BCC Minutes 05/10/2011 R
May 10,2011
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida
May 10,2011
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, 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
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Jim Coletta
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
Georgia Hiller
ALSO PRESENT:
Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney
Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager
Crystal Kinzel, Clerk of Courts, Finance Director
Ian Mitchell, Executive Manager to the BCC
Michael Sheffield, Operations Manager, CMO
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples, FL 341] 2
May 10, 2011
9:00 AM
Fred W. Coyle - BCC Chairman; Commissioner, District 4
Jim Coletta - BCC Vice-Chairman; Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Chairman
Donna Fiala - BCC Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Vice-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
EXECUTIVE MANAGER TO THE BCC PRIOR TO 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.
Page 1
May 10, 2011
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."
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 PROCEEDING 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
ACCOMMODA TlON IN ORDER TO P ARTlCIP A TE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING 1M]} AIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Pastor Michael Bannon - Crossroads Community Church of Naples
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. April 7, 2011 - BCC/Parks and Recreation Master Plan Community Meeting
C. April 12, 2011 - BCC/Regular Meeting
D. April13, 2011 - BCC/Regular Meeting Carryover
Page 2
May 10, 2011
3. SERVICE AWARDS - ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS
A. 5 Year Attendees
1) Kenneth Kelly, Collier County Code Enforcement Board and the
Affordable Housing Advisory Committee; Rick Medwedeff, Tourist
Development Council; Edward 1. Olesky, Tourist Development
Council; Sharon Kenny, Historic and Archaeological Preservation
Board; Lindsey J. Thomas, Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Local
Redevelopment Advisory Board.
B. 10 Year Attendees
1) Robert M. Slebodnik, Lely Golf Estates Beautification Advisory
Committee; George C. Mohlke, JI., Health Facilities Authority; N.
Rex Ashley, Health Facilities Authority.
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating May 25th as National Missing Children's Day. To
be accepted by Amelia Vasquez, National Center for Missing & Exploited
Children; Sgt. Ken Becker, Collier County Sheriff's Office; Special Agent
Tracy Maurer, Florida Department of Law Enforcement; Chief Thomas
Weschler, Naples Police Department; Lt. Matt Fletcher, Naples Police
Department; Captain John Adams, Naples Police Department; Sgt. Dave
Sugrue, Naples Police Department; and Jennifer Casciano, Naples Police
Department. Sponsored by Commissioner Henning.
B. Proclamation designating Mayas National Bike Month. To be accepted by
Michelle Avola, Executive Director, Naples Pathways Coalition. Sponsored
by Commissioner Hiller.
C. Proclamation designating May 2011 as Supervised Visitation Month. To be
accepted by Gail Tunnock and Jackie Stephens from the Children's
Advocacy Center, Lisa Reddick and Linda Oberhaus from the Shelter for
Abused Women & Children, and Marcy Krumbine, Director of Housing,
Human and Veteran Services. Sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
Page 3
May 10, 2011
D. Proclamation designating May 21 through May 27, 2011 as Safe Boating
Week. To be accepted by Andy Evva. Sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
E. Proclamation designating May 2011 as Motorcycle Safety Awareness
Month. To be accepted by Marie and Bill Ratcliff. Sponsored by
Commissioner Coletta.
F. Proclamation designating May 14,2011 as Mother Annie Mae Perry Day.
To be accepted by Frank Cummings and Vaughn Young. Sponsored by
Commissioner Coyle.
G. Proclamation designating May 16 through May 22, 2011 as National
Association oflnsurance Women International Week. To be accepted by
Betty Curry. Sponsored by Commissioner Hiller.
H. Proclamation designating May 16 through May 20, 2011 as SCORE Naples
and Small Business Development Center, National Small Business Week.
To be accepted by Chick Heithaus, George Ahearn, Dan Regelski, Suzanne
Specht and Julio Estremeria. Sponsored by Commissioner Hiller.
I. Proclamation designating May 15 through May 21,2011 as Collier County
Emergency Medical Services Week. To be accepted by Jeff Page, Chief,
Emergency Medical Services. Sponsored by Commissioner Fiala.
J. Proclamation designating May 10,2011 as Dr. Robert Boyd Tober Day. To
be accepted by Dr. Robert Tober. Sponsored by Commissioner Coyle.
K. Proclamation designating May 15 through May 21, 2011 as Water Reuse
Week. To be accepted by Dr. George Yilmaz, Wastewater Department
Director; Danette Huff, Wastewater Reuse Manager; Dale Waller, Plant
Manager North County Water Reclamation Facility; Jon Pratt, Plant
Manager, South County Water Reclamation Facility; Paul Mattausch, Water
Department Director; and Lisa Koehler, Media/Outreach Specialist, Big
Cypress Basin/South Florida Water Management District. Sponsored by
Commissioner Coletta.
L. Proclamation designating May 2011 as National Drug Court Month. To be
accepted by Judge Christine Greider and the Collier County Drug Court
Team. Sponsored by Commissioner Henning.
Page 4
May 10, 2011
M. Proclamation designating May 6 through 12, 2011 as National Nurses Week.
To be accepted by representatives of the nursing profession. Sponsored by
Commissioner Coletta.
5. PRESENT A TIONS
A. Recommendation to recognize Jay Kim, Database Administrator,
Information Technology Department, as the Employee of the Month for
Apri12011.
B. Presentation by Corporal Sylee Gibson, Collier County Sheriffs Office,
regarding the home "makeover" that occurred at the residence of "Miss
Amy" Atkins thanks to the efforts of the Sheriffs Office, Lowe's Home
Improvement, Tropic Disposal, Thomas Amendola General Contractors and
several other dedicated and caring residents of the community.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Collier County Coastal Advisory
Committee.
B. Appointment of member to the Black Affairs Advisory Board.
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid #11-5652 MarGood Harbor
Park in the amount of $1,119,823.52 to Brooks and Freund, LLC for park
improvements. (Vicky Ahmad, Project Manager, Parks and Recreation
Department)
B. Recommendation to award a construction contract in the amount of
$25,935,470.53 to Mitchell & Stark Construction Corporation and reserve
Page 5
May 10, 2011
$3,315,000 on the purchase order for funding allowances, for a total of
$29,250,470.53 for ITB No. 10-5342 - "SR 84 (Davis Blvd) Radio Road to
Collier Blvd; SRlCR 951 Intersection improvements; Collier Blvd (SRlCR
951) North to Magnolia Pond Drive; and CR 951 (Collier Blvd) North to the
E Golden Gate Canal", Project No. 60073 and Project No. 60092. (Marlene
Messam, P.E., Sr. Project Manager, TECM)
C. This item to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. Recommendation to consider the
request by the Economic Development Council of Collier County to provide
a Job Creation and Fast Track incentive package (creation of 15 full-time
jobs at 131 % of the current Collier County private-sector average wage) to
Collier Scrap Metal Recycling, Inc. and approve the incentives in
accordance with Florida Statute Section 125.045 for the proposed project to
be located at 2011 Seward Avenue (Fiscal Impact: $30,000) (David Jackson,
Executive Director, Economic and Business Development and Tammie
Nemecek, President, Economic Development Council)
D. Request for authorization to advertise and bring back for future
consideration an amendment to Ordinance No. 2001-13, as amended, the
Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, which would modify
provisions related to the annual payments required to obtain and maintain a
Certificate of Public Facility Adequacy. (Amy Patterson, Impact Fee and
Economic Development Manager, Growth Management Division)
E. Recommendation that the Board approve a Change Order to facilitate Staffs
continued efforts to complete the 1-75 Interchange Justification Report (UR).
(Fiscal Impact $125, 110) (Nick Casalanguida, Deputy Administrator,
Growth Management)
11. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
12. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
13. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
14. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
Page 6
May 10, 2011
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water utility
facility for Cascada at Fiddler's Creek and to authorize the County
Manager, or his designee, to release any Utilities Performance
Security to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent.
2) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water utility
facility for Marquesa Royale at Tiburon and to authorize the County
Manager, or his designee, to release any Utilities Performance
Security to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent.
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water utility
facility for Legacy at Lely Resort, 6450 Legacy Circle, and to
authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release any Utilities
Performance Security to the Project Engineer or the Developer's
designated agent.
4) Recommendation to award Bid #10-5520 to "Motorola Central
Control Irrigation Supplies and Services" to Ag- Tronix, Inc. The
annual expenditures are estimated to be $75,000.
5) Recommendation to adopt a resolution and to quitclaim to the Florida
Department of Transportation compensating turn lane right-of-way on
Davis Boulevard (SR-84) east of the entrance to Madison Park.
(Fiscal Impact: None)
6) Recommendation to approve the release of lien in the Code
Enforcement Action entitled Board of County Commissioners vs.
Susan B. Williams, Code Enforcement Board Case No. 2007060820,
relating to property located at 1705 Tarpon Bay Drive S., Collier
Page 7
May 10,2011
County, Florida.
7) Recommendation to approve a Resolution to petition Governor Scott
to extend the "Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern" designation
awarded to Florida's Heartland Regional Economic Development
Initiative, Inc. Region another 5-years and to keep the Community of
Immokalee within the South Central Rural Area of Critical Economic
Concern designation. This item is being placed on the agenda at the
request of the Economic Development Council of Collier County.
8) Recommendation to approve a purchase agreement for the purchase of
right-of-way required for the construction of Oil Well Road and
terminate the agreement with the former owner. Project No. 60044.
(Fiscal Impact: $30,600)
9) Recommendation to approve a Work Order under Contract #09-5262
with Agnoli, Barber and Brundage Inc. ("ABB, Inc."), to provide
professional engineering services related to design, bidding assistance,
and construction services of the Wing South Airpark Channels portion
of the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project (LASIP) in the
amount of $199,922, Proj ect #51101.
10) Recommendation to declare a valid public emergency and direct the
County Manager or designee to proceed with are-evaluation of the
FEMA-designated floodplain using the 20 I 0 LiDAR and approve all
necessary budget amendments. (Fiscal impact $400,250)
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation that the Community Redevelopment Agency
approve an Event Grant Agreement between the CRA and Bayshore
CAP A Center, Inc. to support the 2012 "Bayshore Festival of the
Arts" event at Sugden Regional Park; approve a grant of up to
$15,000 from the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Trust Fund (Fund 187)
FY 12 Marketing & Promotions budget to fund certain event costs, and
declare that the grant and event serves a valid public purpose. Fiscal
Impact Fund 187: $15,000.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
Page 8
May 10, 2011
1) Recommendation to approve a Florida Department of Environmental
Protection Certification of Financial Responsibility Form for the
South County Regional Water Treatment Plant Injection Well, IW-2.
2) Recommendation to authorize a one-time exception to Ordinance No.
2005-54, for nine properties located within Courtside Commons of
Wyndemere, pertaining to the annual Solid Waste Collection and
Disposal Services Special Assessment for the collection, disposal, and
administration of municipal solid waste due to a billing error, and to
direct the County Manager or his designee to take all actions
necessary to implement the exception.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve attached budget amendment enabling
expenditure of $204,627 State Aid to Libraries Grant awarded Collier
County Public Library.
2) Recommendation to approve an agreement with the District School
Board of Collier County for transporting school-age recreation
program participants at an estimated cost of $52,000.
3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
Agreement with the Collier County Sheriff's Office to participate with
the operation of the Criminal Justice, Mental Health and Substance
Abuse Reinvestment Grant. Funding has been provided through
Memorandum of Understanding #LHZ25 from the Florida
Department of Children and Families.
4) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
modification to Disaster Recovery Initiative Agreement #08DB-D3-
09-21-0 I-A03 between the Florida Department of Community Affairs
and Collier County. This modification will extend the grant period.
5) Public notice of intent to consider final disposition of Neighborhood
Stabilization Program residential properties, consistent with the
requirements of Collier County Ordinance No. 2009-63 and
S 125.35(3), Florida Statutes.
Page 9
May 10,2011
6) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community
Development Block Grant-Recovery (CDBG-R) Agreement providing
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds to Big
Cypress Housing Corporation(BCHC) for $467,788 to provide energy
improvements at Main Street Village (MSV) and Eden Gardens
Apartments in Immokalee, FL.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the
Assumption Agreement from R.W. Beck, Inc. to SAIC Energy,
Environment & Infrastructure, LLC for Engineering Technical
Support and Financial Consulting Services for Solid Waste.
2) Recommendation to recognize and appropriate revenues for specialty
facility maintenance services in the amount of $1 06,594.03 to the
Facilities Management Department cost center and approve all
necessary Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Amendments.
3) Recommendation to accept a bronze bust of former County Manager
James V. Mudd from Abbas Asli (landlord of the former Property
Appraiser's office building) for placement in the James V. Mudd
Emergency Services Center.
4) Recommendation to approve, and authorize the Chairman to sign,
Gopher Tortoise Short-Term Protected Recipient Site Permit Number
GTSR-II-00003, the Conservation Collier Caracara Prairie Preserve
Gopher Tortoise Recipient Site Policy Resolution, and the Interlocal
Agreement between Collier County and Corkscrew Regional
Ecosystem Watershed Land and Water Trust.
5) Recommendation to reject vendor quotes for Invitation to Bid (ITB)
#11-5629 Background Checks New Hires and Vehicle for Hire
Owners and Drivers and to approve outstanding payment of three
invoices to Sterling InfoSystems, Inc. totaling $6,374.82.
6) Recommendation to accept reports and ratify staff-approved change
orders and changes to work orders.
Page 10
May 10,2011
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to approve a Memorandum of Understanding
between Collier County and Hodges University in support of
Emergency Management activities related to natural and manmade
hazards emergency response.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Proclamation designating May 10,2011 as Conservancy of Southwest
Florida "Saving Southwest Florida" Campaign Celebration Day. To
be presented at the Conservancy of Southwest Florida event May 10,
2011 by Kristi Bartlett. Sponsored by Commissioner Coyle.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of April 9,
2011 through April 15, 2011 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of April
16, 2011 through April 22, 2011 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
3) To present to the Board of County Commissioners the State Revenue
Sharing Application for Fiscal Year 2011-2012 and to obtain approval
for the Chairman to sign the application.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
I) Recommendation to Approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
Amount of$297,500 for the Acquisition of Parcell 11 in the Lawsuit
Styled Collier County v. NB Holdings Corporation, et aI., Case No.
06-0658-CA (Santa Barbara Boulevard Proj ect No. 62081) (Fiscal
Page 11
May 10, 2011
Impact: $3I4,737)
2) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent,
National City Mortgage Company, for Parcel No.'s 162FEE and
I 62TCE in the amount of$14,500 in the lawsuit styled Collier County
v. Tania Cantin, Sr., et a!., Case No. 1O-2646-CA (Collier Boulevard
Project No. 68056) (Fiscal Impact $2,400).
3) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent,
Annette Pocchi, for Parcel No.'s 105FEE and 105TCE in the amount
of $25,000 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Annette Pocchi, et
a!., Case No.1 0-2682-CA (Collier Boulevard Project No. 68056)
(Fiscal Impact $4,200).
4) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $4,200 for Parcel 145RDUE in the lawsuit styled Collier
County v. Lamartine Petit Monsieur., et a!., Case No. 10-2681-CA
(Collier Boulevard Project No. 68056) (Fiscal Impact $700).
5) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
the attached Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release with Surety
Construction to recover damages incurred by the County as a result of
contracted work for the repair to the Pollution Control Laboratory in
Building "H" 3rd Floor in the amount of$88,559.49.
6) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment for Parcel
Nos. 112RDUE and 112TCE in the amount of $356,263 in the lawsuit
styled Collier County v. Kaye Homes, Inc., et a!., Case No. 10-2680-
CA (Collier Boulevard Project No. 68056) (Fiscal Impact $66,963).
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDA TION 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
Page 12
May 10,2011
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 adopt an ordinance which would amend the Collier
County Ethics Ordinance (Ordinance No. 03-53, as amended), to provide the
opportunity for Commissioners to attend charitable functions and pay for
only the actual cost to attend the event.
B. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 76-48, as
amended, which regulates the use of County parks, by eliminating the
prohibition against the possession, transport, or discharge of a firearm as
such regulatory authority has been preempted by Section 790.33(1), Florida
Statutes.
C. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 1975-16,
as amended, relating to the placement and presentation of matters on the
official agenda.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 13
May 10, 2011
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good morning, everyone. The Board of
County Commission meeting is now in session. Would you please
stand for the invocation by Pastor Michael Bannon of the Crossroads
Community Church of Naples.
Item #lA
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
PASTOR BANNON: Would you pray with me, please.
Lord God, we acknowledge that You are a great God, mighty in
the heavens. Grant to us the humility to seek Your will, the wisdom to
recognize that it is good and perfect and acceptable, and the courage to
do it. For the glory of Your name we pray, amen.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.
(Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Please be seated.
County Manager, would you please go over the changes to the
agenda, please.
Item #2A
TODA Y'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA AS
AMENDED - APPROVED AND OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the County
Commission. These are agenda changes for the County Commission
meeting of May 10, 2011.
First change is to withdraw item 10.B. That's a staff request for
withdrawal. It was a construction contract award for road expansion
Page 2
May 10,2011
of Davis Boulevard and the Collier Boulevard intersection. One of the
unsuccessful bidders has filed a bid protest. And according to your
procurement policy, we will pull this item from the agenda and hear
the bid protest before we bring it back to the Board.
Next change is to move item l6.A.7 to item 10.G on your regular
agenda. It's a recommendation to approve a resolution to petition
Governor Scott to extend the rural area of critical economic concern.
This item has been moved from the consent agenda at Commissioner
Hiller's request.
Next change is to withdraw item 16.A.9. It was a work order for
a contract for construction services for Wing South Air Park Channel
as it relates to the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project. After
the agenda was printed, the Clerk of Courts Finance Director
contacted our staff with some additional questions on the procurement
process related to the Consultant Competitive Negotiation Act, and we
need a little more time to work with the Clerk's office, and then we'll
bring this back for Board approval.
Next change is to move item 16.E.3 to item I O.F. It's a
recommendation to accept a bronze bust of former County Manager
Jim Mudd. And that item was moved at Commissioner Hiller's
request.
Next change is to move item 17.C from your summary agenda. It
would become Item 8.A, a recommendation to adopt an ordinance
amending Ordinance 1975-16, relating to the placement and
presentation of matters on the official agenda. That item was moved at
Commissioner Hiller's request.
And we have one time certain item this morning, Commissioners,
that's to be heard at 11:00 a.m. It's item 10.C on your agenda. And it's
a recommendation to consider a request from the Economic
Development Council for a series of economic incentives for a
potential new business in Collier County.
Those are all the changes that I have, Commissioners.
Page 3
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: No changes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then we'll go to the
Commissioners. We'll start with Commissioner Henning this
mornmg.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good morning. I have no ex
parte communication on today's agenda and I have no changes to the
agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, good morning, Chairman
Coyle.
I have no ex parte to disclose and no changes to the agenda.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I have no ex parte to disclose and
I have no further changes to the agenda.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes -- excuse me, somebody's cell
phone -- no ex parte on the consent or the summary agenda and no
changes to the agenda. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No changes to the agenda. No
communications other than on item 17.C, which is now Item 8.A,
where I've had discussions with staff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, very well. I'll entertain a motion
for approval of to day's agenda.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve today's
regular consent and summary agenda as amended.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve the agenda, as
amended.
Page 4
May 10,2011
I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is it really amended?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, it's amended by the County
Manager's changes here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we have a motion to approve the
agenda as amended and -- by Commissioner Coletta and seconded by
Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Page 5
Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
May 10,2011
Withdraw Item lOB: Recommendation to award a construction contract in the amount of
$25,935,470.53 to Mitchell & Stark Construction Corporation and reserve $3,315,000 on the
purchase order for funding allowances, for a total of $29,250,470.53 for ITB No. 10-5342 - "SR 84
(Davis Blvd) Radio Road to Collier Blvd; SR/CR 951 Intersection improvements; Collier Blvd
(SR/CR 951) North to Magnolia Pond Drive; and CR 951 (Collier Blvd) North to the E Golden Gate
Canal", Project No. 60073 and Project No. 60092. (Unsuccessful bidder has'filed intent to protest the
award)
Move Item 16A7 to Item lOG: Recommendation to approve a Resolution to petition Governor
Scott to extend the "Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern" designation awarded to Florida's
Heartland Regional Economic Development Initiative, Inc. Region another 5-years and to keep the
Community ofImmokalee within the South Central Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern
designation. This item is being placed on the agenda at the request of the Economic Development
Council of Collier County. (Commissioner Hiller's request)
Withdraw Item 16A9: Recommendation to approve a Work Order under Contract #09-5262 with
Agnoli, Barber and Brundage Inc. (" ABB, Inc. "), to provide professional engineering services
related to design, bidding assistance, and construction services of the Wing South Airpark
Channels portion of the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project (LASIP) in the amount of
$199,922, Project #51101. (After the agenda package went to print, the Clerk of Courts Finance
Director presented concerns related to the CCNA process for this item. Therefore, staff is requesting
that this item bepulledfrom the May 10, 2011 Agenda so staff may work with the Clerk's office to
address and resolve their concerns. The project construction schedule should not be adversely affected
by this delay.)
Move Item 16E3 to Item 10F: Recommendation to accept a bronze bust of former County
Manager James V. Mudd from Abbas Asli (landlord of the former Property Appraiser's office
building) for placement in the James V. Mudd Emergency Services Center. (Commissioner Hiller's
request)
Move Item 17C to Item 8A: Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No.
1975-16, as amended, relating to the placement and presentation of matters on the official agenda.
(Commifsioner Hiller's request)
Time Certain Items:
Item lOC to be heard at 11 :00 a.m.
5/1012011 8:45 AM
May 10,2011
Item #2B, #2C and #2D
MINUTES FOR THE APRIL 7, 2011- BCC/PARKS AND
RECREATION MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY MEETING;
APRIL 12,2011- BCC/REGULAR MEETING; APRIL 13,2011 -
BCC/REGULAR MEETING CARRYOVER - APPROVED AS
PRESENTED
With respect to the minutes of the April 7, 2011 BCC Parks and
Recreation master plan community meeting, are there any changes to
those minutes?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If not, is there a motion to approve?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve April 7th Parks
and Recreation Master Plan Community Meeting. Motion to approve
the April 12th BCC regular meeting. And motion to approve April
13th regular meeting, all of these are the minutes. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And she's read them all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Might as well just get rid of them
all.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right, we'll do them all at one
time, okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And motion to approve all of the
minutes, remaining minutes, and -- by Commissioner Fiala, seconded
by Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Page 6
May 10,2011
Any opposed by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes unanimously.
That brings us to service awards, County Manager.
Item #3A
ADVISORY BOARD MEMBER SERVICE AWARDS - 5 YEAR
ATTENDEES; KENNETH KELLY, COLLIER COUNTY CODE
ENFORCEMENT BOARD AND THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ADVISORY COMMITTEE; RICK MEDWEDEFF, TOURIST
DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL; EDWARD J. OLESKY, TOURIST
DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL; SHARON KENNY, HISTORIC AND
ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION BOARD; LINDSEY 1.
THOMAS, THE BA YSHORE/GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE LOCAL
REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD - PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Commissioners. If you'd be kind enough
to join us in the front of the dais, we'll read off the names of your
advisory Board member service awards.
Commissioners, we'll start with our recognizing advisory Board
members with five years of service on various county advisory
Boards.
Our first recipient is being recognized for five years of service on
both the Collier County Code Enforcement Board and the Affordable
Housing Committee. That's Ken Kelly.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Recognizing five years of service on the Tourist
Development Council, Ski Olesky.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Five years of service with the Historical and
Archeological Preservation Board, Sharon Kenny.
Page 7
May 10,2011
Sharon.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Recognizing five years of service with the
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Local Redevelopment Advisory Board,
Lindsey Thomas.
Lindsey.
(Applause.)
Item #3B
ADVISORY BOARD MEMBER SERVICE AWARDS - 10 YEAR
ATTENDEES; ROBERT M. SLEBODNIK, LEL Y GOLF ESTATES
BEAUTIFICA nON ADVISORY COMMITTEE; GEORGE C.
MOHLKE, JR., HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY; N. REX
ASHLEY, HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY - PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Recognizing 10 years of service with the Lely Golf
Estates Beautification Advisory Committee, Robert Slebodnik.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: 10 years of service with the Health Facilities
Authority, George Mohlke. Chuck Mohlke, sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's Chuck.
(Applause.)
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, that concludes our service awards
this morning. Thank you.
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS - ONE MOTION WAS TAKEN TO ADOPT
THE PROCLAMATIONS
Mr. Chairman, that takes us to item four on your agenda,
Page 8
May 10,2011
proclamations.
Item #4A
PROCLAMA nON DESIGNA TING MAY 25TH AS NATIONAL
MISSING CHILDREN'S DAY. TO BE ACCEPTED BY AMELIA
VASQUEZ, NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING & EXPLOITED
CHILDREN; SGT. KEN BECKER, COLLIER COUNTY
SHERIFF'S OFFICE; SPECIAL AGENT TRACY MAURER,
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT; CHIEF
THOMAS WESCHLER, NAPLES POLICE DEPARTMENT; LT.
MATT FLETCHER, NAPLES POLICE DEPARTMENT;
CAPTAIN JOHN ADAMS, NAPLES POLICE DEPARTMENT;
SGT. DAVE SUGRUE, NAPLES POLICE DEPARTMENT; AND
JENNIFER CASCIANO, NAPLES POLICE DEPARTMENT-
ADOPTED
Item 4.A is a proclamation designating May 25th as National
Missing Children's Day. To be accepted by Amelia Vasquez, National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Sergeant Ken Becker,
Collier County Sheriffs Office, Special Agent Tracy Maurer, Florida
Department of Law Enforcement, Chief Thomas Wechsler, Naples
Police Department, Lieutenant Matt Fletcher, Naples Police
Department, Captain John Adams, Naples Police Department,
Sergeant Dave Sugrue, Naples Police Department, and Jennifer
Casciano, Naples Police Department.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Henning. If they're all
here, please --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Why doesn't everybody in the audience
come up here.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I only have one proclamation. Who's
Page 9
May 10,2011
going to take it?
(Applause.)
Item #4 B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNA TING MAY AS NATIONAL BIKE
MONTH. ACCEPTED BY MICHELLE A VOLA, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, NAPLES PATHWAYS COALITION -ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Item 4.B is a proclamation designating Mayas
National Bike Month. To be accepted by Michele A vola, Executive
Director, Naples Pathway Coalition. This item is sponsored by
Commissioner Hiller.
(Applause.)
MS. A VOLA: I just wanted to thank you very much for all of
the efforts that you've been making in this county to make it more
enjoyable and safe for pedestrians and cyclists. So please keep it up.
Appreciate it. And get out there on your bikes this month. Thanks.
(Applause.)
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY, 2011 AS SUPERVISED
VISITATION MONTH. ACCEPTED BY GAIL TUNNOCK AND
JACKIE STEPHENS FROM THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY
CENTER, LISA REDDICK AND LINDA OBERHAUS FROM THE
SHEL TER FOR ABUSED WOMEN & CHILDREN, AND MARCY
KRUMBINE, DIRECTOR OF HOUSING, HUMAN AND
VETERAN SERVICES - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: 4.C is a proclamation designating May, 2011 as
Supervised Visitation Month. To be accepted by Gail Tunnock and
Page 10
May 10,2011
Jackie Stephens from the Children's Advocacy Center, Lisa Reddick
and Linda Oberhaus from the Shelter for Abused Women and
Children, and Marcy Krumbine, Director of Housing, Human and
Veteran Services.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
(Applause.)
MS. STEPHENS: We appreciate this opportunity this morning.
This is a very strong partnership between the county, the Children's
Advocacy Center, the Department of Children And Families, Naples
Police Department. There's many of us that are involved with this.
And just a quick note, this year, just our fiscal year since July
through April, we've served -- we've provided 1,454 visitation
exchanges, 985 supervised visits, and we've had 398 new referrals.
These are families that are involved in domestic violence. It's a very
important and vital part of public safety in our community, and we
appreciate this opportunity. Thank you.
Item #4 D
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 21 THROUGH
MAY 27,2011 AS SAFE BOATING WEEK. ACCEPTED BY
ANDY EVV A - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Item 4.D is a proclamation designating May 21
through May 27, 2011 as Safe Boating Week. To be accepted by
Andy Eva.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
Andy here?
Item #4 E
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY, 2011 AS
Page 11
May 10,2011
MOTORCYCLE SAFETY AWARENESS MONTH. ACCEPTED
BY MARIE AND BILL RATCLIFF - ADOPTED
Item 4.E is a proclamation designating May, 2011 as Motorcycle
Awareness Month. To be accepted by Marie and Bill Ratcliff.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Coletta. Please come
forward.
Okay.
Item #4 F
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 14,2011 AS MOTHER
ANNIE MAE PERRY DAY. ACCEPTED BY FRANK
CUMMINGS AND VAUGHN YOUNG - ADOPTED
Item 4.F is a proclamation designating May 14,2011 as Mother
Annie Mae Perry Day. To be accepted by Frank Cummings and
Vaughn Young.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Coyle. Please come
forward.
(Applause.)
MR. CUMMINGS: First of all, I'd like to thank all the
Commissioners. And especially you, Commissioner Coletta, for
sponsoring this proclamation. We're with the Naples Youth
Empowerment Project. And the Naples Youth Empowerment Project,
what it represents is empowering our youth to be productive members.
Because we've got to understand that our youth of today that we see
walking the streets and running around the basketball courts are going
to be our leaders tomorrow, are going to be sitting in some of these
panels. So we've got to empower them with the knowledge they need
to be able to hold these positions.
Thank you so much.
Page 12
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, appreciate it.
MR. YOUNG: Like Frank said, we'd like to say thank you to the
Commissioners, Commissioner Coyle, we thank you for recognizing
Mother Perry and her accomplishments.
We plan to utilize her name to help empower the youth
throughout the county through different programs. One of the first
things that we're doing will be to have a money matters seminar for
children.
We're doing things from a different perspective and we're asking
that everybody get on Board, because it's going to be great.
And we're having a prayer bunch in Mother Perry's name to
honor her on Saturday. We know it's short timing, but it will be held
at the Naples Church of God, if I'm not mistaken, from 11 :00 a.m. to
2:00 p.m. So you're all invited, come out and have a good time.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
Item #4G
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 16 THROUGH
MAY 22, 2011 AS NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INSURANCE
WOMEN INTERNATIONAL WEEK. ACCEPTED BY BETTY
CURRY -ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, item 4.G is a proclamation
designating May 16th through May 22nd, 2011 as National
Association oflnsurance Women International Week. To be accepted
by Betty Curry. This item is sponsored by Commissioner Hiller.
(Applause.)
Item #4 H
Page 13
May 10,2011
PROCLAMA TION DESIGNATING MAY 16 THROUGH MAY
20, 2011 AS SCORE NAPLES AND SMALL BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT CENTER, NATIONAL SMALL BUSINESS
WEEK. ACCEPTED BY CHICK HEITHAUS, GEORGE
AHEARN, DAN REGELSKI, SUZANNE SPECHT AND JULIO
ESTREMERIA - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4.H is a proclamation designating May 16th
through May 20th, 2011 as SCORE Naples and Small Business
Development Center, National Small Business Week. To be accepted
by Chick Heithaus, George Ahearn, Dan Regelski, Suzanne Specht,
and Julio Estremera.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Hiller. Come forward.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: All rolled up into one guy, huh? All
of those guys rolled up into one guy, is that it?
(Applause.)
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I think I owe a short explanation.
I'm not all four of those people, obviously. One of them let me know
he wasn't coming. The other three, I don't know. It's interesting, this
was supposed to be recognition of the teamwork that's going on
between the SBDC and the SCORE group. I want you all to
remember SCORE came. And we appreciate Commissioner Hiller's
initiative in making this happen.
Thank you.
Item #41
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 15 THROUGH
MAY 21,2011 AS COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES WEEK. ACCEPTED BY DAN SUMMERS, BUREAU
OF EMERGENCY SERVICES DIRECTOR - ADOPTED
Page 14
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Item 4.1 is a proclamation designating
May 15th through May 21 st, 2011 as Collier County Emergency
Medical Services Week. To be accepted by Paramedic Todd Fiala,
recent graduate from paramedic school.
And this item is sponsored by Commissioner Fiala.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's my boy.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: She paid for the proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I didn't. They earned it. It's
much deserved.
Can I go down there and hug him?
MR. SUMMERS: Commissioners, Dan Summers, Division of
the Bureau of Emergency Services and Emergency Management.
Commissioner Fiala, that's a very bright smile on your face this
morning. How about that. And congratulations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: A smile of pride.
MR. SUMMERS: Absolutely. Congratulations on his recent
achievements.
I just wanted to take a moment and remind you all that these men
-- very professional men and women of Collier County EMS respond
to that call for help almost 36,000 times a year. They work very hard
to improve their daily skill set.
In addition, there are a lot of things behind the scenes that the
general public is not aware: The special operations response team
training, the S W A T medics training, the land search and rescue, the
outreach that our paramedics do for automatic external defibrillator
training, C.P.R. training, first responder type training elements, as well
as I want to recognize many partners in our pre-hospital care industry,
albeit fire and law enforcement, as well as the general public.
