BCC Minutes 11/13/2012 R BCC
REGULAR
MEETING
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 13, 2012
I
November 13, 2012
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, November 13, 2012
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing Board(s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Fred Coyle
Jim Coletta
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
Georgia Hiller
ALSO PRESENT:
Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney
Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager
Crystal Kinzel, Clerk's Finance Director
Mike Sheffield, Business Operations - CMO
Troy Miller, Television Operations Manager
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
L 4,
r ;>>:
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples FL 34112
November 13, 2012
9:00 AM
Fred W. Coyle - BCC Chairman; Commissioner, District 4
Jim Coletta - BCC Vice-Chairman; Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Vice-Chair
Donna Fiala - BCC Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Chairman
Georgia Hiller - BCC Commissioner, District 2
Tom Henning - BCC Commissioner, District 3
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH
THE EXECUTIVE MANAGER TO THE BCC PRIOR TO PRESENTATION
OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED
SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE
TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
Page 1
November 13,2012
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A
MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, SUITE 1,
NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112 (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES
FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Dr. Edward Thompson - First Presbyterian Church of Naples
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and
summary agenda.)
B. October 9, 2012 - BCC/Regular Meeting
3. SERVICE AWARDS
Page 2
November 13,2012
A. EMPLOYEE
1) 20 Year Attendees
a) Bernard Sullivan, Pollution Control
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating November 16-22, 2012 as Farm City Week in
Collier County. To be accepted by Blake Gable, Chair; Sheriff Rambosk,
Chair-Elect; Cyndee Wooley, Executive Committee; John Schmieding,
Executive Committee; Larry Berg, Executive Committee; and Steve
Kissinger, Treasurer. Sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
B. Proclamation recognizing December 1-7, 2012 as Crohns and Colitis
Awareness Week in Collier County. To be accepted by Irene Williams,
Board Chair & Founder; Yvette Stafford, Chief Operational Officer; Lena
Jones, Executive Secretary; Akita Lisa Canon, Board Advisor; Barbara
Melvin, Board Advisor; Juanita Williams, Board Member; Kyle Stafford;
Ashley Coyle; Kristine Doria; and Melody Coyle. Sponsored by the Board
of County Commissioners.
C. Proclamation recognizing and congratulating Naples Daily News on
receiving the WRAP Award for their continued efforts promoting waste
reduction, reuse, recycling and environmental awareness. To be accepted
by Kelly Benson, Vice-President and Robert Caton, Technical Service
Manager. Sponsored by the Board of County Commissioners.
D. Proclamation designating November 14, 2012 Conservancy of Southwest
Florida Susan and William Dalton Discovery Center Day. To be accepted by
Rob Moher, Conservancy of Southwest Florida. Sponsored by the Board of
County Commissioners.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation of Collier County's Business of the Month November, 2012
to the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. To be accepted by Andrew
McElwaine, President and CEO.
Page 3
November 13, 2012
1
B. Recommendation to recognize Hailey Alonso, Operations Analyst, Public
Services Division, as the Employee of the Month for October, 2012.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request from Mr. Edward Dunphy regarding a process to
reduce hauling and landfill expenses.
B. Public Petition request from Mr. Bob Krasowski regarding issues relating to
beach renourishment.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
Items 8 and 9 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Presentation to review and approve the 2012 combined Annual Update and
Inventory Report (AUIR) on Public Facilities and Capital Improvements
Element (CIE) amendment provided in Chapter 6.02.02 of Collier County
Land Development Code and Section 163.3177(3)(b), Florida Statutes.
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Collier County Public Safety Authority.
B. Request for reconsideration by Commissioner Fiala of Item #11C from
the October 23, 2012 BCC Meeting titled: Recommendation to consider an
out-of-cycle Tourist Development Council ("TDC") Grant Application from
City of Marco Island/Hideaway Beach District for Erosion Control
Structures at Hideaway Beach and if approved make a finding the project is
in the public interest and authorize all necessary budget amendments.
Estimated fiscal impact: $925,000.
C. Request for reconsideration by Commissioner Coletta of Item #10C from
the October 23, 2012 BCC Meeting titled: Appointment of member to the
Collier County Planning Commission.
Page 4
November 13,2012
D. Request for reconsideration by Commissioner Coletta of Item #16K6 moved
to #12B from the October 23, 2012 BCC Meeting titled: Recommendation to
adopt a Resolution terminating the Employment Agreement with the
Executive Manager to the Board of County Commissioners.
E. Request for reconsideration by Commissioner Coletta of Item #14A1
from the October 23, 2012 BCC Meeting titled: The Annual Performance
Appraisal for the Airport Authority Executive Director.
F. Discuss Policies and Procedures governing processing public record requests
and requests for inspection of personnel records. (Commissioner Coyle)
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to approve a budget amendment of$300,000 to fund
additional Baker Act services through David Lawrence Center for FY13
in accordance with Board direction. (Mark Isackson, Director of Corporate
Finance and Management Services)
B. Recommendation to consider using federal payment in lieu of tax (PILT)
dollars and ad valorem tax revenue to construct approximately $600,000
in improvements to Ochopee Fire Control District Station 61 at Port of the
Islands (Mark Isackson, Corporate Finance & Management Services)
C. Recommendation to adopt a position regarding East Naples Fire Control
and Rescue District's proposal to Collier County's Legislative Delegation
to expand District boundaries by adding property currently in Isles of Capri
Fire Department MSTU. (Len Price, Administrative Services Administrator)
D. Recommendation to review and approve final beach access sign renderings
for installation throughout the Gulf Shore Drive corridor for direct public
beach access via county easements. (Steve Cornell, Interim Public Services
Administrator)
E. Recommendation to uphold the protest decision denying Poole & Kent
Company of Florida's formal protest for objection regarding ITB #12-5931,
Master Pump Station 312 Rehabilitation Project No. 72549. Companion to
Item #11F. (Len Price, Administrative Services Administrator)
Page 5
November 13,2012
1
F. Recommendation to approve award of ITB #12-5931, Master Pump Station
312 Rehabilitation, Project No. 72549 to Douglas N. Higgins, Inc. in the
amount $5,961,000, authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement and
approve necessary budget amendment(s). Companion to Item #11E.
(Tom Chmelik, Public Utilities Planning and Project Management Director)
G. Recommendation to uphold the protest decision denying Poole & Kent
Company of Florida's formal protest regarding award of ITB #12-5952,
Aerated Sludge Holding Tank (ASHT)/Flow Equalization Tank (FET),
Project No. 70091. Companion to Item #11H. (Len Price, Administrative
Services Administrator)
H. Recommendation to approve award of ITB #12-5952, Aerated Sludge
Holding Tank Flow Equalization Tank for North County Water Reclamation
Facility Project No. 70091, to Mitchell & Stark Construction Company, Inc.
in the amount of$6,307,000, authorize Chairman to execute the contract and
approve necessary budget amendments. Companion to Item #11G. (Tom
Chmelik, Public Utilities Planning and Project Management Director)
I. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on the item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to hear from Crisis Center of
Tampa Bay, d/b/a TransCare Medical Transportation Services and the public
to determine the need for an additional Class 2 post-hospital inter-facility
transport ambulance transfer service in Collier County. (Dan Summers,
Bureau of Emergency Services Director)
J. Recommendation to approve and execute an Improvement to Parking Area
Agreement with Naples Zoo, Inc., related to cost sharing for entrance and
parking improvements at Naples Zoo with Collier County sharing 50% of
final certified construction costs, currently estimated at $2,600,000. (Steve
Carnell, Public Services Interim Administrator)
K. Recommendation to review and approve documents that outline the history,
timing, prior guidance and approvals received for: The beach renourishment
program; Local Government Funding Request (LGFR) grant applications;
and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) appeal process.
(Gary McAlpin, Natural Resources Department, Growth Management
Division)
Page 6
November 13, 2012
i
L. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to establish general requirements
and procedures to amend the Growth Management Plan (GMP), as provided
for in Florida Statutes. (Mike Bosi, Planning & Zoning Services Growth
Management Division Interim Director)
M. Recommendation to consider options for re-structuring the Board Office.
(Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
1) Recommendation the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the
Airport Authority, approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
Contract #12-5885, "Design and Related Services for Marco Island
Executive Airport (MKY) Runway 17-35 Rehabilitation Project" in
the amount of$660,000 with Hole Montes, Inc.
2) Recommendation the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the
Airport Authority, approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
Contract #12-5885, "Design and Related Services for the Immokalee
Regional Airport Runway 9-27 Rehabilitation Project" in the amount
of$761,000 with Hole Montes, Inc.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation the Community Redevelopment Agency complete
the 2012 annual performance evaluation for the Immokalee CRA
Executive Director.
2) Recommendation the Collier County Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) approve and execute an amendment to an employment
agreement between the CRA and Penny S. Phillippi, Immokalee CRA
Executive Director, extend term of employment 3 years, make certain
Page 7
November 13,2012
I
changes to the contract, and authorize the Chairman to sign. (Penny S.
Phillippi, Executive Director, Immokalee CRA)
3) Recommendation to award Agreement #12-5896, Design
Construction Documents, Civil Site Design (SDP Permitting) Permit
and Bid Services and Construction Administration and Related
Services for the Immokalee First Street Zocalo to David Corban
Architect, Inc. Fiscal Impact: $113,450.
4) Recommendation to approve Termination of an Interlocal Agreement
between Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency and
Collier County Airport Authority for the Immokalee Business
Development Center. (Companion to Items #14B5 and #14B6)
5) Recommendation the Board of County Commissioners acting as
the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) authorize continued
operation of Immokalee Business Development Center (IBDC) under
the auspice of Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
and exclusive of a partnership with Collier County Airport Authority
and Immokalee Airport. (Companion to Items #14B4 and #14B6)
6) Recommendation the Board of County Commissioners acting as
Community Redevelopment Agency approve amending Immokalee
Business Development Center (IBDC) Proposal, IBDC Application,
IBDC Policies & Procedure Handbook and Proposed Lease
Agreement. (Companion to Items #14B4 and #14B5)
7) Recommendation the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
acting as Community Redevelopment Agency approve submittal of a
Rural Business Enterprise Grant application to the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development in the amount of$35,000 to
complete a Feasibility Study to evaluate expanding the current
Immokalee Business Development Center and approve all necessary
budget amendments. (Heard after Item #14B4, #14B5 #14B6)
8) Recommendation the Collier Community Redevelopment Agency
Board designate Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency
Executive Director Special District Registered Agent for the CRA.
Page 8
November 13, 2012
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of water and sewer
utility facilities for the Quarry, Phase 2B and authorize the County
Manager or his designee, to release a Utilities Performance Security
of$4,000 to the Project Engineer or Developer designated agent.
2) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve an extension to complete subdivision improvements
associated with Turnbury Preserve AR#10119, pursuant to Section
10.02.05 B.11 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
3) Recommendation to award Quote #12-5891 for post-disaster damage
assessment software (ARM360) and services from GeoCove, Inc. in
the amount of$40,250 for software and annual maintenance
beginning in 2014 in the amount of$7,000 with a 3% cap.
4) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of water and sewer
utility facilities for the Quarry, Phase 2A and authorize the County
Manager or his designee, to release the Final Obligation Bond in the
amount $4,000 to the Project Engineer or Developer designated agent.
5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of water and sewer
utility facilities for Aviano at Naples and authorize the County
Manager, or his designee, to release the Final Obligation Bond in the
amount $4,000 to the Project Engineer or Developer designated agent.
Page 9
November 13, 2012
6) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water utility
facility for Aviano at Naples, Phase 2 and authorize the County
Manager, or his designee, to release the Utility Performance Security
(UPS) and Final Obligation Bond in the amount of$32,389.80 to the
Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent.
7) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of water and sewer
utility facilities for the Covenant Presbyterian Church, 6992 Trail
Boulevard, and authorize the County Manager or his designee, to
release the Utilities Performance Security and Final Obligation Bond
in the amount of$33,868.67 to the Project Engineer or Developer's
designated agent.
8) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve recording the final plat of Veronawalk Phase 4C, Karina
Court 2nd Replat, Application Number PL20120001618.
9) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a security in the amount of
$21,873.50 that was posted as a development guaranty for work
associated with Seacrest School.
10) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a Performance Bond in the
amount of$104,450 that was posted as a development guaranty for
work associated with Arthrex Commerce Park, PL2011000783.
11) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve recording the final plat of Gaspar Station Phase 1,
Application PPL-PL20120000409, approve a standard form
Page 10
November 13,2012
Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approve the amount of
the performance security.
12) Recommendation to extend Contract #07-4105 with White & Smith,
LLC, Planning and Law Group, under same terms and conditions as
the original contract for a 1-year period ending December 11, 2013.
13) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment to recognize carry
forward for projects within the Transportation Supported Gas Tax
Fund (313) in the amount of$3,150.
14) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve recording the final plat of Riverstone , Plat Two, Application
Number PPL-PL20120001179, approve a standard form Construction
and Maintenance Agreement and approve the amount of the
performance security.
15) Recommendation to approve an Assumption Agreement releasing
WCI from future maintenance responsibilities on a portion of
Mainsail Drive.
16) Recommendation to approve a transfer of Assumption Agreement
releasing WCI from future maintenance responsibilities for medians
on Collier Boulevard (S.R. 951) at the Mainsail Drive intersection,
transferring responsibility to Hammock Bay Owner's Association.
17) Recommendation to approve a Resolution implementing Board
direction to exempt Lane Rental Fees on County sponsored projects
located within or adjacent to Right-of-Ways and eliminate permit
charges for services previously provided by the County on behalf of
the Florida Department of Transportation.
18) Recommendation to execute a License Agreement with the Barefoot
Beach Club Condominium Owner's Association, Inc. and The
Conservancy, to allow mangrove trimming and monitoring on
County-owned property in the vicinity of Lely Barefoot Beach.
Page 11
November 13,2012
19) Recommendation to approve the release of lien in the amount of
$38,333.43 for payment of$24,083.43, in the Code Enforcement
Action entitled Board of County Commissioners vs. Gloria Perdigon,
Code Enforcement Case Number CESD20100009141, relating to
property located at 2931 8th Avenue NE, Collier County, Florida.
20) Recommendation to approve the release of lien in the amount of
$6,162.29 for payment of$562.29, in the Code Enforcement Action
entitled Board of County Commissioners vs. Alicia Vives, Code
Enforcement Case Number CEV20110011656, relating to property
located at 410 5th Street NW, Collier County, Florida.
21) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve an extension for completion of subdivision improvements
associated with Mockingbird Crossing, AR#9975, pursuant to Section
10.02.05 B.11 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
22) Recommendation to accept $112,647 in additional funding from the
Florida Department of Transportation for Local Agency Program
Agreement 429902-1, for construction engineering and inspection
services for the Naples Manor Sidewalk Project; authorize a necessary
budget amendment and Resolution memorializing the Board's action.
23) Recommendation to increase annual expenditures for countywide
Bid #09-5289 "Purchase & Delivery of Inorganic/Organic Mulch" to
Forestry Resources for an estimated annual expenditure of$250,000.
24) Recommendation to approve the peer review for Wiggins Pass
Channel Improvements by Olsen Associates, Inc. for a lump sum
amount of$34,900 and a peer review of Collier County Beaches
volume design by Atkins North American, Inc. under Contract #09-
5262-CZ for a lump sum amount of$15,905 and make the finding that
these items promote tourism.
25) Recommendation to approve releases of lien in the amount of
$55,288.24 for a payment of$8,488.24, in Code Enforcement Action
against Terry Dilozir, relating to property located at 5322 Catts Street,
Page 12
November 13,2012
i
4035 22nd Avenue SE, 4301 20th Place SW, and 4913 18th Avenue
SW, Collier County, Florida.
26) Recommendation to increase annual expenditures for Request for
Proposal (RFP) #11-5677, "Growth Management Division Planning
and Regulation Staffing" to NOVA Engineering and Environmental,
LLC for the annual budgeted expenditure of$150,000, approve a
budget amendment from Fund 113 to pay for the contracted services
and authorize payment of an outstanding invoice.
27) Recommendation to reject all bids Bid #12-5948, Immokalee Road
Safety Improvements, Project No. 60016.4 and to re-bid the project.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation the Board of County Commissioners acting as the
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) approve a Site Access
Agreement between the CRA in Immokalee (Owner) and Stevens &
Layton, Inc. (Contractor) allowing said Contractor to store its
materials and equipment in conjunction with Boston Avenue Sidewalk
Improvement Project #11-5674, located on the southwest corner of
South 9th Street and Main Street, Immokalee. (Folio #00122840009)
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to award Bid #12-5908, Grease Hauling Services, to
Carlos Rivero Plumbing and Septic Tank Contractor, Inc., in the
estimated annual amount of$175,000.
2) Recommendation to award Bid #12-5954, Water Meter Test Bench, to
Mars Company in the amount of$117,169.53.
3) Recommendation to approve Contract #GC-690 Amendment 2,
"Agreement for Storage Tank System Compliance Verification
Program for Collier County" between the Collier County Board of
County Commissioners and Florida Department of Environmental
Protection to continue administering the pollutant storage tank
compliance verification program for regulated tanks.
Page 13
November 13,2012
4) Recommendation to award Bid #12-5925, "Removal of Agricultural
Plastics at Immokalee Transfer Station" to Rational Energies, Inc.,
at no cost to the County.
5) Recommendation to accept Amendment 1, a zero dollar time
extension to South Florida Water Management District Alternative
Water Supply Grant#4600002535.
6) Recommendation to reject all quotes for the Woodcrest Drive Utility
Extension Phase 1, Segment C Project and to re-quote Project #70071
and #70044.
7) Recommendation to approve an amendment in the amount of$26,900
to Contract #06-3972 with Tele-Works, Inc., to transfer an existing
delinquent water/sewer customer account courtesy calling system to a
hosted environment.
8) Recommendation to authorize advertising an ordinance repealing
Ordinance Number 80-43 that created the Goodland Water District.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve Right of Entry with Florida Department
of Environmental Protection to install, maintain and monitor
groundwater monitoring wells at Pepper Ranch Preserve, at no cost to
the County.
2) Recommendation to approve three (3) Satisfactions of Mortgage for
the State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program (SHIP) in
accordance with the Board's Short Sale Policy.
3) Recommendation to approve four (4) Subrecipient Agreements for
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) projects previously
approved for U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) funding in the 2012-2013 Action Plan approved by the Board
on July 24, 2012. (Agenda Item #11E)
4) Recommendation to approve an amendment to a Community
Development Block Grant Agreement between Collier County and the
Page 14
November 13,2012
Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) extending the
grant agreement period, requiring compliance with the FY 2010 HUD
Grant and 24 CFR 570, and modifying Exhibit A, Scope of Services.
5) Recommendation to approve amendments to Subrecipient Agreements
between Collier County and David Lawrence Center, NAMI of
Collier County, Inc. and Collier County Sheriffs Office funded by a
Criminal Justice, Mental Health & Substance Abuse (CJMHSA)
Grant.
6) Recommendation to award Bid #12-5953 "Lely MSTU Pebble Beach
Lighting Project" to Bentley Electric Company of Naples, Florida,
Inc., in the amount of$129,617.46.
7) Recommendation to accept a FY12-13 Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) Section 5310 Grant award in an amount of$272,655, authorize
necessary budget amendments and approve the purchase of three (3)
paratransit vehicles utilizing those funds.
8) Recommendation to approve the FY12-13 Contract between Collier
County and State of Florida Department of Health for operation of the
Collier County Health Department in the amount of$1,258,100.
9) This item was continued from the October 23, 2012 BCC Meeting.
Recommendation to approve a budget amendment recognizing
$199,478.74 in income revenue generated when conveying property
acquired under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP 1).
10) Recommendation to ratify the Chairman's execution of the revised
buyback agreement between the County and the Agency for Health
Care Administration (AHCA) for additional eligible funding
leveraged under alternative intergovernmental transfer programs
(IGT); funds are already budgeted in the FY13 approved budget.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
1) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
Page 15
November 13,2012
renew the Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for Advanced Life
Support Transport for 1-year and authorize the Chairman to execute
the Permit and Certificate.
2) Recommendation to approve Agreement #12-5983 with Naples BMA,
LLC d/b/a Physicians Regional Healthcare System (PRHS) for use of
the medical examiner facility to conduct autopsies.
3) Recommendation to authorize purchase of a Microsoft Enterprise
Agreement from SHI for Microsoft software and licenses in the
amount of$343,028 and authorize additional software and license
purchases during the year utilizing the State of Florida's Contract
#252-001-09-1.
4) Recommendation to ratify Property, Casualty, Workers Compensation
and Subrogation Claims settled and/or closed by Risk Management's
Director pursuant to Resolution 2004-15 for the 4th Quarter of FY12.
5) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
renew the annual Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
(COPCN) with Ambitrans Medical Transport, Inc., to provide Class 2
inter-facility transport ambulance service for a period of 1-year.
6) Recommendation to approve award of Contract #12-5874 to
Intermedix Corporation to provide billing services for Collier County
Emergency Medical Services.
7) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
Assumption Agreement from Tri-County Pest Control South, Inc. to
Orkin, LLC for pest control services.
8) Recommendation to approve an assumption agreement with Evans
Energy Partners, LLC d/b/a Evans Oil Company ("Evans Energy")
for Contract #07-4180 "Gasoline & Diesel Fuel" and ITB #10-5581
"Motor Oils, Lubricants and Fluids", waiving the purchasing policy to
purchase gasoline and diesel fuel from Evans Energy without a formal
Page 16
November 13, 2012
bid to refuel county vehicles at Evan's commercial refueling site on
South Horseshoe Drive; and retroactively approve payment for all
purchases made with Evans Energy since September 26, 2012.
9) Recommendation to approve the third amendment to the Collier
County Emergency Services Medical Consultant's Contract to clarify
a section related to compensation upon termination and add a section
related to an annual performance evaluation process.
10) Recommendation to accept reports and ratify staff-approved change
orders and changes to work orders.
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to approve Release of Lien for the St. Matthew's
House, Inc. Wolfe Apartments for impact fees that have been paid in
full in accordance with the Multi-family Rental Impact Fee Deferral
Program set forth by Section 74-401(e) and 74-401(g) (5) of Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordinances.
2) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Adopted Budget.
3) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution designating Goodland Bridge
Number 030184, crossing over the Marco Channel on CR92 "The
Stan Gober Memorial Bridge".
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation to establish the commencement date of a Collier
Lease Agreement between the Collier County Airport Authority and
Salazar Machine & Steel, Inc., as December 1, 2012, and provide the
Airport Authority Executive Director authority to waive collection of
rent until the final completion date of ongoing improvements to the
leased premises.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Page 17
November 13,2012
i
1) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
She attended the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce Business
after 5 on October 18, 2012. The sum of$8 to be paid from
Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
2) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
She attended the NAACP 30th Annual Freedom Fund Banquet on
October 27, 2012. The sum of$100 to be paid from Commissioner
Fiala's travel budget.
3) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
She attended the Junior Achievement Awards on October 30, 2012.
The sum of$74 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
4) Commissioner Hiller requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
She will be attending the 2012 Citizen of the Year Banquet on
November 13, 2012. The sum of$35 to be paid from Commissioner
Hiller's travel budget.
5) Advisory Board vacancies dated October 25, 2012.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Submission of the Investment Status Update Report for the quarter
ending September 30, 2012.
2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
October 6, 2012 through October 12, 2012 and for submission
into the official records of the Board.
3) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
October 13, 2012 through October 19, 2012 and for submission
into the official records of the Board.
Page 18
November 13, 2012
4) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
October 20, 2012 through October 26, 2012 and for submission
into the official records of the Board.
5) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment recognizing
Federal HUB Vote Program Grant Award 2008 Funds for Voting
Accessibility for Individuals with Disabilities in the amount of
$11,315.73.
6) Recommendation to endorse the United States Department of Justice
and United States Department of Treasury combined Equitable
Sharing Agreement and Certification through September, 2013.
7) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
Agreement authorizing the Collier County Sheriff's Office Traffic
Control Jurisdiction over Private Roads in Summit Place Subdivision.
8) Request the Board of County Commissioners accept and approve the
capital asset disposition records for the time period October 1, 2011
through September 30, 2012.
9) Request authorization to advertise an ordinance to establish
limitations, in addition to those in Chapter 538, Part I, FL Statutes, on
the sale and/or purchase of secondhand goods. (secondhand dealers)
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment as to
Parcel 215RDUE in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Giovanni
Castellana, et al., Case No. 12-CA-2508 (Everglades Boulevard
Intersection Improvements at 18th Avenue N.E., Project No. 60016.
(Fiscal Impact: $6,900)
2) Recommendation the Board of County Commissioners, in its capacity
as the Collier County Airport Authority, memorialize its October 23,
2012 extension of and amendment to the Collier County Airport
Authority Executive Director's Employment Agreement and authorize
the Chairman to execute the Extension and Amendment Agreement.
Page 19
November 13, 2012
3) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to file a lawsuit on
behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, against
Timothy Hilts in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in
and for Collier County, Florida, to recover damages incurred by the
County for repair to a fire hydrant, sidewalk and for street damaged in
the amount of$29,649, plus costs of litigation.
4) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to file a lawsuit on
behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, against
Viviana Pineda-Lopez in the County Court of the Twentieth Judicial
Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida to recover damages incurred
by the County to repair a guardrail in the amount of$3,148.04, plus
costs of litigation.
5) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to file a lawsuit on
behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners against
Angela Hendricks and Deandre Nikko Woods in the County Court of
the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, to
recover damages incurred by the County for County Personnel to
clean-up and repair damaged roadway in the amount of$2,697.58,
plus costs of litigation.
6) Recommendation to approve a Settlement Agreement in the sum of
$61,250 and direct the County Attorney to file all documents
necessary to end with prejudice the lawsuit styled David Scribner v.
Collier County Board of County Commissioners, Case No. 2:10-cv-
728-FtM-29-JES-DNF, now pending in United States District Court,
Middle District of Florida, Ft. Myers Division. (Fiscal Impact:
$61,250)
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
Page 20
November 13, 2012
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance of
the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending
Ordinance Number 2004-41 as amended, Collier County Land Development
Code that established comprehensive zoning regulations for the
unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, for a project identified as
PUDZ-A-PL20120000303, Mirasol RPUD, amending Ordinance 2009-21,
Mirasol Residential Planned Unit Development, increasing the permissible
number of dwelling units from 799 to 1,121; amending Ordinance 2004-41,
the Collier County Land Development Code by amending the appropriate
zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an
additional 95+ acres of land zoned Rural Agricultural (A) to the Mirasol
RPUD; by revising development standards; by amending the Master Plan;
and adding deviations and revising developer commitments. The property is
located on the north side of Immokalee Road (CR 846) bordered on the east
by Broken Back Road and future Collier Boulevard (CR 951) in Section 10,
15 and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida,
consisting of 1,638.6+ acres; and by providing an effective date.
B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to consider a Resolution
amending Resolution Numbers 2004-89 and 2005-234A for the Town of
Ave Maria Stewardship Receiving Area to revise the SRA Master Plan to
add an access point on Oil Well Road. The property is north of Oil Well
Road and west of Camp Keais Road in Sections 31 through 33, Township
47 South, Range 29 East and Sections 4 through 9 and 16 through 18,
Township 48 South, Range 29 East in Collier County, Florida. (Petition
SRAA-PL20120000705 and companion to DOA-PL2012-00001160)
C. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to consider a resolution
Page 21
November 13,2012
1
amending Resolution Number 05-235 (Development Order 05-01), as
amended by Resolution No. 11-132 (Development Order 11-03), for The
Town of Ave Maria Development of Regional Impact ("DRI") located in
Sections 31 through 33, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Sections 4
through 9 and 16 Through 18, Township 48 South, Range 29 East in Collier
County, Florida by providing: Section One, Amendments to Development
Order revising Exhibit "C" and Map "H" contained in the DRI Development
Order to add an access point on Oil Well Road; Section Two, Findings of
Fact; Section Three, Conclusions of Law; and Section Four, Effect of
Previously Issued Development Orders, transmittal to Department of
Economic Opportunity and effective date. (Petition DOA-PL20120001160
and companion to SRAA-PL20120000705)
D. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Petition VAC-
PL20120001426, to disclaim, renounce and vacate County and Public
interest in part of a10-foot Utility Easement located in Lot 1, Block I, Gulf
Acres, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 111, of the Public Records of Collier
County, Florida, located in Section 22, Township 49 South, Range 25 East,
Collier County Florida, more specifically shown in Exhibit A.
E. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. CU-PL20120001757, Mac Business Plaza, a
Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida,
providing for establishment of a Conditional Use in a C-3 Zoning District to
allow up to four buildings on four different parcels, up to 15,000 square feet
each of gross floor area in principal structures for food stores, food services,
personal services, video rentals, or retail uses pursuant to Subsections
2.03.03.C.1.c.10, 2.03.03.C.1.c.16 and 2.03.03.C.1.c.17 of Collier County
Land Development Code for property at the southeast corner of Tamiami
Trail East and Barefoot Williams Road in Section 33, Township 50 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
F. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
Fiscal Year 2012-13 Adopted Budget.
Page 22
November 13, 2012
1
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 23
November 13,2012
I
November 13, 2012
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, Board of County
Commission meeting is now in session. Would you please rise for the
invocation, to be delivered by Dr. Edward Thompson of the First
Presbyterian Church of Naples.
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — GIVEN BY
DR. EDWARD THOMPSON FROM THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN
CHURCH OF NAPLES
DR. THOMPSON: Gracious God, we come before you,
gathered together, asking your blessing upon the work of the County
Commissioners for all before us today in ways of celebration, in
recognition and ongoing day-to-day activity of the county's business.
We pray, Lord God, that we will take care of this place that we
call home, that we will do our best at all times for the safety and
security of all peoples, for business and commerce, for education, for
environment and all that is good in this place.
Gracious God, in the days following elections, we give thanks
that all is well, and we pray for those that are elected to serve you in
public office at this level and at all levels will do so to work as best
they can for all the people they serve.
Holy God, we give you thanks for the goodness of this day.
Bless the work that is before us. In Christ's name we ask, amen.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Dr. Thompson.
Please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
(Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
County Manager, will you please go over the changes to the
agenda this morning?
Page 2
November 13, 2012
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND
SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED — APPROVED AND/OR
ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members
of the Board. These are your proposed agenda changes for the Board
of County Commissioners meeting of November 13th, 2012.
First proposed change is to continue Item 6.A to the December
1 lth, 2012 BCC meeting. That request is made by the public
petitioner.
The next proposed change is to continue Item 6.B to the
December 1 lth, 2012 BCC meeting. That also was requested by the
public petitioner.
The next proposed change is to continue Item 16.A.18 to the
December 11, 2012 BCC meeting. There are some documents that
came in after the agenda package was printed. So we're just going to
move this one meeting, make sure we get the updated documents put
in the agenda packet for the Board.
Next proposed change is to continue Item 16.D.9 to the
December 11, 2012 BCC meeting. That change is made at the staffs
request.
Next change proposed is to move Item 16.E.9 to become Item
11.N on your regular agenda. That move is made at Commissioner
Hiller's request.
Next proposed change is to move Item 16.G.1 to become Item
14.A.3 under your airport authority regular agenda. That move is
made at Commissioner Hiller's request.
Next proposed change is to move Item 16.K.2 to become 12.A
under your County Attorney agenda. That move is made at
Commissioner Hiller's request.
Page 3
November 13, 2012
The next proposed change is to continue Item 17.E from your
summary agenda and move it to the December 11, 2012 BCC
meeting. That continuance is at the petitioner's request.
Commissioners, you have two time certain items scheduled for
this afternoon. Item 11.0 is to be heard at 2:30 p.m. Item 11.J is to be
heard at 3:30 p.m.
Commissioners, I also have a note and a request for the Board to
hear the regular agenda CRA items before you hear the County
Manager's report. That's taken a little bit out of order because the
Immokalee CRA has a regular meeting scheduled for tomorrow and
they also have some public meetings with constituents out there to go
over some design charrettes for the area, so they wanted to make sure
that if possible they could have their items heard Tuesday so they
wouldn't have to postpone or reschedule meetings from Wednesday.
So with the Board's indulgence we'll hear Item 14.B after Board
of County Commissioner item under 10.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: And a final item, Mr. Chairman, is clarification of
Item 16.J.8 pursuant to county staff research for capital assets initially
listed as missing on the backup material; need to have a status update.
Two of the assets were destroyed. They were not missing, they were
destroyed. And the other two are still in service and will be removed
from the list of dispositions. The Clerk's Finance Department helped
us with that update. We appreciate that.
Those are all the changes that I have this morning, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And County Attorney, if you try
real hard to continue some items, we might get out of here by 12:00,
the way things are going. Do you have any suggestions?
MR. KLATZKOW: I do, but I'll leave that to the Board.
No changes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right, we'll go to the
commissioners, and today we'll start with Commissioner Hiller.
Page 4
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you, and good morning.
The first is with respect to 14.B.9. That can be moved back to
consent. It's with respect to the pipes being maintained on a location
at southwest corner of South Ninth Street.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's already moved back.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we got that this morning. Thank
you. We got you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, I missed that then. I
apologize. Thank you for moving that. I appreciate that.
The other thing is is I'd like to go ahead and pull the Ave Maria --
the two Ave Maria agenda items from the summary agenda.
And the last thing is I'd like to continue the work order for Atkins
review of the beach renourishment calculations to December's agenda.
Olsen's work order is fine, but the wording of Atkins doesn't provide
what we're looking for, so I'd like to give you the opportunity to
amend the wording of the work order.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who's the petitioner on that latter item,
County Attorney (sic)?
MR. OCHS: It's a staff item.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's under growth management, I
believe --
MR. OCHS: Yes, it's a consent agenda item under growth
management. I believe it's 16.A.24.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think both of these items are
under Mr. Casalanguida.
MR. OCHS: So ma'am, you would like 16.A.24 to move forward
with respect to Olsen but come back with respect to Atkins?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Atkins, yeah.
MR. OCHS: And then items -- Item 17.B and C would become
Items 9.B and 9.0 under your advertised public hearings.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Say them again, what numbers?
MR. OCHS: 17.B and 17.C, those are the two summary items
Page 5
November 13, 2012
having to do with the Ave Maria.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. But what number --
MR. OCHS: They would become 9.B and 9.0 under your
advertised public hearing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And --
MR. OCHS: Those are heard after 1 :00 by rule, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And as far as ex parte goes, I have
no ex parte for 11.I. On the consent agenda I have no disclosure for
A.2, A.8, A.9, A.10, A.11, A.14, A.21, E.1, E.S.
With respect to the summary agenda for -- well, 17.A we're
continuing, correct? The -- no, 17.A we're actually hearing, the
Mirasol? So that's staying on the agenda. Mirasol is staying.
MR. OCHS: Staying as 17.A, yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So 17.A, I have reviewed the staff
reports, I've had meetings with staff, and calls.
And then for 17.B, I've reviewed the staff report, I've had
meetings, emails and calls.
For C, the same. For D, no disclosures. And E, I've had -- I've
reviewed the staff report meetings and calls as well.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner -- are you finished? I'm
sorry.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let me just ask one thing. Is E
going to remain on the agenda?
MR. OCHS: Ma'am, it's been requested for continuance by the
petitioner.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right, that's fine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have no additions,
corrections or changes to the agenda. And as far as the ex parte, on
the consent agenda I have one disclosure, which is the Gaspar Station
-- God bless you -- and I received an email on that.
Page 6
November 13, 2012
And under the summary agenda, the ones that have stayed on, the
one under Mirasol I've had meetings, correspondence. I'm going back
a ways, so I didn't know if I wanted to go back too far.
But actually a few years ago I went and met with the developer's
representative a number of times. We also went out and took a site
visit to see what it looked like. I've met with the environmental
community. So I've had quite a bit of information in the last few
years.
And 17.B and C are already pulled off of this, so I'll disclose
them at that time.
And 17.D, no disclosures.
And 17.E is continued, so I won't report on that at this time.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
I have no further changes to the agenda. I have no ex parte
disclosure for the consent agenda.
And with respect to those items remaining on the summary
agenda, I have disclosure on 17.A. I have read the staff report dated
9/20/2012. And I have also participated in numerous hearings of the
Mirasol project over the past many years.
And that concludes my remarks.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir, thank you very much.
I have no changes to the agenda. And the -- as far as disclosure
goes on the summary agenda, I have a staff report dated 9/20/2012 and
have had numerous experiences over the year with the Mirasol RPUD.
On 17.D, no disclosures. And of course 17.E has been continued.
And that does it for me, thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'd like to have 16.A.24
removed from today's consent agenda.
Ex parte communications, that would be Mirasol, the Planning
Page 7
November 13, 2012
Commission's staff report. All the Ave Maria stuff is coming off the
regular agenda. So that's the only ex parte that I have.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: When you said 16 --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Where is that going, yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- A.24, you said remove. But did
you want it to be continued?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Removed from consent agenda.
MR. OCHS: And become Item 11.0 on your regular agenda,
Commissioners?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. I'm sorry, did that
answer your question --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That was -- I'm sorry, 15.A was
moved --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, 16.A.24 was moved to 11.0 on the
regular agenda.
Okay, is there a motion to approve the regular consent --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and summary agendas as amended?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second that motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Coletta to
approve, seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 8
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then it is approved.
Page 9
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
November 13,2012
Continue Item 6A to the December 11,2012 BCC Meeting: Public Petition request from Mr.Edward
Dunphy regarding a process to reduce hauling and landfill expenses. (Petitioner's request)
Continue Item 6B to the December 11.2012 BCC Meetingi Public Petition request from Mr.Bob
Krasowski regarding issues relating to beach renourishment. (Petitioner's request)
Continue Item 16A18 to the December 11,2012 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to execute a License
Agreement with the Barefoot Beach Club Condominium Owners Association,Inc.and The Conservancy
to allow for mangrove trimming and monitoring on County-owned property in the vicinity of Lely
Barefoot Beach. (Staffs request)
Continue Item 16D9 to the December 11.2012 BCC Meeting: This item continued from the October 23,2012
BCC meeting.Recommendation to approve a budget amendment recognizing$199,478.74 in program income
revenue generated when conveying properties acquired under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program
(NSP1). (Staff's request)
Move Item 16E9 to Item 11N: Recommendation to approve a Third Amendment to Collier County
Emergency Services Medical Consultant Contract to clarify the section related to compensation upon
termination and add a section related to an annual performance evaluation process. (Commissioner Hiller's
request)
Move Item 16G1 to Item 14A3: Recommendation to establish the commencement date of the attached
Collier Lease Agreement between the Collier County Airport Authority and Salazar Machine&Steel,Inc.,as
of December 1,2012,and to provide the Airport Authority Executive Director the authority to waive the
collection of rent until the final completion date of the ongoing improvements to the leased premises.
(Commissioner Hiller's request)
Move Item 16K2 to Item 12A: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners,in its capacity
as the Collier County Airport Authority,memorializes its October 23,2012 extension of,and amendments to,
the Collier County Airport Authority Executive Director's Employment Agreement,and authorizes the
Chairman to execute the Extension and Amendment Agreement. (Commissioner Hiller's request)
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
November 13,2012
Page 2
Continue Item 17E to the December 11.2012 BCC Meeting: This item requires that ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members.Should a hearing be held on this item,all participants are
required to be sworn in.CU-PL20120001757,Mac Business Plaza,a Resolution of the Board of Zoning
Appeals of Collier County,Florida,providing for the establishment of a Conditional Use in a C-3 zoning
district to allow up to four buildings on four different parcels of up to 15,000 square feet each of gross floor
area in the principal structures for food stores,food services,personal services,video rentals,or retail uses
pursuant to subsections 2.03.03.C.1.c.10,2.03.03.C.1.c.16 and 2.03.03.C.1.c.17 of the Collier County Land
Development Code for property located at the southeast corner of Tamiami Trail East and Barefoot Williams
Road in Section 33,Township 50 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida. (Petitioner's request)
Time Certain Items:
Item 11C to be heard at 2:30 p.m.
Item 11J to be heard at 3:30 p.m.
Note:
Request to hear the Community Redevelopment Agency(CRA)regular agenda items(Items 14B)before the
County Manager's Report(Items 11).
Item 16J8: Pursuant to County staff research,four capital assets initially listed as missing on the back-
up material need to have their status updated. Assets tagged as 30016629 and 30016630 were struck by
lightning and should be labeled as destroyed,not missing. Radios tagged as 30016702 and 30016728 are still
in service and will be removed from the list of dispositions. (Clerk's Finance Department request)
11/13/2012 8:42 AM
November 13, 2012
Item #2B
MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 9, 2012, BCC/REGULAR
MEETING — APPROVED AS PRESENTED
Now, with respect to the October 9th, 2012 BCC regular meeting
minutes, is there a motion to either modify or approve?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Fiala. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
That brings us to employee service awards.
Item #3A1
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS — 20 YEAR ATTENDEE
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, we have one 20-year service award
this morning. If you'd join us in front of the dais, please.
Commissioners, celebrating 20 years of service with county
government this morning from your Pollution Control Department,
Bernie Sullivan. Bernie?
Page 10
November 13, 2012
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Bernie, get a photo.
That concludes our service awards. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, that takes you to Item 4 on your agenda this
morning, proclamations.
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS — ONE MOTION WAS TAKEN TO ADOPT
ALL PROCLAMATIONS
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 16-22, 2012 AS
FARM CITY WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY
BLAKE GABLE, CHAIR; SHERIFF RAMBOSK, CHAIR-ELECT;
CYNDEE WOOLEY, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE; JOHN
SCHMIEDING, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE; LARRY BERG,
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND STEVE KISSINGER,
TREASURER — ADOPTED
4.A is a proclamation designating November 16 through 22nd
2012 as Farm City Week in Collier County. To be accepted by Blake
Gable, Chair, Sheriff Rambosk, Chair Elect, Cyndee Wooley,
executive committee, John Schmieding, executive committee, Larry
Berg, executive committee, and Steve Kissinger, treasurer. This item
is sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
If you'll all please come forward to be recognized.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just as a matter of information,
while the speaker is coming up to the podium, I just wanted to tell you
that you can buy these Farm City barbecue tickets from any Kiwanian.
Page 11
November 13, 2012
And the Kiwanians then put it into a pot and part of that money
actually goes to the Kiwanis Key Clubs. And that's a great fundraiser
for them. Key Clubs are people in high school that are learning to
give service to the community. And they're busy little people. So I
just wanted to say, if you find a Kiwanian, do buy it from them.
MR. GABLE: Well, perhaps I ought to leave out the other three
charities that we sponsor then.
Thank you. Real briefly, we really appreciate the Commission's
support. Farm City is now in its 57th year nationally. We've been
doing it here for decades, and helping sponsor this is Barron Collier
Company and Collier Enterprise. We're thrilled to be part of it again.
