as other property
owners within the county. It had a public information meeting,
correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: There will no longer be public -- in Eastern
Collier County, on -- there will not be public information meetings.
Page 95
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There has been, though, on
every single process that I just explained?
MR. KLATZKOW: Up till now, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Up until now, because you're
waiting for action of the board, the Board of Commissioners, who
wouldn't have that public information meeting --
MR. KLA TZKOW: No, because it's not a rezoning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. That's what the claim is,
that it's not a rezoning action?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It has been advertised --
Commissioner Coyle, are you upset?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, no. I was just shaking my head that
that's not correct. But go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. It has been advertised as
always a public zoning, went through the Planning Commission
process, like all rezonings do, on the recommendations. Everything
that has been done that you can see in the past to how we treated the
RLSA is the same that we have done for any other zoning action?
MR. KLATZKOW: Up until the creation of the RLSA.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Do you want to explain
that?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. The difference in opinion is that the
Eastern Collier County property owners took the position, and the
arbitrator agreed, that the rezoning was completed by the Board of
County Commissioners when they adopted the RLSA overlay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But -- okay. You
misunderstood. The actions -- the zoning actions that we have taken
in the past with the RLSA --
MR. KLATZKOW: You've only taken one action.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- only one, was the town of
Ave Maria. There was a public information meeting. There was -- it
Page 96
January 11,2011
went through the -- on this one, the EAC and the Planning
Commission. The proposed map change that was on our agenda
today, it went through the same process, correct? They had a public
information, it had -- it went through the Planning Commission, it was
public (sic) advertised in the Planning Commission, Board of
Commissioners, even was continued because there was a flaw in the
public advertising.
Anything I said is incorrect?
MR. KLATZKOW: There's public advertising, but it's different
than a rezoning. We don't put up a sign, for example.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There is a sign on their land.
MR. KLA TZKOW: It's not required.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pardon me?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's not required.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not required?
MR. KLATZKOW: By the ordinance. You've got two different
ordinances now in Collier County. You've got your regular zoning
ordinances for what I'll call Western Collier County, and you have
your RLSA overlay for this portion of Eastern Collier County, and
they're a different process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that was what the arbitrator
is saying?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. That isn't how we've
been treating it. How we've been treating it is the same as any other
zoning process. That's a matter of fact. I'm done.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mr. Klatzkow, when an SSA is
created, isn't it created pursuant to a contract between the applicant
and the Board of County Commissioners?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's more of an agreement -- it's more of an
agreement where the property owner agrees not to develop his
Page 97
January 11,201 I
property in a certain way in exchange for getting developmental rights
that could be monetized. So it's not truly a zoning change. It's an
agreement not to do any development on that property.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're correct. It's not a zoning
change. It's an agreement. It's a contract.
MR. KLA TZKOW: That's how I view it, yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: There is a meeting of minds
between the two parties regarding that piece of property with respect
to the creation of an easement over that property, a conservation
easement more specifically; isn't that correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: That's how I view it--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's why --
MR. KLATZKOW: -- which is good -- which is why we can put
it into escrow.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Exactly. And that is why it is not
a zoning action, because it is the creation of an easement by contract.
You can't zone by contract and, therefore, there has to be a 3-2 vote.
There is a very clear difference in the creation of an easement
and the SSA as a result as compared to the creation of this SRA and
what's done within the SRA, which is very clearly a zoning action.
MR. KLATZKOW: I would agree with that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The other thing that concerns me
with respect to the 3-2, or let's just say the non-supermajority vote, is
-- and I don't think the community is aware of this. But if we actually
can have zoning actions determined by a simple majority with a
five-man board, we have a quorum with three, meaning you could
actually have a win, if you will, if -- you know, you would basically
have a ruling with just two votes.
So we could actually see the whole Ave Maria -- the whole town
of Ave Maria developed based on two votes with respect to these
zoning actions?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, that town was already approved. I
Page 98
January 11,201 I
think your better example would be Big Cypress.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. Okay. Well, Big Cypress
then. Big Cypress.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, if there were only three commissioners
present, a simple majority would be two commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's somewhat concerning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: There's the issue of preemption.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sorry, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: In your opening arguments, you
clearly established that Collier County, with respect to its zoning
votes, is governed by the Special Act; is that correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And for Collier County, the
requirement is four-fifths, a four- -- you know, four-out-of-five vote, a
supermajority vote.
MR. KLATZKOW: You need a minimum of four affirmative
votes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: A minimum of four votes.
MR. KLATZKOW: To change the zoning in Collier County.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: To change the zoning.
MR. KLATZKOW: The difference here is that, the argument is
that they already changed the zoning in Eastern Collier County, so that
was done, so that, in essence, the creation of the town of Ave Maria is
more akin to the filing of a Site Development Plan than it is a
rezoning. It's a different concept than we've had before in the county.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand, and I wouldn't agree
with that. I don't think the creation of a town is equivalent to a Site
Development Plan.
I have serious concerns about this. I think this issue raises
equal-protection concerns. I think this issue raises preemption
concerns. I think it puts the public at risk, and particularly the public
Page 99
January 1 1,2011
that intends to live in Ave Maria, that there would not be sufficient
safeguards in place to ensure that that community is developed in a
proper way with respect to their interests in that community.
I think you did a very good job when you argued this, and I want
to thank you for your contribution.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How many public speakers do we have,
Ian?
MR. MITCHELL: There are eight public speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Why don't we call the public
speakers.
MR. MITCHELL: Okay. Mike Pettit, and he'll be followed by
Marielena Montesino de Stuart.
MR. PETTIT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Mike Pettit. I'm
here on behalf of the Eastern Collier Property Owners. Our firm,
Cheffy Passidomo, represented the property owners in the arbitration
before Justice Bell.
We're here today to ask that you simply follow the arbitrator's
guidance and establish, once and for all, that a majority vote is
sufficient, a majority vote of this board is sufficient to designate a
Stewardship Receiving Area in the Rural Land Stewardship Area.
There are a number of reasons that we think that result is
absolutely right. I'm going to start with the first one, which I think is
very compelling, and that has to do with the quality of the arbitration.
This arbitration, it came about because the RLSA zoning overlay
ordinance is silent regarding the adoption for the resolution for an
SRA. And your county attorney said that, to the extent there was a
supermajority requirement that could be imposed, it would have to
flow from the 1967 Act, and he said that on October 26,2010.
You determined to seek the viewpoint of a neutral and highly
qualified arbitrator, and you directed us and the county attorney to
find that arbitrator and conduct a nonbinding arbitration. We did that.
You have the benefit of the arbitrator's II-page decision in your
Page 100
January 11,2011
agenda package.
I think what I want to emphasize, though, is the quality of that
proceeding. First of all, the arbitrator was a former Supreme Court
Justice. He has 18 years experience as a judge. He was the youngest
judge ever appointed to the Circuit Court in the First District of
Florida. He is a board-certified real estate attorney.
There were collectively over a hundred years of experience
presented by witnesses to that arbitrator, both the witnesses called by
Mr. Klatzkow and his team using highly experienced members of the
County Attorney Office, Ms. Ashton and Ms. Hubbard, and our
witnesses.
Because of time constraints, I won't go through them. If you
want to let me talk longer, I will.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't want to let you talk longer.
MR. PETTIT: Okay. There were 70 pages of briefing done by
both parties. There were thousands of pages of exhibits provided to
this arbitrator, all the pertinent ordinances, documents.
This is an example of one binder of exhibits. There were seven;
four from the county, three from us.
The arbitrator had a full airing of this issue and brought his
experience from the Supreme Court, as a real estate attorney, and as a
trial judge to bear and decided that a simple majority was sufficient.
A second reason --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're going to wrap up, Mike?
MR. PETTIT: I will wrap up right now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
MR. PETTIT: The second -- I think the second most compelling
reason to adopt the arbitrator's decision here is, the fundamental rule
in this country is majority rule. That's the rule that's endorsed by your
Land Development Code, that's the rule that's endorsed throughout the
rest of the country. Supermajorities are exceptions. They tend to be
undemocratic. There's sometimes good reasons for them. They have
Page 101
January 11,2011
to be expressly stated. They are not anywhere expressly stated.
You do all your business, serious business, except for a few
limited exceptions, by majority rule. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask you a couple of
questions, please?
MR. PETTIT: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: First of all, thank you for your
presentation.
With respect to the arbitration, why was there no discussion
about the equal-protection issue? I mean, the judge has all this
experience. Why did he not identify that there was a very important
constitutional question in this proceeding? And with that I ask, can
you have arbitration of an issue that affects a large number of people,
and in this case, on a constitutional matter? That's my first question.
MR. PETTIT: First of all, I don't want to speculate why that
issue wasn't brought forward in more detail, to the extent it was
brought forward by the county attorney.
Second of all, I can't speculate as to the arbitrator's thought
process. What I will tell you is, I do not think there is an
equal-protection issue here. I think that, as you know, being an
attorney, the usual touchstone for equal protection is whether the
legislation is rationally based. I don't know anyone in this room
would say that the Rural Land Stewardship Overlay Zoning District is
not rationally based unless there's an improper classification based on
religion or sex or race, and, of course, that doesn't apply.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think equal protection applies to
disparate treatment.
MR. PETTIT: Well, I -- we may have to disagree with that,
Commissioner Hiller, because absent an impermissible classification,
you only have to show a rational basis to support legislation.
Secondly, I think it's apples and oranges to compare zoning in the
western part of the county to the zoning in the Rural Land
Page 102
January 1 1,2011
Stewardship Area.
First of all, the Rural Land Stewardship Area zoning was
accomplished in 2003 at the end of a very lengthy collaborative public
process. Second of all, the ordinance is highly detailed. It contains all
the information you would need to establish an SRA. The third issue
is, it creates a unique form of currency. And, in fact, in your Growth
Management Plan and in the ordinance, zoning is not really allowed
there. The zoning occurred in 2003, and that's what the arbitrator, in
fact, found, if you look at Page 5 and 6 of his decision.
So we believe that there is no equal-protection issue. The zoning
occurred in 2003. And the arbitrator clearly agreed with that position.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Now, the second point you made
is with respect to a simple majority being the norm and
supermajorities being the exception.
We have a state law here, a special law, that provides for a
supermajority vote. Are you disregarding preemption?
MR. PETTIT: I don't disregard preemption, but I don't think it
applies here. Again, from our perspective and from the arbitrator's
perspective, the Special Act did not apply. The zoning occurred in
2003. The Special Act applied to the adoption of the zoning overlay.
It did not -- does not apply to either the adoption of an SSA or an SRA
by resolution.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So does that mean that holds true
for all overlay districts throughout the county, that merely the creation
of an overlay district is what requires a supermajority vote, and any
subsequent land use act within an overlay -- like, let me take for
example, you know, Vanderbilt Beach has an overlay. I'm sure the
citizens of my district would be very interested to find out that, you
know, every subsequent action following the creation of an overlay
only requires a simple majority vote and, in the presence of a quorum
of three, only two votes.
MR. PETTIT: I can't represent to you that I've ever laid the
Page 103
January 11,2011
Vanderbilt Beach overlay side by side with the overlay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But just generally as a -- just
creation of an overlay, because that's what we're not talking -- that's
what we're talking about. Just simply the creation of an overlay is
what you're saying is the zoning act, and that all subsequent acts --
MR. PETTIT: I think you can't take it out of the context of the
uniqueness of the Rural Land Stewardship Area.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Why not?
MR. PETTIT: Because it is -- it's an exceptional program where
these issues were fully vetted, and there was an -- these were the
decisions that were made by not only the public, but by the
commission ultimately.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, the --
MR. PETTIT: Each -- my suspicion is that each zoning overlay
is somewhat unique.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But regardless of the uniqueness of
the overlay, we're not talking about what the overlay is about. We're
talking about the fact that you're saying the creation of an overlay is
the zoning act, and any subsequent act with respect to the land beyond
the creation of the overlay is not zoning and doesn't require the
supermajority pursuant to the Special Act.
MR. PETTIT: I don't believe I generalized in that way,
Commissioner. My point is that with respect to the particular overlay
we have before us, the Rural Land Stewardship Area overlay, that the
SRA designation, which is adopted by resolution, not by ordinance,
not by a document filed with the Secretary of State, is simply an
implementation of the very detailed regulations and processes already
voted on by supermajority by this board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I completely understand, but
I'm going back to the premise that we're supposed to be working from,
and that is that a zoning overlay, or I'm sorry, that an overlay is the
zoning action. And it shouldn't make a difference because it goes
Page 104
January 11,2011
back -- you say there's no equal-protection issue. So, I mean, whether
it's an overlay for Vanderbilt, regardless of what that overlay is or why
it's created, the creation of the overlay is the zoning act. Any
subsequent acts within that overlay, as you say, should all just be a 3-2
vote.
MR. PETTIT: And without having knowledge of the particulars
of the Vanderbilt Beach overlay, it's pretty much impossible to answer
that question. I don't think you can make those kind of generalizations
from one piece of legislation to another.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, but if we're talking about no
equal-protection issue, that basically, you know, they're all similarly
situated and everybody's equally affected, then that would have to be
the conclusion; otherwise, we have, you know, disparate treatment.
MR. PETTIT: Well, as I said, we may have a fundamental
disagreement on what equal protection is, and that sometimes happens
between attorneys.
As I understand equal protection, once you are not dealing with
an impermissible classification based on race or sex or religion,
something that is protected under the Constitution, the -- if the
legislation can be rationally defended, it is to be upheld. There isn't an
equal-protection issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Next speaker?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Marielena Montesino de
Stuart, and she'll be followed by Mike Rosen.
MS. de STUART: Good afternoon. Ladies and gentlemen,
Commissioners, my name is Marielena Montesino de Stuart. I am a
property owner and resident of Ave Maria.
The arbitration hearing held on December 11 and 13,2010, has a
fatal flaw. It was a prejudicial act undertaken by some members of
the Board of County Commissioners who choose to deal with a select
group of favored powerful developers and large landowners in Eastern
Page 105
January 11,2011
Collier County.
This arbitration process was prejudicial indeed because not
everyone affected by this process was notified nor included. In fact,
the day before the hearing, Commissioner Hiller wrote me, and I
quote, "This matter relates to all residents of Collier County and,
therefore, this is a matter unsuited for arbitration."
I am a property owner in Ave Maria, as I have said. On
November 12, Commissioner Hiller wrote to County Attorney Mr.
Jeff Klatzkow asking him that homeowners in Ave Maria be made a
party and notified of the arbitration hearing since we would be clearly
affected.
Mr. Klatzkow responded to Commissioner Hiller on the same
day, November 12th, with the following statement. I quote, "Mr.
Passidomo, opposing counsel, and I are still in the process of trying to
find an appropriate arbitrator. Once that is done, the matter can be
scheduled." Nothing ever happened.
The matter of notifying homeowners in Ave Maria was never
carried out. In fact, when I wrote to Mr. Klatzkow asking for
notification and inclusion in the arbitration, he referred the matter to
Judge Bell. Judge Bell wrote back saying he wanted the lawyers for
Barron Collier Companies and the large landowners to approve my
participation as a property owner in Ave Maria.
It became a sad and embarrassing example of unfairness working
against and depriving many of the landowners in the Rural Land
Stewardship Area of their fundamental property rights and due
process.
Finally, I appeared before Judge Kenneth Bell on December
11 th, and my statement before him took place after much difficulty
and after trying for many days to obtain permission to speak as a
property owner directly affected by the mockery of justice that was
about to take place.
When I arrived at these chambers on December 11 th, I was met
Page 106
January 11,2011
by a reluctant Judge Bell who tried for several minutes to dissuade me
from speaking, even though I had made it very clear that I was
prepared to strictly address the narrow issue of the law.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Your time has expired. Could you wrap
it up, please.
MS. de STUART: Yes. Ladies and gentlemen, the arbitration
process that took place inside these chambers on December 11 and 13,
2010, constitutes an illegal act, as well as an embarrassment in Collier
County's legal history, an abuse of the rights of property owners and a
waste of taxpayer money.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MS. de STUART: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So if I understand correctly, the
attorneys that were here representing the other side of this issue were
not here on behalf of the residents of Ave Maria and that there was no
representation, legal representation, of the residents of Ave Maria?
MS. de STUART: Absolutely. They were not represented--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That is completely unacceptable.
MS. de STUART: -- the property owners. And I had to struggle,
truly struggle, to be able to make my statements before Judge Kenneth
Bell.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That is unacceptable.
MS. de STUART: And then he finally, after several minutes of
standing right in front of Chairman Coyle's chair where Judge Bell
stood, he then said, "Well, why don't you ask permission of Cheffy
and Passidomo and see if they will agree to let you speak and speak
with Mr. Klatzkow." So this took several minutes of my struggling to
be heard.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So basically you asked to join, and
really the people were not represented?
MS. de STUART: Right. And this was preceded by many days
of emailsbackandforthwithJudgeBell.Mr. Klatzkow, and even Mr.
Page 107
January 11,2011
Passidomo emailed me, completely aware of my pleading to be heard
and to be made a part of the proceedings.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That is fundamentally unfair.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Next speaker?
MR. ROSEN: Ready? Good afternoon, Commissioners. Mike
Rosen, representing Collier Enterprises.
As you know, we have in the pipeline and approved SSAs, 14
and 15, for our town of Big Cypress, as well as our SRA being
evolved now. We've met with staff many times in the past, and that
will be coming forward in the future sometime.
We joined the Rural Land Stewardship Program under the -- with
the understanding that there would be an incentive-based program,
and it would be equally based with SSAs versus SRAs, the sending
and the receiving areas. Based on that, our anticipation was a 3-2
vote.
We were pleased to see the Supreme Court Justice Bell opined in
the fact that this should be a 3-2 vote, and we would hope that you
would uphold that vote.
Thank you very much.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mr. Rosen, can I ask you a
question?
MR. ROSEN: Of course.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: In the creation of the SSA, you're
going to enter into an agreement with the county; is that correct?
MR. ROSEN: We already have.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And does the agreement provide
that if you can't sell these, whatever you want to call them -- what do
you call them?
MR. ROSEN: The SSAs, the credits?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The credits. If you can't sell the
credits, can you reverse the transaction?
Page 108
January 11,2011
MR. ROSEN: I -- you know, from memory -- and hopefully
maybe Attorney Klatzkow could help me out there, because he helped
draft that agreement -- I think it spoke about permits and not credits, if
I recall.
And, Jeff, can you refresh my memory?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, because I created the process.
MR. ROSEN: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: Some time ago the question came up, What
happens if Big Cypress doesn't get developed? We're creating these
SSAs. They'll be worthless if we're not developed. And the whole
point of the program is to preserve property.
And so I created an escrow agreement where the SSA documents
are held in escrow to allow sufficient time for the Big Cypress
development to come in. That agreement was taken to the board on
executive summary asking, is this the approach the board wants to
take, and the board agreed with that approach.
So that the last, I don't know, two years worth of SSAs are being
held in escrow. The economy's changed, and we had to adjust the
procedure.
MR. ROSEN: I think, Commissioner Hiller, to answer your
question, the fear that we as landowners had during the SSA program,
and we asked Attorney Klatzkow to help us draft this agreement, was
on the federal side, if there was an issue where we couldn't get federal
permits -- which the county doesn't control, but yet we had already put
land, 10,000 acres, under conservation easement, which was
irrevocable -- we lost 10,000 acres. So that's where the escrow
agreement came from.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So basically these are not
easements into perpetuity, these are not conservation easements in
perpetuity, and you basically have a contract which is reversible at
your option if the program doesn't financially benefit you?
MR. ROSEN: No, I think it's a five-year limit. I believe after
Page 109
January 11,2011
five years we either have to -- we have to -- the easements then go into
place after five years if we don't voluntarily pull them.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So you have a five-year period
during which time you can eliminate those easements?
MR. ROSEN: Yeah, if we don't -- if we don't get our permits,
yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then after those five years,
those easements are recorded and they're easements in perpetuity?
MR. ROSEN: I believe that's correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: They can pull them. If Big Cypress doesn't
come through, they can, in essence, end the SSA.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: After the five-year period?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. The SSA was conditioned upon the
SRA being developed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So that doesn't match what Mike
just said, because --
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, he's relying on memory. I just --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So we know--
MR. KLATZKOW: As am I, by the way.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So if -- there is no five-year limit.
So at any point in time in the future if this doesn't work beyond five
years even, you can just reverse the whole transaction on the SSA
side?