These men and women go through things every day that you and
I would not like to necessarily be a part of. I'm incredibly proud of
them, I'm incredibly proud of the county, and 1 thank you all for
Page 15
May 10,2011
recognizing them during EMS week.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Dan and Jeff, I'd just like to add,
having a son involved with EMS and then working for EMS and
studying to be a paramedic, I've learned a lot about the guys. And I'm
telling you, I've gone to visit them at different places, they are so
dedicated. I haven't run into one that isn't totally dedicated to what
he's doing. And they have to leave their families 24 hours a day, and
yet they're so dedicated and caring. And they handle each patient as
though it was the first patient. And I'm just really proud to be a part of
them. Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4J
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 10,2011 AS DR.
ROBERT BOYD TOBER DAY. ACCEPTED BY DR. ROBERT
TOBER - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, item 4.1 is a proclamation
designating May 10,2011, as Dr. Robert Boyd Tober Day, who is
celebrating, by the way, 30 years of service with county government.
To be accepted by Dr. Rober Tober.
And this item is sponsored by Commissioner Coyle.
Dr. Tober?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And this is the guy who has helped EMS
become so great in Collier County.
It's more than a proclamation, it's recognition of over 30 years of
commitment to our community service to the people of Collier
County. And I'd like to read you a little from the proclamation itself.
Dr. Tober was the one who initiated the advanced life support
EMS system in Collier County in 1986. He has worked as a clinical
Page 16
May 10,2011
investigator on numerous cutting edge procedures, most notably his
initiation of the Code Save A Heart, a program that has received world
attention and reported the lowest mortality for acute heart attack
anywhere in the world.
He has been the recipient of the award of the Finest EMS in the
State of Florida, as well as nation's top honor as Paramedic Service of
the Year by the National Association of Emergency Medical
Technicians and Paramedics.
He was the first recipient of the NCH Health Care System
Physician of the Year award, and was honored by the American Heart
Association, receiving the Golden Heart award for initiating for the
Code Save A Heart program.
Dr. Tober has twice been named EMS Director of the Year by
the State of Florida, most recently in 2009. He is one of 10 recipients
of the Journal of Emergency Medical Service innovators in EMS
awards, which recognizes those whose efforts are an inspiration and
challenge to the rest ofthe EMS community.
So it's with great pleasure that I recognize Dr. Robert Tober for
his 30 years of dedicated service in creating one of the finest EMS
systems in the nation today.
Dr. Tober, thank you very much. And we have a proclamation
for you and a plaque to commemorate your years of service.
(Standing ovation applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And you get to say something if you'd
like.
DR. TOBER: Thank you all for the great honor. It's hard to
believe that when I came in 1978 that so much would come together.
We actually rolled our first ALS case on February 2nd, 1979. And at
that time the position that you're in, Commissioner Coyle, was
occupied by Raymond Pistor, who was the chairman then. And he
had hoped that we saved one life in the first year of operation and
come back to the Commission and demonstrate that.
Page 17
May 10,2011
And on day two, one of our young paramedics, Joe Fungiello,
who is now a Merrill Lynch stockbroker, defibrillated a 55-year-old
physician's heart at Marco Island Marriott at 9:00 a.m., on February
3rd, actually. And we went on national TV that night. And Raymond
Pistor called me about 10:30 in the evening telling me what a hero I
had made him for coming forth with money to fund the initial ALS
system.
So the successes we have are due to the medics that are on the
street every day, as mentioned by Dan Summers, by the relentless
leadership that we have at EMS. And I'm really just a figurehead of
that enormous effort.
So thank you all very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Bob.
(Applause.)
Item #4 K
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 15 THROUGH
MAY 21,2011 AS WATER REUSE WEEK. ACCEPTED BY
DR. GEORGE YILMAZ, WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT
DIRECTOR; DANETTE HUFF, W ASTEW A TER REUSE
MANAGER; DALE WALLER, PLANT MANAGER, NORTH
COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY; JON PRATT,
PLANT MANAGER, SOUTH COUNTY WATER
RECLAMATION FACILITY; PAUL MATTAUSCH, WATER
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR; AND LISA KOEHLER, MEDIA
OUTREACH SPECIALIST, BIG CYPRESS BASIN SOUTH
FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4.K is a proclamation designating May 15th
through May 21st, 2011 as Water Reuse Week. To be accepted by Dr.
George Yilmez, Wastewater Department Director, Danette Huff,
Page 18
May 10,2011
Wastewater Reuse Manager, Dale Waller, Plant Manager, North
County Water Reclamation Facility, John Pratt, Plant Manager, South
County Water Reclamation Facility, Paul Mattausch, Water
Department Director and Lisa Koehler, Media Outreach Specialist,
Big Cypress Basin, South Florida Water Management District.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Where is DeLony? Why aren't you up
here?
MR. DeLONY: You have the right people up there, sir.
MS. KOEHLER: Good morning, Commissioners. 1 don't want
to take a lot of your time, I know you've had a lot of proclamations
this morning.
And I was going to originally tell you how great your system is,
but you can find that information on your Internet. And I'm sure it's
also in your annual reports. And hopefully you know the fantastic job
you guys do.
So I just want to say thank you for recognizing the proclamation
and how important reuse is to conserving our water here in Collier
County .
And I want to recognize your fantastic staff. They do a wonderful
job of producing your reuse water and delivering it to our customers of
the Big Cypress Basin and of Collier County. So I just want to say
thank you and congratulate your staff.
(Applause.)
Item #4 L
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 2011 AS NATIONAL
DRUG COURT MONTH. ACCEPTED BY JUDGE CHRISTINE
GREIDER AND THE COLLIER COUNTY DRUG COURT TEAM
- ADOPTED
Page 19
May 10,2011
MR. OCHS: Item 4.L is a proclamation designating May, 2011
as National Drug Court Month. To be accepted by Judge Christine
Greider and the Collier County Drug Court team.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Henning.
(Applause.)
JUDGE GREIDER: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Christine Greider. I'm a Circuit Court Judge and honored to serve as
the Drug Court judge here in Collier County for the past five years.
This program was started a little over 10 years ago by Judge
Blackwell. And if any of you know him, they are very large shoes to
fill.
Our mission statement is changing and saving lives through
honesty, personal responsibility and recovery. And it is the Drug
Court Team that's comprised of the State Attorney's Office, the Public
Defender's Office, our treatment provider, the David Lawrence Mental
Health Center, representatives from the recovery community and the
support of the Collier County Sheriffs Office through their bailiffs,
and the Clerk of Courts Office, through their clerks every Thursday
night. Mothers are getting their children back, children are getting
their mothers and fathers back.
Thank you for recognizing this.
(Applause.)
Item #4 M
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 6 THROUGH
MAY 12,2011 AS NATIONAL NURSES WEEK. ACCEPTED BY
REPRESENTATIVES OF NURSING PROFESSION -ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Item 4.M is a proclamation designating May 6th
through May 12th, 2011 as National Nurses Week. To be accepted by
representatives of the nursing profession, particularly Linda Hill.
Page 20
May 10,2011
,
And this item is sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: This is family day, by the way.
Commissioner Coletta's wife, who is a nurse, is here also.
It's good to see you, Linda.
(Applause.)
MS. HILL: Thank you, Mr. Coyle. Good morning. My name is
Linda Hill, LPN. I am president of the Nightingale Tribute Nurses
Society Honor Guard.
Oh, what a pleasure to stand among you and represent the nurses
of today.
May I acknowledge the County Manager, County Commission
and the staff that made this possible. I accept this proclamation with
great honor and joy.
Weare nurses trusted to care. Weare known as angels on earth.
We have wings that care. The Nightingale Tribute Nurses Society
Honor Guard has as our mission that no nurse should be laid to rest
without proper recognition of a job well done and a life well lived by
selfless service to others.
Weare an honor guard that gives a tribute to nurses that have
passed away. We are a not-for-profit organization. Donations are
accepted and are used to endeavor our mission. A white rose and the
nightingale learning lamp are a symbol of our calling. May the light
always shine to keep our memories bright.
Thank you. God bless. Take time, I'm there. Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve the
proclamations as presented today.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve the proclamations by
Commissioner Henning. Second by Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, please signifY by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
Page 21
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
That brings us to presentations.
Item #5A
RECOMMENDATION TO RECOGNIZE JAY KIM, DATABASE
ADMINISTRATOR, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT, AS THE EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR
APRIL 2011 - PRESENTED
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir. Item 5.A is a recommendation to
recognize Jay Kim, Database Administrator Information Technology
Department, as Employee of the Month for April, 2011.
Jay, could you please come forward.
(Applause.)
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, Jay has been an employee of the
county for the past eight years, working in our Information
Technology Department. As the sole database administrator for the
entire agency, he's responsible for supporting over 200 databases. He
responds quickly to unplanned work. And since taking the position in
2006, there have been no major disruptions in service from any of our
users, largely on Jay's behalf and hard work.
He often stays into the night to help with projects like the new
agenda management system, the permitting system for our Growth
Management Division, and also for our utility billing system.
His efforts have helped make it possible for the Information
Page 22
May 10,2011
Technology Department to reduce staffing over the last several years
and still increase database services to the agency. Jay's a positive and
helpful employee who is truly an asset to his department and truly
deserving of this award.
Commissioners, I'm honored to present Jay Kim, your database
administrator and Employee of the Month for April, 2011.
Congratulations.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Kim.
MR.OCHS: Congratulations.
Item #5B
PRESENTATION BY CORPORAL SYLEE GIBSON, COLLIER
COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, REGARDING THE HOME
"MAKEOVER" THAT OCCURRED AT THE RESIDENCE OF
"MISS AMY" ATKINS THANKS TO THE EFFORTS OF THE
SHERIFF'S OFFICE, LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT, TROPIC
DISPOSAL, THOMAS AMENDOLA GENERAL CONTRACTORS
AND SEVERAL OTHER DEDICATED AND CARING
RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY - PRESENTED
Commissioners, item 5.B on your agenda is a presentation by
Corporal Sylee Gibson, Collier County's Sheriffs Office, regarding
the home makeover that occurred at the residence of Ms. Amy Atkins,
thanks to the efforts of the Sheriffs Office, Lowe's Home
Improvement, Tropic Disposal, Thomas Amendola General
Contractors, and several other dedicated and caring residents of the
community .
MS. GIBSON: Good morning. My name is Corporal Sylee
Gibson. I've been with the Sheriffs Office for approximately
1 O-and-a-half years.
Page 23
May 10,2011
I recently -- I work in East Naples and I recently joined the
COPS unit, which is community-oriented policing. And the focus of
our unit is to work with our community in a positive manner.
And I met Miss Amy Atkins several months back through Dixie
Lee Craig, who had seen an article in the paper where Golden Gate
City had done something similar. Dixie contacted me and stated to me
-- told me about this wonderful lady, Amy, who is truly a wonderful
lady, and stated that she was in some need for -- her home was in
some -- needed some repairs, some security issues. She had been
retired and she had fallen ill.
And so we went out there and I looked around, and I thought,
wow, this lady is just really sweet and she's been taking care of her
family and her grandchildren. And I got Lowe's involved, the new
Lowe's that was built on Collier and 41, the new one. I contacted the
manager, and they were outstanding.
And basically we ran from there. We went out and spent the day.
I brought some pictures so you can see what the home looked like
prior. She had a wheelchair ramp that turned out to be completely
rotted through.
This is the day that we came out there and worked. We had
several people that came out. We had Lowe's show up with a big
caravan with all kinds of stuff. We had Tom Amendola, his wife
works at Lowe's. He's a general contractor. He came out and built
that entire ramp from scratch, brand new Boards, everything.
We had folks from Wal-Mart come out, they donated food. We
had a barbeque, we grilled, we had cake. Tropic Disposal came out
and they donated the dumpster. So everything that was done in her
residence was all donated through local businesses in the East Naples
community, which is just outstanding. As you can see all the Lowe's
employees that I've got there just working away.
Were-did her yard, we power washed her house, we mulched.
We had neighbors come out and lend a hand. The commissioner came
Page 24
May 10,2011
out and was able to see firsthand exactly what we had done out there.
It was a labor of love is what it was. And it turned out to be I think
really beautiful.
There's just a -- it turned out that it was her 88th birthday on the
day that we did the home makeover. So we got her a birthday cake
and grilled hotdogs and hamburgers, and fed everybody and just had a
wonderful time.
The lieutenant, my lieutenant, Jay Mulholland, came out and
brought his children. So we had kids out there. Just, I mean,
unbelievable the response that we got from our local businesses and
from the neighbors and people from the Sheriffs Office. I actually
had a couple of uniform guys that were working patrol that came out
and swung a hammer for a little bit, which was just great.
And this is their result here. We built her a new garden. Amy
loves to garden. So we built her a brand new garden, planted her all
new vegetables and some fruits and stuff. We took down an awning
that was on the side and we mulched it over and we put some tables
and chairs out there. Windows were replaced, storm doors put in. An
entire new wheelchair ramp was built for her. Power-washed. She got
motion-lights outside the house for safety issues. There was a couple
of windows, another window that was broken, we repaired that also.
And basically just brought her home to where she could feel safe in
her home. That was the concern. And then just beautified it for her.
I couldn't have done it without the help of these folks here.
These folks did an outstanding job of coming out and just -- I mean,
amazing. And I've got several representatives from Lowe's, and Amy
is here, and Dixie is here. And some of the other representatives
weren't able to make it here, but just --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Why don't you bring all ofthe people
who supported this effort up front. Let's get a picture of them and we
can express our appreciation to them.
(Applause.)
Page 25
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, could I make
a couple of comments?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Actually, I wrote about Miss Amy
in a column, actually a couple columns. And somebody dropped by
the newspaper and dropped off a check which I was happy to take
over to Miss Amy. And somebody else had given me a frozen turkey,
so I was happy to take that over to Miss Amy as well. And when I
stopped in there, she had been writing this letter to you and to
everybody who had helped her so much. And I told her I would pass
it on, which I will do in written form.
But today is a perfect opportunity for me to talk about it.
And by the way, Sylee, you forgot to mention all of the kids of
the people who were there. The parents brought their kids. They had
a day of community service, and it was a good opportunity for them to
teach the kids it's an important -- it is important to give back to your
community. Everybody was so wonderful there. And the neighbors
came in to help also, because they were exclaiming over what a
wonderful lady Miss Amy was.
So let me read this: To the wonderful task force of the Sheriffs
Department, thank you so much for all you've done to make a brighter
future for old Americans. Thank you over and over again. I don't have
the funds to express my gratitude, but you certainly have my blessings
and constant prayers for you and your beloved families. April 2nd will
always be remembered for the showers of blessings you poured on me
and my household. May God ever bless you for every detail of your
kindness and concern for an 88-year-old's birthday.
And then she wanted me to copy a few of these people, but she
mentioned Dixie Craig, she mentioned Sheriff Rambosk and all the
wonderful people working in his office. She threw my name in there
too, but I just was there. Corporal Gibson and Lowe's and his
contractors. And she mentioned -- she says, I love you and hope that
Page 26
May 10,2011
this deed of kindness will open the eyes and hearts of all the
wonderful people of Florida.
Thank you, Miss Amy, for this.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: This lady is a nurse, by the way, and
she worked up until she was 85 years old.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I have only one certificate of
appreciation for you, but I'm going to make a request that staff provide
certificates of appreciation for every organization and individual who
participated in this effort, please. And thank you all for the wonderful
work you do for our community.
Who is going to accept this one certificate of appreciation?
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't know that her daughter
was in a very bad accident. Her leg was taken off and she was injured
in her spine and her brain. And so she's been an invalid. She has four
children. So Miss Amy has been taking care of all of them ever since
that accident seven years ago. So it's even more heartfelt when you
realize what she's gone through, and yet the beautiful smile and love
that pours out of her is beautiful.
Thank you for letting me take that time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure. No problem. This is the kind of
thing we should take time with.
MS. ATKINS: 1 just would like to say thank you so much to
everyone, especially Dixie Craig, who saw the notice in the paper and
informed me. Then we got into contact with Corporal Gibson. And
from there on, it seems everything just flew up in the air.
And what a wonderful, wonderful job. They were so relentless in
the work, so sweet, so kind. Just a precious bunch.
And I really do want the world to know that we have such
wonderful people alive and doing such great things for people,
especially the old who has been unfortunate.
Page 27
May 10,2011
Forgive me for crying, but thank you all so much.
(Applause.)
Item #9 A
RESOLUTION 2011-87: CONFIRMING THE REAPPOINTMENT
OF WAYNE W ALDACK (MARCO ISLAND REPRESENT A TIVE)
AND ROBERT RAYMOND (CITY OF NAPLES
REPRESENTATIVE) AND ALSO REAPPOINTING JOSEPH A.
MORELAND AND M. JAMES BURKE TO THE COLLIER
COUNTY COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to item nine on your
agenda this morning, Board of County Commissioners.
Item 9.A is an appointment of members to the Collier County
Coastal Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I'd like to make a motion to
approve the committee's recommendation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Fiala to
approve the committee's recommendation for reappointment of Joseph
Moreland and James Burke, and recognition of the appointment by
Marco Island, Wayne Waldack, and by the City of Naples, Robert
Raymond.
Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, Commissioner Coletta seconded the
motion.
Discussion?
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, I had occasion to speak with
Mr. Burke, who is in our audience today, and when he called me, I
Page 28
May 10,2011
was very pleased and reassured by his position on Clam Bay and Clam
Pass. And I encouraged him to articulate that position where he
doesn't support expanded dredging of Clam Bay and Clam Pass for
expanded navigational purposes, and he sees the proposed solution by
the county of placing the canoe trail markers as recommended by Fish
& Wildlife as a solution to the marker debate.
And so with that, I support his re-nomination, and I look forward
to his articulating the position that he shared with me to finally bring
closure to what has been a very heated debate over so many years with
respect to this issue.
So Jim, I thank you for your service and your continued service,
and I look forward to you building the bridge between the
communities.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The Ordinance for the CAC,
there's supposed to be some qualifications for coastal experience.
I didn't see much of that in the applications. I was kind of wondering
if we could get that in the future.
When we have specific requirements for the advisory Board
members, I hope that in the future we can try to adhere to it. That
committee is (sic), in my opinion, got some great people on there.
But there could be some more experience on these coastal matters.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
All in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
(No response.)
Page 29
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the motion for appointment passes
unanimously.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2011-88: APPOINTING ALVAN ST. AUBYN
COKE TO THE BLACK AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD -
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 9.B is appointment of member to the Black
Affairs Advisory Board.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve the
committee recommendations for Alvin Coke.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve the appointment of
Alvin Coke, seconded by Commissioner Coletta, seconded by
Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Item #10A
Page 30
May 10,2011
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD INVITATION TO
BID #11-5652 MARGOOD HARBOR PARK IN THE AMOUNT
OF $1,l19,823.52 TO BROOKS AND FREUND, LLC FOR PARK
IMPROVEMENTS - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us to item lOon your
agenda this morning. Item 10.A is a recommendation to award
invitation to bid number 11-5652, Margood Harbor Park, in the
amount of$1,119,823.52 to Brooks and Freund, LLC for park
improvements.
Ms. Vicky Ahmad, Project Manager, Parks and Recreation.
MS. AHMAD: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
my name is Vicky Ahmad. I'm with Parks and Recreation, and I'm the
project manager of Margood Harbor Park.
And I'm ready to do my presentation, but I can proceed with my
presentation, or if you wish, you can ask questions on my item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commission Henning, do you have a
question you'd like to ask?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just a general question on these
awards.
When the EEOC building was built, I know that Commissioner
Coyle had very (sic) concerns about the change orders, as the others.
It was my understanding that before we go out to bid, we have final
design that those designs are going to be brought to the Board.
Is that wrong?
MR. OCHS: I didn't recall that direction, Commissioner, but I'd
be happy to research it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, to try to facilitate a
reasonable -- and I'm not saying this is not reasonable -- a reasonable
amount of capital improvement, personally I would like to see those
designs come forward so we can study them and approve them in
advance. No?
Page 31
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Would--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Because the issue is the design
consultant and staff is driving, driving the expenditures of these
capital improvements, and it should be the elected officials that really
do that.
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Chairman?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I guess I don't have enough
support.
MR. WILLIAMS: Just one comment if! may make. Barry
Williams, Parks and Recreation Director.
The Florida Communities Trust grant that the Board of County
Commissioners received has a land management plan that dictates the
amenities that are found in this conceptual plan, so this --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You misunderstood my general
comment.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, but I just wanted to make that point.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you know, I wouldn't mind
seeing the design either. You know, I mean, I would -- I think it's
good for all of us to see what the final product is going to look like. I
certainly don't want to tell the design team how to handle things or --
you know, I have no design experience. But it wouldn't be a bad idea
to see what you expect as the final outcome, if that's what
Commissioner Henning is talking about.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is it possible to provide an overview of
that design now --
MR. WILLIAMS: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- in a reasonable period oftime?
MR. WILLIAMS : Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And then the Board members can react
to that. It is a little difficult -- when you have alternates under the bid
for various features, it's a little difficult for the Board to envision
Page 32
May 10,2011
exactly how this thing is going to be done and in what sequence.
But would that satisfy your concern, Commissioner Henning, if
we do that now?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It was a general statement over
all the capital improvement projects prior to even going out to bid is
that we take a look at the design features of that, you know, and
approve them.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then I recognize the general
nature of your concern. But with respect to the item that's on the
agenda now, there are two ways we can proceed. We can bring it
back and have a discussion on the design, or we can have a discussion
on the design right now.
And if you wish to get a consensus of the Board about doing this
as a normal course of action, we can also do that now. Would that--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- address your issue?
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like to add to what
Commissioner Henning just said. I agree completely. In fact, I think
it needs to go beyond presenting one design. I think we need to be
presented with reasonable alternatives.
For example, when the issue of the pathway improvement with
respect to Immokalee was put forward by staff, we heard that we
could not just have one design presented because the federal and state
agencies require that you present alternatives, not just one design.
And that's a concern I've had while I've been on this commission for
this short period of time, that I've been presented with just one option.
And I'm not speaking specifically to this project, but to go to
what Commissioner Henning said, I think staff needs to present
reasonable alternatives so that the members of the community can
indicate which one better serves them and that the Board can respond
accordingly.
Page 33
May 10,2011
So I completely agree with you, Commissioner Henning, I think
it's absolutely essential that we see not just the design, but alternative
designs for projects that are presented so that we can make an
informed decision in the best interest -- in the best decision in the
interest of the public.
I would like to make a motion that we continue this so that we as
a Board have the opportunity to review this design proposal and any
alternatives within the parameters of this particular trust as they've
defined the limitations. And then once we've had time to review it and
consider it acceptable, then approve the contract.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Isn't there a time limit to this?
MR. WILLIAMS: Well, Mr. Chair, just a couple of comments.
Commissioner Hiller, I guess we're here at the direction ofthe
Board, however you'd like us to proceed.
We have vetted this project on numerous neighborhood
information meetings with the folks of Goodland. They've endorsed
this design and what we're proposing here. There are time limitations
that certainly we can work through. Weare at 100 percent design. If
we're to offer alternative designs at this point, it will be a cost
associated with that. So I do want to point that out.
We do have a limited budget with this park, and part of our
presentation to you today is to suggest a phase where we are able to
accomplish a portion of the recreational amenities that people have
asked for. So there -- and Florida Communities Trust is giving us --
they understand the times that we're in in terms of funding, so they're
giving us a reasonable amount of time to finish the rest of the project.
For us, though, the remaining aspects of it are mainly the dock
area and some of the cottages that we wish to restore. We also are
looking at potentially acquiring grant funds for those.
But if! may, what I'd like to suggest, if we could go through the
presentation for you today, and certainly ifthere's direction you'd like
us to take beyond that, we would be -- certainly we would follow that.
Page 34
May 10,2011
But if I could ask Vicky to come back up and go just through the
presentation with you?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, sure, let's do that. But let's focus
on the sequence of construction and the alternatives that were
considered and what the community has indicated they want.
MR. WILLIAMS: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And then that will inform us. And if then
we have any questions about that, we can certainly pose those to you.
But I still have a few questions by others.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you.
Thank you, Barry for bringing that up.
You know, this is something that's vetted through the community
over a period of time. We're not designing this for our own personal
use, and I don't think there's a person on this Board that could consider
themselves an architect in park designs to be able to qualify for it.
So I have absolutely no need for more than one drawing. Now, if
I take a look at it and I for some reason have some questions, I'll ask
the questions. And ifthere's a good reason, I may not approve it.
But for the most part, if you've been through like you have in the
past, through the community meetings, you met the needs of the
community, I think we're there. I don't want to spend another dollar,
and I think we need to get this project underway.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala, you want to say something now or wait?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll wait till after the presentation,
thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Vicky, if you'll just go through the
plan itself and tell us about the alternatives that were evaluated and
what the community --
MS. AHMAD: I just want to -- oh, okay, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- what the community expressed an
Page 35
May 10,2011
interest in, okay?
MS. AHMAD: I just want to add one thing. The design of this
project went to the state with the Department of Historic Resources,
and they reviewed the design and they approved it. So we went
through the process back and forth and they approved the design. So
we are at the stage now that, you know, all the plans have been
approved.
I'll go ahead with the presentation. Our item here is a
recommendation to award this bid, 11-5652 to Brooks and Freund for
improvements to Margood Harbor Park in Goodland.
And this is the Town of Goodland. Harbor Park is located
around here by the harbor. It's about 2.67 acres.
And this project began with the acquisition of the land from the
Florida Community Trust, FCT, for 1.9 million.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What was the year?
MS. AHMAD: Around 2005.
This grant comes with a lot of conditions, and one of them is the
management plan that governs the development of this project site.
One of the conditions of this management plan is to provide two
or more user-oriented outdoor recreational facilities and resource
based outdoor recreational facilities.
This is the project base bid scope of work, the renovation of the
interpretive building, site work, demolition of existing structures,
landscaping and irrigations.
And I'll show you the proposed design of Margood Park. These
are all the improvements. And as I described, those are renovation of
this interpretive building that's highlighted here in red. All this site
work includes the parking lot, all the walkway and pathways, grading,
all the utilities are all part of civil work on this project. And all the
landscaping and irrigations.
There are alternates included on the base bid that we added.
The three alternates: The bocce Boards, that alternate one, the
Page 36
May 10,2011
volleyball courts and the horseshoe, and those are all considered
user-oriented facilities.
And alternate two is the playground shelter.
And alternate three is the gazebo at the point.
All these alternates were added to the base bid in order to satisfy
the management grant.
These are the three alternates that I just mentioned. And this
project went out to bid. We have five bidders, and all the five bidders
are local. And all the three -- five bidders are all very close. The top
three bidders are really very close. But the lowest bid is Brooks and
Freund. Our recommendation here is to award this bid to Brooks and
Freund as the lowest bidder.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala, you had your light
on first.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I was very pleased that you
had reached out over the years, actually, working with the community,
getting their input. Actually, I was lucky enough to attend a couple of
those, and 1 felt it was really important. So when you finally came up
with the final results, it was with the blessing of the people in the
community, and the participation of them.
So I make a motion that we move forward with this and approve
it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Fiala that we
approve the award of the contract, and seconded by Commissioner
Coletta.
And Commissioner Henning, you have a question or comment?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. When the Board was
considering the land trust offer to purchase this property, at the time
Marla Ramsey was talking about docks there for canoes and kayaks. I
mean, I know that's shallow water there, and that would be a perfect
use for that. Whatever happened? Was that ever discussed?
Page 37
May 10,2011
MS. AHMAD: That's one of our alternate on this project.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there docks or a --
MS. AHMAD: We have kayak launch up here. See this?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pardon me?
MS. AHMAD: There's a kayak launch.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Kayak launch?
MS. AHMAD: Yes. You have those, kayak. And is that the one
up there? Yeah, that's actually one of our first alternate that we pick
up to add to this base bid.
But when we talk with the Florida Community Trust, they want
us to add a structure that goes with the kayak launch. And the
structure is not included as part of this design.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. AHMAD: But we do have that as our next future we have
to --
MR. WILLIAMS: And Commissioner, if I may add, just while
we don't have a formal launch area, we do have the ability. And for
kayakers, we work very closely with the kayakers in the community.
We know that they just need a space to put -- a very small space to put
in. And we're going to certainly promote that area. That's a great
place to launch a kayak.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. It's kind of far away
from the parking, but I guess you could wheel one down.
When you say structure, you mean -- you're talking like a
floating dock structure for the canoeers or the kayakers?
MS. AHMAD: They didn't give us a specific. But they want a
structure and we have to build it, and that's not part --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ted's Shed?
MS. AHMAD: Yeah.
MR. WILLIAMS: Well, Ted's Shed is good idea, but it would be
like you say, a floating dock. In the second phase, if you will, what
we would look at is dock and area that would be around the bay area.
Page 38
May 10,2011
If I can, with the pointer, right here is the dock, and then we
would have some type of structure. A floating dock would certainly
be a good application we think in terms of putting in. So that would be
added.
But it would not prevent us from promoting the site for kayakers
now. It would be an opportunity for us to -- we would use it in -- the
big thing for us is you're aware of the property. I mean, it's been in
disrepair for many years. Certainly this project's going to improve
that area a great deal.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have a motion to approve.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor of the motion, please signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the project is approved
unanimously. Thank you.
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's deal with the second issue here, and
that is for future programs of this type. Is there support on the Board
to ask staff to provide us an overview of plans before they're sent out
for bid? Is there a problem? You see a problem with that in any way?
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, if you could clarify just a little bit
so we can understand better your intent, what you mean by an
overVIew.
Page 39
May 10,2011
The concern is that if we come to you with a 100 percent design
and then you want something different, we're going to be into, you
know, some potentially costly change orders.
What the staff would suggest, if you want to see conceptual
designs or 30 percent design plans or maybe even 60 percent where
we still have time to make alterations before the final plan is done but
it's still enough time for you all to get a good sense of what the
concept is, perhaps we could work on that and maybe some
parameters about the size of the projects that you're talking about.
I mean, in our vernacular anything over 25,000 is considered a
capital project. But I don't know that you want to see the design on a
lift station or a telemetry station or something like that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller was first.
Commissioner Hiller, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What I would like to see is first a
list of possible alternatives and with, you know, what limited
information we have what the scope of those alternatives are before
we get into the design phase.
And then in the design do as you recommended, where we've
selected which alternatives we want to see, do limited design, or just
maybe a conceptual design with, you know, the limited facts that we
need to be able to make an informed decision as to which design we
want to move forward on. And I think looking to how the state and
the feds require that with respect to their capital projects I think is
good guidance.
I mean, for us to be given one alternative and basically be told,
you know, it's this way or the highway really doesn't work, especially
where we've already, as you pointed out, expended a great deal of
monies towards completing a design and then obviously it's not the
best choice and not what the people want.
So I would ask that Commissioner Henning, since he was the one
who brought forward the obvious weakness in the system, put forward
Page 40
May 10,2011
a recommendation to an approach to solve this problem that we have.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think we can address it.
Two projects that come into mind in the past, and they're talked about
today. You know, we have a world class EEOC building. Now that's
great and the public ought to be -- feel really safe with that. But is that
really necessary?
We have a park that had several change orders, and want to try to
avoid those bigger capital improvement expenditures. Now, I'm not
talking about a replacement of a sewer pump, okay. I'm talking about
those bigger capital improvement projects. Quite frankly we might
not see one for many years. But this is the opportune time when we
do have the ability to drive the project. Instead of letting the staff
drive the project for the community, let us assist you in a 30 and 60
percent design. That's where I'm going.
This Margood project does have some history on it, and it's -- 1
wasn't really talking about that project. I was talking just the overall
thing.
Transportation does have a 30, 60, 90 phase public meetings.
Commissioners are -- you know, can go to that. That's the only really
one that we get to individually get involved with. I think we need to
drive it and not others. I'm talking about, you know, a $2 million
project and more. Okay?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Why don't I suggest this: County
Manager, could you come back to us with something relatively
specific about the review process and the size of the project in dollar
values that would not be cumbersome and expensive to administer?
And then let us make a decision on whether or not that meets the
requirement.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. We'll put that together in executive
summary, make a report to the Board, and then you can direct how
you'd like us to proceed.
Page 41
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is that okay with everybody?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's good with me.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I got a light on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would add to that, it would be
great to also have a rundown, a timeline of how we got to where we
were. A brieftimeline. But also too, the community involvement
from advisory Boards to the local community and community
meetings that were held, which we're also invited to, I would imagine.
To be able to see what kind of oversight is already existing. Before
we put an additional layer over the top of everything else, I'd like to be
able to see what has been done to come up with the final drawings that
we see before us today, or any drawings, for that matter.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, if I could just amplify on that a bit.
The last thing I think commissioners should try to do is insert
themselves between the community and the staff. Ifwe're interested
in doing what the community wants us to do, then what we should do
is attend those community information meetings, and then we know
what the community is asking us to do, and we won't then be likely to
start making independent judgments about what we think should be
done.
So we certainly have a fiduciary responsibility to make sure that
money is spent wisely. But I for one don't want to get involved in
micromanaging the exchange of information between the community
and the staff during the community information meetings.