We do have a number of major sponsors this year in addition to
ourselves and Collier Enterprise. Arthrex, First National Bank of the
Gulf Coast, Waste Management and Naples Daily News have all
stepped up. We've sold more tickets already than we have
historically. We're expecting well over 1,000 people out there. And as
Commissioner Fiala mentioned, in addition to the Key Clubs, which
do a wonderful job, the monies that are raised go to sponsor junior
deputies and 4-H as well as Youth Leadership Collier as well. So
we're looking forward to a great event. We'd love to see you guys
serving food. We feel like we really get our taxpayer dollars worth
that day. And we're looking forward to another great year. So thank
you all very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Blake.
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING DECEMBER 1-7, 2012 AS
CROHNS AND COLITIS AWARENESS WEEK IN COLLIER
COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY IRENE WILLIAMS, BOARD CHAIR
& FOUNDER; YVETTE STAFFORD, CHIEF OPERATIONAL
OFFICER; LENA JONES, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY; AKITA
Page 12
November 13, 2012
LISA CANON, BOARD ADVISOR; BARBARA MELVIN,
BOARD ADVISOR; JUANITA WILLIAMS, BOARD MEMBER;
KYLE STAFFORD; ASHLEY COYLE; KRISTINE DORIA; AND
MELODY COYLE — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4-B is a proclamation recognizing December
1st through 7th, 2012 as Crohns and Colitis Awareness Week in
Collier County. To be accepted by Irene Williams, Board Chair and
founder; Yvette Stafford, Chief Operational Officer; Lena Jones,
Executive Secretary; Akita Lisa Canon, Board adviser; Juanita
Williams, Board member; Ashley Coyle and Kristine Doria.
And this item is sponsored by the entire Board of County
Commissioners.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who is Melody?
MS. COYLE: My mom.
MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you for allowing the Crohns Charity
Service Foundation to spread the word about this debilitating disease.
We are celebrating Crohns and Colitis Awareness Week
December 1st through the 7th.
Lots of folks have some form of this disease and they suffer
silently as they try to take care of the situation. This happened to my
family, and we toiled for over five years before we got results that
would help my grandson. Doctors were treating him with meds that
weren't solving his problems. Finally we found a solution that helped
him cope with his pain. We reached out to pharmaceutical companies
and Johnson and Johnson supplied us with his meds. He receives
infusions every two months, and he's able to live more normally.
We also have a young lady here, Ms. Coyle, that is also receiving
treatments from -- through Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical
Company.
Colitis of America has participated and partnered with us with
Page 13
November 13, 2012
supplies of literature. That's why we need to give a shout out to the
communities.
This is a worldwide disease, but we are just trying to bring
awareness to Collier County.
Our mission is to assist Crohns, IBD, colitis and digestive
disorder patients and families to regain and sustain a normal life by
pledging to provide information, awareness and financial assistance to
help them through their illness and rebuild confidence and self-esteem.
Now, we do this and we also have to have financial help. And
what we're doing November 30th is we're giving a casino cruise on the
Princess. And anyone that desires to come and help us to finance our
venture, please feel free.
Our website is www.crohnscharityservicefoundation. And I
thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
One question. Is Johnson and Johnson providing this treatment
free of charge or are they subsidizing --
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, they are.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: They are, good. We should thank
Johnson and Johnson too, shouldn't we?
(Applause.)
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING AND CONGRATULATING
NAPLES DAILY NEWS ON RECEIVING THE WRAP AWARD
FOR THEIR CONTINUED EFFORTS TO PROMOTE WASTE
REDUCTION, REUSE, RECYCLING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
AWARENESS. ACCEPTED BY KELLY BENSON, VICE-
PRESIDENT AND ROBERT CATON, TECHNICAL SERVICE
MANAGER — ADOPTED
Page 14
November 13, 2012
MR. OCHS: Item 4.0 is a proclamation recognizing and
congratulating Naples Daily News on receiving the WRAP award for
its continued efforts promoting waste reduction, reuse, recycling and
environment awareness. To be accepted by Kelly Benson, Vice
President, and Robert Caton, Technical Service Manager.
This item is sponsored by the County Commission.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Would you like to make a few remarks?
MS. BENSON: Good morning. On behalf of Naples Daily
News and Scripps Media Group, we want to thank you for this award.
And first for the nomination. And you're all welcome to come and
visit any time.
We're very proud of our recycling program. I know many say,
you know, we kill trees, but actually our news print is made of
recycled paper, so is our ink, we recycle our plates, and we have a
very efficient building. So any time any business or any of you would
like to come and visit, you're more than welcome. And again, thank
you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Item #4D
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 14, 2012
CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA SUSAN AND
WILLIAM DALTON DISCOVERY CENTER DAY. ACCEPTED
BY ROB MOHER, CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
— ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4.D is a proclamation designating November
14, 2012 as The Conservancy of Southwest Florida Susan and William
Dalton Discovery Center Day. To be accepted by Robert Moher,
Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
Page 15
November 13, 2012
This item is sponsored by the entire Board of County
Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: This is not Robert Moore.
MR. McELWAINE: You got the short end of the stick today.
I'm looking to see if he's here. He's not.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Andrew, it's a pleasure to have you here.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Picture first. Picture before speeches.
MR. McELWAINE: On behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Dalton -- for the
record, I'm Andrew McElwaine of The Conservancy.
On behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Dalton, I'd like to thank the
Commissioners very much. They were sorry not to be here today.
Just quickly, we are having our ribbon cutting for the new Nature
Discovery Center tomorrow at 10:30, and all are welcome. This is a
major event.
Now, we still have two buildings under construction and a third
coming into permitting shortly. But we have enough of the visitor
experience ready to go that we are now reopened to the public. We do
have our boat rides and as well as a number of our facilities open.
This is the main piece of the visitor experience that is now
opening. And we really appreciate the help of the Commission in
getting us to this point where we are open to the public. The new
entryway is open.
Also I want to give a tip of the hat to two Nicks. Nick
Casalanguida and Nick Biondi, both of whom came together when we
ran into a lot of trouble trying to get wildlife hospitals and things like
that through the permitting process. So I appreciate their coming
together and trying to help us work that out.
So thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Page 16
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Don't leave, we have one more for you.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, if I could get a motion to approve
the proclamations this morning, please.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Hiller, second by Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
Item #5A
PRESENTATION OF COLLIER COUNTY'S BUSINESS OF THE
MONTH FOR NOVEMBER, 2012 TO THE CONSERVANCY OF
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA. ACCEPTED BY ANDREW
MCELWAINE, PRESIDENT AND CEO — PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Takes us to Item 5 on the agenda this morning,
presentations. Item 5.A is a presentation of the Collier County
Business of the Month for November, 2012 to The Conservancy of
Southwest Florida. To be accepted by Andrew McElwaine, President
and CEO. Andrew?
(Applause.)
Page 17
November 13, 2012
Item #5B
RECOMMENDATION TO RECOGNIZE HAILEY ALONSO,
OPERATIONS ANALYST, PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION, AS
THE EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR OCTOBER, 2012 —
PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 5.B on your agenda is a
recommendation to recognize Hailey Alonso, Operations Analyst with
your Public Services Division as the Employee of the Month for
October, 2012.
Hailey?
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: While Hailey's getting her photo, I'll read a few
things and embarrass her.
Commissioners, Hailey's been an employee of the county for the
past six years. Started originally with our Domestic Animal Services
Department, currently serving as our operations analyst serving the
entire Public Services Division, providing professional and technical
support to that division.
In addition to all of her normal responsibilities, Hailey always
takes on numerous projects and initiatives, and most recently was
appointed to be the chair of the Collier County Government Team,
also known as Team Collier, for the 2012 United Way Walk. As
chair, she came up with several new ways to raise funds and increase
the number of employees signed up for the walk.
Through innovative ideas like the dunk your boss event the
county raised almost $5,600 for United Way and signed up over 260
people to participate. As a result of those efforts, Team Collier was
awarded certificates of appreciation for having the largest community
walk team and for the most funds raised by a community walk team.
Without Hailey's leadership, organizational abilities and
Page 18
November 13, 2012
motivation, these achievements simply would not have been possible.
Hailey's enthusiasm and efforts make her an asset to the county and to
the community, and she is very truly deserving of this award.
Commissioners, it's my pleasure to present Hailey Alonso,
Employee of the Month, for October, 2012.
Congratulations, Hailey.
(Applause.)
MS. ALONSO: I have a few words to say.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, sure. You have 20 minutes.
MS. ALONSO: No, I won't need that much.
I'm really honored and humbled being nominated the Employee
of the Month, but I have to say that I didn't do this alone. The whole
Team Collier, every single employee of Collier County, all the
Constitutional Offices came together as Team Collier.
Mother Teresa once said, I alone cannot change the world but I
can cast stones across the waters to create many ripples. And that's
what we did together.
And that's why I want to say thank you to Team Collier, which is
every employee in Collier County. Because without their commitment
or their dedication, this would have never happened.
And I challenge everyone to continue to throw stones in waters in
our community, because together we can move mountains. And
remember, that a house divided cannot stand upon itself. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to Item 10 on your --
I'm sorry, Item 7, Public Comments on General Topics.
Page 19
1
November 13, 2012
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, you have one registered speaker,
Jeffrey Macasevich.
MR. MACASEVICH: Thank you for that, John.
My name, for the record, is Jeffrey Macasevich. I'm a proud
resident of East Naples. Good morning, Commissioners, Chairman
Coyle, County Attorney, County Manager and Clerk of the Court.
My public comment this morning has to do with the Florida
Sunshine and public records request one might have in regards to any
county public meeting such as this commission meeting or any other
meeting.
I have at times had an opportunity to watch Channel 97 from my
home or on my PC, which I appreciate. But what I have noticed is
electronic communication of some type, via what appears to be texting
or use of one's phone during a meeting. It's blatant and I can see it
right on the television. And I've watched it for months. And it's now
time for me to come forward and say something about this.
How would I or any citizen of Collier County be able to make
public records search of these communications that are going on
during a commission meeting or any other meeting via electronic
devices? That is my question.
MR. KLATZKOW: There's no record of these, I'll call them
tweets.
MR. MACASEVICH: Or whatever they are.
MR. KLATZKOW: Or whatever they are.
MR. MACASEVICH: And under the Florida Sunshine, is that an
acceptable thing, to be texting during a meeting, blatantly on the
television that we can see?
MR. KLATZKOW: You're assuming that they're texting on
some item of the agenda.
MR. MACASEVICH: I wouldn't have any idea unless I have
access to their records.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Jeff, I think it's a really, really good
Page 20
November 13, 2012
question. I don't think Florida law has advanced with the technology
to deal with the issue, quite frankly.
MR. MACASEVICH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But it's a good question and it's
something that --
MR. MACASEVICH: That I've noticed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Something you've noticed and lots of
other people have noticed, I suspect. And it's something I think that
maybe the commissioners should be able to resolve.
MR. MACASEVICH: I would hope so. And the Clerk of the
Courts also I guess would be involved with that, would they not be,
with understanding what Sunshine is and everything else that we've
had, transparency in government as we all claim to have?
To me there's nothing transparent if I do not know what
communication is going on. You're verbally speaking, but if I see
things being texted, I don't know who they're being texted to. And
I've seen it for months, and I just thought it was time for me to step
forward and say something about it. And I hope you can address that
altogether, please, for the sake of the residents of Collier County.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Jeff.
Okay, County Manager?
Item #10A
RESOLUTION 2012-231 : APPOINTING REG BUXTON,
EDWARD MORTON AND JANET VASEY (TERMS EXPIRING
JULY 2, 2016) TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY
AUTHORITY — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: That takes us to Item 10, Board of County
Commissioners. Item 10.A is appointment of members to the Collier
Page 21
November 13, 2012
County Public Safety Authority.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve -- well, the
committee recommendation is Reg Buxton, Ed Morton and Janet
Vasey. So I make a motion to approve --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- these people.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion to approve the committee
recommendations by Commissioner Fiala and seconded by
Commissioner Coletta.
Is there any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The three members, Reg Buxton,
Edward Morton and Janet Vasey, are approved unanimously.
Item #10B
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONER
FIALA OF ITEM 11C FROM THE OCTOBER 23, 2012 BCC
MEETING TITLED: RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER AN
OUT-OF-CYCLE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL ("TDC")
GRANT APPLICATION FROM THE CITY OF MARCO
ISLAND/HIDEAWAY BEACH DISTRICT FOR EROSION
CONTROL STRUCTURES AT HIDEAWAY BEACH AND IF
Page 22
November 13, 2012
APPROVED FINDING THE PROJECT IS IN THE PUBLIC
INTEREST AND AUTHORIZE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS — MOTION TO RECONSIDER — FAILED
MR. OCHS: 10.B is a request for reconsideration by
Commissioner Fiala of Item 11.0 from the October 23rd, 2012 BCC
meeting titled Recommendation to Consider an out-of-cycle Tourist
Development Council grant application from the City of Marco
Island/Hideaway Beach district for erosion control structures at
Hideaway Beach, and if approved make a finding that the project is in
the public interest and authorize all necessary budget amendments.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, Henning was first.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sorry, Commissioner Henning, go
ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Roberts Rules of Order states a
person can reconsider an item before the close of the business or if
there's a holiday, the next day after the holiday. However, our
ordinance states you can reconsider an item up to two meetings after
the item has been heard. Four of the members voted in the majority.
And that member shall send a memo to the County Manager stating
what item he wants to be reconsidered. So I'm asking for the memo.
Where's the memo? There's no memo on our agenda.
County Manager, did you receive a memo?
MR. OCHS: I received an email, sir, from Commissioner Fiala
asking for this item to be placed on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, anything else?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, then I make a motion to deny.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, we have public speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, let's call the public speaker.
MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker is Burt Saunders. He
Page 23
1
November 13, 2012
will be followed by Bruce Anderson.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we have two public speakers.
MR. MILLER: Four.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Four public speakers. Okay.
MR. SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, my name is Burt Saunders.
I'm serving as the city attorney for the City of Marco Island.
I'm going to respond to questions and things that the County
Commission may have. Had no comment on the motion that was just
made.
I'm here to comment, if there are any questions or issues. Also
Bruce --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We have an attorney to give us
advise.
MR. SAUNDERS: -- Anderson is here representing Hideaway
Beach.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have at least two
commissioners' lights on right now. One is Commissioner Hiller. Go
ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, and the comment I'm about
to make will apply to not only 10.B but also to 10.C, D and E, since
these are all requests for reconsideration.
It's my understanding that the reason these requests for
reconsideration are being brought forward, and that is 10.B, C, D and
E, but we are hearing 10.D at the moment, is because certain
commissioners would like to block Commissioner Henning from
being able to bring -- or myself as the case may be, to bring this back
-- these items back at the next meeting. And I believe the County
Attorney has said that any reconsideration vote today will not bar -- if
the request for reconsideration is denied, it will not bar Commissioner
Henning or myself from bringing any of these matters forward at the
December meeting for reconsideration.
You had written a memo, Jeff, I believe that summarized that
Page 24
November 13, 2012
conclusion. And also I will say from reading the plain language of the
ordinance as it's written, it clearly provides any commissioner who
votes in the majority can bring back an item for reconsideration, and
there is no limit on the number of times a matter can be reconsidered.
The other thing is in Roberts Rules of Order, which in effect was
superseded by our ordinance, also provides if the motion to reconsider
is lost, it cannot be repeated except by general consent. So at the next
meeting that motion for reconsideration can be repeated if the majority
of the sitting Board at the December meeting chooses to do so.
So I just want to say that if that's your intent, Commissioner
Fiala, you know, Commissioner Henning could bring this matter
forward again.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta, do you want to
speak now or you want to hear --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to say one thing right now. I
think I'm next.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I just find it ironic that when I
ask for a reconsideration it's fought about because they want to ask for
a reconsideration. But then it's okay. And that doesn't compute as far
as I'm concerned.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would rather hear from Mr.
Anderson first and I'll ask my questions. Keep my light on, please.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Anderson?
MR. ANDERSON: Good morning, Commissioners.
Commissioner Fiala, I need to ask a clarification from you. Your
motion said a motion to deny. Did you not mean to say a motion to
reconsider?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I am so sorry. Yes. Thank you
for --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Still not going to approve.
Page 25
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- clearing that up. My goodness.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Well, just let me say that we have
a motion on the Board -- on the table by Commissioner Fiala,
seconded by Commissioner Coletta to consider the reconsideration of
this item.
Okay, Mr. Anderson, please.
MR. ANDERSON: Section 2-369(H) of Collier County Code
states that, quote, except as herein provided, questions of order and the
conduct of business shall be governed by Roberts Rules of Order.
Roberts Rules of Order states a motion to reconsider cannot be
reconsidered unless it was materially amended during the first
reconsideration.
Now, with regard to the opinion of my esteemed colleague, Mr.
Klatzkow, a new Board of County Commissioners may be able to give
a new interpretation to the reconsideration ordinance to allow a
reconsideration of a failed motion to reconsider. What a mouthful.
But only as to new matters that have first been heard by that new
county commission.
It would be violation of due process to apply a new interpretation
retroactively to a matter that was previously subject to a failed
reconsideration motion by a prior county commission.
There has to be some finality to decisions made by a deliberative
body such as yourself. Which is why Roberts Rules of Order provides
that you cannot endlessly reconsider the same matter over and over
and over again.
Residents, businesses and other units of government by necessity
must rely on your decisions and commitments in organizing their own
affairs and conducting business.
Now, I believe what Mr. Klatzkow's opinion said, and he can
certainly speak for himself, was that this Commission can interpret the
reconsideration ordinance to only permit one reconsideration within
Page 26
November 13, 2012
the two meetings, the following two meetings. But that a new
commission could conceivably give a different interpretation that
would allow two reconsiderations within the next two meetings. That's
what he said, as I understood it.
So there's no for sure that a new commission would even give a
new interpretation. And I thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, Mr. Anderson, thank you
very much for that.
I think I understand how it's going. The way this is going to play
out is I can see right now, the motion to reconsider will fail, which
will put everything into a different light. Once again the County
Attorney has opined differently than the direction that the majority of
this commission is ready to go, which leaves us in kind of a dilemma.
At the next meeting if it comes back again, I mean, the challenge will
be brief and it will be over with and very likely it will be a turnaround.
Sir, you want to comment on that?
MR. ANDERSON: I'll let Jeff speak for himself, but I don't
think he's told you that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, so what I was going to
suggest, to be able to bring something as far as clarity goes to this, we
have the County Attorney's opinion, we got your opinion, and they're
in conflict. At least they seem to be. In other words, he's saying the
commission can rewrite its own ordinance on the fly whenever it
wants. That's the way I interpret what he said. And it may be true. It
might be the power that's granted to it.
May I make a suggestion that -- can you as an individual, ask for
an opinion from the State Attorney General?
MR. ANDERSON: I don't believe so, no, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm a little bit concerned about
the County Attorney, how it might be worded if he makes that request
for an opinion.
Page 27
1
November 13, 2012
But in any case, I would suggest that before the next meeting at
some point in time we get that opinion. Would that be of some help,
Mr. Anderson?
MR. ANDERSON: I don't believe so, sir, no, sir. The Attorney
General is on her own time table, and we have no idea when or if they
would respond. And it's -- you know, it's essentially a procedural
question of Roberts Rules of Order and how it interplays with, you
know, a sentence or two of your reconsideration ordinance. I mean, it's
really a very picayune point of law.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So the way I see it, the only
thing we can do is play this thing out as we see correct. And whatever
happens happens. And possibly we get to go to lunch a little early.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, Mr. Anderson.
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The chapter you read out of our
ordinance, our meeting ordinance, Roberts Rules apply except where
provided in the questions and order of the conduct is that correct?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Would you believe that 2-41 is a
part of our ordinance?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now, are you saying that
Roberts Rule of Order is a hierarchy of a document to the constitution
bylaws, ordinances of government or organizations? Are you saying
it's a hierarchy?
MR. ANDERSON: Well, I don't want to answer your question
until I understand it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Are you saying that
Roberts Rules applies even though it is contradictory to constitutional
or bylaws or ordinance or general law of a body as an assembly?
MR. ANDERSON: I am saying simply that your ordinance is
Page 28
1
November 13, 2012
silent as to whether a motion to reconsider can be made more than
once if it has been defeated. And in the absence of addressing that
matter that Roberts Rules of Order applies and it is crystal clear that
you cannot reconsider a failed reconsideration motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, wouldn't you say that
2-41 addresses the issue of reconsideration?
MR. ANDERSON: No. Well, it addresses reconsideration, yes.
And it provides a time table within which a reconsideration request
must be filed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The -- now, you know
Roberts Rule of Order. I've seen you conduct -- or opine on Roberts
Rule of Order in different settings.
Does this say in Roberts Rule of Order that any motion that is
contrary to the constitution or bylaws or any other law of the body is
therefore null and void? You don't remember that? I'll send it to you.
MR. ANDERSON: Oh, thank you, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commission Fiala, did you want to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I know we have a couple more
speakers, but I just want to say to the folks in the audience, as well as
my fellow Commissioners, this is the City of Marco Island that is
requesting this. The reason they want erosion control structures placed
here, there's three of them that they want, is because there's been so
much erosion into the middle of the bay and then TDC dollars have to
come back and continue to dredge it back out again. And the City of
Marco Island is hoping that this will keep that pass clear for all the
boaters, not only of Marco Island but Isles of Capri and anybody else
who is boating in that area. This is what it's all about. And I feel this
is a direct slap in the face to the City of Marco Island.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Saunders, did you want to speak?
You said before you were going to respond to questions. Is there
anything you want to say?
MR. SAUNDERS: Yes. And Mr. Anderson I think laid out the
Page 29
November 13, 2012
legal argument very well. This is a very important project for Marco
Island. The City of Marco Island, City Council has passed resolutions
in support of this. The Chairman of the City Council was here at the
last meeting when this was approved. It's critical to the protection of
Tigertail Beach. It's critical to preventing erosion that will -- sand that
will flow into the channel there and cause additional dredging. It's
very important to the residents of Hideaway Beach in terms of
protecting their properties and protecting a tax base that's important to
both the City of Marco Island and to Collier County. And so we need
finality. Because the purpose of bringing this forward as early as it
was brought to you is that we want to get this project done before the
turtle season starts in May. There's going to be a beach project out
that. The mobilization cost for this project, the T-groin project, and the
mobilization for the beach project is combined so that the residents of
Hideaway are going to be paying that mobilization cost, but there's a
savings by doing this project now.
We understand the procedural matter, and, you know, we may
very well be here again in December with the same argument. But I
will tell you this is a very important project for all the citizens of
Marco Island. There's 17,000 residents out there during the season.
There are 36 to 40,000 people out there. They provide over 22 percent
of the total tourist development tax dollars for this county. They don't
get very much of that back. And this I believe is about a $1.2 million
project. It needs to move forward.
And this Commission has approved this project in the past, it's
been funded by TDC funds in the past, your County Attorney has
opined that it's a legitimate public purpose, it's a legitimate use of
those funds, and we just need to get on with it. And that's our request,
Mr. Chairman and members.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Fiala, do you have a question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I just wanted to know if there
Page 30
November 13, 2012
are any other speakers, and then I'll --
MR. MILLER: Yes. We have -- your next speaker is Michael
Poff. He'll be followed by Eric Brechnitz. And we did have one other
request come in since the item began.
MR. POFF: Good morning. For the record, Michael Poff,
Coastal Engineering. I'm the principal engineer for the project,
available to answer any technical questions that you may have.
I just would emphasize that (sic) the critical erosion. The sand's
moving off into the channel. Time is of the essence. I would
encourage you to act timely and again, I'm here to answer any
questions that you may have of a technical nature. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's my understanding, Mr.
Klatzkow, that on a motion for reconsideration there is no discussion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. It's what our rules say.
MR. KLATZKOW: There's no discussion as to the merits of the
underlying issue. You do have a discussion as to whether or not
reconsideration is appropriate.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I agree with that. So I don't think
we should be discussing the merits of the issue today.
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Erik Brechnitz. He'll
be followed by your final public speaker, Marcia Cravens.
MR. BRECHNITZ: I have nothing to add. I'm here to answer
questions, if there are any.
MR. MILLER: Ms. Cravens.
MS. CRAVENS: Good morning, Commissioners. Marcia
Cravens.
And I am speaking not only as a full-time permanent resident of
Collier County but also as representative of the Sierra Club's Calusa
Group.
There's a couple of things I just would like to point out. And I
appreciate this is a very difficult thing for decisions to be made.
Page 31
November 13, 2012
There's a finite amount of money to be distributed for beach projects,
and every one of the Commissioners here is interested in improving
tourism for their districts.
I'd just like to point out that beach renourishment does not stop
erosion. It simply doesn't. Beach renourishment projects -- beach
renourishment projects fall under two categories: One is mitigation
for proposed projects that humans impact on beach areas that cause
erosion; and two is remedial for nature caused beach erosion.
And one of the things that falls into consideration here is we're
lacking a comprehensive overall beach plan where all public beaches
are considered and given, maybe some sort of proportional allowance
within TDC grants of how they're awarded. And some areas have
terrific public access, some areas less so.
And I have to ask the question, why don't we have a proportional
type of calculation? Why don't you take a page from DEP for their
grants when they consider how well public access occurs at those
areas when they calculate DEP grants for beach renourishment
projects?
I ask that beach planning be done in a more comprehensive way
that allows consideration of public access to the degree that exists
there, and also allows for private and public partnerships for areas that
have less than terrific public access.
So I'm not taking a particular stand on this particular item, I'm
just asking for overall consideration. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Remember, this is a hearing on
reconsideration, that's all. Has nothing to do with merits of the issue,
okay?
MS. CRAVENS: Well, the way you calculate it and the way it's
disbursed. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we -- is that the public speaker?
MR. MILLER: That's it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then who was first,
Page 32
November 13, 2012
Commissioner Fiala or Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I just wanted to make a
comment. She was mentioning beach renourishment. But this of
course is not beach renourishment, this is erosion control structures to
prevent any erosion from going back into the channel and harming
boats who might be able -- or preventing boats to go through the
channel until we dredge it out again. So I just wanted to mention that.
And I also wanted to mention that on Marco Island, the largest
hotel in Collier County and the biggest hotel to collect TDC dollars
and the most passionate about never using those dollars for anything
but advertising is the Marriott on Marco Island. The general manager
is a man named Rick Medwedeff, and he voted for this because he felt
this was so important to the island, to the tourists. They take shuttles
regularly from the Marriott to Hideaway Beach because the shelling is
so good there. And in front of the hotels, the beaches are raked clean
so there aren't any shells for the tourists to come in and enjoy.
And so this is certainly a definite tourism related issue, and that's
why he voted for this -- these erosion control structures to be placed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we'll have one more comment
from Commissioner Hiller and then I'm going to call the motion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No comment.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would you repeat the motion,
please?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Well, the motion was a motion
for reconsideration by Commissioner Fiala and seconded by
Commissioner Coletta.
So all in favor of reconsideration, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All opposed to reconsideration,
please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Page 33
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion fails. Motion for
reconsideration fails by a vote of 4-1, with Commissioner Henning in
opposition.
Okay, so we're finished with that one. Let's go on to the next one,
County Manager.
Item #10C
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONER
COLETTA OF ITEM 10C FROM THE OCTOBER 23, 2012 BCC
MEETING TITLED: APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — MOTION TO
RECONSIDER — FAILED
MR. OCHS: 10.0 is a request for reconsideration by
Commissioner Coletta of Item 10.0 from the October 23rd, 2012 BCC
meeting titled appointment of member to the Collier County Planning
Commission.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for reconsideration.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion for reconsideration by
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
We don't have any public speakers?
MR. MILLER: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying --
all in favor of the motion to reconsider, please signify by saying yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
Page 34
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Henning is voting
in favor of reconsideration.
All opposed to reconsideration, please signify by saying yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the motion passes to defeat the
motion for reconsideration by 4-1 with Commissioner Henning voting
against.
That brings us to Item 10.D.
Item #10D
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONER
COLETTA OF ITEM 16K6 MOVED TO 12B, FROM THE
OCTOBER 23, 2012 MEETING TITLED: RECOMMENDATION
TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION TERMINATING THE
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT WITH EXECUTIVE MANAGER
TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS — MOTION TO
RECONSIDER — FAILED
MR. OCHS: 10.D sir. It's a request for reconsideration by
Commissioner Coletta of Item 16.K.6 moved to Item 12.B from the
October 23rd, 2012 BCC meeting titled recommendation to adopt a
resolution terminating the employment agreement with the executive
manager to the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Coletta for
reconsideration, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please -- all in favor of reconsideration, please
Page 35
November 13, 2012
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Henning votes in
favor of reconsideration.
All opposed to reconsideration, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion for reconsideration fails by a
vote of 4-1 with Commissioner Henning dissenting.
That brings us to another one, 10.E.
Item #10E
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONER
COLETTA OF ITEM 14A1 FROM THE OCTOBER 23, 2012 BCC
MEETING TITLED: THE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE
APPRAISAL FOR THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR — MOTION TO RECONSIDER — FAILED
MR. OCHS: It's a request for reconsideration by Commissioner
Coletta of Item 14.A.1 from the October 23rd, 2012 BCC meeting
titled the annual performance appraisal for the airport authority
executive director.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion for reconsideration by
Commissioner Coletta, seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the reconsideration motion, please signify by
saying aye.
(No response.)
Page 36
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All opposed to reconsideration,
please saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The most passes unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Takes you to Item 10.F --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sorry, it should be that the motion
failed unanimously. We stated the vote correctly, but I summarized it
incorrectly. So the motion for reconsideration failed.
And then that takes us to 10.F or do we go somewhere else?
Item #1 OF
DISCUSSION ON POLICIES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING
PROCESSING PUBLIC RECORD REQUESTS AND REQUESTS
FOR INSPECTION OF PERSONNEL RECORDS — DIRECTING
STAFF TO BRING BACK RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
HANDLING PUBLIC RECORD REQUESTS IN A MORE
EFFICIENT MANNER AND PROPOSE POLICY THAT WHEN
CONDUCTING COUNTY BUSINESS AND CORRESPONDENCE
ON PERSONAL COMPUTERS THE "COLLIERGOV" EMAIL
ADDRESS SHOULD BE COPIED; ALL MAIL SENT TO THE
BOARD IS DELIVERED TO A CENTRAL LOCATION, OPENED,
DATE/TIME STAMPED AND DISTRIBUTED TO
COMMISSIONERS AND PUBLIC RECORD REQUESTS GO
THROUGH THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 10.F, sir. It's a discussion of policies and procedures
governing the processing of public records request and request for
Page 37
November 13, 2012
inspection of personnel records. This item was placed on the agenda
by Commissioner Coyle.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I have brought this forward
primarily as a result of some confusion concerning the release, the
request and release of public records involving some of our
employees, which have caused a resulted threatened lawsuit and have
caused considerable embarrassment to an employee because of the
inappropriate release of health information that should have been
protected under our public records request procedure.
And unfortunately the lawyers among us were the ones who
caused the problem. So we would like -- I would like to ask the Board
to consider, number one, emphasizing the proper method of getting
public records by members of this Board. And secondly, to consider a
public records ordinance which would require that all personnel
records be kept within Human Resources and not be maintained
independently by other offices throughout the county so that there
could be some uniform and hopefully accurate control over the
dissemination of public information concerning our employees.
So that's the reason I brought this up.
I'll add one other. Many of us use our own computers to do
business. The reason for that is it's too inconvenient to carry and
maintain two computers, your personal computer and a business
computer, if you're traveling or going for meetings from one place to
another.
There are ways to deal with that problem, and one of those ways,
which I try to observe but must admit on occasion I have forgotten to
do so, is that any email I send on my personal computer, I send a blind
carbon copy to Collier County so that they keep a record of it.
I would like to have that procedure included in our public records
requirements so that at least there is some way of easily tracking --
more easily tracking email communications by commissioners who
use their personal computer.
Page 38
November 13, 2012
And then lastly, I think we need to have a central records
repository here in Collier County for all of the correspondence coming
in to the Collier County offices for the commissioners. The practice
of some commissioners having mail delivered to another address or
location essentially takes all that communication out of the control of
the people who are responsible for satisfying public records
requirements. And there's no way of determining if correspondence
was ever even received.
So I would like to propose that we adopt -- well, let's -- let me
back up, not adopt but instruct the staff to come back to us with
recommendations about how these kinds of procedures can be put into
place most efficiently to assure that our public records obligations are
done more efficiently and properly.
So that's the reason I brought this up. And we have a whole
bunch of lights. Who was first?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Henning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, I think it's an
assumption from an employee's attorney that there were health records
in inappropriate storage, by the way. Those -- and that was a problem
with that manager who did not manage records properly.
But I would like to have the County Attorney explain what
happened and was it HIPAA information that was shared.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, we can certainly do that. But I
would like --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I would like that. And
then I have some further questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But I just wanted to correct one of your
statements. You said it is the opinion of an employee. It's more than
that. We have proof it was released. So it wasn't just an opinion, it
was absolutely true.
So is Scott Teach going to address this issue?
Page 39
I
November 13, 2012
MR. TEACH: Good morning, Commissioners. Scott Teach,
Deputy County Attorney.
I just wanted to share with the Board, yesterday I went to Fort
Myers and I met with John Potanovic, an attorney with the law firm of
Henderson and Franklin, to have -- and Mr. Potanovic is a Board
certified employment lawyer, very versed in these issues that we're
discussing.
Because of the allegations in the letter, both the County Attorney
and our office are conflicted out of it. So what I've done is I've
reached out to Mr. Potanovic and his firm to provide an opinion at a
future date that will address issues that could affect the Board and the
county's interest, not individual interest of the parties; Commissioner
Hiller and Mr. Klatzkow who were referenced in the letter as well.
Because that's not the role of the independent counsel.
Mr. Potanovic, when I left yesterday, shared with me what he
would like to do is, he needs to take a look at the records himself, he
needs to consult with Commissioner Hiller and Commissioner
Klatzkow -- County Attorney Klatzkow separately in order to render
an opinion. And that's where we're at on the item.
So I just wanted to report that back to you. And I think, you
know, there'll be a further opportunity presumably by the next Board
meeting or earlier when Mr. Potanovic or his firm can render an
opinion on that issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
Commissioner Henning, you said you had some other questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, statements on your
recommendation.
Constraining the representation of the people here in Collier
County is not going to resolve anything.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Constraining?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The Florida Statute is clear that
commissioners can get any information about the county. And as far
Page 40
November 13, 2012
as mail being delivered at a different address here, that is constraining
a representation of a commissioner.
You want to centralize everything. So -- but you can put it on the
agenda, that's fine. We'll speak about the merits when it comes back.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, that's the most convoluted
argument I've ever heard, I think. But nevertheless, who was next?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think Commissioner Fiala was.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I would think -- now, I'm a
really transparent person, so you can find out anything on mine. You
know, my calendar is available, my messages are available, it's easy to
find.
When Commissioner Henning made a record request on my
email and phone calls just a while back -- and, you know, it's easy
enough to see and you can just do it.
But anyway, so then he requested information on other phones
that I may have, as well as other email addresses I might have. Well, I
only have one phone, and that's -- honest to goodness, that is not only
for business but also for personal. I don't own a second phone. So
there was no way I could come up with anything. But I was wondering
why he thought I would have.
And then the second thing is, as far as emails go, I have a
personal address and I have a company address. I don't have any other
addresses anyplace at all. And so as you're beginning to see, this is --
we're going in a wrong direction. Suspicion and accusations are
beginning to prevail. And I don't know how we can ever get to a
cooperative and united commission if the -- if things like this prevail.
I can understand why all mail should come in, because what we
do when our office receives mail, they have to stamp everything as
received and they have to copy things. And if it doesn't come to our
office, then you have no idea when it was received, to whom it was
sent or who sent it.
Page 41
November 13, 2012
And so, you know, that's all a matter that I'm sure everybody
should have as far as the Sunshine goes, to be able to just completely
present whatever they're receiving. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I couldn't agree with you more,
Commissioner Fiala. I think the best thing to do is we referenced
several times about public records being able of commissioners. I
think we can remove the name commissioners and just say public
records for public and that covers everyone. Because we don't -- we
shouldn't have any special status in this. If we can legally receive
medical records and be able to look at them, then the public should be
able to too. Of course that's not a legal entity and we can't go there
and that's the reason for the suit that's before the county now.
All the records should be public, every email. We should have a
setup, a system where are all our emails are public records to be
posted possibly every week or so so people could look at it and see,
you know, and that would help the transparency even more so.
I have from day one, anything I ever received in my personal
account, I have always forwarded it on to the county server, so that
would always be available for anybody that wanted to see it to try to
eliminate that. You could make that part of that ordinance and make
sure that people comply with it. It's a very simple measure.
Another thing that has to be done to address true transparency
would be that there has been times in the past I've heard where people
have got around public information requests by making sure mail that
was destined for them would be sent to a third party and then printed
off and handed to them. We have to specifically mention that in our
revised ordinance as being something that's not acceptable and that it
has to be made part of public records, identified to the commissioner
that it was actually addressed to rather than putting it together in such
a way to avoid disclosure. I think that's something that's important.
One of my biggest concerns I have right now too is the -- what is
Page 42
November 13, 2012
public records and what isn't public records. It depends on who's on
the determining end of the stick I guess what this is. But this (sic)
video tapes that have been requested from the county and been denied,
even though that the Attorney General has opined to the fact that they
were public records, is extremely troublesome. I wasn't here for that
vote and I don't know if it was presented in a light that was
understandable.
But there's a real concern the fact that I understand those video
records are supposed to be destroyed 30 days after they're created. So
in other words, if we can delay that long enough and not talk about it,
we can remove that evidence from consideration.
MR. KLATZKOW: I've directed Mr. Camp to maintain those
records, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, sir. I appreciate that
very much. We got that on the record now. And that's something that
I -- that's an oversight that I'm glad you have taken care of.
That pretty much covers what I have to say on the subject.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Sheffield, Commissioner
Coletta stated that I asked for records from her personal email and her
personal --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Fiala said that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala.
Is that your understanding?
MR. SHEFFIELD: I'd have to go back and review.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Would you do that?
MR. SHEFFIELD: Sure thing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That request didn't come from
me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Well, you know, there
was an email sent and then -- and what I was told from the email was
that that wasn't enough, you had requested additional information.
Page 43
November 13, 2012
I'm glad to hear it wasn't from you. So I'll have my secretary
look it up, though. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, so I will make a motion that we
ask the staff to look at a number of issues relating to the better control
of information so we can more effectively respond to public records
requests.
And those things would be, number one, making it a matter of
policy that any commissioner who conducts business on the personal
computer send a blind carbon copy or an open copy to the county to
the county; perhaps their aide. And that will make sure that it goes
into the county computers and it will be available for review.
Number two is to assure -- is a procedure that will assure that all
mail coming to members of the Board of County Commissioners will
be -- will come to a central location where it will be open time
stamped and then distributed to the appropriate commissioner or
commissioners.
And number three -- what was number three?
MR. OCHS: You had discussed what I call a document
management, a records management system for all documents. That
one's going to be very complex.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: More difficult.
MR. OCHS: We'll look at it, but there -- we have procedures in
place in my agency that put controls on release of documents, whether
they're in department files or in --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm not talking about release at this point
in time. I'm just talking about getting them under control of
government so you can respond to a public records request, okay?
MR. OCHS: Got it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's one of the things that I'm
interested in. Okay?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I think the final item was to
Page 44
November 13, 2012
emphasize the procedure when it comes to public records requests by
commissioners that they should go through your office for that
dissemination, okay?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, was there anything else that I
mentioned that we need to include in this motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir. There was -- I don't
want to speak out of turn; Commissioner Henning's light was on
before mine.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, we have a new
member coming to this Board. I think it would be more appropriate to
have a workshop, not only on public records, but Sunshine Law.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I think certainly the new member
will get that orientation when he comes on Board. That's standard
procedure for us. To delay --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Hiller, did you
get information or confirmation or anything from staff about what is
public records and what is Sunshine Law?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I did.
MR. OCHS: Yeah, I believe Mr. Klatzkow's office had
organized that as part of his orientation with new commissioners. I
don't want to speak for Jeff, but I know he's done that in the past.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I am amazed that all the commissioners
don't understand that public records requests go through the County
Manager, because that's what our ordinance says. And we all know
that. End of story. There is no debate about that. So we need make
sure we adhere to that process. Because going around that process is
exactly what got us into this particular problem. If we had not
violated that process, we wouldn't be here today talking about this.
Okay?
Now, you had something, Commissioner Coletta?
Page 45
1
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir. To develop an open
registry for all commissioners, emails and correspondence.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't know what an open registry is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, your email
would be posted within like a month's time to a public accessible page
where people would be able to bring it up and view it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That wasn't my recommendation. That
might be yours.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That is mine. And that would
also include the correspondence that would be scanned in and just be
made available to the public also.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, making it available on-line is
going to be a more difficult and time-consuming job.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's done in a number of
counties.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I understand that. But they did it
by spending a lot of money on doing that. And I don't have a problem
with that, it's just that I don't know the financial implications to the
County Manager's office about doing that. And maybe you can come
back and advise us of that, County Manager.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay? There's nothing wrong with that
kind of transparency, it's just throwing it at you all at one time after
the budget's been approved is a more difficult thing to do deal with.
Okay, that's the motion. Now, does anybody want to talk about
the motion? Any further? Anybody? Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one little --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta, Commissioner
Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller will be next.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You had stated -- you just stated
Page 46
November 13, 2012
before something about the aides would just be able to send --
somebody said this, I don't even remember who -- aides would be able
to send all of the emails weekly or monthly to a general area? But I
don't know, you know, some aides don't even have access to the email,
so I don't know how they would be able to do that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, there's two ways. For those
commissioners who don't like for their aides to know what they're
doing, then they could send it to the county. I send mine to my aide.
Then of course that puts it on the county computers. It is searchable
then and people can find it if you have a public records request.
So that solves the problem automatically under those
circumstances.
So the commissioners are going to have to make their own
individual decisions about how they get it to the county. But every
time we do business on a personal computer, a copy of that should be
sent to the county so that it is a matter of public record. Okay?
MR. OCHS: I think the easiest way is just to send it to your own
county email.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Or mail it to the county, that's right.
Okay?
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Whatever applies to the Board should apply to the staff. We
should have the same standards. So if staff is using their personal
email to conduct public business, that correspondence should be
copied to the government email account.
Also, when staff communicates with commissioners, staff should
use the colliergov address. For example, I got an email from Leo and
he emailed me on my personal account. I don't really know why.
And this was just this past week.
So I'm going to ask Leo, you know, redirect that email to my
colliergov account. And I have repeatedly told people when people
Page 47
November 13, 2012
email to my personal account not to do so. And I do what
Commissioner Coyle recommends, which is basically copy the
communication to my colliergov address and just forward it.
