Loading...
Minutes 02/16/2012February 16, 2012 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Isles of Capri, Florida a February 16, 2012 MAR LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Isles of Capri Fire Advisory Committee, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 6:30 p.m. in REGULAR SESSION at the Isles of Capri Fire Station, with the following members present: Chairman: Fiala Hiller r" Henning Coyle Coletta ALSO PRESENT: Joe Langkawel Jim Gault Kevin Walsh Jim Hughes Chief Alan McLaughlin — Fire District Misc. Corres: Date: Jr 122 I i 2 item* CC',)ieS to: Page 1 February 16, 2012 CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay, if we can call this meeting to order. It's 6:30. In attendance is myself, Joe Langkawel, Jim Gault, Kevin Walsh, Jim Hughes, Chief McLaughlin, and we have a court reporter here today. So one thing I will ask, if you're called upon to speak at any time, please identify yourself so she can get your name recorded properly and stuff. And please speak up, because I'm three quarters deaf tonight. My sinuses are really giving me problems. I can hardly hear anything. Okay. First thing that we have on the agenda is yes, we do have a quorum; there's four out of five of us here. The first thing on the agenda is the minutes from the January 19th meeting. If you can review them and -- MR. WALSH: Not having been at the meeting, it makes perfect sense to me. I move approval. MR. GAULT: And I'll second that. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Approved by Kevin, seconded by Jim. All in favor, say aye. MR. GAULT: Aye. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Aye. MR. WALSH: Aye. MR. HUGHES: Aye. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And it's unanimous that those are approved as written. MR. GAULT: I just had a question. Wasn't I on the phone for this one? Wasn't this when I -- 111.4 CHAIRMAN 4ANGKAWEL: You were on the phone for that dIn t MR. GAULT: Okay. We're not going to list that as on the Page 2 February 16, 2012 phone? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: No, because I lost you halfway through the meeting. So you were on the phone for half the meeting. MR. HUGHES: You get partial credit. MR. WALSH: So you'll get partial credit for that one. MR. GAULT: Cut my salary in half? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That was the one where it went dead on us. Okay, the second is the minutes from the special meeting that we held on 3 February. It's right there. MR. HUGHES: This one? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah. MR. WALSH: These are all February 3rd? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes, February 3rd. MR. HUGHES: Okay, I'm in the wrong pew. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah, the 3 February meeting was when the Isles of Capri Budgetary and Operational Investigation Committee presented their report, and that was the whole meeting. Gave it to us and we left. MR. GAULT: I make a motion we accept the minutes. MR. HUGHES: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. And Alan, you want me to give these to you? Those are the two cycles, just to get those out of the way. Okay, going down our agenda for this evening, the one thing that we need to add under new business will be discussion of the report from the Isles of Capri Budgetary and Operational Investigation Committee that we were given at the last special meeting, so just to get that on the agenda itself. So from there, let's see, we have the Chief s report done up in a whole new format. Page 3 February 16, 2012 CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Yes. We have a new reporting system that's kicking it out a little differently and we're working on trying to consolidate that down, but we have a total record of 36 for the month. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay, we have 36 for the month. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: And they're broken down by incident type. You're just going to have to follow it through on each one. MR. GAULT: Is this going to be the new format? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Yes, it is. We're trying to condense it down so it's not so spaced out. We're still working on developing the report program itself. We have to actually go creative. It's still new, we're still playing with it. MR. GAULT: Now next month will show January/February or will it -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Just monthly. MR. GAULT: It won't show cumulative here? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: No, we can. We're working on that. I'm working on it from my board also that shows them cumulative. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah, the accumulative was really helpful in the past to keep track -- MR. GAULT: Yeah, for trend analysis. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Right. MR. HUGHES: Where does it say it's in or out of district? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Okay, if you look, the incident -- anything that's just dispatched or canceled in or out, those are all out of district. Because those will all be either calls to Marco Island or East Naples. Everything else is in district. MR. HUGHES: So if it says canceled en route, that would indicate out of district? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Otherwise you'd have another line item under it. Like if you actually had a fire in there somewhere else, it would actually show up. 0=1 February 16, 2012 CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. S o l 0 canceled en route. Those would be all out of district. Okay, we had a wildfire, was that in or out of district? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: That one was in East Naples. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That was in East Naples. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: That was out of district. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: So that's out of district. MR. HUGHES: Could that be added to this? Indicate en route? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Lieutenant Michaels is working on it. I had the same questions on trying to get this a little more accurate. MR. GAULT: It's a good start. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes, good start. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: We've only been working with it two weeks, so we're -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah. Okay. Standbys and move -ups, only one. That's -- okay, and total of 36 for the month. That's actually pretty good for this time of year. Pretty low. Okay, so any other questions on the Chiefs report? MR. WALSH: Just clarification. Because we eliminated our mutual arrangement with Marco, but we still have some sort of backup responsibility with Marco? Because you mentioned both Marco and East Naples were included in this 10 number. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: If the other units are already on call, let's say Engine 23 is on a call and Engine 61, because Ochopee's also not responding down there for when they -- when the other units are called out and not available, the CAD keeps going down the list looking for the next available unit. Well, at some point it's going to come here and call this one when those units are so far out. It's just going to revert here to the center. So you'll see that happen from time to time, but it's not every incident now. Page 5 February 16, 2012 MR. SMITH: Is that equally true with East Naples? Can we be called upon just like we can with Marco? THE COURT REPORTER: May I have your name, please? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Please ask to be addressed to the Board first before you just start talking, and please identify yourself for the court reporter. MR. SMITH: Okay, I'm very sorry. Forget it. THE COURT REPORTER: May I have your name, please? MR. SMITH: My name is Carter Smith. I just thought it was apropos when he was talking about Marco, I thought we could also hear about East Naples. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I cannot comment on East Naples. You'd probably have to go to their district meeting, which I believe they hold on the second Tuesday. MR. SMITH: In other words, they don't call upon us to handle their fire problems, East Naples? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Okay, you redefined your question. Yes, we do respond to them for additional help. When they get short on structure fires in certain districts, we are first call. Back side of Fiddler's Creek in the areas of where 23 is up there north of us, we respond as a third new engine. MR. GAULT: It's all part of a 9 -1 -1 protocol. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: That's all part of a 9 -1 -1 protocol. It's not even -- that's not even really part of the mutual aid agreement between the Chiefs Association. That's just in the 9 -1 -1 CAD. MR. SMITH: So they're the two principal communities we have is Marco Island and East Naples? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Yes. MR. SMITH: Sorry. My apologies. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's okay. We just have a lot of people here tonight, we need to try to keep it orderly. February 16, 2012 We do -- just as a statement, we do have mutual aid agreements with every fire department in the county. If we have a fire in one of the large highrises in North Naples, there will be equipment there from every department in the county. Same thing on Marco Island. But yes, we do respond back and forth between them. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: And to answer your question, because most of the citizens don't realize this, in the 9 -1 -1 system now the system sees the fire service in Collier County as one. You don't have nine individual departments. And this was done years ago, 15, 20 years ago as part of the Chiefs Association with their board saying we need to have this as a seamless integration of fire service in the community. So the CAD doesn't look at lines on a street, it just looks at who the closest units are and pulls them out. Those can be adjusted by the departments because of manpower, but generally that's how the system was set up. It looks at it as a countywide system. MR. SMITH: Can I finish up with one? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Sure. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Sure. MR. SMITH: There are two fire communities, it's been my understanding for years, that are governed by Collier County, and that is Ochopee and Marco -- and the Isles of Capri. Is that a correct statement? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: That is a correct statement. MR. SMITH: And the county's been threatening for years to get out of the fire business; is that a correct statement? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I do not believe that's true. I've never heard that personally. Firsthand I've never heard that. MR. SMITH: Okay. Years ago when this thing was first threatened that we were going to be absorbed by East Naples, my wife and I went around the Isles of Capri and we got about 400 signatures Page 7 February 16, 2012 that were opposed to this thing. Well, you know, when you got 400 signatures, you can talk turkey up there in Collier County. It was a very interesting thing. And it's even -- it's been back that far, and we salvaged this thing, along with other people that worked on it, Matt Crowder over there. And now we're back to the same old problem, aren't we? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: No, you're not. MR. SMITH: Who's going to take over the Isles of Capri? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's a discussion -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: That's not this discussion. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's not what we're discussing now. We're discussing our Chiefs report and where we've gone. We'll get into possible structuring a little later. Okay, any questions on the Chiefs report? MR. WALSH: Move approval. MR. GAULT: I second. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay, all in favor? MR. GAULT: Aye. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Aye. MR. WALSH: Aye. MR. HUGHES: Aye. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay, Chiefs report is approved as presented. Okay, moving down under old business, we have the holiday pay study being conducted by HR. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I spoke with Amy Lyberg this afternoon and she said that they have almost finished and they will have a plan in 30 days and all the answers that we're looking for. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: A plan and what we're looking for in 30 days? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Yeah, the final answer. February 16, 2012 CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. And the final answer being? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: What needs to be owed, how it's going to be paid and what we have to pay out. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And have they determined whether or not it needs to be paid out at all or if it should stay the way it was? The last discussions with the county manager was that he can say this has been the policy for the last 16 years, this is correct and we'll let it go. Has that been determined? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I was not told that. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. So that's still an issue that we have that's out there. Because we haven't even determined whether or not we're supposed to be paying this. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Correct. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And we don't have a figure of how much they want us to pay. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Correct. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And this has been going on since November till the end of February that they can't decide if we're paying it incorrectly, how much we should be paid or how much we should go back on. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Correct. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. And we will have that answer for them within 30 days? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: That's what I was told. And to answer your question on the other side is I believe the hangup was what you were told and what labor law says. And that's what they're investigating. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And what labor law says and also what the county -- the chairman of the Board of Collier County Commissioners said that if a practice has been in place for a number of February 16, 2012 years becomes county policy by default. He has said that publicly. I think 16 years from the inception of this department means that it has been there and been in place for an awfully long time. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And so to just change it goes against county policy, so that will have to be discussed. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I think the problem was, Mr. Langkawel, that a county policy cannot usurp federal law. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. Well, we'll look into it and we'll see what their report is. Kevin? MS. NEUHAUS: Thank you, Joe. MR. WALSH: Is Amy the -- is she the one most knowledgeable on -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: She's the one in charge. MR. WALSH: Because I think she's the one I talked to, and after about 10 minutes I had a throbbing headache. She was frustrated, and so we agreed to meet face -to -face. But if we're 30 days away from resolution, I'd rather have her work on the problem than trying to educate me. It will be what it will be. There's nothing I can do to influence the outcome. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: So we'll look for an answer in 30 days. MR. GAULT: And will we be legally bound to that answer? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Pretty much so, yes. I mean, we can discuss it and we can bring it up. But yeah, I believe that we will be held to that answer, okay. That doesn't mean the discussions are done with it. I think that we have some input that would go into that. MR. ROGERS: Mr. Chairman, do you want comments now or later in the meeting? THE COURT REPORTER: May I have your name, please? Page 10 February 16, 2012 MR. ROGERS: I'm sorry, John Rogers. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: If it's on this particular subject, I'd rather cover them as we go. So go ahead, John. MR. ROGERS: I just want to clarify the record, because you said this has been going on since November. Actually, having met with Barbara, there are emails on this very issue with the county and Ms. Lyberg, who is completely confused, as early as August of last year with a promise in September to have an answer in 30 days. So with the county management, you are exactly today where you were in September. That's factual. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. I know it's been dragging on and dragging on. And it's just -- and I know that it will take a while before we resolve this. The bad part is is that the longer this continues, if there's a liability building up, it's going to be harder to make up that liability out of the payroll section of the budget as we get farther and farther into the year. Yeah, Jeri? MS. NEUHAUS: Jeri Neuhaus. I'm concerned -- first I want an apology for what you said earlier. How are you going to find out? In 30 days who's going to notify who? You've come to a meeting now and have had to ask for a status. It would seem to me that somebody from the fire advisory board should be in the loop. As painful as Amy Lyberg is, that somebody might want to be on that list where they notify you -all instead of notifying Alan to then notify the board so all the board members can know before the next meeting if something happens. How are you -all going to find out? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: The normal method, as soon as the county notifies the board or the department of anything, it would come through our Chiefs office here and then be given to the board members. And it's always been given to us as soon as it comes in. Page 11 February 16, 2012 MS. NEUHAUS: So it goes to you all individually then -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah. MS. NEUHAUS: -- it doesn't just go to one of you. Because you can't communicate with the other ones. It would go to all of the board members as soon as the information is available. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's the way we've always done it in the past and it's worked very well. I don't have a problem -- MS. NEUHAUS: I'm just curious as to why you -all didn't already have the information that Alan just had. I mean, Allen said there's going to be a decision in 30 days. Why didn't you -all -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Because this is the forum for information like that where he would tell us. MS. NEUHAUS: So if there's a decision, will you wait 30 days to give it to him at the next meeting? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: No. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: A deci -- once we have a decision, that decision would be emailed to the board members in a blast email all at the same time as a forward to them of what the decision was. MS. NEUHAUS: And just for clarification, basically like John said, we're just back where we were in August. We've got another promise of 30 days. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Well, and that may be. And we have to -- we have to at some point take them -- MS. NEUHAUS: No fault of yours, I'm just -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: -- at their word that they said they'll have it in 30 days and so we will look for it in 30 days. At the end of 30 days, as Kevin has said, he's going to give her the time to complete it. If not, he had volunteered before to be the representative to go up there and sit on her desk until we get an answer. MS. NEUHAUS: You have my sympathies, Kevin. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: So we will take it from there and Page 12 February 16, 2012 we'll move forward on that part of it. Okay. Okay, under new business, discussion of county services provided by 44,600 indirect costs. Alan, do you know what that's -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: The -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: I see the document here. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: There was -- apparently I guess the committee went up and had some questions on what does this district receive for indirect costs. This is what they were given. And it was passed along to the Board members of what was -- that's all. Basically the budgetary investigative committee met and this is what they were given of what that 44,000 in here provides. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Oh, okay. I was going to say because yeah, that number fits with what we pay and stuff. I just wondered why it was a separate line item. It's good that it breaks it out individually for a little clarification. That's good information that we can use in our follow -on budgetary issues. Speaking of budgetary issues, any rumblings through the county yet? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: We're still waiting for the first posting to come out. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Which should be the end of March. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: So we're actually for it a little sooner than that this year. Hopefully by the end of next week. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That would be nice so we can go from there. Okay, Isles of Capri brush truck. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I've discovered this week that the fleet manager had put the brush truck out for auction, and I had it removed Page 13 February 16, 2012 from the auction list and had a discussion with him. They have a matrix that they use on age and cost and repairs of vehicles and so forth and so on that they just automatically do. They did it with my water tank in Ochopee for three years. The director of the service has that ability to pull that off, so I've had it pulled off. And we've already discussed some of those costs related to that particular vehicle, but that's for another discussion. I just wanted to let you know that they had done that. It's been removed from that auction list. It's still in service, it's not going anywhere. There's still discussion about some of the costs related to it. It currently is due for $1,000 worth of service on a muffler system because it has to be fabricated, and the shop is looking to bill us a fleet labor charge of 16,000 for FY 12. The end for that total cost for that unit, and it's a labor cost on it, it's a high thing with the parts, is an estimate. And they do an estimation. MR. WALSH: Chief, based on your experience and your knowledge of the economics of this, and assuming that the representation that it's had two runs in the, what, five years that we've had it, would it be your recommendation that we get out of the brush truck business? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I don't want to make a decision on a district that I'm only acting as a provisional chief on. However, if it was mine in my district, I would put it out to third -party auction and try to get at least a minimum of 40,000 in cost back of what I've got into it and reinvest that back into some type of a unit and use the pickup truck out there that's sitting there doing nothing at this time except shuffling people back and forth to get groceries. Personally. And I'll leave it at that. MS. NEUHAUS: Kevin, can I offer one piece of information? Jeri Neuhaus. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Jeri Neuhaus? Page 14 February 16, 2012 MS. NEUHAUS: Two calls in district. The call -- we have done multiple, multiple calls. We met with Wilbur from the Department of Forestry. We have done many calls out of district. Which is one of the reasons we get so much District 1 money. We're a fire department who supports other districts in brush trucks and everything else. So it's a big mistake when people say and tell people we've only done two calls. We've done two calls in district. We don't have many brush fires in the Isles of Capri. But as a result we get District 1 money for that brush truck, for the boat calls and things like that. And we can't lose sight of that. I agree with Alan, I think that the brush truck should be one that's functional and one that's effective and cost effective and all that, but I don't think that using a number of two is a fair representation of what we do and why we do it. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: May I comment? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Go ahead, Alan. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Correction on that. You do not get District 1 money because of the wildland fires, you get District 1 money because of Keewaydin Island. District 1 money is -- the District 1 area that's represented is divided between East Naples, Golden Gate and Ochopee. The other piece of that, which is a smaller percentage, goes to the Capris district strictly for Keewaydin percentage that is in District 1. Which is a pretty good -sized area actually -- MS. NEUHAUS: That's not what we've been told. I'd like to see that documented. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: When you look at the percentages how it's divided up, it becomes very apparent of the area that's divided up into and how that's divided up. So anyways, that has historically always been there. Now, do they have a -- is there a brushfire responsibility in part of that? Yes. Page 15 February 16, 2012 And it goes both ways. But the majority of that is because pretty much the only ones going to Keewaydin are the Capri folks here. And that's by boat. Because it is matching your district. I mean, they're getting very limited response from the City of Naples. Marco's going to eventually go there. East Naples is bordering it, but they don't even have a boat to get out there. So the -- MS. NEUHAUS: Meaning the response people. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Right. So Capri's been the number -- MS. NEUHAUS: Not the people using it. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: -- one responder to Keewaydin for the last 15, 18 years. And that's evident. And that's part of that money. And your statement is true, two calls in district and then multiple calls, Corkscrew and other areas of the county. And of course I was asked by one of the residents, who's paying for the backfill and where's our truck if they're over there? Well, that is a cost to the citizens here. You are paying to send someone out to Corkscrew or to North Naples or to Golden Gate. And that's just the fact of it is. There's other things that could be done. And I agree with you, like you have a pickup truck out here that you could put a skid unit on it for $4,000 and be fully functional and still do everything you're doing with that unit. It's probably tremendous cost in parts and for labor because of the type of vehicle. Doesn't negate you still can send them somewhere. But those have been some of the issues and the questions I've been raising. They're facts, but that's -- depending what the citizens want to do. If they don't mind that, then that's up to them. You still have the unit here we have to protect, which means we have to backfill that with either job bankers or overtime. MS. NEUHAUS: We also need to make the Department of Forestry aware, because as recently as a few weeks ago when they met with the various chiefs talking about the availability of brush truck Page 16 February 16, 2012 response vehicles, they counted Capri among those vehicles. And they only found out a week and a half later that -- they were told by a firefighter here that you -all were getting rid of the brush truck, you -all were getting out of the brush truck business. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Not a true statement. It's not a true statement. The analogy was can we take a truck that you currently own that's much newer, make it do the same thing at a whole lot less. MS. NEUHAUS: No, no, no, I'm talking about the statement that said we don't want to do brush calls outside of our district. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I haven't heard that statement. I can tell you the only analogy that was discussed was is there a cheaper way that we can have a brush vehicle for the district that the citizens aren't paying that kind of money for the repair and equipment on that vehicle and still provide a brush response. And the answer is yes, there is. MS. NEUHAUS: I'm talking about the conversation with -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I can't address the conversation. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah, that all may be true. I had heard through the grapevine, and I have to put it that way, nothing to confirm it, that one of our fireman had told the Forest Service that we're getting out of the wildfire business. And my response was simply, not to my knowledge, we have no intention of doing that. But back on the issue of the brush truck that we currently have, I will make no secret of the fact that I have never liked having a Humvee as a brush truck, simply because of my past experience with humvees. They are a very good vehicle, they can do a lot of things that other vehicles can't, but their maintenance costs are extremely high. And there's no question about that. And I think that when we got into this, based on the use of them around the state, it was a very good choice of a vehicle. I can also see that by our maintenance cost, because we go through the county to do our maintenance, they're not equipped to Page 17 February 16, 2012 handle it. And because of that, our costs are escalating. A muffler system should not cost us the type of funds that they're looking at. But because they don't know how to handle the vehicle and they can't properly service it, we're paying a great deal of money for what we get out of the vehicle. And I agree, I see the two in- district fires, I'm rather surprised we had two in- district with it. I think the numbers are closer to 55 or 60 that's run total throughout its life. Which it has been an asset to all of Collier County, Lee County and other areas of the state. And so we've done very good with that. But I think if we're looking at a vehicle that's going to cost us in maintenance close to an average of $10,000 a year for a brush truck, I think we do need to explore other options that are viable. We do have a four -wheel drive pickup, heavy -duty diesel, which we use as a runabout vehicle. It's a crash truck here. Could easily be converted to be a brush truck. Would serve 99 percent of the same purpose of what the Humvee does. I will say, I'm not a big fan of Humvees, but I also know there's things that they can do that a pickup can't. Because I've done it with them. I've also wrecked them, so I know what it cost to repair them. And we may wish to discuss and look seriously as to whether or not we want to convert our pickup into a brush truck and eliminate the maintenance cost of the Humvee. And that would be a discussion -- MR. WALSH: Yeah, to the extent that that is the apparent outcome of the discussion, is that our responsibility to authorize, one, the sale of the brush truck and two, the -- or is that simply an administrative decision made by the county? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That would be a good question. The fact that the name on the title says Collier County, I guess they can sell it if they want. If you look at the charter of the advisory board for financial February 16, 2012 issues, if you talk about $50,000 of our budget, I certainly think that falls within the budget. Our charter also authorizes us to approve or disapprove capital expenditures, and a fire truck is what I would call a capital expenditure, even if it's a brush truck. MR. WALSH: Do you know whether the board approved the purchase of the brush truck? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes, we did. I was on the board at the time that we did. I will also tell you that I am the only board member that opposed it at the time that we purchased it, okay. But there was a good argument as to why we did. And they do, they do make a very good brush truck and they're used in certain locations. And if you had a fleet of 10 or 15 of them, the maintenance cost probably wouldn't be too bad. But having the only one in the county, I can see where it's running us up a very large bill. MR. WALSH: Well, I'm happy to defer to the experts in this matter. And I guess what I'd like to do is leave the topic with a resolution that authorizes the appropriate parties to proceed with the action, including putting up the brush truck for auction or sale or negotiated sale, whatever the appropriate method is for disposition, and then the outfitting of the pickup truck so that this board doesn't have to talk about the issue again. I mean, if the decision is essentially an obvious one, then let's make it and go on. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I will make a comment just to say the FY '12 cost that they've generated here for that labor on the current vehicle, for about two- thirds of that you can fully outfit with a brand new skid unit, pump system, everything for the pickup truck. So to me as a manager, if I owned a business, to me it would be really simple. I mean, I can get basically a brand new truck with a brand new unit, a truck that was rebuilt and modified and cost me money for almost two - thirds what the maintenance costs are going to Page 19 February 16, 2012 cost me. And I'm losing a truck off of the fleet. Total cost of vehicles, that means the overall fleet cost to the district is going to drop. So we're going to save money on that side. MR. WALSH: Okay, I'd be happy to put it in the form of a motion. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: One more question, first, Kevin? Is it possible to take the pack that's on the Humvee and put it in the pickup? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: No, because -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Because that pretty much just slides in the back of the Humvee. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: That one on there is too wide because of the wheel wells. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Wheel wells of the Humvee is really wide. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: It was designed with -- the width is beyond the -- Captain Purcell, you measured that. I believe it's like six or 10 inches bigger than the wheel well width? CAPTAIN PURCELL: Ten inches. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Yeah. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised. The Humvee is extremely wide. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Yes, it is. MR. GAULT: That would determine the value of the vehicle also. I think we just get the new equipment, put it on the truck and -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. But I was just curious if we could pull the pack off and then it would just be a simple tradeover and then we'd sell the Humvee as a vehicle. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: We looked into that. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: But we'll sell it as a vehicle. Okay, Kevin, you wanted to make a motion? Page 20 February 16, 2012 MR. HUGHES: I'd like to ask a question first. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Go ahead, Jim. MR. HUGHES: Will the truck -- I guess I heard the Humvee has trouble carrying all the water. Will the truck have less water, or will there be -- is that truck heavy enough to take it? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: The truck would carry a 200 - gallon tank, according to the specs that we got from the manufacturer. They build these skid units constantly. Currently the weight of the vehicle itself with the Humvee, and I'd have to -- Joe is probably more familiar, the vehicles are extremely heavy as they are. So when you add all the equipment, the pumps on them and 300 gallons, we're actually 700 pounds over the vehicle's weight. So to be legally safe on the road we have to run it with 100 less gallons in the tank, which we carry 200 gallons in it. That's exactly what we can put on the pickup truck and still have about an eight percent safety factor with all the equipment to personnel. MR. HUGHES: That's a one ton pickup? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: It's F -250 -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: It's a heavy -duty three - quarter. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah, but it's heavy duty so I don't know how -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: It's got the extra springs on it. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: -- they count that. It's got extra springs. CAPTAIN PURCELL: Captain Tom Purcell. It's got an extra towing package, load package, heavy -duty suspension in the rear for such a vehicle. When we had it spec'd out, we spec'd it that way. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. MR. HUGHES: Second the motion. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. Page 21 February 16, 2012 MR. WALSH: Yeah, just the motion authorizing the appropriate party, and it sounds like it's going to be somebody in the motor pool in the county that actually pulls the trigger, but authorizing the disposition of the current brush truck and the outfitting of the existing pickup truck to function as a brushfire truck. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: On a third -party auction, the BCC has to approve that. It has to go through the Clerk's Office, and then it goes to purchasing and then it's put up to third -party auction with a minimum bid. Otherwise the standard March auction, there's no minimum bid. Someone could offer $2,000 and walk away with it. And I wasn't going to allow that to happen. I mean, we need to get every dollar we can. And so my option, if that was to happen, would be only to go to a third -party bid. That way we can state a price and they have to meet that. And if it doesn't -- MR. GAULT: It's not an absolute auction. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: No, it's not an absolute. So we're not stuck with someone just walking off with this thing and losing 25, $30,000. MR. GAULT: It's a good strategy. Good recommendation. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. And we have a second by Jim Hughes. Any other comment? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I have none. MR. GAULT: So you'll fill out a request form to do all this? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: We have to fill out an executive summary to be approved by the BCC. And that will be attached with your notes from the meeting here of your approval. Or whatever you vote for. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay, all in favor of that? MR. GAULT: Aye. Page 22 February 16, 2012 CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Aye. MR. WALSH: Aye. MR. HUGHES: Aye. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Unanimous. Okay. All right, next item on the agenda for this evening is the report by the Isles of Capri Budgetary and Operational Investigative Committee. It was given to us on the February 3rd meeting. I don't think there's a copy of it in that stack that you're looking through, Kevin, if that's what you're looking for. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: No, there's not. It was just presented tonight. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: These are ones that we all received at that meeting, except those who were on cruise ships in the South Pacific. MR. WALSH: I'd have rather been here. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. Okay. To start this out, I was asked by Matt if he could have just a small statement he'd like to present. MR. CROWDER: What I asked -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: For the record? MR. CROWDER: Matt Crowder. What I asked actually was time for members of the committee who had done work with the committee to have time each to say something. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. And that would be fine. MR. CROWDER: But I would like to start with just an opening statement. Of course we presented our report to the board at the special meeting on February 3rd specifically so that the board would have a chance to digest the report and come back today at the regular meeting Page 23 February 16, 2012 to discuss it and take action on it. So I want to thank the board again for allowing us and supporting us in our work. Our recommendation of course is only for fact finding. I just want to put at ease the minds of those who have shown up at the meeting tonight and may not be fully aware of exactly what's in the report. At this stage we're asking only for fact finding. And we hope that the board will seek fit to take action. So with that, I'd like to invite the members of my committee who are here to speak, if that's okay. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's fine. MR. CROWDER: I have four of them here. MS. NEUHAUS: I have a few -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Jeri Neuhaus. MS. NEUHAUS: Jeri, me, Neuhaus. Just two years ago I stood here and objected to a suggestion by Marco Island. I owe it to you all to explain why my position has changed since then. Back then our situation was different. Collier County had not yet shown us their blatant disregard for our fire advisory board and the concerns of our residents. Collier County and EMS have financial troubles of their own and they're looking to use our fire department and our resources to help solve their problems, not ours. There's little if any question that Dan Summers is making plans to consolidate our department into a general fund department and utilizing our resources and revenue as he, not us, sees fit. The committee worked hard and researched the available options and unanimously agreed that the most reasonable and practical alternative to remaining under Collier County's inept administration is to further explore creating an MSTU under Marco Island. While it may seem like a big change, it's actually a solution that provides the least amount of change for us. This option, if through fact Page 24 February 16, 2012 finding and additional research is confirmed, this would allow us to retain our identity as the Isles of Capri Fire Rescue District. It would allow our ad valorem and impact fees to remain yet into our district. Our department would once again be administered by our fire chief with an excellent reputation and long history in the fire service, in this instance Mike Murphy. We would have a fire advisory board who actually has an ear of its administrator. A board whose input and hard work would actually be taken into consideration. A board with a voice. Let's be clear, at some point down the road it's very likely that all the fire departments will be consolidated in some fashion or another. It's highly unlikely that Collier County will be that coordinating force. Rather, it will be independent districts merging with one another and then ultimately, if they so choose, municipalities like the City of Marco Island and the City of Naples. Until that time, however, why should Isles of Capri be the guinea pig for Dan Summers' grand plan? We need to continue as an MSTU until and if the time comes for consolidation. By then the kinks will have been worked out by those other organizations and we'd be j oining a successfully consolidated organization, which will never happen under Dan Summers and BES. There are a couple of residents here who have said that our department is running just fine in its current incarnation. I beg to differ. We have some wonderful firefighters here, paramedics; we have some very dedicated personnel here. However, I believe documents and emails can be and should be obtained by somebody that address just a few of the situations that have arisen since Rod's termination in November. Here's just a few examples. The unsanctioned cutting of mangroves by personnel, which I'm told is still under investigation by the FWC. The unsanctioned and unofficial dredging by personnel with Page 25 February 16, 2012 apparently serious detrimental impact to the newly constructed dock pilings resulting in a boat having to be moved to another lift. The complete dismantling of the command equipment in the former chief vehicle. Possession of a firearm by an employee on fire department property. And statements by personnel to residents, including myself and other agency personnel, that this is their fire department and not ours. They're giving the rest of the firefighters here who work so hard here a bad rep, just a few of them. That's just samples of the things we're hearing about. And I believe they're a result of a lack of supervision. We can't look to Alan to cover both our fire department and his beautifully, especially considering the distance between them. And as he said to both me and John, you don't want to be our chief, you've got your hands full with Ochopee. So we can't expect him to do this. It's time for the Fire Advisory Board to decide whether to move forward with our recommendation and further explore the option with Marco Island. It's time for the FAB to appoint a member to either chair or be on that committee to lead that investigation, look to us for resources if you want, and keep the district residents informed throughout the entire process and get their input. It's time to demand that Collier County delay any further plans for consolidation of our district during this process, and allow us to work with their budget officers, the necessary personnel, and get the materials and information necessary to determine whether this option will in fact work -- I believe it will -- and if so, to demand that they support its implementation. Time is of the essence. If we decide to do nothing, we will simply be sitting and waiting for Collier County and Dan Summers to destroy everything that Chris, Wally, Acey, Rod and countless other people have worked so hard to create. We can sit idly by and watch as Page 26 February 16, 2012 they give us the proverbial finger yet again. MR. CROWDER: Can I add something to that? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Matt? MR. CROWDER: Another good example of the kinds of things that we see from the county is exactly this thing with the brush truck. Because Alan, thank you for going up there and intervening and getting that thing pulled off the auction. I'll presume since the board wasn't aware that Alan went up and pulled it off the auction, the board is also not aware that it had been put on the auction. I think that's a fine example of the kinds of things we see. You know, it's like a signature move on the part of the county to just do end runs around the fire board, even on issues that, you know, have a clear budgetary angle. So thank you for that, Jeri. And next, Debbie, you have something to say? MS. O'DEAN: I do. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Your name for the record? MS. O'DEAN: I'm Debbie O'Dean. I'm curious why you're here. We don't usually have a court reporter. THE COURT REPORTER: I was hired. MS. O'DEAN: You don't want us to know, okay. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: I don't have an answer, but we don't have our normal person for taking notes. So this is what we have. MS. O'DEAN: I was just curious. We never had -- MR. ROGERS: So Collier County sent her? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. MR. ROGERS: Unbeknownst to you? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. MR. ROGERS: That's absurd and that's embarrassing. Page 27 February 16, 2012 THE COURT REPORTER: May I have your name, please? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Please, please don't. MR. ROGERS: I'm sorry, not you. John Rogers. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Let's keep this down. MR. ROGERS: But Joe, Mr. Chairman, really, how could you not call them up and find out? This is exactly what we've all been talking about. And we're just letting it happen and happen and happen. So tomorrow they can pore through it and put out rumors and put out lies, like we're going to show you when you work with us that they've been doing for months. Why do we not get to the bottom of these issues and say Collier, stop treating us this way? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We will get to the bottom of these issues. But as far as having our meeting tonight, we had a scheduled meeting. I'd like to continue it. MR. ROGERS: We didn't have a court reporter at the last meeting. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We've never had a court reporter. MR. ROGERS: Why don't we tell her thank you very much, it's not her fault, and let her go home. And we'll tell Collier what we want them to know about this meeting. We've done that in the past. I mean, it's up to you guys, I'm not trying to offend you all, you're the board, but they sent her for a reason. MS. O'DEAN: Yeah. That's why I asked. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: They did. MR. ROGERS: I've made my point. You do what you want. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Your point is well taken. We've given them video tapes in the past of meetings. We always give them tape recordings. MR. ROGERS: Our tapes. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Our tapes. We have provided February 16, 2012 that. So nothing takes place at these meetings that I'm concerned with moving forward. MR. ROGERS: Oh, I agree with that. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And if this is what they wish to do, this is fine. Debbie, if you have a statement that you'd like to make concerning the consolidation report that was -- or the recommendations report, please, we'd like to hear it. Let's move on. MS. O'DEAN: I want to mention how much we all feel that this is a unique community and how -- I don't think people of the county understand how unique we are here, what a family we are, what a close -knit situation we have. The trips to the fire station, I don't know how many neighborhoods have people that come and visit the firehouse and bring cookies and, you know, all those kinds of things that we have here. And the reason I'm bringing that up is that I think that we're going to lose a little spirit of community and feel like we've lost some connection with who we are if we don't try to keep things as close as it has been. That's my personal emotional feeling about it. And while we were on our -- in our committee, that's one of the reasons that I feel that the MSTU with Marco, it's reiterating what Jeri said, it would provide us with the least amount of change, we'd still have our name out there, we'd feel like we're still the Isles of Capri Fire Department and not have a different name out front. I feel very emotionally attached to being here in this community for a reason and liking what I have here, that's why I'm here, and I'd like to see it not change too much. So I'm just reiterating that our recommendation, which was unanimous for the MSTU at Marco Island being the first thought of process that we thought would make the most sense is a little bit more emotional coming from the standpoint that I'm presenting right now. Page 29 February 16, 2012 CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Thank you, Debbie. MR. CROWDER: Acey, you got anything? MR. EDGEMON: Acey Edgemon. E- D- G- E- M -O -N. Since I've probably been here as long as anybody, I came to Capri in 1973 and we built our home in 1978, right at the beginning of the volunteer of the old guys in. Not to beleaguer what everybody said, because everybody knows why I'm here. Just change is coming, whether you like it or not. So this is our opportunity to sort of have an input in change. So either we step up and tell the county or whoever will listen what we'd like to do or sit back and county's going to take it over and do what they want to do anyway. Everybody is in a budget crunch. The county is not any exception. So everybody is looking for resources. We had long discussions with East Naples and Marco. Marco actually seemed to be in better financial shape than some of the others. City of Naples is in pretty good shape also. But change is coming. And long -time residents, I'd just like to see our little community stay as much as it can. Some things are going to change. There's not much you can do about that. But like Jeri said, at least keep it somewhat familiar. I realize the fire truck over to my house, it says Isles of Capri on the side. That could very well change. Also I have great concern for the guys that work here. And I know that they're concerned because the worst thing for somebody in the fire service or law enforcement or whatever is uncertainty what's coming down the pike. So they're all freaking out, I might as well say. So whatever we're going to do, decide, whether we decide to go to Marco or stay the same, we also have to think about the guys here and make sure that the benefits and everything are good, stay the same or better, and rightfully so. We all know that in any organization you always have two or Page 30 February 16, 2012 three bad apples. No different here. No different from the civic association or Jeri's office as far as that goes, who knows. MR. WALSH: Two or three? MS. NEUHAUS: Not me. MR. EDGEMON: That's just human nature. But this is our chance to have a say. And county is paying attention. They are paying attention. And it's like anything else, you get big, you forget about all those little people underneath you. And that's where we are now. Back in the good 'ol days where we were a bunch of volunteers, county loved us because we didn't cause any heartburn or any trouble, we just did our own thing. But those days are long gone, and they're not going to come back. So as Forrest said, that's all I got to say about that. MS. NEUHAUS: Thank you, Acey. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Thank you, Acey. John Rogers? MR. ROGERS: John Rogers. Madam Court Reporter, I apologize, my comments were in no way directed to you personally. THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you. MR. ROGERS: Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I apologize. I don't normally have an outburst. Not as an excuse but by way of explanation, it's really been a tough week. Please, I didn't mean to step out of line. I wholeheartedly endorse the work and the decision of the committee that I was fortunate to serve on, and offer my services, should this board decide to proceed with a recommendation, follow the recommendation of the committee to continue to work towards the end that as I said at the last meeting and Jeri said tonight and Acey said, while this seems like a big change, it is really what effects the least Page 31 February 16, 2012 change, which is we want our station the way we believe it was and the way it has been for a long time. And it preserves the best interest of the firefighters, which Acey correctly alluded to. It was difficult. The committee's work was not easy. We did not sit around and sip wine and flip coins. We worked very hard, we attended a lot of meetings, we read a lot. They emailed constantly. I didn't get involved in all of those, but there were hundreds of emails that I read. It was very, very difficult. And your decision to investigate this further will be even more difficult. But I think I speak for the committee that we are ready to stand there, provide any additional information, resources, and even work that we can do to help you with this. We think our decision is in the best interest of our fire district, and we encourage you to consider it thoughtfully, carefully, and pursue the recommendation and at least do the fact finding. So I appreciate the time I spent with all the committee members and appreciate your attention today. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Thank you, John. MR. CROW )ER: Just one thing in closing. You know, a lot of this is about our tax dollars -- Matt Crowder, sorry. It's important to remember that because we have an MSTU we're in a unique situation. Our tax dollars within the boundaries of this district are spent on this fire department within this district. Consolidation obviously means our tax dollars being spread across a larger area and our resources also being spread across a larger area. So that's what is so important about preserving our MSTU and preserving that unique situation, at least staving off consolidation for as long as we can. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Thank you, Matt. Okay, board members? MR. WALSH: I've got a question that has to do -- I'm kind of running to catch up, because I was at the -- I was out at the last Page 32 February 16, 2012 meeting when a lot of this material was distributed. I don't know whether the others that are here have had access to that same information, that is, the -- your committee's recommendation to the Collier board at the special meeting on February 3rd. Which included, for example, a pro forma, as I read it, with Barbara Shea's fingerprints on it that showed that in the contemplated amalgamation under Dan Summers, our millage rate would go from two to three and a half mills. Or there were two different models, but a significant increase in the millage rate. And I think that's important information to share. This may not be the forum to do it. As a matter of fact, it occurs to me that with the civic association meeting next week, I don't know whether this was discussed at last month's civic association, because I wasn't at that meeting either. But I think an informed citizenry is an important part of where we go from here. And I think everybody ought to have the facts as they have been shared with us by the committee. So if that hasn't been shared with the members of the Isles of Capri Civic Association, I would encourage that that be done at next week's meeting. MS. NEUHAUS: Kevin, that was -- it was all distributed and telegraphed by Ann Hall. MR. CROWDER: I don't think that what Kevin is talking -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Wait, wait, wait. Please, let's slow down. (Audience speaking amongst themselves.) THE COURT REPORTER: I'm not getting this on the record. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Sorry, let's -- okay, the question was has this been distributed to the community. MR. CROWDER: The answer is that via the Coconut Tele (phonetic), two pages of the consolidation related documents were distributed via the Tele. Page 33 February 16, 2012 CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Not the entire -- MR. CROWDER: There was a second pack which was another five pages which was supporting documentation. For example, Barbara's consolidation work sheet that was on there, that probably did not get distributed through the Tele. But I would like to respond to what you said, Kevin, by saying this: We said it in writing in the report and I'll repeat it as often as I possibly can: Open door meetings, town hall meetings, in the bays, workshops, because people do need to know. And I'm grateful for everybody who was concerned enough to come out here tonight. But in order really to make an informed choice and like you said, to have an informed citizenry, we need I think a larger forum and more exposure and more announcements to get more people out. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Get more people. MS. NEUHAUS: As documents are created, can we put them someplace where people can access them globally? MR. CROWDER: Well, the work of this committee is done, but we -- you know, the fire board may indeed want to do some things like that. A lot of that I think will hinge on the decisions that are made. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah, we may explore that, depending upon what the decision is. Alan? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: The consolidation document that you're talking about that Ms. Shea did, was that the one that incorporated Goodland in the event that the contract with Marco fell through? MR. CROWDER: Yeah, I think so. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: And that was assigned so that went away, that didn't happen. MR. CROWDER: Well, that didn't happen, but that contract with Marco is just a one -year contract -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Well, I want to make a point though. Page 34 February 16, 2012 MR. CROWDER: The contract that we already know -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: The point being is that document was based on Goodland and the Marco Island /Goodland contract failing and how -- what could be done to incorporate them. MR. CROWDER: But there was more than one scenario. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: There was several scenarios to that, actually. MR. CROWDER: It was a consolidation worksheet -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Based on -- MR. CROWDER: -- is exactly what it was. Consolidation of four districts. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: -- Goodland/Marco Island contract failing. And you want facts, let me state facts. That's what that document was based on. Because Emilio Rodriguez and myself both worked on that at the same time. MR. CROWDER: Well, let me tell you another fact. We are concerned about the fact that the contract with Marco is only one year long. So the fact that it got signed does not put it -- you know, put an end to anything with respect to Barbara's document. It can all come up again in a year. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: True. Point of fact is all. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. Kevin? MR. WALSH: Yeah, the other question that occurred to me was in looking at the range of alternatives, and I think you outlined three. One was to do nothing, the second one was to seek a shotgun marriage with East Naples, and the third one protectorate under Marco. Did you look at I guess what I would consider a fourth option, I'll call it the Goodland model where they in effect turned over the responsibility for fire service to the City of Marco Island? MR. CROWDER: We did not look at that option. LIEUTENANT LARA: Lieutenant Jorge Lara, L- A -R -A. Page 35 February 16, 2012 I've sat on a couple of these meetings and I've been very quiet and it's been purposefully done. Jeri; you know, I think that to see this many people out here shows buy -in, shows that we have an investment in this community, they have a investment in us. And if my voice breaks a little bit, it's because I feel like a real small fish in a really big pond right now. And I've got my chief next to me and my peers. But I hope I speak clearly and that I get my message across. When you folks -- change is coming, you're right. And one of my greatest professors told me, change with change or become extent. And the change is going to come. But remember, change gives and it takes, you know. We got the light bulb, we lost the candlelight dinner. So if in your options when you choose or you suggest that we go with another department or whatever, remember that there's gentlemen here with families. And it's not just the families, it's the investment we have in what we do. You know, we love what we do. I for one have been in social services since 17 years old. Troublemaker before that, then got into social services. Go figure. And even the people that I work with, some of them who make mistakes, because we're not perfect. I can guarantee you those people that you guys are thinking about, if they respond to any of your homes, to any incident in this county, they will give 110 percent, no matter what bad decisions they make sometimes. Our firefighters are a breed of their own. And this is one of the greatest peeves that I have with the county, that this is not IBM, this is not a corporate office. We do what we do because we're passionate about it. And we're not meant for an office environment. I think one of the things that's coming right away that is concerning all of us -- and if I'm speaking out of line, tell me, guys -- is they're going to hire a new chief. It closes tomorrow. And if it counts Page 36 February 16, 2012 for anything, I can tell you I've worked for this gentleman right here, Alan McLaughlin. I can direct him as Chief right now, he's Alan McLaughlin, our interim chief. And I worked in Ochopee with him. And there were a lot of problems in Ochopee. And one thing I can tell you about this gentleman, he's objective, he's fair and he's firm. And he can keep this boat in line while whatever change comes. And I know everybody's got their own opinion, and I respect it, but people, I've worked with him. I know we've suffered a loss, we're all hurting, but we need to see clearly and we need to see what's coming right away. We've got a $280,000 deficit we're facing, correct? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Possibly. LIEUTENANT LARA: Possibly. Hiring another chief is only going to put us deeper in a hole when we can split a chief who's more than capable. If you look at other departments, there's chiefs managing 100, 120 people. This man can do it with his hands behind his back, and he can do what needs to be done. And he is what we need right now. So that's something that if you're advocating, if you're out there putting -- you know, if you're going to write to Dan Summers, you need to knock on his door and say let's freeze the hiring of a chief. It's going to put us deeper in the hole. It could possibly cost one of us our job. It could get us from what we love to do when we have somebody's who's highly qualified right here, you know. And I'm not looking for a promotion or anything, trust me. And Alan knows me. It's that -- it's what's right, you know. I don't pride myself in doing what's popular, because I'm not the most popular guy in the world. I do what's right. And sometimes I'm very unpopular for that. But right now some of you made disagree with me. What's right is to freeze this whole chief thing, keep a chief that's more than competent right now, save money for the department, do whatever they Page 37 February 16, 2012 want to do with the brush truck. And we're still bringing the brushfire service, because we love doing that. I mean, it's a service to the community, you know. But, you know, advocate for that. While you do your other research, you know, no one's telling you to stop. You're more than welcome. This is your department. You folks pay the taxes, you guys keep the doors open. We just operate. MS. NEUHAUS: George, you're very eloquent. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay -- MR. CROWDER: Without trying to be rude, can you cut to the chase so we can move on? LIEUTENANT LARA: The chase is, is, you know, you guys are looking at these huge options of merging or not merging, when the immediacy right now is that they're going to put another chief in here. MR. CROWDER: But let me see -- LIEUTENANT LARA: At 85, $90,000 a year -- MR. CROWDER: -- if I can understand this. As residents -- LIEUTENANT LARA: Plus $50,000 advance. MR. CROWDER: As residents and taxpayers, we're concerned about something that, while I think your point is valid, is not on the level right now of whether to hire a chief or suspend hiring a chief. We came out at the beginning of this process asking for a freeze at a meeting a couple months ago. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes, we did. MR. CROWDER: But what I'm saying is that has nothing to -- I would say two things to the firefighters: One, with respect to the work of this committee on the agenda that's right now in front of the board, the agenda item that's in front of the board, we're not really focused on whether specifically a chief gets hired right now or doesn't get hired right now. We know Alan very well. I mean, Alan and I rode motorcycles, Harleys, together. He's been in my home many times. February 16, 2012 The other thing I would say is we're not asking for anything that would change anybody's job here, except maybe the name that's on your check. LIEUTENANT LARA: Remember, change gives and it takes. MR. CROWDER: I understand. But you've got to understand too, we have very large concerns here with respect to the future of our fire department. And that's what our primary focus is. And that is what I believe should take precedent over those other issues. LIEUTENANT LARA: And the survivability of some of our guys. It's going to put us in a deficit, sir. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: George, I appreciate your support and I absolutely appreciate everything you've said. And I know a lot of people in this community; I spent seven years here with most of these people and it's a great community. And my comments to Jeri and Matt were that I don't want to be here, but the reality is probably within a year I'm going to add a third to my department. And I've got two major building projects going on. Yes, it is a handful. And that's not to negate -- I think the world of this and I helped build a lot of what's here. But I think what the point is, the committee's looking at a more than just the -- they're looking at leadership beyond immediate leadership. They're looking at something that's beyond that who governs a leader, and who makes those statements, and whether it's the BCC or it's a city council, that's what the people would have to deal with. If they're not dealing with the BCC, they're going to have to deal with Marco City Council or an advisory -- excuse me, a hired fire board of an independent district. And that's the reality of what they're looking at and that's what their concerns is for the future. I don't think, and I've never felt from anyone that it was the immediate leadership of what was here, even though we've been working through a lot of things. And Ms. Neuhaus has called me on Page 39 February 16, 2012 several occasions. We've tried to figure out exactly what's going on. And she makes valid points to some of the community residents that, you know, it's hard to be in two places. I mean, you've got a 19 square mile district here that covers basically two miles of inhabitable land. I've got 1,180 square miles. I'm touching four counties aside from that. That's a lot of area to cover. Thank goodness I don't have to be in it all at once. But the reality is just to get back and forth from office to office is a 45 -mile drive. And that's the realty of it. So that's a good -- I mean, I spend two hours in a car every day driving from here to there, here to there. And that does make it difficult. And unless -- there are other options in there, but they're not open for discussion right now. There are other levels of supervision and things that can take place, but that's not what this committee is looking for. They're looking for something at the big end, and they're not looking for something at the immediate end, and that's totally valid, long -term. So I appreciate that, and I know what you're saying, but I also know what they've looking for and asking and I just wanted to clear that up. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Thank you, Alan. MS. NEUHAUS: We appreciate your comments, Jorge. MR. CROWDER: We have no problem with that. Jorge, I appreciate you. I didn't mean to cut you off. We've got no problem with -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: I understand completely what you're saying, and I agree with you to a certain degree. Yes, and what you're looking at is correct. But what we're looking at here, the hiring of a chief right now is a short-term problem that we have to deal with as to whether we do it now or a little later down the road. That's something that we're concerned with. And we worry about, you know, how thin Alan is spread, and different ways, and we're looking and 0=4 February 16, 2012 considering different options that are available there. But what we're looking at is the overall management and health of the fire department itself and where we will be not just this year but the next year and the year after and five years from now. And when I say the department, I don't just mean the building and the equipment sitting out here, I'm talking about all the people that work here. We're looking at the options of where your jobs and your futures will be protected as much as anything else because you are the fire department here. LIEUTENANT LARA: And that needs to be said. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And let me, you know, just clarify that, that that's exactly what we're looking for when we talk about change or consolidation. And we'll get into it probably in a little more detail. But one of the options, this place would be disbanded. And where the personnel and equipment would go would be to the four winds, okay. That's not an option that I find to be real acceptable in any way, shape or form. We're trying to find when we say a way to not change or to stay the same, what we're talking about is how do we keep the identity of the Isles of Capri Fire Department, its personnel, its equipment and its function as close to the same as we can do it. And the options range from going completely to the four winds to keeping it basically the same only with just maybe a different figurehead that's above us. And so these are the options that we're looking at. But our goal is to keep the identity, keep this -- the term I use is a neighborhood firehall. That's what we want to see. We like the fact that we know the people that work here. LIEUTENANT LARA: Keep the integrity of the department. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We want to keep the integrity of the department. And when we talk about preserving, we're talking about your job, Page 41 February 16, 2012 your job, every one of you. That's what we're trying to do is to make sure that we can maintain this. So please, through these discussions understand that's what we're trying to do. And if that's not what we were trying to do, I for one wouldn't be sitting here. MS. NEUHAUS: We can't do it without you. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's what we're trying to do and we're trying to find the best way to do it and we're trying to find the most cost effective way to do it. So those are the discussions that we're in. And it's just what direction we want to take. We do know that where we're at right now, we have been told quite pointedly that in the next couple of years it will not remain the same. It will change. And not necessarily with a specific plan, but it's headed that direction. MR. KISH: Hi, Russ Kish. Who's telling you that? That's what -- I'm trying to get some information here. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Discussions with the county manager, discussions with Dan Summers, the head of Emergency Services. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Fire service steering committee. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Fire service steering committee. I was at the meeting last month with them. And just between all of the fire departments within the county. Things are changing. What direction, we don't know for sure. MR. KISH: And that consolidation report that you're talking about, that's available to other residents? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: It's a public document. It certainly is. MR. KISH: Where do I get it? MR. CROWDER: I don't know if I have a copy of it with me, but Page 42 February 16, 2012 MR. KISH: See, I'm running for commissioner, so that's -- and I want to do what's best for the area. And I got a lot more than I bargained for when I came in. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's what you usually get when you come to Capri. MR. CROWDER: I have it down the street at my house. MR. KISH: Which way? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We can get you a copy of this after the meeting. MS. NEUHAUS: Whatever the residents decide, she'll support it. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: But that was just the committee's report that they put together. But we can get you a copy of that if you wish, that's no problem. Yes, Betty? MS. MOENKHOUS: Betty Moenkhous. M- O- E- N- K- H- O -U -S. I've got just a couple of questions -- things that were just mentioned that I picked up. Jeri, you said, if I understood you correctly, that if we were to join with Marco that Mike Murphy would be our chief? MS. NEUHAUS: It's not that we would be joining with Marco. They would be administering our MSTU. Mike Murphy would be the chief. MS. MOENKHOUS: And he would be our chief. Well, isn't that kind of chief splitting just like we were talking about? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: No. MS. NEUHAUS: No, he would not -- MS. MOENKHOUS: I don't know, that's why I'm asking. MR. CROWDER: Mike Murphy would fill a role that's more akin to Dan Summers' role with respect to our department. He wouldn't be the chief of our department, he'd be the -- whoever was in Page 43 February 16, 2012 charge of this department, he'd be their operational superior in the same way that Dan is Alan's operational superior. MS. MOENKHOUS: Okay, that makes more sense. So there would be somebody else coming, more or less. MR. CROWDER: Well, of course those are the kinds of decisions that would talked about during the fact - finding. MS. MOENKHOUS: Sure, right. MS. NEUHAUS: There'd be somebody in charge. MS. MOENKHOUS: And then the other thing I wondered about is if the county's so darned good at changing the rules as we go along or making them up as we go along, what's to prevent them from -- well, first of all, I don't understand that being with the City of Marco exempts us from any current absorption (sic), and what would prevent change taking the City of Marco in? Do you understand, John? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We're going to -- those are the things that we're going to discuss here, Betty, that we haven't gotten to. MS. MOENKHOUS: Oh, thank you. I'll sit back down and hush. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Thank you for your comments, though. If we can get back to the document that was handed out. Three alternatives were presented to us. And the recommendation was to investigate moving the MSTU from under the county's management to the City of Marco Island's management. The other option is to just stay with the county as -is and let things flow the way they are going. And the third option was to try to move the MSTU under East Naples. Although that wasn't considered a viable option, and so the recommendation to go to Marco. Going to Marco would raise some questions that we would have to investigate; one question that I have as to whether or not it's actually 0 ii February 16, 2012 legal for the City of Marco to have an MSTU that's outside of its physical boundaries. Chief Murphy apparently believes it is. But I think we need to get a legal read on that. If that was not the case, that would end the discussions immediately. MS. NEUHAUS: I spoke with Chief Murphy today, and they are having an attorney look into that as well. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. MS. NEUHAUS: They said it might simply be a matter of having an MSTU that still the funds are collected by the county and then distributed to Marco Island, but that he believed preliminarily that is possible. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's correct. I -- MR. WALSH: Which is the way Goodland is done now. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. MS. NEUHAUS: Because Goodland's outside of their city limits. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. And so, you know, these are things that would just have to be explored. There would be a question of ownership of equipment. Comment I made earlier tonight, the name on the title of the fire truck is Collier County. And to, you know, where that would have to be titled, that would be an issue that would come in. The role of the advisory board and the authority that they would have, the hiring and firing, at what level. There would be a lot of discussion that would have to take place before we could actually move forward with anything like that. And I think the comment that was made earlier that we need more public involvement on the Isles of Capri, I'm absolutely adamant that we have to have that. But I think before we present a great deal to them, we need to have the answers to a lot of those questions, because right now my answer to most of them is I have no idea. I don't know if we can do this or not. Page 45 February 16, 2012 I think the biggest question that lies before the board tonight or that we need to look at is whether or not we want to explore our options to move the MSTU someplace. And if we do, is the recommended option from the committee's report where we want to go? And from the board members in particular I'd like some comments of what your thoughts are. Those are just my thoughts at this point. MR. GAULT: Well, in reviewing it, I think that the committee did a great job and I'd like to pursue their recommendation. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. I agree. Yeah, Kevin, I know you just got your hands on the full document now, but I know you read the synopsis of it and I think you understand part of the problems. We can't -- we could move the MSTU to East Naples, but if we do so, it still belongs to Collier County and they could pull it at any time they want. MR. WALSH: No, I think I've gotten far enough into it to satisfy myself that number one, I think the committee did a superb job in the fact - finding that they did that led to their recommendation, so I thank all of them for their efforts. But I think we're at the point now where, you know, it's kind of the pick and shovel work that has to be done with, as Jim calls it, the 101 questions that have to be answered. So in terms of where we go from here, I'm supportive of the 101 questions that have to be answered, and then we have to talk about who's going to do it. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Jim? MR. HUGHES: I've been studying this since the 3rd. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. MR. HUGHES: And it's been a -- I've put a lot of things in writing, so I'm basically going to read what my thoughts are. It's been a tough time deciding what would be best for the citizens a = =. � February 16, 2012 of Capri and the employees of the Capri Fire Department. The citizens that I've listened to, and I've daily talked to many and listened to many, nearly all of them stated that whatever happens, they don't want to lose the location of the fire department because they depend on the quick response. And as they get older, the more they depend on that quick response. And they do not want to lose this. That's been very firmly said. The committee has spent hours interviewing county people and reading county documents. And I applaud them also. They studied all of the information and they came to the conclusion that they feel sometime in the future Isles of Capri Fire Rescue will be consolidate with other county fire departments. They also came to the conclusion that if this happens, our department could lose some of its equipment and personnel to other locations. Three choices were created from their investigation: Have East Naples be our administrator and after a year we would be consolidated into East Naples. That years ago was tried and the citizens of Capri were very much against that. Second option: Stay with the county. The county has a lot of resources that will no longer be available to us; maintenance of the building, the grounds and vehicles, fleet buying power, the human resources department, payroll handling, a FEMA coordinator, attorneys, insurance for property /casualty of vehicles, the IT department, which is communication and computers, and a commissioner that listens to us and has provided a lot of support for us. Third option: Have Marco Island Fire Department as our administrator. Several citizens mentioned that they do not trust Marco to administrate our fire department. Our county MSTU would be dissolved and a new MSTU would be created by the City of Marco Island. The fire department personnel are concerned about their Page 47 February 16, 2012 retirement fund and health insurance, since they will no longer be county employees. And I heard one statement, unofficially, but I could accept that -- I feel it's pretty close to the truth because of the person that said it -- that firefighters on Marco Island, their benefits are less than the benefits of the firefighters at the county, their retirement and health benefits. The committee feels that these and other resources that the county now provides can be replaced in the negotiations with Marco Island to be our administrator. They feel that some costs might go up, while other costs might go down. So in conclusion, there are so many unknowns and probabilities. The committee, which I would like to thank again, has provided information from their extensive investigation which indicates that if we stay with the county, our fire rescue department's response time could be in jeopardy. My conclusion is we have proven that -- we have proven we have the people power available on this island to fight any calls that comes along. And if we stay with the county, we'll probably have many fights ahead of us. In the future, if there is a fight, I feel we have a better chance to win a fight in the county with a commissioner on our side than to fight against the Marco Island City Council. And the City Council has proven to me in the past that they don't listen to their citizens, like the sewer problem. I read a statement in the paper where one councilman said something to this effect of you hired me to be a councilman, I'll decide what's best for you. So my conclusion is to stay with the county. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. Those are -- MR. WALSH: I just have one question. Because you said that we would have to dissolve the MSTU and Marco would create a new one. I don't know whether that's -- February 16, 2012 MR. CROWDER: Inaccurate. MR. HUGHES: Okay. I was told that by Jeri Neuhaus. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That is one of the -- MS. NEUHAUS: Not that they would dissolve it, that they would -- what we had talked about originally was that they had suggested that they would end our MSTU with Collier County and we would create an MSTU under Marco Island. It would be at the same time. It would be a simultaneous thing. MR. CROWDER: That was also Betty's question. I mean, the answer to that is also the answer to Betty's question, which is an MSTU is created by the governing board. Our MSTU was created by the Board of County Commissioners. It can be dissolved, merged or otherwise changed only by the Board of County Commissioners. And that is by Florida statute. An MSTU is governed by the body that creates it and only that body that created it can dissolve it. So you do have a situation where an MSTU would have to be created under Marco City Council as the governing body. So it's effectively a transfer of the MSTU. But in terms of the mechanics, it does mean ending one and starting the other. And to your point, Betty, how does having an MSTU under Marco insulate us from the threat of being consolidated under the county? Because by starting an MSTU under the Marco Island City Council, now the Board of County Commissioners does not have that absolute authority to do with our MSTU what they will. While we don't think that they would do this, the Board of County Commissioners can dissolve our MSTU tomorrow. They can also raise our millage rate up to 10 mills tomorrow. And if anybody thinks that those kinds of things require a referendum vote, they don't. Not any one of them. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Not in your charter. MS. MOENKHOUS : May I? Page 49 February 16, 2012 CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes, Betty. MS. MOENKHOUS: Does that mean that we would be dealing within instead of with the county, instead we would be dealing with Marco City Council? MR. CROWDER: That is functionally the change that you would see. And that's mostly with respect to our fire board, because it's our fire board that deals with Marco City Council and -- I mean with the governing board and it would be the Marco City Council instead of the Board of County Commissioners. If I could just respond to something that Jim said? Just to remind you, there are a lot of people in this room who were called a mob at a Board of County Commissioners meeting and had the County Attorney invite us to sue him. So that's our experience with respect to our voice at the Board of County Commissioners meetings, okay? While they're -- you could certainly argue that Marco City Council is an unknown in this regard, but there's nothing in doubt about the way we're viewed by the Board of County Commissioners. I will also add this: Commissioner Fiala supports this fact - finding effort. And through conversations with Chief Murphy, Tom Cannon at East Naples and even Leo Ochs has already given us a lot of positive feedback with respect to the idea of even moving the MSTU to Marco Island. Because, you know, it's still in Donna's district. Even though it would not be under the Board of County Commissioners, everything about what we're doing remains in Donna's district. She's fully aware of what we've been doing. I've met with her twice. She has a copy of the report. And she has expressed nothing but support for our effort. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay, thank you, Matt. MS. NEUHAUS: I have one question -- one statement to what Jim said. Jim, I think your concerns about the fire personnel are exceptionally valid. I think concerns about their retirement, their pay Page 50 February 16, 2012 -- Acey made the same point in his statement, that's -- we're not saying let's do this, we're saying let's do the fact - finding. We're asking the fire advisory board to support the decision to let the Collier County Commission know that we want them to hold off on everything will we do this. Help us talk to budget people, do all that so that we can get the answers to that. Because I've heard things contrary to what you've heard. I've heard that there's good benefits, I've heard things -- but we need to find the truth so that people do know it. And we don't have that information. So what we're asking for is the okay for them to get those answers. As Kevin called them, the 101 questions. And that's what we're looking for support for. We're not looking for support to say let's go to Marco, we're asking for the investigation to get those 101 answers so that then an informed decision can be made. MR. CROWDER: Can I make this observation? We're only here and discussing openly the future of our fire department because of the fact that we have an MSTU and we have our own fire board and our own fire board has a voice with the Board of County Commissioners. In a consolidation scenario, you guys are gone. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's correct. MR. CROWDER: You're gone, we're all gone. There's not any of these kind of meetings where we all get to talk about what we think is best for the fire department. So that whole dynamic about having our own MSTU disappears. We become just another county department. So the only scenario whereby we do get to keep a fire advisory board that can operate in the same way that you guys have is by moving our MSTU somewhere. And of course by virtue of the report you have in front of you we found out the most logical choice is Marco Island. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Thank you, Matt. Page 51 February 16, 2012 MR. ROGERS: Just to clarify something, I'm sort of feeling like the impression is getting out there with all of these questions that we didn't ask any of them. I want you guys to know that we did. We asked about insurance, we asked about retirement, we asked about salaries, we asked about the chief. We satisfied ourselves to make a recommendation and got their commitment to go forward. We didn't think we should come forward and say they're going to pay you "X" and you "Y ", because we don't have the authority to negotiate. But we satisfied ourselves at the board by addressing -- there hasn't been one point -- and if I'm wrong somebody point it out. There hasn't been one question raised here that we didn't discuss informally with the Chief or with our board and get subsequent answers to. It was the answers we received, as well as our ultimate goal of the least amount of change possible that led us to make the recommendation. So we're not sending you blindly over to Marco should you decide to do this. I mean, they're prepared to open their books, explain stuff. In fact, we discussed the union versus non -union issue. We went into great detail on how retirement issues would work, on what personnel -- what influence you would have over personnel. So we -- I just got a feeling here a minute ago that we didn't ask any questions. We were with them for hours. And we think when you go there the groundwork is laid for you to get questions that you guys can actually have the power to negotiate. MR. KISH: I just have a question. What's the power profile that's going to be different if you're in Marco or if you're with the county? How's it any different? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: There are a lot of ways where things would be different. But -- MR. KISH: I mean, you're still the board, right, you're still the advisory board? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We're still the advisory board. Page 52 February 16, 2012 MR. CROWDER: That's it. But this advisory board is appointed by the Board of County Commissioners. So it's the board's board. And it would be the new -- a new fire advisory board would be appointed for Marco City Council. MR. KISH: So you guys might be done, it might be somebody else. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That doesn't threaten us. MR. KISH: Our schedule is still the same. MS. NEUHAUS: There's one thing that somebody -- when we voted to create an MSTU, one of the things that we get to do that we didn't do in 1977 -- we learned a lot from what happened in '77 -- is we get to negotiate the creation of the MSTU. And during that negotiation we can ask for and expect and it's going to be give and take, like Jorge knows, everything is give and take, we can ask for certain expectations of a -- we can demand that our board have a voice this time, that our board actually have some power. We can actually negotiate these things in the MSTU, and in fact were offered that option by Chief Murphy. He said when you get ready, your attorneys -- you negotiate what you feel you need and then we'll talk, we'll make it -- we'll make things work. We won't get everything we want but we'll get a crap load more than we got with Collier County. Where have you been? MR. KISH: I'm just getting in the mix. I was at East Naples. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Anything else from the board? MR. WALSH: Yeah, it occurs to me that the people in this room are informed and concerned citizens -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. MR. WALSH: -- but we never see any representation from the non -Capri portion of the Capri Fire District. Is there any way that as we go forward we could somehow -- you know, we talked before about getting somebody on the fire board that Page 53 February 16, 2012 would represent the non -Capri portion of the fire district. MS. NEUHAUS: I'm Main Sail. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: I will make this comment: Historically, the six years I've been involved, we at one time had a member from Main Sail in the last six years. Very good, and he was on the board for a long time. But even when he was over at Main Sail we had a very hard time getting participation from them. The front portion of Fiddler's Creek that we have, that's pulling teeth. And we have some problems there with it's a closed community with no solicitation and they take even us coming over there trying to talk to people, we have to go through the homeowners associations. It's very difficult. But yes, as we start with an informational campaign, we will have to overcome those hurdles to get the information out to them. I have made contact with the homeowners associations over in Fiddler's Creek to get an inroad there that at least through them we can contact their people. Main Sail is a little easier in that we can canvass that area. MR. WALSH: Is there a Main Sail association? MS. NEUHAUS: You can't really canvass Hammock Bay. You CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: No, not Hammock Bay, but -- MS. NEUHAUS: -- Tropic Schooner or some of Tropic Schooner and -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And I talked to the towers over there, Serrano and them, and the homeowners association there is willing to work with us. So yes. And as we move forward, before we make any actual decision to move someplace or not move someplace, we are definitely going to have to have a hard core campaign to get everyone involved with it. But I think the stage that we're at right now is to answer all of the Page 54 February 16, 2012 questions that you had, Jim, that you brought up. And about 25 or 30 more that I have. And I'm sure that the rest of us -- to answer those questions to see if that's a direction that we want to move. MS. NEUHAUS: But what we're asking you tonight now is just -- I think what we're asking is for you all to -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Or if we want to move at all. MS. NEUHAUS: -- decide -- yeah, is just decide whether or not you -all want to explore it. Isn't that where we're at? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's what I'm trying to say is, at this point we're just discussing whether we're going to explore further, based on the information that we have. So that's what we're trying to digest. MR. FITZGERALD: Joel Fitzgerald. Once this -- if it does make for a decision to change the MTSU (sic), who decides or is there a vote by the communities involved, all the people involved, or how is it decided? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's one of the things that we've been looking into. To dissolve the MSTU does not require a referendum. And actually to create a new one does not require a referendum. So when you're talking the legal side of that, my understanding of it at this point is that is not required. I will tell you, as the chairman of the Fire Advisory Board I would not be comfortable going to the Board of Collier County Commissioners if I didn't feel that I had a large majority of support from the community. Whether we do that through an actual referendum or a straw vote or something that we would have to pay for to have put on the ballot, or if we get good response at community meetings, you know, like was brought up earlier, if I get a petition there and I've got 800 signatures on it, I can feel fairly safe that I have a majority of the community who's in favor of it, and then I'm willing to do something. Page 55 February 16, 2012 If I put a petition out and I get 150 signatures in support, I'm not going to go forward with that and say that this is what the community wants. So that's just me speaking, that's my take on it before we would do anything like that. But is it required by law to have a referendum? The answer to that, as far as I know, is no, it's not. Yes? MR. SMITH: Carter Smith. Just a clarification. Fiddler's Creek is no longer owned by the original developer; is that a correct statement? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's correct. MR. SMITH: Because I see their name is removed now. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's correct. MR. SMITH: And so who's the entity we're dealing with? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We're not dealing -- I guess just Fiddler's Creek -- MS. GREEN: It's Gulf Bay Corporation. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Well, it's Gulf Bay Corporation who is the master homeowners association of the entire Fiddler's Creek, but really who we're dealing with is Mallard's Landing and Pepper— MS. NEUHAUS: Individual associations. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: -- Tree and the little communities, the subcommunities within Fiddler's Creek who are part of our district. MR. SMITH: Okay, we're -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And that's why it makes it a little more difficult for us to contact them, because when you contact the master homeowners association they pretty much said, well, that's just a small portion of our stuff, we can't put that out to all our people. So we have to contact the individual homeowners associations for those Page 56 February 16, 2012 communities that are within our district. MR. SMITH: Well there is an entity in which we're collecting taxes from. What is it, a quarter mile in or half mile, whatever it is? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We have that. Yeah, we have that. We know exactly by address who's in our district and who isn't. There may be some discussion as to whether the house on this side of the street or that side, but we can go to the tax rolls and find out who's paying taxes to us. MR. SMITH: Years ago we were supposed to have put a substation over in Fiddler's Creek. It went back long before you, I guess. And it never seemed to happen. I used to ask the older chief, is this ever going to happen? Well, we're working on it. Where does that stand today? MS. NEUHAUS: It doesn't. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: As of today, it doesn't stand at all. We're not going to -- we've looked at putting a substation in Fiddler's, we've looked at putting a substation in Hammock Bay, we've looked at putting one down by the airport. We're constantly exploring the options of what can be done to provide better service. But as of right now there are no plans, no studies, nothing on the books for another substation. MR. SMITH: If we had this, would we have more clout up at the Collier County? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: No. MS. NEUHAUS: No, we'd just spend more money. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: No, it would -- because we're dealing with the same tax revenues, it would increase our taxes to support a second station. And as far as the county's concerned, we're still the Isles of Capri Fire Department. That doesn't change our clout one way or the other, it just gives them more assets to play with. Page 57 February 16, 2012 MR. SMITH: Yeah, exactly. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's all that would do. John Rogers? MR. ROGERS: John Rogers. If I could just clear up one more statement, just to show you how Collier County feels about the Fire Advisory Board. You just stated there are absolutely no plans. On February the 3rd we met with Mr. Dan Summers in his office who said he has absolute plans and has greased the skids for a substation for Isles of Capri at the new airport. MS. NEUHAU S : What? MR. ROGERS: But he hasn't bothered to tell you guys about it. I just want to point out again, you're getting kicked in the teeth. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. I can only tell you what I know. MR. ROGERS: I know. Just wanted to point that out. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And so these are the issues that we're looking at. So the question before the board tonight, I think we get back to the issue is do we want to proceed and explore any of these options or do we want to just hold the status quo? MR. GAULT: Do you need a motion? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah, something. we'd need a motion to do MR. CROWDER: Mr. Chairman, can I do one thing real quick, just to summarize? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. MR. CROWDER: At the end of the report we had included some recommended steps for the board for moving forward, just based on our understanding of mechanically what would be needed to sort of get the ball rolling. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. Page 58 February 16, 2012 MR. CROWDER: And if you guys can review it, one of them was to -- our recommendation would be to form a committee, a second committee, not the one that just got finished with its work but a committee chaired by a member of the Fire Advisory Board to -- if you should decide. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: If we decide to move forward, then we would have to do that. MR. CROWDER: And then second, again, if you should decide to move forward to specifically, as a part of your decision tonight, to resolve to go to the Board of County Commissioners with specifically informing them not only of your intent to go forward with an investigation, but asking them for approval and the resources that would be needed -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That is correct, we would -- MR. CROWDER: -- to access -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: -- have to do that. MR. CROWDER: -- the county personnel and budget, people and things like that. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We would have to. I have sent them a letter saying that we were considering the report and to please support us in looking at the report. But yes, if we were to go farther. But first we have to make the decision as to if we are going to go forward and if we are going to go forward, what is it we're going to pursue. And that's what I'm looking for at this time. MR. GAULT: I make a motion that we pursue fact - finding to merge with Marco Island. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: With Marco Island? MR. GAULT: But it's a fact - finding, that's what we're looking at. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. I would take that as a motion, that it's a fact - finding committee or a fact - finding thing to February 16, 2012 explore further options with them for the feasibility. MR. HUGHES: So the bridges won't be burned with the county. MR. GAULT: I think we're not in great shape with the county now. I mean, Jim, what are we burning here? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: At this point the discussions that have taken place with the county have all been please, go forward and look into it. MR. WALSH: I have a hunch that we're enough of a toothache to the county, they'd be delighted to see us resolve this in that direction. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Or they may know that -- and I'll throw this, they may know that there's going to be a stumbling block that will totally stop us from doing this, but they're going to let us expend the time and energy to go find it ourselves. I mean, you know, it could be taken either way. But so far, and our commissioner in particular has said that she fully supports any type of action along this line. MR. GAULT: I think there has to be a lot of questions have to be answered. You know, Kevin's right, there's 101 questions and Matt and John, it's just a fact - finding. We have to do a whole cost benefit analyst, we have to look at the legal aspect, can we even do it, as Joe said, can Marco do it. I mean, there's a -- we're just going out and looking at information. MR. WALSH: Yeah, I think in addition, asking the Board of County Commissioners for resources, I think it would be appropriate to ask Marco for some staff resources to help with -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: As well. MR. WALSH: Yeah. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: They have already offered that, but yes, we would request that. MR. CROWDER: They have offered it again and again. They would have come to the meeting tonight except that we thought maybe February 16, 2012 we had some more steps to do just ourselves as a group before we included them. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Well, before I invited them to come or do anything, I figured we better decide whether we want them to come. MS. NEUHAUS: They have already talked to I believe it's Councilman Nagle and they've gotten some preliminary approval to help us research it, help with budget and cost analysis and things like that. Because they have to know that they can do it too. They still have questions that they have to determine. But they're willing to do the work with us to find out if this is the way to go. And Donna Fiala supports it 100 percent. MR. CROWDER: If I could just add, I would just reiterate exactly what Jeri just said. With respect to the fact - finding, Donna supports the idea 100 percent. So you have the wind at your back with respect to getting approval and the promise of more resources from the Board of County Commissioners. Remember, this is all in Donna's district. You know, it's not -- the Board of County Commissioners, I'm sure you guys realize, is they don't really operate as one mind. It's five individual minds. And I think you'll see a lot of deference to Donna's judgment on this issue because of the fact that it's all happening within her district. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Your name? MR. HALL: Eddie Hall. Most of you probably remember that in 2007, I think it was, Jeri, that Commissioner Coyle, I believe it was, said that the county wanted to get out of the fire business. So that's something to keep in mind too. MR. CROWDER: I think he said it again on the record about two weeks ago or three weeks ago. He said again, we don't -- MS. NEUHAUS: Dan Summers is the only one that wants to stay -- Page 61 February 16, 2012 MR. SMITH: How about 1998 or 1990 (sic). They been trying to get out of it for years. MS. NEUHAUS: So what are you doing? MR. GAULT: I made a recommendation that we go to fact - finding. MR. WALSH: As recommended, that we proceed with fact - finding. I'm certainly supportive of that. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: So you're seconding the motion? MR. WALSH: I'm seconding the motion. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We have a motion to continue with a fact - finding mission for the administrative management of the MSTU with Marco Island. MR. WALSH: Uh -huh. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Take a vote on it. All in favor? MR. GAULT: Aye. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Aye. MR. WALSH: Aye. MR. HUGHES: Aye. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: It's unanimous. Now that we have decided to move forward in looking at that -- MR. GAULT: How do we do it. MR. WALSH: Well, I would recommend that we designated Ted Decker as the representative. MR. GAULT: I second that. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Never be absent. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: All in favor of that? MR. GAULT: Aye. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Aye. MR. WALSH: Aye. MR. HUGHES: Aye. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Unanimous. Page 62 February 16, 2012 And I will -- I have a question that I will have to get clarified. But if we set up a committee to do this, can two board members be on the committee? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: No, they cannot. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah, I don't know how that works. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: In violation of Sunshine. MR. CROWDER: Unless all of them are on the committee. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Unless all of you are on the committee. But the minutes you do that, you fall under the Sunshine and everything that applies on this meeting -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Applies to that. I know, whenever we get together -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I did -- because someone asked me and I got a clarification from the County Attorney, yes, one member of the board can be on that committee. But the minute you do two, you step over the -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's what I wanted to clarify. I thought that was the case, but I just wanted to clarify to make sure that that was the case. MR. CROWDER: May I say something on the floor? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. MR. CROWDER: On behalf of the committee, you know, we've worn Ted out already. I don't know how serious you guys were about that. But he's been through meeting after meeting, step by step of the way. So while we totally respect his judgment and think he's been great on our committee, I personally would recommend another fire board member to do it, simply just if nothing else to have a different perspective on the thing. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Different perspective on it. MS. NEUHAUS: I vote for Kevin. I vote for Mr. Finance. Page 63 February 16, 2012 CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Kevin, would you be willing to head that up? MR. WALSH: Yeah, well, recognizing that I leave on or about the I st of May. MS. O'DEAN: We don't have a whole lot of time. MS. NEUHAUS: Right. The fact - finding should be complete well before then. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Well, I don't think there would be an issue. If you head up north at that point we would replace you with another person on the committee. I don't think that's an issue. As long as we only have one on the committee at a time I guess is the -- AUDIENCE MEMBER: Or they just won't let you go. MS. NEUHAUS: I think we need to keep in mind that remember, time is of the essence here. We can't go into another budget season with Collier County. I agree with Jorge, it's something you -all are going to have to address individually about whether or not there's a chief here in the meantime. But I think we need to get the fact - finding started and have our recommendations on whether to go forward with it or not and have all the fact - finding done before that. I mean -- MR. GAULT: I'd like to say, if I'm able, 60 days before the next budget cycle. MS. NEUHAUS: Absolutely. MR. ROGERS: You can have more than one committee. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: I agree that we do and we may find that we have to have more than one committee to look into different areas of it. I also -- I believe that it's appropriate, I will put together a list of what I consider to be issues. Then I can email that to you. I don't think that violates anything that we have. And I think that we all need to do that, to put in a list of questions that way. Page 64 February 16, 2012 MR. GAULT: Do we forward the questions to you or to Kevin? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: To Kevin. MR. WALSH: Or to keep it I guess as broad as possible, can we direct everything to the chairman of this committee? Because I've agreed to serve on the committee, not to chair the committee. So whoever the committee chairperson is. John, have you been functioning in that role? MR. CROWDER: It's been me. And I have to tell you that specifically our committee thinks it's important that a member of the fire board chair this new committee. MS. NEUHAUS: At least the main one. MR. CROWDER: Because we really need -- we that connection MS. NEUHAUS: We need your voice. MR. CROWDER: -- and that legitimacy. We need this leadership -- at this stage now that we've kind of handed it off, we need the leadership to come from this fire board. We don't want to have to push the fire board along, no disrespect intended. But we feel like we really need the board to take a lead. John, did you have something? MR. ROGERS: Yeah, I hope we've been clear too. We were told directly by Marco, if your board -- and correct me if I misstate it -- if your board votes to pursue this, to pursue it, we are prepared to bring forward budget, legal, HR, whatever, and work toward these ends. So I -- I'm not trying to say our committee did the harder part, but they're ready to come in a room, to a beautiful room with a big square table and, you know, well, we have this concern, we have this concern. If they don't have the answer, go get the answer. I mean, I really think it's going to be faster because the people who can answer the questions are going to be present. It's not going to be like us just sort of grabbing straws in the dark. But I think it's going February 16, 2012 to move pretty quickly. MR. WALSH: Are all of your committee members willing to continue to function in some capacity? MR. CROWDER: The ones -- MS. NEUHAUS: Some of us are. MR. CROWDER: -- I've spoken to have said yes. MS. NEUHAUS: I am. MR. CROWDER: I certainly am. MS. NEUHAUS: Acey, is that a yes? MR. EDGEMON: Yes. MR. ROGERS: And a new board is welcome. MS. NEUHAUS: Yes, please. MR. CROWDER: Acey, you thought you were going to get to go back home and retire, right? MS. NEUHAUS: That wouldn't happen. I don't know if Debbie -- that's a yes? MR. WALSH: Okay. Well, if that's the desire of the board, I guess I'm willing to accept the chairmanship. And that means the questions will be directed to me. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Thank you. Yeah, we'll direct them to you. And you may want to take a look at it, Kevin, and possibly break it into stages as you do that. And at that time we could change, you know, the players if we have to to continue on. But I think that that would work out very well if we would do that. So that's good. So the next thing is I guess I need to draft a letter to the commissioners stating what we have decided to do. And I will do that. And I'm not going to promise I'm going to have it done tomorrow, because I don't know that I'm going to get out of bed tomorrow. MS. NEUHAUS: Will that letter ask them to hold off on any planned or unplanned consolidation during this process? 01=6 February 16, 2012 CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: I will come up with something. At this point I'm not going to -- MS. NEUHAU S : Sinus, I know. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah, my head is throbbing really bad right now. My sinuses have reached the end of their -- MR. CROWDER: Just in closing, Joe, I will be petitioning to get on the agenda at the next BCC meeting, and I'll keep you informed of that process, because of course a letter's not -- you're not going to get anything from the board just with a letter. We're going to have to go up there and ask -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Go up there and ask. MR. CROWDER: -- for not only again the blessing to do it -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. MR. CROWDER: -- but the resources that we need. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That was going to be my next statement. MR. CROWDER: And get them to sort of have that conversation on the record at a BCC meeting. And so as a sort of one of the last jobs of this old committee, or maybe one of the first jobs of the new committee, I'll be putting in that petition. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: If you would do that, and I'll work with you on it and stuff. But I should be the one probably that goes before the board. And I think that would appropriate. Just right now I'm not going to tell you what I'm going to put in there because if I'd tell you that right now, you wouldn't like, because I'm not thinking straight. MR. GAULT: Could I ask that you try to put a goal in there? Because like Jeri said, I agree, to try to report this back out at Naples before we have to get down to serious budget talks? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: All I would ask is for Kevin to Page 67 February 16, 2012 put -- as you put together a -- give us a time line as quickly as you can on it. And yeah, I think this -- MR. WALSH: Certainly we'll be in a position to give a progress report at each of the regular meetings. And hopefully avoid the need for special meetings during the fact - finding phase. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah. But to move as quickly as we can on that. And I hate to try to set a date on it, because -- MR. GAULT: I understand. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: -- without a calendar in front of me, I know we have to mesh county board meetings with -- you know, and by the time you mesh everyone's meetings, unless you actually have those calendars, it's impossible. MR. WALSH: But there's no reason we can't go ahead and begin scheduling meetings. I mean -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: You can schedule meetings immediately. Well, pretty much. You can start your work. MR. WALSH: Your presentation of the commissioners isn't asking their approval, it's really telling them what we're planning to do and asking their support with resources. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Asking their support for -- yeah. And I think that's -- MS. NEUHAUS: Going on the record publicly. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: It's going on the record with them, yes. MR. SMITH: Carter Smith. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yes. MR. SMITH: I walked into this meeting and I observed the young lady over there taking notes. I assumed that she was your secretary taking notes for this meeting. And I subsequently heard that that's not a correct statement; is that right? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That is a correct statement. February 16, 2012 MR. SMITH: And you are employed by -- can we ask her questions? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Well, she's employed by Collier County. THE COURT REPORTER: I'm not employed by Collier -- CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Or you're not with the county. Okay, I don't know who you're employed by. THE COURT REPORTER: I'm a freelance court reporter. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Freelance court reporter, you're contracted by Collier County. THE COURT REPORTER: No, not me personally. I'm a subcontractor that works for a reporting agency. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: A reporting agency. Whatever. I did not contract her. She was sent here by the county to be here. Our normal administrative assistant is not here who takes our notes and was not available. And so I rather than take offense to her being here look at it simply the fact that anyone who has read the notes that I take from a meeting would probably appreciate having someone who can do it much better than I can. And so as I have always said with these meetings, there's nothing that we say here or do that we're ashamed of or that we are hiding. And if you want to do a complete transcript of it, that's wonderful. MR. WALSH: We even permit videotaping. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We videotape them and we provide actual videotapes of all of the meetings. So not only do you get the words, you get the picture and body gestures that go along with it. So we have nothing to hide with any of our meetings and that's why I just am not overly concerned with it. AUDIENCE MEMBER: Transparency is good. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Transparency is good. And if the county feels they have those funds that they can spend, they can spend Elm February 16, 2012 them. But if it shows up on our bill, then we've got an issue with them. We didn't contract for it. MR. GAULT: Do we want to schedule the next meeting? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: The next meeting should be -- MR. ROGERS: Are you done? I have another piece of business. Are you adjourning? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: No, not yet. MR. SMITH: Oh, I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Who has a calendar in front of them? Third Thursday of March. MR. GAULT: Thursday the 15th. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's the 15th? Okay. The third Thursday is the 15th. Okay. So we'll go for the third Thursday of March 15th. MS. NEUHAUS: Kevin, thank you. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Is there any other issues from the board members? Jim, any other issues? MR. HUGHES: No. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Kevin, anything? MR. WALSH: No. MR. GAULT: Do I need to get sworn in? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Do you need to get sworn in? MR. GAULT: For my new term. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Did you swear him in at the last meeting when I wasn't here? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: No. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Then you need to swear him in. MR. HUGHES: Did you get sworn in? MR. GAULT: I got sworn at but not sworn in. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: I will be quite honest, we have never sworn in a board member in the last six years that I've been here. Page 70 February 16, 2012 We get the letter from the county that says you've been appointed and that's what we've always taken and that's been the end of it. So that's a procedure that no, we've never done. If they want us to swear in -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: You don't work for me but for the BCC. MR. GAULT: We serve at their pleasure. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We serve at their pleasure. If they want us to, they can -- MS. NEUHAUS: They can swear you in. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: They can swear us in. We don't have a problem with that, but we've never done it in the six years I've been here. That's why I -- MR. GAULT: I just wasn't sure what the procedure was. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Yeah, I've never seen it done. But if there is, Alan, if you find out that we're supposed to, bring the stuff and we'll all swear at the next meeting. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I'm not sure what they say. Like at my board, they present them the paper. The document comes from the BCC and they just announce it through a member of the board. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Well, that's what we do is we give them the -- if that's what you call swearing them in, yeah, we get the letters from them and it's like okay, you're a member of the board. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Congratulations. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That's all we've done. But we haven't done any, you know, raise your hand and do all that stuff. Okay, nothing from you, nothing from you, nothing from you. Okay, anything else from -- John, you said you had one more issue? MR. ROGERS: Yeah, it's old or new business, I don't know what you want to call it. On December the 15th, Mr. Chairman, I sent you a memo and to the board in which I specifically mentioned that I felt two employees Page 71 February 16, 2012 here needed to be terminated. One of those employees was Ms. Shea. And I wrote that memo based on a statement that the county put out under her name. Ms. Shea subsequently revised that statement when she first saw it. It was not even shown to her until some 39 days after she made it, despite the fact that the county on three occasions published it as true. When I met with Ms. Shea and after we beat the county to abolish their secretive and deceitful ways, we were given her corrected statement in which Ms. Shea absolutely corrects all of the statements that Dan Summers made -- or put in her mouth and the county stood up and said they were true. I've met with Ms. Shea and I've personally apologized to her, because I think she was another pawn on the part of Collier County. Mr. Ochs and Mr. Summers specifically. And I want to publicly apologize to her. I think if they had done the right thing and had her review her statement as they said they did prior to that, then the issue never would have come up and I never would have drafted those concerns. So I want to retract it. When I'm wrong, I'll say I'm wrong, unlike any of the people at Collier County. And I want to again apologize to Ms. Shea. The second person that I mentioned should be fired for his confession of wrong- doings, I would like to know if anything has been done about that. I maintain my position that he should be terminated, and I'd like to know if that's been looked into, if anything's come of it. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Well, that letter, as far as I know, I gave it to you, you took it to Human Resources. I have not heard anything back, any action from anyone at this time concerning those issues. MR. ROGERS: So that I'm clear, here we are 60 days later and we have a person who works here who put in writing and signed that I Page 72 February 16, 2012 did all of these things wrong for three to four years while I was an employee and I'm admitting that I've done them wrong and we have no response from the county on what they -- any investigation, anything? CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Nothing that has come back to us. MR. ROGERS: Okay. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: And I will only say that the one thing I did get back from the county manager was a statement who told me that my responsibilities were fiscal, budgetary and deals with money. And personnel I'm to stay out of. So you know me, that I have always contended that there's nothing that goes on here that isn't connected to money, because I don't have personnel if I don't have money. But -- MR. ROGERS: So I want to understand, so the Fire Advisory Board is not going to look into it and it's going to fall on the chief? Because I don't want to -- CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Right. The current way it's designed is the fire advisory board, both of them that are out there, have no operational authority. Which is one of the things Ms. Neuhaus talked about, some changes. I personally walked that down and I -- from Joe the day that he handed it to me and handed it over to Human Resources and told them that this needed to be looked into and here's a statement. I have not heard anything back since then. MR. ROGERS: And is that the typical way it goes with HR? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Not normally. Usually I get a response back. Thirty days, 45 days. MR. ROGERS: Would it be appropriate for you to follow up? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: I'll send an email to who it was handed to. Because I know who it went to in HR. It was handed down to our generalist. I haven't received anything back on the status. MR. ROGERS: I'm flabbergasted, but nothing has surprised me Page 73 February 16, 2012 in the last six months when it comes to Collier County. Thank you. MR. CROWDER: Alan, who did you hand it to? CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: It went to our generalist, which is -- MR. CROWDER: I don't know what that means. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: Every department, the county has an HR generalist. Ours handles like public works and EDS and several others. So when that was handed over to Ms. Lyberg, it got handed down the trail to I'm sure him, because that's who would actually look into it and do the investigation. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: That would be normal. CHIEF McLAUGHLIN: That would be Mr. Molinaro, who you already know. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay, any other comments from anyone? MS. NEUHAUS: One last one from me. I can't thank you all enough for taking action tonight. And Kevin, I'll do whatever you need, man. I'll water your lawn, anything to get you to those meetings, man. You need me, I'll be there. But thank you. We need you on this. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Okay. If not, can I get a motion to adjourn. MR. WALSH: So moved. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Do I get a second? MR. GAULT: I second it. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: In favor? MR. GAULT: Aye. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: Aye. MR. WALSH: Aye. MR. HUGHES: Aye. CHAIRMAN LANGKAWEL: We're adjourned at. Page 74 February 16, 2012 (At which time, the meeting concluded at 8:35 p.m.) Page 75 February 16, 2012 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 8:35 p.m. ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE ADVISORY COMMITTEE E �LANG, KAWEL Chairman These minutes approved by the Board on as presented or as corrected CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER State of Florida ) County of Collier) I, CHERIE' NOTTINGHAM, Notary Public, in and for the State of Florida at Large, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings. I further certify that I am not a relative, employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I financially interested in the action. Dated this 22nd day of February, 2012. CHERIE' NOTTINGHAM Gregory Court Reporting 2650 Airport Road South Page 76 Naples, Florida 34112 Page 77 February 16, 2012