So I think you can work out something that meets our
requirements and does not result in a cumbersome expensive process
for the staff and the community.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's interesting you say what
you said, Commissioner Coyle, because it reminds me how the
commissioners interjected themselves on the matter involving the
Page 42
May 10,2011
recycle station at the north end of town, where it was very clear that
there was united community opposition and very clear evidence that
there was no need for that transfer station, the recycle transfer station
specifically. And notwithstanding, you know, three commissioners
marched forward on that with complete disregard to what the
community's wants were, or needs were.
That being said, this all reminds me of the bid protest. Naples
Daily News wrote an article about a bid protest which is going to
delay the start of a $30 million project near 1-75 interchange by the
alley. And what was really interesting about this bid protest is it
actually boils down to a design feature which would save the county a
million dollars. And this is an example where you have design
alternatives which can result in material cost savings, and the type of
alternative which the contractors all should be able to avail themselves
of to get us the best possible price and thereby, you know, savings,
while giving us the same quality.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, a point of order
please. What item are you talking about?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to add the point to the
point that we're talking about right now, this discussion we're having
on design. I think it's actually great.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are you talking about the contract under
10.B, which has been removed from the agenda?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It may be the same one. I'm
actually referring to the article.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I think it is the same one. I would
ask that you hold your comments until the time that is placed on the
agenda and then we can discuss it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But it goes to the issue of what
we're talking about, which is design alternatives and how design
alternatives do result in options which produce cost savings, as is
evidenced by this particular case in the article by the Naples Daily
Page 43
May 10,2011
News.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, it really has nothing to do with this
contract. So--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it doesn't -- it has to do with
the second item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- this is not even on the agenda today.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle, I'm sorry
to interrupt you, sir, but there's been comments made that are going
unanswered. Even though it's not on the agenda, statements have been
made. And if the record needs to be corrected, I'd like very much for
Mr. Feder to be able to step forward and correct the record at this time.
MR. KLATZKOW: May I? You have a bid protest that's to be
coming towards you that you're going to have to be judging. And I
wouldn't allow it to be prejudged. I mean, it's going to have to come
back to you. You'll have a full backup to this bid protest. And at that
point in time I think that's when you should discuss it and that's when
staff should discuss it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Next item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We go to the next item then. We finished
with this one.
MR.OCHS: Is your court reporter okay, sir?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, she's not okay.
MR.OCHS: This one might take a little time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're going to take a break. We'll be
back here at 10:33.
(Recess.)
MR.OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, we are back in
seSSIOn now.
Item #10D
Page 44
May 10,2011
REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE AND
BRING BACK FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION AN
AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 2001-13, AS AMENDED,
THE COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED IMP ACT FEE
ORDINANCE, WHICH WOULD MODIFY PROVISIONS
RELATED TO THE ANNUAL PAYMENTS REQUIRED TO
OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC
FACILITY ADEQUACY - MOTION TO APPROVE WITH A
REVIEW IN ONE YEAR - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to item 1O.D on
your agenda. Request for authorization to advertise and bring back for
future consideration an amendment to Ordinance No. 2001-13 as
amended, the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance,
which would modify provisions related to the annual payments
required to obtain and maintain a certificate of public facility
adequacy.
Ms. Amy Patterson will present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Henning to
move to approve.
Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Coletta.
Commissioner Hiller has a question or comment.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. Thank you, Amy.
I met with Mr. Casalanguida last week, and I asked him for
certain information which I haven't received as yet.
What I wanted to know was what is the financial impact to the
county with respect to large projects that are currently in the pipeline,
and how will they be benefited by this and what does that mean in
Page 45
May 10,2011
terms ofthe county now having to advance monies for projects which
are underway, which now we're not going to be getting the funding for
til this later point in time?
I'm really concerned about what we've got in the pipeline where
we had anticipated cash flows, that now based on this change, I would
assume be not forthcoming.
And to give you an example, and I don't know if this is a good
example, but take Oil Well Road, you know, where are we in terms of
the cash flowing on that, how much are we advancing where we
anticipated we already would be collecting the funds, et cetera?
And so I need that information to understand, you know, what
the financial implications of this to existing projects is today.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the record, Nick Casalanguida.
Commissioner, Oil Well Road is fully funded right now and the
project's encumbered. So there is no cash flow issue on Oil Well
Road.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sorry to interrupt you, but let me
ask. You say it's fully funded with impact fee dollars?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Impact fee dollars, gas tax, general
fund.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Have we collected all the impact
fees we anticipated to collect for Oil Well?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, ma'am. But we have the funding
for the dollars for the project and it's been let.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: For the portion that has been let?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what we're going to do is not
build any further than the portion that we are currently building?
What portion is that?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's the western section to
Everglades Boulevard, and then from roughly Camp Keais back about
a mile or so past the entrance of Ave Maria.
Page 46
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that is being fully funded by
impact fees?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Impact fees, gas tax and general fund.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Have we received -- I'm focused
on the impact fees. Have we collected the amount of impact fees that
we intended to collect to build the section that you're talking about?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: When you say intended to collect, we
do a forecast. But from that development or any place else we've
collected sufficient impact fees to be funded. But, you know, that
forecast changes from year to year. We at one time expected 59
million a year, now we're down to about $8 million a year.
But to answer your question regarding cash flow that you started
out with, this will improve your cash flow in the first year. And one
of the things staff has discussed -- I think we need to talk about
Commissioner Fiala, because maybe we want to revisit this after one
year like we do the change of use, and then talk about how the
program's proceeding and talk about the cash flow, how many projects
have taken advantage of this and what our forecast looks like. But in
year one, we would get more money.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: When I read the proposal, my
understanding was you were going to cut back the first year
contribution. Weren't we proposing we were going to go from 40
percent down to 33 percent? And then instead of having installment
payments, we were going to now propose not having any installments
made until the permit is pulled?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct. But--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That materially changes the cash
flow projection.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, ma'am, because in year one, the
20 percent you get is available cash, the second 20 percent is a bond.
So it's not --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is a what, a bond?
Page 47
May 10,2011
MR. CASALANGUIDA: A bond or letter of credit. So it's not
available cash to the road program.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So how are we making more
money? If we're now going to 33, are we saying 20 percent is still a
bond, 13 percent -- I mean, 20 percent still cash, 13 percent bond?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, no, ma'am, it's 33 percent cash in
year one versus 20 percent cash and 20 percent letter of credit. So
after the first year 1 may start to generate less income if the
development community is not doing well.
But for instance, commercial usually trues up within 18 months
of the SDP, so that commercial isn't really phased. It really only
affects residential.
Typically projects coming in right now, we haven't seen any plats
really in the past six months or so, very few of them, plats where they
come in with residential lots, 50 or 100. Right now there's not that
many comIng In.
So I think today you're going to get a little bit more of a cash
flow in year one. And if we go with the change of use program, come
back in a year and tell you how we've done, I think it will improve our
situation in the first year, and we'll see how many people have taken
advantage of it, and then the Board can make a decision if we go to
something different.
In my opinion, Commissioner, I think between this change that's
been proposed by Mr. Y ovanovich and reviewed by staff, other
changes this Board has made, the 42 percent reduction of roads,
you've shown the development community you're working with them.
And in response, I've told folks like Rich and the developers I meet
with that when things turn around we're going to be back in front of
the Board if we have to fund projects and maybe change things. And I
think that they've acknowledged that and they welcome that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what is -- over the course of
this next year, what cash that we anticipated by way of impact fees
Page 48
May 10,2011
would we not be collecting?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You wouldn't be collecting -- again, in
your first year, if! was going to collect, say --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You have projections.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Roughly $9 million I think we're
projecting, eight or $9 million. I'm going off memory. In fiscal year
'12, I think we're looking at about $8 million.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So now we would not be
collecting those 8 or $9 million --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, ma'am, I --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- because we're deferring it to the
time the permit is being pulled?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, because my down payment is 33
percent instead of20. I may collect more in that first year. I may
collect $11 million, if I increase it by say roughly 10 percent or 15
percent.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But I need those numbers.
I need you to take your projection, I need you to now show me the
modification between the 20 and the 33, and you know, those
projected future cash flows to the time when you anticipated the
permit to be pulled and how we're not going to be collecting those
funds and yet we still will be able to move forward with those projects
as planned.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And what I'll tell you is, if I've --
whatever is in my CIE, I'll take a look at it. And I believe it's roughly
$8 million in fiscal year '12, could be a little more. If we're going to
collect 20 percent and now 33 percent, I would say increase that by
roughly 10 percent would be a safe number.
Going forward, depending on what comes in this next year, I
could do projections. But until I see what comes in, I won't know that.
So my recommendation might be that do the project for a year, as
Commissioner Fiala said might be prudent, as we met, and then come
Page 49
May 10,2011
back to the Board with a report, and say how many people have taken
advantage of this and what would that do to our cash flow going
forward.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm still not getting the answer that
I had asked for last week, today. So it's leaving me in a very difficult
position.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I apologize, but I can't tell you until I
know many people participate in the program, what I think.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But everything is based on
projections. So I need you to basically revise your projections based
on this change, and I need to see what those numbers are.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I can do that. It's -- after the first year
it becomes speculative, just like it has been the past five years. We
were at one point up at 59 million and we cut it to 30 within the next
year and then down to 20 within the next year. So if! gave you
projections five years ago you'd be looking at me and saying, Nick,
what's wrong with you, you're off by $50 million.
So I'd really like to stick with that first year and then say based
on that first year response I can kind of look forward a little bit and
give you a feel for what's happening. But -- and that's --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That just doesn't make sense to
me.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who was first, Commissioner Fiala or
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you very much.
I had some concerns with this. This is why I couldn't second the
motion before. And that is, first of all, I think it's a great idea. I think
it's going to stimulate the economy, which is something we want to
do, and that's a good thing. I think it's almost like offering an olive
branch, and that's a wonderful thing.
Page 50
May 10,2011
But I also believe that this is a temporary fix at the present time.
And then as we talked about, Nick, in my office, you know,
maybe next year we should revisit this.
So that being said, in this paragraph it talks about wanting to
include required changes to the LDC. Well, 1 don't think we should be
changing the LDC if this is only a temporary fix and we're going to
come and revisit it again. Which is my suggestion, by the way.
So I would hate to see us go through all that process of the LDC
change and then next year say no, that doesn't work, we have to
change it back again or whatever we're going to change it to.
So maybe there's some other type of fix to actually put this in
place temporarily. Is that possible?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'd really work with the County
Attorney, we could do it like the change of use program.
MR. KLATZKOW: Your LDC would then be in conflict with
the ordinance.
I mean, the reason we do it this way, ma'am, is be -- the better
practice to do this would be through the LDC, but that's a very lengthy
practice. So what we're doing is we're changing the Code of Laws and
Ordinances and then we're catching up with the LDC to make them
conform.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you're saying that could be
done through the Code of Laws and --
MR. KLATZKOW: We're doing this by a simple ordinance
change, okay, which is the quick way to do it. The LDC is a very
lengthy process.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, that's the way I felt too. I
didn't want to go through it --
MR. KLA TZKOW: But your LDC --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And expensive.
MR. KLATZKOW: But your LD -- well, no, because we'll do it
at the same cycle as we do others, you know. And then we'll catch up
Page 51
May 10,2011
in the LDC. Your LDC will be in conflict with this.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, by the time we're in
our next LDC cycle, I think you'll be close to that year, by the time we
go through the advisory Boards and then get in front of you. So I
think at that point in time you'll have that option to consider whether
to, you know, approve it in the LDC or say no, go back to the same
process that you had before.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So then should we just add a
provision in here that says we'd like to revisit this in one year? I
mean, if that is in agreement with the other commissioners, of course.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, I would be willing to do that. I
don't see anything wrong with spelling out what our intent really is.
Our intent really is to see if it works. And then if it works, then we
might want to continue it. If it doesn't work, we won't continue it.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'll put that a part of my
motion.
I think Nick Casalanguida really eloquently said that, you know,
when we're in boom years, you want to start, you know, getting those
capital improvements, the roads in this case, done. And that's why we
advanced transportation impact fees, to get those projects done. This
is just taking it the other way, because we're not building those
projects.
And will it help out the building industry? Well, let's hope we get
some jobs out of it. It just really makes sense for the -- for this time,
very appropriate, we do need to keep on checking in to see if we need
to advance those impact fees in the future. Let's hope that we have
that problem for the economy and the citizens.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. So what is your --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, as far as the changing of
the Land Development Code, can we put that part of the LDC within
the Code of Laws?
Page 52
May 10,2011
MR. KLA TZKOW: Yes. In order to expedite the process, we
did it that way.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Absolutely. And then it only
takes -- we don't have to wait for a cycle, we can just change the Code
of Laws any time.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So your motion is?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, my motion is to approve
the ordinance, direct staff to bring it back in another year and report
back to the Board on the effectiveness and make recommendations on
whether we need to change it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: My second reflects that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. So we have a motion by
Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Coletta.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, you know, if we're not going
to be adversely impacted by doing this, which is what you're
suggesting, then, you know, why are we taking these halfway steps? I
mean, why don't we do what other counties are doing and why don't
we just go for a full impact fee moratorium? Why don't we do that for
a year?
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, we're not changing the impact fee
rate, we're just --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, but I'm suggesting --I'm
suggesting that let's go for an impact fee moratorium. If we're serious
about incentivizing then, and if there is no adverse economic impact to
this delay, then, you know, why don't we try to stimulate the local
economy for this year full throttle?
Let's go ahead -- I mean, county after county throughout the State
of Florida have proposed moratoriums on impact fees. You know,
why don't we do it for a year? I mean, why are we doing this halfway
approach? Because it's not really -- I don't really see that anything
Page 53
May 10,2011
we've done is in effect, you know, stimulating. So my suggestion is
let's go all the way.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Couple points, Commissioner. You
have about 4,500 residential units that have already paid their impact
fees. And about 12 -- 1.2 million square feet of commercial has paid
their impact fees. So I think it was Sarasota or Charlotte County that
did what you said and then within three months tried to reverse it as
some big developments came in and tried to game the system, as they
say.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not gaming. That's exactly
what we want. We want them to take advantage of no impact fees.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, ma'am, we vetted this in front of
DSAC, and their concern was that developers might game the system.
They even said working with the development communities -- we
brought this to DSAC, and they said this is another small step that
helps us because it alleviates a short-term letter of credit financial
problem, but we also like the fact that Collier County has been very
prudent in building roads, which allows us to develop.
So in talking to -- I think you have a public speaker, Mr.
Y ovanovich, proposed this. They don't want to see the system
derailed because they like the fact that we have quality of life, roads in
place.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But they are in place. We've got
tremendous infrastructure.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We have some left to do that are
programmed now with grants as well in the next three years. So they
want to see those keep going, they don't want to see those stopped.
This is something they'd say helps them in the short term because of
the banking letter of credit issue. So I think it's a step in the right
direction. I wouldn't want to go that far because I think it would
destroy the rest of the program if that was the case.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Fiala?
Page 54
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And I totally agree with you,
I'm in support of Commissioner Henning's motion, by the way, and I
think that we have done a lot, as much as we could, and we keep
trying further steps to incentivize the development community, such
as no impact fees at all on any existing property that's, what is it now,
two years old or older, trying to encourage people to get some of that
inventory off of our records, off of our books and get those things
functioning again rather than deteriorating.
It's done a little bit. Not as much as we would have liked it to,
but at least it's helped a little bit. We've done things like reducing our
impact fees in half and hoping to incentivize. We've done a lot of
things. But I think that we can't cripple ourselves to go into a
moratorium. Because then if we're not -- you know, if we have to
return all of the stuff we've already collected, which will then stop any
movementswe have right now in building these roads that allow the
developers to build because then they have concurrency, I think we're
crippling ourselves. It's the wrong way to go.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We wouldn't have to return
anything.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, please, you're
interrupting another speaker and you do not have the floor.
Commissioner Fiala, do you have anything further?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know what, that's all I had to
say. I was really proud because it keeps our taxes down, which we all
know that is an important thing. By having this growth-pay-for-
growth, we don't have to then pay the taxes ourselves.
And what we found, even in our hey-dey years, and we've said
this many, many times, yes, our impact fees were the highest in the
State of Florida. Our taxes were the lowest in the State of Florida.
And our growth rate was the highest in the State of Florida and second
highest in the country. So 1 think that we have to find a marriage
between all of them that will stimulate the economy and yet not
Page 55
May 10,2011
cripple us. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You have public speakers?
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have two public speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, let's call the public speakers.
MR. MITCHELL: The first speaker will be Duane Billington,
and he'll be followed by Rich Y ovanovich.
MR. BILLINGTON: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, Duane Billington.
You know, when is enough enough? On June 8th of2009, the
Certificate of Public Adequacy was amended to benefit Mr.
Y ovanovich's clients. Now just two years and two days later he is
back for more.
There is no need to stretch out impact fee payments. Developers
do go bankrupt. What happens then? The taxpayer takes it in their
shorts.
There have been tens of millions spent acquiring right-of-ways
for Oil Well and the Vanderbilt Beach Road extensions. And we don't
have it all yet. Lord only knows what Vanderbilt will cost. Oil Well
Road is estimated it will cost 70 million.
Nick Casalanguida just told us we're spending general fund
revenues now, today, to fund this construction. So why are we even
considering stretching out the acquisition of these impact fees? Our
debt is already three-quarters of a billion dollars, and our annual
carrying cost is around 76 million. The impact fees are needed so we
may pay down the debt and not dip into the general fund revenues that
should be used to restore services.
Send a message to Mr. Y ovanovich and his clients that you're not
willing to pick the pockets of the rest of the taxpayers of Collier
County to make things easier and more profitable for his clients.
Deny this request. Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Rich Y ovanovich.
MR. OCHS: Before Rich speaks, if I just might, just so the
Page 56
May 10,2011
Board understands, there is no general fund revenue supporting
transportation impact fee debt.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right. And it never has--
MR.OCHS: From impact fee.
MR. BILLINGTON: Mr. Casalanguidajust told us that general
revenue was going to be used for construction.
MR. OCHS: There is no general fund dollars back-stopping
transportation impact fee debt.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're talking about building a road.
MR. BILLINGTON: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He's talking about debt. The impact fee
dollars are not necessary to pay for the debt that has been accrued in
the transportation division.
This is --
MR.OCHS: There's not debt--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, there is no debt, okay.
MR.OCHS: In transportation, impact fees are used on a
pay-as-you-go basis, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. And there's just no point in
continuing that discussion, because you don't go out and build a road
unless you've got identified sources of funding. If the sources aren't
already identified, you're not going to sign a contract for building a
road. End of story. And that's for the entire cost of the project.
So there's nothing that he is doing that depends upon some future
unidentified source of revenue. That's why they're in such good shape
now.
So the process does make some sense. But we can debate this
from eliminating all impact fees, which will really exacerbate the
problem that you've brought up, to leaving it the way it was before.
But a temporary measure, I think it's probably worth at least
exploring for a short period of time to see if it works. If it doesn't
work, scratch it.
Page 57
May 10,2011
Okay, Mr. Yovanovich?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Just real briefly, he's correct, it was a few
years ago that we came forward and said the second half -- remember,
you had a system where you paid half up front and then three years
later you had to come up with the second half. And we're in a little bit
of a recession, and developers were at the point where they said, we
can't come up with that second half, work with us to come up with a
payment plan which will hopefully stimulate cash flow so we can start
building homes and start employing more people.
The first year we had to come up with 20 percent, they put up a
bond for the second 20 percent, or a letter of credit. We had hoped
that would work and would stimulate the economy to where we could
build homes and employ people.
What happened was the second year came around and you had
your letter of credit up and you had to come up with another 20
percent, which was effectively a 60 percent pre-funding of your road
impact fees. From a cash flow standpoint, several of my clients could
not afford to come up with that next 20 percent.
And the way your ordinance reads right now is if you don't come
up with that next 20 percent, you effectively lose the benefit of the 40
percent you've already come up with. So you've paid all this money
in, you get no vesting for the money you've already paid, and you
have to come to the Commission and ask, please vest us for what
we've already paid.
What I've proposed is we'll pay a little bit more up front, 33
percent in that first year, and hopefully that will mean we'll come in
sooner for building permits to pay the remaining 67 percent. And at
the same time we'll start employing people in the construction of
homes. And I think we all acknowledge that the construction industry
is the backbone of our economy, and has been the backbone for many
businesses, and people were earning a living and homes in
foreclosures and all that.
Page 58
May 10,2011
We're just looking for, and we appreciate the fact that the
Commission has been working with us over the past few years in
reducing impact fees, in trying a payment plan. And 1 know we're
coming to you and staying hey, we still need more help. But the help
will benefit the entire community. And we hope that you can support
the request that we proposed.
The one year, let's see how it works, is a great idea. It allows
people who are already in the system to continue to go forward. And
it also allows new projects to come forward, which will stimulate the
economy.
And you know what, to be honest with you, I would love the,
hey, no impact fee alternative. But the reality is, what does that do to
the people who have already paid, you know. The new people that
come in are immediately at a competitive advantage over those who
have already paid those impact fees. And you receive some of the
same comments for existing buildings, where people didn't have to
pay impact fees.
On the residential side, we continue to need your help and that's
what we're asking for. And a one-year period we'll see whether it
really harms the cash flow.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much, Mr. Y ovanovich.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Leo, help me out. What do we
need impact fees for, if all our road construction projects are funded
with non-impact fee revenues, based on what you just said? In other
words, we're not pledging impact fee dollars against any debt service
on any of these roads. And these roads are fully funded by obligations,
by bonds; isn't that correct --
MR. OCHS: No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- or are we actually paying cash
for these roads?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: In your five-year program right now
Page 59
May 10,2011
you have two projects I would say that are sizable, minus the bridge
program. You have Collier Boulevard, which we have approximately
$7 million in trip grants, and you have 951 and 41 where developers
have prepaid and promised to pay $8 million in impact fees. By doing
so, the state contributed $8 million, and then we received another $3
million grant. So those are the only two major projects.
What I think the County Manager was saying is, we have not
incurred any debt nor do we intend to incur debt. With that eight to
$10 million in next year's cash flow, with the money we've already
collected and with these grants, those are probably the only two
projects you have in your five-year program.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But the existing debt is not being
paid with impact fees. We don't pledge impact fees against
transportation, debt service.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And so basically all we're using
are general fund dollars and gas taxes and other -- or actually, are we
using -- we're not using ad valorem, are we?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Actually, the County Manager --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We're using non-ad valorem
revenues against these special revenue bonds?
MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, Administrator,
Growth Management Division.
Commissioner, two separate issues. The first is we have not
taken any of our impact fees and bonded them in any manner, create a
debt utilizing our impact fees as a source of repayment. That's number
one.
Number two, when we fund a project, we have three sources of
funding. The primaries have been impact fees and gas tax and there's
some support from ad valorem. But generally it's impact fees and gas
tax.
I use those impact fees. I haven't bonded them, but I use them
Page 60
May 10,2011
directly as they're received, as well as the gas taxes received, for a
project. That's why our work program has removed a lot of projects,
because the higher level of impact fees aren't being realized now, gas
tax has gone down just a little bit. And so basically, as was pointed
out, based on grants and other things we've been pursuing, we've kept
two projects over the next five years with greatly reduced revenues
and gas tax -- in impact fees and somewhat reducing gas tax. But we
don't bond our impact fees.
We did bond way back in 2000 the gas tax, and basically
structured that to handle what is called the backlog. And I could not
use impact fees or bring them to growth pays for growth if I didn't
show that I was addressing the backlog fully. And so that was done
back then, and that is a gas tax that was bonded, but never our impact
fees.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I understand, the special
revenue bonds that fund our road construction --
MR. FEDER: You don't have special revenue bonds funding any
road construction. What you do have is, we use utilities and they help
pay their portion. There are some bonding of utility issues, but that's
not the item here. On a road project you do not use bonding funds,
other than what we did in catching up with the backlog, which we've
done. And now we're paying off the last of that debt.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we don't have bonds funding
these roads?
MR. FEDER: No, you do not, you're paying as you go.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to call the question, please.
We've got a motion on the floor --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right--
MR. FEDER: I'll be happy to explain further.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, we do.
Commissioner Henning has made a motion to approve the item,
with a clear statement that it would be reevaluated in 12 months from
Page 61
May 10,2011
today. And it's seconded by Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, it passes 4-1, with Commissioner
Hiller dissenting. Thank you.
Item #10C
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER A REQUEST BY THE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF COLLIER
COUNTY TO PROVIDE A JOB CREATION AND FAST TRACK
INCENTIVE PACKAGE (CREATION OF 15 FULL-TIME JOBS
AT 131 % OF THE CURRENT COLLIER COUNTY PRIV A TE-
SECTOR AVERAGE WAGE) TO COLLIER SCRAP METAL
RECYCLING, INC. AND APPROVE THE INCENTIVES IN
ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTE SECTION 125.045
FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT TO BE LOCATED AT 2011
SEWARD AVENUE - MOTION TO DENY - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to your 11 :00 a.m.
time certain. It's item 10.C on your agenda. It's a recommendation to
consider the request by the Economic Development Council of Collier
County to provide a job creation and Fast Track incentive package, the
creation of 15 full-time jobs at 131 percent of the current Collier
County private sector average wage, Collier Scrap Metal Recycling,
Incorporated, and approve the incentive in accordance with Florida
Statute, Section 125.045 for the proposed project, to be located at
Page 62
May 10,2011
2011 Seward Avenue. Fiscal impact, $30,000.
Mr. David Jackson, your Executive Director of Economic and
Business Development and Ms. Tammie Nemecek, President of
Economic Development Council, will present.
MR. JACKSON: Good morning, Commissioners, David
Jackson, Executive Director, Collier Business and Economic
Development.
Before you today is an application from a client -- or from a
potential business owner to ask for some incentives.
In 2009 the Local Emergency Economic Development Act was
installed by this Board. And in 2006 there was a Fast Track ordinance
resolution also.
Last year, in July and in September, the Board of County
Commissioners here in Collier County directed staff to do everything
that they could within the existing ordinances and programs to assist
any and all businesses, future and existing, to grow and prosper in
Collier County.
Currently today what we have today is, on your visualizer you'll
see is a recommendation for an application to provide 15 full-time
jobs to Collier Scrap Metal Recycling and to provide the incentives
under Florida Statute 125.045.
What they've got now for the people -- for you to understand is
that this program is a two-step process. Two steps. The first step is
the Board of County Commissioners reviews the application and you
give them authority to proceed.
The second step is when they come back with the agreement and
all the i's are dotted, t's are crossed, and an agreement is written and
entered into between the Board of County Commissioners and the
company. And at that point you get two shots at it.
Where we're at today is this company is a target industry to
create 15 jobs. The additional criteria that we've applied to this
company is that they will have health benefits, they will haveu
Page 63
May 10,2011
residency in Collier County. What that does for you is that cycles
through the income of each of those people that live in Collier County
seven to nine times. And also they have to be legal residency.
So in the -- second slide, please, thank you, Leo -- is that when
you review this today, if you approve them to go forward, it will come
back to you in the form of an agreement. And before any dollars are
expended, any dollars are expended -- it's a performance based -- they
must show that they created the jobs, they must show that they've been
there full time, they must show that they're legal residents, they must
show that they live here in Collier County. They have to prove that
before they get paid.
Not only that, the 15 jobs that they're asking for is to be five jobs
per year over three years. So it will be five, five and five, and they're
staged out. So there isn't any funds expended until the company
performs.
And that's what we have before you today is a request for the
Board of County Commissioners to approve a job creation, a
Fast-Track incentive package under Florida Statute 125.045 for
Collier Scrap Metal Recycling, Incorporated.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have -- how many public
speakers do we have, Ian?
MR. MITCHELL: Four, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller and
Commissioner Fiala, would you like to wait till after public speakers?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, call the speakers first, please.
MR. MITCHELL: The first speaker will be Duane Billington,
and he'll be followed by Peter Gaddy.
MR. BILLINGTON: Good morning again, Commissioners.
Again for the record my name's Duane Billington.
In looking at the backup for this, staff has indicated that this
company does not meet the requirements for getting assistance. The
requirements, those numbers, those guidelines, were established by
Page 64
May 10,2011
you as the threshold where anything less did not qualify because it
made no economic sense.
If something didn't make economic sense at that point in time, I
don't see where it makes economic sense at this point in time to violate
those carefully prepared guidelines.
The property is currently zoned industrial and requires a
conditional use permit. I'm curious as to why this commission is
hearing this economic incentive package prior to the company having
proper zoning. If the commission grants the incentive, they are also
telling staff and the planning and zoning people to approve the
conditional use.
I'm kind of curious as to this performance-based criteria. I think
that should be a standard part of all these incentive packages, if you're
going to have them.
Is this a standard thing or is this something new?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, standard.
MR. BILLINGTON: That's standard? Thank you.
The other item I'd like to bring up is what about fair competition?
There's currently at least one, I think two, other industries involved in
this right in that immediate location. Garden Street Recycling is
located on Shirley Street, not far from where this proposed entity is.
As far as I know, they get no economic incentives for being good
neighbors and a part of our community.
You know, at what point is this going to end? Is every business
that's going to expand in this county get a payment from the
taxpayers? Is every business that thinks they might want to come in
going to get a payment from the taxpayers?
From what I'm seeing there's not going to be any end to this, and
again, we're going to be picking the taxpayer's pocket. Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Peter Gaddy.
MR. GADDY: Good morning, Commissioners. Peter Gaddy on
behalf of the Coalition for Open Economic Development.
Page 65
May 10,2011
The applicant in this case does not meet the requirements of the
ordinance for the Fast Track program or the job creation program.
They are 25 percent short of the minimum requirements for the
number of jobs and 19 percent short of the salary threshold.
It is suggested by the executive summary that an exception or
variance be granted the applicant.
This Board regularly grants exceptions and variances to strict
requirements when there are special circumstances or hardships. No
hardship or special circumstances are brought forth in the application
or the supporting material. Even ifthere were a special circumstance
or hardship, the ordinance on which the applications rest does not
provide for variances or set any guidelines under which an exception
should be granted.
If you approve the application, you will have set a precedent that
anyone can feed at the government trough, regardless of whether or
not they meet the standards.
A free market economy depends on competition and a level
playing field. If you want to change the rules, you should change
them for everyone. The government should not be engaged in
corporate welfare or granting earmarks to favorite companies, or
picking winners or losers. Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Graysen Johnson, and
he'll be followed by Robert Weber.
MR. JOHNSON: Good morning. Thank you for hearing me.
My name is Gray Johnson, I'm the owner/operator ofL&F Scrap
Metals.
I just wanted to quickly just speak about kind of my views of the
whole economic assistance. Kind of my view when I got information
about this was kind of concerning about -- you know, I've been in
business since 1988. I've been a resident of Collier County. I guess
my tax dollars would be supporting another business that would be
basically directly in competition with me in a very tight market.
Page 66
May 10,2011
I've done everything I can do to survive in the last three years
with the demise of the construction industry and whatnot. We've had
to diversify, just like a lot of businesses, to maintain what we need to
maintain to survive in this business and economic environment.
So when I hear about the -- kind of the whole program where
people are getting assistance and whatnot and still learning quite a bit
about it and I still have a lot to learn, I'll admit that, you know, it just
doesn't sit well with how would that be feasible in an industry which
has really been crippled by the demise of the construction and building
and whatnot in this county.
I just wanted to come up here and kind of give my view of kind
of being against a program like that that would allow that, and
certainly in a very tight and confined market. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Could I ask you a couple of questions?
How many employees do you have?
MR. JOHNSON: Six.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Would you be interested in a program
like this to expand your business?
MR. JOHNSON: I don't know enough about it. I've had a lot of
trouble trying to expand it. We've kind of gone through a survival
mode. The reason we have six employees, we're a commercial
pickup, but we bring it back to our facility and we de-manufacture, if
you will, we pull everything into smaller pieces and then we'll bail it
and resell it. So a lot of ours is very, very labor intensive, not so much
volume intensive.
So we've kind of -- that sounds great. I would love to have that
vision. Right now we're just coming out of an economic time where
we're holding our own, so -- I haven't been able to grow that, you
know. I've been doing this full-time since 2000 here as a resident in
Collier County, and I've never been able to get to that level, even
when we had the boom years. So that's --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Have you -- has the county ever given
Page 67
May 10,2011
you a variance or has there ever been a zoning problem with your
property, your facility?
MR. JOHNSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. Thank you very much. I
appreciate your comments.
MR. MITCHELL: The last speaker will be Robert Weber.
MR. WEBER: Good morning. My name is Robert Weber. I'm
President of Garden Street Iron and Metal. We have a location at
6101 Shirley Street, which is in the same industrial complex as the one
you're proposing the loan to Seward.
I have some pictures here, I don't know if they could put them on
the overhead and --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure. In fact, you can use that podium
over there, if you'd like.
MR. WEBER: First off, we had approached Collier County
fairly recently about expanding our current business, which we've
been here since 1991. We have no code violations or anything, have
never had an issue with Collier County government. We've always
been a good neighbor.
In the process, we approached the EDC about getting assistance
and stuff like that. And when we read through the application, of
course we don't qualifY because we wouldn't be -- you know, the
wages wouldn't be such that would require the assistance from there.