MR. ROSEN: I don't think so. I was under the impression--
and, again, I don't have the document in front of me. It was a
multi-page document which we did, I think, two years ago -- that the
escrow agreement was based on permitting. And at the end of the five
years, if we didn't get all the permits we wanted or needed, I should
say, not wanted, but needed, then we could voluntarily pull our land
out of the escrow agreement.
But I thought that it said -- and again, I'm going two years back --
Page 110
January 11,2011
if we got to the five-year point, they automatically went into the
easement -- into the conservation-easement stage, and it was
irreversible, I thought, at that point.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So they'd become easements into
perpetuity?
MR. ROSEN: I believe that's correct, but again, I'd have to rely
on reading it again after two years.
MR. KLA TZKOW: I can pull it. I'll just pull it. You know, it's
going to take me five or ten minutes.
MR. ROSEN: That's fine with me.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think that's a very, very
important issue, because if you have -- and this goes to the point that I
made earlier -- these are vastly different acts.
What you really have here with respect to the SSA is a contract.
It's a contract agreement. It's not a zoning agreement. It's the creation
of an easement pursuant to a contract, which is between the Board of
County Commissioners and the landowner and is subject to reversal.
It's subject to amendment. It's subject to revision.
And it, by no means, constitutes a zoning act, and that is the
fundamental difference between this and what is going on with the
question that is being arbitrated.
MR. ROSEN: You know, you could be right; however, I'm -- I
don't have the legal background to joust with you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MR. ROSEN: It was my interpretation that since the -- inside the
agreement was a conservation easement which changed the status of
your land, then you were, in fact, changing the zoning of your land.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. It's an easement.
MR. ROSEN: That's my thought.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's an easement. Just like, you
know, you have a utility easement, you have conservation easements.
That doesn't change the zoning of your land. Every time that an
Page 11 I
January 11,2011
easement is placed on your land, then it would constitute a zoning
action, and we would be overworked.
MR. ROSEN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do you have the answer?
MR. KLATZKOW: We're getting it, ma'am. It's going to take,
like, five minutes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's fine. Well, I'll just bring it
-- when you bring that --
MR. KLATZKOW: Somebody's running upstairs now to get it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. I'll just readdress that when
it comes back to us.
MR. ROSEN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Next speaker?
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker will be Russell Priddy, and
he'll be followed by Nancy Payton.
MR. PRIDDY: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Russell
Priddy, and I'm here today representing myself, my wife, and my two
children.
Three versus four is not about Jackson Labs, but the integrity of a
program that provides significant public benefits to county residents
by protecting natural resources at no cost to the taxpayers, in turn, for
the predictability and reliability of a program to utilize the credits that
resulted from creating the Natural Resource Protection.
When I last had the opportunity to speak before you in
November, you decided to have an arbitrator decide a matter oflaw,
not staff opinion, not your opinion, not the public opinion, and not my
opinion, but a matter of law.
Your attorney and my attorney jointly selected the arbitrator.
After two days of testimony, he decided what the majority of you and
the landowners believed to be true.
I ask you to honor the decision of the arbitrator and preserve the
integrity of the RLSA program. Thank you.
Page 112
January 11,2011
MS. PAYTON: Good afternoon. Nancy Payton, representing
the Florida Wildlife Federation.
I want to remind commissioners that the Rural Land Stewardship
Area program came into effect as a result of a settlement of litigation
by the Florida Department of Community Affairs, Florida Wildlife
Federation, and Collier County Audubon Society. And the Florida
Department of Community Affairs had found that Collier County was
not properly protecting its environmental resources, its wetland,
wildlife, and wildlife habitat, and had to find a different way, a
creative way, an innovative way, a community-based supported way
of protecting the environmentally sensitive lands in Eastern Collier
County. The old way of doing it was not working for protecting large
tracts of environmental lands.
The federation participated in good faith in the nonbinding
arbitration that took place last month, which was directed by the
commission and agreed to by the Eastern Collier Property Owners. It
was two days. There's an II-day, well-thought-out opinion by a
former Supreme Court judge.
We ask you to move forward, to adopt the arbitrator's decision
that a simple majority is needed to establish or amend a Stewardship
Receiving Area, making it consistent with the procedure, simple
majority for establishing a stewardship sending lands.
Please adopt and let's move forward. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Nancy, can I ask you a question
related to what Mike Rosen just addressed.
If these conservation easements are not into perpetuity, how are
we achieving the objective of what was intended by that settlement?
Because it seems to me that is not happening. And I would think,
from your perspective, you would be very concerned.
MS. PAYTON: Well, there are a number of stewardship sending
areas that are in permanent stewardship statutes. The ones in the last
two years are the ones that have the revocable clause. And my
Page 113
January 11,2011
understanding as a nonlawyer of the revocable charge, that there's a
five-year window from the day that they were established, that the
landowner has to decide whether he's going to use those credits, bank
those credits, or sell those credits.
At the end of the five-year period, he has the option, ifhe hasn't
found a use or a buyer for those credits, that it can be revoked, that it
does not become a permanent easement.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So in affect what's happened to
these earlier contracts which were established that created the -- these
easements into perpetuity where they are unable to sell their credits,
they basically have given up their rights for nothing?
MS. P A YTO N: At this point, and that was one of the reasons
why -- to address a revocable, within a certain time frame, easement,
because there was the issue of the Half Circle L Ranch, and that it was
a question of concern about having the ability to find a buyer or enter
into some -- a user of those credits.
I have not read those easements lately, so I leave it to the attorney
to tell us what it specifically says, and I hope it clarifies that, yes, it --
it's five years. Am I done?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Nancy?
MS. PAYTON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How many acres are currently
permanently preserved?
MS. PAYTON: I don't immediately have that answer. But when
we talk about the protection out there, it's roughly 50,000 acres.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But other than just a few, all
subject to reversal?
MS. PAYTON: No, a few subject to reversal.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The majority are perpetual
easements?
MS. PAYTON: We could get up the map that the county has on
Page 114
January 11,2011
their RLSA website and look and confirm which ones are permanent
and which ones are the revocable.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you help us with -- can you
interpret what you've put before us and explain to us what this is, Jeff?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. It's -- we gave them five years to get
the necessary permits and everything else done; otherwise, the escrow
agreement terminates. And so this agreement would have been
November 18,2008.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So after five years --
MR. KLATZKOW: It goes dead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: If -- basically it reverts back, and
there is no easement on the property?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So that's contrary to what your
understanding of the situation is? I mean, basically there is no --
MS. PAYTON: No. It's totally consistent with what I said.
MR. KLATZKOW: We're talking two sides of the same coin. I
mean, we created it so that -- we wanted -- we wanted to incentivize
the property owners to create SSAs, but they weren't going to do that
if they didn't know they could get the receivingship areas done.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay. But they had to get the SSAs done
before they could work on the SRAs, because they had to get the
developmental rights.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: And so what we said is, an incentive for you
to put on the SSA is, if you can't get the SRA done, we'll free up the
SSA for you, because there's no purpose for the SSA if you can't get
the SRA. And I'm sorry I'm talking in acronyms, but --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I completely understand
exactly what the issue is. And then we have a few people who, right
from the get-go, were forced into perpetual easements, and now they
Page 115
January 11,2011
have these credits they can't sell because there's no market for them.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, and I thought that was unfair.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's completely unfair. But this also
suggests that this program basically unwinds if these contracts are not
sellable.
MR. KLATZKOW: Not that the program unwinds. It's the
economy changed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I understand.
MR. KLATZKOW: And when Big Cypress comes in, there will
be SSAs available in order to develop it. At that point in time, these
things will either be redone or they'll go hard.
If Big Cypress never comes in, if there is never another
receivership area coming in, then you will not get any more SSAs out
there because the program simply is not working as envisioned.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep. So the 50,000 acres are
really at risk?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because if Big Cypress doesn't
develop -- would Big Cypress absorb all 50,000 -- you know, the
credits attributable to those 50,000 --
MR. KLATZKOW: Oh, I don't know how many.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or what -- do you know what --
MS. PAYTON: Some of those acres have been used to--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: For Ave Maria.
MR. KLATZKOW: Ave Maria.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MS. PAYTON: For Ave Maria.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So those are secured. Those are in
perpetuity. But the balance are not?
MS. PAYTON: No. I would not say the balance. I think you
need to look at the map to educate yourself on which ones. And I
can't pull it out of my memory, but it is available on the county
Page 116
January 11,2011
website, and it very clearly, last time I looked, identified those that are
revocable and those that are permanent.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, it would just seem to me,
based on that, that the characterization of the SSA is very, very
different than an SRA. And the fact that the document was silent as to
the vote on the SRA and explicit on the SSA is for an obvious reason.
The established law with respect to the SRA was already stated as it
applies to the whole county with respect to such zoning matters.
And while I understand the owners of the SSA would like to see
an easier voting threshold with respect to the SRAs, you know, they
are no different than all the other -- or I should say the SRA applicants
are no different than all the other zoning applicants in the county and
should be subject to the same laws.
The owners of the SSAs are fully protected with this provision in
there that allows them to not be bound if they can't sell their credits.
They're fully protected in this business transaction.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Next speaker?
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Duane Billington, and
he'll be followed by Brad Cornell.
MR. BILLINGTON: For the record, my name is Duane
Billington.
It's been clearly stated that the arbitrator's recommendation is not
binding. It does not have the force of law. Our Collier County
attorney explained to the landowners well over three months ago that
there's a legal remedy through the courts to revolve this.
Instead, Commissioner Coyle and Coletta supported a motion by
Commissioner Fiala to go to arbitration.
This was and is a circumvention of existing law to benefit a
group of rural lands receiving area developers.
Currently zoning variances are determined by a supermajority
vote. This has resulted in a relatively -- relatively well-thought-out
community with a quality ambience for over 350,000 residents.
Page 117
January 11,2011
A supermajority requirement would extend that same opportunity
to the 300,000 plus. Think of that, 300 plus -- thousand-plus future
residents projected for the receiving area.
Change this and you could destroy not only part of that ambiance
but certainly abandons the residents at Ave Maria to the whims of the
Barron Collier Corporation.
The special act that created Ave Maria allows the developers to
have control of local decision making that affects the pocketbook and
quality of life of the residents until a majority of the property is sold to
others.
This could take decades. The citizens' only protection is the
supermajority vote on zoning changes.
You have a decision to make. Decide if it is your duty to protect
the present and future residents of Collier County or help fatten the
wallets of the developers and future -- and further indenture the
residents of Ave Maria.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. BILLINGTON: Any questions?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Next speaker?
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Brad Cornell, and he'll be
followed by the last speaker, who will be Nicole Ryan.
MR. CORNELL: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Brad
Cornell, and I'm here on behalf of Collier County Audubon Society.
And I appreciate the opportunity to address you on this, which is a
very important question.
I want to first point out that this question is not about Jackson
Labs and that Collier County Audubon Society has no position on
Jackson Labs. This is a much more important question. And I'm glad
to hear you debating this this afternoon.
This is not just a landowner issue. It is a environmental issue.
The original -- as Nancy Payton pointed out to you, the original final
order from the governor and cabinet back in 1999 required Collier
Page 118
January 11,2011
County to better protect 300,000 acres of rural resources.
The chosen method was an intentive-based Rural Land
Stewardship Program, and that program was innovative and different,
completely different from the way land use planning and entitlement
had been done previously, and that was by design. We needed
something different because it was a long intractable fight that we
were in and out of court for a long time. This was a way to figure out
how to benefit the citizens of Collier County, the resources of Collier
County, and the landowners in this particular area.
Its adoption was the high bar back in 2003. And any further
supermajority requirement serves to disincentivize implementation of
that Rural Land Stewardship Program and the vital and effective
resource protections in Eastern Collier County that it implements.
That's why Collier County Audubon Society supports the whole Rural
Land Stewardship Program, including the incentivized SRAs. The
zoning action was accomplished with the overlay. We believe that that
was a very specific and arduous planning process that determined
where we would put or where would be appropriate to put future
developments and where we need to have, we must have, resources
protected, and that's the way that plan works out, and we support that.
Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Your final speaker is Nicole Ryan.
MS. RYAN: Good afternoon. For the record, Nicole Ryan, here
on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
As you may be aware, the Conservancy did participate in the
arbitration hearing, and we spoke in favor of a supermajority being
required for SRA designation and adoption and amendment.
And as one of the members of the initial RLSA Citizens'
Oversight Committee, our organization was involved in providing
input on both the overarching concepts of the RLSA program and also
on the specific detail policies of the program.
One of our specific comments back in 2002 was concern over the
Page 119
January 11,2011
lack of specificity as to where new towns would be located. It was
and still is the Conservancy's opinion that the intent of the RLSA is to
protect natural resources, not only through designation of Stewardship
Sending Areas, but also through appropriate locational siting of the
Stewardship Sending Areas.
We were assured that such specific review would come in the
future when applications for new towns were submitted through the
DRI review and also through the SRA review and approval process,
which was akin to a PUD.
The importance of this is not only to ensure an appropriate
Stewardship Receiving Area design internal to the receiving area, but
also to ensure that Stewardship Sending Areas are located and
designed in a manner that will maintain the integrity and continued
viability of natural resources in adjacent and surrounding areas which
include Stewardship Sending Areas.
The RLSA program anticipates at least 45,000 acres of SRAs
could be developed throughout the life of the program with SRAs
ranging from several hundred acres in size to 5,000-plus acres. These
SRAs are, by design, intensive land uses created to be compact and
sustainable but also acknowledged to be urban forms of development
in an area that is primarily rural.
While the population within the RLSA today is minimal as
compared to the total population countywide, it is anticipated that with
current and future SRAs being approved and brought online, the
population is going to increase significantly.
When that happens, changes made within SRAs and the
designation of new SRAs are going to impact communities, and these
residents deserve the same level of tough scrutiny and protection
provided by the rezoning process, including that supermajority vote.
It's the Conservancy's belief that if a project is good for the
community, there should be no trouble in obtaining the necessary four
votes that it would take to achieve that rezoning supermajority
Page 120
January 11,2011
approval.
As you're aware, the arbitrator's decision is nonbinding, and the
Conservancy asks that you carefully consider how your decision of
SRA designations being simple or supermajority will affect our
community and our environment within the 40,000-plus acres of
RLSA lands that are yet to be proposed for intensification of land use.
And I did want to finish by reiterating what Commissioner Hiller
brought up, the fact that we're not really debating four out of five
votes and three out of five votes. If we're talking simple majority, that
could be a two vote if you only have three commissioners present.
We don't believe that's a high enough standard of scrutiny.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Nicole, I think you make a very
important point, that the creation of this program wasn't only for the --
not only with the intent to protect areas that deserve protection under
conservation easements, but also to ensure that the development
within the SRAs and the location of those SRAs does not adversely
affect the environment and, you know, continue with that goal of
conservation; therefore, I cannot see how in the interest of protecting
both citizens and the environment when an action taken within the
SRA, for example, an amendment like, for example, you increase the
concentration of commercial relative to residential in a significant
matter, that that would not constitute the requirement for a
supermajority vote, just as it would in a PUD anywhere in Collier
County.
MS. RYAN: And that's -- that's our opinion of the process,
because you're correct, if -- you can't just look at setting lands aside
and say we're done. You have to take a look and say, ifmy
development is located here, how will that impact the lands that we set
aside to protect? Will additional roads have to be cut through those
lands to get people to and from? It needs to be part of that really
bigger review process.
Page 121
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, it's no different than with the
county as a whole. When we have, you know, lands that are
designated residential or commercial or whatever and a PUD decides
to be developed on that site, that is a zoning action, and that requires a
supermajority vote, doesn't it?
MS. RYAN: Correct, yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What is the difference?
MS. RYAN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's the last of our speakers?
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, that was your last speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. The -- I think the 14th
Amendment is clear as to all born natural citizens of the United States
of equal protection of life, liberty, and property. I think it's very clear.
I never would have set up a different process, and one would
have to argue that it's not -- we would have to treat the North Belle
Meade overlay the same as the RLSA, the Bayshore/Gateway overlay,
the rural fringe overlay, state critical -- critical state overlay, and the
NRPA overlays, and some of the subject districts that Commissioner
Hiller brought up, such as Henderson Creek overlay, Livingston Road
overlay, Corkscrew Island overlay, Orange Blossom overlay and the
one that was continued, Davis Boulevard/County Road (sic)
commercial subdistrict.
I think it's very important, as I was sworn in to protect the U.S.
Constitution and the state constitution, that everything should be
equal; therefore, until we ask the legislators to change the process of
zoning and land use, I'm going to make a motion that we treat the
RLSA lands the same as we do others on zoning with a supermajority.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I second that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And to do otherwise would be
unconsti tuti onal.
Page 122
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a motion by Commissioner
Henning, second by Commissioner Hiller to -- and I'm going to
rephrase what you said, to reject the decision made by the arbitrator,
because that's really what we're talking about; is that not true?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, I'd like to just make a
couple of comments here. The idea that we treat everyone the same is
simply not substantiated by law, constitution, or anything else. People
are not treated the same. Eighteen-year-olds can't do things that
21-year-olds can do. PUDs can do things that you as a homeowner,
independent homeowner, can't do or can't get.
We let communities create overlays to suit their specific needs
because we have believed in the past that those communities know
best what's good for their community, and they have a lot oflatitude in
developing overlays.
We just approved and -- at least the initial stages, and I think
we'll have another meeting on this soon -- an overlay for Immokalee
that has entirely different zoning standards than for any other place in
Collier County, and there are good reasons for doing that. So this idea
that everybody is treated the same is -- simply doesn't exist.
Now, let's get to the issue at hand here. I don't see any need to
change the current law. I don't see any inappropriate application of
the law. Section 11 of the 1967 statute says that a four-fifths majority
is required for the change of a zoning ordinance. It doesn't say a
zoning action. It says zoning ordinance. And not only that, but in
order for a change in the zoning ordinance to be effective, it must then
be filed with the Department of State.
So the question that the arbitrator was asked to answer was, is an
SSA or modification of an SSA a change of a zoning ordinance? And
the arbitrator said, no, it's a zoning action; it's not a zoning ordinance.
And he goes on to say -- and I'll read just so that you all understand
what he was trying to get at.
Page 123
January 11,2011
We know from precedent in Collier County that the designation
or amendment of an SRA is not deemed to be a zoning ordinance. We
know this because zoning ordinances require not only a supermajority
vote but must be filed with the Department of State in order to be
effective.
The sole existing SRA in Collier County, which is Ave Maria
SRA, was designated years ago by two separate resolutions, and
neither resolution was filed with the Department of State. Moreover,
the two resolutions stated that they were adopted after motion, second,
and majority vote.
This quoted language is not hidden deep within the text of the
subject resolutions. Instead it appears within inches and on the same
page as the board chairman's signature line as well as the county
attorney's signature line approving resolution as to form and legal
sufficiency.
In sharp contrast, ordinances approving rezones which do, in fact,
require a four-fifths board vote for approval contain the following
language: Approved with motion, second, and supermajority vote.
So the question was a fairly narrow question. Is a designation or
amendment of an SRA a change in the zoning ordinance? And the
judge has decided that, no, it is not a change in the ordinance. If it's
not a change in the ordinance, it's not governed by Section 11 of the
1967 law.
Consequently, no change to the law is required. We will
continue to have four-fifths majority for zoning ordinance changes
throughout Collier County. There will be no unequal protection, and
there is simply no evidence other than a desire to defeat a land
development petition that was, at least once upon a time, connected
with Jackson Labs. Had they not been connected with Jackson Labs,
none of this discussion probably would be taking place here.
So I think the decision was based on a very specific point of law,
and I would not support this current motion.
Page 124
January 11,2011
So with that, are there others who want to make comments?
Commissioner Coletta, were you next?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm not sure, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's start with you. You've been
quiet for a long time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's because it's hard to get a
word in edgewise when you're talking.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I know. It's real hard.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Basically you covered it very
well. And the only thing I wanted to add to it is that the verbiage
that's being used out there is that there's a difference between the
eastern part of the county and the western part of the county. I mean,
God help us, I mean, the RLSA is not what I would call the eastern
part of the county. It's a small portion of the whole land mass that's
out there.
So if we're going to use any kind of descriptive phrases, we ought
to use that one in the correct context, rather than saying east versus
west, trying to get everybody from 951 as some sort of dividing line.