So that is -- again, what applies to the Board applies to staff
across the Board.
With respect to mail, same thing holds true. For example, I
remember you know, going back over a year ago where Mr.
Feldhouse from Pelican Bay was working on some draft proposal,
some sort of settlement agreement, and he actually emailed -- he sent a
hard copy of it to Mr. Ochs at his personal residence. Now, I'm not
sure why he did that. And then Mr. Ochs had to deliver a copy to me
after I requested it. But that should never -- has never happened. And
it should be automatic that all communications with the county goes,
you know, to the county and not to individual private addresses of
anyone who works for the county, be it staff again or commissioners.
I think your idea, Commissioner Henning, about having a
workshop is an excellent one. I think there are real concerns about,
you know, what a public record is.
You know, Commissioner Coyle, I believe your aide, as Mr.
Mitchell, believed that a public record is only a public record. In other
words, a document produced by the government only becomes a
public record when a member of the public asks for it. And otherwise
it's not a public record. Which obviously is not the case.
There also seems to be some confusion as to what a request from
a member of staff or the Board is. And all of us acting in our official
capacities are not making public records requests. We are not the
public. We are government. And we are simply looking at our own
records.
And so these are not from the standpoint of the Board asking for
information pursuant to Chapter 125, which is the Board's right,
whether it's staff asking other staff for government records, you know,
within -- held and controlled by government, those are not public
Page 48
1
November 13, 2012
records requests. Public records requests are when members of the
public are asking for documents produced by government.
And with respect to publication, the rules as to what the public
can see are different than what we as members of government can see.
You know, there are exemptions where the public doesn't have the
right to see documents that we as government can see. And so there is
a redaction of, you know, government records when the public makes
a request, and that has to be separately considered as well. And then
when redactions are made for the benefit of the public, those
redactions have to be explained by reference to a statute and an
explanation of how that statute applies with particularity.
I had a constituent share something with me that makes the point
that Commissioner Henning makes very important. A constituent
asked for a document that was included in a personnel file of one of
our managers, and -- well, two things happened. The first is when the
constituent went to Human Resources, Human Resources actually
wanted the citizen to produce a driver's license to identify themselves
before releasing the document. That's just not acceptable. It's not legal
to do that.
The second thing that happened was, in some communication the
constituent was told by a representative from HR that the employee
had not allowed this document to be released, and any further releases,
I'm paraphrasing, more or less would have to be with the employee's
approval.
That's not an option either. You know, the person who creates
that public record doesn't have the individual right to deny the public
the right to see that document. And that document that that citizen
was asking for was most certainly a public record and was defined as
such by the Attorney General's Office.
So with respect to a workshop, I think it's extremely important
we have a workshop. I think we need to address all these issues.
I would like to make a recommendation that we actually have a
Page 49
November 13, 2012
mandatory annual review of public records law, Sunshine Law, open
government law as a requirement of every employee's annual
evaluation, that they -- in fact, I spoke to Pat Gleason at the Attorney
General's Office and they actually already have a review program
available. So it would be at no cost to Collier County. And
essentially what would happen is that every employee would be
required on-line to review, answer a few questions, the supervisor
would sign off. And that way every -- including commissioners of
course -- everybody's understanding of these rules would be updated
as the law changes and would be fresh in their mind as they're doing
their county business.
So I'm going to bring that forward in January, Jeff. And I know I
had mentioned this to you earlier, and I am proceeding forward with
that, and I'll bring that at a later date. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Fiala, and then I'm
going to call the question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. Thank you very much.
And I hear what everybody is saying. What you also hear as the
underlying issue is, well, there's a lot of trust in this. We have to trust
that we receive everything that's being received on emails at home or
wherever they're sent. We have to trust that everybody is going to be
forthcoming. We have to trust that everybody wants to share this
information with the entire county.
And how do you know -- this is a question for everybody, how
do you know that they are doing that? I don't think there's any way to
really tell. You have to say are you sending us everything, and the
person would have to say no. I mean, you don't see that too often. So
no matter what all we say, I don't think there's any way of enforcing
those requirements.
And I like the idea also of a workshop. I think that's a good
thing. Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we've got a motion. I would like
Page 50
1
November 13, 2012
to add to the motion a suggestion that Commissioner Hiller made,
which is to make sure that these procedures apply equally to county
staff.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to add to your motion, if I
may, if we could add that we should have a workshop on this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, you said you were going to
introduce that later.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Actually, my goal was to introduce
the -- I can do that separately, but my goal was to introduce, you
know, the -- a computerized review of Sunshine Law that all
employees and the Board would have to -- you know, basically study,
answer some questions and sign off on annually.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, why don't we ask that the staff
come back and include that in their recommendations to us and
provide a date for a workshop.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, all of that should be
included.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor of the motion, please signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the motion passes unanimously.
We're going to take a 10-minute break. We'll be back here at
10:45.
(Recess.)
(Commissioner Coletta is not in the Boardroom.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you've got a live mic, sir.
Page 51
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, Board of County
Commissioner meeting is back in session now.
Where do we go?
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, as we discussed this morning when
you set the agenda, we are now moving to your CRA items.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Item #14B1
THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
COMPLETION OF THE 2012 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION FOR THE IMMOKALEE CRA EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Those are items beginning with Item 14.B.1. That
is a recommendation to the Community Redevelopment Agency to
complete the 2012 annual performance evaluation for Immokalee
CRA executive director. Ms. Phillippi is here to present or answer
any questions the Board may have.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Ms. Phillippi?
MS. PHILLIPPI: Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you
for letting us move forward on the agenda. Thank you, Mr. Ochs, for
facilitating that.
I'm bringing my evaluation ahead of time. It's actually due to be
brought back in January, according to our resolution. However,
because my contract ends December 3rd, I wanted to request you do
my evaluation prior to the contract, prior to hearing the contract.
So one other thing I'd like to say. Because the annual evaluation
talks about all the really marvelous things that we've been able to
accomplish at the CRA in Immokalee, and it should be said that this
was done by many, many people through the support of the County
Manager's office. But I especially want to remember someone that we
Page 52
November 13, 2012
completely lost, and her name is Lynn Wood. She worked down in
our purchasing department. And we had a memorial for her a week or
so ago. And this was one of our most excellent employees, in my
opinion. And she was someone who knew purchasing rules inside out
and backwards, and I just wanted to say this quick little remembrance
of her. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
We have no public speakers?
MR. MILLER: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes unanimously.
Item #14B2
THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) APPROVAL & EXECUTION OF AN
AMENDMENT TO AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CRA AND PENNY S. PHILLIPPI, THE
IMMOKALEE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, EXTEND TERM
OF EMPLOYMENT 3 YEARS, MAKE CERTAIN CHANGES TO
THE CONTRACT, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO
SIGN — APPROVED; MOTION TO RECONSIDER — FAILED
Page 53
November 13, 2012
MR. OCHS: That takes us to 14.B.2. It is a recommendation
that the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency approve
and execute an amendment to the employment agreement between the
CRA and Penny S. Phillippi, the Immokalee CRA Executive Director,
extending the term of employment three years, make certain changes
to the contract, and authorize the chairman to sign.
(At which time, Commissioner Coletta entered the Boardroom.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, any questions?
MS. PHILLIPPI: Before we move forward, could I make a
change to that contractual amendment?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, go ahead.
MS. PHILLIPPI: It says in the contract, as you can see we
placed on the overhead, that the base pay is $85,000. And February
24th of'09 this Board provided a COLA for 4.2 percent. And so the
actual amount that should be reflected on there is $88,570.
So in this contract we're basically asking for an extension for
three years, we're asking to revise the contract to provide for a COLA,
should a COLA be provided to the rest of the county staff, and to
remove Section 13, which requires that I must reside within the
enterprise zone. I have for the past five years and still do, but the
requirement is rather onerous. And I would like for that to be
removed. Everything else should stay the same, in my opinion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And the payment rate is the correct
payment rate?
MS. PHILLIPPI: 88,570.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But --
MS. PHILLIPPI: You see in the contract?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I know that. But I'm looking at $85,000
here on this item, and it doesn't indicate that it's changed.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Right. It would have to be a strike-through and
initial. It should be changed to $88,570.
Page 54
1
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, but that's not shown on this
particular document. That's all I'm saying.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we wouldn't be approving this
particular document, we would be approving this document with a
further change --
MS. PHILLIPPI: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- of the basic salary, right?
MS. PHILLIPPI: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala, were you
first? Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies first.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much.
I just want to say, Penny, that I was so pleased to read everything
that -- all the evaluations from not only people that work for you but
people outside your office, the community at large, as they've come
into my office here and there to praise what you have done and how
much you've uplifted that community. And I think that this is
certainly in order and I would absolutely vote for it.
In fact, I'd like to make a motion to approve this. I'm so glad that
you've taken hold of this thing and really started to lead this
community forward to upgrade itself.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: A motion by Commissioner Fiala to
approve this contract with the noted changes, including the salary
adjustment to the correct salary. And it was seconded by
Commissioner Coletta.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you'll be traveling from
Page 55
November 13, 2012
Highlands County down to Immokalee every day?
MS. PHILLIPPI: No, sir, not at all. I'll still live in Immokalee.
But generally speaking, there are houses on the periphery a little more
out into the farmlands that are, you know, within five, 10 miles that
are available that we've been looking at that are much more affordable
than the cost of rent within Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're going to live in
Collier County?
MS. PHILLIPPI: In Immokalee, yes, in the surrounding area.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Coletta, do you
have anything?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just want to tell Penny I
appreciate your efforts. You're the greatest thing that's happened to
Immokalee in a long time. You've made a tremendous difference.
And by your contract here I see that you're willing to make a
commitment going off into the future. And for that I'm very pleased
with the fact that I'm here to support you and will always be there for
you. Thank you very much.
Now, just one question. The pay increase, you've got that taken
care of. The right to be able to locate someplace in the Immokalee
area is part of your right.
Is there anything else that we didn't put in this that we should
have? Is there --
MS. PHILLIPPI: Not at all. Not at all.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, that satisfies --
MS. PHILLIPPI: I do want to say to you, Commissioner, thank
you for your support over these past five years as you're leaving us,
and we will honor you for a long time to come. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor of the motion, please signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 56
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the motion passes 4-1 with
Commissioner Hiller dissenting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to bring this motion back
for reconsideration, 14.A.1.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 14.A.1?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I believe that's the number, isn't
it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're on 14 --
MR. OCHS: 14.B.2.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: B.2, excuse me. Okay, I'm one
page off there. Back for reconsideration.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion for reconsideration by
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, second, because I'd like to
know what he's talking about.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala seconds the motion.
Is there any discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could you tell us? You wanted to
bring it back today for reconsideration, did you say?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Bring back the motion for
reconsideration. Vote it up, vote it down. Preferably down.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all in favor of the motion for
reconsideration, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all opposed to the motion for
reconsideration, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 57
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the motion for reconsideration is
defeated with a vote of 4-1 with Commissioner Henning in support of
the reconsideration.
MR. KLATZKOW: Mr. Chair, are you comfortable signing the
amendment with that strike-through, or would you like me to bring it
back on consent?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm comfortable with the strike-through,
because that is the correct -- the amount of the salary that Penny is
talking about is the amount that was included in prior minute --
minutes of this meeting where it was approved at the amount that she
has specified. So it is an error on our part in the preparation of this
executive summary in the contract. So I feel comfortable --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the second agrees.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- with doing it. Okay?
All right.
MR. OCHS: Takes us to 14.B.3 on your agenda. It's a
recommendation --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to say I don't agree. I
think that, you know, if a contract is changed, it needs to be brought
back to the Board so that the Board has the opportunity to review the
correction. I'm not sure if this is the right amount. It may or may not
be. It has to be recomputed and verified. And we're now introducing
information that, you know, was not introduced prior. So I do think it
needs to come back for Board approval.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Does that mean you want to change your
motion of support of the contract?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, my position stays the same. I
Page 58
November 13, 2012
think that the Board, in order to vote on this contract since it's changed
has to hear it at the next Board meeting. Just like Commis -- gosh,
everyone is calling you Commissioner Klatzkow today.
MR. KLATZKOW: Please don't.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm sorry.
But yeah, I do think it needs to come back. If a contract is
changed, it needs to come back as modified and verify --
MR. KLATZKOW: You can do this like this if that's your
preference. I will check with Amy Lyberg that that is indeed the
correct amount.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I've already seen the minutes of
the -- we'll put the minutes of the Board meeting on the overhead.
MR. OCHS: I don't have the minutes, sir, but I do have the SAP
report from payroll that shows the salary history. And $88,570 is the
current annual salary, as verified by our SAP system and our payroll
department.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's good enough for me to sign it.
And it's always been that way. And I've seen the minutes of the
meeting where it was changed, so I feel very comfortable with it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do you -- County Attorney, do
we have to memorialize this with a vote?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We approved it with the changes.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, we're good.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's fine. We got that
information, that's fine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Take us to the next item.
Item #14B3
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD AGREEMENT #12-5896,
DESIGN CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, CIVIL SITE DESIGN
(SDP PERMITTING) PERMIT AND BID SERVICES AND
Page 59
November 13, 2012
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION & RELATED SERVICES
FOR THE IMMOKALEE FIRST STREET ZOCALO TO DAVID
CORBAN ARCHITECT, INC. — APPROVED; MOTION TO
RECONSIDER — FAILED
MR. OCHS: 14.B.3 is a recommendation to award agreement
No. 12-5896 for design construction documents, civil site design,
permit and bid services and construction administration and related
services for the First Street Zocalo for Immokalee to David Corban,
Architect, Incorporated; fiscal impact, $113,450.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Commissioners, this is part of the $810,000
grant we received to design and build the plaza at the corner of First
Street and Main Street in Immokalee.
We purchased the land, as you recall, and we put out an RFP -- or
RFQ. And the winning company was David Corban, Architects. And
he's here with us, if you would like for him to answer any questions
for you.
But this is to award the contract for the design/build and
construction oversight.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 60
1
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for reconsider (sic).
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have a motion for
reconsideration by Commissioner Coletta, second by Commissioner
Fiala.
All in favor of reconsideration, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning is voting in
favor of reconsideration.
Those opposed to reconsideration, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion for reconsideration fails by a
vote of 4-1.
Item #14B4
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE TERMINATION OF AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND COLLIER
COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY FOR THE IMMOKALEE
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 14.B.4 is a recommendation to approve termination
of interlocal agreement between the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency and the Collier County Airport Authority for
the Immokalee Business Development Center. This is a companion
Page 61
November 13, 2012
item to 14.B.5 and 14.B.6.
MS. CAPITA: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Marie Capita and I am the Center Manager for the Immokalee
Business Development Center.
And we have before you, it's a recommendation to approve the
termination of an interlocal agreement between the Collier County
Community Redevelopment Agency and the Airport Authority.
Originally when the Immokalee Business Development Center
was created, it was supposed to be a joint partnership between the
CRA and the Airport Authority. However, we did not locate at the
airport, we're located at another location, and we would like to
terminate the agreement, since it's no longer needed.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- approve by Commissioner Coletta,
seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously. Thank
you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I hear you're doing a great job over
there.
MS. CAPITA: Thank you, Commissioner.
Item #14B5
Page 62
November 13, 2012
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS ACTING AS COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZE
CONTINUED OPERATION OF THE IMMOKALEE BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT CENTER (IBDC) UNDER THE AUSPICE OF
IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(CRA) AND EXCLUSIVE OF A PARTNERSHIP WITH
COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND THE
IMMOKALEE AIRPORT— APPROVED; MOTION TO
RECONSIDER — FAILED
MR. OCHS: 14.B.5 is a recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners acting as the Community Redevelopment
Agency to authorize the continued operation of the Immokalee
Business Development Center under the auspices of the Immokalee
Community Redevelopment Agency, exclusive of the partnership with
the Collier County Airport Authority and the Immokalee Airport.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Fiala. Second by?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for reconsideration.
Page 63
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wait a minute.
Motion passes unanimously.
Now we have a motion for consideration (sic) by Commissioner
Coletta. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Me.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion for consideration (sic), please signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning votes against the
motion for consideration.
And all in --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The other way around.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Votes to oppose -- no.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm confused.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, I am too.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's sort this out.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He was trying to approve it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, he speaks in favor of
reconsideration.
And so those opposed to reconsideration, please signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes -- or the motion fails by a vote
of 4-1 with Commissioner Henning in favor of reconsideration.
Item #14B6
Page 64
November 13, 2012
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTING AS THE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVAL FOR
AMENDING THE IMMOKALEE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT
CENTER (IBDC) PROPOSAL, THE IBDC APPLICATION, IBDC
POLICIES, PROCEDURE HANDBOOK AND PROPOSED LEASE
AGREEMENT — APPROVED W/CHANGES (THE IBDC LEASE
AGREEMENT WAS STRUCK OUT OF THE PROPOSED
RECOMMENDATION)
MR. OCHS: 14.B.6 is a recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners, acting as the Community Redevelopment
Agency, to approve amending the Immokalee Business Development
Center's proposal IBDC application, IBDC Policies and Procedures
Handbook and IBDC proposed lease agreement.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I'm sorry.
MS. PHILLIPPI: The lease agreement was struck.
MR. OCHS: The reference to the IBDC proposed lease is struck
from that motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is the motion incomplete?
MS. CAPITA: No, we had struck out the proposed lease
agreement. I guess they didn't make the change on the agenda. But
everything else is --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'll strike that out at this
time. Change my motion to read that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion for approval by
Commissioner Coletta. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 65
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
Okay, that brings us to item number 15.B.7; is that correct,
County Manager?
MR. OCHS: 14.B.7, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: 14.B.7.
Item #14B7
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTING AS
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVED THE
SUBMITTAL OF A RURAL BUSINESS ENTERPRISE GRANT
APPLICATION TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE (USDA) RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $35,000 TO COMPLETE A FEASIBILITY STUDY
TO EVALUATE EXPANDING THE CURRENT IMMOKALEE
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER AND APPROVE ALL
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS — APPROVED;
MOTION TO RECONSIDER — FAILED
MR. OCHS: It's a recommendation that the Collier County
Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Community
Redevelopment Agency, approve the submittal of the attached Rural
Business Enterprise Grant application to U.S. Department of
Agriculture Rural Development in the amount of$35,000 for the
completion of a feasibility study to evaluate expanding the current
Immokalee Business Development Center and approve all necessary
budget amendments.
Page 66
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for reconsideration --
I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion for reconsideration by
Commissioner Coletta, seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All opposed to the reconsideration,
please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
The motion for reconsideration fails by a vote of 4-1 with
Commissioner Henning dissenting.
Item #14B8
Page 67
November 13, 2012
THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY BOARD DESIGNATE IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AS THE
SPECIAL DISTRICT REGISTERED AGENT FOR THE CRA —
APPROVED; MOTION TO RECONSIDER — FAILED
MR. OCHS: And 14.B.8 is a recommendation that the Collier
Community Redevelopment Agency Board designates the Immokalee
Community Redevelopment Agency executive director as the special
district registered agent for the Collier County CRA.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion to approve by
Commissioner Coletta, seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
Would you take just a second to tell everybody what that means,
very quickly.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Yes. The CRAs are established as a special
district under the State of Florida. And historically that registered
agent has been David Jackson. And we're simply changing the name
to my name, and we'll forward the payment fee to the state on an
annual basis.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor, please signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for reconsideration.
Page 68
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right, motion for reconsideration by
Commissioner Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. Oh, I opposed. Hold it,
correction. No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: See how complicated this gets?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, it is, it is. I just got to
remember, whatever Henning does, I do the opposite, right? I got it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I guess that's the way it's working out,
yeah.
Okay, Commissioner Henning votes in favor of reconsideration.
Those opposed to reconsideration, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes 4-1 to oppose
reconsideration, with Commissioner Henning dissenting.
All right.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that all of the ones that have to be
reconsidered now?
MS. PHILLIPPI: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Today.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Today.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there a 9?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Isn't 9 on there too?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It is.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, that was moved. That's back
on consent.
Page 69
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was moved back?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, that's Commissioner Hiller's --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That was moved to consent.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Motion to reconsider
item 16.B.1?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wait a minute. Where are we?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You got 14.B.9 that's been
moved to 16.B.1. I make a motion for reconsideration.
MR. OCHS: Wait a minute.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Hold on.
MR. OCHS: Where was that?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's get coordinated here. What item
are we going through now?
MR. OCHS: Sir, that's all the items on your CRA regular
agenda.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just have a question. Are we
going to go through this motion for reconsideration on all items? Why
don't we just have like a blanket, you know, on every item that
Commissioner Henning votes yes on, Commissioner Coletta files a
motion for reconsideration, Commissioner Henning votes yes, we all
vote no and just make that like a standard.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Why don't we make a temporary rule
today that that's the way --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It would seem, rather than do it,
you know, every single item. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, County Manager, where are we
going?
Item #1 l A
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A BUDGET
Page 70
November 13, 2012
AMENDMENT OF $300,000 TO FUND ADDITIONAL BAKER
ACT SERVICES THROUGH DAVID LAWRENCE CENTER FOR
FY13 IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD DIRECTION —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: We're going to item 11 on your agenda,
Commissioners. It's the County Manager's report.
First item is 11 .A. It's a recommendation to approve a budget
amendment in the amount of$300,000 to fund additional Baker Act
services --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Hiller, second by Commissioner Henning.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you, Mark. Great
presentation.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, it was.
Item #11B
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER USING A FEDERAL
PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAX (PILT) DOLLARS AND AD
Page 71
November 13, 2012
VALOREM TAX REVENUE TO CONSTRUCT
APPROXIMATELY $600,000 IN IMPROVEMENTS AT THE
OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT STATION 61 AT PORT
OF THE ISLANDS — MOTION TO APPROVE OPTION #3 —
APPROVED W/AN EXTENSION TO THE REPAYMENT TIME
TO 3 YEARS
MR. OCHS: Let's see if he can do it as well on the next one,
Commissioners.
It's 11.B. It's a recommendation to consider the use of federal
payment in lieu of tax dollars and ad valorem tax revenue to construct
approximately $600,000 in improvements to Ochopee Fire Control
District Station 61, located at Port of the Isles. Mr. Isackson will
present.
Just for quick background, Commissioners, we'll recall at our
final public hearing to adopt your FY13 budget the Board had asked
that we bring back two items to amend the budget, one having to do
with the David Lawrence Center and this is the other item having to
do with finishing off the Ochopee Fire Station that's located in the Port
of the Isles.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to reconsider.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Denied. Denied. Just denied.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, this is the wrong one, right. Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wrong one.
Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Hiller. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, there is. But we have to
approve some --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, seconded by Commissioner Fiala,
but go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You have to approve one of these
Page 72
November 13, 2012
options, and I want to approve option three because I feel that that is
the best one to service all of the community.
And I would like to make a comment, just for anybody who's not
aware. These PILT funds mean Payment In Lieu of Taxes funds. And
they're sent to us each year, and each year we've got so many uses for
them, believe me. But meanwhile we've got the Ochopee Fire
Department having to rent motel rooms because we haven't --we own
the building, we just don't have anything in it for them to use. And so
they have to sleep in this motel room.
And I want to also mention that this section of Ochopee handles
all of the fires that happen -- there's no taxpayers that live there, but
the fires that handle (sic) in all the state-owned lands, federally owned
lands, even county-owned lands that in fact house a lot of species,
protected species, as well as plants and so forth. And we want to
make sure that these stay protected. They have a huge area. I guess
it's the largest area of all.
And so I want to make -- I agree with Commissioner Hiller, I do
want to make the motion, but I want to signify that it is item three, as
the staff recommended that we approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Okay, we had a motion by
Commissioner Hiller. Commissioner Hiller, do you agree with
Commissioner Fiala's --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, I do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- alternative?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I do. It's the same motion, just
specifically alternative three.
Do you want to put alternative three on the overhead so the
members of the audience and the public can see what that option
states?
MR. OCHS: Go ahead, Mark.
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, option number three is
essentially a combination of a general fund subsidy which translates
Page 73
November 13, 2012
into moving the remaining PILT dollars that were budgeted in FY13.
That's your 2683 number. With a general fund advance totaling
$331,700. That will have to be repaid over two fiscal years. We'll
have to bring back to you an ordinance which -- or a resolution, one of
the two, which will allow an increase in the property tax rate to cover
that advance amount over that two-year period.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Would that be a three-year period?
Could we make that caveat in here?
MR. ISACKSON: What did we say, option two. Well, you've
got the change -- if the motion maker and the one seconding it would
agree to three, I think it would probably cover it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Three is fine.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It seems more reasonable.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So the motion is for approval of
alternative three with an extension of the period of time to repay the
general fund advance from two to three years.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then the motion passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Real quick, motion to reconsider.
No, I'm kidding. I'm just kidding.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'll second it if you make a motion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to ask, did we have
Page 74
November 13, 2012
any speaker on this?
MR. MILLER: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'd just like to make an observation. The
PILT and the general fund advance are both classified as general
funds.
MR. ISACKSON: Well, the money that comes --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I know. I just want to make the
distinction that the money that's coming from general funds as an
advance is going to be paid back, okay?
MR. OCHS: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's really the only deduction from
general funds from taxpayers.
MR. ISACKSON: The 331 number, that's correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right.
All right, let's go to the next item.
Item #11D
RECOMMENDATION TO REVIEW AND APPROVE FINAL
BEACH ACCESS SIGN RENDERINGS FOR INSTALLATION
THROUGHOUT THE GULF SHORE DRIVE CORRIDOR FOR
DIRECT PUBLIC BEACH ACCESS VIA COUNTY EASEMENTS
— APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Next item on your agenda is 11.D. It's a
recommendation to review and approve the final beach access sign
renderings for installation throughout Gulf Shore Drive corridor for a
direct public beach access via county easements. Mr. Carnell will
present.
MR. CARNELL: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the
Board. Steve Carnell on behalf of your Public Services Division.
And this item is follow-up into actions previously taken by the
Page 75
November 13, 2012
Board in which we want to update the Board and bring to conclusion
some final questions that are out there that need to be discussed
regarding this matter.
Specifically we're talking about eight beach access locations
along Gulf Shore Drive, which I've listed on the screen for you,
beginning from south to north, numbers one through eight. The
southernmost one being approximate to the Turtle Club and the
northernmost location being Bluebill Avenue.
I think most of you know the whole question of beach access and
public beach access along this section of Gulf Shore Drive has been
contentious in this community for many, many years. And this was
brought to conclusion last year with a settlement agreement following
litigation that this Board approved in October of 2011.
In that settlement agreement the county was authorized to
maintain the access points that were named in the agreement, to install
bicycle racks at these locations, and to install signage identifying each
of the access points.
Within the signage requirements that were referenced in the
settlement agreement, the signs were to be installed within the
right-of-way. They were to read "Beach Access", and they were to be
no larger than 26 inches by 30 inches in dimension. And they were to
be installed at the minimum height allowed per applicable code.
In April the Board approved funds to purchase and install the
signs based on a design consistent with the settlement agreement, and
there was a rendering presented to the Board at the time as backup to
the agenda item.
And in May there was some public comment discussion in which
the Board directed staff to work with a representative from the
Vanderbilt Beach MSTU to finalize some details regarding the design
of the sign.
Staff-- in conclusion with that discussion, staff has agreed -- has
in fact ordered the signs and they read "Beach Access". The signs are
Page 76
November 13, 2012
within that 26 by 30 dimension. And one of the changes that was
made in discussion with the MSTU and other members of the public,
if you look back on the record, the original rendering of the signs
included a canopy pole, and that has been removed and replaced with
just a simple post, sign post.
And the signs are intended to be mounted at a height of seven
feet, and that's in accordance with FDOT standards.
So to elaborate on the FDOT standards a little bit further, and this
is specifically the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, or the
MUTCD, the bottom of the sign is to be no less than seven feet above
the roadway or adjacent sidewalk. And if part of the sign hangs over
the sidewalk, then there's a requirement to raise the sign to eight feet.
And the sign shall be placed at least six feet horizontally away from
the roadway.
Where we are presently, staff has ordered -- has obtained price
quotes and ordered the signs. Signs have been produced per the
dimensions described here. And the vendor is prepared to install the
signs in the right-of-way, using the seven-foot sign posts for the
minimum clearance height per the FDOT requirements.
So with that, we're recommending that the Board approve the
beach access sign renderings as presented for installation at the eight
locations along Gulf Shore Drive.
I'd be happy to answer questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How many public speakers do we have?
MR. MILLER: We have two public speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioners, would you like to
hear the public speakers first?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you put the rendering up?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd just like to ask --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, go ahead, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- maybe the public speakers can
address this.
Page 77
November 13, 2012
I saw the picture of the original design for the signs, which is
really quite lovely and indicative of that area. I saw what the people
have requested in its place. Now, it's true that we saved an awful lot
of money by doing the new type of sign. I just wanted to make sure
that the people along Gulf Shore Boulevard indeed want the very
simple sign. Saves us money, I love the idea, but I want to make sure
that they're happy.
MR. CARNELL: Commissioner Hiller, when you asked for the
rendering, there's the sketch which I've put up, is that what you're
talking about?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, that's what I want.
MR. CARNELL: I can also show you --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just wanted everyone to see what
Commissioner Fiala was -- you know, I just wanted everyone to see
what these proposed signs are going to look like.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You can show the original sign too.
But I have no problem with it. You know, whatever they want is
fine with me. And this is the Commissioner for the district, so she
should really be making that. I was just making a motion. I just
wanted to make sure that this is what everybody is wanting so when
the speakers come up they can say yeah, we love that, or something.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm going to just put a -- I'm going
to put this up. This is -- I'm just going to come down there.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Where does the eight-foot sign
requirement come in?
MR. CARNELL: That's only conditional. That would be in
instances if the sign, any portion of the sign hung over the sidewalk,
which is not the case here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: None of the signs hang over the
sidewalk?
MR. CARNELL: No, they're not intended to. No, they would be
in the right-of-way off of the -- away from the sidewalk.
Page 78
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Now, it wouldn't have as much
writing as these signs, right, it would just say Beach Access. But it
would be in the dark green with the --
MR. CARNELL: Is it green?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just asked if it was dark green or
black. Is it?
MR. CARNELL: Actually, I have a photo shop version of it I
can show you as well.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, that might be --
MR. CARNELL: Leo, let's take that off the visualizer.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Does Commissioner Hiller have a
speaker permit? You didn't fill out a form.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Ten lashes with a wet noodle.
If I may, I think we should have signs consistent with what the
other signs are along that corridor and elsewhere in the county for
identifying beach access. I mean, the green is very tasteful. I can't
imagine what the black would look like. But, you know, this blends in
with the environment, it's --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It is green.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's dark green, it's very tasteful.
So it might make sense to do it the same say. Well, he said it was
black. I know that's what it says, but --
MR. CARNELL: It's going to be green.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It will be green. You said black.
MR. CARNELL: I'm sorry. It will be green.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just wanted to confirm that it
would be consistent.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, let's call the public speakers.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, your first public speaker is Emily
Maggio. She will be followed by Mary Lou Smart.
MS. MAGGIO: For the record, Emily Maggio.
I'd like to cede my time to Mary Lou Smart. Her comments will
Page 79
November 13, 2012
reflect my own opinions, thank you.
MS. SMART: Good morning, if it's still morning.
I'd like to say first of all that we've been very lucky to have a
commissioner like Jim Coletta looking out for the entire community
for the last several years. I've come to know the concern Jim Coletta
has for Collier County's well-being by the way he has supported
tourism and beach improvements, which are so important to inland
communities.
Certainly your legacy will not be one of obstructing the will of
the people to gain the favor of a few.
At Vanderbilt Beach we have several issues standing in limbo for
years on end, thanks to the people that live right at this beach and do
not want improvements in basic things, such as access, signage or
even a beach facility at our busiest beach.
When it comes to beach signage along Gulf Shore Drive, the
lawsuit that was signed off on I think over a year ago dates back years.
Following that settlement the signs were designed -- I think they were
designed in November, 2011. I called Collier County Parks and Recs
in February and the image of the signs under consideration -- which
was quite attractive; you should put that one up. That was emailed to
me. Nobody was hiding the signs.
In May someone from Vanderbilt MSTU -- does this group have
jurisdiction over signs? I've lived in Naples Park for over 20 years.
Nobody's had special meetings for me or anybody in Naples Park to
review signs.
This person said the signs were ugly and complained about being
left out of a year long debate. Is this really possible that the people
that complain about everything and try to micromanage every single
improvement that would benefit the beach going public did not have
any opportunity to see or discuss the signs? Was I given special
consideration when I called up and they emailed it to me?
So now we're going back to the drawing Board and you have
Page 80
November 13, 2012
some ugly signs that might be lower and farther from the street in
some bushes. Maybe you'd like them out in the Gulf six feet under.
The "no parking any time" signs are seven or eight feet off the
ground on both sides of the street, every few yards, 1.3 miles up and
down the street. The signs for beach access in the City of Naples are
huge and they're informative and they're everywhere. Along Bonita
Beach these signs have got to be 12 feet tall and they're welcoming,
they're colorful they're very nice.
Along Vanderbilt Beach they used to be teeny little decals in the
bushes or on trash cans and now they're nonexistent.
Your largest economic driver is the beach. Since the people
working to stall this effort have zero concern for the economic
wellbeing of Collier County in regards to tourism, which bicycles and
pedestrian traffic do promote, or of the people living beyond walking
distance of the beach, the commissioners that look out for all of
Collier County should put some additional money into this project,
either for cameras near these signs to film the next vandalism of public
property, which most of us grew up to understand is illegal, or better
yet, equip the hard one signage with permanent ink that will spray all
over these beach front vandals so that we can see their true colors once
and for all.
Attractive signage welcomes the community and promotes
tourism. But a warm welcome is not certainly anything near what
we're getting from Vanderbilt Beach or certainly not something that
some commissioners seem interested in either.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Who's the next speaker?
MR. MILLER: That was your final speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That was it, okay.
Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll make a motion to approve.
Page 81
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, a motion to approve by
Commissioner Hiller, second by Commissioner Fiala. Question by
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So what are we approving, the
simpler sign with the wooden post?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The staff recommendations, I think.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm not too comfortable with
this. How do those posts go into the ground? Are these going to be
set in concrete or are these something that are easily removed and be
used for firewood?
MR. CARNELL: Sir, they'll be aluminum posts and they will be
mounted with concrete in the ground.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I personally like the
number signs myself, to be honest with you. It would help people get
an idea of a location to go to. If you say sometimes, you know, meet
me down at the beach access point, how do you describe it if it doesn't
have a number? I thought the number was an excellent idea.
MR. CARNELL: Well, if I could, two things. One, this sign is
the product of compromise, and it is simple in nature. And remember,
it is located right next to the actual beach access. It's not as though it's
a sign that's 100 or 500 yards away from where access commences. I
mean, the distance between you and me, Commissioner, is where the
access actually begins. It's right behind the sign.
So I don't know that most members of the public would have
trouble finding the access point behind the sign.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And this agreement what we
have as far as the signs go, what we gave up with that agreement is
what, public restrooms and parking?
MR. CARNELL: Yeah, that's correct. That's correct. We agreed
also to limit any type of improvements there. We're allowed, as I
mentioned earlier, to place bike racks and we're allowed -- we're not
Page 82
November 13, 2012
permitted to have full trash cans there either. But we are allowed to
add some signage potentially reminding people not to litter. But those
are the limitations.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So we have limitations that help
to keep the exposure down, that help to keep the amenity, what do you
call it, less than accessible for the general public that has to drive to
get there or may want to plan to spend a day there.
I'm afraid I can't agree with this. I thank you very much for your
best efforts. I know you're caught between a rock and a hard place
with this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I didn't realize there would be
no trash cans.
Now, what about the -- especially the surrounding people, if there
isn't a way to dispose of bottles or diapers or whatever is on the beach,
and we all know that in many areas when there's no place to dispose of
some type of rubbish, they just leave it on the ground. If the -- if the
will of the people right now is no trash cans, when they find that
they're not happy with that ruling, will they then be allowed to install
the trash cans?
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, just again, we'll answer your
question, but I wanted to clarify one thing. The restrictions that we're
talking about apply to three specific access points of the eight that
we're talking about with signage. So I don't want the Board to think
that all of your public access points have the restrictions that Mr.
Carrell enumerated. Those three were specific restrictions, negotiated
as part of the settlement agreement that you entered into back in 2011,
I believe.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I did not understand that, so I
appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah the settlement agreement,
I'm just giving Commissioner Fiala a copy so she can -- the Board
Page 83
November 13, 2012
approved it. So we're bound by whatever the Board approved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I always like -- first of all this
is Commissioner Hiller's district, so -- and I'd like to honor that as
well. I just wanted to make sure that this is -- you know, that I
understand that these people want this and this is -- you know, and
they want to go forward with this. Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Does anyone else need to speak? I've
got a lot of lights on here. No? Okay.
All in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the motion passes 4-1 with
Commissioner Coletta dissenting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Should we reconsider?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You can. You want to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, next item.
Item #1 l E
RECOMMENDATION TO UPHOLD A PROTEST DECISION
DENYING POOLE & KENT COMPANY OF FLORIDA'S
FORMAL PROTEST FOR OBJECTION REGARDING ITB
#12-5931, MASTER PUMP STATION 312 REHABILITATION
PROJECT 72549 — ONE MOTION WAS TAKEN TO CONTINUE
ITEMS #11E, #11F, #11G AND #11H THAT ARE BEING
PROTESTED FOR FURTHER REVIEW BY STAFF AND
Page 84
November 13, 2012
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes you to Item 11.E. It is a
companion item to the following item, 11F. 11E is a recommendation
to uphold the protest decision denying Poole and Kent Company of
Florida's formal protest objection regarding award of invitation to Bid
No. 12-5931, Master Pump Station 312 Rehabilitation Project 72549.
And Ms. Price will present.
MS. PRICE: Good morning, Commissioners.
Just for clarity, there were two separate bids that were put out,
and the same firms -- the same firm is protesting on both of them. So
you'll hear essentially the same argument for 11 .E as for the next item,
which is 11.G.
If in fact you agree with staffs recommendation to deny the
protest, then the next items would be to award the contracts for each of
those. So I just wanted to clarify that for you, since it might have
seemed a little bit duplicative.
I'm going to allow our interim purchasing directory to present the
facts surrounding this case to you. And we'll both be here to answer
any questions that you might have. I believe the attorney representing
the firm is here as well.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Who's the attorney representing
the firm?
MR. SAKWA: I am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And who are you?
MR. SAKWA: Stuart Sakwa, on behalf of Poole and Kent
Company.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Zack?
MR. SAKWA: Stuart Sakwa.
MS. MARKIEWICZ: My name Ms. Joanne Markiewicz, the
Interim Purchasing/General Services Director.
Commissioners, you have quite a bit of backup documentation in
Page 85
1
November 13, 2012
your agenda. And I just want to take a few minutes and highlight key
points and dates.
Item 11.E is to determine the final resolution of the protest
decision related to Poole and Kent's objection to invitation to bid
125931, the Master Pump Station 312 Rehabilitation.
The purchasing director electronically advertised to
approximately 1,800 registered vendors on July 29th, 2012, and closed
for submittals on August 21st, 2012.
192 solicitation packages were downloaded and there were four
submitted responses. The order of the contracts by lowest to highest
was Poole and Kent of Miami, Douglas Higgins of Naples, Manhattan
Construction of Naples, and Mitchell and Stark of Naples.
The Poole and Kent Company of Florida appeared to be initially
the lowest responsive bidder at the time of submittal. The firm
declared themselves as a local vendor under the Board's purchasing
policy, and after further review by the purchasing staff and in
consultation with the County Attorney's Office, it was determined that
the Poole and Kent Company of Florida, as their address was
identified on the affidavit, was 1200 Kismet Parkway West.
They were declared nonresponsive for a number of reasons. First
of all, they're registered at the State of Florida with a principal address
of Miami, Florida. They were registered with the Lee County Tax
Collector. Their business tax receipt was available. They're not
registered with the Collier County Tax Collector. They have not made
payment for real property or tangible property taxes to Lee County or
Collier County.
The identified property address is owned by the City of Cape
Coral. The purchasing staff confirmed with Poole and Kent
immediately following the closure of the bid that they had a trailer on
the property address at one point.
In addition, the purchasing staff reviewed past Board decisions,
specifically the decision review before coming to the conclusion was
Page 86
November 13, 2012
the Cardinal Construction case that came before the Board in March,
2010. The apparent lowest bidder, Cardinal Construction, operated a
construction trailer on Marco Island and claimed local preference.
They employed Collier County residents; however, the company's
registration with the State of Florida Division of Corporations
demonstrated a principal address in Sarasota, Florida, and they were
not able to provide evidence of a business tax license.
Further, in consideration of those facts, the Board looked at the
physical address and determined that they had not paid real property
or tangible property taxes to the county.
In summary, the Board decided that it was not a significant
evidence of a contribution to the local economy.
At that point in the process, purchasing staff concluded that Poole
and Kent were non-local vendors, according to the Board's purchasing
policy. There's a time line identified on the overhead. And as you can
see, we proceeded with a right-to-match offer to Higgins. And
subsequently Poole and Kent protested the award recommendation.
Based upon all the facts, the purchasing director opined that there
was no presence of Poole and Kent office at 1200 Kismet Parkway
West in Cape Coral, Florida, at the time of the above mentioned bid
submission. And in turn, there wasn't a presence on the Cape Coral
property one year prior to the bid submission.
Accordingly, it was the decision of the purchasing director to
disqualify Poole and Kent's bid submission for submitting false
information to the county.
On September 19th, 2012, Poole and Kent's attorney issued a
written objection to the purchasing director's decision and requested
that the County Manager appoint an independent hearing officer. The
County Manager upheld the purchasing director's decision and denied
the request.
Staff requests that the Board deny the protest objection by Poole
and Kent Company of Florida regarding this particular invitation to
Page 87
November 13, 2012
bid, and we'll take questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have how many public speakers?
MR. MILLER: Two.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Two public speakers.
Board, do you want to listen to the public speakers first?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, call the first --
MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker is Stewart Sakwa. He'll
be followed by Brian Penner.
MR. KLATZKOW: You may want to waive the three-minute
requirement on this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do we have a remote mic for
this gentleman?
MR. SAKWA: I'm going to stand.
Good morning. My name is Stuart Sakwa. I'm appearing on
behalf of the Poole and Kent Company of Florida.
I would like to explain to you why the Poole and Kent Company
is entitled to the award of both contract numbers 125931, which is the
Master Pump Station project, as well as 125952, which is the aerated
sludge holding tank. The arguments are essentially the same for both
projects.
To start kind of at the beginning of this, Collier County back in
2008 created a local vendor preference policy. It was not done by an
ordinance, it was just done as a policy procedure. And since that time
it has come to my attention that that policy is in violation of Florida
Statute 255.20.D.1, which requires that the contract be awarded to the
lowest qualified and responsive bidder.