We also had -- are looking to expand our business. We currently
only have three employees there. As Graysen has stated, with the
downturn of the economy with the construction and demolition, our
industry has been pretty much flat in Collier County.
You currently have I believe four recycling businesses in Collier
County, three of them are scrap metal businesses, which we've been
competitors of each other for the last 20 years that I know of.
We also operate yards in Fort Myers and stuff and have operated
what I consider to be class type operations.
Page 68
May 10,2011
What I brought here today was some pictures of U.S.A. as they
are existing in Miami currently, and I believe it's the father of the
gentleman who's applying for this assistance.
You'll see in these pictures what happens when you have a
business that one, doesn't have the financial strength to be able to take
care and maintain their business and operate in the kind of level that I
think Collier County expects.
The first picture you see there was in 2009 when they first were
able to get their property. The second picture is as of this morning.
Now, I found out about this this morning when it was on NBC-2
News, so I kind of was in a rush to get this put together. But you can
see a significant difference between the appearance in 2009 and today.
The next picture again, 2009, you can see a nice clean setting and
everything. This was when they were first granted their permission.
And that's the building as of between 7:00 and 8:00 this morning.
I mean, these guys, when they don't have the money to be able to
operate and maintain their business aesthetically to the way that I
think the county wants, you know, I think the county is throwing away
money to try to bring these guys in and give them a kick start.
Here you'll see -- there's just some more pictures. That there is
the street as it was put in in 2009. You can see it, nice paved street.
The street no longer exists.
The next picture is an overhead where you'll see that when the
business is open, they actually occupy the street. And I don't know
how many employees they have there. I'd be willing to bet you it's not
anywhere near 15 employees.
And I would just say that the one-acre site that he's proposing to
use on Seward, there's no way you're going to have 15 employees on
that property, I don't care what he does. I've been in business all my
life.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, that was your last speaker.
Page 69
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
Who was first?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I have a few questions, things
that troubled me about this.
Number one, they say that they will start offwith five employees
and add five each year. Well, if these guys only have three
employees, the six employees, that's troubling as it is. I don't know
how they can project that.
But what are the wages for these people? Now, they're talking
about $50,000 as the average wage. Where do they really start? It
says in here that they have three classifications: Accounting,
management and technicians. And the technicians, are they the
drivers? Are these drivers, do they go out and pick up the trash, do
they sort the trash? Who are these technicians? But if they make a
very low income, does that mean then that they will need help from
the county to help support them?
Secondly, with these employees, will they all, including the very
lowest income employees, will they all be receiving full health care
coverage? And if they are not, then it's going to be our responsibility
as taxpayers to cover their health care costs, and that troubles me.
And thirdly, I think we should -- you know, as we discuss this,
we ought to have a very clear criteria going forward about how the
wages are drawn up in each of these things, rather than give us an
average. Because that can be an inflated figure. $50,000 average
could mean one person's making two and a quarter, and the other 12
are making 17-five or something like that.
It's -- and also, we should also have a clear criteria as to whether
health care coverage must be part of this agreement as we move
forward. Right now I have to say that I'm not in favor of this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?l
Page 70
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I totally agree with what
Commissioner Fiala has said. I think she made some excellent points.
Mr. Jackson, when you presented at the beginning of this
segment, what you failed to highlight is that what's being asked here
today is a waiver of what the ordinance and this program allows. And
specifically, the requirement is that 20 new full-time jobs at 150
percent of the current Collier County private sector average wage of
$58,079 is what is required to participate in this program. The
applicant does not qualify under the program.
I reviewed the laws that the County Attorney is relying on to
suggest that a waiver would be permissible. The ordinance does not
allow for a waiver. 2009-22, which is the other ordinance that was
being relied on, relates to planned unit development time limits and
time limit extension requirements, so that doesn't apply to this.
And the state program applies to grants. And this is part of a
specific incentive program, not a grant program driven by very
specific criteria.
The other thing that's omitted in this presentation, which I've
asked and have not received any information on, is the source of
funding. Where is the money going to come from? We don't have
money set aside for this type of cash incentivization that I know of.
And it isn't reflected in the information that was provided.
Of serious concern to me is -- Mr. Weber, are you still here? Can
you come up? I want to -- and the other gentleman hit on this also.
You're talking about a saturated market, a market that doesn't
experience growth. This is not a market that is promoting diversity in
Collier County. And it is not the type of industry that actually
supports high wages. I'm actually very, very concerned.
Do you see -- do you see what I'm saying is true?
MR. WEBER: Yeah, in the next three to five years I don't see
Collier County growth really kicking back in, because we're not going
to have new development construction that we've had through the
Page 71
May 10,2011
boom time. We're flooded with existing, you know, housing and
everything. And predominantly that's where the scrap metal was
generated from. When there's new construction, it's the dropping and
stuff when they're making the screen enclosures or the railings and
stuff like that, as well as the steel from the rebar and, you know, all
the different items through construction.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I understand that you had
wanted to qualifY for fast tracking and that you basically were denied
by EDC. I understand that right now, the EDC this morning
apparently came and said, oh, you know, we'd like to Fast Track you
too, because they were concerned about the proposal that was coming
forth today.
MR. WEBER: Right. And originally 1 had hired a company to
go through and do the application and stuff like that for Fast Track.
We were denied initially because of of course the different criteria in
order to be able to meet that. And naturally, the number of jobs plus
the salaries in our industry just don't meet that criteria.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
And that goes to the point that Mr. Gaddy made, that we should
not be cherry picking who qualifies for clearly established legal
programs. And that's in effect what's going on here. And I quite
frankly find that unacceptable.
MR. WEBER: And I kind of take offense that, you know, the
business that's been here since 1991, and I forget what year Graysen's
been here, I think it was in the mid-nineties he started his business,
that we've been here trying to maintain and keep our businesses alive,
that the county would then take our tax dollars and use it against us to
support another business in an industry that's already saturated in this
area.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, first a question for the
County Attorney.
Page 72
May 10,2011
Does or does not our ordinance allow for waivers?
MR. KLATZKOW: If you look at the legal considerations, I
never use the word waiver. What I tell you is that under Florida
Statute you have the ability to do this, okay. You're not boxed in by a
particular ordinance. This is a policy decision for the Board. You
have the home rule power to do this if you choose.
If you believe that this particular application does not meet your
particular goals and standards of awarding taxpayer money, then you
vote against it. Every application is taken on its own merits as they
come in here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's my feelings also too.
Because I know of some exceptions out there in the past that made
total sense.
Tammie, I appreciate you being here today. When I met with
Raphael back about a week or so ago, my concern dealt with the fact
that -- existing competition. At that point in time I was told that this
business was very unique, that they're going to be shipping everything
out, they're going to be dealing in junk cars, and nobody else is doing
that in the area. And now I find out that's not quite the truth.
Now, if we're going to create jobs, the idea is to create new jobs,
not to displace other jobs that are out there. There's a possibility he
has a business plan that will capture a certain portion of the market,
which means he will be vested that somebody that's already in place
might not be able to compete with him. So we create one new job and
we lose one job on the other end of the spectrum.
Can you talk to me a little bit about this particular scenario? My
fellow commissioners so far have shared this with you over and over
again. I thought this was a slam dunk when we got started, but after
hearing the other businesses there I have serious concern that we
might be undermining the well-being of the business community with
tax dollars.
MS. NEMECEK: Commissioner, thank you very much.
Page 73
May 10,2011
Tammie Nemecek.
I do want to clarify a statement Commissioner Hiller made and
the business owner made, that they had applied for assistance through
the EDC and were denied. That is an inaccurate statement. We have
yet to receive an application from the existing business. We have sent
applications to them two times now, to their representatives, as well as
the company representative themselves. We're awaiting application.
And our feedback to all businesses that are interested, existing as
well as new, is that as of this point we do not have a funded incentive
program. We do have a Fast Track program. But we are bringing
every opportunity to the Board of County Commissioners and
allowing you to review this and make the decision of whether or not
you would like to support new businesses in the community or support
our existing businesses.
So at this point in time these applications are being vetted by the
EDC to make sure they're complete and that the information is there
for your consideration. But the companies themselves would have to
come up here and answer the specific question that you're asking.
But I do want to make sure that everybody understands that every
existing business in Collier County, any new business that wants to
move here, we are open to them applying for these programs, and
we'll bring every single opportunity to the Board of County
Commissioners to allow you to make the decision of whether you'd
like to support these opportunities or not.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, I would like to have the
answer regarding the competition and how this all comes together.
MR. MORENO: Hello everyone. My name is Raphael Barrios
Moreno, and I would like to answer a few questions that I have (sic),
also that you have and some of the people have here in this room.
First, the companies that you have nowadays in Collier County
have failed to provide service that -- that's the service that I will be
providing. And where it is. Every Saturday and every Friday
Page 74
May 10,2011
afternoon you can see lots of trucks going to Fort Myers and different
counties, and lots of people from Naples go to Miami to my father's
business to sell things that they don't buy in Collier County.
Now, I was two, three weeks ago in Garden Center and I was
trying to sell a barbeque. That question goes straight to Weber. They
don't buy it. They don't buy it. Those trucks are trucks and SUV
hauling trailers and towing trailers and giving us 10, 18 tons of C02
per year. Let's say 100 trucks, that will be like -- that's south and --
the amount -- what I'm trying to go is the footprint in the whole
process, that's why I'm trying to bring that here. I'm trying to collect
that from the people here in Collier County. 1 want to buy that scrap
here, things that they don't buy. That's what I want to do now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You just repeated what you told
me in my office, that there is no one taking these trucks -- or picking
up these cars in Collier County and recycling them, they have to go to
Fort Myers or Miami? These other places do not take used cars that
are, well, junk cars, whatever you want to call them?
MR. MORENO: Yeah, there is a place that takes junk cars in
Naples. But that's not my business. I'm not trying to buy junk cars.
I'm trying to buy metals, stainless steel, copper, aluminum and lots of
things. But my question is why they do not buy simple things like a
barbeque. They don't buy it. This is not out of the common. I went
with the barbeque in my little truck and I tried to sell it --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Your spectrum of products that
you buy exceeds theirs, but you do overlap with them.
MR. MORENO: Actually, what's my whole deal is not money.
And my whole deal is not actually come over here and I'm going to
make myself a millionaire out of -- and then I'm going rip out the
competition. That's not the point. The point is trying to acknowledge
that I don't want to see people going far away and spending X amount
of dollars in fuel, just because you're not offering a service.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, I'm totally confused. I'm
Page 75
May 10,2011
no better off than I was before.
So you are or aren't in competition with the existing scrap metal
dealers?
MR. MORENO: Not really. They don't offer the service. They
don't.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, they refuse the
products you're going to take?
MR. MORENO: Yeah, if you go there -- you can do it and you
can exercise (sic) that situation. And you go there and you try to sell
them something as simple as a piece of metal a little bit bigger than
what they accept, where are you going to sell it? You have to go out
of the county to Fort Myers or Miami.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, but they do -- the stuff
you'll accept, a lot of the stuff will be the same as they accept.
What my concern is -- and by the way, when it comes to
competition, you come to Collier County, you run your business, and
eventually if you're the only one that's left after a number of years of
exposure to the business climate, good for you. That's what business is
all about. But bad for us if we do anything to incentivize you with tax
dollars that gives you an edge over your competition, even if it's a
minor edge.
This is my concern. You're not offering something that's new
and unique. You do take some things they don't take, but you do
overlap, from what I can determine from this conversation. And that
was something that I didn't understand in our first meeting.
So it's going to be hard for me to be able to say this is justified,
when I may be putting other jobs in Collier County at risk by allowing
you to continue with the small amount of tax dollars.
MR. MORENO: Well, I totally agree. But there's something
that you also would like to know is that the fact that I'm coming with
almost a million dollars invested just to create X amount of jobs. And
I'm only -- I mean, asking you for two percent out of the whole
Page 76
May 10,2011
investment.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand. I understand,
Raphael. But the thing is, it's still tax dollars. It's pulling competition
with people that are already existing. And your million dollars will
probably go a long ways to investing you in business. And I'm sure
your youth and exuberism (sic) will carry you forward far.
But it's a hard reach to be able to say that this justifies putting tax
dollars in your business when we may be jeopardizing a job in an
existing business. That's where the problem lies with here.
And I wish you the best of luck, but I'm going to have a -- I can't
support this.
MR. MORENO: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You were next?
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. One other thing I wanted to
bring out. And it might be -- it has occurred to me that if this business
really is being loaned the money, the one million dollars from the
Miami business in order to start this business, then if all the
bookkeeping happens to be done in Miami and the paychecks are
maybe written from Miami, would also the tax dollars collected be
given to Miami rather than to Collier County? And the whole thing I
think is not sitting right, so I make a motion to deny.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to deny by --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I second that motion --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Commissioner Fiala, second by
Commissioner Henning.
Commissioner Henning, did you have anything else to add?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. What I understand when
the businessman came up here and said I went to the EDC, I looked at
the application and found out I didn't apply -- or I didn't qualifY for it.
What I got that is he didn't apply for it. What I got out of it is he didn't
qualifY so he didn't take it any further.
Page 77
May 10,2011
So that's the way I took it. I'm sorry if somebody other took it
some other way.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, and I understand it the same
way, that he was told he didn't qualify. And so why bother applying
for something you don't qualify for.
And that's part of the problem I have. I have a concern where the
EDC is telling some people, you know, we'll move you through on a
waiver and others you don't qualify because you don't meet the
criteria. And that's problematic, where the EDC is actually selecting
who they will and won't advance for purposes of a waiver.
I looked back at the underlying article in our code of ordinances
and it's very clear, we have very specific criteria. The public policy
was established when this ordinance was passed. And that is what has
to be respected. And this doesn't qualify.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, I'll call the motion.
You have something else you want to add, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, it was secondary, I forget it.
Go ahead and call the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the motion passes unanimously to
deny the request.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, if! may, as a matter of guidance
for the staff from this point forward, several of these incentives that
Page 78
May 10,2011
we've brought to you over the last couple of years obviously were
acknowledging exceptions based on the economic climate and the
business conditions in the county. But am I hearing direction from the
Board to let's go back to strictly the guidelines that are in your current
program at this point? Because it's hard to pick and choose at this
point, you know, based on the discussion --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I understand. You're not hearing that
from me.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay? I don't know about the others.
But I do not believe the ordinance itself is supposed to be confining.
If we find good reason to approve something that doesn't quite meet
the threshold, I think we have the authority to do it.
Here is the thing that caused me concern today . We're trying to
increase the overall employment in Collier County. And if we're
going to be making a decision on the value of certain jobs to be
created by a company coming in from the outside, we also must
evaluate the risk that other jobs will be lost from businesses that are
already here.
So we have to have -- I have to have a convincing argument that
the net benefit is positive for Collier County. And so I -- that is my
concern with this particular thing.
So my guidance would be if we have future situations like this,
we need to have at least an assessment of what impact it will have on
other employers in Collier County and would it result in for fewer jobs
net for our community. I hope that helped.
Commissioner Coletta, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I think the guidance would
be what's the product they're going to be dealing with. If it's
something unique that's going to be accepted throughout a good part
of Florida or maybe the world, whatever it may be, that's great.
Because whatever you take in the unemployment roll and you put in
Page 79
May 10,2011
there, they're not going to be a direct competition to the existing base.
But if it's something that there's a limited amount of clientele for, like
scrap metal, and you already have competitors for it, there's no way
you're going to realize a net gain on jobs.
The only thing they're going to do is they're going to get in there,
going to fight it out, and at some point in time there's going to be a
readjustment as far as who works where and how many people's
employed. So you've got no net gain and you lost a little bit of money
that you invested in it as far as the incentive to be able to grow jobs,
because that's the whole reason. That would be my only suggestion.
Other than that, you know, use good common sense when you're
looking at these things and just bring them forward. Because
everything's different and you can't possibly build in all the
redundancy you need to be able to say this would be yes or this would
be no.
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala -- I'm sorry,
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let Commissioner Fiala go.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. As I mentioned before, just
also when you come back forward on any of these, if you could give
us some clear criteria. For instance wages, what is the lowest wage
and how many employees are making that, and the highest wage,
rather than just the average wage.
And secondly, I want to know if they're all going to be receiving
health care insurance, you know, because I don't want to be voting for
something and then saddling the taxpayers to pay for the health
insurance. So anyway, that's important to me. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, Chapter 49, Economic
Development, article three, job creation investment program, Section
4935, program eligibility criteria. We need objective standards by
Page 80
May 10,2011
which we apply these incentive programs. Otherwise you basically
start fostering a culture of crony-capitalism. It goes against public
policy to do that.
The program doesn't provide for waivers, the program provides
for objective standards so everyone is treated fairly and one business
isn't given preference over another where neither qualifies because one
has a closer relationship with staff or commissioner or EDC, as the
case may be. So I have a real concern about that. I think the law is
very clear.
The other concern I have is to the extent that these are being --
that these companies are being selected for advancement by the EDC.
I believe those deliberations as to who is and is not selected for
advancement, since the EDC is vested with the legal authority to make
those selections; that all those deliberations have to be done in the
Sunshine. I don't think that where they are recommending that certain
companies be moved forward and certain companies be denied, that
that can be done outside of an open meeting.
And I would ask that that be looked into and that all the meetings
be publicly noticed, and that the discussions regarding the decision of,
you know, who does qualify to be brought before the Board for final
approval, just like with the advisory committees, be done in the
Sunshine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Not only do I think that is really
ridiculous, I think it will doom any opportunity to have an economic
development program in Collier County, because very few businesses
are going to sit down and negotiate and divulge their business plans
for public view before they even reach some agreement. So I think
the -- this requirement is way overstated.
I believe that we should, however, make it very clear that our
ordinance provides us latitude to make decisions that are in the best
interest of our community. And if -- otherwise we don't need a Board
of County Commissioners reviewing this, we can just let staff make
Page 81
May 10,2011
decisions in accordance with the very, very rigid criteria, and then we
will criticize them because they didn't do it the way we wanted them
to do it.
So these are not solutions. So what I would ask of the Board is if
there is support to direct the County Attorney to clearly specify in our
ordinance that the Board has certain latitude with respect to granting
economic incentives under the ordinance. Is that possible?
MR. KLATZKOW: With three votes, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. How about with one vote?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't know how you feel. How many --
do we have three?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think that's fair.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. You want it in the form of
a motion, is that what you're looking for?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, just guidance --
MR. KLATZKOW: I can provide direction--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just guidance. Because I don't know
what he's going to write. And once it comes back, we can all have a
shot and see if we think it works.
Yes, Tammie?
MS. NEMECEK: I'm sorry, one clarification again is that every
application that we receive, completed application signed by a
business owner, we bring to the Board of County Commissioners. We
are not denying any applications.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think that's a wonderful procedure.
Thank you.
Okay, where do we go next, County Manager?
Item #10E
RECOMMENDATION THE BOARD APPROVE A CHANGE
Page 82
May 10,2011
ORDER TO FACILITATE STAFF'S CONTINUED EFFORTS
TO COMPLETE THE 1-75 INTERCHANGE JUSTIFICATION
REPORT - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Sir, you go to item 10.E on your agenda this
morning. It's a recommendation that the Board approve a change
order to facilitate staffs continued efforts to complete the 1-75
interchange justification report.
And Mr. Casalanguida will present.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good morning, Commissioners. For
the record, Nick Casalanguida. rfthe County Manager would be so
kind as to turn the computer viewer on.
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you.
What you have in front of you is a brief Power Point that goes
through the project that you've seen many times. What you're looking
at is an aerial view of the existing interchange as it sits right now at
1-75 and Everglades. Notice on the north side and the south side you
have the ramps that are being used by Army Corps of Engineers, the
Water Management District to construct the project to the south,
Picayune Strand rehydration.
Give you a quick time on review. Board of County
Commissioners directed a committee to study the Golden Gate Area
Master Plan back in 2001 and 2003. 2004 you adopted an ordinance
that included the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. It strictly discussed
-- specifically discussed the I-75/Everglades.
In one section it referenced in Policy 6.1.2, to coordinate with the
FDOT in the vicinity ofI-75/Everglades, which we have done. In
Policy 7.3.1 it directed us to go with Emergency Services and other
state and federal agencies to look at specifically r-75 and Everglades,
which we have done.
Your Collier MPO Board voted middle of 2005 to include it in
Page 83
May 10,2011
your long-range transportation plan, and you funded this at the end of
2005 to the tune of approximately three-quarters of a million dollars.
Public information meeting was held at the EFIS Center.
Comprehensive Planning Department worked on some weighted
average population estimates.
If you notice in that little red bar, that's when we were going
through the high growth period in Collier County, and then we came
into what I would call the rapid decline into the recession. Most of our
population figures were back from the prior time.
Your draft memorandum letter was done, submitted to Federal
Highway. We talked about what our parameters for study would be.
We took into account the funding at the time. Had not submitted to
the review for the independent agency review.
2008 we had the wild fires and got many calls and complaints
regarding the interchange and ways to get out of there. I know the
Sheriffs Office and Florida Highway Patrol and Emergency Services
has the opportunity to get out of there right now, but that has come up
many times.
We were lucky enough to receive some federal funding at the end
of 2008 to the tune of $245,000.
Then we entered into what's called the ETDM, Efficient
Transportation Decision Making System. Goes out to everybody,
pretty much.
You laugh.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who came up with that one, Nick?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It wasn't me, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Had to be the state or federal
government.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Pretty much.
That goes out to agency review. In a sense, the good part about it
is that they get an early review. At that time we got a lot of comments
that came back about controversy regarding that location.
Page 84
May 10, 2011
We held our first public meeting in the middle of 2009 at
Palmetto Elementary School. Several hundred people attended and
there was a lot of discussion about the location. Mostly people were
asking what's taking so long, they wanted to see access to 1-75. We
got responses back from some of the community members that they
wanted to talk about impacts to Everglades Boulevard. So we did that
in the subsequent meeting.
We did do what's called a dispute resolution kick-off meeting.
That's where these ETDM comments come in and we actually meet
with the folks that make those comments and we say what can we do
to get past this.
Current studies are underway. Your IJR is currently highlighted
there in yellow. It goes to the east to State Road 29, south along 1-75,
and to the west along 1-75, to the north at Oil Well Road.
This is the interesting part. The cumulative effects studies a
25-mile radius that we're involved in right now, analysis. It's a
lengthy process and expensive, and it's being conducted by the FDOT
in conjunction and in parallel with our IJR right now.
Interesting to note, during the discussion of the dispute
resolution, Federal Highway and staff said, you know, we had a 2015
opening date. Due to the facts that have come up with the ETDM
comments, the recession that we're in it and the funding issues that we
have, it was not realistic to open up in 2015. It didn't make sense. So
we moved it back to 2019.
What that means is all your analyses have to be redone to date so
far. And that's kind of what's bringing us to this point in time.
Second public meeting was held. Congressman Mario
Diaz-Balart attended. Commissioner Coletta I believe was there.
Again, several hundred members of the community showed up. They
still supported the project. And we went into a little more detail about
the impacts to Everglades at the request of some of the community
members, if it stayed there.
Page 85
May 10,2011
Point of notice: We always wanted to put it someplace else. We
would have loved to work with Collier Enterprises and shifted this to
the east. There is no development there now. We cannot apply the IJR
there right now, so we're moving forward with what's there existing
today.
This is where we are in terms of the MLO needs to be updated,
early in 2011. And without that update and updated technical
information required to submit to Federal Highway, we will have to
stop the project now.
That's what's in front of you today. It's $125,000 to continue the
project. We budgeted last year in fiscal year '11 to the tune of
$200,000. The consultant originally asked for 177. We worked down
to try to make this as tight as possible, and we're at 125. And I'll take
you through what I think will happen now.
We'll finish the IJR in the end of2012. Cumulative effect study
should be done about one or two months later. That may slip because
they're having some delays with modeling.
PD&E is set to follow right behind it if we're successful with
both of those. That is funded with federal dollars and state dollars
right now. And part of that process, 2015 through 2018, design
permits and right-of-way is partially funded. We don't have
construction funded at this stage, but we wouldn't because we're
waiting to see what the PD&E would show before we would start the
program, some of those dollars and what those costs would be.
And again, I'll leave you with questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd be willing to hold my
questions till after the speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There are no speakers.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh. In that case there, couple of
things that raised concern with me was the August, 2009 dispute
resolution process were originally agreed to to date for modeling
Page 86
May 10,2011
traffic but were no longer appropriate. And that was the result of the
kickback we got back from the environmental community. Is that
correct?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's the environmental community as
well as Federal Highway. The fact that the funding didn't meet the
construction schedule of 20 15 anymore was a combination of those
three factors: The recession, environmental concerns, and funding
that said 2015 is no longer reasonable, it needs to be 2019. So I would
say it was those three factors.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The cumulative effect study
though was not the result of the lack of funding, it was the result of
concerns that were raised by the environmental community.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You're absolutely correct,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, how much time -- how
much more time is added to the process in what happened to the
cumulative effects study, as far as that goes?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I think between the delay in the IJR
modeling and the cumulative effects study, we've added about two
years to this process.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The four years have been added
to the process, is there -- what can be done to reestablish this as a
priority at the federal and state level?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I think you have it with your MPO
process as your number one priority. I think FDOT has shown strong
support. And I believe at the federal level you had a million dollars
from Senator Nelson that was appropriated -- not appropriated, set to
be filed as a bill. But when they did a moratorium on I would say
omnibus funding, they pulled it off. So that's gone. But you had
strong federal support.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I know there's
tremendous support. I can tell you that our state legislators and our
Page 87
May 10,2011
federal legislators, I haven't found one that had any objection to this
project. It doesn't mean that some time in the future they might, but at
this point in time they're all aboard.
God bless Mario Diaz-Balart for taking the time to come all the
way over here when he actually didn't represent anyone in this area
any longer but still had enough interest in it.
And I've got to -- this has been our number one priority for what,
five, six years as far as the federal issues go?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: About five years, sir, yes, that's
correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can see no better expense of
money than to keep this thing on track as soon as possible.
And is Commissioner Fiala coming back in a moment?
MR. OCHS: Here she is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, great.
So I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion for approval by Commissioner
Coletta, and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Coletta, what is
Conservancy's position on the interchange?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Say that again, please?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What is Conservancy's position?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, The Conservancy position
verbally to me was the fact that they were going to oppose this
highway, regardless of what happened. On the public front they're
saying that they're waiting for the study to come back.
The next question I asked them, when the study comes back, if
the study is workable for the county to be able to go forward could
you approve it? And the answer was not likely, we'd have to review it
agam.
Page 88
May 10,2011
I expect what will happen, unless we can show a really united
front, something like we have been doing, that what's going to happen
is that when we get back and we finish up with the justification report
and the cumulative effect study, that the data that came in to come up
with the final results will be positive, will be challenged. They'll try
to run the clock out to be able to force a new study. And at that point
in time, you know, we just have to be diligent and stay on top of it.
I mean, what's at question here is the health, safety and welfare of
a large part of our population in Eastern Collier County.
I hope that was a simple enough answer.
Now, once again, I'm not quoting verbatim what they told me,
I'm just giving you my reflections of what I seen, and don't hold me
right to it to the letter.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Nick, when we spoke about this,
one of the questions I had was a concern about double counting, you
know that--
,
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What's the answer to that?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I've reviewed the scope that was
provided in the original proposal and the scope that's been submitted
here, and I don't see double counting, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So in other words, what hasn't
been completed in the original project will not be paid for. In other
words, we don't have an outstanding payable for that work. And this
new proposal here will reflect what was not completed in the other.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You have remaining dollars in some
of your scope items in the original project. Those dollars would be
supplemented by dollars in this scope to finish that task as identified in
the original scope.
An example would be technical memorandums. They started to
prepare them. They did the modeling for them using the 2015 opening
year and an interim year of2025 and 2035.
Page 89
May 10, 2011
They didn't finish the technical memorandum. They were
submitted to us as drafts but they did the work. So the remaining
dollars then, I'll use an arbitrary number of say 10,000, if to complete
the technical memorandum required additional 20,000, that's what was
submitted in this scope. So you're taking what's left over from the first
scope that's not completed, supplementing with this scope to get your
finished documents. But no double payment, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. One thing. I feel the urgency
for this as well. My daughter lives out there, and she was just
evacuated for the fires, taking a picture of the fire raging right in her
backyard as they were evacuating her street. And I was thinking it's so
important for those people to have a way to get out to safety, and we
need to assist them to do that.
You made a comment and you talked about Collier Enterprises.
And I know they've been in my office, oh, about a year ago I guess,
saying that they would like to see a different interchange. You just
addressed that. But right now they're not interested in moving forward
with that. At some point in time, number one, if they are interested
and if it would work better, could we switch it over? That's my first
question.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay? And then the second
question is, is it also environmentally affected, or not as much?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I wouldn't want to quantify that. I
think your environmental folks are going to say that no matter where
you put it you're going to have impacts, whether it's farther there or to
the east.
To your first question I said yes, but it depends on when. The
IJR is a traffic analysis report that says based on traffic you need an
interchange at that location. Assuming Federal Highway supported
Page 90
May 10,2011
that statement, I don't think it would be that difficult to resubmit some
documentation to say it's moving to the east and we're going to
reconnect those -- configure those roads. But right now we do not
have an application from Collier Enterprises.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like assurances that that
study does allow for relocation. Because isn't the current location one
that will precipitate a large number of takings and the other location
doesn't?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, no, ma'am, because you still
have to tie in those roads. Now, you will have more takings on
Everglades Boulevard. You may have more costs.
And remember, the issue you may have is, let's say you moved it
to the east. If there was a diagram, I could show you. I'm not sure
that there's a clear diagram that's here. That's about the best we have.
This is DeSoto here. You're talking somewhere in this location
here. And to do that, you'd still have to connect to the road to the
west. That means you'd have impacts to those folks to tie those in.
Some more bridges, possibly impacts to DeSoto Boulevard.
And right now the purpose of our application is just to show that
there's a traffic need to connect the folks within the study area to 1-75
at Everglades. Federal Highway will say submit more documentation
and re-justify that need based on a location over here, and that's what
they'd want to see if we were going to change that. But there's no
guarantee that they would -- it would be a simple matter. They may
require quite a bit of documentation.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But is this study locking us into
this one location?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: At this point in time it is, because
you're specifically applying there at this point. When you get into the
PD&E stage, you can consider greater alternatives.
Page 91
May 10,2011
So you're going to show the need through traffic. You're going to
do a cumulative effects study that encompasses both locations or a
shift to the east. Assuming we're successful with both of those when
you get to the PD&E, at that point ifthere was a development in place
you could apply and talk about it with them.
But I'll be honest with you, I don't see in the next 24 months that
Collier Enterprises is going to submit a development that will tie us
into that location. So I think you're going to be moving forward with
Everglades.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have a motion--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to make sure that
alternative is available. And I'm concerned that this study -- it sounds
to me -- I echo Commissioner Fiala's concern, that the way this study
is being proposed does have the effect of locking us into this location
and doesn't, you know, propose -- or doesn't allow for another very
real alternative.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I couldn't apply, ma'am, without
having something there. I could not submit an alternative right now to
Federal Highway without having a development or a road that existed
there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And my second of course stands,
yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the motion passes unanimously.
Page 92
May 10,2011
We are taking a break for lunch. We'll be back at 1 :04.
(A lunch recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, Board of County
Commissioners meeting is back in session.
You want to go to 8.A, County Manager, or--
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- do you want to take something else?
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2011-17: RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 75-16, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO THE PLACEMENT AND PRESENT A TION OF
MATTERS ON THE OFFICIAL AGENDA - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, 8.A would be the place to go on the
agenda. It's previously item 17.C. It's a recommendation to adopt an
amending Ordinance Number 1975-16, as amended, relating to the
placement and presentation of matters on the official agenda.
This item was moved by Commissioner Hiller.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller, you want to
go directly with your questions, or you want someone to make a
presentation?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, County Attorney, are you
planning on making a presentation?
MR. KLATZKOW: Whatever the pleasure of the Board is,
ma'am.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you need a presentation,
Commissioner Hiller, or you just have questions?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I think we have issues, not
questions.
What's being proposed in the wording of this ordinance is not
Page 93
May 10,2011
what was voted on by the Board. And what I have is a copy of the
minutes where we voted on this. And what we voted on was to
include backup when an agenda item was presented, be it by staff or
the Commissioners. And that when -- and that the backup would be
presented -- hang on a second -- that the backup would be presented so
as to allow the Board to better be able to prepare and deliberate the
agenda item.
What the County Attorney has done has added wording which
was not voted on by this Board, specifically that no additional
information could be added to what has been presented as backup to
an agenda item once the agenda has been published unless there was a
majority vote of those present.
And obviously that's a problem. Because ifI as a Commissioner
read the backup that has been presented by another Commissioner
with respect to an agenda item and I find more information, I would
like to have the ability to present that and not to be barred from
presenting that by a three-two vote.
If a Commissioner comes up with more information after he has
published an agenda item because the public comes to him after he's
published an agenda item and presents him with additional
information that either supports or goes against what's been proposed,
or for that matter staff has proposed, they should be able to do that.
If I ask questions of staff after an agenda item is put forth and
staff gives me additional information, staff should have the ability to
supplement the agenda with that information so other Commissioners
have the opportunity to have the same information I have.