We're one county. We're going to solve this issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning and
Hiller, did have you --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you want to speak again?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who brought this issue up about
not supporting Jackson Lab and the zoning issue and the three-fourths
(sic)? Wasn't that the landowners, or was that commissioners?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't know what you're talking about.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, your comment about the
-- this all stemmed from the non-supporters of Jackson Labs and the
zoning action.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Are you saying my observation is
not correct?
Page 125
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. Who is -- who are you
referring to?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, do you know anybody here who is
opposed to this who wasn't also opposed to Jackson Labs? I can't--
Nicole is probably the only one. All of the others are clearly and
strongly opposed to Jackson Labs, and they will be clearly and
strongly opposed to this land development petition. And it would
never have come up, in my opinion, had it not been connected with
Jackson Labs.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you for your
clarification, even though I don't agree with it. But I just wanted you
to clarify it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Jeff, was the RLSA created
by ordinance?
MR. KLATZKOW: The RLSA ordinance, yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. Section 11 of the
1967 Special Act, as amended, provides as follows: Supplementing
and amending the zoning ordinance. The governing body may from
time to time amend or supplement the regulations in districts fixed by
any zoning ordinance adopted pursuant to this act. Proposed changes
may be suggested, blah, blah, blah, blah, and it goes on and on.
Essentially what they're saying is that any resolution -- the
zoning ordinance and any resolution or -- should there be any -- let me
restate that.
Ifthere is the desire to amend or supplement regulations pursuant
to an ordinance, it's a four-fifths vote. That's my understanding.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That wasn't the judge's understanding.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I mean, I'm reading it right
here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
First Commissioner Fiala?
Page 126
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Possibly we want to take a
break about now?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Two commissioners--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It is -- this is -- and I'm just going
to refer everyone to -- I mean, it seems to me --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, it's Commissioner Henning's --
okay. He's back now. So I'm going to call the question.
There's a motion on the table by Commissioner Henning,
seconded by Commissioner Hiller, to refuse to accept the arbitrator's
recommendations.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It -- motion fails with Coletta, Coyle,
and Fiala dissenting.
I will make a motion that we approve the arbitrator's
recommendations. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
Is there a discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes -- all opposed, by like sign,
aye?
Page 127
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. You need to say aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, 3-3.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, 3-3. That's a tie vote. You want to
do it again? Okay. The motion to accept the arbitrator's decision is
approved with Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Hiller
dissenting.
Take us to the next item of business. You want to break; that's it.
You don't want to break? Okay. That's right. We'll go for another 30
minutes.
Item #10A
SEEKING AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE BY GIFT OR PURCHASE
THOSE PERPETUAL AND TEMPORARY EASEMENT
INTERESTS NECESSARY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENTS FOR OUTFALL #3 AND #4
SEGMENTS OF THE LEL Y AREA STORMW A TER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. (PROJECT NO. 51101.)-
DISCUSSED; NO ACTION TAKEN
MR. OCHS: That takes us to Item lOon your agenda,
Commissioners, county manager's report.
lOA is a recommendation to adopt a resolution seeking authority
to acquire by gift or purchase those perpetual and temporary easement
interests necessary for the construction of stormwater improvements
for the Outfall Number 3 and 4 segments of the Lely Area Stormwater
Improvement Project.
Jay Ahmad, your Director of Transportation Engineering and
Construction Management, will present.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
Page 128
,.....__""_.,.__,,.,cu' _ 0" .~_"-..-....",__'_'
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Fiala.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's a second by Commissioner
Coletta. And there are questions by Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you need to get anything on
the record?
MR. AHMAD: No, sir. I have a presentation, if you wish, I
could present to you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have -- the question I have is,
there are -- there are two easements, outfall easements, that you're
seeking. How wide are these easements?
MR. AHMAD: Let me put something on display for -- for the
record, Mr. Chairman, I'm Jay Ahmad, your director of Transportation
Engineering.
On the display there's a typical section for Outfall 3, and it shows
60 foot of existing easement, and all we need is approximately 10 feet,
10 to 15 feet, on the south side of that outfall.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're acquiring 10 foot?
We already have --
MR. AHMAD: It varies. As can you see, it varies between 10 to
15 feet. And I -- let me just -- yeah. If I can switch to the other
display.
The Outfall 3 as shown on the display there, the area in green is
pretty much the existing easement, which is approximately 60 feet,
and on the south side, as you can see, the yellow line is about 10 feet.
It varies in some areas, 10 to 15 feet, but average of about 10 feet.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How do you come to the -- I
guess it would be an estimate -- of requiring just an easement of 10
foot, approximately 10 foot on these two streets?
MR. AHMAD: The next display I have is maybe answering that
question. You could see the parcels, and the numbers indicate the
Page 129
January 11, 2011
parcels we need for this project.
Weare about 60 percent design in this -- on this project, and we
do have survey and engineering drawings of this canal. As you saw
earlier, there was a cross-section. It is based on those design
engineering plans that we have that we know we need those
easements.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. The price of those
easements.
MR. AHMAD: Oh, the price. It's -- your staff, Kevin Hendricks,
my Property Acquisition Manager, and his appraisal (sic), Harry
Henderson, they estimate these parcels based on market value.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. AHMAD: Sure. If you wish, the other question that you
had is the other easement, the other outfall, and I don't think I
answered your question on that one.
This is a part of engineering drawings I was mentioning, and the
area in green is the existing easement. The area in --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pink?
MR. AHMAD: Yeah. The display on your visualizer shows
three areas of colors. The area in green is the existing 30-foot
easement. That's the drainage easement that exists by plat.
Throughout the life of LASIP, there have been purchases, existing
60- foot purchased in prior years, and the pink area shows the area that
we need.
So it's not quite as easy or as clean as the other one with 10 feet.
It varies from -- you could see, along the project, from different areas.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So what's the purple?
MR. AHMAD: That's the area -- the purple is the -- proposed for
drainage easements that we need, and it's part of your item this
afternoon. For the outfall, the -- what you have before you is an item
to approve the -- to approve a resolution to allow staff to negotiate
with those property owners in that color, that purple, for the LASIP
Page 130
January 11,2011
project.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Jay, would you go back to that aerial
photo, please.
MR. AHMAD: Certainly.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now, I know that these lines are not
precise, but it looks to me like you are taking some structures, at least
on the Outfall Number 4. I'm just wondering how much that increases
the cost of this and if there is a less-expensive way to get this job
done.
MR. AHMAD: Sir, those are not -- there are structures -- there're
encroachment structures, sheds, and some outparc- -- structures out
there.
The engineers were directed to make sure that we minimize the
costs of right-of-way acquisition. And as you can see, they have taken
parcels on the north and on the south side for Outfall 4 to address that
issue. They didn't just go on one side of the canal as opposed -- on
one side or the other. In this area where the structures are, they've
actually gone on both sides to minimize impact.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's still not clear to me. But when you
say that these are encroaching structures, are you telling me they
encroach into current setbacks or easements?
MR. AHMAD: No, sir. I don't know the answer to that. What
I'm saying, there are structures almost to the rear lot line, if you will,
of that parcel. They are not the primary residences of -- that's what I
meant.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are they set back the appropriate
distance from the lot lines?
MR. AHMAD: I don't know the answer now, but that's
something we are looking into if -- when we are negotiating with
them, if they are legal structures or not, and that would affect the value
of those.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Tell me why you need to take
Page 131
January 11,2011
more land on the north side for this outfall but only for a small portion
of it, or let's say a third of the total length.
MR. AHMAD: The primary reason is the canal exists, and all
we're doing is widening. And you can see toward the left of your
screen, if you will, that portion of the canal does exist. And so we're
keeping the alignment to minimize the cost where the canal exists
today, and we're just making it wider where we can and not changing
completely the alignment of that canal, but accommodating the
product within the alignment of the existing canal.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's still not answering my question, Jay.
You have a yellow line which shows the proposed easement for
the south side of that outfall, and then you have a yellow line on the
north side of that that is just for roughly a third, or maybe a little more
than a third of the distance of the outfall. Why is that?
MR. AHMAD: Maybe I'll go back to the other display which
explains that a bit better, I think.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. AHMAD: The one you see here is the little area on the
north side of the canal, and you can see the majority of the -- the
majority of the take is on the south side to avoid those impacts to the
properties, and essentially it's to keep the canal in the existing -- the
green is the alignment pretty much where the existing canal is and
without moving the canal to the south and taking advantage of
addressing it on the south side.
And I think the other explains it a bit better. Let me see if I -- it's
__ the majority is for a roadway actually for not -- for a service to
maintain this canal. There is -- there's a proposed -- a roadway on the
__ the canal on the south side, so it's just to develop that cross-slope
back. You know, the canal-- the canal has three-to-one slopes, and
essentially to regrade that slope, a lot of the north side taking is -- for
re-grading of that -- the shape of the canal.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Page 132
January 11,2011
MR. OCHS: He wants to know why this line doesn't extend in
both directions.
MR. AHMAD: I'm sorry?
MR. OCHS: He wants to know why this line doesn't extend all
the way down on both sides; why just in the middle?
MR. AHMAD: Right. And it's because of the existing alignment
to the canal. I don't know if I'm explaining it best. It is because the
existing canal on the west side exists, and we're not shifting the canal
to the south. We're simply widening the canal. And all we need is --
to reshape that canal is a three-to-one slope and get back to existing
ground.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So -- okay. Let's start with the -- you
know, this is getting much more complex than it needs to be.
We're talking about Outfall 4, and we take that yellow line
segment to the north of Outfall 4.
Now, if you need that full distance between that partial yellow
line and the yellow line on the south to permit appropriate flow of
water --
MR. AHMAD: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- why don't you need it to the right and
to the left of that?
MR. AHMAD: It's -- the canal-- I don't know how to explain
this a bit better. Maybe, Norman.
MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, Transportation
Administrator -- or Growth Management Division Administrator,
excuse me.
To the right of there, you're a little bit narrower. This is an
outfall, and it becomes a bit of a spreader lake, it's a little wider, and
therefore the capacity demands. To the left it exists, as you can see
there today.
So what you're doing is you're taking a canal, which is a little bit
narrow, as you see up at 41, it broadens a little bit, and then it
Page 133
January 11,2011
broadens out a little bit more to address the full impact of the project.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And then it narrows back down before it
dumps into the creek.
MR. FEDER: No, not actually, because if you can see there, it's
already established in a water body, and that's being utilized as part of
the canal. It's a little wider to that left-hand side.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. FEDER: The section right in here --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm with you.
MR. FEDER: -- is in canal--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Why don't they just widen it down
on the south side of it where there's nobody living --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Leave it alone.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- and they won't take anybody's --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Why not just widen it there?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It seems to make sense, rather than
go in and --
MR. FEDER: Commissioners, let me do this. I know that they
evaluated it in the design. But we haven't answered your question
today. We'll bring this back to you before we proceed.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good. I'll withdraw my motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Henning, you have a question or comment?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can -- can you forward me a
copy of your PowerPoint, or is that it there? Can I have that?
MR. AHMAD: Certainly, yes, sir. You certainly can. And I
have it in email format. I can also email it to you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, I want them both.
MR. AHMAD: Okay.
Page 134
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm greedy.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala, did you
have anything else?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nope.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then take us to the next item.
Item # lOC
IN SUPPORT OF THE GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION
MSTU, AWARD BID #10-5595 FOR, CORONADO PARKWAY
AND HUNTER BLVD. MEDIAN, CURBING AND LANDSCAPE
INSTALLATION PART ONE: CURBING TO BONNESS INC. IN
THE AMOUNT OF $764,985.16, AND PART TWO: LANDSCAPE
& IRRIGATION INST ALLA TION TO HANNULA LANDSCAPE
& IRRIGATION INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $290,879.86-
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Next item is 10C. It's in support of the Golden
Gate Beautification MSTU. Recommendation to award Bid Number
10-5595 for Coronado Parkway and Hunter Boulevard median,
curbing and landscaping, installation part one: Curbing to Bonness,
Incorporated, in the amount of $764,985.16; and part two: Landscape
and irrigation installation to Hannula Landscape and Irrigation, Inc., in
the amount of $290,879.86.
Ms. Michelle Arnold will present.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Whose district, Coletta's or --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning has made
a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
Any questions by commissioners?
Page 135
January 11,2011
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously. Wonderful
presentation.
MS. ARNOLD: Thank you very much.
Item #10D
PROJECTS AND POLICY PRIORITIES PROPOSED FOR THE
COLLIER COUNTY FISCAL YEAR 2012 FEDERAL
LEGISLATIVE AGENDA WHICH WILL BE PRESENTED TO
THE CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION AND TO ADVOCATE
FOR FEDERAL FUNDING CONSIDERATION AS WELL AS
PURSUE ELIGIBLE 2011 GRANTS AND ANY APPLICABLE
FEDERAL PROGRAMS THAT BECOME A V AILABLE-
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, 10D is a recommendation to
review and approve the projects and policy priorities proposed for the
Collier County fiscal year 2012 federal legislative agenda, which will
be presented to the congressional delegation and advocated for federal
funding consideration as well as pursuant for eligible 2011 grants and
any applicable federal grants that become available.
Ms. Debbie Wight, Legislative Affairs Coordinator, will present.
Page 136
January 11,2011
MS. WIGHT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. You have before
you a list of proposed agenda with nine projects; seven of those are
continuing projects, and three of those are proposed projects that are
new this year, and one of those should look very familiar. It was on
your state -- you approved it as a state legislative priority, and that is
the Ochopee EMS and Fire Station on 1-75.
You identified it as a critical public safety need, and we're
working our state and federal level sources for that.
Just to point out a few things. There are the continuing projects,
Naples Bay restoration, beach renourishment, Vanderbilt lagoon, and
the tri-county water interconnect. Those are four authorized projects
in the 2007 Water Resources Development Act. We still haven't
gotten the appropriation, and that's why we continue to bring them
forward.
We dropped off the Emergency Services Center, because that has
been adequately funded several years succeeding in past -- on past
agendas.
We also removed the Immokalee airport from the agenda because
that is going to seek funding in the same avenue that the Marco
airport, which is through the Federal Aviation Administration. As you
recall, in 2010 it received a grant for over $6 million, which is
probably one of our largest grants last year, and we were real proud of
that success, which was through efforts outside of this program, but
still.
MR. OCHS: Which project was that?
MS. WIGHT: The Marco airport taxiway. And I talked to Mr.
Curry, and they are, indeed, going to pursue funding in that same
Federal Aviation Administration avenue.
Also, the stormwater drainage pipes. Because of too many
proj ects in that same account, we've removed that.
So I think you're familiar with most of these, although I do have
-- the project managers are here if you have questions. Collier Area
Page 137
January 11,2011
Transit is new, because that -- you know how successful that is, and
we are asking for the federal government for funding to improve the
facility at the new -- the Radio Road facility to further develop that.
Collier Health Services, we're trying to -- that's also been a very
well-received project for the under and -- underinsured and uninsured
through the Physicians Led Access Network that now we're in the
Senior Friendship Center, and now we have expanded that project to
include services for the blind, and so that's where that's going. We're
asking for equipment for that. And that's always been very well
received.
Let me see. Our two main -- the two highest priority projects
continue to be 1-75/Everglades Boulevard interchange, as well as
1-75/Collier Boulevard, SR84, Davis Boulevard.
I think you probably read -- if you read the executive summary --
and you probably are well aware of the earmark situation. Our
lobbyists, the Ferguson Group, has continued to emphasize that even
though that is a -- the current climate, political climate, they have had
us pursue agencies, National Park Service, Department of Homeland
Security, Department -- U.S. Department of Transportation and
Federal Highway, et cetera.
There are just various other avenues to pursue funding for our
projects. And we do, there's no doubt about it, we have the support for
our projects of our congressional delegation.
Anyway, I'll be quiet and see if you have any questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I had one simple question.
What is Brookdale Center?
MS. WIGHT: That is the name for the center.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, out in Golden Gate?
MS. WIGHT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The new one that they built?
MS. WIGHT: Yes, yes. Marci told me that today.
Page 138
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Good. I didn't know that.
Okay.
One of the other parts -- and it didn't say it on here that I saw, but
we got a memorandum from Jim Coletta, Commissioner Coletta. And
so first of all, I'd like to just take this out of context and say I'd like to
make a motion that Jim Coletta be our representative to Washington,
D.C. I'm delighted that he's already gotten these offers and--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you've been up there so many
times. You know the ropes already, so you would be great for us.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That wasn't publicly advertised.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Do we have to -- it's --
let's see. When is the trip, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The trip will take place on
February the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there any way we can handle
this under commissioner's comments?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We could, or we could just put it on the
agenda next week for that particular thing. But there's no -- there's no
requirement that we approve his trip. I mean, he's got a travel budget.
He can travel where he wants to go.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. You still have to approve it
if it's outside the state.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ah, that's right, that's right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So let's limit the action to the
approval trip --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That won't work, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: What do you mean it won't work?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if I have to wait till the
next meeting --
Page 139
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, no, no. I'm saying right now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, wait a minute, wait a minute.
There was nothing in this that addressed the approval of
Commissioner Coletta to go up to Washington, D.C.?
MR. OCHS: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Not in this item?
MR. OCHS: No. We're simply asking for your endorsement of
the 2012 federal legislative agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then why don't we do the second
part of this under correspondence and communications.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That will be fine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- Mr. Klatzkow, that works?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. What about, you know,
approving his budget and everything; do we have to do that, too, or
can we just nominate him to be our representative for Washington
during correspondence?
MR. KLATZKOW: This board -- it's the pleasure of the board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Now, let me ask you this:
Why can't we just nominate him now to do this even though it's not
part of this, a separate nomination altogether instead of waiting till the
end of the meeting? Isn't it six of one, half a dozen of another?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's the pleasure of the board, ma'am. It's
usually the chairman who would be make this decision.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. I don't want to do it that way.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. We'll wait.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine. It does say in here
that it would be presented to our congressional delegation for federal
Page 140
January 11,2011
funding. It doesn't spell it out. But in order to present it, you have to
have somebody carry it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right, right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Under communications we'll take
that up, okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Very good then. And I think
this was a well-prepared report. Ferguson Group's been a great
lobbyist group for us in DCA (sic), and so -- Washington, I'm sorry,
airline code. Didn't I slip in an airline code -- for five years, and so I
want to approve these.
I liked every one of these things. Most of them are ongoing. I
don't know that we'll ever get any of them because of all of the
elimination of the --
MS. WIGHT: Earmarks.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- yeah, earmarks.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: They're now going to become grants.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. But hopefully we get some
of them, because most of these things are very important to our
community, so I make a motion to approve this slate of requests.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll be happy to second that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But also comment that we do
have a very good legislative delegation up in Washington, D.C.
They're very supportive of us here in Collier County. And I'm sure
that when they take a look at it -- although I doubt seriously we're
going to see everything on the list. I know that they'll take our
priorities, especially our high priorities, with great enthusiasm.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And the new guys up there are good
friends of yours, from what I know, and so you'll be able to -- be able
to talk with him one on one, and I'm sure that they'll go to bat for you.
And same with Commissioner Henning, he's had a lot of workings
Page 141
January 11,2011
with them as well.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He has.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So that helps a lot.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It does. It helps the cultural --
to culture (sic) personal relationships with the elected congressman or
senator.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Comnlissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Getting back to the
discussion at hand, okay, even though at a previous item that wasn't
advertised, we continued to the next meeting -- but getting to the topic
at hand, you were talking about, you know, the earmark process that's
not going to happen anymore, and then you talk about different
agencies, those agencies applying for -- through those agencies.
Now, are you talking about doing grants through those agencies?
MS. WIGHT: For instance, currently the Ochopee, the 1-75 and
EMS and fire facility, we have -- I'm actually proud to say we have
both our state and federal lobbyists working on it. We're working with
the National Park Service. We're working with Dan Summers and his
staff, as well as myself. We have been communicating with Senator
Nelson's office. We've also been -- currently, because of -- I'm trying
to answer your questions, but currently --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. WIGHT: I am getting to it. Because of the -- because there
wasn't an omnibus appropriations bill passed in December, we're still
waiting for the FY20 11 appropriations bills. Our lobbyist does not
know the disposition of those bills and the congressional guidance of
those, which will be -- usually what they do with those is they will be
split up and given to the agencies, i.e, the National Park Service,
Department of Homeland Security, whatever, and then we will pursue
those in whatever -- our Ferguson Group will be watching those,
monitoring those, perhaps some will go to TIGER grant.