There is an exception, that if a county passes an ordinance for a
local vendor program, that that ordinance is not preempted by the
statute. However, because Collier County has not passed an ordinance
and has only passed a policy, the statute preempts the local vendor
policy that you all have created and therefore it should not be enforced
Page 88
November 13, 2012
on either contract. That's the first item.
The second item is that I believe there's no dispute that Poole and
Kent was the lowest responsive and responsive bidder, and Poole and
Kent has done work for the county in the past. In fact they did a 24
million or $26 million project, upgrading the reverse osmosis
treatment plant between 2005 and 2008. They got high
recommendations from the county staff that they did an excellent job.
This is not an issue of whether Poole and Kent is competent to do the
work.
Second -- and then with regard to the specific program, even if
the program -- the policy did not conflict with the statute, which it
does, the way it -- generally local preference programs can still
remain, even if they conflict with the statute, if they still allow for the
low bidder to be awarded the project. The difference here between
Collier County and there's maybe one or two other counties in the
state that have a similar type thing versus most of the other ones is
Collier County has what's called a right-to-match procedure, whereby
everybody submits a bid, then if the company that's considered a low
bidder -- that's considered a local company is within 10 percent of the
low bidder, they get a right to essentially get a redo and match the low
bidder's price.
That policy is -- that essentially gives them two bites at the apple,
which is in violation of Florida law which says you can't change your
bid after bid opening.
What other counties do in order to get around such a problem is
that -- is if there is a local bidder and a non-local bidder and they're
within five percent or 10 percent, however, they're both given the
opportunity to submit best and final offers, in which case whoever
submits the low bid out of those two gets the job and therefore it's still
in compliance with Florida law that says the low bidder gets the job.
And so I believe that the county should revise its policy going
forward to make it so that it's in compliance with Section 25520 where
Page 89
November 13, 2012
it gets the -- where the low bidder gets the job. But in this case the
statute I believe preempts the local vendor preference policy.
With regard to the specific facts of whether Poole and Kent is a
local contractor, as the county purchasing director said, we did request
a hearing. We feel that our due process rights have been denied by the
fact that the county will not let us confront the witnesses, claiming that
we don't have an office or trailer on-site up in Lee County. Essentially
they have submitted an affidavit for somebody. We haven't had the
right to cross-examine that person. We haven't had the right to put on
any evidence. We asked for an independent hearing examiner, that
was denied. We asked for this to be a hearing before you where we
could swear witnesses. That was not allowed. We were told we were
going to have three minutes today. And we feel that we should be
given a full hearing so that we can present our facts to show that in
fact we comply with the -- that if you do find that the policy is going
to apply, that we are in fact a local vendor so that the price mat
shouldn't apply to us.
I have brought somebody from Poole and Kent who has been
working in Lee and Collier County since 2005 on multiple projects.
Poole and Kent has done $140 million worth of work within Lee and
Collier County since 2005. We currently have relocated the office
that was in Lee County is now at the City of-- in the City of Naples at
their water treatment facility. We're working there currently.
But unfortunately we haven't had the opportunity to present this
evidence, other than through this Commission, because the purchasing
department has not given us that opportunity.
I'd also like to just direct your attention to the fact that included
in our bid protest letter, we pointed out to the staff that there was
almost identical policy and identical legislation in Connecticut on a
school project, and there a court ruled that the local price match option
was in violation of the Connecticut state statute and required that the
low bidder be awarded the contract, rather than the local contractor.
Page 90
November 13, 2012
And we believe that that same rationale would apply here in Florida.
It was the only case in the country that we could find that addressed
this similar type of program.
In terms of Poole and Kent's economic activity in the county,
again we are using the interlocal -- there's an interlocal agreement
between Lee and Collier County which says if you're considered local
in Lee County, then you qualify as local in Collier. And we've been
working in Lee County since 2007 -- or 2006, excuse me.
And then between 2006 and today, Poole and Kent has employed
128 people who live in either Lee or Collier County -- I'm sorry, 128
total employees, 73 of them who live in either Lee or Collier County.
So they have been or are a source of economic growth in this county
during this hard time.
It is true that Poole and Kent has limited its facility, its offices as
much as possible. Because frankly the construction industry has been
decimated since 2008. And if they can find a way to not have to rent
space and have an office, that's what they're doing.
And Lee County -- I'm sorry, the City of Cape Coral, within Lee
County, allowed them to have their office trailer on-site while they
were doing work for a project there. That's what they used.
After that project ended in 2009 --
MR. PENNER: It's actually still ongoing, major construction. --
MR. SAKWA: Okay, the major construction ended in what year,
2009?
MR. PENNER: 2010.
MR. SAKWA: 2010. Since that time they scaled back their
operations but they still had a trailer there with somebody working
full-time, or just about full-time doing essentially warranty and
maintenance work for the last three years.
And like I said, they've been doing -- they do other work as well
when they can. But the local ordinance doesn't say you have to have
X amount of dollars in order to be considered local. It just says you
Page 91
November 13, 2012
have to have a physical address, which they do, and that you have to
have the local business tax receipts, which they do. And that you have
to provide some economic benefit to the county, which they have.
And instead of just having a minimum threshold, they're trying to
say, well, you didn't have enough. And there's no way for us to know,
or for any other bidder to know, how much do you have to spend in
order to be considered local. How much rent do you have to pay, how
much taxes do you have to pay in order to be considered local? It's
quite arbitrary the way it's being applied in this case.
And the final thing I'd like you all to consider is with this policy
in place, the county is discouraging bidders from coming here. By --
I'll just tell you, by comparison, Manatee County recently had similar
type bids out where there were I think between 11 and 13 companies
that submitted bids. In this case you had one bid where there was four
bidders, and in the other one there was only two. And the reason is is
because anybody who thinks that they're not local isn't bothering to
bid on these jobs anymore because they know they can't get them
because the local guy will just do the price match.
And so in the future you're going to find that the only people
bidding these jobs will be the people who are local. And that's going
to result in the county paying more and more for the same work. For
instance, on this job, Poole and Kent was almost $75,000 lower than
the local bidder. So had Poole and Kent not bid this project, you
would have paid $75,000 more for this work.
They mentioned Cardinal Contractor. Cardinal's not bidding your
work anymore because of that last bid protest. And Encore
Construction showed up in 2010 and said you need to change this
policy or we we're not going to big, and they're not bidding.
And most of the companies that do water and wastewater
treatment plant work in this case, if you'll notice they're not bidding
your work anymore, because this policy is so unfair and it's being
applied in such an arbitrary and capricious manner that nobody except
Page 92
November 13, 2012
the local contractors can get work here. And I thank you for your
consideration.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Do we have another speaker?
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir, Brian Penner. And that is your last
speaker on this item.
MR. PENNER: I'm Brian Penner, CEO, Mitchell and Stark
Construction Company.
I've just got a couple comments I would like for your staff to
uphold the -- your staffs recommendation. He brought up a couple of
points just saying about get two final offers, and then they compete in
these local vendor preferences.
I'm familiar with Lee County, City of Cape Coral, Charlotte and
Sarasota, and that's not how they operate. In fact, in some of theirs,
basically they don't even have to match the low bidder. They're three,
five percent more. They get that preference. None of them that you
have a rebid after the fact. Maybe other places throughout the state,
but in Southwest Florida that's the way the ordinances read there.
When the ordinance was started, I can remember having -- at the
local vendor preference actually having conversation with Steve
Carnell, and the whole concept of physical address was a concern that
I raised to him. Because the whole intent in my mind, at least in my
mind and of course you guys passed the ordinance and you would
have to make the final decision. But in my mind the intent was never
to say a construction trailer was -- the person operating out of a
construction trailer was a local vendor.
And when I had this conversation with Steve Carnell he said, you
know, at that time you had to have an occupational license, which was
requirement to be considered a local vendor. To get an occupational
license, you had to have a physical address. A construction trailer was
not issued a physical address.
So that kind of calmed me down or, you know, found that
Page 93
November 13, 2012
acceptable. Because at the time I felt like that a local vendor wouldn't
be somebody that could just go from job or work a few jobs in Collier
County and then pack up and leave. The intent of this I thought
always as a local vendor is you're making an investment in the
community. You're renting. You're either renting an office space
from somebody that's paying taxes or your own property you're
paying taxes on. And that's my feeling of the intent of the local
vendor office. Because that's to me an important requirement for you
to be a local vendor.
And that's -- I'd just like for you to uphold the staffs
recommendation. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Scott?
MR. TEACH: Commissioner Coyle, Scott Teach, Deputy
County Attorney.
One of the issues raised by Mr. Sakwa is a new one but gives me
some pause, and that's his reference to the adoption of the purchasing
policy through ordinance.
And I can tell you, during the course of the last year we've had
discussions, as this Board knows, with outside Counsel Dulcea on
amending our purchasing policy. And those discussions have been
ongoing with the Clerk's Office as well to try to come up with a policy
that everybody can agree with. And that amended policy has not
come forward yet.
As you can see, there's an extra court reporter here today from
Poole and Kent. And whether -- if this Board were to approve staffs
recommendations or to deny staffs recommendation, I think we're
ultimately going to have more involvement in this matter.
My suggestion and recommendation based on the presentation
today by Poole and Kent's counsel is to continue all of these protest
related items so that we can engage in some further discussion and
bring a recommendation back to the Board in light of this newly
Page 94
November 13, 2012
referenced provision, and then make a recommendation at that point. I
just think it would be the prudent course at this point.
I do want to point out to the Board that I don't believe staffs
review of this matter was inaccurate. We do have a reciprocity
agreement with the City of Bonita Springs. If the City of Cape Coral
where the property that the Poole and Kent alleges is their office
which consists of a storage trailer, we have an affidavit from the City
of Cape Coral that says that they don't allow entities to conduct
business on their premises. There's -- I don't think Poole and Kent has
clean hands on this particular item. But my overriding concern
regarding this other issue predominates my recommendation to you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
Okay, who was first?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Fiala, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Certainly I want to agree with your
recommendations to continue it. But I have to say, one of the reasons
we have a local vendor preference is because we want to see the
money stay here in Collier County where they pay taxes, where they
hire our employees, and where they're responsible so that we can tap
on their doors and say this isn't right or this is great.
When they're outside of our county, when they're across on the
other side of the state, we have no access. And surely they might hire
some local people, but they're not paying taxes here. And so we
prefer to support those local people.
And you say other people aren't bidding outside of the county.
Well, you know, we'd like to see county businesses do business in
Collier County.
But I'll bow to your recommendation and make a motion to
continue until the County Attorney's Office studies the issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion to continue by
Commissioner Fiala.
Page 95
November 13, 2012
MR. TEACH: And sir, can that be for all of the items with the
bid protest items? We have 16 -- 11.E and 11.G are both the protest,
as well as the contract awards, which are 11.F and 11.H.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: What were the first two?
MR. OCHS: Sir, they're right in order. 11.E, F, G and H.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So this motion would apply to --
MR. OCHS: All four.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- all four items, okay.
There's a motion by Commissioner Fiala to continue those four
items. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Coletta.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, you do have registered speakers
on Item 11.F and 11.G.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Are they the same speakers that
have already spoken?
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do you feel compelled to speak
again?
MR. SAKWA: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, do you have -- you
want to have questions in view of this motion, or not?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Having listened to what
counsel said more globally, I would like certain questions answered
which I think will be part and parcel of the research and
communications that you'll have.
As I see it, the issues are that supposedly we have a local vendor
preference point award that has not been codified into an ordinance
and as such is, according to opposing counsel, not legally valid as a
result of an existing statute. We have a claim that there is no
definition of what local is. And as such, the decision that a vendor is
Page 96
November 13, 2012
or is not local is arbitrary.
We have a challenge to the right-to-match provision that I
suppose has been adopted by Collier County. And then there's a due
process challenge as to whether or not the Poole and Kent Company
has been given the right to properly be heard on this matter.
And these issues will come up with respect to anybody who bids
and loses as a consequence of local vendor preference, and due
process will come up with respect to any vendor that's going to have a
challenge.
So this is very concerning. And I think it's very important that
we have a very clear understanding going forward.
The other thing that I'd like to ask, is any of this going to be
funded with federal dollars? No federal funds? Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Didn't we approve the local
preference by resolution?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Sir, are you talking about
Statute 25520(C.10)?
MR. SAKWA: No, it's D.1.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: E.1.
MR. SAKWA: D as in David.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: 255.D.1?
MR. SAKWA: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's see what it looks like.
Because I'm looking at other -- others, and it says by charter,
ordinance or resolution. I mean, I have -- personally I've got double
digits going on the agenda next meeting and I don't want to
overwhelm staff.
MR. SAKWA: Under -- if I may?
MR. KLATZKOW: You know, we're not going to resolve this
issue, Commissioner, like this.
Page 97
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If we adopt it on a resolution, I
think it's allowed. So let's just look at it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, the problem, Commissioner
Henning, is that you are not our attorney. We're going to have to get
an opinion of our attorney before we --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's look at the law.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, Commissioner Henning. But that's
what our attorneys get paid for is looking at the law. And it's
frequently more complex.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Here, it is, D.1. I'm not done
yet, don't interrupt me.
It is awarded based upon price. Contract must be awarded to the
lowest qualified responsive bidder according to applicable county
municipal ordinance or district resolutions in accordance with the
application of contract documents.
We have a resolution. Our policy is not by resolution. Do you --
MR. TEACH: No, that's correct, sir. I still -- my
recommendation remains the same. Simply because some of the issues
even that Commissioner Hiller raised I believe are worthy ones to
consider further.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we have a motion to continue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, but I just --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I made that motion already and it
was seconded. I just wanted to ask staff, they stated that they have
somebody every day in their office in Cape Coral that our people say
is a storage shed. I just want to verify that the City of Cape Coral
allows somebody in this office to run that office every single day on
their property. From what I understand, they do not allow business of
other companies to be conducted on their personal property.
And second of all, if-- I don't know that we could ever do this,
but if people are filing -- if people are bidding with erroneous
Page 98
November 13, 2012
information and not being up front and truthful, I don't know if-- I
don't even know why we should -- we should accept that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all in favor of the motion, please
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion to continue is unanimous.
Okay, we're breaking for lunch. We'll be back here at 1 :04.
(Luncheon recess.)
(Commissioner Hiller is absent from the Boardroom.)
MR. SHEFFIELD: You have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. Okay, Board of County
Commissioners meeting is back in session.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: When he says 1 :04, he means 1 :04,
right?
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS — OPENED UP
FOR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right, that's right. We've had a
request by some gentlemen who have been sitting here all morning for
public input to make a statement at 1 :04. And they have requested six
minutes between the two of them.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're going to hear comments from the
public at this point in time. So gentlemen?
Page 99
November 13, 2012
MR. COLE: Mr. Chairman and Board of County
Commissioners, thank you for the opportunity of allowing us to speak,
we appreciate it very much.
My name is Ron Cole. I'm a retired major airline captain who
has been educating himself on a geo-engineering weather modification
phenomena for nearly six years now.
I recently attended the Monroe County Board of Commissioners
meeting back in June, June 20th, and I got an earful of what the U.S.
Navy is planning effective June of 2014 with the proposed updates to
its five-year warfare plan for the East Coast and the Caribbean.
After the Keith and Schnars presentation -- Keith and Schnars is
Monroe County's consulting firm who reviewed the environmental
impact statement -- I was the only citizen to publicly comment. My
comments were based upon my experience as a U.S. Naval aviator
working similar warfare training exercises in the Atlantic fleet
weapons range in Puerto Rico in the 1960's.
The transcript below starts when the consultant, John, was asked
by our commissioners about the 30,000 aerosol aluminum chaff
canisters that were going to be deployed in the Gulf of Mexico. That's
right here next to you. Quote --
MR. BURRIS: Downwind.
MR. COLE: John. Quote. He said, inside there are a couple of
million fibers the size of a human hair. They're glass coated with a
little bit of aluminum. These things go out as a cloud. The missile
goes through a cloud of chaff instead of hitting the aircraft, end quote.
He further stated, quote, chaff can remain in the air for 10
minutes or 10 hours, can travel a couple of hundred miles. It
eventually settles out. It will float for a little while and then it will
sink.
And about this time our commissioners' chins were hitting the
dais.
Commissioner Murphy asks, quote, is this life expectancy very
Page 100
November 13, 2012
long? John replied, it's glass and aluminum. It's very long. Especially
with 30,000 canisters. Quote, this is the premium place to use chaff
and flares.
Commissioner Wiggington asked, does all the chaff reach the
water or is some of it inhaled? John the consultant said, quote, some
of it is inhaled. Not all of it hits the water. It depends upon which
way the wind is blowing. Look at the radar picture of North Florida.
And then the camera went to the screen and it showed all of
North Florida under this cloud of aluminum chaff.
He says, you can see that the cloud has drifted over the state. It
can travel a long way and gets ingested by birds and people and fish
and all that.
There is an analysis in the draft EIS that considers inhalation and
ingestion of chaff and it concludes that there have been studies and
they've done testing on animals and other things to see if high doses of
chaff would have any effect on anything. And they concluded that it
doesn't have any effect on anything. And they conclude that it doesn't
pose a significant threat.
Commissioner Murphy replied, I would hope not.
CAPTAIN BURRIS: I'll tell you, outside right now it is going
on. This cover over us is aluminum barium cadmium spent uranium.
I've done hundreds of hair samples with people from the BP event all
around into the Keys. We have found some horrible stuff. We need
to talk to one of your attorneys. This needs to go to -- there's trillions
of dollars of liability against the chemical alkanes who are doing this
from aluminum and the barium industry.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What is your name?
(At which time, the following video was played:
Well, if we find all these other toxic metals that are indicative of
brain problems, then can we say that all this mental illness is due to
stuff that is straight or is in the air or food or water?
What I do know is that aluminum is one of the primary
Page 101
1
November 13, 2012
ingredients in some of that chemtrail. When they started talking about
the toxicity of certain metals and what it did to the human brain, the
allergies that it can produce in, you know, the body, as well as the
brain. There are brain allergies as well as, you know, like body
allergies.
Okay, one in five are crazy in America.
Yeah, 20 percent of the U.S. adults. And what I'm saying is
toxicity in the form of Aspergers disorder, I'm seeing it in autism, and
the Aspergers, you know, syndrome. There's more and more kids with
that. There's no question that some of the heavy toxic metals, you
know, mercury, led, you know, cadmium --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's a contrail. That's not anybody
spraying something.
(Video: -- things that are being sprayed --)
CAPTAIN BURRIS: This man's a 747 pilot. These are
chemicals. We've got the samples. We've got hundreds of thousands
of samples. We have the hair samples.
(Video: These things are filtering down and people are picking it
up through either their water supply or their food supplies or, you
know, things that we typically would think would be safe products.
They're not.
One of the things that I see that might be very helpful is to just
get a hair sampling and find out like what kind of metal toxicity do
you have in your body, what's the level of that. The side effect of
metal is that it begins to hurt the brain.
You've taken a hair sample and we're going to get it back very
soon. And from that will you then show it to patients to encourage
them to know what the enemy is?
Yeah, I think that's reasonable. Because once they discover what
metals might be in their child or, you know, a family member, if they
can see high toxic levels of it, they know the emotional disorders that
are a result of that. They also can begin to make plans to actually rid
Page 102
November 13, 2012
their body of that. But they've got to know because it's going to make
them sick, you know, physically and mentally. The children that are
going to be born with the needless kind of mental disorders that they
have right now is just criminal, in my opinion. You know, it should
not be allowed. And there should be some kind of recognition that
everybody understands it, everybody knows. I'm not sure, you know,
what the valid excuse is now for it. You know, there's lots of things
one can conclude. But it just doesn't seem to be a valid practice at all.
Yet in holding scientific research and discovery --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, you've had your six minutes,
gentlemen, thank you very much. You've had your six minutes.
MR. COLE: It was an insult to tell me that that's a contrail when
I've been tracing this madness for 10 years. Everyone in this room is
contaminated. We need to sue these people, we need to sue the
industry behind this, the Navy needs to be sued for spraying it. You
just heard it, the Navy said, we're going to spray you with three
million pounds of aluminum. And they're doing it right now in the
skies over this town --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we've got it. Okay, we've got it.
The world's coming to an end.
MR. COLE: Well, here's the video for you guys that might wake
you up. You apparently don't want to hear it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just keep it. I don't want it.
MR. COLE: This is what's going on. Everybody here is being
poisoned.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, where do we go next, County
Manager?
MR. OCHS: We're on to Item 9, sir. That's your advertised
public hearings to begin after 1 :00 p.m.
Item #9A
Page 103
November 13, 2012
ORDINANCE 2012-42: PRESENTATION TO REVIEW AND
APPROVE THE 2012 COMBINED ANNUAL UPDATE AND
INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) ON PUBLIC FACILITIES AND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT (CIE) AMENDMENT
PROVIDED IN CHAPTER 6.02.02 OF COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE AND SECTION 163.3177(3)(B),
FLORIDA STATUTES — MOTION FINDING THE AUIR
PROVIDES ADEQUATE WATER — APPROVED; MOTION
FINDING THE AUIR PROVIDES SUFFICIENT ROADS —
APPROVED; MOTION FINDING THE AUIR PROVIDES FOR
SCHOOL DISTRICT CIP — APPROVED; MOTION FINDING
THE AUIR PROVIDES FOR CIE AND INCORPORATES AUIR
ELEMENTS FOR CATEGORY A — APPROVED; MOTION
FINDING THE AUIR MAINTAINS SCHOOL CONCURRENCY
BY ACCEPTING SCHOOL DISTRICT RECOMMENDATIONS —
APPROVED; PROVIDE STAFF GUIDANCE TO BRING BACK
EMS AND SHERIFF DEPARTMENT'S PORTION REGARDING
CURRENT LEVEL OF SERVICE & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
NEEDS IN JANUARY, 2013 — ADOPTED
Item 9.A is the presentation to review and approve the 2012
combined Annual Update and Inventory Report on public facilities
and Capital Improvements Element amendment as provided for in
Chapter 6.02.02 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Mr. Bosi will lead the presentation.
MR. BOSI: Good afternoon, Commission. Mike Bosi, Interim
Planning Director, Growth Management Division.
Today we're here for the Annual Update and Inventory Report,
the AUIR, as well as the annual update to the Capital Improvements
Element of your Growth Management Plan.
The AUIR, the CIE, they're basically snapshots of time of the
projected population growth that we expect over a five and 10-year
Page 104
November 13, 2012
period and measured against the infrastructure and service provider's
expansion to meet those increased demands that the population will
bring. And that's all against the levels of service standards that we've
adopted as a county.
The AUIR/CIE, really, it stands as the blueprint for concurrency.
And the AUIR/CIE used to be separate processes. We've combined
those in the past two years. And the AUIR set the establishment for
the CIE, the CIE improvements.
What's included within the AUIR books are your category A
facilities, which makes up the backbone concurrency, which is roads,
drainage, potable water, wastewater, solid waste, Parks and Rec and
schools. And then your non-concurrency, your category B, which is
jails, law enforcement, libraries, emergency medical services,
government buildings and your two dependent fire districts.
The driver behind the AUIR/CIE is ultimately population. It's
how we determine the level of expected projected needs for the
county.
The county utilizes the University of Florida Business and --
Bureau of Business and Economic Research, BEBR, utilizing the
medium population range. And we also have an adjustment for our
seasonal population. Our seasonal population is our permanent
population times a -- with a 20 percent markup.
The way that we determine how much we build is basically that
population projected over the five and 10-year period, charged against
a level of service standards. And an easy way to understand this as an
example would be the library buildings. The county has adopted a
level of service of .33 square feet for each resident within the county.
So we take that .33 square feet, multiply it against the number of
people we project in the five-year period, and that's the amount of
improvement we will be required to add during that five-year period,
to make sure that growth is maintained or the facilities are being
maintained at the level with the incremental increase within
Page 105
November 13, 2012
population.
In today's AUIR/CIE, you're going to find that there are very few
improvements being contemplated. The majority of your systems
have adequate capacity within there. Only roads and drainage are the
two components that have projects within that -- the first two years
where construction activity is immediate.
The AUIR/CIE was heard by the Planning Commission in late
September; received a unanimous recommendation of support and
approval from the Planning Commission to the Board of County
Commissioners.
Another note that's of interest, and it's of interest to the financial
times and the environment and the planning environment that this
county has experienced in the past five years, this will be the fourth
year in a row that the county has received population projections for
an annualized population increase below two percent. And now prior
to 2006, 2007 we were averaging an average of two and a half to three
and a half of a percentage increase on an annual basis.
This new growth reality that we've seen under the two percent
seems to be where we're tracking, at least for the last four years. As
conditions change, obviously the projections can be influenced by
those activities. But moving forward, it looks like right around a 1.7,
1.9 percent annual increase in population is what the county can build
upon and plan for.
If you look within each individual component of your AUIR,
you'll see where those next increments of improvements are. And
most of them are in that six and 10-year period.
We know that within that period of time we're going to need to
add new facilities. But we have time to make sure those new facilities
that we are going to add are going to be the ones that are the most
efficient and provide the greatest solution for meeting those needs in
terms of its location in relationship to where the population sits.
One of the things I always talk about when this event comes
Page 106
November 13, 2012
around is we are the only county that I've discovered in Florida that
not only talks about what our concurrency management system makes
up and the improvements contained within that, but the only county
that I know of that has such an active and open process for your
Category B facilities, for where your citizenry can come in and make
comments upon your library level of service, your law enforcement
levels of service, your jails, your government buildings, all these
various components that normally do not gain as much opportunity for
the general public.
The county does a unique job in allowing for that type of an
input. That input, in combination with the recommendation from the
Planning Commission, helped shaped what the Board of County
Commissioners determines as the appropriate levels of service.
Based upon the limited number of improvements, staffs design
for today was not to have individual components of the AUIR come
up and make presentations. But because of, like I said it was only
drainage and transportation with a very few number of projects
included, I was just going to see what questions the Commissioners
may have and call staff up as needed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller -- I'm sorry,
Commissioner Henning was first.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You want to go first?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. I wanted to start with one
quick question.
The population projection as you pointed out is the most
important driver. And we had a presentation put on by the South
Florida Water Management District, because obviously that's -- you
know, the basin is driven by those same demographics. And one of
the things that was discussed during that presentation was the
importance of making sure we were all using the same projections.
And I had suggested that when you come to this stage that you go
back to their presentation and make sure that you're using the same
Page 107
November 13, 2012
numbers they are and, you know, they agreed about the importance of
that reconciliation. Did you do that?
MR. BOSI: Yes, I did. There was an anomaly. And the
anomaly is that the 10-year water update is using numbers from 2009.
We are using numbers from 2011, the most current.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And my understanding is is that
your numbers show a lesser population growth than theirs. I believe
theirs was higher than the number you have in this book, if I'm not
mistaken. Is that correct?
MR. BOSI: Yes, you are correct. It's a 7.4 percent difference.
They're allocating supply for a 7.4 percent greater population than the
population we're projecting for that 2030 number.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just for the benefit of the
community, and you have a very nice appendix that summarizes the
population, can you go ahead and just highlight for the benefit of the
public what we project the population to be in five years, 10 years and
then at 25 years? Which is -- it's in the back in the appendix.
MR. BOSI: Sure, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because there are so many
schedules, rather than have people look at all of them and try to figure
out which is the appropriate one, there's really only three numbers that
they need to know.
MR. BOSI: Well, utilizing the April 1st -- we do our population
projection by April 1st and October 1st. Just for ease of convenience,
utilizing the April 1st projections, currently for the county-wide
population --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Why don't you put that on the overhead
so everybody can see it.
MR. BOSI: I may have to pass out magnifying glasses.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I can read it.
MR. BOSI: In your population for 2012, the estimate is -- and
this is permanent population, this isn't peak season population. For
Page 108
November 13, 2012
2012, is 328,246.
Taking that out five years to 2017, you're at 355,084.
Taking that out for your next increment of five years would put
that population up to 388,000.
And then the next end point for this schedule that we have at
2025 is 408,300.
The total number we were projecting for 2030, off the top of my
head I believe was 439,000. The number that the 10-year water
supply plan was using, 472,000, and that was the discrepancy that was
there.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Which is not material, but being
more conservative is actually better.
MR. BOSI: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The only other thing I wanted to
point out in reviewing this analysis was how dramatically the impact
fees have come down. Your projections, for example, the
transportation impact fees are projected to be only about five million
per year, which is a huge drop over what we had in the past.
MR. BOSI: Well, it's all tied together. When we were
experiencing the boom years and we were putting more facilities on
than we -- I mean, on a rapid pace, the impact fees that were
associated were high. Now that we're projecting a much lower growth
environment, those impact fees are proportionately reflective of that.
So you are correct, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the gas taxes are expected --
for example, on the transportation side the gas taxes, while they
haven't been adjusted downwards, what I have heard from attending,
you know, state-wide MPO presentations, is that they're expected to
decrease quite a bit too in the future and that we need to figure out,
you know, how those will be recalculated. Otherwise we're definitely
not going to see gas tax revenues either.
MR. BOSI: Well, I know one of the things that's not my area of
Page 109
■
November 13, 2012
expertise but I do know that that gas tax is a static percentage, and it is
not adjusted for inflation. So I know that that has a negative effect as
well in terms of the amount received.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That, coupled with the more
efficient vehicles that, you know, reduce the miles traveled per gallon.
But thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or I could say --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question on transportation.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- increase the miles traveled per
gallon. Sorry.
Good job, by the way.
MR. BOSI: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And Nick and I were discussing
on our one-on-one, one of the charts shows a projected projects and
the revenues differ. Do you have an explanation for that?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. I think you're looking at -- for
the record, Nick Casalanguida, Commissioner.
You're looking at the CIE portion? There's a Capital
Improvement Element where we show on -- probably the easiest
exhibit, let me put it up on the viewer and I can talk to you about it.
And it's the same. I checked into what we had shown -- discussed on
our one-on-ones.
Yeah, if you'd put that on the viewer for me, Reed. Thank you.
Commissioner, you'd asked -- in the first year FY 13 is roughly a
surplus of$3.2 million when you add it up. In FY 14 that surplus
drops to 1.9 million. It's because of the multi-year function of the
projects. We actually accumulate in one year and then pay out in the
next year.
So if you look at FY 14, we've got Collier Boulevard, which
actually starts. So we're saving in one year to pay for a project that's
coming up in the following year. And that's typical, we've done that
Page 110
November 13, 2012
in the past.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Over the -- well, even
over the five years it won't balance out, if that's what you're doing.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right. At the end of the five years I
think we're showing 43,000 left over at the very bottom.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now that's not part of the
ordinance.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: What's that, sir?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is not an exhibit within the
ordinance, it's in --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yeah, you're referring to the other
exhibit, this one that was just highlighted.
I know which one he's talking about, the CIE one, Reed.
It's the same.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's the same? Okay, that's all.
I have questions about potable water.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And my first question on
potable water is the population associated with the service, is that the
population -- total population within the serviceable area?
MR. BOSI: The population work that comprehensive planning
performs for distribution of the AUIR, the water and sewer districts,
the potable water district is identified by the population within that
individual designated district and not the population as a whole.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I know that. That isn't what
I asked.
MR. BOSI: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I asked is that the total
population within the district that it's being served. You have a map
of potable water.
MR. BOSI: And the population that we have allocated for the
water district --
Page 111
November 13, 2012
MR. BEALS: Good afternoon. For the record, Nathan Beals,
Public Utilities.
The map that shows the water/sewer district boundaries
encompasses the entire boundary. There are residents within that are
not served that are in the Golden Gate Estates area and others that we
don't currently provide water/sewer service to. But we have to be
prepared that we can serve them, because they are within our
water/sewer district boundaries. So we do count them in our
population.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And that is -- that
projects the availability of capacity when you do that.
MR. BEALS: In terms of the AUIR, yes. But we -- our current --
our capacity is for current and future demands and are consistent with
commitments approved by the Board through PUDs.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is it including the Orange Tree,
your population?
MR. BEALS: No, it's counted separately.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's counted separately.
MR. BEALS: And it's shown in a separate section. But in our
section there's a section where we discuss Orange Tree.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, you have areas east of
Collier Boulevard in Golden Gate Estates in the fringe area, in the
yellow map. Is that population, future population, counted?
MR. BEALS: Yes, sir, it is technically within the water/sewer
district boundaries.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the problem that I see is
your -- we, not you, we are counting population and then we have to
really think, is it feasible that these places in Golden Gate Estates or in
the fringe would ever be added? In other words, we've got -- we have
excess capacity because of, you know, the downturn of the economy.
But then we're also counting capacity that I think is very questionable
whether we'd ever serve the residents in the Golden Gate Estates area.
Page 112
November 13, 2012
MR. BEALS: Well, without a change to our water/sewer district
boundaries, there's always that possibility. I agree, it's probably
unlikely, but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Probably unlikely that we'll ever
serve them?
MR. BEALS: With the previous studies that we've done in the
water/sewer district and brought to the Board about east of 951, I don't
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Even west of 951, west of
Collier Boulevard, along Logan Boulevard. Along Collier Boulevard
there's quite a few rooftops out there. So I'm just kind of thinking, you
know, are we -- as we go out and do any kind of expansion, I think
that we really need to take a look at how we're counting services and
population and how we're serving that.
My second thing, my question, and I never did quite find the
answer, is what is the allocation of gallonage that you are applying per
resident?
MR. BEALS: In the AUIR section we define our level of service
as 170 gallons per day per person.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 170 per day?
MR. BEALS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the national average?
MR. BEALS: I don't know off the top of my head. We can try
to find out.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why did we apply 170 per
person? There must be a reason why we picked that.
MR. BEALS: As part of our master planning process, we review
the level of service that we have for residents, and in the 2008 master
plan 170 was deemed what it should be based on historical population
in flows, which in 2008 we did reduce it from 185 to 170.
We are in the current process of a new master plan going forward
to review our level of service again.
Page 113
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So in 2008 you actually used the
demands. You took a capture of a household over, you know, an
annual period and then you allocated it?
MR. BEALS: We looked at the total distribution for the year
compared to the population and divided it equally to calculate what --
our historical level of service. So it was all-encompassing of our
distribution.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if we're using the total
population within the district and not servicing the whole district, is
that a fair calculation of--
MR. BEALS: It is a more conservative look. If we used the
population only served, we would have a drastically higher level of
service, I think.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that you would. But I
think it's important for us to take a look at the real demands.
MR. BEALS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know if that would be
that hard to do if you take a -- just a sampling of different areas of
annual gallons used, you know, and divide that by 2.5, if that's what
we're using for the basis for our population within your service
district.
MR. BEALS: We can definitely look into it for next year's
AUIR or however you would like to do it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're doing -- updating the
master plan, you have the consultant?
MR. BEALS: We haven't selected the consultant. That will be
brought to you in the next couple of months, I believe.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. But that's part of the
process, right?
MR. BEALS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: George, you understand?
MR. YILMEZ: Yes, sir. If I might?
Page 114
I
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
MR. YILMEZ: For the record, George Yilmez, Public Utilities
Administrator.
Commissioner, we got your intent and understand the questions.
Yes, we do have integrated master planning process based on
sensitivity analysis. Not only looking at data provided by other
entities, but also we will look at our own data in terms of flows and
corresponding population and will bring it back to you with
Risk-based CIPs for our informed decision-making process.
So the answer to your questions are yes, yes, and yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Can you do the same
thing on waste also?
MR. YILMEZ: Yes, sir. It will be concurrent, both wastewater,
water and the irrigation to reuse water will be coming before you in
the same similar integrated fashion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR. YILMEZ: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's the only question that I
have.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, where and how are the baby
boomers reflected in this? We've heard that the influx will be
reaching us shortly. I know some of the developers are now building
for the baby boomers. Have we taken that into consideration?
MR. BOSI: Well, I mean, we haven't directly taken that into
consideration, but the population folks at the University of Florida
most certainly know of that demographic cohort population and the
tendency of a percentage of that cohort to choose Florida and in
particular Southwest Florida as their destination for retirement and
other activities.
So while it's not specifically articulated to how that has been
accounted for, that is part of the population projections that the
Page 115
November 13, 2012
University of Florida has allocated for Collier County.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, great.
And then what happens if we plan for 1.7, and that's certainly a
conservative figure and we all like a conservative figure. But what
happens if two years down the road it jumps up to 3.1 and all of a
sudden we haven't prepared for them. Are we -- do we have the
ability to jump into action and accommodate a higher rate of growth,
if need be?
MR. BOSI: Absolutely. We do this every year, and it's a
snapshot in time to analyze what those demands and the projected
demands are.
When I described that the majority of your AUIR components
have improvements in them but only in the years '06 and '10, well,
that's that next iteration. The early planning has already begun on
that. The locational decisions have begun. The acquisition process
has started, depending on where it's at within that schedule.
When we see that there's a higher demand projected in a quicker
period of time, that those improvements have to come on quicker, we
just accelerate the process in terms of that next activity up.
So that's the advantage of this annual process. I know during
some years it's a little more cumbersome than others, but it is a strict
advantage because it allows us to respond to the changing conditions.
Because as we know, most certainly our society is very dynamic,
and how it changes can be pretty rapidly. And we have to be ready
and in place to implement plans on a quicker manner, if needed.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How many public speakers?
MR. MILLER: Four, Mr. Chairman. And two want to speak
specifically about water and wastewater.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, let's start.
MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker will be Burt Saunders.
He will be followed by Matt McLean.
Page 116
November 13, 2012
MR. SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, members, for the record my
name is Burt Saunders with the Gray Robinson law firm. And
mercifully I'll be very brief.
I'm representing the Orange Tree Utility system. And we have
no fault with what's contained in the AUIR, but we do have a couple
of questions. And Matt McLean is the engineer for Orange Tree
Utilities.
And in the interest of saving some time, I thought it would be
quicker for him to ask a couple questions of your staff. It's
information I think the Board needs to hear also, and that's why we
chose to do that this way this afternoon.
So with your permission, Mr. McLean has a couple of questions
for your staff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MCLEAN: For the record, Matt McLean.
We've actively been working with the county staff with respect to
the Orange Tree Utility site and what the county's intentions are,
which we're trying to determine from Orange Tree site to continue to
work through the business plan of what remains to be Orange Tree
Utility.
And as we look through this 2012 AUIR report, it appears to us
that the county's intentions are to exercise their option to serve the
Orange Tree service area next year in 2013 and operating on-site at
the Orange Tree Utility plant from a water perspective for 10 years till
2023 and a wastewater perspective on the utility site at Orange Tree
indefinitely, as the AUIR part doesn't show any expansion in the years
through the 2031 time frame.
With that, Orange Tree's trying to determine and work out with
the county what the details are for this interim period of time, this
10-year period or possibly indefinite period of time from the
wastewater perspective on their site, because they are concerned with
respect to being able to redevelop the utility site one day in the future
Page 117
November 13, 2012
and whether or not that's an indefinite period of time or what the true
plans are with respect to the county's timing on this pending takeover.
So with those questions, I mean, we're really looking to figure
out what the future on-site -- you know, with future on-site expansion
there's going to have to be some in the future. This AUIR report
suggests that there's going to be a deficit with respect to the utilities
within the time frame, and what is the county's intention with respect
to that? Are they intending to expand on the existing utility
wastewater and water treatment facility site or are they planning to
build the northeast regional facility sooner? These are things that we
just don't know the answers to at this stage.
So quite frankly we're just a little bit concerned about what the
uncertainty is with the plan for when the county provides its intention
for the 2013 takeover of Orange Tree Utility and we're looking
forward to working with the county staff to determine that so we can
plan accordingly.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can we get answers to those questions,
County Manager?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, we can give you some idea, although I
have to caution you that we're still performing our own due diligence
internally as a staff. Our target was to present this item to you shortly
after the new year in the January timeframe to have you consider
whatever recommendations we'd bring forth related to Orange Tree.
As Mr. McLean and Mr. Saunders have said, we've been meeting
with them regularly. So I think the process at least at this level has
been fairly transparent and open, but they --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the takeover is not on the
agenda. This is the AUIR. It has nothing to do with the takeover of
the utility plant.
MR. OCHS: And we do have an Orange Tree component, as
they said, in the AUIR. I'll let Mr. Chmelik or Dr. --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let me comment on that.
Page 118
November 13, 2012
It's just as valid to plan for the takeover of an existing plant in an
AUIR as it is to plan on the possibility of having to assume support of
people in Golden Gate and Golden Gate Estates.
If you've done one, why haven't you done the other? And if you
think both are irrelevant, then why is one in the AUIR and the other is
not? So are you prepared to answer those questions now, or how are
you going to handle that?
MR. OCHS: Sure. They're both in the AUIR. So go ahead and
address it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So the expectation of a takeover of this
plant is in the AUIR, yes or no?
MR. OCHS: The capacity is, yeah.
MR. CHMELIK: Tom Chmelik, for the record, Public Utilities.
The takeover of the plant is not in the AUIR, but available
capacity to serve that area is.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Well, that's the important part.
Okay. So they have apparently planned the capacity to do that and
they're negotiating with you, aren't they, or planning --
MR. CHMELIK: Well, under the --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- the takeover?
MR. CHMELIK: I'm sorry.
MR. MCLEAN: There's no negotiation on it. I mean, that stuffs
all been worked out. The county has the right at any time after the end
of December to provide notice to the utility company of their
intentions. We're just trying to work out the interim period and trying
to determine how this is actually going to work out from a business
standpoint.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, that's not the point of the AUIR. I
thought your question was that there was no evidence in the AUIR
that the county was planning on taking responsibility.
MR. MCLEAN: Well, in the AUIR it clearly shows that the
capacity for the Orange Tree service area is being placed from Orange
Page 119
1
November 13, 2012
Tree's portion into the county's portion, if you will. So as we're
looking at that, we're taking that under the assumption that the county
is coming to take utility in 2013.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's what I would assume too. Okay.
All right, you answered my questions.
Okay, next speaker?
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Marcia Cravens.
She'll be followed by your next speaker, Doug Fee.
MS. CRAVENS: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
While I appreciate that there was a public workshop, I think
through the Planning Commission, I have to admit I'm pretty ignorant
about what this very large comprehensive AUIR contains within it.
And I think it's a reasonable assumption that most of our permanent
residents who are affected by what this planning and expenditure and
appropriation of public funds constitute are also just as ignorant as I
am about it.
And I would request that the public workshop be kind of a
starting ground but hopefully that there would be more outreach to
inform, educate and take feedback from the citizens who are paying
for this and who are affected by it.
And so I can't really comment about most of what's in there
because it's very difficult to get through it when all of a sudden you
just have these I don't know how many pages of material.
And that's all I want to say on it, thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your final speaker is Doug Fee.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Doug, do you mind if I comment
on Marcia's suggestion?