So in order to avoid these problems and to basically present the
wording as was voted on by the Board, what should be presented in
the ordinance as item three should be limited to the following
wording. I have it here and I'll put it on the overhead. But basically it
should say: Prior to the publishing of the agenda, whoever places the
item on the agenda should include as much supporting documents,
Page 94
May 10,2011
information and material as is needed to aid the Board in its
preparation and deliberation of the agenda item.
And the wording that proposes a majority vote of those present to
accept or deny the addition of additional information should be struck.
The paragraph with respect to continuing an agenda item stands
regardless, so we don't have to repeat what the procedures are for
continuing an item in item three.
And I'll bring the proposed wording so it can be viewed on the
overhead.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Yeah, I'm with you.
The executive summary is a little different than the proposed
ordinance, maybe that's where the confusion. The intent was, is just
exactly what you're saying. And we just need to delete some wording
within the ordinance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, what wording are you talking
about deleting?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What wording to leave --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mr. Ochs, can you put my wording
-- I gave the proposed wording as it ought to appear, which deletes all
the other wording in subsection three, leaving the wording as stated on
the overhead, which is what I just read. And that was what was voted
on by this Board.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Henning, is that
what you're saying?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, we're leaving out the part
that's important is that the items will not be accepted by the Board or
has the right to be able to deliberate whether it should be included or
not if it comes in late. Without that, the rest of it's meaningless.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Page 95
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The idea is to try to keep it
flowing, not just to put meaningless words in there that don't take you
in any particular direction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think it's a policy within
the ordinance that supporting documents shall be included or should
be included. That's a policy.
There are several times, whether it could be the public or staff,
provides us extra backup material. Quite frankly if it's too voluminous
I don't read it anyways. But if it's something pertaining to the issue
that I can read, comprehend and make a decision on, that additional
information I think is very helpful.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I respond?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, please.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, and you're right, but there
lies the problem. It's impossible when somebody puts 100-some pages
on this front dais as they're walking by for you to be able to even
make a determination whether at that point in time it's relevant or not.
And so we should have that right at that point in time to not have
to accept it if we don't want to, and enter it in if we think it's needed or
even to be able to continue the meeting if the information is important
that needs our deliberation in a timely fashion.
This is designed to try to keep everything flowing in a way that
would be more a little more advantageous not only for us but for the
public itself, so the decisions we made are based upon the information
we received and can understand in a meaningful way.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the language presented
doesn't prohibit you -- anybody from doing that, continuing an item
because there's information handed to us and it's too voluminous to
comprehend and make a meaningful decision. It doesn't prohibit that.
Is that correct --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That is correct --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- Mr. Klatzkow?
Page 96
May 10,2011
MR. KLATZKOW: Are we talking about the proposed language
that Commissioner Hiller is coming forward with?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MR. KLA TZKOW: The language is more of a policy issue
where you're supposed to do it. It doesn't prohibit you from including
additional documents thereafter, which I thought was the intent of the
Board. But it's whatever the intent of the Board is.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let me see ifI have this right.
Commissioner Henning believes that you don't need the statement in
the latter part of paragraph three and it should be deleted. That's a
statement which says if additional documents are presented, we have
the option of considering them, if we feel we can, or if we can't we
continue the meeting so that we have a chance to review them and
integrate that into what we already know about the process, and then
have a reasonable and informed vote at a later time.
Ifwe eliminate that language, where in the document is it clearly
stated that we have that option?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Item four.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that sufficient in your mind, County
Manager (sic), item four?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You mean County Attorney?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Attorney, yes, I'm sorry.
MR. KLATZKOW: I think that the Board always has the option
when presented with additional information to refuse to take that
information. You've always had that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And item four really doesn't
address that, it only addresses a continuance.
MR. KLATZKOW: It only addresses a continuance, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So the language you have drafted
here more clearly explains the options of the Board, in my opinion,
and is not in conflict with item four -- with paragraph four.
Page 97
May 10,2011
MR. KLATZKOW: No, it is not in conflict.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Who was next?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think Jim Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just spoke.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, you just finished.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that -- your button is already on.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I'm speaking after you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine.
I got a little bit confused here, in that when Commissioner Hiller
said if we put out additional information or if we submit additional
information. She likes to study this in preparation for the meeting.
And I know I feel the same way. I like as much information as I
can. I don't want to come in and then all of a sudden be blindsided
and presented with something after we're sitting here and I didn't even
know that it was going to be coming forward so I had no opportunity
to study or to do any research on that.
And so I think we're saying the same thing. I want to be able to
prepare with as much information as I can get. Certainly if somebody
-- I can't tell you how many times this happens where somebody will
put a whole packet of information here and they say it's all included in
here. Well, I don't know what's included in there, you know, they're
just handing that to me. And even if I had the time to look through it,
I couldn't listen to them then.
So I'd like to be able to get as much information as I can. And I
think this is what it's going for in this, in what the attorney said, the
County Attorney said. It says everything should be presented, which
gives us all an opportunity, all of us an opportunity to study and
prepare. And not only that, it gives the public an opportunity to see
what's going to be presented and they too can then weigh in on it.
So I think it's pretty clear as to what we've said.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
Page 98
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, what's being said is
something very different. In fact, what's being said is that information
will be blocked by a three-two vote if that information is presented
after the agenda is published. And that's unacceptable.
If I meet with staff after an agenda item has been published and I
get additional information and I want to introduce that information on
the record to support my vote and the public's right to know why I am
voting, because information has come forward subsequently, I should
have the right to enter that information on the record.
And to basically block the public's right to additional information
by a three-two vote because the agenda was published on a Thursday
and was only -- and only included information that one commissioner
or one staff member wanted is absolutely problematic.
And I'll give an example. Like for example, there is an item that
was included on the consent regarding maps, and backup information
regarding those maps was not included. I requested that information.
That information has not been forthcoming. I didn't even know that
agenda item was on there, til the agenda was actually published.
Now, the public didn't have the information, I don't have the
information. I'm being asked to vote on it. And according to what
this ordinance would provide, if Commissioners Coletta, Coyle and
Fiala would like to block me from being able to publish that
information or get that information, they could do so. And that's
fundamentally wrong.
According to Florida Statutes, specifically 125.74, subsection
one, subsection C, I have the right to ask the County Manager and his
staff for any and all information I need in order to make an informed
decision. And anything that blocks my ability to get that information
goes against my ability to properly vote. And this is what the effect of
this three-two vote prohibiting the addition of additional information
on the record would have the effect of doing. And that is not
supported by law.
Page 99
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller, let me
address that. You have completely misrepresented the intent of this
particular statement. In fact, what you are stating -- what you're
advocating would in fact result in some kind of censorship.
The statement says that the Board may, by majority vote, elect to
either continue the item or hear the matter. It does not say that we
block the inclusion of the information into the record and an
opportunity to debate it. In fact, it specifically says -- it specifically
provides for better public vetting of the information.
There is no option here for the Board by majority vote to block
any information from being submitted for the record or for being
debated. It facilitates the debating in the public -- in a public forum by
saying if we believe it's too complex and voluminous for us to read it
on the dais, then we can continue the item. If we believe we can read
it and properly inform the public, we will continue to hear the item.
There is nothing there that says that the item or the person will be
blocked from debating this issue.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not the item but the underlying
materials. So should additional documents, information and materials
be presented, where do I have the assurance that that will be included
and can be considered?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, if the majority were to vote, the
majority would have two choices: Either to hear that information right
now as you present it or we would continue the agenda item until
everyone could read the information. And at that point we would
debate it in a public forum and you or anyone else who presented the
information could make your arguments.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That interpretation is not what
Commissioner Coletta is proposing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That is what is written here in this
document, which is what we are voting on.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It wasn't clear to me in that
Page 100
"'__"""_,,__,.. _....._,..__ __.____~___"_______..._,_._._u,._..
May 10,2011
fashion. Is there any way the wording could be clarified? Because
there were members of the public that were concerned about this also.
Is there some way the wording could be made clearer to ensure that's
the case?
And quite frankly I don't really see what the difference is
between what's being proposed and the simplification with the
continuance provision in four.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Because a continuance can be declined.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But it can be declined under both
three and four, because it's a three-two vote that would initiate a
continuance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The continuance provision is the
same under both three and four.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, let me read this to
you. The Board may, by a majority vote of those present, elect to
either continue the agenda item to a future Board meeting or hear the
matter. Those are the two choices. We either continue it to a future
Board meeting, at which time it's discussed, or we can hear it right
now.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then why not eliminate the
wording, waive this requirement and just say or hear the matter if
it determines the agenda item is significant public importance and
should not postponed?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't see that it changes it anyway, but
the phrase waive this requirement is merely saying what you do.
It waives the need to continue the agenda item.
So it's very clear I think to anyone who reads it -- is it clear to
you, County Manager -- or County Attorney? I'm sorry. I keep
demoting you. Or is it -- or is this --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Demotion?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Or is it promotion? I don't know which
Page 101
May 10,2011
it is.
MR. KLATZKOW: I would consider it a promotion. But I don't
want the job.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He would probably consider it a
demotion.
MR. KLATZKOW: The intent is this, and this is what I gathered
from your discussion, that the general requirement is that the person
who is putting an item on the agenda, whether it's staff, a
Constitutional Officer, whether it's a Commissioner, whoever it might
be, include all the documentation if they can do it. It helps the public
and it helps you in your deliberations and preparation.
But that at the time that we're hearing the item, ifthat person
wants to do additional material, you have two choices: You can
continue it or you can waive the requirement that everything gets done
beforehand and hear the matter, depending upon whether or not the
materials are less than voluminous or it's a matter of public
importance. So it's completely your decision.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It doesn't suppress anything. It assures
that whatever was presented, additional information was presented,
gets a fair and complete hearing in a public forum. And I think that's
exactly what we expected to do.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Will it allow for the additional
documents to be included as a public record at the request of whoever
wants to include it?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, if it's continued--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, not if it's continued, if it's
being heard.
MR. KLA TZKOW: If it's heard, yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And if it's being continued?
MR. KLATZKOW: Then no. When it's actually heard at a
following meeting, at that point in time it becomes part of the public
record.
Page 102
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So in other words it would
ultimately be included in the public record.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So at no point in time will this
serve to bar anyone from being able to add information on an agenda
item who can -- anyone who can carry forward an agenda item.
MR. KLATZKOW: The intent is not to bar anyone from
information. The intent is nobody gets surprised at the last moment by
additional information that they didn't have time to prepare for.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And so basically it will either be
heard with the information being accepted or it will be continued with
the information accepted at a later date.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion to approve by
Commissioner Coletta --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor --
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have public speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Howmany?
MR. MITCHELL: Three. The first speaker is Doug Fee, and
he'll be followed by Tim Nance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I could have told you that before you
called out the names.
MR. FEE: Good morning -- or good afternoon, Commission.
I basically have my answers. I was concerned that somehow I
could not individually call my Commissioner or anyone of you if
there was an agenda item on the summary or consent agenda and ask
that that be removed to the regular agenda item.
Page 103
May 10,2011
And further, once it made it onto the agenda, that as a member of
the public, that I would have the ability to submit documents in on that
agenda item so that that could be considered.
Specifically at the last meeting there was an item on the consent
agenda in reference to speed limits, and I asked my Commissioner to
pull that item. It made it onto the regular agenda and I was able to
speak. And if I had documents, I certainly would want to be able to
submit those and have them put into the record.
And obviously with agenda items only appearing on Thursday
for the public, and in this case it was Easter weekend, so really, you
couldn't do anything until Monday, I would want to make sure the
public -- I know a lot of times we want to use the word I, but really
what we're talking about is everyone in this room or anyone out there
in TV land to be able to submit something maybe staff hasn't
considered. And I think we have that today and I would accept the
change.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I just add, that's exactly what
this is about, to make sure the public knows all of the information that
will be presented so they can study it as well. And maybe from the
agenda item, you know, from the executive summary, we wouldn't
have really known. But with the backup material, other things
presented in advance, they can study and they can come up just as you
did and say, you know, I don't like that or yeah, I agree with that or
let's change it or whatever.
But this way then we're giving full and complete information
rather than hitting it, you know, at the meeting without the public
being able to see it in advance. I appreciate you saying that, Doug,
thank you.
MR. FEE: And the other thing too is I like the fact that the word
continue is in there. Because sometimes somebody will raise an issue
at the very last minute, not surprisingly, but just it's a fact that they
Page 104
May 10,2011
may know and nobody else knows it. And I respect the fact that you
have the ability to continue.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And Doug, ifI may, the concern I
have, and it mirrors what you said earlier, really arises out of the
sentence, documents, information and materials will not be accepted
by the Board following publication of the agenda. That's a problem.
And that's what they're making subject to that three-two vote. And
that's where I have a concern.
So if that sentence is eliminated, then the rest is not a problem.
If the intent is truly at no point in time, be it when the information is
presented or at a future meeting, to block the addition of additional
information, then obviously it's a very supportable ordinance
amendment.
But to have inclusion of documents, information and materials
will not be accepted by the Board following publication of the agenda
subject to a three-two vote, I got a problem with that.
MR. FEE: And if that is the case, I --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's what it says --
MR. FEE: -- as a public member would want to make sure that
definitely we all have it in this room that we are not prohibited from
doing that, because sometimes that does occur.
And I'm right with you, and I think -- it sounds like everybody's
on the same page.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we need to really eliminate
that, because an argument will be made that this doesn't apply to the
public, but it very well could in the example you just gave. And it
certainly applies to my rights to get information from staff and
included on the agenda, and to any staff member to update their
inclusions as part of the agenda, any Commissioner, any
Constitutional.
So to support Commissioner Coyle's position, the modification
would be limited to documents, information and materials will not be
Page 105
May 10,2011
accepted by the Board following publication of the agenda, it should
be struck, and leave everything else as is.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Tim Nance, and he'll be
followed by Peter Gaddy.
MR. NANCE: Good afternoon, Commissioners, Mr. Chairman.
I believe that anybody that's interested in making the best
decisions and in processing all the available data should have
absolutely no problem accepting additional information at whatever
time it happens to arise.
I think during the time when I volunteered for the government,
each one of you has individually contacted your constituents and said,
I wonder if you're aware that this is on the agenda, and I think this is
something you might have an interest in and something you might
want to come down to the BCC chambers and address. Each one of
you has done that. I know I have done it. Each of you have done that.
This agenda is not very descriptive. If you can imagine what
you go through making your decisions, this is what the public gets.
Imagine if you only saw this agenda that we get out in the hall.
We have absolutely no idea what these agenda items mean. There
cryptic, they're not very descriptive. I think they need a bunch of
major work.
If you truly want to know what the public thinks, you have to let
them know what you're going to consider, and that's not always done.
If in fact you're considering something, I also have been in this
room when the public has come up and brought new information to
you that was significant, and in fact it has changed your mind. Not
often, but not occasion. I think some of those decisions were
important. And I think you should embrace those. I don't think you
should have any maneuver that restricts that from taking place.
As a matter of fact, if somebody walks to your seat where you're
sitting, deliberating on an item and presents you with 100 pages of
information, that's a pretty good sign that everybody doesn't know
Page 106
May 10,2011
what's going on. I don't think that all these packets of information that
are presented to you are frivolous.
Now, you may have already made up your mind about that, and
I've seen the occasion when that was the case. But there are other
occasions when some of this information is significant.
I certainly don't understand, as each of you, most of the majority
of you have served on this Board for up to 10 years, why you would
want to change the rules at this point. Thank you very much.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Peter Gaddy.
MR. GADDY: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
Peter Gaddy.
In lieu of striking the offensive language, I would just like to
throw out the suggestion that an additional paragraph be added as
paragraph five, and that that paragraph state that nothing contained
herein shall abridge the right of a commissioner or the public to
introduce additional information on an agenda item following
publication. That's the only suggestion I have.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, that was your last public speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think what I heard from the three
gentlemen who came up here, as well as what I'm hearing from all of
us is we're all saying the same thing. We want every bit of
information to be available to all of us to make a knowledgeable
decision. We all feel the public has a right to know. The public has a
right to know everything we're doing.
Yet when somebody comes up with a new piece of evidence at
the last minute and they're here, we always are eager to hear it. I can't
tell you how many times I've actually changed my vote right here
because of something the public has said as they're standing here.
And I would have never thought of that until they produced that
information.
Page 107
May 10,2011
On the other hand, if they present something that's probably got a
lot of information in it but it's 60 pages long and I don't have time to
read it, I would prefer to continue it. Not ever stop any information,
just continue it so I have a chance to study, as well as everybody else.
So in keeping with that, I believe we're all saying the same thing,
the public has a right to know every bit of information that we can
produce at a meeting. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And unfortunately I agree with
you, Commissioner Fiala, you're absolutely right, and this provision
does not allow for that, because it basically would limit that
information coming forward by a three-two vote because the Board,
by way of this section here, has the ability not to accept any
information following publication of the agenda. And that's a
problem, because that goes against exactly what you're saying we all
stand for.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you want to go first?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, it's amazing,
absolutely unbelievably amazing the spin that can be put on this.
It simply says that either we can take the evidence that we get and act
on it at that point in time or we continue it the next meeting so we and
the public can be able to assimilate the information. I can't understand
what's so evil about that.
We're not saying we're going to disallow the information, we're
not saying we're going to vote the item down. We're either going to
accept it or we're going to ask for a continuance.
Am I correct? Did I get -- understand it?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why is that not so simple to
Page 108
May 10,2011
understand?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, you do not have
the floor.
And I will read from the ordinance: Whereas the intent of this
change to ensure -- is to ensure that the Board's deliberation of any
matter is based on the most accurate and comprehensive information
available, and to aid the public in understanding the issues presented.
And Mr. Nance, if I got 100 pages dropped on my -- dropped in
front of me during a meeting, I have the option now of saying I can't
read all of this and understand it and make a decision, what are my
options? I can throw it in a pile and ignore it while we continue to
make decisions, or I can say this is possibly very important
information so I would like to make a motion to continue this to our
next meeting so that the public will have a chance to understand this,
I will have a chance to understand it, and we can debate it and be an
informed Board.
So the spin that is being put on this is clearly political in nature
and is giving the public the wrong impression of what this change is to
accomplish. There is absolutely nothing here that would prevent
anyone from dropping a 100-page document in front of us during a
meeting.
Furthermore, there's nothing to prevent anyone from approaching
their commissioner and say will you please continue that item to the
next meeting or will you pull it off the consent agenda and put it on a
regular agenda so we can have a full airing -- that happens all the time.
And so none of those things are being changed. We're actually
improving the process despite all the spin that's being put on this
thing.
Commissioner Hiller, and we have -- we have a motion and a
second to approve this thing.
Go ahead, Commissioner Hiller.
Page 109
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: There is absolutely no spin.
The ability to continue items as a result of new information being
presented has always been the case. We have the ability as a Board to
vote to continue an item for whatever reason we see fit.
The issue here is as stated. The wording in this ordinance, which
is wording that would block material from coming forward
specifically as follows: Documents, information and materials will
not be accepted by the Board following publication of the agenda.
And the only way that would be reversed would be by a
three-two vote. That's unacceptable.
If you delete that sentence and leave the rest as is, then it serves
the objective of providing information as readily as possible, as much
as possible, to the benefit of the commissioners who are deciding and
the public who have the right to know.
Leaving that in there has the opposite effect. There is no spin.
The spin is in that sentence and the three-two vote.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Attorney, how long have you
been practicing law?
MR. KLATZKOW: That's not the issue, Commissioner. It's--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Have you been practicing law longer
than Commissioner Hiller?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: How long have you been
practicing?
MR. KLATZKOW: 1983, ma'am.
I don't think taking that out really does anything one way or the
other. The purpose of the language is to make it clear that the policy
here is that we get things in on time for publication so that everybody
can see it. And that's the policy.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not what it says.
MR. KLATZKOW: May I finish?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
Page 110
May 10,2011
MR. KLATZKOW: The Board then has the ability to either
continue the item or to hear it. If you wish to take that sentence out, I
don't think that changes anything one way or the other.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have a motion, and I'm going
to call the motion. I'll take Commissioner Henning's comment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think what's important here is
what Mr. Klatzkow said, and how I'm going to vote on this item. He
said the person submitting the item on the agenda shall support -- or
have, you know, supporting documents as much as possible. He didn't
say it prevented anybody else from providing that material.
And if that is the intent, and if that's how we're going to conduct
ourselves, then the public or any commissioner can have additional
information.
MR. KLATZKOW: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's the important part.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have a motion by
Commissioner Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala for approval.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Anybody opposed by like sign?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes 4-1 with--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'd like to explain why I'm --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Commissioner Hiller dissenting.
Let me get the vote on record, Commissioner Hiller.
Okay, now go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We're governed by the plain
language of the law. Your interpretation or what the intent is is
irrelevant to what's written here. You have voted to allow this Board
Page 111
May 10,2011
by a three-two vote to block information from being presented on the
record once the agenda is published. That's unacceptable.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that's an absolutely false statement,
so please do not be tricked by these little games that are being played
here.
So okay, where do we go now, County Manager?
Item #lOF
RECOMMENDA nON TO ACCEPT A BRONZE BUST OF
FORMER COUNTY MANAGER JAMES V. MUDD FROM
ABBAS ASLI (FORMER LANDLORD OF PROPERTY
APPRAISER'S OFFICE BUILDING) FOR PLACEMENT IN
THE JAMES V. MUDD EMERGENCY SERVICES CENTER-
APPROVED W/IMPUT FROM THE MUDD F AMIL Y
MR. OCHS: Sir, you go to item 10.F, which was previously item
16.E.3 on your agenda. It's a recommendation to accept the bronze
bust of former county manager, James V. Mudd from Abbas Asli for
placement in the James V. Mudd Emergency Services Center. This
item was moved at Commissioner Hiller's request.
Mr. Camp is here to present.
MR. CAMP: For the record, Skip Camp.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Skip, hold on a minute.
Commissioner Hiller, do you have any questions about this item?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I do.
You know, I think this is a very significant item. Mr. Mudd
made a very material contribution to the county. And if someone is
willing to donate a bust, which we don't have the specifics about and
we need the information because obviously we can't approve
something we know nothing about, then I think it deserves the proper
public recognition of, you know, such an act honoring, you know, a
Page 112
May 10,2011
gentleman who made, as I said, a very positive and significant
contribution.
And I pulled it forward because I couldn't believe that something
like this was buried in consent.
And also, I wanted to know, you know, what we're approving
and that it meets with, you know, what we find acceptable to
commemorate him.
MR. CAMP: Well, since the bust has not yet been designed or
constructed, staff recommends acceptance of the bust contingent upon
its final form. The donor did say that he would work closely with the
Mudd family on that design also.
You can accept it on contingency -- you can accept it. And then
when the final design is done, we'll be happy to show it to you, and if
you have an issue with it, then we can bring it back on the agenda. If
not, he can go through with the construction.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Great. Thank you.
So I guess --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I agree. I mean, I would like to
hear from the Mudd family whether it is acceptable.
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I mean, I really think -- I
think we should have a formal presentation and, you know, the design
should be presented and we should have the Mudd family here and I
think it should be done in a, you know, very formal fashion to -- and
then properly accepted, if the design is, you know, acceptable to all.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: What the staff has told me in response to
my question concerning this is essentially this: This item has been
moved to the regular agenda. Staff is simply looking for initial BCC
approval to accept this gift.
Staff intends to bring final design and related specifications back
to the BCC for final approval before the project would be
commissioned. Since the bust has not yet been designed or
Page 113
May 10,2011
constructed, staff recommends acceptance of the bust contingent upon
BCC final approval.
MR. CAMP: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's been read into the record, that is
what you have informed me in writing, and that seems to conform to
the desires of both Commissioner Hiller --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'll make that as a motion --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So there's a motion by Commissioner
Hiller to approve the staffs recommendation as stated, as we have
stated on the record. It's seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Understanding that we're going
to get some input from the family, right?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Absolutely. That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would hate to --
MR. CAMP: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. The family will be crucial in
making that decision, in my opinion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you know who the sculptor is
going to be?
MR. CAMP: No, it has not been commissioned yet.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
Page 114
,"~,.u__._.-~.,~.." ,..".~.,.._.._,._ ...... "~_____.__~_'"""'~
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously. Thank you.
Item #10G
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO
PETITION GOVERNOR SCOTT TO EXTEND THE "RURAL
AREA OF CRITICAL ECONOMIC CONCERN" DESIGNATION
A WARDED TO FLORIDA'S HEARTLAND REGIONAL
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE, INC. REGION
ANOTHER 5- YEARS AND TO KEEP THE COMMUNITY OF
IMMOKALEE WITHIN THE SOUTH CENTRAL RURAL AREA
OF CRITICAL ECONOMIC CONCERN DESIGNATION. THIS
ITEM IS BEING PLACED ON THE AGENDA AT THE REQUEST
OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF COLLIER
COUNTY - MOTION TO CONTINUE - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to Item 10.G, which
was formerly 16.A.7. It's a recommendation to approve a resolution to
petition Governor Scott to extend the rural area of critical economic
concern designation awarded to Florida's Heartland Regional
Economic Development Initiative, Incorporated region, another five
years, and to keep the community of Immokalee within the south
central rural area of critical economic concern designation.
This item was moved to the regular agenda at Commissioner
Hiller's request.
Ms. Nemecek is here to answer any question or present
Page 115
May 10,2011
additional information.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, the reason I moved this from
consent to the general agenda is because no backup was provided.
And I did ask for the backup subsequent to the publication of the
agenda, and to this day it hasn't been forthcoming.
I need to understand the boundaries of this map, how this -- how
these boundaries compare to what existed, why these boundaries
extend beyond the Immokalee urban area, and who will be benefited
as a result.
The other thing I learned yesterday, and this came to all of us as
an e-mail from the Clerk's office, is that -- was it the Governor's --
would you like to fill us in?
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Hiller, for the record, Crystal
Kinzel with the Clerk's Office.
We received an e-mail from the Governor's office asking us to
execute this. I assumed, as in the role of the Clerk, Mr. Brock is
asking me to forward that to all Commissioners for your direction.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you explain what that is?
MS. KINZEL: It was a Memorandum of Understanding and an
agreement, and signed by the Governor's Office.
And then the second piece of information required the Board's
execution and signature.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And it related to the economic
zone that would be defined by the maps that --
MS. KINZEL: There wasn't any map attached to that particular
agreement. It did refer to the rural area of critical concern.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I guess one ofthe concerns I
have then is that in fact this rural area of critical concern described in
this Memorandum of Understanding is one in the same as being
proposed here today, because --
MS. KINZEL: I do not know that.
Page 116
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It should be -- I would assume that
it should be an exhibit to that Memorandum of Understanding.
So I have a number of questions as I listed out, and I'd like the
information.
MS. NEMECEK: I asked for the validating map from the
Governor's Office. I haven't gotten it yet. I have one that is one that
we use. There's a -- so I can show you what I have. But I'd rather
have the map, the final map from the Governor. Because the Governor
is who actually has the authority to designate the boundary for the
rural area of critical economic concern. Our participation in it is
validated by the Memorandum of Agreement, which will come
subsequent to this resolution.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we don't really -- we don't
know what the Governor has approved as the boundaries at this point?
MS. NEMECEK: This is the boundary that I have, but I haven't
gotten validation from the Governor's Office that that's exactly the
map that they have in their office.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So shouldn't we continue this item
until we do have validation and where we can attach the maps to the
Memorandum of Understanding, and this can be brought forward as a
comprehensive package?
MS. NEMECEK: When it was originally approved -- I'll just put
this up here. I don't know if you want to see it or not. But it's
basically your -- obviously I've never used that before.
It's the enterprise zone and the federal empowerment zone
boundary, as well as abutting the urban boundary. It does not go
outside the urban boundary to the south but it does to the north,
because it's equivalent to the enterprise zone and the empowerment
zone.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: When you come back with the
state approved map, could you please highlight who is being benefited
beyond Immokalee?
Page 117
May 10,2011
One of the concerns I have is, you know, Immokalee has not seen
the economic development it has hoped for. And while I do
understand surrounding area benefitting Immokalee, where we're
spreading these incentives where we want to economically develop
Immokalee beyond the Immokalee borders, I think it has the effect of
diluting the benefits to Immokalee proper.
MS. NEMECEK: Yeah, it has to be contiguous. Keep in mind
that this is just our portion of it. We are actually part of a larger, what's
called the south central rural area of critical economic concern. There
are three areas of rural critical economic concern in the State of
Florida. You have to abut. You can't skip over land. So that's why
the empowerment zone boundary was used, because the empowerment
zone actually includes both Collier County and Hendry County in that.
So if you're going to remove that, then you're going to lose the
benefit of participating in the rural area of critical economic concern,
because they're not going to hop over.
And that's the same as Palm Beach County. Palm Beach County
also participates in this, and the areas are contiguous as part of that as
well.
But I can get that clarification. And we can bring back both this
resolution, as well as the Memorandum of Agreement, which Crystal
had gotten, in one fell swoop with the next meeting.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think that would be the best,
because I think we're really dealing with a lack of information here
today.
MS. NEMECEK: I'm pretty sure this is accurate. But again,
I wanted to validate that with whatever Governor had in there.
Because they might have -- they might have changed it when they
reauthorized it as well --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the Memorandum of
Understanding isn't part of the public record either.
MS. NEMECEK: We have this on the agenda. The next item
Page 118
May 10,2011
would have been brought back. But we can put both of them on the
agenda at the same time next time for the next time, just to expedite
the process.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Henning, Henning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Henning, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to continue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion to continue by
Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we do have a public speaker.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I do have something to ask
also.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You have a question to ask. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because I agreed with
Commissioner Hiller on this. I really felt that we did need more
information. And although I tried to seek as much as I could
beforehand, I really didn't know even where to go. So I'm kind of glad
it's going to be brought back, because then we'll have the benefit of,
you know, a better understanding, how will we benefit, what is the
purpose, how will the other counties benefit, is this a cooperative
effort, all types of things like that, so that we get an overall picture of
what we're doing.
MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, your public speaker waived.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just one quick question, please.
One more time, emphasizing the timeline. If this waits two weeks,
does it have any value for us to be able to send a letter at that point in
time?
MS. NEMECEK: It's fine. I mean, the authorization has already
Page 119
May 10,2011
been approved by the Governor. The Governor has the authority to
set the boundary. This is our participation to have a seat at the table as
part of the process.
And, you know, I would suspect that if you don't do the
Memorandum of Agreement then they would remove Immokalee from
participation. And at some point in time that I can work with them to
let them know what's in the process. And we should be fine.
And keep in mind too, this is the Memorandum of Agreement,
you already have one in place, which expired with the last one. So
that's why you have to re-authorize it. You approved a Memorandum
of Agreement in 2006 to participate in this program. We've also had
several resolutions on the BCC agenda, which you've approved, to
participate in the Catalyst Program. That's part of the RACEC as well.
So this is an ongoing program that's been in place for a number of
years. It's just reauthorizing participation in it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How many speakers do we have?
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we had one public speaker, and she's just
waived to me.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right, all in favor, please
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion to continue passes 4-1 with
Commissioner Coletta dissenting.
Okay, that brings us to communications.
Item #14
Page 120
May 10,2011
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. OCHS: Sir, first you have public comments on general
topics, item 14, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we have any public comments on
general topics?
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir, we do.
The first speaker will be Tim Hancock, and he'll be followed by
Ray Bass.
MR. HANCOCK: Good afternoon. I scratched out good
mornmg.
I'm appearing before you today on behalf of Jerry and Kimberly
Blocker. They are owners of property at 1123 Alachua Street in
Immokalee.
The purpose of my appearing today is to request direction from
this body, as provided for in LDC Section 2.03.07.G.6, in an effort to
hopefully bring closure to a longstanding Code Enforcement issue that
started as far back as 2001.
You have coming before you in two weeks an amended
Immokalee Area Master Plan. Certain provisions of that plan may
have an adverse impact on property owners who own mobile homes
that may be destroyed by storms or fires in the future, as well as
owners of a mobile home park. Now, I just found out today that the
version that I --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Excuse me just a minute.
Gentlemen, if you're going to have a conference, please step out
in the hallway.
I'm sorry, Tim, go ahead.
MR. HANCOCK: If I want to be ignored, I can go home.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, that's all right. You don't get paid
if you go home.
MR. HANCOCK: That's true, that's true.
Page 121
May 10,2011
But there may be some adverse impacts. Now I just found out
today that the document, the Immokalee Area Master Plan document I
downloaded from the website is no longer current, so I'll have to
review what actually is current and get back with you on that.
But in November 2007, the Blockers appeared before the Code
Enforcement Board in response to a zoning violation.
And as that all went forward, and I have no intention of going
into detail and rehearing those things for the simple reason that it's
treading the same water twice. But it's always been the policy of this
Board, for as long as I can remember, that if you can encourage and
find resolution to outstanding code issues in a fair and equitable
manner, that that's what we're going to do, particularly in lieu of
taking someone's private property.
The purpose of my request today really is to ask this body to give
direction to staff to permit the Blockers to take advantage of one of
two paths in the Land Development Code with respect to properties
and nonconforming mobile home overlay districts, and to utilize one
of those two paths to find resolution to this and get out of the courts,
stop spending money on things that are counterproductive and see if
we can't find a final solution to this.