Page 142
January 11,2011
And Commissioner Coletta just had excellent meetings with the
Department of Transportation and made great strides in our two
transportation projects talking about those safely because these two --
two projects are among five that you-all voted in April of 2009 to be
on your transportation reauthorization bill candidates, as you recall,
when Congressman Diaz-Balart was here and Connie Mack several
years ago or -- well, April 2009.
Have I not answered your question?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you -- when you go through
the agencies, is this some sort of grant or is this a grant when you say,
if the appropriations, earmarks go away?
MS. WIGHT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's through grants?
MS. WIGHT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And those grants are up for
everybody to grab?
MS. WIGHT: Yes. It's going to be very competitive.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So it's the same thing
that we have done -- Marlene Ford is our grant coordinator.
MS. WIGHT: We're going to be working with Marlene.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So why do we need to go
through -- why do we have to have a lobbyist, a staff member -- well,
maybe not -- staff member go to Washington, D.C. -- I kind of heard
from the county manager that wasn't going to happen -- and a County
Commissioner? Why are we lobbying those when it's a process of
submitting a grant application and being approved by the agencies, not
the legislators, the Congress?
MS. WIGHT: Commissioner, I think we still have yet to see how
it's all going to flesh out, but I think there's enough work to be done
that I think -- I can't speak for Marlene, but I think she's going to
welcome the assistance.
And I can tell you that the Ferguson Group, in three years we've
Page 143
January 11,2011
got -- the return has been $7.5 million.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Please, please, just stay with
me.
MS. WIGHT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And real simple -- it's a simple
question, simple answer.
MS. WIGHT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not trying to get a whole
bunch of information, just the answer to my question.
MS. WIGHT: Okay. In the -- okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll ask a different question.
MS. WIGHT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there going to be any
earmarks this coming session?
MS. WIGHT: I thought I answered that. There -- no.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
MS. WIGHT: The House Republicans have said no.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MS. WIGHT: So it will be the second year of a moratorium.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MS. WIGHT: And there are --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So all we'll have is the ability to
apply for grants to agencies like we have historically done. So I'm not
sure why we need, again, Commissioners, a lobbyist, a staff member
go to Washington, D.C., or a County Commissioner. We just apply
for the grants.
MS. WIGHT: If -- if I may?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can we answer that latter question about
commissioners during our correspondence period, since --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I'll remove that from my
comment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Page 144
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They're all interlinked.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, but they're different things than the
subject of this item.
MS. WIGHT: Okay. In may? The TIGER grant, which we did
not get any -- any success -- we had no success with, and we've
applied twice, when you meet with the DOT and the agencies and you
get the support of your members and you have them communicating,
writing letters -- Congressman Connie Mack, Congressman David
Rivera, they will write letters, they will make calls. We already know
they support our projects.
Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart, who is no longer in our district,
we picked up the phone and called him and he was here a couple of
months ago for the Everglades/I-75 interchange and promised that he
will continue to support our efforts. It's a little bit different, our
approach and their ability -- they're a way of helping us.
And one other point I want to make, it's cyclic in D.C. This
earmark situation, our lobbyist doesn't believe it's going to last,
because the people, especially in the Senate that support it, don't
believe it's going to last, because peo- -- the members want to bring
things home to their local governments. We haven't all had -- all of
them haven't had bad projects or bad -- they haven't brought back and
had bad press from the things they've done in their home governments.
So I mean, there -- we -- I'm proud of everything we've brought
back. And I think that those Senators and those Congressmen are not
going to be satisfied with a moratorium on earmarks forever.
Yes, maybe there should be earmark reform, but to do away with
the lobbyist and then go through and find another one? They do a --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thanks, Norman.
MS. WIGHT: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller was next, I
believe.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have a similar question. I mean,
Page 145
January 11,2011
I really don't understand. We're hiring a lobbyist to supplement what
our federal representatives are already supposed to do for us. So we're
already compounding our representation at that level.
Now, on top of that, we're going to add staff to that? I mean, I
really don't understand. We're -- you know, we're in very difficult
economic times. I don't see where the value add is, and I question the
expenditure of public funds to triple the lobby, if you will, when we
know exactly what the situation is. There are no earmarks available.
You've made that abundantly clear. We're applying for grants where
there is -- there should not be political influence but rather it should be
based on -- you know, it should be need based and merit based,
depending on what the grant is about.
So I just really find that it's an inappropriate expenditure of
public funds to be sending staff when we're already spending funds on
lobbyists, which I should -- which I also say should not be necessary if
we had good federal representation.
The one thing I want to be sure of is that with any funding that
we get from the federal government, that we are fully made aware of
what conditions attach to the county in receiving those funds, to make
sure none of the conditions that are attached to those funds, whatever
the source, would be conditions that we would find unacceptable.
So I, in particular, would like to know any and all conditions that
relate to the grant funding, you know, outside of, you know, here's the
money to build a road; build a road.
So if you could apprise me of that, I would very much appreciate
it, and highlight any that you may think might be, you know, negative
to the county's interest and direction.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Just to put a couple of
things in content. As far as earmarks go, I think it's just a temporary
suspension of them. As far as budget items go, it's only half of 1
percent of the budget of these different departments to go actually into
Page 146
January 11,2011
earmarks.
They're a way that the legislators can reach back to their home
base and show them they're doing something, even though they may
be smaller appropriations compared to what you have in the
transportation budget. It's still away from the response, so don't be so
quick to write them off. They could still be there when the time does
come.
An interesting point. Senator Nelson had come up with a
million-dollar earmark for our Everglades interchange project, and
that whole thing was based upon the fact that he came down for the
Everglades restoration. He insisted that staff drive him to Everglades
Boulevard where the interchange was at Everglades and 1-75. And
they kept insisting there was no interchange, and he said he could see
it on the map and drive him there. No one was going to argue with the
senator.
So he got down there. He found out there was no interchange,
and to say he was a little bit T'd off would probably be putting it
mildly, and that's where that million dollars came. So sometimes
there's a little humor to this positive outfall.
As far as the grants, the TIGER One, TIGER Two grants that
took place over the previous two years, and the anticipated TIGER
Three grants that are coming up, we -- I believe we have applied, but
we have not been successful.
Now, the truth of the matter is, do they base everything upon the
application that's sent in? No, they don't. There's always external
factors that take place that move it forward.
The senior policy analyst for transportation, his name is Robert
Mariner -- and I talked to him for about an hour in Washington, and he
was very receptive of what we're trying to do. We seemed to build up
a certain amount of trust and friendship with the gentleman. And he
offered that when we came back to Washington to visit with our
congressional -- our congressman and our senator, that he would be
Page 147
January 11,2011
more than happy to accompany us when we go to those meetings to
explain what they have to do at their level to be able to move it
forward.
So as far as what comes back to us, there's a cause and effect.
The more interplay you have with your elected officials, the more the
positive results would be. And that's not only here; it's at the state,
and we even see it here with the commission, too.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great. Then I want to help you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I need all the help I can get.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'll probably just bounce off of
that then, because that's what I was going to center around.
I don't have all of the -- all of the particulars, but if I remember,
we never even used to go to Washington or anything, and then Jim
Mudd decided to go up there. And when he sawall of the people
going in there and bringing money back home, he came back here and
he said, "You know what, we're missing this opportunity. We should
be doing this."
So we then began to try and do this, and then we found that we
needed some expertise up there who actually knew what grants were
available, what new things were coming onboard, because we were
too far away to know what was coming about.
And Marlene, bless her sweet heart, she can only do so much.
She can't know what all is going on in Washington.
So then he said, "We need to have a lobbyist group to go with
us," and he insisted on our people going up to work with them,
because that made all the difference. And we began to bring millions
of dollars into Collier County that we never had before.
And so I'm really solidly behind it. They've paid for themselves
over and over and over, and it's helped us in situations where we
wouldn't have the money.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the same at the state level.
Page 148
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Same at the state level.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We could use all the help we
can get at the state level.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do we have a motion to approve
this item?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passed 4-1 with Commissioner
Henning dissenting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Terri's fingers just fell off.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We've got another 45 minutes to go. No,
we're going to take a ten-minute break. We'll be back at 3:13.
(A recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, the Board of
Commission meeting is back in session.
Now, where do we go?
Item #10E
Page 149
January 11,2011
AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY REPORT
REQUIRED BY SECTION 125.045, FLORIDA STATUTES AND
AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER TO SUBMIT A COPY
OF THE REPORT TO THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC AND
DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: We go to 10E, sir, that was formerly Item 16F2.
It's a recommendation for the board to approve an Economic
Development Agency report required by Section 125.045, Florida
Statutes, and authorize the county manager to submit a copy of the
report to the Office of Economic and Demographic Research.
This item was moved from the consent agenda at Commissioner
Hiller's request.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, the reason I brought this
forward is because I actually do read the information that's included in
our packet, and especially if it's produced by outsiders and I'm
supposed to rely on it and the board is supposed to rely on it for
informational and as a result of decision-making purposes.
When I started reviewing the numbers in this chart that was
submitted in detail, I started having some concerns. And what I'm
going to do is I'm going to walk up to the podium so I can put some
things on the overhead and address my concerns.
So here's the report as submitted by the EDC. Not Page 2, just
Page 1. It's very difficult to read, so -- actually, I will take -- I will
take the mike.
This report basically extrapolates the economic impact generated
as a result of the investment in incentive dollars in the various
businesses that the EDC held. And the problem that I have with this
report is that in these extensions it appears that there is an
overweighting that tends to inflate the real economic impact.
And let me give you an example why. If you look at the first
Page 150
January 11,2011
three line items which describes three different companies or, you
know, it's with respect to three different companies, Company one, the
projected new job creation was zero. Company two, the projected
new job creation was 15. You look at Company three, and the
projected new job creation was zero again.
And then you go to the average wage column as it relates to these
three companies. And the average wage for Company one was
57,000; the average wage for Company two was 24,000 -- and I'm just
rounding -- and Company three was 52,000.
Now, remember, we have 0 employees, 15,0 employees, and yet
we have the average wage being applied to come up with a weighted
average of 43,000 based on 57-, 24-,52,000 to those 15 newly created
positions.
Obviously, when you have such a large weighted average
attributed to those 15 new employees, you're going to come up with a
very, very large number.
So just for fun -- and I didn't even continue because, you know,
obviously what that column already has issues with it, you know,
going beyond and looking at multipliers really doesn't make any
sense, doesn't really have any benefit -- I basically eliminated the
salaries.
And I'm going to introduce all of these as exhibits so anyone who
wants to look closer, you know, is welcome to. It's a little bit difficult
with these overheads.
You basically, when you eliminate the -- the weighted -- when
you eliminate the salaries attributable to those companies who have no
new projected jobs and you extrapolate, the direct earnings impact is
materially different than what was reported by the EDC.
The number I came up with was 5 million -- and again, I'm just
going to round -- 200,000. The number the EDC came up with was,
sorry, 29,500,000.
So basically what you see is that there is clearly a very inflated
Page 151
January 11,2011
representation of the economic impact of the investments made and
the projected job creation. And that, to me, is very troubling because
it makes things look much better than they are.
And when I as a commissioner am making public policy
decision, I need to know what really is going on. So that's the first
issue I have.
Then another issue that I was really concerned about is, there was
one footnote that addressed a company that had not yet reported back,
and I was very concerned about that, because when we make an
investment in an entity like the EDC, and the EDC turns around and
makes investments in these companies, we want to know what process
is in place to validate that what we expected these companies to do to
benefit economic development in this community has actually
occurred.
And what I would like to see is, they're supposed to -- the EDC is
supposed to be tracking the return on the investments made over a
three-year period. I think our Board of County Commissioners needs
a three-year look-back report to really see that all the companies that
made a commitment to generate jobs or make capital investments or
whatever they committed to do, in fact, did.
And like I said, I'll turn these in to the --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Court reporter.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Now, the last issue that I want to
make is, in this analysis they are -- the EDC is including existing jobs
in their calculations. And there's a problem with that, because an
argument cannot be made that investing for the creation of a new job
is in some way contributing to the retention of these businesses, and
but for the investment, these companies would close down and move
elsewhere.
That isn't the case. Whenever economic impact is calculated, it's
based on the incremental value generated by the investment, not on
the total, assuming the existing jobs that are already here.
Page 152
January 11,2011
And those are the few comments that I wanted to bring to the
table, and I thought they were significant, and that's why I asked to be
pulled -- why I asked this to be moved from the consent agenda, and I
really look forward to the EDC responding, and I'm going to turn it
over to them, and then I'll turn these records into the reporter.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who wants to respond from EDC?
Tammie Nemecek.
MS. NEMECEK: Tammie Nemecek, President and CEO ofthe
Economic Development Council, Collier County.
We'd be happy to sit down with Commissioner Hiller and go over
the methodology of these numbers and how they're calculated and
work with her on modifying that or looking at multiple ways of
showing how the impact of what the EDC is doing here in Collier
County.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you want to have the public
perception at the present time that you have done it incorrectly?
MS. NEMECEK: No, the public perception is not "incorrectly".
What we show on these reports are the economic impact that these
companies have here in the community.
We value both existing jobs of the businesses that are here and
those people that are employed in those businesses, as well as the new
jobs that they're creating.
If you notice on the report, two of the companies actually receive
financial incentives from the county. The rest of them are programs
that we administer through Grow FL, which is a state program called
Economic Gardening, workforce training programs where we're
training existing employees. There's multitudes of programs on here
that -- and for the majority of them, they are factored on focusing on
the existing business with the existing jobs in the business and helping
make that solid so that they are prepared to create the new jobs down
the road and stay here in Collier County.
So I would -- I would contend that the majority of our work is
Page 153
January 11,2011
focused on actually keeping people here, keeping them open, keeping
them thriving and supplemented by the job creation and the new
business recruitment activity that we do.
I will point out one, Haynes Corporation, that was approved by
the Board of County Commissioners that is reported on here. There
was an Economic Impact Report that was prepared by Gary Jackson
from Florida Gulf Coast University which showed specifically that
company was deciding, do we do this here or do this out in California?
And because of the incentives provided by the county, the company
decided to move those jobs here to Collier County.
So a lot of what we do is retention activity, working to get the
businesses to expand, as well as new job creation through new
companies coming to Collier County.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So is it your contention that the report is
properly completed and the figures are accurate?
MS. NEMECEK: Absolutely, for the methodology that we use
to show how these companies impact Collier County.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that methodology standardized in any
way as far as other economic development agencies are concerned in
Florida -- in the State of Florida?
MS. NEMECEK: Correct. There's two things that you want to
show. You want to show the impact of the companies that is have--
that are in the community. You also show, for example, the Haynes
Corporation Economic Impact Report that Gary did for us that
showed, here's the economic impact of the job losses in the
community as well as the impact of those new jobs that will be
coming to the community.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. Thank you very much.
MS. NEMECEK: Thanks.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like to -- thank you for
your comments, Tammie. I'm going to just add a couple of things.
What's interesting to note is, this is the report that was publicly
Page 154
January 11, 2011
presented by Lee County for -- I don't know. Everything is so small.
Is there any way we can make it bigger?
MR. OCHS: Yes. Where do you want to go? Tell me where --
are you trying to get the whole thing?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I guess the visibility isn't very
good. But anyway, this report is a summary of job creation details.
It's their five-year summary. And I think it would really be beneficial
if Collier County Government received the same type of report from
the EDC.
And what you can see in this report is basically they outlined the
demographics, they then categorize the various types of incentives, for
example, like industrial revenue bonds and, you know, how many
companies, how many direct jobs, so forth was -- were involved.
And then there's a summary at the bottom about job creation.
And just to put in perspective for you -- and I think these numbers are
very, very interesting. In 2009, they dealt with six companies, and the
direct jobs created as a result of their involvement with these six
companies was 875 new jobs. The indirect jobs created was 1,674.
And the total economic impact of investing in those six companies
was $345 million.
Now, if you look at what comes off of the EDC's report as
presented by Tammie for 2010, there were 19 companies invested,
128 direct jobs created, 580 indirect jobs created, for an economic
impact of 54 million. Okay. I think that speaks for itself. I don't
think there's any further comment required.
The only last comment I would make is the statute provides that
you, you know, list out the various source of funds, and I know that
you have done that and you've, you know, identified that on that back
page, but it would really be nice if we could see, you know, a
grouping of the sources like Lee County has so we can actually see
who's -- you know, it's sort of in line in this format. It's a little bit
clearer.
Page 155
January 11,2011
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do we have a motion to approve
the report?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I'm sorry. Commissioner
Henning, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Jackson, in the statutes it
says the county shall report economic incentive format specified by
the legislative committee of intergovernmental relationships or its
successors. Do we have that format?
MR. JACKSON: David Jackson, Collier Business Economic
Development. Not that I'm aware of, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. JACKSON: The format that I was working off of 1- --
Statute 125, it was the format that was given to us by the Economic
Development Research Office, which is -- was filled out by the EDC,
and then -- there was no other direction on that.
Now, there is a survey that they have, and we have put that
survey in, which is an electronic survey which basically just told us --
was a very simple one, do we provide incentives, and approximately
how much.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. I'm looking at the
statutes now.
MR. JACKSON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we have a deadline of
January 15th.
MR. JACKSON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But it's supposed to be under a
different format.
MR. JACKSON: I'm not aware of a format, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, it's -- I'm not aware of it
either. I'm just asking -- obviously it's a format specified by
Page 156
January 11,2011
legislative committee interlocal relationships, because they're looking
at what Mrs. Hiller brought up as not the -- you know, so much the
indirect as, you know, the direct.
So I don't know what we -- obviously, we can't do anything this
year.
MR. JACKSON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you provide the board
members the format, you know, seek out what the legislative
committee is looking for?
MR. JACKSON: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thanks.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know, Commissioner
Henning, you were talking about the economic impacts -- and I know,
Tammie, you were talking about indirect impacts like, you know,
benefiting people through programs and whatnot. But I'm looking at
the statute, and they have, you know, obviously the direct financial
incentives, but the indirect financial incentives are grants and loans
that are provided to businesses and community organizations that
provide support to businesses or promote a business or development,
and then they have fee-based or tax-based incentives, and then they
have below-market-rate leases or deeds for real property.
They don't have what you're describing as one of the things that
they want included in this report. So I think you need to, you know,
eliminate the soft contributions, if you will, and I think they -- this
report needs to only include, according to what the statute reads, in'm
interpreting what the statute is saying correctly, those -- the impact of
those four categories of financial assistance.
MS. NEMECEK: I think the statute in particular is looking at
what the county government is providing directly to the businesses.
But I think there's a component in there that, because of the financial
support you provide to economic development in general, that they
should be aware of the effect of that.
Page 157
January 11,2011
And if you provide that information, it's an opportunity for them
to understand that there's a greater impact that Collier County has in a
positive way to the business community here in Collier County.
So you could separate it out to say, here's the direct financial,
here's how it's being supported through all these various programs.
But at the end of the day, I think that the county government is having
a positive impact on the businesses here in Collier County, and that
needs to be known.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't disagree that it's a positive
impact. The question is is, what is that impact, that that is the whole
exercise to quantify what that positive impact is and, you know,
whether we're doing enough.
And I think this report is nonconforming to what the statute
requires. Are you going to resubmit a report that basically separates
those companies that have received the type of financial support as
described in the statute, and then give us the economic impact number
for that and, then you know, separately show us how these other
programs are benefiting economic community as a postscript?
Because that's not what this report that you presented today does.
MS. NEMECEK: So your suggestion is is, the effect of the
400,000 that you provide to the EDC should not be taken into
consideration as an impact to the businesses.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Actually, no. That's not true,
because that -- the 400,000 --
MS. NEMECEK: Right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let's see. No, it definitely should
be considered.
MS. NEMECEK: And then that report accurately reflects the
effect of the $400,000 investment by Collier County.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So do you have an accounting for
how that 400,000 was spent to show that went -- only to these things
in this report?
Page 158
January 11,2011
MS. NEMECEK: It's in our annual report.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So you have a full
accounting of the 400,000 that we did look at?
MS. NEMECEK: It's in the annual report.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do you have a separate report that
identifies like contributions that were direct contributions like, you
know, direct, indirect incentives, the tax-based incentives, or anything
like that?
MS. NEMECEK: We don't -- EDC does not have money that we
give to the businesses.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
MS. NEMECEK: It's all the county's incentive dollars, which are
reported in here as well.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: In your report as well?
MS. NEMECEK: Uh-huh, yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Well, that's what I'm
asking. Have you separated what is the county's direct-incentive
contributions from the economic impact? And like, for example, the
economic impact of 400,000 of the EDC should just be one line item.