Commissioner Coyle, may I?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Marcia, thank you for your recommendation. I think it's a very
good one. And maybe what we ought to do with the -- this book is do
Page 120
November 13, 2012
a presentation like we do for the -- for example, for the parks master
plan update when we do that and, you know, other larger plans, and
have a meeting at the north end of town and at the south end of town
and have staff present their various tabs and explain to the citizens of
the county what investments are being made and for what reason. I
think it's actually a great idea.
So it's something I think we ought to consider if not for this year,
maybe next year going forward as a standard procedure.
Leo, do you have any thoughts on that?
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am. If that's the will of the Board, we'll go
out and do the presentations.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think it really would be
worthwhile. Because, I mean, it is a large book, there is a lot of detail.
And I think people are interested to know what projects are being
contemplated in the near term in their communities. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Mr. Fee, go ahead.
MR. FEE: I'm going to use this mic, if you don't mind.
For the record, my name is Doug Fee. And I put on the projector
a map. I'm not sure if it's on the right --
MR. OCHS: No, you're right.
MR. FEE: The north is here.
What we have here is we have EMS. There is a section in your
AUIR book on EMS. And what I'm pointing out here with the map is
there was one zone, number 42, which is in North Naples. It also is in
the North Naples fire district. So I don't know if you'll be able to see
that, but it is in your book.
The second thing I want to show you is response times. It might
be a little hard to see, but this is Page 156 and 155.
And what you have here is -- what I want to point out is zone 42,
your goal is to have 90 percent response time -- I'm sorry, eight
minutes in the urban area 90 percent of the time. And what you will
see here in the chart is zone 42 is only making it 68.80, under eight
Page 121
1
November 13, 2012
minutes, okay?
If you go to column under 11, you then see the response time is
91.97.
Now, what I'm pointing out is this is only using EMS as the
responder.
The second page that I have up here is actually using North
Naples Fire, ALS engines as well as EMS. And under eight minutes,
the goal, in that zone it's 82.97. But you do not reach the 90 until
under 10 minutes, okay.
I started looking into a roadway up in that area called Veterans
Memorial Boulevard and how that road affects the safety aspects of
our area. I have asked many questions of the county, to Mr. Kopka. I
appreciate Commissioner Hiller, because she has spent time on this as
well.
I'm only pointing out that here you have the AUIR, and I'm
concerned as a citizen that whereas in many zones you are meeting
your goal of eight minutes, in this particular zone, which happens to
be up in my area, there is a significant difference in your response.
Okay?
Along with this, today under your consent agenda you issued to
the EMS department a COPCN. And in this consideration there is a
number four that says that the proposed service will have sufficient
personnel and equipment to adequately cover the proposed service
area.
I am concerned that we need to do some shuffling to figure out
this zone so we get better coverage.
And then the last thing I will say is I'm certainly thankful that
you the Board have allowed North Naples Fire District to also have
ALS. And I hope that in the future if they have to renew that, that in
fact it gets renewed. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No more speakers?
MR. MILLER: No, sir.
Page 122
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm done.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, you're finished.
Commissioner Fiala, are you finished?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right, Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like to suggest that we
bring back the EMS portion of this and look more closely at the
response times and how we're performing and how dependent we are
on the independent fire districts to help us with ALS support in order
to achieve our level of service standard. You know, obviously we're
talking about saving lives. So it's very important to make sure, you
know, that we are doing what we should be doing in the best possible
way.
So I would like to make a motion that we accept what you have
presented here today, if you're done with your presentation, with the
exception of the EMS component and just bring that back. And
maybe you can talk to residents like Mr. Fee who brought this to my
attention. And if there are any other concerns about response times in
any of the other parts of the county, that we consider that as well.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, before we continue with the
motion, the staff is asking us for five different things here, and we
might better handle it with independent motions.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. That's not a problem.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay? If we could start with number
one, the requested action number one is find that the AUIR for 2012
provides adequate drainage canals and structures, potable water/sewer
treatment collection, solid waste, public schools and parks and
recreational facilities will be available to support the development
order issuance until the presentation of the 2013 AUIR.
Since that doesn't address EMS, then it would conform with your
motion to approve that portion of the AUIR. So let's take that as a
Page 123
November 13, 2012
motion by Commissioner Hiller.
Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, then the next portion of the
requested action is to provide a motion that there's sufficient road
network capacity in the transportation concurrency database for
continued operation of the real time declining balance ledger to
support development order issuance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by Commissioner Hiller.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
Page 124
1
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That action is approved unanimously.
Then you're asking us to provide a motion for the school district
CIP, capital improvement plan, to be included by reference within the
FY 2013 schedule of capital improvements.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Hiller, second
by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That action is taken unanimously.
And then approve the ordinance relating to the Capital
Improvements Element of our Growth Management Plan to
incorporate projects based on the AUIR into -- including updates for
the five-year schedule of capital improvements and schedule the
capital improvements for future five-year periods from 2018-2022.
That does or does not include EMS issues?
MR. BOSI: That is only for the Category A facilities.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. Then is there a motion
to approve --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- that action?
Motion to approve by Commissioner Fiala. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
Page 125
1
November 13, 2012
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, then let's go to the final action, but
then we'll take up EMS. Provide direction to maintain school
concurrency.
Now, you're asking us for direction. The school makes
recommendations to us about how they're going to achieve school
concurrency. So why don't we just accept the school's
recommendations and we'll have school concurrency, won't we?
MR. BOSI: The school's recommendation is to maintain school
concurrency.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then we can just tell you to
accept the school district's recommendations concerning concurrency
for schools, right? We have no authority other the schools anyway. Is
that right?
MR. BOSI: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll make --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I'll make that motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Fiala, second
by Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Page 126
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, that passes unanimously.
Now let's take the issue of EMS that Commissioner Hiller raised.
And Commissioner Hiller, would you want to restate that and tell
us how you'd like to handle it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We should bring it back at the
December meeting and carefully evaluate and review our performance
under our current level of service standards and see if there are any
improvements that we can recommend at that time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, that's a motion?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then -- and we have a second by
Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor please -- I'm sorry, Mike, go ahead.
MR. BOSI: The only question I have is December, I mean, our --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know what, you're right,
December is not a good idea. Let's do January. You're right.
MR. BOSI: It's just so we can be comprehensive. I wouldn't --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, right.
MR. BOSI: -- want to be abbreviated and not --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. January the 1st?
MR. BOSI: Yes, sir, first meeting in January.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I think Commissioner Coyle
wants January 1st. You know, he probably wants to start analyzing it
December 31st and then carry it --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's going to take me until the 15th to
recover from January the 1st. Okay, so sometime in January.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, that's fine.
Page 127
November 13, 2012
And then the other thing that I'd like to just address with respect
to Category B facilities, I see Chief Smith -- would you like to
comment on anything? I mean, if you would like to talk about the
jails and if there's anything that the Sheriff would like to have
considered? I know you have a problem with your evidence room, it's
not very good.
CHIEF SMITH: Excellent. Thank you. For the record, Greg
Smith, Chief of Administration for the Sheriffs Office.
Just two quick points that I would like to make, and you'll find
both of them highlighted in your AUIR. One with regard to the jails.
We did diminish the jail bed capacity this year because the sprung
structures became uninhabitable. So they've been removed, which
reduced our bed rating by about 52 beds. We don't think that that's
going to be detrimental in the short term. In the long term it may
facilitate the need to go forward with the planning -- at least the
planning portion of adding another pod in Immokalee. But currently
we're not housing -- well, we are housing inmates there but only
because we're doing some major renovation over here in Naples. So
there is that consideration.
Secondly, and while not a part of the AUIR, you do make a very
good observation that we've shared some discussion over and that's
with regard to our evidence facilities. At some point we're going to
have to make a formal determination on what we need to do regarding
some impound areas and some other areas that we can dedicate
towards secure storage of those things which are necessary to further
prosecution efforts.
And then lastly you see in the law enforcement portion under
utilities that in this five-year cycle a permanent structure comes on the
horizon for the Golden Gate Estates area. I'd just like to remind the
Board that we have been inhabiting a double wide trailer out there for
almost 10 years now. We are not well servicing the needs of the men
and women who are stationed there. We are not well serving the
Page 128
November 13, 2012
necessity of those residents there with permanent location for their
Sheriffs Office station. We would like to see that at least moved to
the planning stage during this five-year cycle.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: If I may comment on what you've
just said, you raised several issues, the last one being a very important
one.
We just accepted the projects as presented in here. It sounds to
me like maybe what we ought to do is amend what we've presented to
incorporate what you have just addressed. So maybe what we ought
to do is bring back law enforcement facilities in December as well,
and maybe you can give us more detail and we can reevaluate that
budget and that plan.
CHIEF SMITH: We could do that, if that's your desire. In
speaking with the Sheriff yesterday, what we thought we might do is
formalize our position and present it to the Board in an upcoming
meeting for consideration and then work with staff to see A, to
identify if there's some funding that may be achievable and then to
come up with some kind of brighter line time table for
implementation.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, one source of funding, the
Sheriff just returned about $3.4 million from his budget from last year.
That money could be allocated toward the improvements that are
obviously needed, that you're describing.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, that's part of the beginning balance
for the next FY, so I just wanted to let the Board know that there's
other tugs on that money. But it's up to the majority of the Board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think we need to -- we'll review
that. I mean, we can -- I mean, that's a -- that can -- do you want to
bring that back at the same time that we bring back EMS so that we
can focus on public safety, you know, during one meeting?
CHIEF SMITH: We certainly could. If that's the direction of the
Board, absolutely.
Page 129
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So that would be the first meeting
in January. Is that sufficient time?
CHIEF SMITH: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Would that be acceptable to the
Board?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Would be okay with me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Whatever works best for them.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So let's do that then.
CHIEF SMITH: Okay. All right, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, now what you have is motions for
each of your five requested actions, and you have guidance to the staff
for bringing back EMS and the Sheriffs agency for consideration for
capital improvements, right?
MR. BOSI: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You finished?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, let's go to the next item.
(At which time, Commissioner Henning exits the Boardroom.)
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2012-232: RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 2004-89
AND 2005-234A FOR TOWN OF AVE MARIA STEWARDSHIP
RECEIVING AREA TO REVISE THE SRA MASTER PLAN TO
ADD AN ACCESS POINT ON OIL WELL ROAD ON PROPERTY
NORTH OF OIL WELL ROAD AND WEST OF CAMP KEAIS
ROAD IN SECTIONS 31 THROUGH 33, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH,
RANGE 29 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 THROUGH 9 AND 16
THROUGH 18, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST IN
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — ADOPTED W/CHANGES
Page 130
November 13, 2012
MR. OCHS: Next item is 9.B. It was previously 17.B on your
summary agenda. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members, should a hearing be held on this
item. All participants are required to be sworn in. It's a
recommendation to consider a resolution amending Resolution No.
2004-89 and 2005-234.A for the Town of Ave Maria stewardship
receiving area to revise the SRA master plan to add an access point on
Oil Well Road.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we'll start with ex parte disclosure
with Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Received staffs report.
Does this take a super majority?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think it's three. Three.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And how about B? Also three. And C?
MR. KLATZKOW: Same.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. And you finished your
ex parte disclosure, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, I did.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I received the staff report
of 10/4/12. That's it. Other than many years of experience with the
subject matter.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. And the same is for me. We've
heard a lot about Ave Maria. But most recently the only thing I have
seen is a staff report for October the 4th, 2012.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, and the same goes for me,
that's the only thing that I've actually seen on this. We've heard a lot
about it though. But my staff report was 10/4/12.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do people need to be sworn on this issue
or not?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
Page 131
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we're going to go with 9.A, which
was previously 17.B, right?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: 9.B, sir.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You don't want my ex parte?
MR. OCHS: 17.B is now --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: 9.B, okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You don't count.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sorry. She's too new to know
anything about Ave Maria.
But okay, go ahead, Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I've had meetings with staff, with
Mr. Casalanguida. I've had emails -- or an email to Mr. Casalanguida.
And I had a call with Mr. Casalanguida and Mr. Strain. And I
reviewed the staff report. And that's for both items.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Very well. Then all persons who
are going to give testimony on this petition, please stand and be sworn
in.
(Speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you very much.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we typically hear from the
petitioner first I believe is the protocol.
MR. PASSIDOMO: Thank you. Good afternoon,
Commissioners. My name is John Passidomo. My address is 821
Fifth Avenue South in the City of Naples. Our firm represents RES
Collier Holdings, LLC.
RES Collier Holdings is landowner of a 21-acre parcel upon
which Arthrex's 200,000 square foot manufacturing facility is being
constructed in the Arthrex Commerce Park on Oil Well Road in the
Town of Ave Maria.
RES Holdings is the applicant in the companion application
before you for consideration this afternoon as agenda items 9.B and
9.C.
Page 132
I
November 13, 2012
The applications were each approved unanimously by the Collier
County Planning Commission when they considered them last month,
and the County Attorney has since provided me with copies of
proposed resolutions, adding two conditions of approval. We accept
the conditions, we agree to abide by them, and we approve the
resolutions as revised.
At the pleasure of the Board, Mr. Chairman, we're prepared to
make a formal presentation or entertain and defer to a motion for
approval.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, you wanted this
item pulled. Why don't you go ahead and ask your questions.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. Well, the reason that I had
wanted this item pulled is exactly the point made by Mr. Passidomo.
The resolution lacked specificity. And as a consequence, the
resolution was amended to make clear what this Board was approving,
and what any future obligation or lack of obligation the county might
have with respect to a median cut.
Would you care to read those on the record for us, Mr.
Passidomo?
MR. PASSIDOMO: I'd be happy to.
The conditions now appended to the proposed resolution read as
follows. And bear with me, please.
This resolution approves the location of a driveway connection
only. Alternative movements including median openings shall be
determined by Collier County in accordance with its access
management policy at the time of right-of-way permit approval.
Collier County retains the right at all times in its sole discretion to
open, close or modify median openings. That's condition number one.
Condition number two: All costs associated with construction of
the turn lanes, median openings and other improvements related to the
driveway connection shall be at the sole cost of owner or developer.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And just so it's clear for the record,
Page 133
November 13, 2012
Collier County is under no obligation to provide a median cut or
approve a median cut related to this exit or access point.
MR. PASSIDOMO: That's correct, just simply abide by your
own management policies.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, exactly. And if you want to
come back and if at some future point you want us to consider a
median cut, you would put forth the evidence as to why it's needed or
why we should support it.
MR. PASSIDOMO: Under standard procedure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, exactly.
So with that, I'd make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Hiller, second by Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion is approved unanimously.
That brings us to 9.C, I presume?
Item #9C
DEVELOPMENT ORDER 2012-02/RESOLUTION 2012-233:
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 05-235 (DEVELOPMENT
ORDER 05-01), AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NUMBER
11-132 (DEVELOPMENT ORDER 11-03) FOR THE TOWN OF
AVE MARIA DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT ("DRI")
Page 134
November 13, 2012
LOCATED IN SECTIONS 31 THROUGH 33, TOWNSHIP 47
SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, SECTIONS 4 THROUGH 9 AND 16
THROUGH 18, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST IN
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY PROVIDING: SECTION
ONE, AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT ORDER REVISING
EXHIBIT "C" AND MAP "H" CONTAINED IN THE DRI
DEVELOPMENT ORDER TO ADD AN ACCESS POINT ON OIL
WELL ROAD; SECTION TWO, FINDINGS OF FACT; SECTION
THREE, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; AND SECTION FOUR,
EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DEVELOPMENT ORDERS,
TRANSMITTAL TO DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE (DOA-PL20120001160
AND COMPANION TO SRAA-PL20120000705) — ADOPTED
W/CHANGES
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- which is 17.C?
MR. OCHS: That's a companion item to this item. It amends the
development order for Ave Maria to allow for the same new access.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Jeff, is there anything that's needed
to be incorporated in the wording of the second action to cover what
was addressed in the first?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think you do the same thing.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Would Mr. Passidomo like to
present the same way?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want to swear in everybody again?
Yeah. Okay, will everyone who's going to provide testimony in this
petition, please stand to be sworn in.
(Speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And the ex parte disclosure for
Commissioners. We'll start with Commissioner Hiller this time.
Page 135
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The same as with respect to the
previous item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I had just received a staff
report, and this was from June 7th, 1912 -- or 2012. Oh, boy.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I told you she's been around a long time.
And I have the same disclosures I had on the previous item.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, and I received the staff
report dated 6/7/2012.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Proceed, Mr. Passidomo.
MR. PASSIDOMO: Mr. Chairman, the presentation is exactly
the same. The first application simply proposed to amend the SRA
master plan, and this proposes to amend the DRI development order
Map H, but they do exactly the same thing. My presentation does not
differ in any way.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
(At which time, Chairman Henning enters the Boardroom.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Coletta.
Commissioner Hiller, you have any questions?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that okay?
MR. KLATZKOW: John, we're making the same additions to
the resolution as prior, correct?
MR. PASSIDOMO: That's correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Page 136
1
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes unanimously. Thank you.
Item #11I
RECOMMENDATION TO HEAR FROM THE CRISIS CENTER
OF TAMPA BAY D/B/A TRANSCARE MEDICAL
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES AND PUBLIC TO DETERMINE
THE NEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL CLASS 2 POST-HOSPITAL
INTER-FACILITY TRANSPORT AMBULANCE TRANSFER
SERVICE IN COLLIER COUNTY — MOTION TO DENY —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us now to item -- back
to Item 11. County Manager's report.
Item 11.I. This item also requires ex parte disclosure be provided
by Commission members. All participants are required to be sworn
in. Recommendation to hear from Crisis Center of Tampa Bay doing
business as TransCare Medical Transport Services and the public to
determine the need for an additional Class II post-hospital
inter-facility transport ambulance transfer service in Collier County.
Mr. Dan Summers, your Director of the Bureau of Emergency
Services, will present.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we'll start ex parte disclosure with
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just read the staff report.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No disclosure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No disclosure for me either.
Page 137
November 13, 2012
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I just met with staff on my
one-on-ones and asked a couple of questions about this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No disclosure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, go ahead, Mr. Summers.
MR. SUMMERS: Commissioners, for the record --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You don't have to swear in people on
this one.
MR. OCHS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you?
MR. OCHS: It's a quasi.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, we do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Will all people who are going to
provide testimony in this petition please stand to be to sworn in.
(Speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. SUMMERS: Commissioners, good afternoon. For the
record, Dan Summers, Directer of the Bureau of Emergency Services
and Emergency Management.
Within your packet today, you have an application from
TransCare Crisis Center -- doing business rather as Crisis Center,
Tampa Bay; TransCare Medical Transportation Services, who have
applied for a Class II post-hospital inter-facility application.
I've reviewed that application. I deem the application complete.
And it is as we have within Chapter 50 of the ordinance, at this point
it's up for your consideration.
There are some speakers and then I'll be glad to answer any
questions you might have at the end.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How many public speakers do we have?
MR. MILLER: We have four, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's call the public speakers.
Page 138
November 13, 2012
MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker is Michael Grant. He'll
be followed by Vanessa Grant Oliver.
MR. GRANT: Commissioners, for the record, Mike grant. I am
the CEO of AmTran Medical Transport, the company that currently
holds a COM in Collier County for this type of work.
Two points very briefly. One, neither staff nor the proponents or
the applicant has shown that there is any need for an additional service
here. There's been no documentation provided from the medical
community, hospitals, doctors, nursing homes, nurses, that the needs
of the residents and the patients that are located here in Collier County
are not currently being met by my service.
Secondly, and I just point this out, that the applicant currently
does not provide ALS services in Hillsborough County where they are
operating. Eighty plus percent of the work that we do in Collier
County on those inter-facility transfers are advanced life support, so if
you grant the -- which is your prerogative. But if you grant the
applicant permission to operate here, just bear in mind that they do not
have experience at the advance life support level. And I thank you
and am open for any questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Do you want to ask a question --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I'll wait till the speakers are
finished.
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Vanessa Grant
Oliver. She'll be followed by Alan Skavronek.
MS. OLIVER: Commissioners, if you don't mind, I would like to
present after the applicant has spoken, if that would be all right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We generally take them in sequence, I'm
sorry.
MS. OLIVER: Okay, that's fine. I'll -- I will go ahead and cede
my time. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Page 139
November 13, 2012
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Alan Skavronek. He'll be
followed by Terence Ramotar.
MR. SKAVRONEK: I waive.
MR. MILLER: Your last speaker is Terence Ramotar.
MR. RAMOTAR: Good afternoon, Commission. My name's
Terence Ramotar. I am the vice president of TransCare Medical
Transportation Services, and I wanted to educate you a little bit more
on our services.
We are a 501c3, a nonprofit that currently exists in Hillsborough
County and services the Tampa Bay area. We've been operating
medical transportation services for over 25 years in the state within
Hillsborough County. We currently employ over 130 EMT's and
paramedics in our service. We transport over 3,700 people a month
with a fleet of over 24 vehicles.
We are nationally accredited by CAAS, which is Commission on
Accreditation of Annual Services. CAAS certifies that TransCare
meets the gold standard set by the industry, as CAAS has granted
Collier County EMS just a few months ago that accreditation also.
TransCare intends to make available medical transportation
services for the over 321,000 residents that you have here in this
county, four major hospitals, 17 nursing homes and many other
medical facilities. By granting TransCare's certificate to compete and
provide its gold standard service in Collier, TransCare will also be
able to add other options to the mix that it provides in terms of
transportation. That includes wheelchair options, ambulatory
transportation for residents in this county.
TransCare stands prepared to provide non-emergency ambulance
transportation within Collier County while providing competitive
pricing to the community. Because of the mission and nature of our
organization, TransCare works with each patient individually. And
regardless of their ability to pay, we do not utilize aggressive
collection tactics, including collection agencies.
Page 140
November 13, 2012
We're also exited to bring additional job opportunities for Collier
County residents that are currently certified as EMT's and paramedics.
But as mentioned in our application, you'll notice that
TransCare's elite management team brings over 100 years of ALS
experience into medical transportation within this county, and we're
extremely grateful for this opportunity to provide this service and our
superior patient care that we do in our other operations.
We humbly ask that the Commission grant our Certificate of
Public Convenience and Necessity and allow TransCare to establish a
local operation and offer an additional choice of ambulance services to
the health care community and the patients of Collier County. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
That was the last speaker?
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Listening to everything, and
you sound like a very capable company and a very good company.
We however have right now an absolutely marvelous group of EMS
people who are extremely capable in and amongst themselves. Then
we have another group of ALS people who take care of our transports.
Plus of course we have AmTrans -- I don't even know if I said that
name right -- who have done an excellent job. They just took right
over. I've been watching your vehicles around town. They're always
clean, they're always nice. And I've been in and out of hospitals a lot
the last few weeks, and I've received no complaints from anybody
about the service. And people feel that they can approach me and tell
me if they have a problem, and I haven't received any.
So right now you might be a wonderful organization, but maybe
you should come back -- in my opinion you should maybe come back
in a couple of years when there might be a need then. That's my
opinion.
Page 141
1
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. Then I make a motion to deny.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to deny by Commissioner
Fiala. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Henning.
My public speaker light is still on. We're out of public speakers
now? Okay, thank you.
All in favor of the motion to deny, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, this -- these things are difficult
choices that we have to make. And the problem is that we must try to
make some kind of determination as to whether or not there is
sufficient business here in Collier County to sustain a number of
different operators. If we split the pie up so finely that nobody can
make a profit, then nobody will be doing the job. So it's a judgment
call, and we have to try to look at it from the standpoint of the people
of Collier County.
And I know that makes it hard for a new company to get a
foothold in an area where there already exists a company providing
services, but I don't know of a different way we could make these
decisions.
So I appreciate you coming here. I know that competition
generally results in better service and lower costs. But it also results
in a fragmentation of the market to the point where nobody wants to
serve it. So thank you very much for being here.
Page 142
November 13, 2012
MR. RAMOTAR: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And the motion is unanimous in
rejection.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, you -- sir, you have a 2:30 time
certain. I think the next item, 10.K, is going to take longer than that. I
suggest maybe we could jump to 10.L.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Before we do, could I make an
announcement?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: This is hard to say. This is very
serious. Dick Lydon passed away. He just passed away.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Really?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's too bad.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, he just -- I just got an email.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, that's a surprise.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I think we ought to remember
him.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, we will.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for mentioning it. I was
thinking about him while we were talking about the signs.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I was wondering why he wasn't
here then. Well, that is a shame.
Okay, you were going to say to us?
MR. OCHS: 11.L, sir, I would suggest, perhaps you can take up
before your 2:30 time certain. Either that or if you want to break for
10 minutes and then come back and hear --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, let's -- if we can get 10.L
completed.
Item #11L
Page 143
November 13, 2012
RESOLUTION 2012-234: RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT
A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
AND PROCEDURES TO AMEND THE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN, AS PROVIDED FOR IN FLORIDA
STATUTES — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: I believe we can.
Mr. Bosi?
Commissioners 11.L is a recommendation to adopt a resolution
to establish the general requirements and procedures for amending the
Collier County Growth Management Plan as provided for with the
Florida statutes. Mr. Bosi will present.
MR. BOSI: Good afternoon, Commission. Again, my name is
Mike Bosi, Interim Planning Director, Growth Management Division.
The item before you is a direction that was provided to staff at
the October 9th Board of County Commissioners meeting. We had a
resolution that dealt with how many times you can amend the Growth
Management Plan. It was one cycle per year with Board opportunity
to initiate a second cycle.
State statutes have changed; allows for more frequent. Based
upon the discussion, the staff has updated the resolution to allow for a
tri-annual cycle with an additional cycle whenever the Board would
recommend.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner --
MR. BOSI: I do know we do have one public --
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, yes, we do have two public
speakers on this item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who are they?
MR. MILLER: Bruce Anderson and Nicole Johnson.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, well, they don't -- no, I don't want to
Page 144
November 13, 2012
hear it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He just keeps coming right up
anyway.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I know. I don't understand it. He just
doesn't pay attention to directions.
Nicole will be nice. She will stay back there and not say a word.
Go ahead, Bruce.
MR. ANDERSON: Good afternoon. My name is Bruce
Anderson and I support the staff recommendation.
I do have two additions to suggest to the resolution which I've
discussed with Mr. Bosi. One is the executive summary itself lists the
three application deadline dates. And I think it would be helpful if
those were placed in the resolution itself so that all the information is
in one place.
Secondly, I think also in the resolution there needs to be some
transmittal hearing deadlines so that the applications get reviewed in a
timely fashion and they aren't allowed to just languish. Otherwise we
kind of defeat the purpose of having the three amendment cycles.
When I spoke with Mr. Bosi, I suggested that since there are four
months between each cycle, that that would be a logical time period to
work with, that the applications would be scheduled for transmittal
hearings by the Planning Commission within four months after the
application deadline.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that reasonable from Mr.
Casalanguida's perspective?
MR. BOSI: I haven't discussed it with Mr. Casalanguida. I
know that it would place a little bit of pressure --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's not tell him about it, okay?
MR. BOSI: -- on our comprehensive planning staff. But because
we have three cycles, we're going to have to place an expediency to
these reviews.
What we did discuss with Mr. Anderson was within four months
Page 145
November 13, 2012
of the application deemed sufficient. Now, there can be circumstances
from a county staff perspective or the applicant's perspective that may
necessitate a longer period of time, but for the most part I think if you
would say by the time the application's deemed sufficient for review,
the Planning Commission hearing should be no later than four months,
staff could accommodate that request.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that reasonable, Mr.
Casalanguida? Are you --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ma'am, it's reasonable. The problem,
it's an interim process. So if-- you know that statement, garbage in,
garbage out. If the applicant doesn't respond to the question staff
gives you then --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's true.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- putting an arbitrary deadline on
sufficiency and submittal.
As long as the applicant's willing to understand that you could be
in front of the Planning Commission with a recommendation of denial
due to insufficiency, we're okay with that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, what about instead of being
specific with respect to that second recommendation, Jeff, couldn't we
put language in the resolution that states that staff will use, you know,
its -- will be diligent in its review and timely?
MR. KLATZKOW: The resolution that Mr. Bosi and I crafted is
very broad because it's meant to go for many, many years. And the
thought process was staff will come to you with a plan each year
saying these are the dates that we want for these cycles and then these
are the deadlines and everything else.
To put it in the resolution means any time you want to change it,
I've now got to change the resolution. So the thought process was to
give the Board as much discretion as possible on any given cycle. The
staff would come with the deadlines and the dates and everything else.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That seems reasonable. And then
Page 146
November 13, 2012
just let Leo deal with it procedurally.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's was the thought process.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That makes more sense, actually.
So just leave it as-is.
So I make a motion to approve as --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right, we've got to hear from Nicole.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, sorry, Nicole.
MS. JOHNSON: Quite all right. I'll be brief; I don't want to talk
you out of anything.
For the record, Nicole Johnson, here on behalf of The
Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
And we do support the resolution. And I just wanted to point out
one part of the resolution that The Conservancy thinks is very, very
important and that's in Section E. And it reaffirms the fact that Collier
County requires a super-majority for adoption of GMP amendments.
And with changes in growth management legislation, law, state
oversight, with more responsibility coming to the county, The
Conservancy believes that the reaffirmation of that super majority is
very, very important. We need to keep that -- a lot of these planning
decisions have very broad-based impacts for our community, for our
natural resources, so we support it and just wanted to have that on the
record that that super-majority is very, very important. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Can I make the motion now?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, please go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Hiller. Second by?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Me.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala.
We have no more public speakers, right?
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
Page 147
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what we can do to give the
applicant certainty of when these meetings will be held is when we
schedule at the beginning of every year what our agenda is for the
future year, we can at the same time schedule when these hearings will
be held so, you know, developers know exactly when they can come
forward at those three intervals.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we're going to take a break. We'll
be back here at 2:40.
(Recess.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Was it important?
MR. OCHS: No, it will keep.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right, we'll take it up at the next
break.
MR. OCHS: We can take it up in just a minute.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Or tomorrow.
Item #1 1 C
RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT A POSITION REGARDING
EAST NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT'S
PROPOSAL TO COLLIER COUNTY'S LEGISLATIVE
DELEGATION TO EXPAND DISTRICT BOUNDARIES BY
Page 148
November 13, 2012
ADDING PROPERTY CURRENTLY IN ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE
DEPARTMENT MSTU — MOTION TO OPPOSE ANNEXATION
OF FIDDLER'S CREEK AND DIRECT STAFF TO WORK WITH
THE COMMUNITY TO ESTABLISH A DETAILED PLAN AND
PRESENT TO THE BOARD ON 1/8/2013 — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: All right, Commissioners, we're on our 2:30 p.m.
time certain hearing. It's Item 11.0 on your agenda. It's a
recommendation to adopt a position regarding East Naples Fire
Control and Rescue District's proposal to the Collier County
legislative delegation to expand the district's boundaries by adding
property currently within the Isles of Capri Fire Department MSTU.
Ms. Len Price will give a brief introduction and then I believe
Commissioner Fiala wants to make a few comments.
Len?
MS. PRICE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Len Price for the
record, Administrative Services Division Administrator.
The item that was brought before you today is a request to take a
position on a legislative proposal that I think is going to be heard
tomorrow at the legislative delegation workshop. And it dealt with the
annexation of certain properties within Fiddler's Creek into the East
Naples Fire Department.
This I understand was a citizen driven initiative, and it was by a
group who was driven strictly by cost. They were looking to save
some money on their millage, not by a service deprivation or any
concerns about that.
On the flip side of that, if that revenue leaves the Isle of Capri
district, it leaves a gaping hole and there is not going to be a
compensating service reduction, because it's a small amount.
So we wanted to bring it before you so that you could take a
position. And over the weekend I believe we held a very productive
meeting where all the stakeholders got together, and I believe that
Page 149
November 13, 2012
you've got a motion that satisfy the concerns of everybody.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I do. First of all, and I want to
thank you for attending that meeting. You didn't have to do that. And
surprise to you, everybody thinks so highly of you. They were calling
me later on to tell me that. And I didn't mean to just compliment you
right there, but they did do that.
Anyway, we met. The people from Isles of Capri and a
representative from Fiddler's Creek and a couple representatives from
East Naples Fire and Len Price and myself.
And yes, this is a very emotional meeting because this affects
both of these organizations greatly. But we got together to see what
we could do together as a team to come up with a solution.
And rather than me just state it from the dais, let me read. This is
-- both teams together, Fiddler's and Isles of Capri put together a
motion that they would like me to read. And I want to tell you, I'm
just so proud of all of these people, I'm just bursting with pride.
I would like to make a motion to oppose the proposed annexation
of 277 homes in Fiddler's Creek by the East Naples Fire Control and
Rescue District and direct staff to work in conjunction with all
property owners or representatives served by the Isles of Capri Fire
Control and Rescue District and the Isles of Capris Advisory Board
and outside fire departments and organizations as needed to prepare a
comprehensive detailed plan for presentation to the Board of County
Commissioners at the December 8th meeting.
Leo, I'd like you to put that on the December 8th -- or January
8th meeting. Excuse me. I'm looking at January and saying
December. On the January 8th meeting. And so if you would put that
on that schedule right away for us.
Such plans should specify responsibilities, dates and deliverables
for presentation of alternative solutions to maintain the viability of fire
service to Isles of Capri District property owners, provide property
owners currently served by Isles of Capri Fire District with an ongoing
Page 150
November 13, 2012
voting interest in fire district affairs and leadership, stabilize and
improve the financial viability of the Isles of Capri Fire District. All
alternatives should be considered in the plan, the goal of which should
be to establish a path that the residents in the Isles of Capri Fire
District can support.
And personally, I'm hoping to see that in the end we see these
groups come together and unite for the benefit of all. And I think
that's what everybody hopes. But this is my motion right now, and I'm
hoping to receive a second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by Commissioner Coletta.
And Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I had the opportunity to
meet with the fire chief from the district, and --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Which fire chief from which
district?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Kingman.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, East Naples Fire District.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, East Naples.
And essentially what -- after it was explained to me what was
being proposed, my conclusion was to divide the Isle of Capri is
exactly the opposite of what anybody wants. I mean, that is not the
goal.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me -- it was never the goal to
divide the Isles of Capri. Are you talking about dividing Fiddler's?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, Fiddler's, but that's in effect
pulling Fiddler's out of the Isle of Capri.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see. Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right? So that would divide the
Isle of Capri.
So my position is, you know, if the East Naples Fire District
Page 151
November 13, 2012
wants all of Isle of Capri, then they ought to take it. And if they want
Goodland and if they want Ochopee. In fact, they could consolidate
all of these districts under the umbrella of the East Naples Fire District
and then we would be moving more towards consolidation and, you
know, hopefully these efficiencies and greater degree of effectiveness
if that proves to be the result.
But to take the Isle of Capri and divide it doesn't make sense. It
just doesn't work.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that's why my vote is --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I support you. I'm just telling
you what my discussion was. I want you to know that I had a
discussion and what was said.
So splitting the baby is not the way to go. But at the same time,
the option is still to be considered and that is, you know, maybe
consolidation of all these MSTU's under East Naples as an option.
And that may be the ultimate final solution.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have two public speakers,
Commissioners. You want to hear them first before you talk?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Phil
Brougham. He'll be followed by John Rogers.
MR. BROUGHAM: I'll waive.
MR. ROGERS: And I'll waive.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Both waive. Okay, good.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We'll wave back.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Hiller, thank you
for your comments. That's exactly what should happen. I'm not sure
if the motion -- not being privy to what happened in these discussions,
Commissioner Fiala, is it your understanding that they're going to be
looking at consolidation?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I know it's spoken of heavily, and
Page 152
November 13, 2012
they're both speaking together in a very positive forum.
I wanted to just correct one thing. It's East Naples has never
gone after these groups.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I know that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But they are talking to East Naples
about an entire -- an entire fire district. But I don't want to push them
any which way. I want them to talk it out amongst themselves and get
there. And I think they will do that. I think they're headed in that
direction. And they've got till January 8th to put together a plan. So
thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'm at a point that I agree
with everybody. That's pretty amazing.
Commissioner Hiller, you're right on the mark in the fact that
when a merger does start to take place, we have to consider the totality
of the area, rather than allowing it to be cherry-picked across where it
goes.
Commissioner Fiala, I do support your motion. I think you're
going in the right direction. I appreciate the fact that everybody came
to the same conclusion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I have a question. You said that
tomorrow before the legislative delegation that somebody is going to
be proposing a consolidation?
MS. PRICE: It's an expansion of the East Naples Fire District
boundaries.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: They are going to be proposing an
expansion of the fire district boundaries tomorrow?
MS. PRICE: It is presently on the agenda for that meeting in the
morning in Immokalee.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Morning in Immokalee?
MR. OCHS: There's two sessions of the delegation here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I understand that. But I just --
Page 153
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I make a suggestion on that?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't quite understand why the East
Naples Fire District is going to Immokalee to address the legislative
delegation when the legislative delegation will be here at 2:00
tomorrow afternoon, which is in East Naples.
MR. OCHS: Chief Schultz is present, Commissioner, if you'd
like him to address that question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Because I need to know what you
want us to tell them about what our position is going to be on this.
Because I'm going to be talking to them at 2:00.
CHIEF SCHULDT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Kingman
Schuldt, Fire Chief, East Naples Fire Control and Rescue District.
That is currently on the agenda in anticipation of today's meeting
and the resolve that I believe that is coming forward. We have already
contacted the attorney that was working on the legislative language
and agenda for us, and he has taken care of preparing a cancellation of
that in the morning.
And to answer your question, when it was placed on Immokalee
or Naples, they kind of slot that in there. But we have already been in
contact with the attorney who's handling this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, so we can make the assumption
that it's not going to be presented to the legislative delegation
tomorrow morning.
CHIEF SCHULDT: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. So I just won't bring it
up at all then in the afternoon. Is that acceptable?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, can I make --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, remember, it's a legislative priority
and we don't have it on our approved list right now.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We would have to modify our
approved list, I understand that.
But what I was going to suggest, if I may, because I know where
Page 154
November 13, 2012
you're going, Commissioner Coyle. If there is a possibility that we
could see consolidation of Goodland, Ochopee and Isle of Capri under
the East Naples Fire District, if that were on option, wouldn't you want
to present that -- I mean, you, Chief-- present that to the legislative
delegation so that you have the ability to do it if that is the will of the
people? Not that you have to do it. And I don't know if this is an
option. But otherwise if the people want to do it and they want to do it
now, you would be forced to wait another year before you could even
start the process. You have an opportunity to open the door.
And if you don't want to do it or it can't be done because the
people don't want it, then you just don't proceed. But at least you have
the option.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner, that's why we
selected the January 8th date. The legislature hasn't even met yet. But
there's always an opportunity to be add us on at that point in time.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I thought so, but I was told that
isn't the case, that if we don't present it now that it can't be done. So
that actually isn't so.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Who told you that?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The Chief did.
CHIEF SCHULDT: I'm sorry, you'll have to repeat that for me,
if you want me to respond to something.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's all your fault.
No, what Commissioner Fiala was saying is that oh, in January it
could be added to the delegation's list of priorities. But when we
spoke you said that wasn't possible, that it can only be done now, that
this is like the one and only time, and if we don't bring it up now then
we're delayed for another year. Because I asked the same question.
CHIEF SCHULDT: That is correct. And let me try to give you
some clarity on this.
When the citizens of Fiddler's Creek approached us and the
attorney was secured to craft the language, that language was specific
Page 155
November 13, 2012
to the Fiddler's Creek citizenry that wanted to come into East Naples,
which would amend our boundaries. So it sounds like we're amending
our boundaries, but it's really a movement of the citizens. So that's the
way the proposed bill is written.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You would just have to expand the
boundaries to include boundaries of all these districts, the county has
these boundaries. And it should be easy to provide you the definition.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, let me ask a question here. Don't
we have legislation that provides the opportunity for multiple districts
to merge?
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioners, you have an MSTU, not a
special district. So you're outside that legislation.
But what you can do, if it's the will of the Board, and if the fire
district agrees, you can in essence get into an interlocal agreement
with them, have them take over the whole thing for you, it would be a
de facto consolidation, and then clean it up with the legislator at
another session.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's the way to go.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I agree with that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Because here's our problem: If you go to
Immokalee and say we want to expand our boundaries to take in a
subset of that district, we're going to be in disagreement with you. I
don't think the legislators will do anything with that if there's a
disagreement with the Board of County Commissioners.
CHIEF SCHULDT: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I think you can guess from the
remarks that have been made by members of the Board that we're in
favor of consolidation of entire districts or MSTUs here. And -- but
we want to make sure that the people in those MSTUs are properly
consulted and their concerns are taken into consideration.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So I think the best way is to proceed as
Page 156
November 13, 2012
the County Attorney has specified, that we talk and try to work out
some arrangement with the MSTUs and get them together, as
Commissioner Fiala has suggested, and try to come to some mutual
understanding of what we can all agree on, and then I think we can do
it. I don't think you need legislation to do it at that point. We can
clean that up, as the County Attorney has suggested, after the fact.
So can we agree that you want to go to the legislators and specify
that you want to change your boundaries? And I won't go to the
legislators tomorrow afternoon and say that we don't like that idea,
we'll just be silent on it and let them know that we're working these
things out. Is that acceptable to you?
CHIEF SCHULDT: Yes, sir. And that is why that when we
spoke to the attorneys that crafted this, they are of that same
anticipated understanding today.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good.
CHIEF SCHULDT: And we talked about many of these
scenarios. But as I am a servant of the public, I want to make sure that
-- understand that both the Fiddler's Creek folks and the folks out at
Isle of Capri wanted to discuss and decide their own fate.
So those are all viable options, I just want to make sure that we
support what the people want at both Fiddler's Creek and Isles of
Capri, since they approached us.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's what we all want to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's the best way, to come to a
final conclusion. And they're all working together well to come to
that conclusion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, if you could amend your
motion, Commissioner Fiala, to include the Ochopee and Goodland --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I can't do that. And the reason I
can't do that is because I haven't talked to Ochopee. And if they want
to be a part of this, fine. But I'm not going to go and tell them what to
Page 157
November 13, 2012
do --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, that's not what I'm saying.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would prefer to -- after we get this
settled we can approach Ochopee, because I think it would be a good
mix. But right now I'm not of the mindset to tell anybody what they
have to do. I'm of the mindset of working it out.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, what I was suggesting is not to
tell them what to do but to give them the opportunity to have a seat at
the table in this discussion if they choose to attend.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, let me handle this one first.
This is the big one. And then let me go over and talk with Ochopee
after that, okay? Good, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, yes.
CHIEF SCHULDT: Any other questions for me?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Not from me. Thank you very much,
Chief.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, if I could get a bit of clarification on
the expectation in January. It was my understanding, Commissioner,
from the meeting on Saturday that we were going to come back with
an action plan in January that laid out some milestones and reporting
requirements, but that all the talks would not be included necessarily
by the first meeting in January. Is that your understanding as well?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, the way I've gotten this --
MR. OCHS: I'm seeing head nods.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- is to direct staff to work in
conjunction with all these people to prepare a comprehensive detailed
plan for presentation to the Board at the January 8th meeting.