There's a lot of history there, and I'll be the first to admit I don't
know all of it. There have been missteps on one or both sides at every
point along the way. But I'm trying to find a new start here and back
it up just a few steps.
And so the two options available that remain in the Land
Development Code are: One, to direct the Code Enforcement Board
to hear testimony regarding the current us of the property as a
nonconforming use specifically. And if so determined, to have the
SIP process made available to them. I'm told by Diane Flagg that they
do not have jurisdiction in that arena. Mayor may not be the case.
I'm not an attorney. But that is one of the options available in the
Land Development Code to us.
Page 122
May 10,2011
The second option is to direct staff to work with the Blockers on
achieving a settlement agreement. And that settlement agreement
could allow for, whether it be the application of SIP, whether it is a
rezone, if it is or is not appropriate.
But most importantly, a settlement agreement could give this
Board the option of looking at things that could be tailored to how this
use can ultimately fit into the master plan instead oftreating it as if it's
a precedent setting case that can be applied elsewhere.
So the settlement agreement certainly has its attractiveness, and
that would come back to this Board.
Either avenue I believe is supported by your code. It would have
the effect of stopping the legal expenditures on both sides, hopefully
bring a final resolution to this. And absent that resolution, the concept
of foreclosing on property where 130 farm workers call home is
probably not a desirous position.
So my request today is simply to ask you to give direction if you
feel it's appropriate in one or two of those directions. And I thank you
for your time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Ray Bass.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wait a minute --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry -- you have a
comment, you've got some lights.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, okay. We've had code
cases, we've been to court twice. At some point in time we're going to
have to resolve this issue.
On the 24th we have the master plan coming back to us.
Hopefully we're not going to have any problems with it. But then
again, whether we do or don't really doesn't end the issue with the
Blockers.
Page 123
May 10,2011
County Attorney, some of the suggestions that were made here,
are they doable to bring back for consideration at the next meeting?
MR. KLA TZKOW: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Not maybe?
MR. KLA TZKOW: Not maybe. The issue here is not a non-
conforming use, the issue here is an illegal use. One of the options
that was presented to the Board was to amend the Immokalee Area
Master Plan to allow this type of use in that area.
The -- my understanding is that the CRA has reviewed that.
They don't want to make that recommendation, that it is not in the
Immokalee Area Master Plan. This Board in fact voted against that as
a possible resolution. That is the only resolution you're going to have
on this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Forgive me, but I mean, at some
point in time there will be a settlement, right?
MR. KLA TZKOW: At some point in time we're foreclosing on
the property. It's an illegal use. Unless this Board wants to amend the
Immokalee Area Master Plan to specifically allow this type of use at
that location where they're currently not allowed, all right, unless the
courts tell us no, we're headed towards foreclosure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, in addition to the use of
the land, there's also a half million dollar fine in foreclosure that's over
the top of them right now. Would that be a settlement agreement,
those two factors?
MR. KLA TZKOW: The Board -- code enforcement liens are the
property of the Board of County Commissioners. You can waive that
at any time, in whole or in part, all right, that's up to you. That doesn't
stop the issue that you have an illegal use at that property.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Tim, hearing what the County
Attorney said, is there something maybe that I didn't phrase the
question right?
I know there was two parts to it, two suggestions. And the
Page 124
May 10,2011
answer with no hesitation in the response, it was just plain no.
Is there something that the County Attorney and possibly myself
is missing in what you're looking to do?
MR. HANCOCK: Well, unfortunately I'm not going to play
legal ping-pong with the County Attorney, he's better educated than I
am.
But I will say this: You have in your current Land Development
Code three options, and one is a settlement agreement. The fact that
the Code Enforcement Board and the courts have ratified that there is
an illegal use on the property, whether I agree or disagree with it
doesn't matter. How that absolutely precludes this Board from any
consideration of a settlement agreement is something I fail to
understand.
MR. KLATZKOW: Because the Comprehensive Plan forbids
residential use in an industrial area. I don't know what else there is to
say about it.
MR. HANCOCK: Well, a settlement agreement could include
direction to amend that.
MR. KLATZKOW: The Board had that issue before and voted
against that.
MR. HANCOCK: So the only option is foreclosure is what
you're being told today. That's the only option available to you,
there's no other options on the table.
MR. KLATZKOW: The other option is to amend the Immokalee
Area Master Plan to authorize the use. It's one or the other.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I took some time to
go out to Immokalee and really try to understand this issue. And I
think I got a grasp on it. This is not the only illegal use of a mobile
home park in Immokalee. This is not the only case. This case will set
precedence on other properties, mobile home parks in Immokalee.
Furthermore, it was stated by staff that the applicant had time to
Page 125
May 10,2011
do an SIP to come into compliance. If it's an illegal use, you can't do
that, okay?
I mean, you -- what he was told, staff told me this, that the Code
Enforcement Board said do an SIP and it will go away. He went to do
an SIP and he was told do a Growth Management Plan Amendment
and then do a rezone, rezone your property for that use.
So there's conflicting information being said obviously. And it's
going to be an issue not just for the Blockers but other people in
Immokalee. And I will not support the Immokalee Master Plan period.
And I'll do everything I can until we resolve this, because it will create
other problems down the road.
So my suggestion would be the Planning Commission made
recommendations of language to put in the Immokalee Master Plan.
That language needs to be brought back to the Board for their
consideration. Whether that goes back to the Planning Commission, I
don't know, but the Immokalee Area Master Plan Committee removed
that language.
And if you take a look at our ordinance, it is the Planning
Commission that makes recommendations. In fact, it's in the state
statutes that the Planning Commission makes the recommendations to
the Board of Commissioners. They did that. It was removed before it
even got to us. And that needs to be put back in the language or sent
back down to the Planning Commission prior to consideration of
approval of the master plan.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You know, I -- I have a problem even
discussing this issue here today. It wasn't advertised. A lot of the
stakeholders are not here. What kind of resolution do you expect us to
make, or come to when the people who are primarily affected by it
have not even been informed that we're going to have this discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we're talking about our
future meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, then that can be placed on the
Page 126
May 10,2011
agenda by any commissioner sitting here, okay? So I don't understand
what we're doing here.
MR. HANCOCK: I'm sorry. Mr. Chairman, we met with
Commissioner Coletta yesterday and had a discussion with him, and
he suggested we come forward under public comment today and ask
for some direction, which is why we're here.
What I'm actually trying to do is get out of the way of the IMP.
As we discussed with Commissioner Coletta, there are two issues
here. They are getting mashed together. And I was trying to find some
way to separate them. So that's why I'm here today, Commissioner. I
realize it was last minute, and I do apologize for that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I just don't like the idea of
discussing a very, very important subject that affects not only the
Immokalee Area Master Plan but a community without having all
those people here and informed that we're going to be having this
discussion. Because we've just gone through a lot of discussion about
if information is presented to us at the last minute that we previously
didn't have, that we would either continue it or deliberate it. And this
is a situation where I think we ought to continue it.
As a matter of fact, I think it should come back on the agenda as
a specific agenda item.
Can we see if we can't dispose of that -- we can't make the kind
of decision here today and be fair to the public.
MR. HANCOCK: No, sir, I'm --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're not making any decision
today.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, yes, you are making a decision.
You're suggesting and you're discussing ways in which this can be
settled. And when you're discussing ways it could be settled, you
need to have all of the stakeholders in the room.
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So that's my feeling.
Page 127
May 10,2011
MR. HANCOCK: My request today was to try and define a
path, if there is one, not necessarily to have the settlement discussions
themselves. You need to know what road you're going to drive on
before you get started, and that's really what I was trying to seek
today, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I understand. But if you get us to tell
you what road to take, imagine the surprise of those people who were
never told we were having this discussion. And they're here next time.
They're going to wonder you know, how did we make that decision
and why did we make that decision. That's bothersome to me.
But we have two commissioners who want to speak. Do we have
any other public speakers?
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir, we do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll have, I think Commissioner
Coletta --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Hiller.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Hiller was next. Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, this is obviously a very
important issue, especially in light of what Commissioner Henning
just said, that he toured the area and that the Blocker situation is one
that's repeating itself out there.
The Land Development Code does not address -- or I should say
does not distinguish between illegal nonconforming and legal non-
conforming as it relates to the permission to participate in the SIP.
And as such, I also have to state that the Planning Commission
voted 9-0 to consider this issue in the Immokalee Master Plan. And,
you know, they viewed it as an issue that was inextricably intertwined
with the planning of that community.
This matter should be brought back. I think it should be placed
on the agenda. I think we should evaluate the options as proposed
through the SIP. I don't think you can separate this issue from the
Immokalee Master Plan. I will not vote to support the Immokalee
Page 128
May 10,2011
Master Plan till this issue is resolved, because it doesn't only affect the
Blockers, it affects similarly situated properties like the Blockers'
property .
And so I would like to suggest, as Commissioner Coyle has
suggested, that this be brought forward for formal -- as an agenda item
for formal public discussion to see how this can be addressed.
But as far as separating it from the plan, I'm not sure that can be
done at this point. And that public discussion maybe will help me
understand how that could be achieved. But at this point I don't see it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And I didn't mean to
cause any great discomfort, I'm just trying to explore to see what other
avenues were there.
Eventually we're going to reach a point where there will be a
settlement. Meanwhile, you know, the clock's still ticking. Hopefully
all the animosity will be put aside so we can perform like we have
performed in all settlements except for the Larry Park one, whereby
we accepted whatever it was for cost and everybody went their merry
way. I was kind of hoping we might be getting close to that point.
Obviously we're not. We've still got people swinging battle axes.
I was hoping there had been a slightly different reception, we might be
able to go down a path that would not compromise what the people in
Immokalee were asking for, both at the -- when they voted as the
Immokalee Master Plan Advisory Group and then when they voted
again as the CRA.
And my whole objective is to try to follow the will of the people
in Immokalee and the people that were at both those meetings were
representative of the people of Immokalee. And it wasn't something
where you could sit back and say, well my, this was a contentious
issue and the vote was close. It wasn't.
So, I mean, it's quite a dilemma to have to deal with. Do you
give the people in that area that are dealing with the situation the right
Page 129
May 10,2011
to represent themselves, or do we as a commission, through whatever
bullying that we want to do, try to force certain issues upon them that
have nothing to do with where they're going. Obviously we're at an
Impasse.
If we hear this again, I think we should just hear it when the
master plan comes back and everybody can make their argument at
that point in time. We already -- I think the die has been cast. It looks
like for sure. I mean, it's great to have that out of the way, rather than
the guesswork of do we have a fourth vote to make the will of the
people in Immokalee whole. Obviously we don't.
So we don't have to lose any sleep over the fact that will that
fourth vote suddenly appear. We've had people that made up their
minds that they're going to go their own direction for whatever reason
they find just. And I'm not going to question their validity for their
reasons. It might be valid in their own minds. I can't get my arms
around it where I could say, okay, this is all right, let's go forward.
I was kind of hoping we could reach an agreement as far as what
the fine was and what the rest of the terms were and be able to get on
with life. And if they wanted to come back with an amendment
somewheres down the road to the master plan, that we might be able
to come up with something that would incorporate everything that
would protect the community and get a community buy-in. But
obviously we're not even close to that point.
It was me that exercised -- and I apologize for any discomfort I
caused you, Tim, or the County Attorney or my fellow Commissioners
or anyone in the audience, but I had to give it a try.
MR. HANCOCK: Every now and then a Hail Mary actually
works.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, could I -- I just make a suggestion?
This is your district, Commissioner Coletta. Would it be
appropriate to leave this in your hands as to when you'd like to see
anything come back with respect to this issue? To either consider it
Page 130
May 10,2011
when the Immokalee plan comes forward or --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But I propose, unless something
dramatic happens between now and the next meeting, that when the
item comes forward, I'm going to make a motion for continuance
indefinitely. Too much time and effort has been put into this plan to
ever have it put in jeopardy so people have to start at ground zero over
an issue that is small in comparison to the whole.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just have a question of
Commissioner Coletta, if you don't mind.
I realize they've been working on this for eight years. And I
realize you had a lot of community input. Was their main -- was one
of their objectives in this master plan to try and rid Immokalee of
unsafe, unhealthy slums? Is that what was going on there?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't want to put words in
everybody's mouths. I mean, the discussion at both meetings was
fairly limited. And the vote was just up or down. And, you know, my
assumption would be is they're looking for something a little more
than they got today. They're hoping that the master plan will take them
at that next level of living that they don't have at this point in time.
But I've got to be careful, because the discussion was quite
limited, and I don't want to put words in people's mouths. I've known
them for 25 years now, and I still don't feel that I'm going to quote
somebody when they didn't make a specific quote to give that
direction --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The reason I asked that question is I
-- you know, that's the impression I had gotten. But you're right, if
that is the impression and we would -- and we would vote to not
accept it and then continue to foster those same conditions, then that
says the Immokalee area can't improve itself really, because they don't
have a master plan in place; is that right?
Page 131
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: To a point it is. Regardless of
what you got in substandard housing in Immokalee, and it has
improved considerably over the years through the effort of this
Commission, most of the substandard housing has been eliminated.
We haven't done anything -- we haven't had a push in the last three
years. But there's been several pushes we put forward. We got
stopped once by a lawsuit. But a lot has been accomplished. I assume
that we'll make a lot of accomplishments in the future as we go
forward too.
But once again, you know, the only assumption -- the reason you
go through a master plan change of the depth and latitude that
Immokalee went through was to try to improve the community. I
mean, you can draw parallels wherever you want. The only thing I
can go by is the end results of what they voted for.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have another public speaker,
don't we?
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have a few more speakers. The next
speaker is Ray Bass, and he'll be followed by Bill Vaughn.
And they're going to speak to Mamie Street.
MR. VAUGHN: Yeah, Ray Bass--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You have to get on the mic, sir, please.
MR. VAUGHN: Ray Bass had to leave. So what I'm -- I've got
a couple of quotes from him that he gave me about this whole
situation.
But this dates back to two weeks ago when we discussed Mamie
Street and the museum. And Mr. Coletta was going to make some
kind of statement today. And actually, he may answer some of these
things that we're talking about. I hope.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We'll see. It's more fact finding
than its statements.
MR. VAUGHN: But the thing that I'm concerned about is last
Page 132
May 10,2011
week we had about nine -- or two weeks ago we had nine speakers
that were going to speak. We heard Mr. Coletta, and I think there was
one other, then Lynn McMillan from the museum was going to speak
and we stopped there with the fact that we all thought that it was
concluded that Mamie Street was a public road and that we should
investigate it.
And of course nothing's happened. And I guess what I'd like to
do is just read -- because what I had is a statement two weeks ago that
tells you my position and also my wife's position. Because we're on --
we're at 355 Mamie Street. And my wife Pat and I have been going in
that road for 51 years. And all of a sudden they come in and they dig
the road out. So we have no road. We don't actually have an address
anymore. If somebody wants to deliver something to us, they have to
come through the community next to us, they have to go under a
building and then come into our house.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask a quick question before
you go on? Can I ask who you are and who -- because, I mean --
MR. VAUGHN: I'm Bill Vaughn.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
MR. VAUGHN: Everybody at the County knows me.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Except me. I'm the
newbie.
MR. VAUGHN: But anyway -- yeah, Bill Vaughn. I'm at 355
Mamie Street. So let me read -- if I can, can I read what --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You have a total of three minutes, so it's
best to get going.
MR. VAUGHN: I was hoping I'd get raised too.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No.
MR. VAUGHN: No. Okay.
Well, you know who I am now. But what we're -- our family has
been assessing -- accessing the property at 350 Mamie Street for 51
years. About six years ago, Florida Georgia Groves purchased the
Page 133
May 10,2011
Blue Heron property and indicated that they were making plans to
develop the property.
I approached them on providing us with an easement to our
property. They initially said they were going to provide us with an
access through their property, and we expressed that we need an
easement access with two of their -- discussed it, I'm sorry, discussed
it with two of their project managers. And they always indicated that
we were going to get access.
And then we also recently have discussed it with the owner of the
property. And we've just really had a tough time trying to get access.
And combined in that is the fact that they came in on a surprise
tactic on the 14th of April and they fenced all the property in. And
fencing was installed and Mamie Street was removed, dug up, actually
dug up, a public road, or a road that hasn't been really decided whether
it's a public road or not, with no prior notice to any of the property
owners. We are the only private residence on this road, and nobody
came to us and said, hey, we're planning this and we're going to try to
give you access. It was we sort of had to find our own way to our
property .
As a result of them fencing the property and digging up Mamie
Street, we no longer have direct access to our property. Florida
George Groves did install a fence so we can access the property
through a neighbor's property. And thanks to our neighbors, Parkway
Condo Association allowed us --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Your time has expired. I'll give you a
little more time, but let me tell you a couple things, okay, and maybe
we'll get it on the record a little faster.
We know Mamie has been torn up. We know a fence has been
installed there. We know what the owner of that property has done.
We think it is reprehensible. I do.
I don't think there is any doubt that that is a public road and has
been a public road for long, long time. There was a post office, a U.S.
Page 134
May 10,2011
Federal Post Office at the end of that road. So anybody who tells me
that the post office was on a private road has got a lot of explaining to
do.
MR. VAUGHN: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we know all these things. And I don't
like it at all. And I know that some of the other commissioners don't
like it either. But we have a process we've got to go through. We just
can't tap the gavel and say solve it. We have to go through a legal
process, and that's what we're trying to do right now.
And Commissioner Coletta I presume is going to give us a status
report later in this meeting.
But we know all the things that have happened down there.
Most of us have seen it. So if -- you just need to know that we hope to
get something done with this and get it done as quickly as we possibly
can. We know the game the builder is playing here, we know that it
will be unsuccessful, but we can't give you an overnight solution.
We're doing the best we can.
MR. VAUGHN: Well, at least somebody should get back to us
and let us know what's going on. Because we've been doing this for
like almost a month, and that's unacceptable. Somebody should be
able to go to these people and say at least you have to give them direct
access to your property. And I know it's a legal situation.
And let me, if I can, can I read these two quotes from Mr. Bass,
Ray Bass?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
MR. VAUGHN: He gave me this to -- the letter two weeks ago,
Mr. Archibald's letter is not conclusive about whether Mamie Street
meets the requirements for an implied dedication, rather the letter
raises the question of an implied dedication. A thorough investigation
should be conducted to determine if the facts exist for the circuit court
to rule that Mamie Street is a dedicated public road by implication.
And the thing is, we need to move on it, because we've got a
Page 135
May 10,2011
house. If you went home tonight and your house was fenced in and
somebody told you you've got to drive through your neighbor's yard to
get to your house, I don't think you'd be too happy.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's crazy. Absolutely crazy.
MR. VAUGHN: And plus, on top of that, of course you've got
the museum down there, and that's a business. And they're not making
any money. And people come through Chokoloskee looking for the
museum, and if you're walking your dog or out, you know, you've got
to tell them it's closed, and everybody thinks it's crazy.
But I just wanted to make sure that everybody knows that we're
still there and that we're the only residents there. So as far as the
museum, it's bad that they're cut off because they're a money-making
business and also a historical landmark --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we understand.
MR. VAUGHN: -- but it's not like you got to drive home. What
if we had kids? Fortunately, we're retired and -- our trash we have to
pull out to another road. All of our deliveries, somebody else has to
come and show them how to get to the house.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We got it.
MR. VAUGHN: We don't have a street.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We've got it, okay. We understand it.
And we're trying, okay.
MR. VAUGHN: And please communicate with us.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta is going to do that
for you.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, the next speaker is Rich --
MR. VAUGHN: He's laughing. It's not funny.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, it's not funny. He was just laughing
that I had delegated it to him. That's what he was laughing about. He
wasn't laugh --
MR. VAUGHN: We've been told from the very beginning, the
developer told us that we didn't know there was a house back there. I
Page 136
May 10,2011
had somebody else tell me, oh, we thought that was an abandoned
house, you know. And there's a nice driveway, palm trees.
So if you all want to come over and take a look at what we're
doing, come over and see what's happening.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much. Thank
you.
MR. VAUGHN: Thanks a lot.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who's the next speaker?
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, the next speaker is Richard Grant, and the
subject is Smallwood Store.
MR. GRANT: I will be quick.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good.
MR. GRANT: Commissioners, I'm Dick Grant. I'm an attorney.
I represent the Ted Smallwood Store.
I'm not going to say anything. I'm here -- I know Commissioner
Coletta is planning to say something about this at some point. And
Lynn McMillan, who runs the Smallwood Store is here with me.
We'll be happy to answer questions or add comments. But thank you
for your support.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I have a question. Dick, what are you
doing to straighten this out from your end?
MR. GRANT: Well, Commissioner, we haven't filed suit yet on
behalf of the store. It may come to that, to be very honest with you.
My nature is, I don't run out and file suits first, I usually try to solve
problems other ways. This one sounds like it may be something that
requires a lawsuit.
I know that Mr. Vaughn, his attorney Ray Bass has already filed
a suit. We were hoping that the county was going to be able to prevail
here and talk some common sense into these folks. And I know
Commissioner Coletta can talk about that. He's got his own views of
whether he thinks he's successful. And I think we'll see.
We met yesterday, and Commissioner asked me if! would make
Page 13 7
May 10,2011
contact with these people again. I did talk to them once. I talked to
their attorney once two weeks ago. We had a civil discussion. We
didn't agree on anything else, but we had a civil discussion.
And I called him again yesterday and I've been trading calls with
him, but he at least did call me back, so I may talk to him yet today.
But my conversation at that point got nowhere, which is they weren't
going to do anything.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, that's helpful, yes.
Commissioner Hiller, do you have a comment or question?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask you a question? It
would sound like you would be filing -- if this is in fact a public road
and it's a county road as a public road, would you be suing the county
to restore the road and then the county would have to sue the
developer in contribution?
MR. GRANT: I don't think so. Ifwe were going to file a suit, it
would be seeking two things for sure: One, a common law way of
necessity, which arises when you have a common parent tract and the
piece that's landlocked got landlocked, because I believe that's the
facts here.
Two, a prescriptive easement, which is sort of the counterpart to
adverse possession, except it takes 20 years and it's more difficult to
prove. But sounds to me like that's possible.
We might seek declaratory relief that in fact it is a public road,
which obviously would inure to the benefit of the public. Would we
have to make the county a defendant in that? I don't know. The
County Attorney and I can talk about that.
But we have two good theories that a private owner has for sure
here, would be where we would go.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: From the standpoint of a
prescriptive easement, it would be for everybody who used that road
to get to Smallwood or strictly for the benefit of the owners of
Smallwood to access their property?
Page 138
May 10,2011
MR. GRANT: Well, I think if the Smallwood Store sought the
court to declare it to be a prescriptive easement, that would sort of
inherently only be for its own benefit. I don't think the store has any
objection to the public using it. The public clearly has used it, as
Commissioner Coyle just said.
It's my understanding it was a post office from somewhere in the
late nineteen-teens to about 1972.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I used to go there all the time to mail my
letters.
MR. GRANT: So I don't understand the thinking of these folks.
But it is what it is right now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's not productive--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- for us to question you about what your
legal strategy is. It's best if you do it -- deal with it yourselves. But
I'm going to take a 10-minute break.
And how many more speakers do we have?
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have three more speakers. The first
two are on the same subject. And then there's a last speaker who's on
general comments.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That would be Mr. Fee, I
presume, right?
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, why don't we have a 10-minute
break. When we come back, I will ask Commissioner Coletta if he
can provide his update now so that that might answer some of the
questions of the other speakers who are interested in talking about this.
MR. GRANT: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
(Recess. )
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're back in session now.
We're going to ask Commissioner Coletta to provide a report on
Page 139
May 10,2011
the Smallwood Store and Mamie Street situation. And then we will
resume with the public speakers.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, here we go. And Jeff,
don't be afraid to jump in. This thing has got more moving parts than
a Black Forest cuckoo clock. I'm telling you, wherever you turn you
find something that's a little different.
But here's the gist of where everything went. The meeting on
4/26, you asked me to go on a fact-finding mission with the County
Attorney and see what we could find out and report back to you at the
next meeting. Well, I'm going to report back what I got. And you go
ahead and tell me what you want me to do from the next point.
We drove to Sebring and met with the Florida Georgia Groves
Company, Gary Blackman, who's the principal, and his attorney and a
couple other people that are members of his Board. Now, mind you,
we went to Sebring. I was hoping that they would come here. And
when they weren't agreeable to that, I offered to meet them halfway.
They weren't agreeable to that. So I wasn't going to leave any stone
unturned. We drove to Sebring. And I can tell you the love bugs are
terrible between here and there.
The meeting went well in the fact that everybody had a
meaningful discussion. Their argument was is that the access is
provided through Calusa. They showed us drawings of where they
were planning to put in a paved road with gutters, curbs, and also
where they had room for the Smallwood sign to go.
My question later was, how could this be, you know? In order to
do that with people owning the right-of-way to the center of the road,
that would be a difficult task to get everybody to buy in, especially
when the people on Calusa are totally opposed to this road taking
place.
We found out since then that either the present family or some
other faction of the family of Smallwood actually owns the
right-of-way of Calusa. So there's an element in there that's less than
Page 140
May 10,2011
known at this point in time.
But the truth of the matter is it comes down to the issue of did
they act within the bounds of what they can do legally.
Well, the permits that they got have been tested many times by
our code enforcement people. They've been challenged almost on a
daily basis. They went back in there numerous times, and every time
they came back and said that they were in total compliance with the
permits that they had.
The issue of the road itself, if you remember at the last meeting
when we were talking about Mamie Drive and the county's
maintenance of this particular road in the future. The regrettable part
ofthis whole thing, and you need to know about it now, is that our
transportation department has spent considerable time researching the
records and they cannot vouch for the fact that that end of Mamie
Street has ever been worked on by the county. However, we do have
personal letters from people that state to the fact they seen it done.
The other part of Mamie Street is listed in a document going back
to, what was it, the fifties, Jeff? In any case, it shows it down there as
a county road. But that's the end that's to the north of Mamie Drive
that goes down to the Smallwood Museum.
So if we approach that and the fact that we go on a lawsuit the
fact that they tore up a county road, we may have a difficulty as far as
proving it, which gives me some concern.
The issue is also a little more perplexed in that we may have an
issue with a prescriptive easement that we might be able to move in
conjunction with the other parties to be able to bring something as far
as a lawsuit goes.
But here's the biggest part of the whole problem. We have to
make the one neighbor whole that lives there and has access. But also
very important -- what is that background noise, is that --
MR. JOHNSON: Push the mic back.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, John, appreciate the
Page 141
May 10,2011
technical advice.
You noticed I'm the only mic without a cover on it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, there's four of them without a
cover --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can I borrow your cover?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thanks, Commissioner Coyle, I
appreciate the drum roll.
Okay, the issue is, is the sustainability of the Smallwood Store
during a lengthy lawsuit. This has got me really concerned because, I
mean, I've gone with the objective that I want to be able to make sure
the Smallwood Store can continue for generations to come and offer
that part of history that no one wants to lose.
Once we go through the door with a lawsuit, it's not going to be
something that's going to be instantaneously solved. There's going to
be challenges, there's going to be all sorts of court dates, there's going
to be continuances. Now, the question is how long can the Smallwood
Store that had a limited revenue stream exist without that revenue
stream?
So my thoughts -- and this is my suggestion, and the County
Attorney is going to weigh in with some other suggestions, I'm sure --
is let's not rush this thing too fast. Let's give it another two weeks to
see if we can get Blackman and his group to come around to grant us a
temporary access with no conditions as we try to work through the rest
of the process, so that we can get the Smallwood Store back and
operating.
But I can tell you that it's unbelievable how all these little pieces
really don't fit together.
Then there's the contention that part of the Smallwood Store is on
the property that Blackman and his group own, which even
complicates the situation more. Smallwoods say it doesn't, but then he
says it does, and you don't know, somewhere in between the two there
Page 142
May 10,2011
may be something in there that comes out true.
So I kind of hope that we might give some thought to directing
the Chair to write a very passionate letter asking Mr. Blackman and
the Florida Georgia Grove Association to give special consideration
for granting a temporary access to the Smallwood Store and the
adjacent property as all the parties try to work through this in a way
that will be less contentious than going to court and trying to battle it
out and putting the Smallwood Store and who knows else in jeopardy.
Jeff, do you have anything you want to add to that?
MR. KLATZKOW: No. As always, I think a negotiated
settlement is always better than litigation. I would hope that the
people in the community get with the developer as well to try to get
this resolved. But this is a very complicated issue. I mean, the fact of
the matter is that area of the county was settled before there were
roads. And it just developed. You look at plats and there are no roads
on the plats. It's a very peculiar area with private easements, and
things just developed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I'll give you a personal opinion.
People who do this sort of thing can't be trusted to negotiate any
reasonable settlement. They're doing this just in the hopes that they'll
put pressure on the Corps of Engineers so they can get an access
through Calusa Drive. There's no indication that we will ever get the
engineer -- Corps of Engineers to agree to that any time soon.
If I had my preferences, I'd slap a lawsuit on these people for
damages that would deplete their entire equity in that property as
quickly as possible.
But I'll do whatever the Board asks me to do. But don't ask me to
send a pleading letter to these people to be reasonable, because I know
they will not.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And may I offer something else
up that may be of interest to you?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.n
Page 143
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What they're trying to do there,
and the value what they have invested in that property, which is a
million plus dollars purchasing the property -- originally the Indians
bought it for four and they sold it for a million.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, that was Manhattan, that wasn't --
(Laughter. )
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think that was $24, but that's
another story at another time. And I had nothing to do with that, by
the way.
There's another issue. In order for them to be able to ever cover
this nut, and they can't do it -- village residential. They might be able
to put three, maybe four small homes there. They have this expensive
boat launching facility they're going to have. They really -- it's going
to be difficult.
So, I mean, at some point in time if they really want to maximize
their investment, they would have to come back to this Board or some
future Board for a Conditional Use, which will require four votes.
This is the part that's extremely puzzling. About the only thing
economically that would work there, that would give them a good
return, would either be a marina, which people in Chokoloskee have
told us before they didn't want, or a condominium. And that would
require four votes.
And if that's the case, if it's today, tomorrow or 20 years from
now, if they poison the well, I'm sure what's going to happen is you're
going to -- even 20 years from now you would have the people from
Chokoloskee in unison rejecting that. And they'd come before the
Board that's in existence at that time -- by the way, Commissioner
Fiala, you'll still be there.
When they come before Commissioner Fiala and the rest of her
Board, it's not going to go well for them. That's almost obvious. I
can't picture it. So it almost seems like they'd want to be a little more
cooperative.
Page 144
May 10,2011
Now -- but I want you to keep in mind something that happened
many years ago, Dolphin Cove. Remember three brand new
commissioners came aboard in 2001 and the people of Goodland came
to see us and they said they were very upset about an illegal use. The
previous commission had granted permits for this condominium to be
built on Dolphin Cove.
Well, this commission, listening to the will of the people, acted
pretty spontaneously and withdrew the permits. And we got sued.
And our counsel came in and they looked at all the evidence and said,
you know something, you don't have a leg to stand on, you better
settle.
Well, it turned out well because the price of land then was
depreciated and it went up considerably. And today that's what we
call the Goodland Boat Park. And we should have named it after
Donna, but we didn't.
But the whole thing is, is when you look at this and you try to
say, okay, what's the final objective, I almost wonder -- and believe
me, this gentleman, I've done some research on him, he's very astute.
He's been involved in development up there in Sebring for some time.
He's -- some people that know him, have known him, I've talked to
them, he knows what he's doing. He won't put himself in a box
without having some option.
I'm almost afraid that maybe they're trying to tempt us to go
down the wrong road, put ourselves in a position, then be able to come
back in court and say there's no way on God's earth we could ever get
a conditional use; the county has so poisoned the well and made it so
difficult we lost the value of our land, so we're suing for the value of
the land, damages and everything else we can get. A concern, you
know.
I don't know, maybe Jeff might want to comment on that. But
that's one of the observations that I have come up with that needs to be
thought about as we're moving forward.
Page 145
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, that's as much information as we
have on the update, huh?
Okay, we have two more speakers that we haven't heard from.
MR. MITCHELL: The first speaker is Lynn McMillan from
Smallwood Store.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: She's waiving?
MR. GRANT: If you have questions, she'll answer them.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Will Dempsey, speaking
for Frank and Yvonne Ogden.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who?
MR. DEMPSEY: Good morning, Commissioners--
MR. MITCHELL: This is Will Dempsey --
MR. DEMPSEY: -- my name is Will Dempsey. I'm from
Cheffy Passidomo. And I represent Frank and Yvonne Ogden, they
live on Calusa Drive. Which, as Mr. Coletta pointed out, is one street
over from Mamie. It's a private road. And Calusa is really where the
developer appears to be wanting to push traffic from the Smallwood
Store, from Mamie onto my client's street.
I just have a couple of observations. On the concern that there's
not enough evidence to demonstrate that Mamie is a public road,
I appreciate Commissioner Coletta's concern there, but let's look at the
evidence that we do have, which reflects that it's a public road.
You have the fact that for 70 years the only post office that
served Chokoloskee and Everglades City was located at the end of the
street. If there's a more distinct icon of a public building than a post
office, I'd like to hear about it. Post office is clearly a public building.