MS. NEMECEK: It's all included -- it's all included on that
spreadsheet that you -- that you were -- that you had up here. It shows
exactly what programs they participated in, whether or not it was
incentive programs or fast tracking or economic gardening. It's all
articulated on that report.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right. I'll work with you on
that. I mean, it's just -- it's just very unclear, as compared to the way
Lee presented it. I mean, it's really difficult.
MS. NEMECEK: Well, Lee has one program. They provide
cash incentives to businesses. That's the only thing that they do at this
point in time. So those six companies were as a result of getting cash
incentives for expansion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll work with you on that. I look
Page 159
January 11,2011
forward to it. Thank you.
MS. NEMECEK: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Tammie?
MS. NEMECEK: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Actually, Mr. Jackson, maybe you're the
best person to deal with this issue, but maybe both of you can.
How do you deal with tax increment financing assistance for
organizations that are newly formed that will be contributing to our
economic growth? And let's take those in the triangle area that you
recently mentioned.
How do you account for those ex- -- tax increment financing
expenditures, incentives, and the economic contribution by those
organizations? Because you've projected substantial increases in job
growth and attracting some other organizations in the pharmaceutical
area.
So can you tell us briefly how you're accounting for that in this
reporting process if, in fact, you really are?
MR. JACKSON: Any funds that is used by the TIF grants are
not included in any of the EDC work, because that money does not
bleed over. It's green and blue money; they don't mix.
The CRA is an independent -- or dependent and independent
district that is a separate government body, and as such, it's run off
TIF and the property values there.
Those businesses that are coming into our area, there is one of
them, Mr. Thomas, that if they don't engage directly with the EDC and
go to the economic gardening program or do not go into the fee
payment assistance or job creation program, they're not included in
EDC's numbers.
Currently the businesses that are locating into the triangle or the
warehouse area that I alluded to are basically startup businesses that
are bootstrapping it on their own. What they looked for was
infrastructure assistance with building improvements. It didn't have
Page 160
January 11,2011
anything to do with job creation or impact fees.
It was specifically for the infrastructure of the buildings, and
that's the only way we can spend our TIF money to help a business at
the current time.
So those jobs are -- would only be included in the EDC report if
they engaged the EDC and talked with them or tried to provide either
from one of her programs or from one of the financial assistance
programs.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, that's just the point I want to make
here. We as commissioners are interested in overall economic growth.
MS. NEMECEK: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we really, quite frankly, don't care
much whether it goes through EDC or it goes through a CRA. And
you miss, we miss a lot of opportunity to demonstrate that economic
growth is occurring here when we fail to account for it merely because
the money doesn't go through a particular channel.
And however you're required to report this stuff, certainly do so
in accordance with the requirements. But we would like, I would like
to see a composite report of economic growth achievements in Collier
County which will not only deal with the things both of you are doing
but the things that Penny Phillippi is doing and the things that Chris
Curry is doing and planning to do.
And if those plans are all -- if most those plans are successful, we
will recognize significant economic growth. And that's the kind of
thing we're looking for in Collier County.
I would doubt that more than five percent of the population in
Collier County even knows about Parker Hannifin and Structure
Medical and Haynes Corporation --
MS. NEMECEK: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and Pelican Wire and all those other
organizations that have come here and created businesses and created
jobs.
Page 161
January 11,2011
So I think we can improve our reporting process so that there's a
better understanding of the accomplishments that you are all
achieving, okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Tammie--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And with that, I will make a motion to
approve --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to -- one second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- the report as it stands and urge you, if
there are any inconsistencies between the information in the report and
the requirements of reporting, that we need to get those straightened
out, and please report back to us if there are inconsistencies, okay.
Is there a second to the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I'll second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. A second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion now?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. What I would like to see,
you know, so that we can be sure -- I'm sorry. It's my phone again.
What I would like to be sure -- can you do something about this
phone? Make it go away.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We can do that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would love to get rid of it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Put it in the back room.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, yeah. That's a great idea.
The one thing I would like to see to ensure that the report is, as
Commissioner Coyle has said, correct, is a copy of the report
guidelines -- the statute provides that a county shall report its
economic development incentives in the format specified by the
legislative committee on intergovernmental relations or its successor
entity. If you could provide me a copy of the report guidelines.
MS. NEMECEK: Yeah, if there are any, Commissioner Hiller. I
know that when this reporting first came out, I was up in -- with an
Enterprise Florida meeting, and they were discussing this and talking
Page 162
January 11,2011
to all of our partner counsels, all 67 county EDOs, and the person
who's responsible for collecting this information created a template,
which is the template that you have in front of you, which is what she
sent out to every 67 county -- or municipality in order to use as a
reporting mechanism.
So we will double check with them and make sure that that's
accurate prior to sending.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I want the -- I want the report
guidelines, in other words, what's supposed to be input in each
column, not just the template with the headers, if there is any.
MS. NEMECEK: If it's available and they created it, because
they did not send it out to the counties from a reporting requirement.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. If you could ask for it,
research and, you know, get back to us on that.
The other thing I think is really critical, I think Commissioner's
(sic) Coyle suggestion that we have a composite report that includes,
you know, all the various agencies that are helping towards economic
development be considered. I think that's excellent. Included in that
report, I think we need -- I think the commissioners need a monthly
report on employment in Collier County. I think we need to know
what the unemployment number is, and I think we also need to know
how many businesses are failing, okay, either they're closing or going
into bankruptcy. Because like I said, one of the issues is retention, not
just recruitment.
So if we could have a report of, you know, closed business,
bankruptcies, and unemployment in Collier County every month from
the EDC, I think that would be invaluable. The last thing I would like
is if -- you know I asked you to give us a financial report, if you will,
of your expenditures of the 400,000. I'd actually like to see that for
the whole of the EDC. I'd like to see, you know, how you are
spending your total budget on economic development.
MS. NEMECEK: We do that in our -- we're required to do that,
Page 163
January 11,2011
actually, in our third-quarter report. We report that on an annual basis
to the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So we'll get that at that
point in time, and we'll be able to discuss that?
MS. NEMECEK: You can look in our third-quarter report from
last year --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: From last year.
MS. NEMECEK: -- and see it, and then we'll report third quarter
this year.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Super. Thank you so much.
MS. NEMECEK: Just a point of clarification, if I might. Dr.
Gary Jackson from Florida Gulf Coast University -- Collier County,
along with Lee County and Charlotte County, partnered together in
order to form, actually, the Regional Economic Research Institute at
the university.
Gary puts out a monthly report. It's a very good report. We were
talking about it today, actually. And if you don't get it on your own--
because it includes all that information you're asking about -- I will
forward it to you on a monthly basis so you can see it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Doctor, I'd like to see it for Collier
County --
MS. NEMECEK: He does.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- not just on a regional basis.
MS. NEMECEK: He does. He does -- sorry, go ahead.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He does it both ways.
MS. NEMECEK: Yeah.
DR. JACKSON: Actually, we don't have business failures in
there, but we do have quite a bit. We track the unemployment, what's
happening. Actually, we're updating it, and it's a really kind of -- the
consensus report shows not only what's happened in Collier, what's
happening in Lee, what's happening in our region.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's great.
Page 164
January 11,2011
DR. JACKSON: Because you have to look at it from a regional
perspective.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Of course.
DR. JACKSON: So hopefully -- and we'd like comments back,
and hopefully it's good use to you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: If you could include business
failures and closures, I would appreciate it.
DR. JACKSON: Yeah. I'll take a look at -- we are looking into
that. What we've found is business licenses and so forth. You try and
put that --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And bankruptcies.
DR. JACKSON: Yeah. And trying to get that data is a little bit
tricky because -- we're prototyping that right now, see if we can do it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How would you handle a business
that just had an explosion, and although they want to come back into
business again -- I mean, they're really out of business, and a lot of
people of employees -- I mean, employees are out of work until they
can -- you know, I don't know what category you'd even put that
under. But, you know --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Which business?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What business are you talking
about?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mangrove Cafe.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Mangrove Cafe.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Really?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Blew up yesterday. Yes, gas
explosion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wow. Propane?
MS. NEMECEK: Thank you, Commissioners.
Page 165
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Propane, not sewer.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Hopefully we won't have too many of
those.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, I guess.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It was a freak accident.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I kept thinking about all of those
people in the prime part of our season, tourist season, with no work
now, and they've got families and -- no fault of their own.
MS. NEMECEK: Yes. Southwest Florida Works, or what was
formerly called Career and Service Center, encourage everybody to go
there, because I know we work with them a lot to find employees for
businesses, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great, great. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion. All in favor,
please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then the motion passes unanimously.
County Manager?
Item #10F
AWARD CONTRACT #10-5599 TO STANTEC CONSULTING
SERVICES, INC., IN THE AMOUNT $341,534, FOR
CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING INSPECTION SERVICES FOR
THE FIRST STAGE OF PHASE IV OF THE SOUTH RO
Page 166
January 11,2011
WELLFIELD RAW WATER TRANSMISSION MAIN REPAIR
PROJECT NO. 70030 - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. That takes us to Item 10F on your agenda,
was formerly 16Cl. It's a recommendation to award Contract
#10-5599 to Stantech Consulting Services for construction,
engineering, and inspection services for the South RO well field raw
water transmission main repair project.
Mr. DeLony will begin the report.
MR. DeLONY: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
Jim DeLony, Public Utilities Administrator.
This item is something you've seen several times, and this is the
-- I would say, the final act before we can begin construction, or
actually actual restoration of this -- on this particular project.
This piece deals with the construction engineer inspector. We're
working with the Clerk's Office. We have reached the point now
where we believe we've got the right form and type of contract and
agreement set in place for this.
Just as a matter of review, this is the project purpose for the
entire act that we're performing out there in the south RO wellfield.
And emphasis now is on restoration and repair, and also ensuring
that we have got the right team on the ground to pursue full cost
recovery, because it's my view that pipelines don't blow up, should not
blow up, and this one did.
And we're well represented with regard to counsel, and I'm sure
Mr. Teach or our county attorney could speak to that if you have any
questions with regard to our strategy in that matter.
We're currently in Phase 4 of this --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You might point out that this was a
water pipeline.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Not a gasoline pipeline.
Page 167
January 11,2011
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir, or natural gas or --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MR. DeLONY: Absolutely. I'm not yet in that business. I do
water, the wastewater, the solid waste.
But on Phase 4 is where we're at right now. Weare well
positioned. But our approach and deployment in Phase 4, as I've
described before, will be measured.
We've taken the 23 wells that are in the wellfield, and our intent
is to do, under this particular first phase of Phase 4 or Phase 4A, the
first 11, learn from that, and then embark on the full restoration of the
subsequent 12.
And from those lessons learned, I believe we can mitigate cost
and arrive at the best-value solution.
And as I said, this particular piece of this puzzle is to put on staff
or put on the team, the consultant, for the in-ground, on-site inspection
on the restoration.
I believe that Mr. Carnell will come up now and provide some
additional material for the record to ensure that we've got for you and
for your decision all of the elements to ensure this is fully sufficient
and ready for your decision, Mr. Carnell?
MR. CARNELL: For the record, Steve Carnell, Purchasing
Director.
Just as a matter of clarification, if you pick up on what Mr.
DeLony just said, thankfully we're not in the restoration pipeline
repair business very often, and so this presented a little bit of an
unusual challenge because we're engaging the inspector to oversee the
repair and, frankly, folks, we are -- we are not spending your money
or your ratepayers' money. This is someone else's fault, and we are
prepared to take whatever steps we need to take to recover those
monies. And we want our case to be airtight and as strong as we
possibly can make it, if and when the time comes as we go forward.
And so that's why Mr. DeLony's talking in steps. That's why he's
Page 168
January 11,2011
talking about, we've got 23 wells involved all total, and we want to
commission the project piece of the work to begin with the first 11,
and then do the rest in a second step or phase, if you will.
This contract reflects that in that we engage the inspector to work
in that first phase of well, those first group of wells, we negotiated a
fee based on a time and materials contract with not-to-exceed limits
for each of the first phase, activities -- activities in the first phase.
And we wanted to, as Mr. DeLony indicated, stop at the end of
the first phase and look at where we are, lessons learned, evaluate any
changes we might need to make going into the second phases of wells
so that we can look, if we have to, at a trier of fact and say, we were
judicious, we were cautious, we made every effort to contain costs and
to focus the work that needed to be done on what needed to be done
and not spent anybody's money extravagantly or run up bills and
charges that we couldn't defend.
So for that reason, we priced out the work for Phase 1, and we
indicated that we would negotiate Phase 2 after this evaluation had
taken place.
Well, the contract was submitted in the agenda package last
week, and as part of the contract review, we got -- we were -- we did
receive questions from the Clerk's Office on this, and their concern, if
I could, briefly, as I understood, in a nutshell is, that they were fearful
that the state law regarding the selection of consultants prohibits us
from negotiating twice, if you will, that there's one distinct phase of
negotiation under the contract.
And we don't necessarily concur with that interpretation, but we
understood their concern, and we believe we've worked together to
come up with a common solution here. And essentially what we want
to do is, the contract has been written to establish an estimated
not-to-exceed price for the second phase of work. And, again, it will
be drawing on the hourly rates set forth in the contract. It will be a
time-and-materials contract. But what we do want the board to
Page 169
January 11,2011
understand is that we have more confidence in terms of those
aggregate estimates of dollars in Phase 1 than we do in Phase 2. And
when I'm talking about Phase 2, I mean, we -- you know, we will have
done that lessons learned, intentional, strategic review at the end of
Phase 1.
And so, at that point in time, we'll know more about what kind of
time and effort it's taking well by well as we go through the restoration
effort.
So there's a possibility that our estimate for the second phase
won't be as good as the estimate for the first phase.
So what we've done to address that is we negotiated the contract
specifically on Phase 1 initially, came up with a cost of$341,000 and
change -- that's a not-to-exceed figure, and we have an aggregate
estimate of about $800,000 for the inspection work in total.
So we are attributing the other 458,000 to the second phase. We
intend to go through, as Mr. DeLony described, with a review at the
end of Phase 1 to see if we -- if our first phase estimate and our work
plan was correct and right and defendable, and we're getting the data
and information and the positioning we need for, again, recovering
this money down the road.
And then we'll make any adjudgments necessary before we go
into Phase 2. It's a very conservative, two-step approach here as
opposed to negotiating, say, a lump-sum agreement or total
time-and-materials agreement up front without full information. So
that's the reason for those two steps.
And to address the clerk's concerns, we did put a dollar amount
in the second phase. It's defined as a not-to-exceed. We have not
defined all the tasks in full for Phase 2. Again, erring on the side of
being conservative, judicious, as we incur these costs and can defend
them if we have to go as far as court to do that later on. So that's the
reason for the logic in that.
Now, just in the speed of agendas here, Crystal had raised
Page 170
January 11,2011
questions with us last week just before the agenda was finalized, we
shipped her back changes to the agreement on Thursday, and then she
asked for a few more changes and clarifications yesterday. Now
you-all -- we delivered to the five of you yesterday the contract based
on what we had given her on Thursday, and we had -- I think we had
addressed really the bulk of her concerns at that time, but there were a
handful of changes she has further requested that we move forward
with.
Now, Mr. Chairman, the pleasure of the board, I can briefly -- the
changes in question are summarized in one page here. You have not
seen these yet. I can briefly go through them if you'd like. We'd like
to get your approval today on them. We don't necessarily, as staff,
believe that every single one of these changes are necessary, but we
also don't strenuously object either. And obviously, if we can be in
concert with the clerk on the language going forward, we're obviously
supportive of that and want to do that.
So I really just need a little direction from you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just want you to know
compensation's misspelled.
MR. CARNELL: Yes, ma'am, yes. You would catch that. Late
in the day; I'm impressed, commissioner, yes. We put that in there
just to see if you were paying attention, ma'am. You passed.
Okay. So with that, I'd be willing to entertain any questions from
the board and get your direction regarding the approval of the contract
going forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I don't have any questions.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: May--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just don't understand exactly
what's going on here. Another company didn't do what they were
supposed to do and now, essentially, we are engaging another entity to
Page 171
January 11,2011
do what they didn't -- or what they did defectively, or whatever the
case may be, and they are -- this first company is going to compensate
us for the expense of correcting or redoing what was done in the first
place; is that the agreement?
MR. DeLONY: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: What we have is a dispute between -- that we've
resolved through approval by this board to take into suit the original
contractor for these deficiencies. That suit has been filed, they have
responded, and we're now in active legal matters with regard to the
first contractor.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did you give them an opportunity
to cure the deficiencies?
MR. DeLONY: Absolutely. They've had notice and
opportunity, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And they failed to do it?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And so now essentially what
you're going out and doing is remedying it at our expense, and then
you hope, through the litigation process, to recover for these
expenses?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So as of right now, there's no
assurance that we're going to recover, because this has to go to court,
and the recovery would be at the determination of the courts --
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- if we prevail?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am, either that or through negotiation or
settlement. We have to get the pipeline back up and running. I need
the wells.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. No, I understand. Can you
explain for the record what the need of the wells is and why this is a --
Page 172
January 11,2011
you know, a public-safety issue if we don't have this repaired now?
MR. DeLONY: I need it to meet demand for the raw water
supply for our potable water customers.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Got it. Thank you.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm going to call the question.
All in favor of approval, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Absent.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes unanimously with
Commissioner Henning absent.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Get it fixed.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir; we plan to. We'll be starting this next
week. With this decision today, we'll be in good stead to move
forward, and I'll be back.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You'll be back?
MR. DeLONY: I will be back.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Phase 2.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Promise or a threat?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm not looking forward to that.
Item #11
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
Page 173
January 11,2011
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to Item lIon your
agenda. That's public comments on general topics.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we have any public?
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, Commissioner. Nick Kouloheras, who
wanted to speak to Item 6A.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't see him here.
MR. MITCHELL: He's not here. So, sir, that was the only
person registered for public comments.
Item #14A
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) 2010
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FOR THE
IMMOKALEE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ~ APPROVED
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, that -- I'm going to turn the
gavel over to the chairman of the Community Development Agency.
We're going to 14A, right?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That's Community Development
Agency action item.
MR. OCHS: Yes, it is.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: The CRA meeting has begun.
MR. OCHS: It's Item l4A. It's a recommendation to the
Community Redevelopment Agency to complete the 2010 Annual
Performance Evaluation for the Immokalee CRA executive director.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is this for Penny; is she still here?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're very thankful for that
fact.
Page 174
January 11,2011
MS. PHILLIPPI: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We have a -- do you really want to
speak about this? Do you want to deprive her of --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I was just going to make a
motion, and Commissioner Henning was already there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- performance appraisal.
Okay. Then we have a motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Coletta, to approve the performance
appraisal of Penny Phillippi.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have -- motion carried, 5-0.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's all right.
And Item 14B?
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, that's an Airport Authority item, not
a CRA item.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. CRA meeting is closed.
Item #14B
RESOLUTION 2011-10: APPROVING THE PROPOSED RATE
SCHEDULES FOR THE EVERGLADES AIRPARK,
IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT AND MARCO ISLAND
EXECUTIVE AIRPORT FOR 2011 - ADOPTED W/CHANGES
Page 175
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Airport Authority meeting is open.
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. 14B is a recommendation--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Chris?
MR. OCHS: -- I'm sorry -- that the board, acting as the Airport
Authority, adopts the attached resolution approving the proposed rate
schedules for the Everglades Airpark, Immokalee Region Airport, and
Marco Island Executive Airport for 2011.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to approve by
Commissioner --
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have a public speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Coletta. And
Commissioner Hiller wishes to speak. Would you like to wait until
after the public speaker, Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Lloyd, are you going to talk to
us? Is it you?
MR. MITCHELL: Lloyd Byerhoff.
MR. BYERHOFF: Only if you want to extend the meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I do not wish to extend the meeting. Are
we okay?
MR. BYERHOFF: Yep.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. All in -- oh, I'm sorry.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have just a couple of concerns. I
want to be certain that -- you know, obviously for -- for example, for
the companies that have crop dusters -- you know, my understanding
is, for example, at the Everglades (sic) airport, doesn't one company
provide about 80 percent of the airport's business?
Page 176
January 11,2011
MR. CURRY: First, good afternoon, Commissioners. Chris
Curry, Executive Director, Airport Authority.
I think the airport you're referring to is Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, I apologize. Yes, you're
absolutely right.