MS. PRICE: That is correct. And that plan will include
milestones, dates, roles and responsibilities, and start to outline where
we're going to go so that everyone understands what the expectations
are with the details to be worked on on those specific milestones and
Page 158
November 13, 2012
due dates.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. And that's what they would
like to do.
MS. PRICE: When there's due dates, things get accomplished.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. OCHS: Okay, thank you for that clarification.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm glad you asked, Leo.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Yeah, we have a motion.
Would you like to restate it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure, if you'd like me to restate the
motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just to make sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The motion -- I'd like to make the
motion to oppose the proposed annexation of 277 homes in Fiddler's
Creek by the East Naples Fire and Control Dis -- and Rescue District,
and direct staff to work in conjunction with all property owners served
by Isles of Capri, the Isles of Capri Advisory Board and the outside
fire departments and organizations as needed to prepare a
comprehensive detailed plan for presentation to the Board of County
Commissioners at our January 8th, 2013 meeting. Such plan should
specify responsibilities, dates and deliverables for presentation of
alternative solutions to maintain a viability of fire service to Isles of
Capri Fire District property owners and provide property owners
currently served by Isles of Capri Fire District was an ongoing voting
interest in fire district affairs and leadership and stabilize and improve
the financial viability of the Isles of Capri Fire District. All
alternatives should be considered in the plan, the goal of which should
be to establish a plan that the residents in the Isles of Capri Fire
District can support.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I second that.
Page 159
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It was seconded by Commissioner
Hiller.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion opposes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Correction, though, I was the
one that seconded it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, okay. All right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You were the third, Commissioner
Hiller. I'll accept that.
Item #11N
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A THIRD AMENDMENT
TO COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICES MEDICAL
CONSULTANT'S CONTRACT TO CLARIFY A SECTION
RELATED TO COMPENSATION UPON TERMINATION AND
ADD A SECTION RELATED TO AN ANNUAL PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION PROCESS — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Chairman, if we could skip down to Item 11.N, that
was previously Item 16.E.9. It was the recommendation to approve
the third amendment to the Collier County Emergency Medical
Services -- excuse me, Emergency Medical consultant contract to
clarify the section related to compensation upon termination and add a
section related to an annual performance evaluation process.
Page 160
November 13, 2012
Commissioner Hiller moved this item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What is the number?
MR. OCHS: It is now 11 .N. It was 16.E.9 on your consent
agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller, you had
some questions?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I did.
The medical director answers to the Board of Commissioners.
And I think it's the Board of Commissioners that needs to be
evaluating the medical director.
The other issue was the question that I raised of whether this is an
evergreen contract. And that really wasn't addressed in this response,
and it was something we said that would be addressed.
And I know Jeff had come back to me and I believe he said yeah,
it did look -- if I remember correctly, that it did look like an evergreen
contract. But it really should be brought up before the Board and we
should -- you know, as a matter of public policy you shouldn't have
evergreen contracts.
So that's why I brought it forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, what do you want to do?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I would like to continue this
and revisit the issue that wasn't addressed and incorporate it in the
executive summary with giving the County Attorney the opportunity
to appropriately comment on this. And change it so that the medical
director is evaluated by the Board. It's very difficult to have the
medical director evaluated by an advisory Board. It makes it --
because right now it's being proposed that the new advisory Board
should advise.
And the medical director doesn't work for the advisory Board.
We should be able to take input from that advisory Board. I think the
input is important. And we could incorporate a recommendation of
input from the advisory Board --
Page 161
November 13, 2012
MR. OCHS: Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- in the evaluation process, but I
just don't think that they should be -- just like I think it's very difficult
-- Penny Phillippi said it was very difficult for her to be evaluated by
her advisory Board, because that's not she works for.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. When we discussed this last time with
the Commission, the direction was to amend the contract to provide a
preliminary evaluation by the public safety authority that would then
be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners that they could
use, along with their independent review of the medical director's
performance to then arrive at an evaluation by this Board ultimately of
your medical director. And that's what's reflected in your executive
summary.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, then I misunderstood.
And then what about the evergreen provision? Can we bring that
back?
MR. KLATZKOW: With three votes I can. Right now the
direction of the Board is not to change that. It's the will of the Board,
ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I think on any contract there
should be an ending -- beginning, ending and a renewal.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, exactly. I mean, it should
have a finite term.
So we can continue this, I can make a motion to continue it to
amend the contract to provide for a fixed term.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, like I said, like other
employees, they have a right to renew, and I think that ought to be in
there also. Contracts that we do business with, you know, on widgets,
it says in there they have a right to renew.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, you know, the right to bring
a contract back for renewal is not the same as what this is. This
basically goes on and on and on unless, you know, we say no. Which
Page 162
November 13, 2012
basically is an evergreen contract.
To have extensions in a contract, say, you know, in other words,
again it's still a fixed term, it's not forever. You say, you know, there's
an option to renew --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are we saying the same thing?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, we're not. Because an option
to renew for a one-year term or a two-year term or like two one-year
renewals still gives you a fixed term. Even though there's an option to
renew -- let's say the term of the contract is four years and then you
say there's an option to renew for two additional one-year terms but
you still have a fixed period of time, it's still a fixed term contract, just
with two extension options, if you will.
What we have here is that unless we say otherwise, it just goes on
and on and on and one and it doesn't have a definitive end date. So it is
different.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the choice is to either specify an
end date --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- now or to continue this and have the
County Attorney bring back another change to the contract that
accomplishes that.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, you've got Dr. Tober to consider too.
He has a certain relationship with this Board. That relationship is a
continuing relationship with you having the right to terminate that on
60 days notice.
The Board cannot unilaterally amend this agreement. You can
direct the County Manager to have conversations with Dr. Tober to
see if he's interested in that. Otherwise, the agreement itself
continues. This is an amendment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, as I see it, it really is a 60-day
contract.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
Page 163
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we can terminate it at any point in
time and we give him 60 days advance notice. So it's not really a
forever contract because we have that capability.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's like the month-to-month tenancy --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- that keeps going to one party because the
other party noticed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. So any time we wanted to we
could say well, let's part company and give you 60 days advance
notice and the contract ends then.
I would rather see us take action on this thing and get it over with
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- rather than just keep bringing it back
for modifications.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then just leave it like that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, you can do it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's fine. Let's just leave it.
Are you going to make a motion to approve?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'll make the motion to approve, yes.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, sir, we have one public speaker
on this item. Mike Pettit.
MR. PETTIT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. In light of the
motion, I'll waive at this point.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know all about public
records.
MR. PETTIT: A little bit.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a motion made by me,
seconded by Commissioner Hiller. Right?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, Commissioner Coletta, I think,
right?
Page 164
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Our voices are a lot alike.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: As long as we don't look alike.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I don't know. Two eyes, a
nose.
Go ahead. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, it passes unanimously.
Item #11K
RECOMMENDATION TO REVIEW & APPROVE DOCUMENTS
THAT OUTLINE HISTORY, TIMING, PRIOR GUIDANCE AND
APPROVAL RECEIVED FOR: THE BEACH RENOURISHMENT
PROGRAM; LOCAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING REQUEST
(LGFR) GRANT APPLICATIONS; AND THE FEDERAL
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) APPEAL
PROCESS — MOTION TO ACCEPT PRESENTATION AND
DOCUMENTS — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: It brings us to Item 11 .K on your agenda this
afternoon, Commissioners. It's a recommendation to review and
approve the documents that outline the history, timing, prior guidance
and approvals received for the beach renourishment program, the local
government funding request grant application to the state and the
Page 165
November 13, 2012
Federal Emergency Management Agency appeal process.
Mr. McAlpin will present.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Leo, before you present, can I just
make one comment? I think approve is the wrong word. We have to
just accept the documents. We can review and accept them, but
there's no really approval. It's not an action for approval.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, ma'am.
MR. McALPIN: For the record, Gary McAlpin, your Manager
of Coastal Zone Management.
Commissioners, the item that you have before you has three
parts. The first is to discuss the timing of the next major beach
renourishment and the planning that went into that. The second is a
response to Bob Krasowski's email, the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection on the local government funding request.
And the third is to discuss the appeals process, the FEMA appeals
process for Tropical Storm Gabrielle, Hurricanes Wilma and Katrina.
There's a detailed response in your information packet. The
comments I make will be summarizing.
Relative to the beach renourishment planning and timing, the
BCC shared concerns on September 25th that the renourishment was
behind schedule. Specifically it was discussed that in the '05, '06
renourishment that that was for a six-year design. And if it was for a
six-year design, then the renourishment -- the next renourishment
should have occurred in 2012.
So addressing that comment, I want to talk about the -- where we
are relative to this item. A tremendous amount of planning, direction,
review and discussion has gone into the beach renourishment program.
Funds in general funds were budgeted in 2009 to do our planning
studies. Planning occurred in 2010. Direction was changed in 2011
and 2012.
In 2009, $150,000 was budgeted for conceptual design. And the
objective of that budget was to develop a more robust fill section for
Page 166
November 13, 2012
the beaches.
Planning occurred in 2010, and it resulted in the conceptual
design proposal that we brought to the advisory committees, and
ultimately that developed into a conceptual design plan.
In 2011, in a joint City of Naples/Collier County workshop, the
direction was changed. And in that, both Boards asked us to develop a
more long-term -- a better long-term solution and to maximize the
time between beach renourishment programs.
We have had at least 10 planning updates, reviews, we've had a
workshop, we've had approvals -- approval had gone to each one of
the Boards, both the CAC, TDC and Board of County Commissioners.
And in that time period we've talked about the conceptual design,
we've talked about the options that we would pursue relative to this
beach renourishment. We've talked about the quantities that we were
going to use, whether it was going to be a six-year design, whether it
was going to be a 10-year design. We had extensive discussions on
contractor selection and the permit application.
So you can see that we really vetted this very well with our
advisory Boards, the CAC, the TDC and also the Board of County
Commissioners.
Also with this you had a six-year design project, that's true, but
we were accruing funds on a 10-year basis. We were accruing $2
million a year. And at $2 million a year, even at a -- at the end of a
six-year design, six-year period, that would only give us $12 million.
And that clearly is not enough money at this point to conduct a
six-year design beach renourishment.
Any discussion about timing, we would have to include Tropical
Storm Fay and the impact Tropical Storm Fay had. We did -- Tropical
Storm Fay hit the coast less than three years after we completed the
'05/'06 renourishment. It occurred in 2008. And Tropical Storm Fay
damaged the beaches, and we received $175,000 worth of additional
sand, if you would, from FEMA to renourish the beaches.
Page 167
November 13, 2012
But at that point in time the beaches were healthy and they were
not in need of immediate renourishment. The quantities that we
would have put on the beaches, if we had moved forward in 2008,
would have spreading 175,000 cubic yards over eight-and-a-half
miles, and it would have not been effective.
And we made a decision with the advisory Boards to take a more
technically and financially effective solution that coupled Tropical
Storm Fay with more of a planned renourishment so that we could
share the fixed costs.
So in summary, relative to this item we started the planning in
plenty of time to move forward with the next major beach
renourishment in 2009. We did a lot of planning in 2010. We had
direction that was changed in '11 and '12, and now we're moving
forward with a six-year design that will be completed in -- starting at
'13 and completing in '14.
Secondly, with -- the second item that I wanted to talk about was
local government funding request that -- and we were asked to
comment on an email that Bob Krasowski sent to the state.
We have been conducting local government funding requests
with DEP for the last eight to 10 years without incident. This is a
pretty normal part of our business, something that we do all the time,
asking for funding.
Staff, we met extensively with DEP over the past year, and we
did that because this is our money year, if you would. We really
needed to improve the competitiveness of our proposal and we really
wanted to shake the trees, if you would, and get everything we
possibly could and identified in this request and make it as
competitive as possible.
DEP throughout this whole process, they shortened the cycle in
terms of submittals, but at the same time they stressed timing and
competitiveness. They weren't going to accept any additional
information and they wanted to make sure our applications were
Page 168
1
November 13, 2012
complete as possible.
We submitted a 420,000 cubic yard design that was the results of
the 2012 survey. We worked real hard to get the 2012 survey done
and got the basis for that for that design, and we put it in as 420,000
cubic yards.
The BCC will have -- and we talked about this at the time we
made our submittal, that the BCC has the opportunity to approve any
grant contract if we qualify. We have -- what we submitted in terms
of the local government funding request is consistent with the
resolution that you provided, and also is consistent with the direction
that you approved on the September 25th meeting.
And September 25th meeting was after the submittal deadline on
the 18th, and so we anticipated what you were doing and the -- in your
September 25th meeting you authorized a 420,000 cubic yard beach
renourishment. Submittal is consistent with that. You recommended
we do an upland sand source, and our submittal -- as a bidding option.
Our submittal is consistent with that. It's not part of the scope.
We talked to DEP at that point in time, and DEP told us that it
would not materially affect -- if it didn't increase the cost, and there's
no reason to do it if it doesn't increase the cost, it would not materially
affect the funding request.
There was also a lot of concern at that point in time with whether
we were going to renourish during turtle nesting season or not. Turtle
nesting season is allowed by the state and the federal government to
occur year round. The Board direction for us is to bid this project both
ways and to look at a project that renourishes during turtle nesting
season and a project that does not. So our submittal is consistent with
direction from the Board.
We also had -- there was a lot of discussion about maps at that
point in time that Mr. Krasowski brought up. We are consistent with
that. The maps, we did not try to persuade one way or another. We
have maps in the proposal that show gaps in there. Those are part of
Page 169
November 13, 2012
attachment one. And maps on Page 3 show beach segments. So we
are consistent and maps that were questioned are included in the
package.
The $5 million in federal funding that was discussed, well is that
for de-obligation and why are you showing funds in there that are
being de-obligated? Well, it's not for de-obligation. Those are for
Tropical Storm Fay. Tropical Storm Fay was authorized and we
included that in there because that funding could be available to us.
The agency, DEP, gives additional points for federal participation
and projects. So we included that in there because we do have
authorizing PW's for Tropical Storm Fay.
Lastly, there was a lot of discussion that occurred relative to why
are you looking at combining with a municipality. And this was the
first time that the Board of County Commissioners has -- it's been
discussed and it hasn't been fully discussed with the Board. But we
mentioned this and we had discussion with the Board on 4/10, 5/22
and 6/26. We had those discussions. They were part of those Board
agenda items when we went through and had our presentations to the
Board.
The DEP gives significant points for regionalization.
Regionalization has a significant impact. Regionalization we believe
has a significant potential to save money. The Board of County
Commissioners is going to make the decision on regionalization if it
makes sense. And lastly, if we move forward with regionalization, the
only way we would do it is if it did not delay our renourishment at all.
There was a lot of question about the 420,000 cubic yards of sand
that would be placed on the beaches. There was discussion, is the
volume right.
We had a joint workshop with the Coastal Advisory Committee
and the Tourist Development Council when we specifically went
through how we were going to build the beach. We discussed this
item back and forth. The design approach that we used is exactly the
Page 170
November 13, 2012
same as the '05/'06 renourishment. The actually beach performance
has validated the -- that we're seeing right now -- has validated the
design assumptions that we've made.
And lastly, later on today we're going to ask you for money to
spend do a peer review so that we can finally put to bed this issue
about whether the quantities are correct or not.
In the package that we submitted to the state, 515,000 cubic
yards of-- was mentioned. Well, the 515,000 cubic yards was only the
area that we could fit under the template, the beach fill template. It
did not have anything to do with the quantities that we were
proposing. We were very clear that we were only proposing 420,000
cubic yards. Our estimate was for 420,000 cubic yards. And anything
above 420,000 cubic yards would have to be approved by the Board of
County Commissioners.
Lastly, there was some discussion about the timing and direction
of the fill placement. We're going to bring that back to the Board when
those decisions are ready to be made. They're not ready to be made at
this point in time. We do not have all the information, and we'll bring
that back to the Board when it's right to do so.
The last item that I want to talk about is the FEMA appeal for
Tropical Storm Gabrielle and how it relates to Hurricanes Wilma and
Katrina.
Tropical Storm Gabrielle, the disaster occurred in September of
2001. And a little bit of background on how things with FEMA work
is the estimates that are -- estimates are used to determine initial
federal obligation. So we go through and we estimate through our
surveys the damage that we expect on the beaches. And at that point
in time we sit down with the agencies and they authorize that.
However, the final costs are determined at close-out and they're
determined by a reconciliation process with the close-out specialists,
both by FEMA and Florida Department of Emergency Management.
We audit, we reconcile, we review and they analyze those and they
Page 171
November 13, 2012
finally make a determination.
On this particular project, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
stipulated that this project would extend three years after the
completion of renourishment, and that we also could do no recovery
work until we had the permits in place.
The permits were not issued until December of 2005. And if we
tried to do work prior to that point in time we would be in violation of
the Stafford Act.
The recovery work that we looked at was from landfill to project
close-out. So that went all the way to the end of 2008 and early 2009.
In August of 2009 we closed the project out. We did that with
the Florida Department of Emergency Management specialists and
FEMA specialists. It took us two months to close this project out.
And in the FEMA close-out report that was generated in January,
2010, FEMA validated $29 million worth of total project costs. They
also directed how the close-out accounting would be done at that point
in time.
FEMA, Lake Mary -- and they are the agency that had
jurisdictional control over Hurricanes Wilma and Katrina, process and
paid an additional $9.5 million worth of funding for that event.
FEMA Atlanta, who had jurisdictional control for Tropical Storm
Gabrielle, refused to pay the additional $9.2 million from Tropical
Storm Gabrielle.
We made a first appeal to the nonpayment on 4 -- on April of
2010 that was partially successful.
MR. OCHS: For which event?
MR. McALPIN: This is for Tropical Storm Gabrielle, Leo.
For Tropical Storm Gabrielle, the first appeal was for -- in April
of 2010 it was partially successful. They agreed to pay us the
environmental monitoring costs. But they did not agree to pay us the
additional sand.
The second appeal we made in January of 2011 and the sand was
Page 172
November 13, 2012
denied on that appeal.
The FEMA -- it's very important that you understand this: The
FEMA denial of Gabrielle appeals had no impact on our budgeting. It
had no impact on our budgeting for beach renourishment because we
never received any of those monies. We never received the $9.2
million. And at this point in time we're talking about appealing their
nonpayment.
But what that second appeal for Tropical Storm Gabrielle did is
they recommended that they reexamine the costs for Hurricanes
Wilma and Katrina.
They did that. FEMA de-obligated $11.2 million for Wilma and
Katrina, and we have filed our first appeal for Hurricane Wilma and
Katrina. We did that in July of 2012. And Florida Department of
Emergency Management has filed their appeal on our behalf to
FEMA.
So we have been consistent all the way through in terms of how
we've handled this appeal process.
And I'll answer any questions that you have at this point on any
of the three items.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How many public speakers?
MR. MILLER: Two, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Two? Let's hear the public speakers.
MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Bob
Krasowski. He'll be followed by Marcia Cravens.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Bob
Krasowski for the record.
There's really too much here for me to cover in three minutes, so
I'll touch on some of the main points. And maybe if we need to we
can have discussions later.
I'm going to talk about two of the documents, not the third, not
the FEMA.
And briefly on the first document, the analysis of the BCC
Page 173
November 13, 2012
comments, what I remember about that meeting where these
comments were made was my question, which I thought was kind of
mixed in with the discussion at the time, was that the -- how was it
that the county staff, when they proposed the umbrella 10-year plan to
us many time over and over explaining that that umbrella 10-year plan
included the six-year plan just doing the Fay renourishment and there
was another option in there, that they were keeping them all alive until
you would make the ultimate decision as to how to go.
Now, the 10-year plan which initially seemed to make sense
failed. It fell off the cliff there. You know, cheese slid off its cracker.
Due to a large part because we were denied certain funding
opportunities.
But that didn't happen. So what the criticism or the concern was
is that the staff did not do what I as an American citizen have always
enjoyed knowing, they did not have contingency plans if the 10-year
plan didn't go forward. The six-year plan was just flat on its face
without the permits to pull it off.
So by pursuing the 10-year plan and forgetting to maintain the
permits on our six-year plan, we were left where we are right now.
When as if we had the permits and we're moving on that as well,
might have cost extra money though. If we would have maintained
that project as well, we would have been able to move forward and we
would have been renourishing the beaches now.
If I may, Mr. Chair, take a few minutes to address the other
document?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's make it brief.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay, okay. This was supposed to be brief.
So this letter I wrote to the DEP, I'm looking for a response from
the DEP. I appreciate Commissioner Hiller's bringing this to the staff
and asking them to address the questions I raised, along with a few of
hers which she'll probably cover later.
Let's see. Okay, an important point. As Gary pointed out,
Page 174
November 13, 2012
they've been working on these projects for eight to 10 years with no
problem. Okay, I think that should be changed. You should give
greater scrutiny and not rely on the CAC and the Tourist Development
Council to work through a lot of these issues before they actually
come to you, especially in years when we have these big
renourishment projects.
He claimed that they only gave him two months to put together
this LGFR. But the LGFR isn't such a complicated document that it
requires a whole lot of time. The main thing that has to be updated on
that are the listings of the properties that are taxed and the hoteliers
that contribute to the funding of the county's part of the funding.
I have here a Coastal Planning and Engineering's scope of work
and their contract, and they were supposed to help with that. So if
they're helping the county with managing that issue, then we should
have had it done weeks before. And I think that should have come to
you before the -- before it was submitted.
They mentioned again that the application was completed and
brought to you on 10/5. I have a DEP document that shows it was
insufficient. Local government funding request deficiency checklist.
They didn't provide the joint operation in their application, so that had
to fall away. They might be able to address that next year.
This also is in the scope of work of CP&E, Coastal Planning and
Engineering, to help the staff accomplish. And if we lose money
because that document wasn't provided in a timely fashion and done
correctly or accurately to what is required -- and we're hearing from
staff now, we haven't heard yet from the FDEP on this -- then we
know exactly who to look towards to why that document wasn't
finished with the joint operation with Long Boat Key.
I did that.
The questions about the financing, the funding, the monies
available, 350,000 and five million. That's not about the
de-obligation. I just made the point that we were sensitive to federal
Page 175
November 13, 2012
monies because of that de-obligation, and it would have been nice to
have it discussed in front of you and vetted that before it went up to
the state. Because it's a big mystery to us, at least, okay?
And then -- and then I'll end with this, and I appreciate your
consideration. There are other things I could say but I'll leave it at
this. The sand volume is confusing to me. And that's why I look to
the state to see how they describe this. With our six-year project, we
lost 77 percent of the -- no, excuse me, we maintained 77 percent of
the sand on the beach. So when you look at how much sand it would
actually take to replace what was lost since 2005, '06, it's something
like, I believe, 170,000 cubic yards or less.
So they're looking for 420,000 cubic yards. And much of that is
explained by the nourishment -- I can't remember the term, the
pre-nourishment, it's called, or something like that, okay. So I was
curious to know where this additional sand came into play in actually
coming back to cover what was done six years ago.
So that's a question that's still not clear in my mind that I have.
And I expect to hear from the state about it. But once again, 170,000
cubic yards, or whatever that number is, it's a pretty small number, to
replenish the beach to the 2006 template. Gary mentioned 500,000
cubic yards to go under the template. So I'm just confused about that
and would like to have that explained.
There are other questions here, but Commissioner Hiller is -- I
think she'll probably talk to that. So thank you very much. I have a lot
of stuff in my head too still, but this will do, and I appreciate the
opportunity to address you.
And oh, I wanted to dedicate my presentation to those who we
acknowledged and showed respect to yesterday and the day before.
Because usually I'm uncomfortable thanking you for the opportunity
to speak because it's not so much you that provided, although you
regulate the time, but it's all through the years, all of the veterans that
have paid for this opportunity for you to sit there, for me to speak to
Page 176
November 13, 2012
you and for this process, this open process that we sometimes enjoy
and sometimes we don't. So I thank you very much again.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, your final registered speaker on
this item is Marcia Cravens.
MS. CRAVENS: Good afternoon. One of my favorite subjects
is to talk about our beaches and our coastal projects.
And on this local government funding request, although this
agenda item is several different items combined within three minutes,
I can't really cover all of that, so I'm just going to focus on the LFGR.
But also point out that statements and assertions made to DEP in the
document submitted there are discrepant from documents that were
submitted at a Coastal Advisory Committee meeting.
And, I mean, there seem to be a lot of different versions going
around of how much volume of sand is going to be used and what the
cost is particularly. And there are -- I'm concerned about the gap
areas. I don't think that that comprises a comprehensive county-wide
beach renourishment plan. And it seems that there are some areas that
seem to be favored and some areas that are not favored. And there
doesn't seem to be a clear policy and procedure for how to rank the
areas. And as I spoke earlier, you know, you could take a page from
DEP on how they rank items.
On a September, 2012 Coastal Advisory Committee meeting on
these issues about beach renourishment, it kind of divided it into two
items. One was truck haul sand. That indicated it would be placed for
a total amount of about 25,000 cubic yards of sand.
And the second item was that there would be approximately
420,000 cubic yards of sand from the borrow site.
It goes on to say that this does not address renourishment at Clam
Pass Beach Park. And it indicates some gap areas.
This also has some additional what it calls -- there's a table with
columns in it on a couple of pages, and it has -- the title of that column
is Additional Features. And repeatedly it shows Clam Pass Park, and
Page 177
November 13, 2012
under additional features it shows 30,000. While it doesn't say what
that 30,000 is, I think the understanding is it apparently is 30,000
cubic yards of sand that would come from Clam Pass to renourish
Clam Pass Park in the north area of Park Shore.
That is problematic because the permits for dredging Clam Pass
are not for using Clam Pass as a sand source, and actually require
avoidance and minimization and only dredge Clam Pass to the
minimum necessary to keep that pass open.
I would just -- can I show you something on the overhead?
Because I always say pictures explain things a lot better than words.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Be brief.
MS. CRAVENS: Okay.
This first item here is the Vanderbilt Beach segment. I don't
know how well --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You need to get on the mic.
MS. CRAVENS: Sorry.
The first area here is the Vanderbilt Beach segment. And you
can see there's a yellow boundary and there's a red boundary. The
yellow boundary is the overall project site. The red line is the area
that's critically eroded.
You can see on the Vanderbilt Beach area all of the project site
pretty much -- all of that has critically eroded beach. And, you know,
of course that's something that needs to be a priority.
This next one is the Naples segment of the beach. And again, it's
got a yellow line that is the boundary of the project area and a red line
which is critically eroded beach. You can see again all of the project
area is critically eroded beach.
But that's not the case with the Park Shore segment. The Park
Shore segment has a yellow area for the project site, which kind of
ends a little bit south of Clam Pass. But the critically eroded area only
comes to about here. So the project area does encompass areas that
are not critically eroded, but it has a big gap of Clam Pass Park.
Page 178
November 13, 2012
And one of the things that's not included in the local share from
being requested for DEP is that there is a commercial establishment
that this has recreational benefit and commercial benefit. Because the
Waldorf Astoria is right here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Marcia, wrap it up.
MS. CRAVENS: Okay. Simply stated, I would request that
Clam Pass Park and the north section of Park Shore of our beach
segments, that all of that area be included in our countywide beach
renourishment planning and not be omitted, because it creates a
conflict of use and it creates a conflict for how Clam Pass is dredged
and purpose and volumes and things like that. It should be able to be
renourished from the off-shore borrow site or truck haul sand. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that our last speaker?
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Gary, can I ask you a couple of
questions?
The 420,000 cubic yards doesn't contemplate any of the sand
required as a consequence of any of the inlet management plans,
correct?
MR. McALPIN: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. I just wanted to confirm
that.
Marcia, the inlet management plans like the Clam Pass
management plan is going to be handled separately. The sand that's
needed for that will be separately accounted for. It's not a discussion,
I just want to clarify that.
I want to thank you very much for going to the trouble for
preparing this summary. And as Bob pointed out, there's too much
here to respond in this discussion this afternoon. So at a future time I
will respond to each of the segments that you have presented with my
Page 179
November 13, 2012
own comments.
I just want to make a few observations --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- based on some of the stuff you
presented today.
I think -- and in all fairness, I think everybody is responsible
here. It's really simple. We had a -- in 2006 we had a six-year permit,
okay? Which means that the renourishment which was undertaken for
that design template was intended to last six years. Meaning that prior
to the expiration of that six years the county should have undertaken
preparations to be ready with a permit in hand and funding in hand to
renourish the beaches at the end of that six-year design. That six-year
design was only intended to last six years.
And that didn't happen. And that is very significant. And
notwithstanding all the discussion here how there were plans to, you
know, develop a, you know, longer lasting beach, that is irrelevant to
the obligation that the county made to the public that in six years that
beach would be renourishment to whatever extend it had eroded,
because that was the design template that was approved under the -- is
it 2006, Gary? Am I right on that? 2006 permit?
MR. McALPIN: 2005/2006 was the last renourishment.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And it's my understanding that that
six-year design permit was actually renewed in 2010, and that that
permit is in effect. And we can renourish under that permit for
another five years. And I don't mean the duration of the time that the
renourishment should last but that that permit has been renewed
through 2015, if I understand correctly.
MR. McALPIN: The permit is valid till -- it's a 10-year permit.
It's valid to 2015.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. So it goes to 2015.
So we actually had the ability to submit the information under the
existing permit and have the dredge in place at this time because we're
Page 180
November 13, 2012
now at the expiration of the six years. And beaches that are critically
eroded would be renourished right now. But instead we have a delay
as a consequence of what was undertaken at Leo's direction. Because
it certainly wasn't Board direction to cause this delay.
In fact, I went back to the minutes of the meeting of the county
and the city, and nowhere does it state that there should have been a
10-year design. In fact, the only thing that was discussed was, you
know, we should consider hard structures like reefs and what ought to
also be considered is better means of securing state and federal
funding and so forth.
So I really don't see that as the direction. And any action taken
by a group at a workshop, regardless of who's attending that
workshop, is non-binding on the Board unless the Board actually votes
at a properly noticed Board meeting that action is the direction of the
Board. That wasn't the case.
So I think the information you've presented is very interesting
and very informative and I do intend to respond, which is generally
again to summarize, we should have had a permit -- we should have
already applied under the existing permit to renourish the 120,000
cubic yards that have eroded. And we still need that reconciliation of
the difference between the 120,000 cubic yards, which is all that has
eroded from 2006 to the present with respect to the 6-year design
template and that 420,000 cubic yards, which is being proposed by
Coastal Planning and Engineering.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then I'll just reserve comment
on the rest, and I'll have a few additional comments with respect to
this at a later time. And I will address these other, you know,
summaries that you have presented at a later time. And I really want
to thank you, Gary. I really do appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a motion to accept the document
in the presentation?
Page 181
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll make a motion to accept the
presentation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to accept the presentation by
Commissioner Hiller, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes unanimously.
You want to go to M now, County Manager, or you want to go
somewhere else?
Item #11J
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AND EXECUTE AN
IMPROVEMENT TO THE PARKING AREA AGREEMENT
WITH NAPLES ZOO, INC., RELATED TO COST SHARING FOR
THE ENTRANCE AND PARKING IMPROVEMENTS AT
NAPLES ZOO WITH COLLIER COUNTY SHARING 50% OF
FINAL CERTIFIED CONSTRUCTION COSTS, CURRENTLY
ESTIMATED AT $2,600,000 — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: You have a 3:30 time certain item, sir. That is Item
11.J on your agenda this afternoon. It's a recommendation to approve
and execute an improvement to a parking area agreement with Naples
Zoo, Incorporated, related to cost sharing of the entrance and parking
improvements at Naples Zoo, with county share to be 50 percent of
Page 182
November 13, 2012
final certified construction cost, currently estimated at $2.6 million.
Mr. Carnell will either present or answer questions, whatever the
pleasure of the board --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve. And why
was this a time certain?
MR. OCHS: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I say motion to approve and
why was this a time certain.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
MR. OCHS: I received a request from Mayor Sorey to ask the
chair for a time certain on this at the afternoon, and so I relayed that
request to the chair and he granted the request.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: On behalf of the city?
MR. OCHS: I assumed it was on behalf of the city, sir. He said
it was Mayor Sorey when I called him. But he's here, I guess he could
answer that.
MAYOR SOREY: On behalf of the zoo, since I'm a board
member of the zoo.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Was there any objection by either
of the -- any member of the public, Steve?
MR. CARNELL: I'm sorry, with regard to the agreement?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Was there any objection -- yeah.
Barry?
MR. CARNELL: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No? Was everybody in
agreement? Nobody voiced any objection?
MR. CARNELL: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then I second --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I already seconded.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, you did? We're in
Page 183
1
November 13, 2012
competition. This is a race to the second, rather than a race to the first.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm not keeping score here.
How many public speakers do we have?
MR. MILLER: Two, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who are they?
MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker is Ellie Krier, and your
second public speaker is Matt McLean.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's Krier. But nevertheless, Ellie is not
here.
MAYOR SOREY: We both waive on behalf of the board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: As long as everybody's in
agreement.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, then we have a motion.
Commissioner Henning, did you make the motion to approve?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Before I reconsider it, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. We'll get to your
reconsideration in just a minute.
So motion by Commissioner Henning to approve and seconded
by Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Hiller.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Thank you for being here, Mayor Sorey.
Page 184
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And no, I will not reconsider.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, come on. Somebody has to
reconsider that.
Item #11M
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER OPTIONS FOR THE
RESTRUCTURING OF THE BOARD OFFICE — MOTION TO
APPROVE OPTION B — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, your next item is 11.M on your
agenda this afternoon. It's a recommendation to consider options for
restructuring of the Board office.
This was an item that I was asked to bring back to the
commissioners for consideration. Essentially there were two options
that I recommended for your consideration: One was to essentially
maintain the existing structure but have the reporting relationship for
the executive manager move from the board to either the County
Manager or the County Attorney.
The second option for you to consider is to create a BCC office
where the aide works at the will of the commissioner that he or she
would serve. And that would then allow the County Manager and the
County Attorney to pick up some of the collateral duties that the
executive manager previously performed.
The variation of that option, if you wanted some kind of a
general receptionist in lieu of an executive manager, that is an option
for you as well.
So those are two of the more viable options that I brought to you
for consideration.
We also included in your executive summary a general schematic
of, if you chose option B, how individual suites for each commissioner
Page 185
November 13, 2012
and aide could be configured in your existing space.
And with that, I'll answer any questions or leave it to the board to
discuss and provide some direction.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we ask the County
Manager or Mike Sheffield to talk to the aides. Some of the duties
that Ian Mitchell did was advisory board reappointments. Personally I
think that the aides may be able to pick that up, if somebody would
communicate. And then we have proclamations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Ordering the supplies.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And they did that in the
office anyway. So there needs to be coordination by somebody to get,
you know, the office aides in synch and what duty is -- whose duty is
what.
I think that would be -- before we go out and ask the County
Attorney or County Manager to take on responsibilities that were done
in the office, let's see if we can handle them in the office.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I -- I'm a little confused here.
You've given us two options. Which option are we talking about right
now?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The option of-- he just stated
the County Manager and County Attorney take up some of the slack
that the --
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. If you decided not to replace the executive
manager and you had each aide work directly for an individual
commissioner, there are some duties that the executive manager
performed, as Commissioner Henning just outlined, that I had
suggested in the summary could be picked up either by my office
and/or Mr. Klatzkow's office. I think what I'm hearing Commissioner
Henning suggest is perhaps that it would be better for the aides to
continue to perform some of those duties.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not really.
Page 186
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well they have been already, so it would
seem logical that some of those who are experienced in doing it could
continue to do it.
MR. OCHS: That's fine. You know, the question is who makes
that decision, and are they going to rotate it or does it just, you know,
go with the aide who happens to be the chair's aide for the given year?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, there is -- may I,
Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There is one thing, and that is
for the Chairman's signature to sign off on the previous action. I know
that Ian Mitchell was involved in some of that. Of course that is the
responsibility of the Chairman. And I really would hope that we don't
delegate that outside the office, because that's more of a checks and
balances of government.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Except to the County Attorney.
The County Attorney could readily handle that. And in fact there
wouldn't be any conflict there. In fact, it would be good if the County
Attorney handled that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You mean prepare them for
signature after each meeting?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. To ensure -- because that
way we could be sure contracts that are being presented for signature
are ones that were approved by the Board at the Board meeting, you
know, that all contracts are signed immediately after the meeting and
there's no delay in execution of contracts. I mean, putting it in --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You have a lot of confidence in
the County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I have actually, I think -- I
have a different perspective. May I speak?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, can I tell you how it really works
first before you start trying to improve it?
Page 187
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, but can I -- I do want to hear
how it really works. Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: What do you want to do first?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I want to hear you. I just want to
sit back and listen to you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's the best decision you've made all
day.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not true. That's not true.
You've told me I've made some really good decisions today. You've
been in agreement with me over and over and over again. I'll have to
put that up for reconsideration.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Maybe I've made some bad decisions
then.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: There you go.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I don't think there's any
expectation that we're going to change the process where the County
Attorney's Office reviews all these things and makes sure that the
contracts are in accordance with what the Board approves and they
essentially sign off on all of those before the Chair signs them. So I
don't see any --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: He doesn't do that.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, we don't --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who does it?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't know. I always assumed Ian did
that. We see some of it. But as far as all the items that come through,
I only see a small fraction of it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: When you sign, you as a lawyer sign for
legal sufficiency --
MR. KLATZKOW: That's before it comes to you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then it gets changed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, that's right.
MR. KLATZKOW: Right. That's not necessarily what the
Page 188
November 13, 2012
Board's approved.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Listen, I don't sign anything unless it has
a lawyer's signature on it. End of story. I've sent it back to you. In
fact, I've even seen statements in those contracts that require me to
certify that something is or is not true and I send it back. And I get
either from you or your department or County Manager's department a
certificate saying staff has verified that we are in fact doing what the
contract says.
So somebody's been doing it and is doing it now because unless
it has an attorney's name certifying legal sufficiency, I do not sign it.
And the other point is when you sign something for legal
sufficiency, that means to me it is in conformance with the decision
that the Board made.
So if you aren't checking it for that purpose, then yes, you're
right, we've got a big, big dark hole here.
MR. KLATZKOW: We sign off on everything before it comes
to the Board. After that we don't necessarily see it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Every contract I sign has an attorney's
signature on it.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's not just contracts.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We'll explain it to him later.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You don't need to explain it to me. I've
been doing it now for three years. I know exactly how it works.
But if you're telling me that you don't review any of these
documents after the Board approves them, we've got a serious
problem.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's not how your system is set up.
Mr. Mitchell -- before Sue Filson, all right, their job was to make sure
that what you approved was sent to the chairman for signature. That's
always been the executive aide's job.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. But when you sign off on
Page 189
November 13, 2012
something, what are you certifying to?
MR. KLATZKOW: The agreements that I sign for come --
they're then placed on SIRE and they go to you. But after that I lose
track of control of the agreement. After that it's up to the aide
typically to make sure that what you approved is exactly what was
being signed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I don't think that's a good idea. I
think that's your job.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's never been our job.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That doesn't mean it shouldn't be your
job.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, that would be fine.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That was my point. We agree. Oh,
my god, we agree.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Again, second time.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So we're back to where I
was.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So the County Attorney must review
everything --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. And present it to the Chair.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- before it is presented for signature, to
make sure it is legally sufficient and in accordance with the decision
made by the Board of County Commissioners.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, that would be fine. In fact, we prefer
that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That is exactly how it ought to be.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's exactly how it ought to be, yeah.
So whoever has been doing it, whether it was Ian or you, the
point is it apparently was getting done. But if we don't have Ian
anymore, I don't want to -- want an aide exposed to that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'd be very happy to do it, sir.
Page 190
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right, what else? Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The functions that Ian performed I
think readily can be divided. Not to the aides, but rather to -- for
example, the contracts going to Jeff. I think advisory Boards -- one of
the suggestions that Mike made -- Mike and I during the course of one
meeting were talking about advisory boards and we were -- he pointed
out how many we have. We have just an overwhelmingly large
number of advisory Boards, and we don't really hear back from these
advisory boards. I mean, we're not like getting the advice back.
And maybe revisiting the -- I think you said there was something
like 50 advisory boards at this point.
MR. SHEFFIELD: There's over 50.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And there's like an incredible
number of advisory boards. For example, I saw a notice that came
across my desk, it was called -- I think it was called like the mitigation
advisory board. So, you know, I thought it was environmental
mitigation, and I was all over it, and I said I want to see the minutes
and how come I've never -- you know, what's going on and what are
they doing? And I was like really excited that there was a group
looking into what I thought was mitigation banking. It was homeland
security. And I was like what is that board doing and why do we need
it? I mean, maybe that should be under the Sheriff. I just didn't really
-- you know, it didn't make any sense.
So the long and short of it is I think we can reduce the tasks if
we, I think revisit some of the processes and, you know, some of the
things that we've been doing, you know, bring back in line with what
our needs are.
And maybe we don't need as many advisory boards. Maybe we
need to consolidate some of the advisory boards and then Mike could
administer the advisory board, you know, notices and appointments
once the structure of the advisory boards has been brought in line with
what the board's needs are.
Page 191
November 13, 2012
What else did Ian do? I mean, Jeff will take care of contracts,
Mike would take care of advisory boards. What was another task he
performed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Junior's job here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Junior, what do you do?
MR. MILLER: Read names.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You read names.
Well, again, I think Mike Sheffield would be very well qualified
when he sits there to read the name of the public speakers. I mean,
there's no reason for you to sit there and do it, Troy. I mean, you do a
fabulous job; I mean, you're exceptional at it. You're obviously very
talented at calling up speakers and keeping them in line. But I think
Mike could readily do that and then that need is eliminated.
As far as phone calls coming in, I mean Ian never handled phone
calls to the individual commissioners.
One of the things with respect to, you know, the switchboard, if
you will, is phone calls can come directly to the commissioners' aides
as opposed to being routed through one central person. You know,
there's no need for anyone to go through two people to get to me; they
can just have my number and call me, call my aide.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And they're very efficient.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And they're very efficient.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I mean, everybody answers the
phones, nobody's saying it's not my job. You know, we never have a
problem.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. But we don't -- I don't think
we need -- if we don't have one common number and if we just have a
number for each of the -- like each of the commissioners has their own
phone number, then you eliminate the need for that switchboard
function, if you will. And that saves us a lot of money. Because if
you take one aide and put an aide at the switchboard one day a week,
in effect what you're doing if the average salary is somewhere
Page 192
November 13, 2012
between 45 and 50,000, you basically have a switchboard operator
you're paying that much to, which is very expensive. Because in
effect you're reducing every aide's productivity by the day they're
sitting on the switchboard.