The only way to get there for 70 years was driving over Mamie.
You have at least three residents on Chokoloskee Island, and I'd
hazard a guess that there are many more, who personally saw county
vehicles and personnel maintaining Mamie Street, dating back to the
1960's. And each of those people are willing to provide sworn
affidavits to that effect.
Page 146
May 10,2011
Your own former transportation director, a fellow named George
Archibald, who was the transportation director for 20 years, from
1972 to 1992, is ready to provide a sworn affidavit and testimony if
necessary that he personally saw this section of Mamie Street being
maintained by county vehicles and using public funds.
George, by the way, doesn't live in some remote part of the
county. He is not only a resident of the county but he's a resident of
the community. He regularly visits Chokoloskee, is routinely in
Everglades City, and this is not a circumstance where he's hearing
through word of mouth from third parties about these maintenance
activities, he personally saw these activities being carried out.
This developer took title to the property that's the subject of all
this debate by way of two separate deeds, two deeds. Each of those
deeds on its face tells that developer they are taking title to that
property subject to the rights of third parties to use Mamie Street.
And ifthat's not very strong evidence that this is a public road,
frankly I don't know what is. And there's been some talk about the
absence of a specific invoice or a particular written document
reflecting the expenditure of monies to maintain Mamie Street.
Ladies and gentlemen, that's -- with all due respect, that's looking for a
needle in a haystack. And particularly when you consider that we're
looking back years and years. We're looking back to the 1970's and
1980's. I doubt that the county maintains records of that specificity
this far removed from the activities.
And, you know, keep in mind as well, this isn't 1-75 that needs to
be maintained on a regular basis. It could very well be that given the
level of traffic on Mamie Street, county trucks can come in once a
year, once every two years and not on a weekly or monthly basis.
So again, if we're looking for evidence that this is a public road,
I think we have it. If we're looking for greater evidence, it becomes a
matter of degrees. And my sense is that you don't need to go any
further down the path in terms of evidence of public dedication than
Page 147
May 10,2011
you already are.
That's it. Appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are you suggesting that the county
should be suing that developer to restore the public street that they've
destroyed?
MR. DEMPSEY: Yes. Yes, ma'am. I don't like to use
colloquialisms or anecdotal statements, but we've all dealt with bullies
over the course of our lives. And how do you deal with a bully? You
punch him in the nose and you make him understand that you're not
going to take it.
And this developer has not demonstrated any ability to negotiate
or compromise. They've carried out these activities under cover of
darkness without consulting with anyone. And my sense is you punch
him in the nose. That's -- with all due respect, that's my suggestion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are you aware that -- and I don't
know, maybe someone here can give me more information on this --
that this developer was actually negotiating with the county to try to
sell them -- or to sell the marina to the county to somehow develop
that? Is there anything like that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can answer it.
MR. DEMPSEY: I'd heard --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you? Can you go ahead and
share that?
MR. DEMPSEY: I heard statements to that effect but I'm not
privy to any particular information.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, back about -- and I don't
want to get my dates off too far -- six years ago, I'm going to estimate,
might be longer, Parks and Rec was looking at several options for a
Page 148
May 10,2011
boat park. And at that time they looked at that particular area. At
that time the motel was still up on the hill. And they were looking at it
with some interest. But there was a couple of problems that existed.
One was the permitting that had to be put into place was extremely
difficult and was going to be very long. And the other thing was the
strong resistance from the community of Chokoloskee for a boat park.
Well, in the meantime the Port of the Isles Marina became
available, and that, along with later the Goodland Boat Park fulfilled
the county needs for many years in the future.
So I can't picture the county at this point in time, with the
economics being what it is, would have a strong interest in this
particular piece of property. We have our needs met for the number of
boat parking places and ramps for a long time to come and with the
economic situation the way it is.
But we never got to the point we negotiated. But the developer
kept reminding us on a continuous basis as we were going through
these talks that we could make it all go away by buying the property.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did we actually buy the slips at
Port of the Isles?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We didn't buy the slips, we
bought the marina. The slips they're auctioning off separate.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So if! understand correctly
then, they were negotiating with us and they basically said they would
not demolish the road if we bought the marina, was that the idea?
Was the road in any way connected to this marina deal?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I'm sorry, you're talking
about the original time six years ago?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, or now. I mean, I don't
know --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, six years ago there was
never an issue and nobody ever brought up the question of the
ownership of the road.
Page 149
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Was the marina and the road
recently brought up together in conversation by the county or the
developer?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, after the fact, after he tore
up the road then we had conversations related to it, yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Related to the marina?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, about purchasing it? I
mean, he made offers asking us if we were interested, we'd make the
problem go away by buying it. And I told him I doubt the county
would ever be interested in buying it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So subsequent to tearing up this
road this developer came back to us and said --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- I'll make the road right if you
buy the marina?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, after he tore up the road --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- that's when the conversations
all started. Before that there was no conversations.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: About the road?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: About the marina, the road or
anything there. It was just one of those things that existed and it was
going its own particular direction.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we're not getting any closer to
resolution of this. We can't spend all afternoon on this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One point --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We need to get this over with.
Okay, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Not over with. I'm going to put
this on the next agenda for final direction. I'm not going to have it as
comments at the end of the meeting. I'll put it on the agenda so that
we can hash this out once and for all what the county role is, if
Page 150
May 10,2011
anything. And I'm sure by then Jeff might have a couple of options
ready for us.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's another two weeks, and there's
people who can't even get to their houses.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So, I mean, if --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Why can't we instruct the County
Attorney to file suit against this guy in the interim? I'd rather bargain
from the standpoint of strength rather than sticking my tail between
my legs and trying to compromise with this character.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It has to do everything with the
Smallwood Museum and how fast you could gain them access with a
suit.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, the damages are going to increase
every day, so the only way we'll ever get him compensated for that is
to sue this guy.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I make a suggestion?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, because we really can't
do this under comments. Why don't we direct the County Attorney to
come back -- to try to negotiate access to the store, and failing that,
come back with option or options regarding a lawsuit to be able to
move us forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, I'll call-- my only concern is
that's two weeks we'll talk about that, and then he'll come back two
weeks later and we'll talk about that, and another month has passed
and we haven't really done anything.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: County Attorney, can't you
come back with something in the way of options that we can --
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioners, you can direct me to file
suit right now if you want. You can direct me to come back with an
executive summary and flesh it out, if you want. It's the majority of
the Board, whatever you want me to do.
Page 151
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But it's still two weeks from
now before we can do that, right?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, you can do it right now, if you want.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, what's the desire ofthis
Board, knowing everything you know now?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, my feeling is I agree with Mr.
Dempsey, you just don't tolerate conduct like this. You know, you
just don't do that. And there are lots of instances where developers
have come before us and gone to communities and they've worked out
arrangements of things, they've informed them, they've had
neighborhood meetings and they work out solutions.
And this guy, without telling anybody about it, goes in and starts
bulldozing a road and putting up a fence and keeping people from
getting to their property. It's absolutely inexcusable. We can't tolerate
conduct like that. And I'd like to smack him upside the head with a
two-by-four and get his attention here. But--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that will work, sir, if we do
one other thing. If we can get the public involved enough to have a
fundraiser to be able to sustain the museum financially to that point in
time that they get this access. Then we don't have that problem of the
museum not being able to exist under their own resources that are
becoming more limited by the day.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, we seem to have trouble when we
get involved in fundraising here nowadays. But it certainly would be
something the community should consider.
But I still believe that this company is liable for the damages that
have been caused by their unreasonable actions, and I think they
should have to bear the cost of reimbursing the Smallwood Store for
business losses.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Perhaps Jeff might give us
something in the way of language we could use to get us to where we
need to be.
Page 152
May 10,2011
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm more comfortable bringing suit if the
Smallwoods join in on the suit. They're the ones who can do the
pecuniary damages, we're the ones who can assert the county's rights
to the road. I don't want to go this just on the county.
I mean, we can do the laboring war on this to keep their legal
expenses down. But if we're going to do this, you know, I want them
as a partner.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Dick, do you have a willing partner
there?
MR. GRANT: Commissioner, you have a willing partner. But
I have to tell you that everything that I and my firm have done so far,
we've done pro bono.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR. GRANT: And I need to have a discussion, A, with the
client and with my partners about whether we can do all of that pro
bono or whether we have to get paid on some basis.
And I feel pretty confident we'll find a way to work that out but I
can't unequivocally commit to that right now. But I think emotionally
and support-wise, we'll do it --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Could we do this --
MR. GRANT: -- Jeff and I can work out mechanically whether
we would both be the same plaintiffs or whether you file and we
intervene. I don't know how we can -- we can work that out.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Could we do this: We could give
direction -- if the Board agrees, we could give direction to the County
Attorney to proceed with a suit, subject to the participation and
cooperation of the Smallwoods. And we would do that expeditiously.
MR. GRANT: I'll even draft the complaint and give it to Jeff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. You want Jeff to pay you then for
that?
MR. GRANT: No, I don't want him -- I don't want anybody to
pay me for it.
Page 153
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Ifwe could do that, does that
make sense to you, Jeff?
MR. KLATZKOW: You can do that if you'd like, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We've got a whole bunch of
lights here by commissioners.
Before we start talking anymore, do the Commissioners feel this
is a wise course of action as something you want to do?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let's look at the Smallwoods and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I want to talk about the topic at
hand, not fundraising or anything else, what's the direction that you
want to go in.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That's what I want to talk
about.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I need more information. I don't
feel comfortable about asking it out in the public. I feel a need to
consult with the attorney before we give a definitive direction.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we can go this route. And
I don't have a problem with it, you know. Once again, what we're
telling the County Attorney to do, he's going to have to do with the
greatest of care, and I know he will, to be able to protect the county in
its long-term interest. Smallwood Store's being a partner in the whole
thing.
And I know we don't want to hear about fundraising, but I'm
going to tell the community right now that if we're ever going to make
this work there has to be a fund established to be able to sustain the
museum during this time of trial.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Dick, you originally were saying
that -- you know, your arguments were really based on prescriptive
Page 154
May 10,2011
easement. And that is very different than the argument that the county
would be bringing forward. Wouldn't it be better for us to just bring a
dec. action to say that it is a public road, based on the arguments
presented by the Cheffy-Passidomo attorney? And -- because once
you get a dec. action that declares that, you know, all the evidence
does support that this is a public road, you know, you're pretty much
done.
MR. GRANT: Well, I think -- I don't know whether you want
Jeff to answer or me or both of us.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't care.
MR. GRANT: I think probably that's what you would do,
seeking to have it declared as a public road under that Statute.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Exactly.
MR. GRANT: I think Jeff can speak for himself.
MR. KLA TZKOW: There are a number of theories here.
Among other things we'd want adjunctive relief to get that road
opened. As prescriptive easement, we have the authority to do it
under that. We have the possibility of a statutory acquisition, the road
through, the maintenance of the road over the years. I've got to get
with staff on that because I'll need their testimony on that. I mean, we
have some bullets to put into the revolver, I mean, if that's what the
Board wants.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's what I want.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, you know, going back to
what you said earlier, Commissioner Coyle, I mean, this hasn't really
been noticed. And it's kind of like sounding like the Blocker issue
again. Shouldn't we bring this back? I know we have a time issue, but
we can call a special meeting, publicly notice a meeting faster than we
would have our meeting every two weeks to address this.
But maybe -- we haven't heard from the developer and maybe we
should hear from him before we start suing. And from others. I mean,
I don't know, there were a lot of people who wanted to speak at the
Page 155
May 10,2011
last public hearing that were not given the opportunity. And now
we're proceeding with action, and I don't know what their thoughts are
on it.
So maybe we do the same thing, you know, maybe we schedule
-- maybe we do something similar, which is schedule a later meeting,
but earlier than the two weeks of the next Board meeting to address
this matter.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. You know, we have the two
principals right here, and -- that are involved with this road. You live
on the road and your business is on the road --
MR. DEMPSEY: And we're all-- we're suing now--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You've already filed a suit.
MR. DEMPSEY: We've already filed.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you've already sued.
And my only question is, you're asking Commissioner Coyle if
we want to move forward with this. I agree with you as far as time is
ofthe essence anyway. And I ask -- Ms. -- it's McMillan, isn't it?
Mrs. McMillan, Linda -- can I just call you --
MS. MCMILLAN: Lynn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Lynn? Okay.
Lynn, you agree that we should sue? Just yes or no.
MS. MCMILLAN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And Mr. Vaughn, even though
you're suing, do you agree that this is the right move?
MR. VAUGHN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Then I'm in. You know, these are
the two people that really are affected by this? I'm in.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And not only that, but it's not going to
cost you that much money to file suit. It will cost you money to go to
court, but we'll have a meeting before that ever happens, and so you
can update us on the issues and we can provide additional guidance at
Page 156
May 10,2011
that point in time and you can take the time to inform all of the
Commissioners about what our strategy is and how many bullets we
do have in the gun.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Three.
MR. VAUGHN: Appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So I don't know if -- I don't know if a
formal vote is appropriate. Can we get a sense of --
MR. KLATZKOW: I'd appreciate a formal vote.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You would, okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, I'll make a motion that
we direct the County Attorney to take legal action.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. In accordance with the
parameters we've already discussed with the other parties.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have a motion by
Commissioner Coletta and second by Commissioner Fiala to proceed
with filing legal action, and in coordination with the other parties
involved.
And all in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes 3-2, with
Commissioners Henning and Hiller dissenting.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'd like to comment on that.
I'm concerned, because this was not an item that was noticed on
the agenda. I have a lot of unanswered questions. In fact, I'm really
surprised to hear what I heard today, that the county was actually
negotiating with this developer about this boat dock after this road was
Page 157
May 10,2011
tore up, and I kind of wanted --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no, no, never happened.
You missed the whole contents of what it was.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Six years previously Parks and
Rec met with them to see if that was one of the viable places where
they -- they were looking for a boat park. There has been zero
negotiations with the developer. Nothing more than a fact-finding
mission that took place. Parks and Rec haven't met with them, we
haven't met with them to purchase it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, so okay, then I misunderstood.
So what you're saying is since they tore up the road, the county
has not discussed anything related to this marina with the developer.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Anything in the last five, six
years. I mean, ever since we got --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I misunderstood. I apologize. I'm
sorry. My mis-understanding. I thought you said that it was
subsequent. I was like getting a little confused with the time line there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would too with this case.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But anyway, I just -- this is all so
sudden. I have no backup on this. I mean, I'd like to understand what
all the legal arguments are. Ifthere's a suit already in progress, I'm not
sure why we have to sue when a suit has already been filed. Why not
let that suit play out? Action is already underway. There's no -- I
don't think there's any reason for us to file a separate lawsuit. It just --
I just really don't see why we have to step into the fray if litigation is
already in progress.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, for one thing, one of the arguments
is it's a county road. And I think we're far better qualified to establish
the fact that it's a county road.
Secondly, there's a time factor here. These people need a fast
resolution. They've been waiting now for 30 days or more. So for
Page 158
May 10,2011
those reasons I think it is appropriate.
And not only that, but at our next meeting I'm sure there will be a
full airing of all of this. And by the way, at our last meeting most of
the facts were presented and most of the background information I
read back then, and I saw the photographs of the road, and I've looked
at the place, I've visited it. So I understand it as clearly now as I'm
going to understand it two weeks from now.
But in any event, we have voted on it and you've explained your
reasons for not voting for it so --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to finish my train of
thought.
I just want to say because a suit has already been filed, I don't --
our filing suit alongside this suit is not going to expedite the process of
them getting any sort of temporary road. This gentleman having filed
a suit, you know, is already in play. Nothing's going to move any
faster.
As far as this being a county road, we'll certainly be called to
testify to that in this gentleman's suit. So, you know, I think he's taken
the right step in moving forward and I think this matter should just be
played out through his litigation. I don't see any need to compound,
you know, what already is, you know, moving forward as it should.
MR. VAUGHN: This is a separate suit that we have. We're
trying to get access for a residential property to a public road. Their
suit would be to re-establish Mamie Street to the museum. If they re-
establish Mamie Street to the museum, then we would try to get access
to Mamie Street.
If for some reason you can't re-establish Mamie Street, we'll go
to Chokoloskee Drive. So our suit, no matter what happens, will
always be a separate suit.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So you're not looking to access
through Mamie Street? Mamie Street is not your issue?
MR. VAUGHN: I'd like to, but we're just saying that we'd need
Page 159
May 10,2011
to access to the nearest public road. And of course we're part of it.
I mean, we're all in there, but they have a separate suit because they
had a business and Mamie Street goes all the way to the end. We only
go, like 400 feet or so to get to our property. They go another 800 feet
to get down by the water where the museum is.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Once they would establish that as
a public road, it would be for the entire length of the road.
MR. VAUGHN: And we would benefit from that because all
we'd have to do -- we would still have to get access to that public road,
Mamie Street.
MR. KLATZKOW: He's got separate issues than the
Smallwood's have, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's why it needs to be
reviewed. I mean, I'm not in a position to support joining this
litigation without reviewing this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. The vote has been taken, it's over
with, we've decided what we're going to do.
Now, did you have something more you wanted to tell --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, one last thing, I'll be brief.
Some time ago we talked about office space for Marco Rubio.
And I made several contacts with his office. Well, we have here today
Mike Brennan --
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we still have public speakers.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Forgive me. I'll finish this--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're not into correspondence yet. We
haven't even gotten to correspondence.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, we haven't --
MR. MITCHELL: We're still in public comment. Sorry.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Don't go away.
MR. MITCHELL: Doug Fee.
MR. FEE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, my
name is Doug Fee.
Page 160
May 10,2011
I don't always come down to these meetings to make comments
or speak on agenda items, but today you heard an item on economic
development. You actually voted not to approve an incentive
package. I just wanted to make a few general comments on that.
I'm an accountant. And I don't say that to drum up business, I
have enough business. But I do probably two to 300 tax returns. If
I have three businesses that are pool operators or air conditioning
companies, each one of them should have the ability here in Collier
County to run their businesses and have fair advantage.
And I think what was before you was a company that may have
not met the qualifications. Maybe they got close, but they did not
meet the qualifications, so you were being asked to provide a variance.
I also serve on your Productivity Committee at your pleasure.
I'm not representing the Productivity Committee, these are my
comments. But in terms of economic development incentives that you
have, I think there are definitely some positive aspects to that.
When you have a company that comes to town, new company,
can provide technology type jobs, I think this county needs to do
everything it can to incentivize and bring those companies here.
But one of the things I wanted to state is Governor Scott recently,
through the legislature, lowered the corporate tax rate, which is really
huge. If you do returns, you know how much businesses are paying in
taxes. And so I want to stress that in your upcoming budget hearings,
which are in June, you guys do a tremendous job, you have over the
last four or five years, you've had to bring down government, the size
of government. A lot of it's been dictated from the state, it's been
necessary .
But I just want to say that in order to bring economic viability to
this county is keep moving forward on the tax issue, okay, because
every dollar you put back into either the homeowner or the business
owner, that is going to be spent in the community with wages. And so
be very careful in all of your expenditures.
Page 161
May 10,2011
And I just would encourage you to keep lowering the taxes as
long as you can, and that's going to be a real push to our economy.
And that's the only comment I wanted to make. Thank you very
much.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, that was your last speaker.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you very much. We're at the
end except for correspondence and communication?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, it's your turn.
MR.OCHS: Nothing from me. I'll be chiming in--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank God.
MR. OCHS: -- with the County Attorney. Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: I do have something.
We have at least the attorney for the South Florida Water
Management District here. We have Clarence Tears either on the
phone or -- I know he spoke to staff in the back.
Your staff and the Water Management District's staffs have been
going back and forth for the last couple of weeks. The issue that's
been really driving this settlement is the fact that you've got a canal
maintenance agreement that's expiring at the end of the month. I'll let
staff discuss that issue with you. That's half of this.
The other half of this is the settlement of the A TV suit where the
District is offering $3 million, half coming out of taxation from the
Big Cypress Basin, the other half coming out of taxation from the
District as a whole. It is an integrated settlement.
And the reason I have to go to you at this point in time and not at
Page 162
May 10,2011
the shade session is that the District's meeting Thursday for the only
time in May, they won't meet again until mid-June, and your
maintenance agreement expires at the end of the month. So that I
need a decision from the Board that we can then take to their Board to
see ifthere's a resolution on this in time prior to the canal maintenance
agreement being done.
I have Jacqueline Hubbard here, she's been the primary attorney
on the litigation. She's here to answer your questions on that. And
again, staff has been working very, very hard on this for the last
couple of weeks.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, Jackie --
MS. HUBBARD: Good afternoon.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Hi. Just a few questions.
They're not really holding us over the barrel with this
maintenance agreement. The fact is we pay taxes for them to maintain
the canal. So we don't really have a deadline, per se. I mean, they still
have to maintain those canals. Or are we saying here today that
suddenly they're going to stop maintaining the canals and we're going
to stop paying them taxes as of the end of the month?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think Nick's better able to handle that
question, ma'am.
MS. HUBBARD: And also, I have to let you know that Mr.
Artau is here from the South Florida -- the attorney for the South
Florida Water Management District.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Come on up, join the party.
MR.OCHS: Go ahead, Nick.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioners, for the record, Nick
Casalanguida.
Effectively June 1 st they become our canals for maintenance and
everything else. Now we've mentioned that we sent an e-mail to the
District saying if they did not want to extend the agreement that we
Page 163
May 10,2011
wanted to coordinate with them, prepare a transition plan and get in
touch with their maintenance staff to see what they were doing. But
right now we feel that what's in front of you now in terms of the
settlement for the canal easement is fine.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So does that mean we don't pay
them taxes anymore?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They've already collected the taxes--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So they would have to give it back
to us.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, my email requested from them
that we would send them a bill for remaining balance of taxes
collected on behalf of maintenance. And that's not been discussed.
What I'm telling you is now what's in front of you under that
paragraph for the continued maintenance we're comfortable with. It
allows us till next year for them to accept maintenance of the canals.
On July 1st they would let us know and we will let them know if we
did not want that to happen. And we would prepare our response
early in the budget cycle to talk to the Board and be able to talk to the
Board intelligently about budget issues that would come up in terms of
canal maintenance.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: This maintenance agreement really
has nothing to do with this settlement agreement.
MS. HUBBARD: Right.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They're tied together.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, that actually was because we
had suggested that they be tied together with the intent that it be going
forward for -- I think we were suggesting for eight years or something
like do an extended contract. It wasn't their suggestion, it was actually
our suggestion.
But quite frankly, I mean, it's not necessary. I mean, because they
would have to give us the taxes that they collected to maintain our
canals. There's no way they could revert maintenance to us and keep
Page 164
May 10,2011
the revenues that we paid for them to provide that service.
So I really don't see this as a negotiating point in this discussion.
In fact, we could just separate them.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I suppose you could. They've put it
together as an offer together. So I don't see how you could do that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But again, I think that was because
that was our offer to them, not their offer to us. In fact they came
back -- our offer to them was an extended agreement, and they took
our extended agreement and rolled it back to one year. So it's not
them, it was us.
But quite frankly, it's not necessary as part of it.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: In talking to your County Manager
and his staff with Growth Management that handles these canals,
we're comfortable extending the agreement the way it's set up right
now in this structure. We have till next year to decide if we want to
go into another four-year extension. They've done a good job, it's been
very cooperative. We've spoken to Clarence. So we have no issue
with that part two of the extension. We support that the Board extend
that agreement.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But isn't it supposed to be -- here,
what does it say? During the term of the -- to resolve, each party
provides notice -- where does it say four years? Okay, made by
mutual consent renew agreement for a period of an additional four
years.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But this settlement is not providing
for that. This is providing merely for an extension through September
30th, 2012.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, it actually includes, I believe--
Jeff, I don't have the language right in front of me, but it talks about a
four-year option.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, it did -- Commissioner is right, the
Page 165
May 10,2011
agreement will be extended to September 30th, 2012. The thought
process is there is some issues that the County and the District have
with respect to certain unauthorized roads, we'll just call them, that
need to get cleared up, with the thought that we'll work with them and
extend it for an additional four years.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know, there's another option
that hasn't been considered, and that is that they could -- it was
Picayune, right? Because this is for the A TV park.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's the first part--
MS. HUBBARD: That's the litigation part.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, that's the litigation. So the
litigation is for Picayune?
MS. HUBBARD: The litigation--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or we gave them Picayune, right?
MS. HUBBARD: We gave them land in the Picayune Strand,
yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So they could -- I mean, we could
settle all this by them just giving that land back to us and turning it
into an A TV park?
MS. HUBBARD: No, it's not that simple. The land was -- the
South Florida Water Management group came over here, and they
basically informed the Board that they were the lead agency in the
restoration of the Everglades, and they have been working on that
project for some time. And they felt that everybody would benefit
from it. But there were parcels of land that they felt they needed, and
they were mostly easements and right-of-ways owned by the county.
So they asked the county to vacate that land. And in exchange for
vacating that land, they made a lot of promises. And one of the
promises that they did not keep was to provide the county with 640
acres, more or less, of a site for recreational purposes that was suitable
to the county. And the county had always made it known that A TV
use would be one of the uses of that recreational parcel.
Page 166
May 10,2011
What we found out is that while they were dredging Lake
Trafford and after the Board had vacated its ownership rights in the
roadways and bridges and whatever out there, that they were dredging
Lake Trafford and they were putting the dredge material on top of the
640 acres that they were supposed to be giving to us for a recreational
site. And that dredge material was taking up about a third or more of
the site. And it contained contaminants that were harmful to humans.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Arsenic?
MS. HUBBARD: Arsenic and selenium.
And so it was unacceptable, when they decided to give it to us.
And they never found another site that was acceptable, because there
are very few sites that were very large in Collier County.
We entered into a series of settlement discussions, and as a result
of one ofthose we located a site that was about 700 acres, except most
of it was jurisdictional wetlands. Passive recreation probably would
have been permitted, but probably not A TV's.
That site was not acceptable. It did allow us to come up with
some valuations, though. And as a result of some of the studies that
we've done with our consultant, I felt, Jeff and I've talked about it, that
the $3 million that they were offering to settle the A TV lawsuit was a
reasonable amount.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What about the A TV ers? I mean,
didn't they have the ability to A TV in Picayune and didn't they -- they
didn't have any -- or were they going to A TV in Picayune?
MS. HUBBARD: They had historically been using a portion of
the land out there for A TV --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: This is all very interesting history --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I need to understand it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- but we have a settlement offer that we,
all of us, you included, Commissioner Hiller, sat in a closed session
and agreed to.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not this one. This is not what
Page 167
May 10,2011
we agreed to. This is modified. This is their response.
I just -- the only reason I'm asking is because I want to make sure
I understand. My concern is the rights of these A TV ers. And if we're
going to accept a $3 million settlement offer, I want to make sure that
these dollars are put into escrow for the purchase of an A TV site
within Collier County, not outside of Collier County, to give these
A TV ers a facility to use.
And I want to ensure that, because otherwise this settlement --
you know, it wasn't about getting money out of them in exchange for
giving them the property in Picayune to do what they wanted, it was
intended to protect the interest of these A TV ers to have a park where
they could do their ATVing within Collier County. And I want to
emphasize within Collier County, not somewhere else.
So, you know, if this settlement will allow the county to acquire
property to satisfy that objective, then that's fine. But otherwise, the
A TV ers are being hosed.
MR. KLATZKOW: This settlement will give you $3 million,
okay. Our experts told us that's a sufficient amount to purchase 640
acres. The problem we've always had is, from an environmental
standpoint, finding anything in Collier County that people do not
object to for an ATV use is very, very difficult. But there's no reason
why you can't set this aside.
MS. HUBBARD: And by the way, the 700 acres that the South
Florida Water Management District and the County discussed earlier
may still be available, and it's possible that, I'm not saying that it's
probable, but there are certain processes that can be gone through to
see if you can use at least a portion for of it for A TV use. You'd have
to get it permitted by state and federal agencies.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I could only support this if
the rights of those who are ATVers is respected where, you know,
they would have a park, as was promised to them when I -- as I
understand all of this started.
Page 168
May 10,2011
MS. HUBBARD: Yes, that's true.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, can we get to the issue? Is $3
million acceptable to this Board?
MS. HUBBARD: That is the issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes or no?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yep.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You hear from Jim Coletta, because
it's his district.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right, he's been doing this.
So at least three people think the $3 million is acceptable. Okay.
Now, let's go to paragraph three. We never have answered the
real issue about paragraph three.
If the Water Management District no longer provides the
maintenance for the canals after September 30th, 2012, or any other --
at the end of any other extension period, and we take responsibility for
that, do we get a tax reduction or do they give us money to
compensate for that change? Yes or no?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I don't know that answer to that
question yet, sir. That's something we would either -- we would seek
from them to keep their budget intact and ask for a transfer. If they
said they didn't want to do that, they wanted to keep their budget intact
and use it for maintenance for other purposes, that would be a
governing Board decision.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then essentially what they're doing is
putting themselves in the position where they can pay us $3 million on
the one hand and then they can terminate the maintenance agreement,
saving themselves probably millions of dollars in expenses, and it's all
at our expense.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct, sir. We would have to
fund that maintenance.
Page 169
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So you got $3 million sitting in escrow
somewhere, perhaps. And then you pick up responsibility for the
canals and you don't have the money to perform the maintenance,
where are you going to get the money to do the maintenance?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That would be an issue, sir. It would
come out of the LASIP program right now or the current stormwater
millage we have until we find an additional funding source.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: See, that's a problem.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It is.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That is a problem.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's a problem. And it doesn't make any
difference if it's included in this agreement or not. You can separate
it. But it is an issue. And that's a big, big risk.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: What you do, I guess, by extending
this agreement one year, you have time to think about that and how
you want to handle it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I've already thought about it. I've
been thinking about it for the last couple of years.
So it's troubling to me, and I guess I'd like to hear from the
lawyer from the District about how we handle things like that. If you
transfer responsibilities back to us, does the money follow?
MR. ART AU: Well, I'm the lawyer that was handling the A TV
case. I'm not the lawyer that handles the public finance issues. I do
know that the Big Cypress Basin Board is set up by statute.
MR. MITCHELL: Excuse me, sir, could you identify yourself?
MR. ART AU: Edward Artau, senior attorney with South Florida
Water Management District.
I do know that the Big Cypress Basin Board is set up by statute.
The members of the Board are appointed by the Governor and they
have ad valorem authority to raise funds by way of ad valorem funds.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We all know that.
MR. ARTAU: And that there's been a long-term relationship
Page 170
May 10,2011
with the county on the primary canal system, in addition to other
projects that we do in Collier County.
And like -- as I think the other Commissioner, Commissioner
Hiller had mentioned before, it was the County Commission who had
sort of tied that item together with the A TV lawsuit in terms of the
negotiating of the resolution of the settlement.
And the only reason that we haven't entered into another
long-term agreement was -- had nothing to do with the A TV problems,
it had to do with some issues that we had with Frangipani Road and
right-of-way issues where people are driving across the right-of-way
that we're using to maintain the canals and the crossways that are --
existed. And they're unpermitted crossways that have been put in that
people use for their -- to come across for access, for their garbage, for
their mail service and like. And those are issues that we were hoping
could get resolved.
And I think that we had proposed -- initially we had proposed
that we would do a long-term commitment so long as you guys would
handle the transportation issues, because we felt that the Water
Management District was not in the business of the transportation
issues, that your residents getting in and out of there is really your
responsibility. We were comfortable doing that in terms of a
long-term relationship.
But we were advised I think by your staff that you were
concerned, that you wanted sort of some time to work out these issues
with the Water Management District, and that a shorter agreement that
would give us the time to do that and come up with a solution so that
we could then enter into a more long-term commitment that already
had resolved in there those right-of-way issues would make more
sense.
We were comfortable doing it either way. But, you know,
certainly it's the -- all communications that I have had has been that
the Water Management District intends to have a continued long-term
Page 171
May 10,2011
relationship with the county. And, you know, we certainly don't want
that affected. We actually want to be out of the business of litigating
with each other and back in the business of cooperating with each
other and getting the work done.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, I'd like to make a suggestion that
the Board consider, with respect to the contract for maintenance, that
we do one of two things: That we include a long-term commitment
for South Florida Water Management District or Big Cypress Basin to
maintain the canals; or alternately, specify that if responsibility is
transferred to the county, that the appropriate funding is to follow, that
the funding follows the responsibility.
So I think that's the only way we can protect ourselves. It makes
no difference whether we separate these two issues or not, the same
issue will continue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll go along with that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Which one would you prefer, a
long-term commitment or a -- well, I don't care --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't care --
MR. ARTAU: The problem from the Water Management
District's perspective is that the long-term commitment that our Board
was comfortable with included the county taking responsibility for the
roads, for the roads that are out there, because we don't want to be in
the business of the transportation issues.
We had suggested I think in paragraph 17 and 18 in the prior
offer that we had made to the county, and we're comfortable entering
into that agreement with those paragraphs in there. But I believe staff
at the county level has an issue with that, so --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let me narrow the options down --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We don't want to do that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. What we want to do is make sure
we can write it just as it is right now, except insert a clause that says if
Page 172
May 10,2011
we accept the responsibility -- if the agreement is not extended and the
county accepts responsibility for maintenance of the canals, that the
appropriate funding will be transferred to the county. Okay?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can buy into that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner -- who was next,
Commissioner Hiller or Commissioner Henning?