MR. CURRY: And there is a crop dusting operation at the
Immokalee airport that purchases approximately 80 percent of jet fuel.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, jet fuel. And the -- does
this rate schedule include -- I don't have it in front of me -- jet fuel as
part of the rate schedule?
MR. CURRY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. My concern is, obviously,
for someone who has a business like, you know, the crop dusting
business and is completely dependent on that particular airport, where,
in effect, we have a monopoly, that we be very careful that we not
engage in monopoly pricing.
I think it is extremely important that when we look at the pricing
of fuel at an airport like that, that we can consider the fuel prices at
similar airports that have a similar type of client. I don't think you can
compare the fuel prices at the Immokalee airport with, for example,
whatever they charge at the Fort Myers regional airport. And I'm no
expert in airports.
But I am very concerned that the pricing does not smack of
monopoly pricing and that it be ultimately fair to users of the airport,
such as the company that owns the crop dusters that contributes 80
percent of the fuel cost, which probably in that airport's case is the
bulk of the revenue, isn't it?
MR. CURRY: Yes, it is. I am an expert at airports. One of the
things that we've done is we have done a fair comparison of similar
airports around the region. We're not comparing Immokalee to
Southwest International Airport in Fort Myers. We're looking at
similar airports, such as LaBelle, Page Field, which is another general
Page 177
January 11,2011
aviation airport and -- for example, and airports in Charlotte County.
So we are doing a comparison of airports.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That primarily service agriculture
MR. CURRY: Well, that service general aviation, not
specifically the agricultural part, because we're selling fuel to general
aviation.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But for --
MR. CURRY: Aircraft in general.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- a very small portion. The bulk
of the -- I mean, the bulk of the business of the Immokalee airport is
agriculture related.
MR. CURRY: Well, that's correct, but it--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not a general avia- -- I mean, it
may be labeled as a general aviation airport but, you know, we don't
have the same type of use that, you know, the Naples Airport has.
MR. CURRY: Right. But it is a general aviation airport. And if
you look at the fuel scale that has been proposed and if you look at
what's been done to accommodate the crop duster since I've been here,
we've actually cut his costs about 40 cents per gallon. And he can
experience additional cost savings if he purchased more fuel.
So that was an action taken by me and the Airport Advisory
Board in October, about two weeks after I arrived here. And our
prices are competitive with similar airports.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we could not be accused of
engaging in monopoly pricing where, you know, someone who is, you
know, an 80 percent user of the airport and doesn't have an alternative
choice, would be able to come back and hold that against this board?
MR. CURRY: No, I don't think so at all. And if that was the
case, you would quickly find that the FAA would take a position in
that it wasn't favorable to the airports.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Has this rate schedule been
Page 178
January 11,2011
brought before your Airport Advisory Board and deliberated and
voted on by them?
MR. CURRY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And did they approve it?
MR. CURRY: Yes, ma'am. They approved the new
rates-and-charges schedule with one exception. They wanted the T
hangar rates in 2011 Rates and Charges to reflect 2010 prices, because
traditionally, the airport, over several years, has increased T hangar
rates 3 percent, so that's one exception that I would like to make with
this 2011 Rates and Charges.
In addition to that, I would also like to implement a scale for
A vgas users at the airport whereby they purchase more fuel, we'll
waive the overnight fees for their stay. So those are two very small
amendments that I would like to make to this 2011 Rates and Charges.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Have you spoken to the owner of
the crop dusting company about these rates?
MR. CURRY: On several occasions.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And is he agreeable to them?
MR. CURRY: No, he's not agreeable; however, fuel is always a
contentious subject at airports. And, again, the move that we made to
better accommodate him was to reduce his fuel costs, as a signator
user of the airport, 40 cent lower per gallon than what we had in effect
for other users.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what you're saying is, you've
given him, like, a commercial discount because of the nature of the
business that he's in?
MR. CURRY: Because of the large volume of fuel that he
purchases and because he's a base tenant, we're allowed to treat him
different than a transient user, and we've accommodated him in that
way.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: A little bit different? Are there
guidelines on how he can be treated differently?
Page 179
January 11,2011
MR. CURRY: Yes, there are.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And did you follow those
guidelines in setting the pricing for him as different from the other
transient users?
MR. CURRY: I have.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. No further questions.
MR. CURRY: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I have only one thing. And, Lloyd, I'd
like to encourage you and/or the Airport Advisory Board, at any time
during these presentations if you have a different -- if you have
different ideas about how things should be done, we welcome your
comments and advice of the Airport Advisory Board, and we value
your commitment to serving on these boards.
So at any time now or in the future, if you'd like to give us
additional information or even information that is not necessarily
consistent with what the airport director is suggesting, we're happy to
hear it, and we would try to make the best decisions we can under
those circumstance, okay.
And I do that just so that we can make sure that your voices are
heard in a way that doesn't create conflict between the Airport
Advisory Board and the airport director. Okay.
Go ahead, Chris.
MR. CURRY: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make one other
comment about the airports, especially the Immokalee airports.
One of the issues that we're having moving forward with
Immokalee is with land value. When I arrived at the airport and I
looked at the different leases, we had leases that were 3 cent, 4 cent, 5
cent per square foot. So what I did is called in the county appraiser
and had it seconded by a third outside appraiser to evaluate the land.
And the land fair-market value rate has been evaluated at 14 cent per
square foot.
So we have an issue as we go forward with the existing leases
Page 180
January 11,2011
whereby they've been paying at least 60 to 70 percent below
fair-market value in many cases.
As a recipient of FAA grants, we are responsible to charge
fair-market value pricing, especially for aeronautic -- for
non-aeronautical users.
In the case of an aeronautical user, we're allowed to negotiate a
price less than fair-market value.
So what you will hear and what you will see is some of the
tenants complaining that their rates are being doubled and tripled, but I
am doing that to bring them up to fair-market-value pricing, because if
we don't we are in confliction with our FAA grant assurances.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I comment on that? I actually
have worked with Chris on this issue. We've discussed it, and I've
brought in Attorney Klatzkow, and that actually went to what I was
going to bring before the board today.
You raised a very important point, and that is negotiating terms
of the leases. And while you feel it necessary to negotiate revised
terms, right now, because the Board of County Commissioners is
sitting as the Airport Authority, we legally cannot delegate
discretionary decision-making.
And I understand that there's a policy right now that does allow
you to do that, which was fine when the Board of County
Commissioners was not the Airport Authority.
So I would like to ask that you hold off on renegotiating any
leases till we address how that should be done so that it is done legal,
because the worst would be for you to negotiate a bunch of contracts
and they be all thrown out as contrary to law because you didn't have
the legal authority to do it.
And that was -- and I'm going to actually introduce a copy of the
executive summary that I had prepared for today on the record so, you
know, everybody can review it. And as Commissioner Coyle
suggested, I'm going to bring this back at the next meeting and, of
Page 181
~_.u."... ~..__"__..,
January 11,2011
course, talk with you again about it. It's what we had all reviewed.
MR. CURRY: Right. But let me respond just quickly, because I
think what we're talking about in that particular executive summary is
slightly different than what I perceive.
For example, I will negotiate a lease, but I will bring it before the
Board of County Commissioners for approval, so --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's great.
MR. CURRY: -- I just want to be clear that any lease will be --
will need to be approved by the County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MR. CURRY: However, I think I'm probably in a better position
to negotiate pricing understanding the airport environment.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't disagree, but I think what
we need to do -- and this was a suggestion by Attorney Klatzkow -- is
come up with a rate schedule that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, come up with a standard contract that the Board of County
Commissioners approves, and then give that to you to go and
renegotiate these contracts with a stated rate schedule and a stated
agreement, then you don't have to come back to us in each and every
instance because your act becomes ministerial and not discretionary.
MR. CURRY: But that's not always the case when you're
negotiating an aeronautical activity rate. It may be different. It may
be different because the FAA allows the flexibility to be below
fair-market value.
In most cases, what you're referring to will work for the airport,
but in certain cases you have to negotiate a rate that's not going to be
set in stone that may be below fair-market value.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you give me an example why,
you know, one client would be entitled to below-fair-market-value
rates over another that would not be stipulated on a rate schedule?
MR. CURRY: Well, for example, we've indicated that by
appraisal 14 cent per square foot was the land value. Okay. In have
Page 182
January 11,2011
a guy on the airport like the agricultural sprayer, he may have other
land that he's leasing on the airport as part of his operation. Well,
because his activity contributes more than just the land lease, he has a
more significant benefit to the airport; therefore, I may be willing to
give him a rate that's 7 or 8 cent per square foot.
You may have another aeronautical user that do not contribute --
that do not contribute any other revenue to the airport except for his
existence in that particular area. He may be given an aeronautical rate
of 10 cent per square foot, because the overall contribution received
from an entity like the agricultural sprayer benefits the airport in so
many other ways overall. So that's how that rate could differentiate
when you're negotiating.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You explained that very clearly.
So essentially what we would do then is, I still would submit that
we do the same thing, have a standard rate schedule, have a standard
contract, and where you have exceptions to that rate schedule that you
can justify by examples as you've given, then you come back and --
come to the board by exception to approve those variances, those
exceptions to the approved rate schedule with the supporting
justification, because you have to bring it back to the board. You
cannot determine those rates independently, and we have to have a
rate schedule so everybody knows we're dealing in a level playing
field.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The -- if I could. The issue, I think, is
not so much approval, because I think it's already set up to be
approved by us. He can't -- he can't set up a rate schedule without it
being approved by us.
MR. CURRY: That's right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He can't really negotiate a contract
without it being approved by us.
The presumption is -- that you've made is that there are a lot of
these contracts that are identical and that he can just do them pro
Page 183
January 11,2011
forma once we've approved the contract format, and I think you'll find
that in the aviation industry there is substantial variation in the types
of activities, ranging from glider activities to commercial agribusiness,
ag-aviation type businesses. So I, quite frankly, would prefer to leave
it the way it is and have it come back to us for approval for all of these
things.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: For each and every lease?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Absolutely. But I don't want to
micromanage the creation of those things. And we ought to give him
responsibility, because he's more qualified than any of us to negotiate
it.
And if Chris would negotiate arrangements, and then he can
bring them to us and we can ratify them, and then we've (sic) done
with it. But I don't want to try to micromanage his business by going
out there and trying to tell him what kinds of contracts he should be
negotiating and how he should be doing it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, we wouldn't be
micromanaging. Just to clarify, Commissioner Coyle is correct, you
do not have the legal authority to engage in committing the county to
leases on rates and terms without pre-approval of the board.
The problem we have is -- and that doesn't in any way negate
what Commissioner Coyle has said -- is that there's an existing policy,
Policy 631, which does provide that you can, contrary to law. So that's
a policy which needs to be rescinded.
Do other airports have fees?
MR. CURRY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Fee schedules?
MR. CURRY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean rate schedules?
MR. CURRY: Annual approved fee schedules.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I don't see why we don't do
the same. And, in fact, it eliminates the micromanagement. It only
Page 184
January 11,2011
deals with the by-exception situations. I really don't want to have you
come back for standard leases that could well be satisfied by a
stipulated -- by a standard -- you know, by a board-approved rate
schedule, just like other airports do.
MR. CURRY: Well, that's the intent. The intent was that this
would be the first year that I would bring the rates and charges to be
approved by the Board of County Commissioners. The last was
approved in 2002.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Great. That's perfect.
MR. CURRY: So if you look at the amount of detail in this
rate-and-charges schedule compared to the previous, then there is a lot
less that I would have to improvise anyway. I had to improvise a lot
because the last rate schedule was not very detailed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. So basically that will
actually minimize the work of the board, because we're preapproving
everything at once, and it gives you the ability to execute what we
have already approved, and then we would look to Mr. Klatzkow to
draft that standard contract that would simplify it even further.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: This is going to be very easy for things
like hangar leases --
MR. CURRY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- in most cases. It will be most all
standard, but in accordance with an appropriate pricing strategy.
MR. CURRY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But you're always going to run into a
situation where you've got a guy who has a museum in his hangar, and
he's going to want to be treated differently, or a guy who puts his
motor home in the museum, not an airplane.
So there are things that are going to be different. But I have -- I
have no problem with having standard leases for those things that are
standard, and that would be fine.
Commissioner Coletta? Let's get over this thing and get it done.
Page 185
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're over it, but just a couple
of brief comments. One, you've got a consent agenda that will
probably handle about 90 percent of all that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Number two, we're wasting
valuable human resources here bringing the Airport Authority and our
CRAs in here towards the end of the day, and they have to stay here
for almost the whole darn meeting to be able to handle -- is there any
way possible you could sit down with the county manager and see if
we could reconfigure the agenda in such a way that we can get staff
out of here?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Why don't we do a time certain for
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we do it
commissioner's comments and just do away with commissioner's
comments?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That would be a good idea.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: At the end of it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we do it in your part of it,
and that would save us --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let -- why don't we do the right
thing and get a vote on this thing, and then we're finished with it and
we don't have to sit around talking about why we've been keeping
them here all afternoon.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I made the motion, and I
will amend my motion to include the two items that Mr. Curry
mentioned that I wrote down. I don't know where I put it.
MR. CURRY: Yes. One was -- one was to freeze the T hangar
rates or keep them at 2010 rates.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, that was part of my
motion.
MR. CURRY: And the second was to implement a scale for
Page 186
January 11,2011
A vgas users that the more fuel they purchase, we would give them
more overnight days free of charge.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. That's a part of my
motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did I second that?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Somebody did.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I will in case I didn't.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala has
seconded it.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that brings us to staff and
commission general communications. Now, Commissioner Coletta
does have something rather urgent that he has to leave for, so I want
him to go first. We'll get this taken care of --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and then get to the rest of you, okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I appreciate you
accommodating me, sir. I've got a minor family emergency that needs
Page 187
"-"--"'--""~."---"~"'-~-
January 11,2011
to be attended to.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, sorry to hear that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, it's hopefully not as bad as
it sounds. Thank you for your concern, Commissioner Henning.
There's several different things I wanted to talk to you about.
One of them was the Washington, D.C. trip that we talked about
earlier, and I was asked to bring it back under commissioner
comments.
As you know, we've had this discussion many times over in the
past regarding the value of a lobbyist or the value of traveling to either
Tallahassee or Washington.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You took all the fun out of it.
Okay. Then go ahead and finish that one. I've still got a couple of
others.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'll withdraw my motion if you have
anything more.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But it pertains to you, sir, and
it's going to greatly enhance your life.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Leo?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You just cut him off.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's all right. Commissioner Henning
had a question about this particular motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you done, Commissioner
Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I was just wanting to hear the
rest of what his comments were, but -- I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We'll come back to that after we get
Page 188
January 11,2011
through this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Ochs, you and I had a
conversation there wasn't going to be a trip to Washington.
MR. OCHS: No. Commissioner, we had a brief conversation. I
said, because of the lack of earmarks, you know, the need for a trip
and the budget this year mayor may not be necessary in my view, but
that's a decision for the board. The staff has that trip planned and
budgeted, but it's certainly the discretion of the board. But you're
right, I mean, there are not the earmarks this year, so we'd working
more with the congressional delegation and the lobbyists up there to
work with the individual federal agencies, as you described earlier,
and trying to get access to the grant process, make sure that our grant
applications are meeting all the specifications and working with the
staff of the -- of the congressional delegation and the grant agencies.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Couldn't you save money by
just meeting with the congressional delegation members in their office
in the State of Florida when they come in instead of going to
Washington, D.C.?
MR. OCHS: Well, that's an option, yes, sir, but I don't control
their schedule.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. OCHS: So whether or not we can get to them on a timely
basis, I couldn't say right now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. If you'll permit me to take just a
minute to explain. And I generally don't agree with a lot of these trips
up to Washington, but because there are no earmarks now, we are in a
tougher competition, and we can write a letter. That's sort of on the
lower tier of influence. And then if you go up the hierarchy, we could
make a telephone call to somebody up there. But there's nothing that
achieves greater success than appearing personally there to talk with
either an agency or a member of Congress about our needs here.
Page 189
January 11,2011
And we have always been a donor county in Florida, and Florida
is a donor state to the nation. We have to fight to get our tax dollars
back to Florida and to Collier County. And it might cost $1,000 or so
for a couple of people to go up there for a couple of nights and
represent us. And I think that we should spend that amount of money
to try to get back millions into Florida, and I just don't think it's an
unreasonable amount of money.
It's not going to increase the budget because it's going to have to
come out of already budgeted travel fees. So it's not like we're trying
to appropriate more money. We've already got travel fees.
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And so that's the reason I think that this
time now, when we're fighting for every penny we can get, we ought
to make the extra effort and go up there and shake hands and meet
people face to face, whether it's agency heads or members of
Congress. And that's the reason I'm supporting it, not because I want
to just spend money.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, thank you for that. And if
I do go, you'll get a full report accounting for every minute that's up
there and every direction we're going and how the follow-up should
take place.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You did that last year, too.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor, please signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes unanimously. Thank
Page 1 90
January 11, 2011
you all.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And thank you. And quickly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Quickly. Swamp
Buggy. Last year we had an appeal come before us under public
petition to be able to place the advertisements for Swamp Buggy,
which has been a community adventure for many years, in our local
libraries, I believe it was. Michael, help me with this. What did we
do last year? What was the direction?
MR. SHEFFIELD: Parks -- community centers and parks, I
believe.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. They're not applying for
TDC funds. This is the only thing they're asking for is that permission
to be able to do what they did last year.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What did they do?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't know what they did last
year.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Swamp Buggy, Incorporated,
does the swamp buggy races.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. But what did they do? I
know all about them, but what did they do?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, what they did was, they
were -- we gave them permission to place their brochures at parks and
rec and at the library on the bulletin boards that are there.
MR. SHEFFIELD: Commissioner, I'm not sure if we gave them
permission last year, but they are asking this year to do that, to place
these posters where they would be seen in community parks.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: To advertise what?
MR. SHEFFIELD: Their swamp buggy event. They're a
non-profit group.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The swamp buggy races?s
Page 191
January 11,2011
MR. SHEFFIELD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We had Chuck McMahon come
before us last year --
MR. SHEFFIELD: Yes, sir, I believe.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and we granted them
whatever he asked for. I can't remember the depth of his request and
what we actually granted. But I think it's kind of a benign thing.
We're talking about an organization that plays greatly in this
community as far as what it gives back and the amount of people that
have a role in it. And so I'm bringing it up to the commission because
I was asked to do so and for your consideration.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't remember that item. But
would that be interfering with the day-to-day business of -- you know,
shouldn't they be going to the Parks and Rec Advisory Board or the
administration for Parks and Rec, or did they?
MS. RAMSEY: For the record, Marla Ramsey, Public Services
Administrator.
We were asked, but I think it was through Michael, if we could
put in for the public to pick up information or post posters and
whatnot. And the concern on the parks side was, if they were an
alcohol sponsor, we were not going to do that. It's not allowed to have
alcohol advertisement in our park sites.
So we had offered that we would put it up in the staffing areas, in
all the staffing areas in all the facilities that we had for sure. And that
is kind of the last that I heard of that, whether we going to -- whether
they were asking us to continue that or not, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that the function of the board,
to direct staff to put materials in facilities? And I have a concern
about that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, we can always ask Leo's
permISSIOn.
Page 192
January 11,2011
MR. KLATZKOW: At the end of the day if--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Leo, may I?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. KLA TZKOW: I mean, at the end ofthe day, this is a small
matter. I mean, if staff has no objections to this, it's a community
event of longstanding nature. Your problem is going to be one of
these days somebody's going to come here and ask for the same thing
that --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- you don't particularly like. At that point
in time, I'm going to tell you, you're going to need a policy.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And maybe -- if I may suggest,
maybe what we need to do is have a policy where staff defines where,
you know, in the park system there can be advertising and what -- the
specificity of what can be included in that advertising, you know,
what should be included, like, for example, no advertising of alcohol,
how long, and that the parks director has the ability to say no if it's
nonconforming to the standards set by the county.
I think it serves a public-information purpose to let people who
frequent the parks know that there is a community event that they
would like to participate in. We want to, you know, build cohesion in
a positive spirit in the community, but it shouldn't be in a manner that
is, you know, disruptive to the park's business or is contrary to the law
with respect to advertising.
So maybe a policy is required to allow this for this business and
any other business, because you can't, you know, just arbitrarily
accept one and turn another one down; it really wouldn't be fair.
MS. RAMSEY: And that's our problem. That is our problem.