So maybe what we ought to do, if I can make a suggestion,
maybe we need to vet this a little further and maybe Leo, if you spoke
to each commissioner and got input, you know, from each of the
commissioners as to how we could divvy up Ian's tasks I think among
you, I don't think the aides really, you know, need to do anything.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think they should do something.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, but work for the
commissioners.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Maybe we could ask the aides if
they would like to offer a couple suggestions also.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely. I think the aides
should -- right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And then we have to have
somebody, and that might be the manager's office. Someplace where
they would call in sick and then select who would assign somebody.
Like for instance, if one is on vacation and one calls in sick, then
there's only one left, are they going to find somebody to cover that
time.
And then also on another note altogether is who would place ads?
Like for instance, Commissioner Henning right now is going to need
to be hiring an aide. Who places those add for --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: HR.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But we should assign that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Exactly right. But something like,
you know, the review of comp. time, the -- you know, basically if
someone is sick, who takes their place if there's a need for that.
If you had designated one person in HR, you know, advertising
Page 193
November 13, 2012
for positions, interviewing for positions, let one person in HR be
responsible for those kinds of things, you know, to make sure that it's
done properly according to the law. And then we don't --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're not really getting anywhere right
now. Why don't we -- we decided on alternative B? Is that the one
you want to go with?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What's alternative B?
MR. OCHS: That is eliminate the office manager and maintain
five separate commission offices, each aide working at the will of the
commissioner that he or she serves.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Keep going.
MR. OCHS: That each commissioner will be responsible for
hiring, performance reviews and other routine personnel and employee
relation matters with assistance from the Human Resources
Department.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
MR. OCHS: County Manager will assume the duties associated
with advisory committee vacancies and advertising, boardroom
scheduling, annual budget development, procurement and expenditure
oversight and other related administrative duties.
County Attorney will assume duties related to the processing of
official documents associated with board approved ordinances,
resolutions, contracts, et cetera, requiring signature of the BCC Chair.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And with respect to those two, I think
what I heard at least a couple of commissioners say, talk with the
aides, talk with the commissioners about how some of those might be
able to be assumed by some of the aides in the most efficient manner.
Some of them are experienced with doing some of this stuff, okay,
already.
And so we need for you to come back and say here's a list of
duties and here's our recommendation for who should handle them.
Page 194
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, don't forget, we have one aide
that isn't in the office that often, so --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, we know that, yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- we have to take that into
consideration as well.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And she's actually doing the bulk
of Ian's work, by the way.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, then maybe it should be done
off-site.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, no, she's actually doing it
here. But it doesn't take that much time.
But again, that's why I think -- I like what Leo has recommended.
I think Leo is right, his recommendation of putting those types of
ministerial functions under the County Manager's Office and not
involving the aides and like the scheduling of the board room and all
that.
Even the changes to the agenda, nobody knows how the agenda
is changing better than you do, Leo. For you to have control and have
someone under you manage the changes as you filter them through the
commissioners and through staff really makes so much more sense
rather than go back to our office and back to you and back to us and
back to you. I mean, I think what you suggested is very reasonable.
MR. OCHS: Well, Commissioners, one of the reasons I
suggested it that way is because of the size of our agency relative to
the board office, obviously. We can train people to fill in when the
primary person's gone and we can build in some redundancy.
When you assign those to one aide and that aide is ill or on
vacation or leaves --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's a nightmare, right.
MR. OCHS: -- you've got to start all over again. I mean, we can
have written manuals and those kinds of things, but you still have to
ramp somebody new up to speed.
Page 195
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Could we just modify your
recommendation by adding one more section which is have HR
responsible for, you know, comp. time, vacation time --
MR. OCHS: Certainly. Anything related to payroll possessing
and leave administration --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And payroll, you know, hiring,
firing --
MR. OCHS: Yes, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- resigning.
MR. OCHS: Well, you'll make the hiring decisions, we'll do all
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, but all properly
administered to through HR. Just make sure HR is the key point for
any personnel related issues.
MR. OCHS: Got it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, the only thing that hasn't
been decided is to give you guidance on doing -- rearranging the
offices to provide privacy for the aides and for the commissioners.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now, does anybody have any problems
with that?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I don't have a problem
with it, but I don't agree with what Commissioner Hiller is saying.
And I'm going to make a motion and let's see where it goes, to
accept B, eliminate the office manager's position, maintain the five
separate offices, commissioner's office. Five aides will be working to
serve each of the commissioners. The commissioners are responsible
for hiring, performance reviews, personnel, things like that.
Now, as far as the -- as part of my motion, as far as the duties that
were historically handled in the office, direct the County Manager to
talk to the aides, see what can be accomplished within the office, and
Page 196
November 13, 2012
talk to the county commissioners thereafter. That's my motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. How about the County Attorney
dealing with all the approved ordinances, resolutions, proclamations,
contracts, et cetera, et cetera?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: County Attorneys to review
after the Board's affirmative vote and amendments to review and
submit to the Chairman for his signature.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second your motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we have a motion by Commissioner
Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala. That covers all the issues,
including maintaining separate offices for the commissioners, okay?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Where does it talk about separate
offices?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, it says eliminate the office
manager position and maintain five separate commissioner offices.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, yeah, okay. But not
physically, just we're talking about the administration of-- that each --
the aides will answer --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, there's one going to be on
the east coast -- west coast.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, west coast. Way, way far west.
Okay, all in favor, please signify --
MR. OCHS: Sir is there a consensus on the floor plan that was --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: One second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's part of it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I wanted to ask --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I don't understand that. And I
want to see it on the overhead so we can all talk about it.
But again, Commissioner Henning, I would love to support your
motion, but I feel very strongly that HR needs to be responsible for all
Page 197
November 13, 2012
personnel matters related to the aides to make sure that it's done
correctly.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think he did say that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, he didn't. HR --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I didn't. Are you talking
about hiring?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm talking about --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to put an ad on Craig's
List, myself. Yeah, that --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm talking about --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Overtime, comp. time --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- everything from overtime,
comp. time, vacation time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's part of my motion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. You know, advertising, if
there's a problem, any resolution -- isn't that what the CMA provides
right now, if there's a -- if an aide has a problem or if there's a problem
with an aide's performance that it goes through HR, and doesn't the
CMA provide for protocols on how those issues are resolved?
MR. KLATZKOW: Do you want your aides to be covered by
the CMAs?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well aren't they already?
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, ma'am.
MR. OCHS: They are covered for everything in the CMA's with
the exception of--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Fair treatment.
MR. OCHS: -- the disciplinary process and the evaluation
process. But that is handled directly by the Commission. That's the
whole concept of at will.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what is this -- okay, so --
MR. OCHS: An individual would work for the commissioner at
Page 198
November 13, 2012
the will and at the pleasure of the commissioner. And if you want to
get a new aide, you simply --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just get one.
MR. OCHS: -- let that first aide go and get another one.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I was under the impression, and I
wasn't here when all this change occurred, so this all took place before
I was elected. But -- and I haven't had the ability to review it all. But
I thought that -- I understood that the CMA was changed with respect
to termination, that it was at will termination and that there was no
right to appeal with that at will termination.
But I still thought that if there was any disciplinary action that it
would still be documented according to whatever the protocol is --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ian was supposed to develop
those CMAs.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, if memory serves, Ian's contract
said that if there were those kinds of issues that they would first go
through him and the next step would be to try to resolve those with the
full board. It was a different process --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: For the aides?
MR. OCHS: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So it didn't go back to HR
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- for the aides?
MR. OCHS: No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what if the aides have an
issue, who do they go to? Do they not go to HR? What's their
recourse?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It goes to the commission.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They go back to the commission?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but some things are pretty
private and they would prefer not to hear it in an open --
Page 199
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think they can go -- Commissioner
Henning's motion allows for that. It says each commissioner will be
responsible for hiring, performance reviews and other routine
personnel employee relations matters with assistance from the Human
Resources Department.
You know, if we need detailed guidelines about that, we can
develop them. But that provides the authority to get HR support.
MR. OCHS: They're at your disposal, Commissioners; they'll
help any way they need.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If they would have a problem then,
say for instance I belted mine around and she wanted --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't feel any muscle there,
sorry. It wouldn't happen. I don't see it happening.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Then who would she -- you know,
she couldn't go to me and say stop belting me around, so she would
have to go to somebody.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: She'd go to Kate Alber's.
MR. OCHS: She'd go to HR.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just put it in the Naples Daily
News. That solves all problems.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That would take care of it right there.
Okay, all in favor --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've got a question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've been pretty quiet.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: She needs a break.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is a what if. And help me
with this a little bit, Leo.
If somebody had been dismissed from the Collier County
Page 200
November 13, 2012
Commission, if one of the aides was dismissed, at this point in time if
a commissioner wanted to hire her back, he could do it, couldn't he?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Say that again?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, if an aide had
been fired by administration and that aide had proved valuable to that
commissioner, that commissioner can now hire that aide back, because
he's doing the hiring and firing without any restrictions from our
department here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They could do that all along,
couldn't they?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think so.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, once somebody was fired,
that was it. And now that it's back -- in other words, Commissioner
Henning expressed very much dismay over his aide being fired. He
could now hire her back.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If he wants to.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure, that would be great. That
takes care of the problem. Because she served him quite well and he
was quite happy with her.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So it will work.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. So he just has to reach
out and tell her to put an application back in. And if something
doesn't work out, you can also dismiss the aide and hire another one.
This is quite similar to what they do with the state legislative
employees, if I'm not mistaken.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all in favor, please signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
Page 201
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
We're going to take a 10-minute break.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What about the offices, we're
going to do that next?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We just did that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We just did it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, the -- we're not going to
redesign the office. Spend $150,000 and redesign the office?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're going to take it out of
Ian's salary.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, it's only money.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, my god.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It will be recovered in two years, three
years.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Take it out of District 2.
MR. OCHS: Break?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We'll be back here at 4:35; going to give
you a few extra minutes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: God bless you, man.
(Recess.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Where do we go from here?
Item #110
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE PEER REVIEW
FOR WIGGINS PASS CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS BY OLSEN
ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR THE LUMP SUM OF $34,900 AND A
PEER REVIEW OF COLLIER COUNTY BEACHES VOLUME
Page 202
November 13, 2012
DESIGN BY ATKINS NORTH AMERICAN, INC. UNDER
CONTRACT #09-5262-CZ FOR A LUMP SUM OF $15,905
AND MAKE THE FINDING THAT THESE ITEMS PROMOTE
TOURISM — MOTION TO APPROVE OLSEN ASSOCIATES
FOR THE PEER REVIEW FOR WIGGINS PASS CHANNEL
IMPROVEMENTS AND TO BRING BACK THE COLLIER
COUNTY BEACHES VOLUME DESIGN WITH ATKINS NORTH
AMERICA AT THE DECEMBER 11TH MEETING — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: We go to Item 11.0, which was previously Item
16.A.24 on your agenda. It's a recommendation to approve a peer
review for Wiggins Pass Channel improvements by Olsen Associates,
Incorporated for a lump sum amount of$34,900, and a peer review of
the Collier County Beaches volume design by Atkins North American,
Incorporated under Contract 09-5262-CZ for a lump sum amount of
$15,905, and make a finding that these items promote tourism.
And this item was moved by Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, we don't -- if a Planning
Commissioner votes no on an item, a land use item, it doesn't go on
the summary agenda. I don't think this one is appropriate. Our CAC
and TDC voted not to fund this item.
And Gary, correct me if I'm wrong, that was your
recommendation is to have a peer review when it came -- when this
Wiggins Pass dredge came to us anyways?
MR. McALPIN: Yes, our recommendation was to conduct a
peer review. There's --just to verify and confirm the design.
The other thing with the peer review from Wiggins Pass, if you
remember, when the Board heard the ST overlay, you directed at that
Board meeting that you approved the ST overlay conditioned upon a
peer review being done.
So with those two items, that's why we're suggesting that a peer
Page 203
November 13, 2012
review for Wiggins Pass be completed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Jeff, if we say no on the
peer review, does that mean the approval of the -- there was a
variance?
MR. OCHS: It was an ST overlay variance?
MR. McALPIN: Permit for the ST overlay for Wiggins Pass. It's
in an ST zone.
MR. KLATZKOW: You can vote no.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the ST variance would still
be good?
MR. KLATZKOW: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. You know, to me if it
needs a peer review on an engineering firm that designed the channel,
if that's what we're really doing, having somebody overlook somebody
else's work, well why in the hell are we paying the consultant to do all
the engineering work? I think that's the reason why the CAC and the
TDC voted no on that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is your light on?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, that was from before.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are you finished?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm finished.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. You know, the Coastal
Planning and Engineering is not warrantying their work on Wiggins
Pass, okay. Nor are they warrantying their work on the beach
renourishment. And as a consequence we, if it's wrong, have no
recourse for whatever their errors are. We're talking about
multi-million dollars projects. And to spend how much of is it,
12,000, 15,000? How much is the Wiggins review, 15,000?
MR. McALPIN: The Wiggins Pass review was for 34,950.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The project has been estimated by
the engineers to be between three and $5 million. And not (sic) to
Page 204
•
November 13, 2012
spend $30,000 to do a peer review to ensure that what they are
proposing for Wiggins is sound I think is putting a great deal of
money at risk.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So are we going to go a
different course if the consultant, Atkins or whatever says no, this is
not going to work?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's actually Olsen.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, whatever it is, are we
going to say it's a no go, we're not going to do it?
MR. McALPIN: I think if we get a peer review and it's raises
some issues with the design, we would try to resolve that issue at that
point in time, Commissioner. I mean, there has been -- we don't
anticipate that there's going to be any problem, but the peer review is
that extra bit of assurance that good engineering judgment was used.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you said you would try to
resolve it.
MR. McALPIN: Well, it could be if an issue is that they disagree
with the sand placement on the beaches or one of the issues associated
with it, there's things we could do to design that could change those. I
mean, we really don't know until we see what there is.
But the objective would be that we would sit down -- if there was
an issue with the peer review we would sit down and resolve it with
the two consultants and DEP. And that's what you have to do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's not we'll try to resolve it,
you will resolve it.
MR. McALPIN: It has to be resolved or the project doesn't move
forward.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, your first statement said
we'll try to resolve it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He was being nice.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll do my best.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's similar to, you know, for
Page 205
November 13, 2012
example in transportation projects where we have the CEI's, is that --
or CIE's. I always get all the acronyms mixed up. But, you know, we
basically have an outside engineering firm reviewing the -- or an
outside consulting firm reviewing, you know, what's being done on a
project to ensure that it's proceeding according to what was committed
to, what was bid.
So, I mean, we do it regularly on our projects. And this is
actually very inexpensive, because usually for those -- it's CEI, right,
that's the acronym? The CEI's typically can run as much as 10 percent
of the total project cost. So we're getting a real bargain from --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's similar, but it's not the name.
But I understand what you're saying.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're right, it's similar, not quite
the same. And Olsen is a highly reputed company. I want to thank
you for picking someone so good. I mean, it really inspires
confidence.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Public speakers?
MR. MILLER: Yeah, we have one registered public speaker.
Marcia Cravens. I do not see Ms. Cravens in the audience.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: She misunderstood. She thought
that Olsen was doing a peer review on Atkins or Atkins on Olsen or
something like that. She didn't quite follow what the relationships
were and what the projects were. But I clarified that for her, so she
was fine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good.
Tell me what other projects you're doing peer reviews on and
what are the total accumulated costs.
MR. McALPIN: The other project that we're asking for a peer
review to be on is the sand quantities for the major beach
renourishment. There is lingering concern about that. We want to get
another engineering firm to take a look at that and go through the
Page 206
November 13, 2012
methodology that the Coastal Planning and Engineering did.
Although it was the same as what was used in 2005, 2006.
There's concern, so we want to put that to bed with a peer review
on that item, Commissioner. And that's for 15,000 --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, that's not on today's agenda.
That was continued.
MR. McALPIN: 15,905.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. That was continued.
MR. McALPIN: So we're asking for both of these pier reviews
to be approved so that any and all questions associated with the
competency of the design be put to bed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're very optimistic.
Okay, yes, County Manager?
MR. OCHS: Commissioner Hiller raised a point. I want to make
sure we don't leave before the Board decides what they want to do.
Beginning of the meeting Commissioner Hiller asked to bifurcate
that item. She was in agreement with the peer review firm for
Wiggins Pass but she wanted to continue the Atkins contract for
another meeting.
Then when you got to Commissioner Henning, he just asked for
the entire item to be moved to the regular. So I had presumed that he
wanted the whole item presented. Commissioner, I don't know where
you stand at this point.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I want to keep it bifurcated. I
mean, it's -- the renourishment should be separate. And it needed
more work, so I didn't want to bring it forward. I asked for it to be
continued. So all that was left to discuss today was Olsen.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you okay with that?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make a motion that we
bifurcate the two issues and approve Olsen's peer review.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second.
Page 207
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion by Commissioner
Henning to bifurcate the two contracts for peer review and approve the
Olsen peer review. Seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, we are intent to bring that Atkins
item back --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: In December.
MR. OCHS: -- in the December meeting --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MR. OCHS: -- because we need to keep the schedule.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MR. McALPIN: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. What's next?
Item #12A
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE COLLIER
COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY, MEMORIALIZE ITS
OCTOBER 23, 2012 EXTENSION OF AND AMENDMENT TO
THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR'S EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZE
THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE EXTENSION AND
AMENDMENT AGREEMENT— APPROVED; MOTION TO
Page 208
November 13, 2012
RECONSIDER — FAILED
MR. OCHS: Sir, that takes you to County Attorney's report,
12.A. It was previously 16.K.2. And that is a recommendation that
the Board of County Commissioners, in its capacity as the Collier
County Airport Authority, memorialize its October 23rd, 2012
extension of and amendments to the Collier County Airport Authority
executive director's employment agreement, and authorize the
Chairman to execute the extension and amendment agreement.
This item was brought forward by Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Henning.
Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner
Coletta.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. For the same reasons, that I
didn't think that Jeff Klatzkow or Mr. Ochs or any of the other
contracts should be changed at this time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for reconsideration.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes 4-1 with Commissioner
Hiller dissenting.
And Commissioner Coletta has a motion for reconsideration.
Page 209
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All opposed to the motion for
reconsideration, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion fails 4-1 with Commissioner
Henning voting in favor of reconsideration.
MR. OCHS: Takes us to item --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 14.A?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- looks like 14.A.1 .
Item #14A1
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, ACTING AS THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY,
APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE
CONTRACT #12-5885, "DESIGN AND RELATED SERVICES
FOR THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT (MKY)
RUNWAY 17-35 REHABILITATION PROJECT" IN THE
AMOUNT OF $660,000 WITH HOLE MONTES, INC. —
APPROVED; MOTION TO RECONSIDER — FAILED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, 14.A.1. I thought you were going to say
something.
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners,
acting as the Airport Authority, approve and authorize the Chairman
to execute attached Contract 12-5885, design and related services for
Page 210
November 13, 2012
the Marco Island Executive Airport runway rehabilitation project in
the amount --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Commissioner Coletta, second by
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I make a comment?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just want to tell you how highly
you're thought of by the people at the Marco Island Airport. They are
thrilled with all the progress you've made at that airport and how
smoothly it's being run. And I know that there's more than just you,
they've got a wonderful staff of people there, but I wanted to mention
it on the record. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And maybe the same thing can one day
happen at Immokalee's Airport if everybody would get out of way,
right?
Okay, we have a motion to approve. All in favor --
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What is the total capital cost for
that rehabilitation?
MR. CURRY: Chris Curry, Executive Director, Collier County
Airport Authority.
The capital costs associated with this particular part of the project
is $660,000.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, the capital cost, how much
is the total rehabilitation going to be? This is the engineering.
MR. CURRY: Well, I'm not sure exactly what the rehabilitation
will be. That will be determined next year and be determined through
this particular process that we're undergoing right now.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What's the estimate?
Page 211
November 13, 2012
MR. CURRY: I would estimate it somewhere around $6 million.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that what was in the JSEP.
MR. CURRY: I'm not sure what was in the JSEP for Marco.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, thanks.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that's $6 million that will be spent
here in Collier County --
MR. CURRY: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- hopefully employing Collier County
workers.
MR. CURRY: Yeah, should be 90 percent provided by the FAA.
We will request five percent to be funded by Florida Department of
Transportation. Although they normally fund two and a half percent.
And our local match should be five percent.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. Thank you.
All in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't think we need to do that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, then I pull back my
motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to reconsider.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You guys want to play this
stupid game, it's not going to matter --
Page 212
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Might be stupid but it's
important.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's not going to work.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Maybe it will.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, you've got a motion for
reconsideration by Commissioner Henning, it's seconded by
Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye -- I'm sorry, no. I'm sorry,
he made the recommendation, I take it back.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's why it's not going to
work.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, go ahead. I thought we
were still voting on the original --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wait a minute, what did we just
vote on?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You voted on the reconsideration. You
said yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We're voting on reconsideration
again?
Did you really make a reconsideration motion? Are you serious?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Henning made the motion, I
seconded it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I thought I'd join in the silliness.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, so my answer to that is
no.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, wait a minute. Okay, all in favor
of the motion for reconsideration on Item 14.A.1, please say yes if
Page 213
November 13, 2012
you're in favor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now, all opposed, please say yes if you
oppose the motion for reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, so the motion for reconsideration
fails by a vote of 4-1 with Commissioner Henning being in the
minority.
Item #14A2
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, ACTING AS THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY,
APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE
CONTRACT #12-5885, "DESIGN AND RELATED SERVICES
FOR THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT RUNWAY 9-27
REHABILITATION PROJECT" IN THE AMOUNT OF $761,000
WITH HOLE MONTES, INC. — APPROVED; MOTION TO
RECONSIDER — FAILED
Okay, that takes us to 14.A.2.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, it's a recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners, acting as the airport authority, approve and
authorize the Chairman to execute attached contract 12-5885, design
and related services for the Immokalee Regional Airport runway
rehabilitation project in the amount of$761,000 with Hole-Montes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, are there any questions?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for approval.
Page 214
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: One question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Chris?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Question by Commissioner Hiller.
MR. CURRY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Again, what is the now revised
estimated capital cost?
MR. CURRY: Well, I assume you're talking about the
rehabilitation that we hope will occur next year.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, this is specifically what
we're paying these services for, 761,000 to Hole-Montes for design
and related services for the Immokalee Regional Airport runway 9-27
rehabilitation project.
MR. CURRY: Again, we will find out the actual cost once we
go through this process.
What's carried in the JSEP for Immokalee is $10 million. What
was estimated when FDOT did the pavement condition inspection was
$9.5 million. So we're carrying $10 million in the JSEP. However, as
I mentioned before, I anticipate this project to be less than 10 million,
somewhere around $7 million.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Last time I think you mentioned
five.
MR. CURRY: No, it's always been somewhere around 7 million.
Immokalee would always be a little bit more than Marco because
we're doing a little more work to some of the taxiways. So I would
have never intentionally stated that Immokalee would be any less than
Marco.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's from last time?
Page 215
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all in favor of the motion, please
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I just want --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're on a role.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to confirm one thing,
Chris, with respect to this engineering work. Because my
understanding is this firm has done work for us before on both these
projects for -- is it just the Immokalee project that they worked on?
MR. CURRY: Well, they've done work at the airport in general.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: At Immokalee?
MR. CURRY: At both airports.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. I just want to make sure
that we don't pay twice for the same work. So that if any of the work
that they have done like in terms of accumulating data for, you know,
whatever past project that they might have worked on and then use it
for this project that we don't get -- that we don't double pay for what
we've already paid for once.
MR. CURRY: Well, we don't plan on that. However, if in case
they did do some similar work and it was years ago, it may not even
be applicable to what we're doing now.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Obviously they have to be paid to
update.
MR. CURRY: Yeah, but we have no intentions of paying
Page 216
November 13, 2012
somebody twice.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to make sure that, you
know, we are not doing that. I'm sure you don't, I just want to be -- I
just want to state that on the record, that if there is information that
they're using, unless there's additional work they're doing with that,
that, you know, that deserves fair compensation, that we're not paying
for it again, having paid for it once before.
MR. CURRY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Listen, it's not meant to upset
anyone, but the truth of the matter is I'm not sure how this is going to
play out. Please bear with the person that's going out the door.
Motion for reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion for reconsideration by
Commissioner Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the reconsideration, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all opposed to the reconsideration,
please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, the motion for reconsideration
fails 4-1 with Commissioner Henning voting in the minority.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I hope that when we get to the
next meeting we find that there was absolutely no reason to do that at
all. Wouldn't that be -- that would be a positive.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure would.
We go now to 14.A.3.
Page 217
November 13, 2012
Item #14A3
RECOMMENDATION TO ESTABLISH THE COMMENCEMENT
DATE OF A LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COLLIER
COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND SALAZAR MACHINE &
STEEL, INC., AS DECEMBER 1, 2012, AND PROVIDE AIRPORT
AUTHORITY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR THE AUTHORITY TO
WAIVE COLLECTION OF RENT UNTIL FINAL COMPLETION
DATE OF ONGOING IMPROVEMENTS TO LEASED PREMISES
— APPROVED; MOTION TO RECONSIDER — FAILED
MR. OCHS: Correct. It was previously 16.G.1. It's a
recommendation to establish the commencement date of the Collier
lease agreement between the Collier County Airport Authority and
Salazar Machine and Steel, Incorporated as December 1, 2012, and to
provide the Airport Authority Executive Director the authority to
waive collection of rent until the final completion date of the ongoing
improvements to the leased premises.
This item was moved at Commissioner Hiller's request.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure, thank you.
The reason I pulled this item was for the following reasons: The
first thing I didn't understand is why Commissioner Coyle didn't sign
the lease on behalf of the Board when the Board approved this lease
about 12 months ago.
Have you since signed it? Have you executed --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I have no idea.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Because it's my
understanding, when I looked back, it didn't seem that this lease had
been executed. And I didn't understand that.
MR. CURRY: Would you like me to answer these one at a time,
Page 218
November 13, 2012
or are you going to give me a group to answer?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it's --
MR. CURRY: Because I can probably --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- let's do it one at a time.
MR. CURRY: -- provide some of the answers.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
MR. CURRY: Well, as you recall, this lease was approved by
the Board sometime near the latter part of last year. And at the time
we had just completed the shell of the building, and were attempting
to move forward with the interior modifications. We had no idea
when the interior modifications would have been completed.
It was my decision to hopefully hold the lease until we could
determine a commencement date to put into the lease before the
Chairman signed. So the airport actually submitted the lease or
attempted to submit the lease to the Chairman much later than what
was approved. But we were hoping that we could at least have the
Chairman sign when we had a reasonable idea when the tenant could
move into the building.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand your explanation, but
I don't think we can do business like that. We as a Board took action,
which meant that that lease was supposed to be signed. If the terms of
the lease were not what we approved at that meeting, then the lease
agreement should have been modified to provide for a later start date.
So Jeff, can you look into that and find out, you know, what's
going on with this lease and what the terms are? Because, you know,
one of the things we're talking about here now is the authority to
waive collection of rent until the final completion date.
But he's not moving in, right? Nobody's moving in. He would
only start paying rent once he moves in.
MR. CURRY: That's correct. Essentially now that we have an
idea of when the building would be completed, we still don't know the
exact day. So I was hopeful that I could ask the Board, now that we
Page 219
November 13, 2012
have a commencement date, to allow me to establish the day so he
could start paying rent from that day.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But he would not move in or use
the building in any manner whatsoever till the day he begins to pay
rent.
MR. CURRY: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. And I don't really see what
the difference is between what has transpired between last December
and now and what's really being proposed here other than to clean up
what happened back then.
MR. CURRY: Well, the difference is when I submitted the lease
and it went through the attorney's review, it was the County Attorney
that recommended I bring it back to the Board to establish
commencement date.
Now, had I understood this when we did the lease in December,
I would have asked the same request that I'm asking for today. I would
have asked you at that time to say, you know, he can't move into the
building because the airport is doing interior modifications, so allow
me the latitude to put the date in that he actually starts to pay rent.
But I didn't do it that time last December.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So Jeff, have you reviewed this?
I mean, what's your position on this?
MR. KLATZKOW: There were two ways to structure this. The
way it's been structured is basically Chris held off on the lease until he
knew when the commencement date was. Which is fine. And he
came to me a couple of weeks ago to get the Chairman's signature. I
said no, no, no, you've got to get your commencement date done now,
which is what we're hearing now.
Now that Chris has a pretty good idea when it's going to be, we
can fill out the terms so we know when rent commences. You've
given him some discretion to start that when the tenant actually moves
in.
Page 220
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So just to clarify, what
we're approving -- and I want to make sure that everybody here
understands, the clerk and you and the tenant and the Board -- is that
the tenant will not move into the building until the building is
complete. And as of the time that the tenant moves in, that very first
day the tenant puts a box in that building --
MR. KLATZKOW: Rent commences.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- is the day that the tenant begins
to pay rent.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. The second thing I wanted
to address was, you know, at one point I had asked you how you had
underwritten this tenant to make sure that we've got a tenant who has
the ability to pay. And you said that there was no, you know,
procedure for doing that.
And, you know, I asked if you had financial -- current financial
statements and if you had determined the creditworthiness. And going
through the records which I received from you, I actually found an
application and qualification schedule which was just in there on its
own, and it basically said that the requirement of the Collier County
Airport Authority was -- and let me read this. Item 4, the current
financial statement prepared or certified by a Certified Public
Accountant or registered public accountant.
And by the way, this applies to Salazar. And then it says: To be
submitted after the lease is approved. Then it talks about a current
credit report also to be submitted after the lease is approved. And a
bond, you know, or suitable guarantee of adequate funds to the Airport
Authority to be used as a security deposit. An estimated lease amount
of last month of lease term and again to be submitted after the lease is
approved.
And I think it's really important that we properly underwrite this
lease, as we would with any tenant in any of our facilities. It is a large
Page 221
i
November 13, 2012
rent and, you know, we want to be sure that this tenant is financially
qualified and able to support the rent that's being proposed.
MR. CURRY: What is the source of your document? What is at
the top of the page?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It says section three, applications
and qualifications. Demonstra --
MR. CURRY: And where that's coming from is the Minimum
Standards of Commercial Airport Aeronautical Activity. That's the
document.
What that document is for is these minimum standards are the
threshold entry requirements for those wishing to provide commercial
aeronautical activities. Mr. Salazar is not providing commercial
aeronautical activities.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not what it says on here.
MR. CURRY: Well, that's --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They're both filled out by the
Airport --
MR. CURRY: What I'm saying to you is that is the rest of the
document that you have. It came from the minimum standards. And
the minimum standard is for commercial aeronautical activity. Mr.
Salazar's lease, because he is not commercial, is -- all the requirements
for him is defined within his lease, not in the minimum standards.
If someone was coming to conduct commercial aeronautical
activities, they would certainly have to comply with all the
requirements of this particular document. And I can show you --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I hear what you're saying, but I
just want you to know, this document has been filled in, and I'm sure
it's probably by your staff, and it says this is specific to Salazar
Machine and Steel. You know, I mean, it's all about Salazar.
MR. CURRY: Well, that was certainly not done by my staff
And again, you know, this whole situation goes back way before you
were on the Board and way before I was even the executive director.
Page 222
1
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's true.
MR. CURRY: But what I'm saying to you is that the USDA said
the airport met the requirements. And what you're reading from
applies to only commercial aeronautical activities, not what Mr.
Salazar is --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what you're suggesting is for
non-commercial aeronautical activities, whichever tenant we take in
we don't do any of this underwriting?
MR. CURRY: No, I'm not suggesting anything. But what I'm
saying is that Mr. Salazar has a history on the airport. He's had at
least a three or four-year history making payments to the airport.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: How much does he pay?
MR. CURRY: With one facility that he has under the airport's
guidance is about $400.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: 400 a month?
MR. CURRY: 400 a month.
But he also rents another incubator type facility that's managed
by another individual. And I'm not exactly sure what the totality of
that rent is.
But again, I think that if you have a history with the person, I'm
not so sure that you take them through a credit report and procedure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I think you do when you're
looking at a difference in the lease which is $400 a month, which
would be what, like four times 12? You know, let's round it to $5,000
a year. And this lease is 140,000 a year.
MR. CURRY: Well, if it's the Board's desire, I will work on a
policy for those that do not fit under the minimum standards of the
airport. Because right now it is not clearly defined. You generally
define that within your lease requirements.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, one of the things I think
that we want to do here is we want to encourage new business, we
Page 223
i
November 13, 2012
want to encourage growth of business. And to do that, I think we
more or less need to lead and to guide rather than to nitpick.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, this is not nitpicking.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Excuse me.
So if like Commissioner Hiller has identified there's something
that needs to be done or an extra step, then what would be our -- you
know, our obligation or yours or whomever is trying to encourage new
business to guide these people on, here's what we need, here's what we
still need, here's what hasn't been done but get this done. So that we
instead of carrying this thing out, we already help them to come to the
winner's circle.
Because that's what we're trying to do now, we're trying to make
this a better place to encourage business. And I think this is a good
opportunity for to us do that. Salazar has been a great businessman.
MR. CURRY: Well, what I was told by the USDA is that when
he applied for this, that there were people in Broward County that
were willing to give him almost anything he wanted to relocate his
business there, but he wanted to stay in Immokalee because that's
where he's from. And we're constantly in the process of rewriting our
agreements, our standards, our rules and regulations. And perhaps as
Commissioner Hiller suggested, maybe some of those things need to
be incorporated into every lease. We're certainly willing to do that as
the airport. If there's requirements from the Clerk's Office, we've
always basically tried to comply with those.
So as we're rewriting these new agreements, we can establish
some standard, if you'd like, outside of a normal lease.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I'm going to step in. I don't have a
light.
But, you know, it seems that we're doing everything -- no, we're
not, some commissioners are doing everything they can to discourage
Salazar from even coming here. And that is really not what we want
to do. We want to encourage him to come here.
Page 224
November 13, 2012
Now, I'm a little concerned about writing some of these other
requirements into existing leases because we might find it drives some
people off of the airport. And I think I have a couple of candidates
already that I think it would adversely impact. And I would prefer not
to do that.
So I would suggest that we start finding ways to help businesses
get started there, rather than trying to create roadblocks for them and
to make up reasons why they should not be able to get a lease there.
So I would like to see us get on with this.
Is there a motion --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- to approve this?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala.
And we have lights on for Commissioner Henning and Coletta
and Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, my question's been
answered.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Mine has too.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm fine too. I just wanted to
make a motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
Page 225
November 13, 2012
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, it passes --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
And now we have a motion for reconsideration by Commissioner
Coletta. Is anybody going to second it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I did.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala seconded it.
All in favor of the motion to reconsider, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all opposed to the reconsideration
motion, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So the motion for reconsideration fails
4-1 with Commissioner Henning approving (sic).
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I just want to add a comment.
You know, I completely agree that we want to encourage business, but
if these underwriting requirements are typically not included in the
lease, they would be done before a lease is executed. And they're not
a deterrent to businesses in the non-public market. In fact, this is
standard underwriting for a lease in any commercial setting.
We have a fiduciary to the public. We are allowing a company
to use a public asset in exchange for rent, and we need to be sure that
we have a creditworthy client. And that's just prudent public business.
So I think the standards that you have here for these commercial
aeronautical tenants that happens to also be used for Mr. Salazar is a
very fair standard and should be applied uniformly to any tenant at the
Page 226
November 13, 2012
airport.
MR. CURRY: Can I comment just --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
MR. CURRY: -- briefly before I leave?
It is not my desire, nor do I get any enthusiasm from writing new
policies. So Commissioner Coyle, what I intended to state is that if it
is the will of the Board for me to do that, then I will.
As an additional statement I would like to make is when I first
got here we had a -- the brewery was looking to relocate out in
Immokalee, and one of the problems that we had as we were going
through the process with them to rent land was that they did not want
their financial statements disclosed in a public arena. So that was one
of the detractions to them moving on the airport. So we tried to figure
out within the county, how can we look at their financial statements
without them being distributed to the public.
So sometimes we do have policies that do create a problem with
people moving onto county property, even though they may want to.
So that was just an example of--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's a --
MR. CURRY: -- a business.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's a very valid consideration.
And we should explore what other airports do with their tenants to
determine, you know, their creditworthiness and how they deal with
that information. I don't know if there's some exemption that applies.
We just need to look and see how, you know, other airports do
business, airports that do business with private entities as tenants.
But it's a very valid point, Chris.
MR. CURRY: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So are we finished now, County
Manager?
Item #15
Page 227
November 13, 2012
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. OCHS: We have Item 15, staff and general
communications.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, do you have any?
MR. OCHS: Nothing, sir, except on behalf of the staff to thank
you, Commissioner Coletta, for your 12 years of service to the
community. It's been a privilege to serve with you. I think you leave
a legacy, obviously of accomplishment and compassion for all the
people in the community that will long be remembered in this
community.
And on behalf of the staff, that we wish you and Mary Ann the
best of health and all the prosperity you deserve in all your future
endeavors. It's been a pleasure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: God bless you, Leo. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I can't add anything more to that. We
gave him a party Friday afternoon, so we're not going to have another
party today. But nevertheless.
MR. OCHS: That's all I had, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: Just to say it's been an honor and privilege
to work with you, Commissioner Coletta, and I truly will miss you.
Especially those trips to Tallahassee. I mean, it's -- no, I'm serious, I
will miss you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll start with Commissioner
Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Jim, I wish you the best in
retirement. Catch a lot of fish --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- and enjoy yourself. You've
done a great job. Thank you for being here.
Page 228
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much.
Appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, a couple things. I hope that
this little -- hope to see that this little stuff that went on today about
the reconsideration and everything was only an exercise of futility and
we didn't even need it to happen at all. But we'll see next meeting.
But we all wanted to make sure that these things that we feel are for
the betterment of the community at large still took place and that our
votes counted. So I understand that.
Second of all, I'm going up to Sarasota to a FAC meeting on the
28th, 29th and 30th of this month to represent Collier County. And
I'm just sure I'm going to be asked by people up there why Collier
County decided not to be a part of this RESTORE investigative team,
because that could have meant millions of dollars to Collier County.
And so I would -- I would like to know if the commissioners that
voted against it could let me know why they felt it was not the thing to
do, I'd really appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you want some
representation that has some fiscal restraints, and that document sure
didn't provide anything.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, if all of the -- only two
counties didn't join; everybody else did along the coast. And they
seem to feel that there were plenty of constraints, restraints in there
and yet plenty of opportunity for counties to be reimbursed.
Commissioner Hiller, why did you feel that way?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I put it on the record. I made my
position clear at the time that I voted.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sorry, I've forgotten. Could you
tell me again?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We'll have to pull it back up. I'll
get you a copy so you can take it with you before --
Page 229
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I'd appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because I need to tell them,
because, you know --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mike, can you pull the minutes
from that last meeting --
MR. SHEFFIELD: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- and give it to Commissioner
Fiala so she can take it with her?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Because I don't
remember what the reasonings were.
But, you know, everybody else is shaking their heads and saying
what in the heck is wrong with Collier County. And I just want to go
up there with some kind of a response and let them know no, we're not
interested in the millions that you have to offer, you guys can split it
between all of you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not actually true.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, that's very false. That's
the problem with the representation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What representation?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The representation that you're
making now is just totally false.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Tell me how it's false.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And those monies by the
settlement from the federal government is supposed to be allocated to
the affected counties, which is the Gulf counties, okay? So if you're
going to represent something totally different than any of these board
members, I have a real concern about you even going.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I understand that. I think
maybe you'd like to go. And as far as I'm concerned, fine, go. I don't
care who goes.
This is not something I needed to do, this is something we needed
Page 230
November 13, 2012
to do for the betterment of our own community. I didn't care if it was
me or not, and I said that right from the beginning. I would invite
anybody to go up. You don't have to send me. If you have no
confidence in me, that's fine. You go. But just somebody should go.
Somebody should be a part of it.
And what the point is, is the federal government who will be
issuing these -- the money will go to the federal government to then
distribute. The federal government would like to just keep it
themselves. Because even if they distribute it, they get some money
right there before they distribute.
Meanwhile five states are recipients. All five states would like
all the money to go to the state legislature. The four states are already
doing that. One state does not want to do that. One state, the State of
Florida, is fighting to say no, it shouldn't go to the legislature because
the money might disappear, it should instead be divided up amongst
the 23 counties that are coastal counties. And that's what we were
fighting to do was to keep it out of anybody else's hands, let it be
redistributed.
Five counties were affected greatly, and they should get the
major part of it. And the rest of the counties would still get a few
million each.
But Commissioner Hiller, if you -- I mean, Commissioner
Henning, if you're afraid of the representation, why don't you go? If
you'll vote for it, I'm willing to do that. I don't mind -- you know, I
don't want to split that baby, I want that baby to come in whole.
So if you feel you can represent us better, why don't you do that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'll chime in.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The only reason that we did not approve
this was we didn't have a full board. If we had had a full board here to
vote, we would have had a majority to get this done. I think it is
extremely foolish to refuse to participate. And I don't care who the
Page 231
November 13, 2012
representative is, but just refusing to participate with the other states is
just a very foolish decision.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It is.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And there's no way you can anticipate
how this is going to turn out. So it's always good to have a seat at the
table. So we don't because --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because it was a split vote.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: A tie vote.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that's the problem. And unless
somebody decides to have a change of mind, we'll still be struggling
with this.
But maybe Commissioner Nance will find this to be a sensible
thing to do and will support a motion to do it. So we'll just have to see
how it turns out.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could we reconsider it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Second your motion for
reconsideration. It will come back at the next meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wait a minute, I'm not sure that it meets
the requirements, it meets the criteria for reconsideration at this point
in time. It's been more than two meetings, hasn't it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. And you have to give
notice in writing to the County Manager six days before the meeting
where it's being brought up for reconsideration.
But Jim, your legacy is going to be Jim, and then in quotes,
reconsideration Coletta if you're not careful by the end of this meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: What's your guidance on a
reconsideration?
MR. KLATZKOW: Super-majority rules. If at the end of day
three, commissioners want to join this pact, we will be joining this
pact. But we're not going to be able to know that until at least the next
Page 232
November 13, 2012
meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we can have --
MR. KLATZKOW: You don't have a procedure on a 2-2 vote.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- Commissioner Henning. If he
feels that I can't represent the county well enough, fine, I don't care.
He can go. Or Commissioner Hiller can go. I don't care who goes. I
just care about having our seat at the table.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we can do that at the next meeting?
MR. KLATZKOW: Seriously, there's no Roberts Rule on this
with a 2-2 vote. It's -- some jurisdictions take it as that you can't bring
it up again, others say well, okay, you bring it up again.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can we bring it up as a new subject?