MR. ART AU: Yeah, I don't have any authority in that regard. In
other words, that's a much more comprehensive issue. This was
intended so that we could work out all of those issues in the interim,
that we would -- since it's scheduled to expire May 31 st, that we
would extend it for another fiscal year, which is what we have.
MR. KLATZKOW: I think what the Commissioners are saying
is we extend the contract to September 30th, 2012 to work out these
issues. But at the end of the day, as of October 1st, 2012, if the canals
revert to the County, then the money that you're currently spending
maintaining those canals follows the maintenance.
MR. ART AU: Well, I understand that, but that's not part of the --
that's not part of what we can resolve in terms of this short-term
agreement. I think that's something that we can work out, you know,
in the interim. But, you know, as far as the authority from -- on
transferring ad valorem funds, that's a much more comprehensive
issue that would involve finance staff and a whole bunch of other staff
from the District --
MR. KLATZKOW: But you have a year and a half to figure it
out.
MR. ART AU: Yes, we'd have a year and a half to figure it out.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning, did you
have anything more?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I'm hoping that we can get
away from these non-agenda items. They are spending a whole bunch
of time on them.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta, anything?
Page 173
May 10,2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just want to bring final
resolution to this.
Jeff, listening to everything that just took place and knowing
what the situation and the players that are there, what recommendation
do you have?
MR. KLATZKOW: You've got a choice. I mean, I understand
fully what the Board's saying as far as the money has to follow the
maintenance and that you're concerned that if we get into this deal
without that, that at the end of the day we're going to be stuck
maintaining things without the money. I understand that.
The risk you take is if their Board says no to that, you will have
these canals as of June 1st.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We will? We won't have any
choice in it?
MR. KLA TZKOW: You won't have any choice.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't understand that. Can you
explain the law? I mean, the attorney for the Water Management
District just said that this was all statutorily defined. How can they
just arbitrarily if they've collected the tax stop maintaining?
I find that hard to believe that all of a sudden they have the
ability to stop maintaining these canals.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I don't believe their responsibility is
by virtue of their millage, it's by virtue of the contract that they've
entered into with the Board for maintenance.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And is that contract driven by
statute? What drives that contract?
MR. OCHS: Because those are your canals. You've contracted
the maintenance of those canals and the operation of those canals to
the Basin.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But the taxes that we're paying the
Basin are for the maintenance of these canals, isn't it?
MR. KLATZKOW: Maintenance for these -- these aren't all the
Page 174
May 10,2011
canals in the county, these are just the county canals. There are also
canals owned by the Big Cypress.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let me stop for just a minute.
Commissioner Hiller, you cut off Commissioner Coletta --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- he was not finished.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I thought -- I apologize, I thought
it was my turn.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I was just trying to grab my
breath for a second.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, sorry. Don't do that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just like home.
Let's get down to brass tacks, okay. We're going through all
these possibilities. I really think probably the recommendation we
have, we've got a year to be able to bring resolution to this, right, if we
went forward with the agreement we're talking about that was
presented to us in the beginning, right?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. In that one year that we
have, we can start to pull every stop that we have out there. After we
got the money in the bank, we got that one year to be able to do it, we
can start working with our legislative delegation. We start working
with everything that's out there to bring attention on what's taking
place and try to get it resolved politically.
You know, I think that we're endangering a final thing. We're
going to end up in court and the settlement's going to end up probably
being less than we looked at it. What was it that they figured, two and
a half million was the real value of it, the examples they were using?
MR. KLA TZKOW: It's closer to two, I believe.
MS. HUBBARD: I would prefer not to discuss what our
consultant said.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand. Thank you,
Page 175
May 10,2011
Jackie. Sorry I brought it up.
But let's get down to it and see if we can get this thing behind us
and then we can attack the problem that's there. They have the power
to be able to force us into it, one, two, three. These people here are
under the direction of the Governor, and we have to be able to reach to
the Governor and past that point and just bring the kind of pressure we
need to make sure that we get a fair shake for the money that we pay
in taxes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, so I'm recommending that
we go with what they recommended.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll make the motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The last sentence, it says the
payment of the three million to Collier County from the District for
the settlement contemplated in this proposal will not reduce existing
funding to Collier County from the District's 2011 budget or from any
future budgets.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But that's not what it says, it
doesn't say or any future budget, it just says 2011. So that it could,
you know, reduce it prospectively, and that's not an option. And it
could be done. So that would have to be added.
MR. KLATZKOW: From their standpoint, that's a deal killer
because that binds their Board now.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Their Board has to be bound. We
can't accept that they would like in 2012 reduce their budget by three
million that they gave us by way of this settlement, because then we're
not getting anything, because next year we'll be three million short.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, I spoke to Clarence
Page 176
May 10,2011
this morning, he'd sent me a few e-mails.
Again, what Jeff told you and this gentleman is going to tell you
is just as you would not commit to a future budget, they cannot either.
What I can tell you is they're looking to submit the same budget
they've submitted annually to us, minus the proportion reductions they
receive from the state.
Commissioner Coletta's discussion point recommendation I agree
with. You've got one year to settle this. You've got one year to do
fact finding. If you put anything on here that kills this agreement
going back to their governing Board, binding their future Board, we
will own these canals on June 1 st.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I will just say we do own the
canals. But as far as the wording, we had wording in this settlement
offer that went to them that was very fair with respect to the source of
funding for this three million. What you're telling me exposes us, and
quite frankly we're in effect going to get nothing, because that $3
million cost down the road will be, you know, something we'll be
taxed for additionally.
So the wording that you had in the settlement proposal that we
gave them, Jeff, is the wording that should be back in here, not limited
to the 2011 budget.
MR. ART AU: Can I be heard on that? I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure.
MR. ART AU: The -- it's basically illegal for us to bind future
Boards like that. So we can't agree to that. And that's a common
situation with regard to government contracting. And I believe, you
know, your Board may have the same issues with regard to its own
contracts.
It's -- I think half of it is coming from general ad valorem funds,
you know, so it's a half and half situation in terms of --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But you're not binding anyone.
What you're agreeing is that no future funds will be reduced by this
Page 177
May 10,2011
three million to cover this expense for your benefit.
MR. ARTAU: Well, first of all, it was always contemplated that
the Lake Trafford site that had the -- that was purchased for purposes
of providing the A TV site, for example, was purchased with Big
Cypress Basin funds. So it was always contemplated that this
arrangement that was entered into, this contract that was entered into
was going to come out of Big Cypress Basin funds. We're actually
agreeing to have half of it come out of general funds.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But not out of our pro rata share,
because otherwise, I mean, if we're actually using our funds to pay
ourself --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There is no need to argue with these
people. The point is we've got to make a decision about what we're
going to do. You're not going to change his mind, okay, so let's focus
on what we have to do. Either we approve this or we don't.
So what I have heard people say is I've suggested we put some
wording in to try to protect ourselves under item three, but I've also
heard that that might be a deal breaker. So somebody give me a
motion --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I did.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- to do something.
You have a motion to approve it as it is, just as it stands; is that
correct?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I seconded it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And there was a second by
Commissioner Fiala, okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me just for clarification just ask.
So when we did this, it's for one year. Say for instance, you
know, Commissioner Hiller brought up the fact that it's only for one
year but then wonder if then in years coming forth they tax us or
something like that. During this year's time will we work that issue
Page 178
May 10,2011
out so that we'll have something concrete so that it can't come back to
bite us?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, you'll work it out, but you have no
assurances that they'll ever pay you if you take over the maintenance
of the canals. So that's always going to be something hanging over
our heads. And I see no way out of it based upon what everybody's
telling me.
MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am. The intent was to take this year to
work out the differences that we have with the District, hopefully.
And if those get resolved, there's an indication that they're made by
mutual agreement of the Board and the District be a four-year
additional extension onto the existing agreement.
If not, we have a year to prepare budgetarily and operationally to
take over the responsibility for maintenance of those canals after
September of2012. And that's better in my view than having to take
that on June 1st of this year.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's call the question.
All in favor of the motion -- Commissioner Henning, did you
hear the motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor of the motion, please signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, it passes 3-2, with Commissioners
Henning and Hiller dissenting, and me with great misgivings. But
nevertheless.
Okay. Do you have anything more, County Attorney?
Page 179
May 10,2011
MR. KLATZKOW: I think that's enough.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now for the Commissioners.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Wow, okay.
The front page of the Wall Street Journal yesterday had a very
interesting article and it was titled Home Market takes a Tumble. And
I would encourage all the Commissioners to read it. I'll enter it into
the record, and it is really very concerning, because in effect what it's
suggesting is that we're looking at what could be best described as a
double dip recession in the housing market.
The article makes reference to Zillow, which is a website,
Zillow.com, that provides information on real estate prices. And if
you go to Zillow, and I go to Zillow regularly to get a pulse on the real
estate market, you can actually type in Collier County, and it will give
you the information about the trends and the sales prices, and you can
expand your trend search to address everything from sales to listings
to, you know, price per square foot to foreclosures. It's a very, very
informative study.
It will also break down the sales by neighborhood in Collier
County. And I encourage everyone to look at it. Because if what is
being suggested does come to pass and we're facing decreasing
property values and the prospect of inflation with respect to other
costs, that is something that we are going to have to very seriously
consider as we move forward in the budgeting process for the next few
years.
So I encourage you all to take a look at it. And I'll enter it into the
record, if anybody else in the audience would like to see it or the
public would like to see it and doesn't have access to the journal from
yesterday.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nothing.
Page 180
May 10,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't have anything.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Say nothing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I do have something.
Some time ago I talked to you about finding an office within this
building for Marco Rubio, and everybody was very, very supportive.
What we have here today, Mike Brennan, who is the aide for Marco
Rubio, and he's looking at offices within this building. However, he
doesn't need anything too tremendous, he needs 400 square feet. He
may need to have a wall in there to divide it.
Skip Camp thinks he might be able to help him. But it would be
great if this Commission would also weigh in on this and say that
we're very supportive of Senator Marco Rubio and his having an
office in this building.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, as a matter of fact we have one
right now that would available for you, Commissioner Coletta's office,
if you'd like to have it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What the heck, I gave up my
office in Immokalee and I work in the meeting room. I can do that
too. Anything that will work for you, sir.
But you do have the support of this Commission. And I'm sure
Skip Camp will take that under advisement as he goes forward to find
you your office.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is this going to be a satellite to a
satellite office? In other words, is there going to be a main office in
Cape Coral? Are we going to be holding this for you for once a month
or what?
MR. BRENNAN: What this will be, the Southwest Florida
Page 181
May 10,2011
regional office. Our region is Collier, Lee, Charlotte, DeSoto,
Highlands, Glades and Hendry.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, great.
MR. BRENNAN: So this would be the only office within that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good. That's good to hear.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Did you have anything?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Just an observation. We
had two items on the agenda that we made -- no, that wasn't an agenda
item that we made a decision on. And we took a heck of a long -- hell
of a long time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Long time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, yeah, long time.
Maybe that's one reason that we want things on the agenda, so we
have enough information. But we did a lot of pontificating about the
Smallwood issue. And I'm glad we're starting to settle issues in
District 5. But I don't know why we keep on saying the same thing.
But we're doing things different. Is it the issue or who brings it up?
Are we going to be consistent?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I think if you assume that all items
that are brought before us are identical from the standpoint of priority
and importance and timing, your concern would be well founded, but
that's not the case. Sometimes things come before us with a deadline
and something has to be done --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I agree with that --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and we need to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- but our County Attorney did
state that we could bring this on a future agenda. It's already in
lawsuit.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, that's what he said. And there
were people out there who are saying I'm having trouble getting into
Page 182
May 10,2011
my house and a museum and a store that is suffering financially. So I
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And those two parcels
are in civil suit. And I want to make an informed decision, not
uninformed decision.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You will have an opportunity to do that
at the next meeting because there will be a report from the County
Attorney about the lawsuit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We are filing a lawsuit. That
was the direction by the majority of the Board.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And he can file a lawsuit tomorrow. But
the point is that not a lot's going to get done from that point forward
for awhile.
But nevertheless, there will be plenty of time for people to debate
that issue and even overturn it if it is appropriate to do so by the time
of our next meeting.
Now, we have a request for comment by Mr. Nance. We may as
well continue this. Although I think we were well into -- well beyond
public comment when it was handed in.
But Mr. Nance, you want to take the podium?
MR. NANCE: Yes, sir, I just wanted to make a comment that
was actually related to the last decision that you just made.
But the mention of Frangipani A venue was made in connection
with the discussion on the maintenance of the canals and the roads out
in that area. And I don't know how current Mr. Klatzkow is on that
situation that's going on out there with Frangipani.
I'm a little disappointed that this did not come up for anybody out
in that area to weigh in on. But that's going to be a very, very
complicated situation. It spans three miles.
Now, I understand there's some lawsuits between banks and other
Page 183
May 10,2011
people regarding some of the things that were done out there in the
past recently. But it's a very complicated situation. It has to do with
Section 13, 14 and 15, which is on the southern side of the main
Golden Gate canal and the C-1 connector. And that's the unpaved
roads that supply access to the businesses and homeowners out in that
area.
So I don't want you to get into something that's very complicated
without being aware that there are some issues out there. Mr.
Klatzkow is pretty familiar with some of them. But it's so complicated
that it involves also the school district, because the school district is a
party to property on that side of the canal. And those accesses and
those culverts in those canals are going to come up for you to deal
with.
So I would offer my knowledge that I have on that. I have a
personal interest because I live over there on the other side of the
canal, and I need to get to my house as well. And there's also several
active businesses there that are unaware that any of this is taking
place. So I hope we have an opportunity going forward to discuss this
in detail.
MR. KLATZKOW: We'll do that by executive summary.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good.
Okay, is there a motion to adjourn?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion to adjourn, second.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign?
Page 184
May 10,2011
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
*****
****Commissioner Coletta moved, seconded by Commissioner
Hiller and carried unanimously that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Item #16A1
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR CASCADA AT FIDDLER'S CREEK AND AUTHORIZE
THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE
ANY UTILITY PERFORMANCE SECURITY TO THE PROJECT
ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT
Item #16A2
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR MARQUESA ROY ALE AT TIBURON AND AUTHORIZE
THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE
ANY UTILITY PERFORMANCE SECURITY TO THE PROJECT
ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR LEGACY AT LEL Y RESORT, 6450 LEGACY CIRCLE,
AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS
DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE ANY UTILITY PERFORMANCE
Page 185
May 10,2011
SECURITY TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER'S
DESIGNATED AGENT
Item #16A4
AWARD BID #10-5520, "MOTOROLA CENTRAL CONTROL
IRRIGATION SUPPLIES AND SERVICES" TO AG-TRONIX,
INC. WITH ANNUAL EXPENDITURES ESTIMATED AT
$75,000 - FOR MAINTENANCE & REPAIR OF COUNTY
IRRIGATION SYSTEMS
Item #16A5
RESOLUTION 2011-85: CONVEYING A QUITCLAIM DEED TO
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR A
COMPENSATING TURN LANE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON DAVIS
BOULEVARD (SR-84) EAST OF AN ENTRANCE TO MADISON
P ARK (FISCAL IMP ACT: NONE) - REQUIRED FOR THE
UPCOMING 6-LANE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE SEGMENT OF
DAVIS BOULEVARD BETWEEN RADIO ROAD AND SANTA
BARBARA BOULEVARD
Item # 16A6
RELEASE OF LIEN IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION
ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS.
SUSAN B. WILLIAMS, CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE
NO. 2007060820, RELATING TO PROPERTY AT 1705 TARPON
BAY DRIVE S., COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - WAIVING
$29,550 IN FINES FOR PROPERTY OBTAINED BY AURORA
LOAN SERVICES THROUGH FORECLOSURE AND HAS
SINCE BEEN BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE
Page 186
'C'~"~~____'__'~""~_M~._"."",.~..,_.__......~.."_N~'-'"","-."__",,_,__~___",~_~~.~~_._._.__...-.,,._,._..._...,-,-_.-_._-_._~.
May 10,2011
Item #16A7 - Moved to Item #10G (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item # 16A8
PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR A RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIRED
FOR OIL WELL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AND TERMINATE
THE AGREEMENT WITH A FORMER OWNER; PROJECT
#60044. (FISCAL IMPACT: $30,600) - FOR PARCEL 227FEE
Item #16A9 - Withdrawn (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A WORK ORDER UNDER
CONTRACT #09-5262 WITH AGNOLI, BARBER AND
BRUNDAGE INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES RELATED TO DESIGN, BIDDING ASSISTANCE,
AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES OF WING SOUTH AIRPARK
CHANNELS PORTION OF THE LELY AREA STORM WATER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $199,922
(PROJECT #51101 )
Item #16A10
DECLARING A VALID PUBLIC EMERGENCY & DIRECTING
THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO PROCEED WITH
RE-EV ALUATING THE FEMA-DESIGNATED FLOODPLAIN
USING THE 2010 LIDAR AND APPROVE ALL NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENTS (FISCAL IMP ACT: $400,250) - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16B1
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVE AN
Page 187
"_.,,,.___.~,,_____.___ _.~,__.,._....._......,_.w".,,__________..._~.~,...'~__~'__~^_.___,_-""_~_v._...~._,__,.,".,,__,,_."~.,_~.,,.___..~,___"~_.__~._.._.,,~
May 10,2011
EVENT GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CRA AND
THE BAYSHORE CAPA CENTER, INC. TO SUPPORT THE 2012
"BA YSHORE FESTIVAL OF THE ARTS" EVENT AT SUGDEN
REGIONAL PARK; APPROVE A GRANT OF UP TO $15,000
FROM THE BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE TRUST FUND
(FUND 187) FY12 MARKETING & PROMOTIONS BUDGET TO
FUND CERTAIN EVENT COSTS, AND DECLARE THE GRANT
AND EVENT SERVE A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE (FISCAL
IMPACT: $15,000) - SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY, 2012
Item #16C1
EXECUTE A FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY FORM FOR SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL
WATER TREATMENT PLANT INJECTION WELL IW -2 - A
PERMIT RENEWAL REQUIREMENT THAT GUARANTEES
THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT HAS THE
$731,578 IN FUNDS THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO
CLOSE, PLUG AND ABANDON THE WELL IN THE EVENT
THE SYSTEM FAILS OR IS NO LONGER REQUIRED
Item #16C2
ONE- TIME EXCEPTION TO ORDINANCE 2005-54, FOR NINE
PROPERTIES LOCATED IN COURTSIDE COMMONS OF
WYNDEMERE, PERTAINING TO AN ANNUAL SOLID WASTE
COLLECTION & DISPOSAL SERVICE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
FOR COLLECTION, DISPOSAL AND ADMINISTRATION OF
MUNICIP AL SOLID WASTE DUE TO A BILLING ERROR AND
DIRECT THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO TAKE
ALL ACTION NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE EXCEPTION
Page 188
May 10,2011
Item #16D1
BUDGET AMENDMENT ENABLING THE EXPENDITURE OF
$204,627 STATE AID TO LIBRARIES GRANT AWARDED
COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY - USED TO PURCHASE
LIBRARY MATERIALS, SERVICES AND EQUIPMENT
Item # 16D2
AGREEMENT WITH THE DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF
COLLIER COUNTY FOR TRANSPORTING SCHOOL AGE
RECREATION PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS AT AN
ESTIMATED COST OF $52,000 - TO TRANSPORT CAMPERS
FROM BASE CAMP LOCATIONS TO EDUCATIONAL AND
RECREATIONAL ATTRACTIONS DURING THE PERIOD OF
JUNE 10,2011 THRU AUGUST 19,2011
Item #16D3
AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S
OFFICE TO PARTICIPATE WITH THE OPERATION OF THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE, MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE
ABUSE REINVESTMENT GRANT. FUNDING PROVIDED
THROUGH MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING #LHZ25
FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES - FUNDS WILL BE USED BY THE SHERIFF'S
OFFICE AND ITS CONTRACTED HEALTH CARE PROVIDER,
PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, TO SERVE THOSE THAT
SUFFER FROM MENTAL ILLNESS, SUBSTANCE ABUSE,
CO-OCCURRING MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE
DISORDERS AND ARE CURRENTLY IN OR AT RISK OF
ENTERING THE CRIMINAL OR JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM
Page 189
May 10,2011
Item #16D4
MODIFICATION TO DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE
AGREEMENT #08DB-D3-09-21-01-A03 BETWEEN THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND
COLLIER COUNTY. THIS MODIFICATION EXTENDS THE
GRANT PERIOD - TO COMPLETE REHABILITATION AND
ADMINISTRA TIVE CLOSE-OUT ACTIVITIES FOR THE
SINGLE-FAMILY HOME REHABILITATION PROGRAM
Item #16D5
FINAL DISPOSITION OF NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION
PROGRAM RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENT OF COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO.
2009-63 AND S125.35(3), FLORIDA STATUTES - AT THE
NAPLES ADDRESSES: 2197 44TH TERRACE SW; 4833 21ST
AVE SW; 4440 19TH AVE SW; 4735 6TH AVE SE; 4300 17TH
AVE SW; 2100 51ST TERRACE SW; 5401 21ST PLACE SW; 4308
ROSE AVE (UNIT A); 4308 ROSE AVE (UNIT B); 2522
LINWOOD AVE (UNIT A); 2522 LINWOOD AVE (UNIT B)
Item #16D6
U.S. HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD)
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT-RECOVERY
(CDBG-R) AGREEMENT PROVIDING AMERICAN RECOVERY
AND REINVESTMENT ACT (ARRA) FUNDS TO BIG CYPRESS
HOUSING CORPORATION (BCHC) FOR $467,788 TO PROVIDE
ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS AT THE MAIN STREET VILLAGE
AND EDEN GARDENS APARTMENTS IN IMMOKALEE, FL-
AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 190
May 10,2011
Item #16El
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT FROM
R.W. BECK, INC. TO SAIC ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT &
INFRASTRUCTURE, LLC FOR ENGINEERING TECHNICAL
SUPPORT AND FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR
THE SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT - DUE TO THE SAIC
ASSET PURCHASE OF RW BECK, INC. (CONTRACT #10-5485)
Item #16E2
RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE REVENUE FOR SPECIALTY
FACILITY MAINTENANCE SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF
$106,594.03 TO FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
COST CENTER (001) AND APPROVE ALL NECESSARY FY11
BUDGET AMENDMENTS - REIMBURSEMENT FOR
SERVICES USED BY VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS, PER
BUDGET INSTRUCTION
Item #16E3 - Moved to Item #10F (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16E4
RESOLUTION 2011-86: ADOPTING A CONSERVATION
COLLIER GOPHER TORTOISE RECIPIENT SITE POLICY
AND FEE SCHEDULE TO GOVERN THE OPERATION OF
THE CARACARA PRESERVE; CHAIRMAN TO SIGN GOPHER
TORTOISE SHORT-TERM PROTECTED RECIPIENT SITE
PERMIT #GTSR-I1-00003 & AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND CORKSCREW REGIONAL
ECOSYSTEM WATERSHED (CREW) LAND & WATER TRUST
-AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 191
___._,.,_____.,.-_.____..".__._~_____'__'''__V___..,.___N~..
May 10,2011
Item #16E5
REJECT VENDOR QUOTES FOR INVITATION TO BID (ITB)
#11-5629, BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR NEW HIRES AND
VEHICLE FOR HIRE OWNERS AND DRIVERS AND APPROVE
OUTSTANDING PAYMENT OF THREE INVOICES TO
STERLING INFOSYSTEMS, INC. TOTALING $6,374.82-
DURING THE SOLICITATION PROCESS THE CONTRACT
WITH STERLING INFOSYSTEMS, INC. HAD LAPSED WITH
STAFF CONTINING TO USE THE CONTRACTOR'S SERVICE;
PURCHASING HAS ENTERED INTO INTERIM AGREEMENTS
WITH TWO OF THE VENDORS THAT WILL BE USED UNTIL
STAFF CAN REVIEW/RECONFIGURE THE SOLICITATION
Item #16E6
ACCEPT REPORTS & RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE
ORDERS AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS - FOR THE
PERIOD MARCH 25, 2011 THROUGH APRIL 19,2011
Item #16Fl
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY AND HODGES UNIVERSITY IN SUPPORT OF
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES SURROUNDING A
NATURAL OR MANMADE HAZARD EMERGENCY
RESPONSE - ASSISTING COLLIER COUNTY W /TEMPORARY
RELIEF ACTIVITIES INCLUDING THE DISTRIBUTION OF
FOOD AND WATER, SUPPLIES AND/OR OTHER ITEMS FOR
AN INITIAL 3- YEAR AGREEMENT PERIOD WITH TWO (2)
1- YEAR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS
Page 192
May 10,2011
Item #16Hl
PROCLAMATION TO DESIGNATE MAY 10,2011 AS THE
CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA'S "SAVING
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA" CAMPAIGN CELEBRATION DAY.
TO BE PRESENTED AT THE CONSERVANCY OF SWFL
EVENT MAY 10,2011 BY KRISTI BARTLETT. SPONSORED
BY COMMISSIONER COYLE - ADOPTED
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 193
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
May 10.2011
I. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Districts:
I) Ouarry Community Development District:
Proposed FYI 1112 Budget.
2) South Florida Water Management District:
2010 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
3) Verona Walk Community Development District:
Proposed FYII/12 Budget.
B. Minutes:
I) Development Services Advisorv Committee:
Minutes of January 7. 2011 Public UtilitieslRPl Subcommittee;
February 2. 20 I I;
2) Floodplain Management Planning Committee:
Minutes of AprilS, 2010; July 12,2010; July 16,2010;
January 10, 2011.
3) Golden Gate Beautification Advisorv Committee:
Agenda of March 8, 2011; April 4. 2011.
Minutes of March 8, 20 II.
4) Golden Gate Community Center Advisorv Committee:
Minutes of March 7. 2011.
5) Parks and Recreation Advisorv Board:
Minutes of February 16,2011.
6) Radio Road Beautification Advisory Committee:
Agenda of April 6, 2011.
Minutes of February 23. 2011.
C. Other:
I) Code Enforcement Special Magistrate:
Minutes of March 4. 20 I I.
May 10,2011
Item # 1611
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD APRIL 9, 2011 THROUGH
APRIL 15,2011 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE OFFICIAL
RECORDSOFTHEBOARD
Item #1612
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD APRIL 16, 2011
THROUGH APRIL 22, 2011 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #1613
THE ST ATE REVENUE SHARING APPLICATION FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2011-2012 AND FOR THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE
APPLICATION - REQUIRED APPLICATION THAT MUST BE
SUBMITTED ANNUALLY BY JUNE 30 TO BE CONSIDERED
FOR ANY DISTRIBUTED FUNDS
Item #16Kl
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$297,500 FOR ACQUISITION OF PARCEL III IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V NB HOLDINGS
CORPORATION, ET AL., CASE NO. 06-0658-CA. (SANTA
BARBARA BOULEVARD PROJECT #62081) (FISCAL IMPACT:
$314,737)
Item #16K2
OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT, NATIONAL CITY
Page 194
May 10,2011
MORTGAGE COMPANY, FOR PARCELS 162FEE AND
162TCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,500 IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V TANIA CANTIN, SR., ET AI.,
CASE NO. 10-2646-CA. (COLLIER BOULEVARD PROJECT
#68056) (FISCAL IMPACT: $2,400)
Item #16K3
OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT, ANNETTE POCCHI,
FOR PARCELS 105FEE AND 105TCE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$25,000 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V
ANNETTE POCCHL ET AI., CASE NO. 10-2682-CA. (COLLIER
BOULEVARD PROJECT #68056) (FISCAL IMP ACT: $4,200)
Item #16K4
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,200
FOR PARCEL 145RDUE IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER
COUNTY V LAMAR TINE PETIT MONSIEUR, ET AI., CASE NO.
1 0-2681-CA. (COLLIER BOULEVARD PROJECT #68056)
(FISCAL IMPACT: $700)
Item #16K5
EXECUTE A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND MUTUAL
RELEASE WITH SURETY CONSTRUCTION TO RECOVER
DAMAGES INCURRED BY THE COUNTY AS A RESULT OF
CONTRACTED WORK FOR REPAIR TO THE POLLUTION
CONTROL LABORATORY IN BUILDING "H" ON THE 3RD
FLOOR IN THE AMOUNT OF $88,559.49 - THE RESULT OF
SUBCONTRACTED WORK (CONTRACT #06-3971) FOR
INTERIOR ALTERATION WORK PERFORMED IN MAY, 2010
Page 195
May 10,2011
Item #16K6
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT FOR PARCELS 112RDUE
AND 112TCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $356,263 IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V KAYE HOMES, INC., ET AL.,
CASE NO. 10-2680-CA. (COLLIER BOULEVARD PROJECT
#68056) (FISCAL IMPACT: $66,963)
Item #17A
ORDINANCE 2011-15: AMENDING THE COLLIER COUNTY
ETHICS ORDINANCE NO. 03-53, AS AMENDED, TO PROVIDE
AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COMMISSIONERS TO ATTEND
CHARITABLE FUNCTIONS AND PAY FOR ONLY THE
ACTUAL COST TO ATTEND THE EVENT
Item #17B
ORDINANCE 2011-16: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 76-48,
AS AMENDED, WHICH REGULATES THE USE OF COUNTY
P ARKS, BY ELIMINATING THE PROHIBITION AGAINST THE
POSSESSION, TRANSPORT, OR DISCHARGE OF A FIREARM
AS SUCH REGULATORY AUTHORITY HAS BEEN
PREEMPTED BY SECTION 790.33(1), FLORIDA STATUTES
Item #17C - Moved to Item #8A (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
*****
Page 196
May 10,2011
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:04 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
'1uJ-w. ~
FRED COYLE, Chairman
ATTEST . :'/~",~' """
'.- .:~. 4. . t,.': ~:, ~.~-~ f :';r.:"'.
. .. '1;":,' '_: ')~'*':.t,'J:..~~~,''''':',..~'' .
DWIGHT E:"BROG:K CLERK
.\ ." .,.' n~"!=)f.> ", . "
. ~'r~t; ,'_ ~. \,:jI'-'~~"'rJ (J... ". ._'-<0/"
i..~1!:~!lyi:;;...~~\.:...
.'~_ -, ~ . ~~ )~~ ~l/" . _ . I
',. -;' " ../.. .' : ./':\. C
..,~.. '~ . w~ . ~". (<.....J '.
These minutes a~ by the Board on 14- ~
as presented or as corrected
Q^<L(jeJ lo/ujl' !O!Ii/1/
(2JF'-"-- ~ 1&33
la/I! 1'201/
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC. BY CHERIE' NOTTINGHAM.
Page 197
10/11/2011 Item 16.J.3.
.
eC>rrQ.d-ed 'I w~ ~ Co~Of'\.
--~~,1~
~ ~e,r-
lo/l\1l\
e.0'\SU\+ 15ufY\n'i).rtt As~o.. ~
-Appt-ovl2.d ~ ~ 0('\ lOrn (2Dtl
- rY\\'n~ crQ 5{to/2.0\ \ -'o.{).prO\J~ o..s
~
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommeudation to approve corrections to the minutes of the Board of County
Commissioners meeting beld on May 10,2011, in regard to a speaker named
erroneonsly. The meeting video has been reviewed and the co.rrections have been
verified by tbe Clerk of the Courts, Minutes and Records Department.
OBJECTIVE: To approve corrections to the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners meeting held on
May 10, 20] 1.
CONSIDERATIONS: The minutes of tile Board of County Commissioners meeting held on May 10,201]
incorrectly note the name of the speaker in the following section:
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. You know. we have the two principals right here, and - that are involved
with this road. You live on the road and your business is on the road _
MR. DEMi'SEY: AIUI we're llIl- we're suing noW-
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You've already filed a suit.
MR. DEMPSEY: We've IIlready jlled.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you've already sued.
And my only question is, you're asldng Commissioner Coyle if we want to move forward with this. I agree
with you as far as time is of the essence tJ1V'W0)'. And I ask - Ms. - it's McMillan, isn't it? Mrs. McMillan,
Linda - can I just call you -
~*
As verified by the Clerk of the Courts, Minutes and Records Department, the following statements were made by
Mr. Vaughn not Mr. Dempsey:
..
"And we're all -we're suingnow-"
"we've already filed."
FISCAL IMPACT:. There is no fiscal impact associated with this Executive Summary.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management impact associated with this
Executive Summary. .
LEGAL CONSIDERA nONS: This item is bas been reviewed by the County Attorney, is legally sufficient,
and requires majority support for approval. -JAK
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Co~missioners approve corrections to the minutes of the
Board of County Commissioners meeting held on May 10,2011, in regard to a speaker named erroneously. The
meeting video has been reviewed and the corrections have been verified by the Clerk of the Courts, Minutes and
Records Department.
ATIACHMENTS:
S4effieJd- Email Correspondence
PREPARED BY:
Mike Sheffield, Business Operations Manager, County Manager's Office
r"\
DATE:
October] I, 2011 .
Packet Page -1127-