And you don't know how many requests we have for everybody to
want to put their stuff up into our facilities. And so we've kind of
taken, if it's not county sponsored or co-sponsored, that we were not
going to allow those to come in, so that was just the overall policy that
Page 193
January 11,2011
the parks has done in the historical time that I've been here, 14 years.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So really it would be a problem
because you would have so many people asking you for advertising,
you wouldn't be able -- you mean, there wouldn't be enough space? I
mean, you could do it on a first-come, first-served basis, do it for a
limited amount of time, and then, I mean, just have a rotation.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
MS. RAMSEY: If you want us to change that policy, that's fine.
We just found that it was -- it's easier just to say, if you're not, you
know, a government sponsored or co-sponsored event that we weren't
going to posting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Being that we allowed it last year,
did we have a problem with it after the --
MS. RAMSEY: No. This is the first year it's been requested of
us. And like I said, I said that I would put them up in the -- on the
employee bulletin boards in all of our facilities so that the employees
would know that it was going on, but that it -- that it wasn't really
what we did for the public's benefit.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What about putting it on our
website, like just having one tab in your -- you know, under your
parks division window that is, you know, all community events, and
whatever, you know, anyone wants to submit, again, as long as the
advertising is conforming, you input it for a period of time and then
delete it?
MS. RAMSEY: I would turn that one over to John Torre's office
to make the -- again, because I don't know where it's going to link to,
and there's also some firewall issues associated with it, and so I can't
comment on that one.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well-- so just say no links.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I withdraw my request. I'll tell
you why.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not worth it.
Page 194
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's raising all sorts of
complications that I never anticipated. I'm going to suggest they get
ahold of the Clerk's Office; maybe they can help them with this.
Anything you've come across, Crystal? But it's becoming difficult.
Maybe at some point in time in the future we can talk about a
community bulletin board in a couple locations --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- where people can post things
like that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Like an Eboard, and talk to John
Torre about --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think that's an excellent idea.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- you know, some way that we --
it doesn't link to any other website, and the input is controlled by our
public information office, and then it just gives an opportunity for the
community to find out what's going on every day of every month.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the last item I'm not going
to get into great detail on, but I have the -- I have the Regional
Planning Council now producing when we call condensed minutes.
They've got it down to about four pages -- that I was going to share
with you a couple of paragraphs that I know you'd find very
interesting. Instead, what I'm going to do is send it to you and
highlight those parts that you really should read. It gives you --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- some sort of insight into
what's happening. Also, too, just for your information, we do have a
seat on the Regional Planning Council, and at some point in time it
would be great if we had somebody else step forward and be willing to
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that you?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We do, Commissioner Halas --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to be a part of it. I'd like to
Page 195
January 11,2011
join you, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's once a month, and we have
different committees you can get involved in. For some reason I seem
to be involved in three of them.
But in any case, thank you very much. It was an excellent
meeting, and I appreciate you understanding in allowing me to go
first.
Okay, good luck. I hope everything's okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I hope everything's okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sure it will be.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll start with Commissioner
Henning now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: On the consent agenda, there
was a proclamation recognizing Ski Olesky. I want to tell you a little
bit about that.
I was at an event where a young man was telling me about his
nephew having a terrible experience with one of Santa's helpers in one
of the big facilities and was very distraught.
Our staff in the County Commission's office made several phone
calls, and one of the phone calls they made was to Santa's winter
residence on Lake Trafford. And Santa took great interest in this
young man and actually grabbed one of his gifts and went to his house
and knocked on the door and says, "I want to see Nicholas. I want to
straighten something out."
I mean -- so anyways, I'm going to be present that at the TDC,
because it's just a -- it's a great story, and our staff, your staff, and the
County Commission's office was very helpful. And I'm glad we did
get it straightened out, because it did upset some of them that was
going to go to this establishment and talk to Santa Claus's helper.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, it's good that Ski knew where
Santa lives during the winter time out there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
Page 1 96
January 11,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's good, yeah.
All right. Anything else?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's it. Thought I'd have
some good news in today's meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't have anything.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't have anything.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. This is getting better and better.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have two things.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Don't spoil my day.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I wouldn't dream of it. You,
especially.
Okay. Jeff?
MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: At the last meeting you had
promised us you would come back with a resolution regarding the
presentation of timing of contracts to you for review. I really want
that. I want to be sure that the County Attorney's Office has the time
to review the contract. So I know you don't have it ready for this
meeting --
MR. KLATZKOW: Next meeting, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- because there was a lot on your
plate in, you know, light of the bond validation and the -- all that stuff.
But I just want you to know, I have a tickler file, and I really want to
see that, because it's for your benefit, and it's for the benefit of the
county to have you have enough time to review contracts before they
come to us.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The other thing I would like to say
is -- and I'm going to introduce this as a public record, so -- if anyone
in the public would like to see this document.
Page 197
January 11,2011
The State of Florida convened a statewide grand jury to
investigate public corruption in Florida, and they have released their
report dated December 17, 2010. And I have asked that a copy be
given to each of the County Commissioners.
It is a fascinating study. And I think that as a result of this study,
it's my understanding that our new Governor Scott is going to come up
with a new ethics standard in order to eliminate the public corruption
that Florida has experienced.
What I'm going to, at a later date, do, is when that new ethics
legislation is approved, I would like to recommend that Collier
County, even though we are subject to the laws of the state because of
preemption, formally adopt it as our ethics ordinance as well.
It makes it a lot easier ifthere is consistency between the state
and between the county. There's an Ethics Commission. There are
ethics rulings. It eliminates the possible subjectivity and the
interpretations if something goes wrong, and it also -- it basically
removes it from our forum. We have precedent that we'll be able to
rely on and state law that we'll be able to rely on.
In this report, there is a very significant statement that the public
needs to be aware about, and that relates back to the litigation between
the Board of County Commissioners and the Clerk of Courts and the
role of the clerk as the county's auditor.
And I would like to read this for the benefit of the public. It's on
Page 63 of the report, and it's under the heading, Auditors and Clerk of
Court. "Each county has a clerk who is responsible for the
disbursement of proper expenditures. It is this constitutional check on
spending that serves our county citizens as a fiscal watchdog.
"While we see the value and importance of inspector generals,
the first constitutional check on local spending comes from our state's
clerks. Their efforts may be supplemented and assisted by inspector
generals, sheriffs, local police and other fraud-fighting components of
government, but their role is fundamental, and because of this, their
Page 198
January 11,2011
liability is personal.
"This is an important area of government that should be more
fully utilized in some areas -- in some areas of our state. If we hope to
slow the theft and mismanagement of government resources, audits
must be conducted in a meaningful way.
"Over the last ten months, we have learned corruption by theft
and mismanagement will not be slowed until the procedures and
systems are in place to dissuade those who would choose to violate the
law."
So, in short, the clerk is our independently elected,
constitutionally backed watchdog, and audits are essential to safeguard
the public's interest. The clerk cannot be substituted for any other
check -- by any other check in order to protect the public assets that
we are stewards of.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. You're going to put that -- well,
we've all read it, but --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm just going to introduce it into
the record.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm introducing it -- I introduce
these documents into the record so that the citizens in the community
can have access without having to search for these documents. They
merely have to, you know, request a copy of the minutes or a portion
of the minutes and the record will-- you know, whatever record I
introduce is attached, and it just makes it easier. It just makes it easier
for the citizens.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, the -- I have only one
comment concerning that. You suggested that we take action on an
ethics ordinance that would be consistent with the state's ethics
ordinance. If past experience is any indicator of the future, that would
mean that we would be diluting our ethics ordinance in Collier
County. As -- although we must not create an ethics ordinance that is
Page 199
January 11,2011
inconsistent with the state requirements, we can certainly have one
that's tougher.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, we can, certainly.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And right now we have one that is way
tougher than the state ethics ordinance, and I have absolutely no
expectation that the state will come up with anything much tougher
than they already have. And I have been involved in the creation of
those ethics ordinances since I started on the city council, and they
still have one of the toughest ethics ordinances in the State of Florida.
And I really would hate to have the standards that are applied at
the state applied here. We need tougher standards here, and I would
dissuade you from making any decision on that until we see what the
state comes up with. And if they surprise us and they come up with a
really good, tight enforceable ethics ordinance, I'll be happy to
endorse it. But I don't think they will.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We'll see what the legislature does,
and I appreciate your comment. My understanding is what Governor
Scott will be proposing and what a host of legislators apparently have
been encouraging and are supportive of is an ethics commission -- I
mean, sorry, an ethics law, if you will, that is tougher than what we
have here today in Collier County.
For example, expanding the definition of who a public official is
or who would be subject to these laws, and they're looking to expand
it to county vendors. So if someone is doing business with an entity
like the county or the state, that they would be subject to the same
legal-ethical limitations that a county employee or a county
commissioner would be limited to.
So what I'm hoping is that it will be expanded, and our support
by restating it as a local ordinance is merely for recognition purposes
so it's on notice that everybody understands this is the law at the local
level as well.
We can always be more restrictive. We can't be less restrictive.
Page 200
January 11,2011
That's the way the law works.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I thought this meeting would never
end. Motion to adjourn.
MR.OCHS: Whoa, whoa, excuse me. You forgot staff
communications.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, you. Sorry about that.
MR. OCHS: I rarely have anything, sir, but this time I have just
two quick items.
May I proceed?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, absolutely.
MR. OCHS: I'm sorry the meeting has dragged on so long.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead, go ahead.
MR.OCHS: Okay. The first one is just to remind the board that
we have set a meeting date for the workshop that was requested by the
Naples City Council to talk about their parks system. That's set for
February 9th at one p.m. at Naples City Hall.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who's going to be there?
MR. OCHS: City council.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You'll send us a notice, right?
MR. OCHS: Oh, yes, ma'am, yes, ma'am.
And the other one, just quickly. Back in May of 2009, the board
authorized the staff to proceed with a project to replace the dated
restrooms at the Vanderbilt Beach beachfront beach access, and we've
been working since that time to redesign that facility. You'll recall
that part of the design called for an elevated design because that land
is in the VE zone under the FEMA maps.
Recently Commissioner Hiller had asked me to contact FEMA to
see what impacts, if any, would result from FEMA if the board were
to grant a variance from the FEMA requirements and direct that that
facility be built at grade, you know, basically below the base flood
elevation required.
Page 201
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or at the current grade.
MR. OCHS: Or at -- required by the VE zone. So -- and I'm
happy to do that. But since, you know, we have an approved project
by the board that was directed at that elevation for that reason, I just
wanted to make sure that the board didn't have a problem with me
moving forward with making that inquiry of FEMA.
We suspect -- we've had some discussions about this in the past
at the staff level with FEMA, or at the management level with FEMA,
consistently getting the same response that, you know, if we were to
do something like that, it would most likely have an adverse impact on
our community rating system. But they're -- they're obviously not
going to give us specific response to a specific set of facts unless we
give them some specific information about what our alternative design
might look like, what kind of mitigation we could build into the
project. Those would require, you know, some added expenses from
both an architectural and engineering standpoint to the project.
On the other hand, if we submitted that and FEMA somehow
granted that variance without adversely impacting your community
rating system, you would not have to incur the expense in that project
in building the ramps and the stairs that are required of an elevated
structure.
So I didn't want to presume that the board wanted me to change
current course, but it may be worth making an inquiry via a letter from
the chairman to, you know, the top official at FEMA to see if we
could get some attention on this if the board is so inclined.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm all in favor of that.
And, you know, it's really -- I mean, I'm hearing two sides of the story,
says that all structures need to be at FEMA height, but I'm also
hearing that it's only livable space that needs to be at that FEMA
height.
And, in fact, a lot of structures have storage underneath the
Page 202
January 11,2011
livable space, and that would be the same as having a shed, where you
have a garage, you know, an attached building.
So it just doesn't make sense what is out there, you know,
non-livable space, it needs to be at the flood elevation. So I would
like to get that answered.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, when they say non-livable space,
they're talking about space that doesn't have bathrooms or plumbing,
and that's one of the problems, because if you --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't live in my bathroom.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I know, but if you have a
bathroom --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I only put deposits in the
bathroom.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I'm glad to hear that. But if you
have a bathroom at -- below the flood elevation, it means that sewage
is going to back up and spill out of that, and that's the one thing they
don't want to see happen.
But I don't have a problem sending a letter. My real problem is --
and by the way, you know, so that you know, I asked this question
three or four years ago.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I didn't see the need for a two-story
structure. It was expensive. But I got an answer that said, you can't
do it. I don't mind writing a letter, but I believe that what might
happen is that they will tell us, if you want to do this, you've got to --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mitigate.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- mitigate, you've got to show us your
design --
MR. OCHS: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- you've got to do this, you've got to do
that. And even then we don't have assurance it will get approved. So
we could spend $100,000 doing redesigns and reengineering and stuff
Page 203
January 11,2011
like that, but that's all supposition. And I'll be happy to write a letter if
that's what you want me to do.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The issue, just for clarification, for
the benefit of the public -- because I know there are a lot of people in
the community, the elderly community, that are very, very upset about
the five ramps that they will have to navigate to get to the bathroom.
I'm not even sure it actually complies with the ADA, whether it's,
you know, one continuous ramp or five ramps. I'm not really sure. I
mean, there might be ADA-compliance issues with those ramps and
the elevation, notwithstanding the intent of the law is that someone
who is handicapped has ready accessibility, and I'm not sure that, you
know, having five ramps to navigate up to a bathroom lives up to the
spirit of the law.
This project actually hasn't formally been approved by the board
because it still has to get four variances from the board. The FEMA
variance is something that the Board of County Commissioners grants.
And FEMA exceptions, FEMA variances, are granted without adverse
effect to community ratings.
To give you an example, I think the Port Royal Club applied for
a permit where, if their facility was destroyed by a storm, they would
have the permit in hand and would be able to immediately start
building so that they wouldn't have to try to apply to rebuild when
everybody else was applying, and they were able to build their
bathrooms at their -- you know, get the permit to allow them to build
their bathrooms at the current elevation.
If you go up and down the coast, the bathrooms are low. So I do
think that there is positive hope, and I'm happy to help with the
process, and thank you for writing the letter.
And we would have to mitigate if it was required in order to get
the variance, but it's in the public's interest to get rid of those ramps so
Page 204
January 11,2011
the elderly community and the handicapped community can get to the
bathroom with ease.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Get a draft letter to me.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Like I said, we may need to do some
redesign and some reengineering. So if you see a slight change order
for that, that's the reason why, because we may have to give them--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not necessarily --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, give them the--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- because there could be a net
savings, because by eliminating the ramps and the pilings, you know,
whatever type of flood protection we may need, would offset that cost.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, all this is pure supposition--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- until we get an answer to the letter,
right?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala, you had
something?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just for the sake of comfort. On
Marco Island they have an elevation bathroom at Residents Beach
and, of course, it's mostly old people over there.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And how many ramps?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I can't tell you how many ramps
they have. I just know that it's elevated. And that's all they have on
the beach. So, you know, at least the people can get there. I've never
heard of a complaint there.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I've heard -- I've heard of nothing
but complaints and concerns of --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to say this to you --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And people outside of the second
district.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- as a comfort --
Page 205
January 11,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're very kind.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- that -- you know, that there are
some here, and it doesn't seem to bother them.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's a question of how much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Actually the ramps, you know, once you
get up there, the ride down is worth the trip. It really is.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You lift your hands up.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So it's just making those turns is the
toughest problem.
Okay. Do I hear a motion to adjourn?
County Attorney, you don't have anything?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to adjourn.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion to adjourn.
Seconded by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: (Absent.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We are adjourned.
****Commissioner Fiala moved, seconded by Commissioner Coletta
and carried unanimously that the following items under the Consent
and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Item #16A1
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF BISCA YNE BAY AT
HERIT AGE BAY UNIT FOUR, APPROVAL OF THE
Page 206
January 11,2011
STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE
PERFORMANCE SECURITY - DEVELOPER MUST RECEIVE A
CERTIFICATE OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES PRIOR TO
THE ISSUANCE OF THE FINAL APPROVAL LETTER
Item #16A2
RESOLUTION 2011-01: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF HAMMOCK BAY WITH THE
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING
PRIV ATEL Y MAINTAINED AND THE RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A3
RESOLUTION 2011-02: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF 3500 CORPORATE PLAZA WITH
THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING
PRIV ATEL Y MAINTAINED AND THE RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A4
RELEASE AND SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN FOR FOUR
SEP ARA TE CODE ENFORCEMENT CASES - FOLIOS
#37864960003, #00279800002, #74030680002 AND #82535560004
Item # 16A5
Page 207
January 11,2011
AWARD RFP #10-5483, AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY AND TINDALE-OLIVER & ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR
PHASE 2 OF THE MASTER MOBILITY PLAN. ESTIMATED
CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $315,700 - TO REDUCE VEHICLE
MILES TRAVELED WITHIN PROTECTED HABITAT AND
ENVIRONMENT ALL Y SENSITIVE LANDS
Item #16A6
A WARD BID #10-5491, FIBER OPTIC CABLE INSTALLATION,
MAINTENANCE & REPAIR TO AZTEK, INC. - IN ORDER TO
EXPAND, MAINTAIN AND REPAIR THE COUNTY'S FIBER
OPTIC INFRASTRUCTURE
Item #16A7
REQUEST BY CREEKSIDE WEST, INC. ALLOWING FOR THE
FUTURE TRANSFER OF ROAD IMPACT FEES PAID FOR ONE
PARCEL WITHIN THE CREEKSIDE PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO ANOTHER PARCEL WITHIN THE
SAME PUD, AS THE SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT ON THE
ORIGINAL PARCEL IS CHANGING FROM THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A SHELL BUILDING TO THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A PARKING GARAGE, WHICH DOES
NOT REQUIRE THE PAYMENT OF ROAD IMPACT FEES
Item # l6A8
AWARD ITB #11-5602 FOR THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL UPGRADE
AT THE INTERSECTION OF AIRPORT PULLING (CR 31) AND
PINE RIDGE ROAD (CR 896) TO ITRAN PARTNERS, INC. IN
THE AMOUNT OF $344,763.95 ~ REPLACING THE EXISTING
Page 208
January 11,2011
SP AN WIRE TO A STEEL MAST ARM ASSEMBLY WILL
SECURE THE TRAFFIC CONTROL INST ALLA TION DURING
BAD WEATHER
Item #16A9
AWARD CONTRACT #10-5586 FOR THE INSTALLATION OF
AN EMERGENCY GENERA TOR AT THE COLLIER AREA
TRANSIT FACILITY AT 8300 RADIO ROAD TO WM. J.
VARIAN CONSTRUCTION CO. INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF
$90,223.85 PLUS A TEN PERCENT CONTINGENCY ($9,022)
FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $99,245.85 - TO ASSIST
OPERATIONS DURING POWER OUTAGES
Item #16A10
AWARD RFQ #09-5220, V ANDERBIL T BEACH MSTU
ROADWAY GROUNDS MAINTENANCE TO FLORIDA LAND
MAINTENANCE, INC. D/B/A COMMERCIAL LAND
MAINTENANCE, INC. IN THE ESTIMATED ANNUAL
AMOUNT OF $61,079 - ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES
NEEDED FOR REPAIR OF AN IRRIGATION SYSTEM DUE TO
DAMAGE BY VANDALISM AND LANDSCAPE
REFURBISHMENT PROJECTS
Item #16Al1
APPROVAL OF THE FY11 PROGRAM OF PROJECTS AND
SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION FOR THE FEDERAL
TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5307 FY11 GRANT
FUNDS ESTIMATED AT $2,578,927 - NEEDED FOR TRANSIT
ENHANCEMENT AMENITIES, INSTALLING SECURITY
Page 209
January 11,2011
CAMERAS AND OUTDOOR LIGHTING, ADA COMPLIANCE,
REPLACEMENT OF BUSES, SERVICE AND MAINTENANCE
ON BUSES AND BUS ROUTE OPERATIONS
Item #16B1
A COMMERCIAL BUILDING IMPROVEMENT GRANT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CRA AND A GRANT
APPLICANT WITHIN THE BA YSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE
AREA. (1712 COMMERCIAL DRIVE, $50,000) - FOR BE HOME
REALTY, LLC BUILDING, FOLIO #61581400003
Item #16C1 ~ Moved to Item #lOF (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16D1
SUBMITTAL OF THE ATTACHED 4-H FOUNDATION INC.