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner, it's the rule of three. If at
the end of the day three of you want to rehear it, we'll rehear it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have no problem revisiting this at
the December meeting. Just put it back on the agenda at the
December meeting. There's no reason we can't keep talking about it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: There's nothing wrong with that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's good enough for me.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know, any -- bringing things
back and having ongoing dialogue on some of these issues that, you
know, like this one is not a problem.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And remember, I don't covet the
position. I don't care who goes, as long as there is a seat at the table.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So let's bring the whole thing
back. Let's bring back, you know -- you're going up to the meeting
before the December meeting?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm going up -- this is a FAC
Meeting that's in Sarasota and it's on the 28th, 29th and 30th.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But they're not going to talk about
this at the FAC meeting?
Page 233
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, this isn't -- I'm not allowed to
do that anymore.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, you can attend the meeting,
you just don't have a vote. You can sit at the table, you just don't have
a vote on what the consortium --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't think Commissioner Henning
would like me to sit at the table. And I wouldn't mind if he went. He
could go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no idea where she's
coming from either.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let's just bring this back at the
December -- let's bring this back.
Maybe, Leo, could you put it on the agenda at the December
meeting for discussion to discuss --
MR. OCHS: Sure. If that's the pleasure of the Board, I'd be
happy to.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that okay?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You got three nods.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Procedural question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Klatzkow, please give the
Board guidance on reconsideration of items after the item was
discussed.
MR. KLATZKOW: There's no majority, it's 2-2.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What is the proced --
what's the rest of the procedure?
MR. KLATZKOW: You don't have a procedure for a 2-2 vote.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, you do. You have a
procedure who voted in the majority. If you're saying there's no
definition on a 2-2 vote, who is the majority, what do they need to do
to get in on the agenda? They have to write a memo to the County
Page 234
November 13, 2012
Manager at least six days in advance of the meeting, correct?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But we're beyond two meetings,
right?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, we're not. That was the last
meeting when Commissioner Coletta stepped out. And it created a
2-2 vote.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do you want me to write a memo
to Leo? I can send an email to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure, that would be great.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Memo?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I'll do it right now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I need a point of clarification.
The reason I stepped out, I told the Chair and I also told the
County Manager that you could tie me back into this meeting with a
simple phone call and I was standing by for it. I never got that phone
call. So it wasn't like I walked out the door not caring if it succeeded
or not. I was very dismayed to find out you had a hang-up of a 2-2
vote.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you didn't even know I was
going to bring it up. This was at the tail end, you know, under
commissioner comments. It wasn't on the agenda.
Okay, that's my second thing.
And my last thing is it's been a privilege and an honor to work
with you. And I want to tell you, I loved all through these years every
time you'd throw in -- the air would get a little tense and you'd throw
in one of your cute little remarks and everybody would start smiling.
And you had a way of just relieving any tension or stress in the room.
And I'll miss that, because you've been an absolute joy to work with.
And you and Mary Ann have been great friends.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Donna. Very kind
of you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I sent you a request. If it's
Page 235
November 13, 2012
inadequate, you need to let me know. And if it's inadequate and you
think it's no good, tell the County Attorney who will tell me.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I want to submit a public records request
for that communication from her to you, please.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Leo, shoot him now, please, I beg
you.
MR. OCHS: I need two more votes for that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, you finished?
Two more votes? You got three heads.
MR. OCHS: No, no, no, I'm just teasing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right, it's my turn now.
As you know, tomorrow I have to go before our legislative
delegation and talk with them about our priorities. I just want to very
briefly determine if there is something that you want me to emphasize
more than any of the others. We've got a list of about 12 or 14 items
on this legislative priority and some of it hasn't change in years.
But very briefly, I'm going -- they are: The public safety center
on Alligator Alley; beach funding and maintenance, we want to
maintain our funding for that; opposition to off-shore drilling in the
Gulf of Mexico; opposition to revenue expenditure caps by state
government; opposition to any attempt to deprive us of the right to
assess impact fees. We want the funding for libraries to continue to be
forthcoming from the state. There's the Everglades Boulevard
Interstate/75 interchange. There's funding and support for the
transportation disadvantaged program. There's an appeal for helping
simplify the Florida Building Code to encourage more development.
We support efforts to control synthetic drugs. We oppose the
legislators' attempts to mandate a no kill animal shelter. Although
that's going to be a tough one to argue. Our logic is that we're not
opposed to saving animals and returning them to their owners or to
find them new adopted homes, it's just that our people believe that if
we had a mandated no kill animal shelter at the present time, it's going
Page 236
November 13, 2012
to result in overcrowding and inhumane conditions for the pets and it
will cost us more money. And I'm going to suggest that maybe
phasing it in over a period of time is a logical thing to do and it gives
us more time to react to it.
Pensions. We want to oppose any effort to increase employees
share of pensions. And Medicaid, we want the state to develop a more
effective method of billing counties for their Medicaid share.
So those are the items that are on the list.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You forgot about procurement.
The CCNA.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, we did.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You mentioned it?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I did not mention that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You might want to mention that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. I must have missed it
somehow.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Did we have any others to -- do you
have any comments about what I should say about any one of these
that I didn't mention?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, I jumped right over procurement.
Okay?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Don't be repetitive and highlight
the new stuff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I'll do the best I can. But I am
seriously thinking about just putting us on the overhead and saying
you've seen most of these before and just pick a few out and talk about
them.
The one thing I do want to talk about is the tax reform measures
which the legislature recommended through amendments to the
constitution failed miserably. And I'm not going to say that. But I
Page 237
November 13, 2012
think the people have said that doing a tax overhaul through the
constitution is the wrong way to do it, and that there are substantial
problems with the way they've approached it. And they involve issues
related to revenue and expenditure caps and the fact that they are
providing more and more tax exemptions on the front end, which
means that the amount of property that is untaxed completely in
Florida and Collier County is growing dramatically.
So nevertheless, those are my remarks for tomorrow. If anybody
sees any problems with them, let me know now.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I forgot to ask one thing. Luckily
my aide gave me a note.
As you all know, every year I hold a few tours, just to see the
facilities that Collier County has and acquaint our people with our
facilities. And this year one of the things I wanted to do was take
people to a few of our parks. Maybe just four or five. But I always
have people take their own car and get to wherever they're going to go
and so forth. And I thought it might be nice if we could -- I was going
to try and rent a bus out of my own money, to be perfectly honest with
you. But Parks has two vehicles that are 12-passenger vehicles, but
they can't use them to drive these people from one park to another
unless I get approval from the commissioners to do that.
And so I'll pay for the gas out of my own money, I don't care, or
if I need to pay for the drivers. Or if you just wouldn't mind having
these people see the parks, that's fine too. I'm just asking for direction
on this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't want them going to my parks.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They're not going to yours.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, how can I be sure of that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll put out a schedule.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I don't have a problem.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't. Not at all. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why isn't the County Manager
Page 238
November 13, 2012
requesting that?
Did you have a conversation with Commissioner Fiala on this?
MR. OCHS: No, sir, I had a conversation with Mr. Sheffield
about this. And this was one of those things where I thought we
needed some Board direction since it was a little abnormal to be using
county vehicles to transport private citizens.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are you afraid of liability; is that
your concern?
MR. OCHS: Well, that's the overriding concern.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not the cost, because --
MR. OCHS: No, no, ma'am, it's not --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- that's not the issue.
MR. OCHS: -- a cost factor or a convenience factor or staff time
factor.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So you're afraid if there was an
accident of some sort that the county would be at risk?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What's -- Jeff, do you have a
position? Did you talk to Mr. Walker about it?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, this is the first I've heard of this.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So maybe we should talk to
Risk before -- I mean, it sounds like a very nice idea. But if there's a
reason why we don't want to do it from Risk's perspective, maybe this
should be brought back.
You want to make it an agenda item?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've got a suggestion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're not going to be driving, are you?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, no.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: In that case we wouldn't have any
risk. It wouldn't be a problem if she was driving.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've got a suggestion that will
solve your whole problem.
Page 239
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The agency we have within
Collier County to be able to handle something like this is our CAT
system. They've got some small buses. Maybe arrangements could be
made for a driver to be able to accommodate us to make it all work.
Okay, no? You're shaking your head no?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No.
MR. OCHS: No, they have some specific restrictions about what
kind of rides they can give, and I don't think this --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Leo, why don't we just put it on
the agenda, bring it back, it could be on consent. Just let Jeff look at it
to make sure we're complying with all risk standards of the county.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, what I'd suggest is a variation, if
you would, on that thing. Let me talk with both Jeff Klatzkow and Jeff
Walker. There may be some kind of a release that we can get these
people to sign and that would solve the liability concern, hopefully.
But I'll work with both Jeffs. And if we can't resolve it, we'll bring it
back. If we think we've got a workaround and the Board's otherwise
fine with it, we'll move forward.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And if I can't do it, and if I
can't afford to do it out of my own money, I don't have to have that as
a tour either. I just -- I like to showcase what we have and let people
know what we do in the community.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're talking about taking the money
out of your travel budget?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I wasn't.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Personal?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was going to take it out of my own
personal, yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But if I couldn't afford it then, you
know, I don't do it.
Page 240
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I understand.
Okay, Commissioner Coletta -- oh, I'm sorry, I would like to add
my congratulations for the work you've done on the Board. We are
going to miss you. And I'm sure you're going to be back here
lobbying for paving Lime Rock Road. And so I'm looking forward to
that. And I hope you enjoy your well deserved retirement.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's your turn now for --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, I don't need more than 20
minutes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm leaving in --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I understand that. And it's
kind of hard to compress 12 years into just a few minutes.
But it's been an unbelievable experience. You know, I was -- it
was something that I never realized I could do the things I did do. It
became quite amazing to me when I took on some of the lobbying
efforts and some of the successes we've seen. The efforts within the
community and seeing some of the improvements that were made
were very gratifying.
However, that was this and this is now. I want you to know I've
been working very close with my replacement, Tim Nance. We've
had several meetings. The last one was a little bit over two hours. We
covered a lot of different issues. His mind is clear. He understands
what the priorities of Collier County is. He's his own person.
I can tell you that I am not concerned to a large degree over the
transfer of power and what may happen to projects that are still left to
be completed. I think Mr. Nance is going to be able to pick up and
he's going to be able to carry it to the next level of accomplishments.
The only thing I ask from him is that when the projects become
to completion, those projects that this Commission has done, that he
grant me the same courtesy that I granted Barbara Barry when I took
this job over and she was the commissioner proceeding me, and that I
Page 241
November 13, 2012
be invited to those events. I'd like that very much.
I still feel a very strong affiliation with Collier County
government in general, especially the employees. The employees
have been unbelievable. I never would have made 12 years if it wasn't
for the employees of Collier County and how hard they work for the
public. They've been truly amazing, and I love every one of them
dearly.
My plans for the immediate future is to do some traveling with
my lovely wife Mary Ann, who at this point in time is probably
watching the television to see when I'm going to leave. Tomorrow
morning we're going to be leaving the house at 4:00 in the morning --
and thank you for concluding the meeting today -- and we're going to
be heading up to New York where Saturday is the opening of deer
season. I have many friends and relatives up there which I'm going to
be visiting with.
And the nicest thing is, and I don't know if you've ever
experienced it, I'm going on a vacation that does not have a definite
return date, which is something that we greatly appreciate. This
summer we plan to either rent or buy a camper and take off and go for
two months and just travel the United States, seeing a lot of places that
we have always dreamed of seeing but never had a chance to.
So I totally embrace the coming years and looking forward to it
with my lovely wife and my six grandkids and my great grandkids and
not to mention my four adult children.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How long have you been married?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've been married 47 years.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wow, that's awesome.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, it's kind of amazing. I
don't know what's wrong with that woman, married to me that long.
But thank you very much for those 47 years, Mary Ann, and I'll
be coming home soon and I promise not to wander too far.
Thank you very much, one and all.
Page 242
November 13, 2012
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you, Jim.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Very appreciative of today and
the timing of it, because just in a few minutes the citizens of Golden
Gate will be recognizing Mark Strain as Citizen of the Year for
Golden Gate and his work to not only Golden Gate but citizens of
Collier County, Collier County government.
After lunch I thought about what Scott Teach recommended and
did. I thought that was a very noble thing. When he wasn't sure he
wasn't going to guess. He said, Commissioners, I think we ought to
continue this item and let me work on it a little bit more. I mean, that
shows --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's the right way to do it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, that shows integrity, not
having to rush things through.
My final thing, we had a public speaker about, you know, cell
phones and texting. And if you notice that I'll reach for my cell phone
and look at it and maybe send a message. These cell phones, the
county cell phones, you can't text off these. The only thing that you
could do is send an email. So for me to look at this screen versus this
one, this one's getting too small, I can't see it anymore, so I can move
this one around with my glasses and send an email. In fact, I sent
emails to Kate Ebert while in my vehicle all the time and said hey, I'm
on the road, I'll be back and blah, blah, blah.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I do public records requests of Leo
all through the meeting. I just had to say that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: People tend to assume without,
you know, communications. They assume that, you know, we're
texting and stuff like that. But I do -- Kate did a public records
request on texting. I do have a cell phone that does texting. She does
have certain dates of those emails. Now, one was -- today was about a
date with a female coming up. It's pretty racy. You want that one
Page 243
November 13, 2012
too? Are you sure? How about from my son on previous dates? Boy
Scouts or anything like that? Because I do text the Cub Scout master
about Boy Scouts. You want those too? You weren't going to get
them anyways. They're not public record. Okay?
So I'll make a motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're adjourned.
**** Commissioner Coletta moved, seconded by Commissioner
Fiala and carried unanimously that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Item #16A1
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR QUARRY, PHASE 2B AND THE COUNTY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE ANY UTILITIES
PERFORMANCE SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO
THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED
AGENT
Item #16A2
AN EXTENSION FOR COMPLETION OF SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH TURNBURY
PRESERVE AR#10119 PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.02.05 B.11
OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE —
EXTENSION REQUESTED BY THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER
UNTIL FEBRUARY 27, 2014
Item #16A3
Page 244
November 13, 2012
QUOTE #12-5891 FOR PURCHASE OF POST-DISASTER
DAMAGE ASSESSMENT SOFTWARE (ARM360) AND
SERVICES FROM GEOCOVE, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF
$40,250 FOR THE SOFTWARE PURCHASE, AND ANNUAL
MAINTENANCE BEGINNING IN 2014 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$7,000 WITH A 3% CAP — ALLOWING THE EOC'S DAMAGE
ASSESSMENT TEAMS TO QUICKLY TRANSMIT
INFORMATION FROM THE FIELD
Item #16A4
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR QUARRY, PHASE 2A AND THE COUNTY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE FINAL
OBLIGATION BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO THE
PROJECT ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED
AGENT
Item #16A5
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR AVIANO AT NAPLES AND THE COUNTY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE FINAL
OBLIGATION BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO THE
PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED
AGENT
Item #16A6
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR AVIANO AT NAPLES, PHASE 2 AND THE COUNTY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE UTILITY
Page 245
November 13, 2012
PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) AND FINAL OBLIGATION
BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $32,389.80 TO THE PROJECT
ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT
Item #16A7
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR COVENANT PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, 6992
TRAIL BOULEVARD, AND THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS
DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE UTILITIES PERFORMANCE
SECURITY AND FINAL OBLIGATION BOND IN THE TOTAL
AMOUNT OF $33,868.67 TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR
THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT
Item #16A8
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF VERONAWALK PHASE 4C,
KARINA COURT 2ND REPLAT, APPLICATION NUMBER
PL20120001618 — DEVELOPER MUST RECEIVE CERTIFICATE
OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES PRIOR TO THE
ISSUANCE OF THE FINAL APPROVAL LETTER
Item #16A9
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A SECURITY IN THE
AMOUNT OF $21,873.50 WHICH WAS POSTED AS A
DEVELOPMENT GUARANTY FOR WORK ASSOCIATED
WITH SEACREST SCHOOL — WORK ASSOCIATED WITH A
DEMOLITION AND RESTORATION PERMIT
Item #16A10
Page 246
November 13, 2012
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE
BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $104,450 WHICH WAS POSTED
AS A DEVELOPMENT GUARANTY FOR WORK ASSOCIATED
WITH ARTHREX COMMERCE PARK PL2011000783 — WORK
ASSOCIATED WITH A VEGETATION REMOVAL AND SITE
FILLING PERMIT
Item #16A11
RECORD THE FINAL PLAT OF GASPAR STATION, PHASE 1,
APPLICATION NUMBER PPL-PL20120000409, APPROVE THE
STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AND APPROVE THE AMOUNT OF THE
PERFORMANCE SECURITY — DEVELOPER MUST RECEIVE A
CERTIFICATE OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES PRIOR TO
ISSUANCE OF A CONSTRUCTION PLAN FINAL APPROVAL
LETTER
Item #16Al2
EXTEND CONTRACT #07-4105 WITH WHITE & SMITH, LLC,
PLANNING AND LAW GROUP, UNDER THE SAME TERMS
AND CONDITIONS AS THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT, FOR A
PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR, ENDING ON DECEMBER 11, 2013
— TO ASSIST STAFF WITH DEVELOPMENT OF A COUNTY
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND RELATED AMENDMENTS TO
THE LDC
Item #16A13
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE CARRY FORWARD
FOR PROJECTS IN TRANSPORTATION SUPPORTED GAS TAX
Page 247
November 13, 2012
FUND (313) IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,150 — CARRY FORWARD
FROM PUD MONITORING/TRAFFIC COUNT PAYMENT-IN-
LIEU PROJECTS
Item #16A14
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF RIVERSTONE - PLAT
TWO, APPLICATION NUMBER PPL-PL20120001179,
APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY — DEVELOPER
MUST RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC
FACILITIES PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE CONSTRUCTION
PLAN FINAL APPROVAL LETTER
Item #16A15
AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT RELEASING WCI FROM
FUTURE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES ON A PORTION
OF MAINSAIL DRIVE — ASSIGNING ALL RIGHTS AND
OBLIGATIONS TO THE HAMMOCK BAY OWNERS
ASSOCIATION, INC.
Item #16A16
TRANSFER OF ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT RELEASING
WCI FROM FUTURE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES
FOR MEDIANS ON COLLIER BOULEVARD (S.R. 951) AT
THE MAINSAIL DRIVE INTERSECTION, TRANSFERRING
THAT RESPONSIBILITY TO HAMMOCK BAY OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
Page 248
November 13, 2012
Item #16A17
RESOLUTION 2012-225: IMPLEMENTING BOARD DIRECTION
TO EXEMPT LANE RENTAL FEES ON COUNTY SPONSORED
PROJECTS LOCATED WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ELIMINATE PERMIT CHARGES FOR
SERVICES PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED BY THE COUNTY ON
BEHALF OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Item #16A18 — Continued to the December 11, 2012 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH THE BAREFOOT BEACH
CLUB CONDOMINIUM OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. AND
THE CONSERVANCY TO ALLOW FOR MANGROVE
TRIMMING AND MONITORING ON COUNTY-OWNED
PROPERTY IN THE VICINITY OF LELY BAREFOOT BEACH
Item #16A19
RELEASE OF LIEN IN THE AMOUNT OF $38,333.43 FOR
PAYMENT OF $24,083.43, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT
ACTION ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
VS. GLORIA PERDIGON, CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE
NUMBER CESD20100009141, RELATING TO PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 2931 8TH AVENUE NE, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA — PROPERTY WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE
ON AUGUST 1, 2012
Item #16A20
RELEASE OF LIEN IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,162.29 FOR
Page 249
November 13, 2012
PAYMENT OF $562.29, IN CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION
ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS.
ALICIA VIVES, CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE NUMBER
CEV20110011656, RELATING TO PROPERTY AT 410 5TH
STREET NW, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — PROPERTY
WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON JUNE 6, 2012
Item #16A21
AN EXTENSION FOR COMPLETION OF SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH MOCKINGBIRD
CROSSING AR#9975 PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.02.05 B.11
OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE —
FOR THE EXTENSION UNTIL JUNE 24, 2014
Item #16A22
RESOLUTION 2012-226: ACCEPTING $112,647 IN
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION FOR LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM
AGREEMENT #429902-1 FOR CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING
AND INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE NAPLES MANOR
SIDEWALK PROJECT; THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT; AND A RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING
THE BOARD'S ACTION
Item #16A23
INCREASING ANNUAL EXPENDITURES FOR COUNTYWIDE
BID #09-5289 FOR THE "PURCHASE & DELIVERY OF
INORGANIC/ORGANIC MULCH" TO FORESTRY RESOURCES
FOR AN ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENDITURE OF $250,000 —
Page 250
November 13, 2012
UTILIZED BY GMD-RM-LANDSCAPE, PUBLIC SERVICES-
MSTU, PARKS & RECREATION, PUBLIC UTILITIIES,
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIES
Item #16A24 — Moved to Item #110 (Per Commissioner Henning
during Agenda Changes)
Item #16A25
THE RELEASE OF LIENS IN THE AMOUNT OF $55,288.24 FOR
PAYMENT OF $8,488.24, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT
ACTION AGAINST TERRY DILOZIR, RELATING TO
PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 5322 CATTS STREET, 4035 22ND
AVENUE SE, 4301 20TH PLACE SW, AND 4913 18TH AVENUE
SW, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — FINES RELATED TO AN
UNMAINTAINED POOL WITHOUT A PROPER POOL
BARRIER WHICH ALSO HAS OUTSTANDING LIENS AND
ABATEMENT COSTS FOR LOT MOWING CHARGES
Item #16A26
INCREASING THE ANNUAL EXPENDITURES FOR REQUEST
FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) #11-5677 "GROWTH MANAGEMENT
DIVISION PLANNING AND REGULATION STAFFING" TO
NOVA ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC FOR AN
ANNUAL BUDGETED EXPENDITURE OF $150,000, A
BUDGET AMENDMENT FROM FUND 113 TO PAY FOR THESE
CONTRACTED SERVICES, AND PAYMENT OF AN
OUTSTANDING INVOICE — TO MANAGE INCREASED
WORKLOADS DURING PEAK BUSINESS PERIODS
Page 251
November 13, 2012
Item #16A27
REJECT ALL BIDS BID NO. 12-5948 - IMMOKALEE ROAD
SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 60016.4 AND RE-BID
THE PROJECT — DUE TO THE LOWEST BIDDER BEING 30%
HIGHER, AND MORE THAN A HALF MILLION DOLLARS
OVER THE ESTIMATED COST
Item #16B1
A SITE ACCESS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CRA IN
IMMOKALEE (OWNER) AND STEVENS & LAYTON, INC.
(CONTRACTOR) ALLOWING SAID CONTRACTOR TO STORE
ITS MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH
THE BOSTON AVENUE SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT (COUNTY PROJECT #11-5674). THE SITE
LOCATION IS AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTH 9TH
STREET AND MAIN STREET IN IMMOKALEE (FOLIO
NUMBER 00122840009) — WORK MUST BE COMPLETED BY
DECEMBER 31, 2012
Item #16C1
BID #12-5908, GREASE HAULING SERVICES, TO CARLOS
RIVERO PLUMBING AND SEPTIC TANK CONTRACTOR, INC.,
IN THE ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $175,000 — FOR
THE WASTEWATER COLLECTIONS SYSTEM AND WATER
RECLAMATION FACILITIES
Item #16C2
BID #12-5954, WATER METER TEST BENCH, TO MARS
Page 252
November 13, 2012
COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $117,169.53 — FOR USE IN
THE WATER DEPARTMENT'S METER QUALITY
ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM
Item #16C3
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. GC-690,
"AGREEMENT FOR STORAGE TANK SYSTEM COMPLIANCE
VERIFICATION PROGRAM FOR COLLIER COUNTY",
BETWEEN THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TO CONTINUE
ADMINISTERING THE POLLUTANT STORAGE TANK
COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION PROGRAM FOR REGULATED
TANKS — AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16C4
BID NO. 12-5925, "REMOVAL OF AGRICULTURAL PLASTICS
AT IMMOKALEE TRANSFER STATION," TO RATIONAL
ENERGIES, INC., AT NO COST TO COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16C5
AMENDMENT NO. 01, A ZERO DOLLAR TIME EXTENSION
TO THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
ALTERNATIVE WATER SUPPLY GRANT #4600002535 — FOR
A TIME EXTENSION TO INVOICE REMAINING GRANT
FUNDS IN FY2013
Item #16C6
Page 253
November 13, 2012
REJECT ALL QUOTES FOR THE WOODCREST DRIVE
UTILITY EXTENSION PHASE 1, SEGMENT C PROJECT, AND
RE-QUOTE PROJECT NUMBERS 70071 AND 70044 — IN
ORDER TO CLARIFY THE DESIGN PLANS
Item #16C7
CONTRACT #06-3972 AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$26,900 TO WITH TELE-WORKS, INC., TO TRANSFER AN
EXISTING DELINQUENT WATER/SEWER CUSTOMER
ACCOUNT COURTESY CALLING SYSTEM TO A HOSTED
ENVIRONMENT — THE CURRENT SERVER HAS REACHED
THE END OF ITS CONTRACTED TWI MAINTENANCE
SERVICE LIFE
Item #16C8
ADVERTISING AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE
NUMBER 80-43 THAT CREATED THE GOODLAND WATER
DISTRICT
Item #16D1
A RIGHT OF ENTRY TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TO INSTALL, MAINTAIN
AND MONITOR GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS AT
THE PEPPER RANCH PRESERVE, AT NO COST TO THE
COUNTY — TO INSTALL TWO SHALLOW MONITORING
WELLS AS PART OF THE EVERGLADES WEST COAST
WATERSHED BASIN STUDY
Item #16D2
Page 254
November 13, 2012
THREE (3) SATISFACTION OF MORTGAGES FOR STATE
HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (SHIP) IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE BOARD'S SHORT SALE POLICY
Item #16D3
FOUR (4) SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENTS FOR THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
PROJECTS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FOR U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) FUNDING
IN THE 2012-2013 ACTION PLAN APPROVED BY THE BOARD
ON JULY 24, 2012 (AGENDA ITEM NO. 11E) — AGREEMENTS
WITH YOUTH HAVEN, SHELTER FOR ABUSED WOMEN AND
CHILDREN, DAVID LAWRENCE MENTAL HEALTH CENTER
AND THE CITY OF NAPLES
Item #16D4
AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA)
IMMOKALEE BY EXTENDING THE GRANT AGREEMENT
PERIOD, REQUIRING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FY 2010 HUD
GRANT AND 24 CFR 570, AND MODIFYING EXHIBIT A,
SCOPE OF SERVICES — TO EXTEND THE PROJECT
COMPLETION DATE TO NOVEMBER 30, 2012 AND TO
MAKE HOUSE-KEEPING MODIFICATIONS
Item #16D5
AMENDMENTS TO THE SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENTS
Page 255
November 13, 2012
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE DAVID LAWRENCE
CENTER, NAMI OF COLLIER COUNTY, INC, AND THE
COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE FUNDED BY THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE, MENTAL HEALTH, AND SUBSTANCE
ABUSE (CJMHSA) GRANT — TO CLEARLY DEFINE GRANT
REQUIREMENTS AND UPDATE CONTACT INFORMATION
Item #16D6
BID #12-5953 FOR "LELY MSTU PEBBLE BEACH LIGHTING
PROJECT" TO BENTLEY ELECTRIC COMPANY OF NAPLES,
FLORIDA, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $129,617.46 — TO
COMPLETE A DECORATIVE STREET LIGHTING PROJECT IN
THE LELY COMMUNITY
Item #16D7
THE FY12-13 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA)
SECTION 5310 GRANT AWARD IN THE AMOUNT OF
$272,655, THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS AND
THE PURCHASE OF THREE (3) PARATRANSIT VEHICLE
UTILIZING THOSE FUNDS
Item #16D8
THE FY12-13 CONTRACT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FOR
OPERATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY HEALTH
DEPARTMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,258,100 — EFFECTIVE
OCTOBER 1, 2012 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2013
Item #16D9 — Continued to the December 11, 2012 BCC Meeting
Page 256
November 13, 2012
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $199,478.74 IN
PROGRAM INCOME REVENUE GENERATED WHEN
CONVEYING PROPERTIES ACQUIRED UNDER THE
NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROGRAM (NSP1)
Item #16D10
RATIFYING THE CHAIRMAN'S EXECUTION OF A REVISED
BUYBACK AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND
AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (AHCA)
FOR ADDITIONAL ELIGIBLE FUNDING LEVERAGED UNDER
THE ALTERNATIVE INTERGOVERNMENTAL TRANSFER
PROGRAMS (IGT); SUCH FUNDS IDENTIFIED ARE ALREADY
BUDGETED IN THE FY 2013 APPROVED BUDGET — AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16E1
RENEWAL OF COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES DEPARTMENT'S CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC
CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR ADVANCED LIFE
SUPPORT TRANSPORT FOR ONE YEAR AND CHAIRMAN TO
EXECUTE THE PERMIT AND CERTIFICATE — COMMENCING
JANUARY 1, 2013 AND EXPIRING ON DECEMBER 31, 2013
Item #16E2
AGREEMENT NO. 12-5983 WITH NAPLES HMA, LLC D/B/A
PHYSICIANS REGIONAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM (PRHS) FOR
USE OF THE MEDICAL EXAMINER FACILITY TO CONDUCT
Page 257
November 13, 2012
AUTOPSIES
Item #16E3
PURCHASE OF A MICROSOFT ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT
FROM SHI FOR MICROSOFT SOFTWARE AND LICENSES IN
THE AMOUNT OF $343,028 AND ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE
AND LICENSE PURCHASES DURING THE YEAR UTILIZING
THE STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT #252-001-09-1
Item #16E4
RATIFYING PROPERTY, CASUALTY, WORKERS'
COMPENSATION AND SUBROGATION CLAIMS SETTLED
AND/OR CLOSED BY THE RISK MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR
PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION #2004-15 FOR THE FOURTH
QUARTER OF FY 12
Item #16E5
RENEWAL OF THE ANNUAL CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC
CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY (COPCN) FOR AMBITRANS
MEDICAL TRANSPORT, INC., TO PROVIDE CLASS 2 INTER-
FACILITY TRANSPORT AMBULANCE SERVICE FOR A
PERIOD OF ONE YEAR
Item #16E6
RFP #12-5874 AND CONTRACT TO INTERMEDIX
CORPORATION TO PROVIDE BILLING SERVICES FOR
COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
Page 258
November 13, 2012
Item #16E7
AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT FROM TRI-COUNTY PEST
CONTROL SOUTH, INC. TO ORKIN, LLC FOR PEST CONTROL
SERVICES — DUE TO TRI-COUNTY BEING PURCHASED BY
ORKIN
Item #16E8
AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT WITH EVANS ENERGY
PARTNERS, LLC DBA EVANS OIL COMPANY ("EVANS
ENERGY") TO ASSUME CONTRACT #07-4180 "GASOLINE
AND DIESEL FUEL" AND ITB #10-5581 "MOTOR OILS,
LUBRICANTS AND FLUIDS;" WAIVE PURCHASING POLICY
TO PURCHASE GASOLINE AND DIESEL FUEL FROM EVANS
ENERGY WITHOUT FORMAL BIDDING TO REFUEL COUNTY
VEHICLES AT THE EVANS COMMERCIAL REFUELING SITE
AT SOUTH HORSESHOE DRIVE; AND RETROACTIVELY
APPROVE PAYMENT FOR ALL PURCHASES MADE WITH
EVANS ENERGY SINCE SEPTEMBER 26, 2012
Item #16E9 — Moved to Item #11N (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16E10
STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS AND CHANGES TO
WORK ORDERS — FOR THE PERIOD OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2012
TO OCTOBER 23, 2012
Item #16F1
A RELEASE OF LIEN FOR THE ST. MATTHEW'S HOUSE, INC.
Page 259
November 13, 2012
WOLFE APARTMENTS DUE TO THE IMPACT FEES BEING
PAID IN FULL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MULTI-FAMILY
RENTAL IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL PROGRAM, AS SET FORTH
BY SECTION 74-401(E) AND 74-401(G) (5) OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES — BALANCE
OF THE IMPACT FEES WAS PAID ON AUGUST 13, 2012
Item #16F2
RESOLUTION 2012-227: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING
GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE
PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2012-13 ADOPTED
BUDGET
Item #16F3
RESOLUTION 2012-228: DESIGNATING THE GOODLAND
BRIDGE (BRIDGE NO. 030184) ON CR92 OVER THE MARCO
CHANNEL AS "THE STAN GOBER MEMORIAL BRIDGE"
Item #16G1 — Moved to Item #14A3 (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16H1
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED GREATER NAPLES CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE BUSINESS AFTER 5 OCTOBER 18, 2012. THE
SUM OF $8 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S
TRAVEL BUDGET
Item #16H2
Page 260
November 13, 2012
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED NAACP 30TH ANNUAL FREEDOM
FUND BANQUET OCTOBER 27, 2012. THE SUM OF $100 TO
BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
— HELD AT NAPLES HILTON, 5111 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH
Item #16H3
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT
AWARDS ON OCTOBER 30, 2012. THE SUM OF $74 TO BE
PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET —
HELD AT THE WALDORF ASTORIA NAPLES
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER HILLER'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE WILL ATTEND THE 2012 CITIZEN OF THE
YEAR BANQUET NOVEMBER 13, 2012. THE SUM OF $35 TO
BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HILLER'S TRAVEL BUDGET
— HELD AT VANDERBILT COUNTRY CLUB, 8250 DANBURY
BOULEVARD
Item #16H5
ADVISORY BOARD VACANCIES DATED OCTOBER 25, 2012
Item #16I1
Page 261
November 13, 2012
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE TO FILE WITH
ACTION AS DIRECTED. DOCUMENT(S) HAVE BEEN
ROUTED TO ALL COMMISSIONERS AND ARE AVAILABLE
FOR REVIEW IN BCC OFFICE UNTIL APPROVAL
Item #16I2
ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES AND AGENDAS TO FILE WITH
ACTION AS DIRECTED. DOCUMENT(S) HAVE BEEN
ROUTED TO ALL COMMISSIONERS AND ARE AVAILABLE
FOR REVIEW IN BCC OFFICE UNTIL APPROVAL
Page 262
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
November 13, 2012
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Miscellaneous Correspondence:
1) Record of Legal Advertisement:
INTP-2012-PL000265I A Notice of Official Interpretation of Collier
County LDC Ordinance for Twin Eagles, Phase 3 6.29.12
2) Bayshore CRA:
Legal Advertisement on Leasing of 1991 Tamiami Trail East
Improvements 8.29.12 and 9.1.12
3) Hacienda Lakes Community Development District:
DEO Letter 9.14.12
4) North Naples Control and Rescue District:
Copy of Resolution 12-019 adopting final millage rate for FY 2012-
2013
Copy of Resolution 12-020 adopting final impact fee rates for FY
2012-2013
Copy of Resolution 12-021 adopting the Final Budget for FY 2012-
2013 for General Fund and Inspection Fee Fund
Copy of Resolution 12-022 adopting the Final Budget for the Impact
Fee Fund for FY 2012-2013
Copy of the Budget for FY 2012-2013 for the General Fund, Impact
Fee Fund and Inspection Fund
Copy of Annual Financial Report for FY ending 9.30.11
Copy of District's Audit for FY ending 9.30.11
Copy of the District's Map
Registered office and agent form
Schedule of regular meetings for the Board of Fire Commissioners
for FY 2012-2013
Copy of the Public Facilities Report
Copy of the Five Year Strategic Plan
Reporting information required by Florida Statute for FY ending
9.30.11 including Annual Financial Reports, an Independent
Auditor's District Audit and the 5 year Strategic Plan
Budget for FY 2012-2013 including Resolutions adopting the same
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES
November 13, 2012
2. ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS
DIRECTED:
A. Minutes:
1) Affordable Housing Commission:
Minutes of 6.4.12; 8.22.12 (Subcommittee)
2) Collier County Citizens Corps:
Minutes of 7.18.12
3) Collier County Planning Commission:
Agenda of 8.16.12
Minutes of 8.16.12
4) Contractors Licensing Board:
Minutes of 8.15.12
5) Environmental Advisory Council:
Minutes of 9.5.12
6) Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee:
Agenda of 8.21.12
Minutes of 8.21.12
7) Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board:
Minutes of 8.23.12
8) Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board:
Agenda of 9.19.12
Minutes of 8.15.12
9) Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Committee:
Minutes of 8.16.12
10) Lely Golf Estates Beautification Advisory Committee:
Agenda of 9.20.12
Minutes of 7.19.12
1
11) Pelican Bay Services Division Board:
Agenda of 9.5.12; 9.24.12 (Ad Hoc Committee for Studying
Pathways and Trees)
Minutes of 8.1.12
12) Radio Road East of Santa Barbara Blvd to Davis Blvd Advisory
Committee:
Agenda of 9.18.12
Minutes of 8.1.12
November 13, 2012
Item #16J1
INVESTMENT STATUS UPDATE REPORT FOR THE
QUARTER ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2012 — PROVIDED BY
THE CLERK OF COURTS
Item #16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 6, 2012
THROUGH OCTOBER 12, 2012 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J3
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 13, 2012
THROUGH OCTOBER 19, 2012 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J4
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 20, 2012
THROUGH OCTOBER 26, 2012 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J5
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING FEDERAL HHS
VOTE PROGRAM GRANT AWARD 2008 FUNDS FOR VOTING
ACCESSIBILITY FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES IN
THE AMOUNT OF $11,315.73
Item #16J6
Page 263
November 13, 2012
ENDORSING THE US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THE
US DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY COMBINED EQUITABLE
SHARING AGREEMENT AND CERTIFICATION THROUGH
SEPTEMBER 2013 — EQUITABLE SHARE REVENUES WILL BE
ACCOUNTED FOR SEPARATELY IN THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Item #16J7
AN AGREEMENT AUTHORIZING COLLIER COUNTY'S
SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO HAVE TRAFFIC CONTROL
JURISDICTION OVER PRIVATE ROADS WITHIN THE
SUMMIT PLACE SUBDIVISION
Item #16J8
CAPITAL ASSET DISPOSITION RECORDS FOR THE TIME
PERIOD OCTOBER 1, 2011 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2012
Item #16J9
ADVERTISING AN ORDINANCE WHICH WOULD ESTABLISH
LIMITATIONS, IN ADDITION TO THOSE SET FORTH IN
CHAPTER 538, PART I, FLORIDA STATUTES, ON THE SALE
AND/OR PURCHASE OF SECONDHAND GOODS
(SECONDHAND DEALERS)
Item #16K1
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO PARCEL 215RDUE
IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. GIOVANNI
CASTELLANA, ET AL., CASE NO. 12-CA-2508 (EVERGLADES
Page 264
November 13, 2012
BOULEVARD INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT 18TH
AVENUE N.E., PROJECT NO. 60016). (FISCAL IMPACT:
$6,900) — FOR CONDEMNATION OF LAND AND EASEMENTS
NECESSARY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS AT 18TH AVENUE NE AND EVERGLADES
BOULEVARD
Item #16K2 — Moved to Item #12A (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16K3
A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AGAINST TIMOTHY HILTS
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL
CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO
RECOVER DAMAGES INCURRED BY THE COUNTY FOR THE
REPAIR TO A FIRE HYDRANT, SIDEWALK AND STREET
DAMAGED BY HIM IN THE AMOUNT OF $29,649, PLUS
COSTS OF LITIGATION — DUE TO AN ACCIDENT ON APRIL
17, 2012 AT VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD AND THE MISSION
HILLS PLAZA
Item #16K4
A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AGAINST VIVIANA PINEDA-
LOPEZ IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE TWENTIETH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, TO RECOVER DAMAGES INCURRED BY THE
COUNTY FOR THE REPAIR TO A GUARDRAIL DAMAGED
BY HER IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,148.04, PLUS COSTS OF
LITIGATION — DUE TO AN ACCIDENT ON FEBRUARY 17,
Page 265
November 13, 2012
2012 ON GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD EAST
Item #16K5
A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGAINST ANGELA HENDRICKS
AND DEANDRE NIKKO WOODS IN THE COUNTY COURT OF
THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO RECOVER DAMAGES INCURRED BY
THE COUNTY FOR CLEAN-UP BY COUNTY PERSONNEL
AND REPAIR TO THE ROADWAY DAMAGED BY THEM IN
THE AMOUNT OF $2,697.58, PLUS COSTS OF LITIGATION —
FOR AN ACCIDENT OCTOBER 9, 2011 ON CR951
Item #16K6
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IN THE SUM OF $61,250 AND
DIRECT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO FILE ALL
DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO END WITH PREJUDICE THE
LAWSUIT STYLED DAVID SCRIBNER V. COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, CASE NO. 2:10-CV-
728-FTM-29-JES-DNF, NOW PENDING IN THE UNITED
STATES DISTRICT COURT, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION. (FISCAL IMPACT: $61,250)
Item #17A
ORDINANCE 2012-41 : AMENDING ORDINANCE 2004-41, AS
AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED COMPREHENSIVE ZONING
REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, FOR A PROJECT IDENTIFIED
Page 266
November 13, 2012
AS PUDZ-A-PL20120000303: MIRASOL RPUD, AMENDING
ORDINANCE 2009-21, THE MIRASOL RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BY INCREASING THE
PERMISSIBLE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 799 TO
1,121 ; AMENDING ORDINANCE 2004-41, THE COLLIER
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY AMENDING THE
APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY
CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF AN
ADDITIONAL 95± ACRES OF LAND ZONED RURAL
AGRICULTURAL (A) TO THE MIRASOL RPUD; BY REVISING
THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; BY AMENDING THE
MASTER PLAN; AND ADDING DEVIATIONS AND REVISING
DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR 846)
BORDERED ON THE EAST BY BROKEN BACK ROAD AND
FUTURE COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951) IN SECTIONS 10, 15
AND 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 1,638.6± ACRES; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
Item #17B — Moved to Item #9B (Per Commissioner Hiller during
Agenda Changes)
Item #17C — Moved to Item #9C (Per Commissioner Hiller during
Agenda Changes)
Item #17D
REOLUTION 2012-229: VAC-PL20120001426, TO DISCLAIM,
RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY AND THE PUBLIC
INTEREST IN PART OF THE 10-FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT
LOCATED IN LOT 1, BLOCK I, GULF ACRES, AS RECORDED
Page 267
November 13, 2012
IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 111, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LOCATED IN SECTION 22,
TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY
FLORIDA, MORE SPECIFICALLY SHOWN IN EXHIBIT A
Item #17E — Continued to the December 11, 2012 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #17F
RESOLUTION 2012-230: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING
CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL
REVENUE) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2012-13 ADOPTED
BUDGET
*****
Page 268
November 13, 2012
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5:45 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
C
FRED W. COYLE, Chai
ATTEST:
DWIGHT,E :ROCK, CLERK
• L ry
A , st at to Wit►t ' ;'
These minutes approve the Board on 0 / 13
as presented or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC. BY CHERIE' NOTTINGHAM.
Page 269