GRANT APPLICATION REQUESTING $63,825 FOR THE 4-H
OUTREACH COORDINATORS AND THE ENHANCEMENT OF
OUTREACH ACTIVITIES MANAGED BY THE COLLIER
COUNTY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA/IF AS EXTENSION
DEPARTMENT - GRANT TERM: FROM JANUARY 1,2011
THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2011
Item #16D2
FOUR (4) RELEASES OF LIEN FOR DEFERRAL OF 100
PERCENT OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR OWNER
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWELLING UNITS
THAT WERE TRANSFERRED FROM THE DEVELOPER TO
THE NEW OWNER - FOR HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN REGAL ACRES, LOTS 1,6,7_
Page 210
January 11,2011
AND 10
Item #16D3
FIVE (5) RELEASES OF LIEN FOR DEFERRAL OF 100
PERCENT OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR OWNER
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWELLING UNITS
THAT HAVE BEEN REPAID IN FULL- A TOTAL OF
$57,935.60 HAS BEEN REPAID TO THE COUNTY FOR LOT 114
- LIBERTY LANDING, LOT 71 - TRAIL RIDGE, LOT 38 -
JUBILATION SUBDIVISION, LOT 10 (BLK 7) - AVALON
ESTATES AND LOT 27 (BLK A) - HABITAT VILLAGE
Item #16D4
NINE (9) SATISFACTIONS OF MORTGAGE FOR OWNER
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWELLING UNITS
THAT HAVE SATISFIED THE TERMS OF ASSISTANCE - FOR
LOT 12 (BLK 1) - BURDALE, LOTS 49, 50, 55 & 62 -
INDEPENDENCE, PHASE ONE, LOT 15 (BLK 194) - GOLDEN
GATE (UNIT 6), NAPLES TRACE - UNIT 202, LOT 10 -
COLLIER VILLAGE AND SECTION 1 - TRAFFORD PINES
ESTATES
Item #16D5
SIX (6) SATISFACTIONS OF MORTGAGE FOR OWNER
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWELLING UNITS
THA T HAVE BEEN REPAID IN FULL TO COLLIER COUNTY -
FOR LOT 71 - TRAIL RIDGE, LOT 114 - LIBERTY LANDING,
LOT 48 - CHARLEE ESTATES, LOT 27 (BLK A) - HABITAT
VILLAGE AND LOT 2 (BLK 1) - GULF ACRES (2)
Page 211
January 11,2011
Item # 16D6
THREE (3) MORTGAGE AND NOTE MODIFICATION
AGREEMENTS FOR SINGLE F AMIL Y REHABILITATION TO
CORRECT THE TOTAL FUNDS DISBURSED ON PREVIOUSLY
RECORDED SECURITY INSTRUMENTS - PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 714 NEW MARKET RD. W (IMMOKALEE), 2260
EVERGLADES BLVD. N (GOLDEN GATE ESTATES) AND
103A BOBOLINK WAY (NAPLES)
Item # 16D7
THREE (3) LIEN AGREEMENTS FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF
COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR OWNER OCCUPIED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWELLING UNITS LOCATED IN
COLLIER COUNTY. APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM WILL
TRANSFER PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DEFERRAL
AGREEMENTS FROM DEVELOPER TO OWNER OCCUPANTS
WITH A CONTINUING FISCAL IMPACT OF $45,083.78-
FOR LIBERTY LANDING LOTS 72 & 133 AND REGAL ACRES
LOT 4
Item #16D8
AN AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $258,667 WITH THE
AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (AHCA)
AND COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES (CHS) TO PARTICIPATE
IN THE MEDICAID LOW INCOME POOL PROGRAM (LIP).
PARTICIPATION IN THIS PROGRAM WILL GENERATE AN
ADDITIONAL $452,907 IN FEDERAL MATCHING FUNDS TO
BE PAID DIRECTLY TO CHS FOR SERVICES FOR THE MOST
Page 212
January 11,2011
MEDICALLY NEEDY IN COLLIER COUNTY - TO EXPAND
PRIMARY HEALTH CARE SERVICES AT THE MIKE DAVIS
MEDICAL CENTER (FORMERLY HORIZONS PRIMARY CARE
CENTER) AND OTHER SITES
Item # 16D9
AUTHORIZING CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY THE STATE
OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
(DCF) IN ORDER TO BE ELIGIBLE TO BE AWARDED 2011
CHALLENGE GRANT FUNDING - IN ORDER TO RECEIVE
$63,397.00 IN GRANTS FUNDS
Item #16D10
AN ADDITIONAL LIST OF EQUIPMENT TO BE PURCHASED
WITH THE HEALTH CARE AND OTHER FACILITIES SPECIAL
CONGRESSIONAL INITIATIVE EARMARK FROM THE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES ACCEPTED BY THE COUNTY ON SEPTEMBER 29,
2009, AGENDA ITEM #16D6 - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D11
AN AGREEMENT WITH THE DAVID LAWRENCE CENTER TO
OPERATE A POST-ADJUDICATION, COURT SUPERVISED,
SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT PROGRAM KNOWN AS
THE COLLIER COUNTY DRUG COURT PROGRAM. FUNDING
HAS BEEN PROVIDED THROUGH GRANT #2010-DC-BX-0016
FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUREAU OF
JUSTICE ASSISTANCE. THERE ARE NO GENERAL FUNDS
Page 213
January 11,2011
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT - MATCHING FUNDS
WILL COME FROM PARTICIPANT FEES AND IN-KIND
SERVICES GENERATED WHILE OPERATING THE PROGRAM
Item #16D12
AN AMENDMENT TO THE HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION
AND RAPID RE-HOUSING PROGRAM (HPRP)
ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN, WHICH PROVIDES GUIDANCE ON
THE PROGRAMMATIC DESIGN, ELIGIBILITY GUIDELINES
AND ASSISTANCE LIMITATIONS FOR AGENCIES
PARTICIPATING IN THE HPRP PROGRAM. THE PROPOSED
AMENDMENT WOULD INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF
MEDIUM TERM HPRP FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE A CLIENT
COULD RECEIVE FROM A MAXIMUM OF $3,000 TO $5,000
PER CLIENT OVER AN EIGHTEEN MONTH PERIOD - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D13
AN AMENDMENT (CONTRACT AMENDMENT #1) TO THE
2009-2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH THE SHELTER
FOR ABUSED WOMEN & CHILDREN (SA WCC) APPROVED
ON SEPTEMBER 15,2009. THIS AMENDMENT IS TO REVISE
EXHIBIT A, SECTION B THE BUDGET, TO UPDATE THE
BUDGET TO FACILITATE REIMBURSEMENT
Item #16D14
REJECT SOLICITATION (ITB) #11-5611 FOR EAST NAPLES
COMMUNITY CENTER ROLLDOWN SHUTTERS AND THE
Page 214
January 11,2011
ASSOCIATED PROPOSALS THAT WERE SUBMITTED AND
AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT TO RE-
SOLICIT FOR THE SERVICES. THE FY 2011 IMPACT
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SOLICITATION IS $166,954 - TWO
BIDS RECEIVED WERE APPROXIMATELY 60% ABOVE THE
ENGINEERS ESTIMATE
Item #16D15
AWARD FOR INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #1 0-5568-R FOR
FITNESS EQUIPMENT REPAIR AND PURCHASE TO TROPIC
GYM TECH, LLC ($70,000 APPROXIMATE ANNUAL
SPENDING) - FOR VARIOUS SITES THROUGHOUT THE
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Item #16D16
RESOLUTION 2011-03: A REVISED RESOLUTION
SUPPORTING THE COUNTY'S FOUR GRANT APPLICATIONS
TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION (FDEP) FOR LONG RANGE GRANT FUNDING
REQUESTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011-2012, AGREEING TO BE
THE LOCAL SPONSOR, AND COMMITTING LOCAL COST
SHARE FUNDS, AND ANY NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS ~ PROVIDING FUNDS FOR THE WIGGINS
P ASS INLET MANAGEMENT PLAN, BAREFOOT BEACH
RESTORATION PROJECT, SOUTH MARCO ISLAND BEACH
RENOURISHMENT AND COLLIER COUNTY BEACH
RENOURISHMENT
Item #16E1
Page 215
January 11,2011
AN ADDITION AND MODIFICATION TO THE 2011 FISCAL
YEAR PAY AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN MADE FROM
OCTOBER 1,2010 THROUGH DECEMBER 31,2010-
POSITIONS LOCATED WITHIN THE IMMOKALEE BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT CENTER AND A PROCUREMENT
SPECIALIST
Item # 16E2
REPORTS AND RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE
ORDERS AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS - FOR THE
PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 22,2010 THROUGH DECEMBER 14,
2010
Item #16E3
TWO LEASE AGREEMENTS WITH THE FLORIDA FISH AND
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION (FWC) IN ORDER
TO ALLOW FWC TO CONDUCT YOUTH HUNTS FOR
COLLIER COUNTY RESIDENTS AT PEPPER RANCH
PRESERVE IN JANUARY AND FEBRUARY 2011 - HELD
JANUARY 14-16,2011 AND FEBRUARY 25-27,2011
Item #16F1
THE SUBMITTAL OF A VOLUNTEER FIRE ASSISTANCE
GRANT APPLICATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,125 TO THE
FLORIDA DIVISION OF FORESTRY FOR THE PURPOSE OF
PURCHASING FIRE HOSE FOR THE BRUSH VEHICLES AND
CLASS A FOAM - ALLOWING THE OCHOPEE FIRE
CONTROL DISTRICT TO COMPLETE OUTFITTING THE
FORESTRY VEHICLES AND INCREASING SUPPRESSION
Page 216
January 11,2011
POWER
Item #16F2 - Moved to Item #10E (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item # 16F3
THE AFTER THE FACT APPROV AL FOR THE SUB MITT AL OF
A VOLUNTEER FIRE ASSISTANCE GRANT APPLICATION TO
THE FLORIDA DIVISION OF FORESTRY FOR REQUIRED
WILDFIRE PROTECTIVE CLOTHING AND FlREFIGHTING
FOAM
Item #16F4
AWARD BID #11-5623 FOR PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF
PINE STRAW MULCH TO CUSTOM PINE STRAW, INC -
BENEFITING THE PELICAN BAY COMMUNITY
Item #16F5
AWARD BID NO. 11-5607 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
BOAT DOCK AT THE ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE STATION,
PROJECT #50070, IN THE AMOUNT OF $97,776 TO M. E. GOSE
INC. AND THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT -
RELOCATING THE FIRE BOAT BEHIND THE FIRE STATION
WILL ALLOW FOR SAFER PATIENT ACCESS AND
TRANSFER TO MEDFLIGHT
Item #16F6
RESOLUTION 2011-04: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING
GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE
Page 217
January 11, 2011
PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2010-11 ADOPTED
BUDGET - RECOGNIZING FUNDS FROM THE OLDER
AMERICANS ACT GRANT
Item #16Hl
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE NAPLES PRESS CLUB HOLIDAY
P ARTY AT THE BELLAS ERA IN NAPLES, FL ON DECEMBER
9,2010. $40 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S
TRAVEL BUDGET
Item # 16H2
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE EAST NAPLES CIVIC
ASSOCIATION MONTHLY LUNCHEON ON DECEMBER 16,
2010 AT HAMIL TON HARBOR YACHT CLUB IN NAPLES, FL.
$18 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET
Item # 16H3
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE UNITED STATES COAST GUARD
AUXILIARY FLOTILLA 95 CHANGE OF WATCH ON
JANUARY 8, 20 11 AT HIDEAWAY BEACH CLUB ON MARCO
ISLAND, FL. $50 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S
TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT 250 SOUTH BEACH DRIVE
Page 218
January 11,2011
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. WILL ATTEND THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY
MEMBER APPRECIATION RECEPTION ON JANUARY 14,2011
IN NAPLES, FL. $25 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD AT LIBRARY
HEADQUARTERS, 2385 ORANGE BLOSSOM DRIVE
Item #16H5 - Withdrawn (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE MARCO ISLAND AREA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ANNUAL INSTALLATION
CELEBRATION AND LEADERSHIP MARCO GRADUATION
ON JANUARY 9, 2011 ON MARCO ISLAND, FL. $75 TO BE
P AID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET -
HELD AT THE ISLAND COUNTRY CLUB, 500 NASSAU ROAD
Item #16H6
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE EVERGLADES
CITY HALL ANNUAL CHRISTMAS PARTY ON FRIDAY,
DECEMBER 17, 2010 IN EVERGLADES CITY, FL. $15 TO BE
PAID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
- HELD AT THE SEAFOOD DEPOT, 102 COLLIER AVE
Page 219
January 11,2011
Item # 16H7
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. WILL ATTENDED ULI
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA 14TH ANNUAL WINTER INSTITUTE
REAL ESTATE TRENDS CONFERENCE ON JANUARY 13,2011
IN NAPLES, FL. $25 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD AT THE CLUB AT
OLDE CYPRESS, 7165 TREELINE DRIVE
Item #16H8
COMMISSIONER HENNING'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER HENNING
ATTENDED THE COLLIER BUILDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION'S 2011 INSTALLATION DINNER. THIS EVENT
WAS HELD AT OLDE CYPRESS COUNTRY CLUB -7165
TREELINE DRIVE, NAPLES, FL., ON 12/08/2010. $45 TO BE
PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Item #16H9
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. TRIP TO WASHINGTON, DC
INCLUDING AIRFARE AND HOTEL. $434.16 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET -
ATTENDED THE SWEARING-IN CEREMONY FOR
REPRESENTATIVE-ELECT DAVID RIVERA AND SENATOR-
ELECT MARCO RUBIO
Page 220
January 11,2011
Item #16H10
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING EDWARD "SKI" OLESKY
FOR HIS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE RESIDENTS AND
VISITORS OF COLLIER COUNTY. TO BE PRESENTED AT THE
TDC MEETING ON JANUARY 24, 2011 BY COMMISSIONER
TOM HENNING
Item #1611
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH
ACTION AS DIRECTED
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 221
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
January 11,2011
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Districts:
1) Verona Walk Community Deyelopment District:
FYI0-ll Regular Meeting Schedule
B. Minutes:
1) Affordable Housing Commission:
Minutes of September 13, 2010; October 11,2010.
2) Airport Authority:
Minutes of October 11, 2010.
3) Collier County Planning Commission:
Minutes of August 25, 2010; August 27, 2010; September 16,2010;
September 20, 2010.
4) Consumer Adyisory Board:
Minutes of April 20, 2010.
5) Contractors Licensing Board:
Minutes of September 13, 2010.
6) Development Seryices Advisory Committee:
Minutes of September I, 2010; October 6, 20 I O.
7) Golden Gate Community Center Advisory Committee:
Agenda of October 4, 20 I O.
Minutes of August 30, 2010.
8) Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board:
Agenda of September 30, 20 I O.
Minutes of September 30, 20 I O.
9) Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agencv:
Agenda of October 20, 2010.
Minutes of September 15, 2010.
10) Immokalee Loeal Redevelopment Advisory Board:
Agenda of October 20, 2010.
Minutes of September 15,2010.
11) Land Acquisition Advisory Committee:
Minutes of October 11,2010.
12) Librarv Advisory Board:
Minutes of August 18,2010.
13) Radio Road East of Santa Barbara Blvd to Davis Blvd Advisory
Committee:
Agenda of October 6, 2010.
Minutes of August 11,2010 Workshop; August 11,2010;
August 16,2010 Special Meeting.
14) Vanderbilt Beaeh Beautifieation MSTU Advisory Committee:
AgendaofOetober 14,2010.
Minutes of May 6, 2010.
C. Other:
I)
Code Enforcement Speeial Magistrate:
Minutes of September 3,2010.
January 11,2011
Item # 1611
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 27,2010
THROUGH DECEMBER 3,2010 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF DECEMBER 4,2010
THROUGH DECEMBER 10,2010 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #1613
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF DECEMBER 11, 2010
THROUGH DECEMBER 17, 2010 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J4
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF DECEMBER 18,2010
THROUGH DECEMBER 24,2010 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16K1
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO PARCELS 156FEE
AND 156TCE IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY
V. KATHERYN MORENO, ET AL., CASE NO. 10-2741-CA
(COLLIER BOULEVARD PROJECT NO. 68056). (FISCAL
IMPACT: $38,570.) - PROPERTY NEEDED FOR THE
EXP ANSION OF COLLIER BLVD. BETWEEN GREEN BLVD.
Page 222
January 11,2011
AND GOLDEN GATE BLVD.
Item #16K2 - Withdrawn (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
AN INCREASE IN THE PURCHASE ORDER FOR GRANT,
FRIDKIN, PEARSON, ATHAN & CROWN TO A TOTAL OF
$115,000 FOR THE CASE OF KER ENTERPRISES, INC., D/B/A
ARMADILLO UNDERGROUND V. AP AC-SOUTHEAST, INC. V.
COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 09-8724-CA, NOW PENDING IN
THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL
CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
(VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD PROJECT NO. 63051) (FISCAL
IMP ACT AN ADDITIONAL $50,000) - FOR ADDITIONAL CO-
COUNSEL SERVICES WITH GREG WOODS, ESQ. FOR THE
REMAINING DISCOVERY, ARBITRATION AND TRIAL
Item #16K3
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$50,500 FOR PARCEL 811 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. MYRTLE PRESERVE, LLC., ET AL.,
CASE NO. 07-0463-CA (LELY AREA STORMWATER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 51101.1) (FISCAL IMPACT
$40,140) - PROPERTY NEEDED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A
PORTION OF THE LEL Y MANOR CANAL AND A
MAINTENANCE ROAD ALONGSIDE THE CANAL
Item #16K4
RESOLUTION 2011-05: COUNTY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL
NECESSARY STEPS TO VOLUNTARILY DISMISS WITHOUT
PREJUDICE COLLIER COUNTY'S BOND VALIDATION
Page 223
January 11,2011
COMPLAINT, AND RESCIND RESOLUTION NO. 2010-211,
WHICH RESOLUTION AUTHORIZED THE ISSUANCE OF
$130,000,000 IN BONDS FOR THE ACQUISITION,
CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPPING OF A SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH AND SERVICES FACILITY TO BE OPERATED BY
THE JACKSON LABORATORY - DUE TO JACKSON LABS
WITHDRAWING THEIR STATE APPLICATION
Item # 16K5
A TRI-P ARTY DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT
WITH E'S COUNTRY STORES, LLC, AND ROBERTO BOLLT,
WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
LOCATED GENERALL Y AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
IMMOKALEE ROAD AND OIL WELL ROAD
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2011-06: PETITION V AC-PL2010-2039, LOWES
SOUTH NAPLES, DISCLAIMING, RENOUNCING AND
V ACA TING THE COUNTY AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN
THAT PORTION OF A 15-FOOT WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT
AS ORIGINALLY RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK
1872, PAGE 1444 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA AND IN THAT PORTION OF A 15 FOOT
C.U.E. (COUNTY UTILITY EASEMENT) AS CREATED BY THE
PLAT OF CAPRI COMMERCIAL CENTER NO.2, RECORDED
IN PLAT BOOK 49, PAGES 5 THROUGH 8, ALL LOCATED IN
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY
SHOWN AND DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A
Page 224
January 11,2011
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2011-07: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING
CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL
REVENUE) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2010-11 ADOPTED
BUDGET
Item #17C
ORDINANCE 2011-01: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 75-16, AS
AMENDED, RELATING TO THE MEETINGS OF THE BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, CLARIFYING THE
TIME FRAME FOR THE ELECTION OF A CHAIRMAN AND/OR
VICE-CHAIRMAN, AS APPLICABLE, AFTER THE GENERAL
ELECTION AND DESIGNATING WHO SHALL SERVE AS THE
TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN IN THE ABSENCE OF THE
CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN WITH RESPECT TO ALL
MATTERS OUTSIDE OF MEETINGS
Page 225
January 11,2011
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:53 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
lc e~ (,,,) CY'::\~
FRED COYLE, Chairman'
ATTEST.~,., 0"
DWIGFIT .E. BR(){cK, CLERK
;-"-, . '<"::
~ "4
~'?~~lL
Att."",,, ~t, tp,N',.... .
119rlatur~~I)/j: <
Thes); minutes approved by the Board on '2 / B / 'Z 0 II , as presented
j( -^-- or as corrected
/
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INe., BY CHERIE' NOTTINGHAM and
TERRI LEWIS, NOTARY PUBLIC/COURT REPORTER.
Page 226